Bathroom afci protection ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ritelec

Senior Member
Location
Jersey
Please correct me if I'm mistaken

Bathrooms do NOT require afci protection.

That would include lighting, receptacle, jacuzzi. Anything and everything.

Correct?

Thank you
 

bphgravity

Senior Member
Location
Florida
That is correct. Branch circuits supplying bathroom outlets or devices are not required to be AFCI protected.

It is uncertain at this point in time if the 2017 NEC will expand AFCI protection to all 120-volt, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits in a dwelling. STAY TUNED...

Please keep in mind the NEC does not prohibit the installation of AFCI protection for bathroom branch circuits.
 

al hildenbrand

Senior Member
Location
Minnesota
Occupation
Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Bathrooms do NOT require afci protection.

That would include lighting, receptacle, jacuzzi. Anything and everything.

Correct?

By themselves, on a branch circuit(s) that only serve bath(s), correct (or some other circuit serving areas not listed in 210.12). However, say the lighting is tagged off the Hallway lighting, then, since the Hallway outlets require AFCI on the branch circuit, the bath lighting would wind up having AFCI protection. . . just saying.
 

jumper

Senior Member
That is correct. Branch circuits supplying bathroom outlets or devices are not required to be AFCI protected.

It is uncertain at this point in time if the 2017 NEC will expand AFCI protection to all 120-volt, 15- and 20-ampere branch circuits in a dwelling. STAY TUNED...

Please keep in mind the NEC does not prohibit the installation of AFCI protection for bathroom branch circuits.

Did it pass the comments stage?
 

bphgravity

Senior Member
Location
Florida
Did it pass the comments stage?

Yes. See Second Revision #319. However, balloting doesn't close until tomorrow. And regardless of the outcome of the ballot, there is a really good chance that a NITMAM/CAM will be heard at the Annual Meeting. (And then there are Appeals and TIA's)
 

mwm1752

Senior Member
Location
Aspen, Colo
Well then industry better come up with 2 pole GFCI/AFCI combo breakers -- existing remodels that change out devices are becoming problematic. Funny how I ever survived in a house with out it burning up with out all this #@*& protection.
 

al hildenbrand

Senior Member
Location
Minnesota
Occupation
Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
Well then industry better come up with 2 pole GFCI/AFCI combo breakers -- existing remodels that change out devices are becoming problematic.

Boy you got that right! Although, if I can keep the GFCI at the outlet, I will do so every time. Until I am forced to protect WIRING with a Class A GFCI, I will only strive to protect it with PURE AFCI. . . which at this point is the GE single pole combination-type that has NO ground fault sensing circuitry.

I want a dual class A GFCI + outlet branch circuit AFCI DEVICE . . . receptacle or blank face . . . both that is clearly labeled as installable on existing ungrounded branch circuits.
 

bphgravity

Senior Member
Location
Florida
Funny how I ever survived in a house with out it burning up with out all this #@*& protection.

This can be said about any evolving technology. Most people won't die in a car accident or an airplane crash so why make them safer? Most people won't die from brain cancer so why try to find a cure? How many lives does take before we do something about it?

I think you get my point...
 

mwm1752

Senior Member
Location
Aspen, Colo
a significant number of people die in car wrecks, plane crashes and from cancer is why we evolve to safer constaints & cures -- now the grounded receptacle that was a break through for safety -- You might get my point...
 

bphgravity

Senior Member
Location
Florida
a significant number of people die...

What is the definition of significant? Significant as compared to what? Are you saying that it is okay if just a small number of people die as a result of an electrical fault or failure. Or should our goal be zero injuries and zero deaths as a result of the use and failure of ANY consumer product, be it a car, airplane, or electrical system?

I would argue that at some point in time, more lives will be saved from AFCI and GFCI technology than from just equipment grounding alone.
 

al hildenbrand

Senior Member
Location
Minnesota
Occupation
Electrical Contractor, Electrical Consultant, Electrical Engineer
This is the same argument that happened at the introduction of the AFCI requirement. Safety at any cost vs. quantifying loss (which the courts do ALL the time).

Bryan, we, the installers of AFCI's are still waiting to be shown how the technology actually works. . . so we can show our clients the value of their purchase.
 

peter d

Senior Member
Location
New England
This can be said about any evolving technology. Most people won't die in a car accident or an airplane crash so why make them safer? Most people won't die from brain cancer so why try to find a cure? How many lives does take before we do something about it?

I think you get my point...

I put anything you say on a very low shelf considering you benefit financially, albeit indirectly, from the manufacture and sale of electrical products. In fact, your words have almost no weight at all.
 

peter d

Senior Member
Location
New England
This is the same argument that happened at the introduction of the AFCI requirement. Safety at any cost vs. quantifying loss (which the courts do ALL the time).

Bryan, we, the installers of AFCI's are still waiting to be shown how the technology actually works. . . so we can show our clients the value of their purchase.

That question has been asked for well over a decade now and still no answer forthcoming. Don't expect that to change anytime soon. We're simply forced to have blind faith in a mystery box and believe that these devices do what they say they will do. I'm an obvious skeptic of those claims.
 

mbrooke

Batteries Included
Location
United States
Occupation
Technician
This can be said about any evolving technology. Most people won't die in a car accident or an airplane crash so why make them safer? Most people won't die from brain cancer so why try to find a cure? How many lives does take before we do something about it?

I think you get my point...

And most people will never see a unicorn so why invest in something regarding mythical creatures?
 

mbrooke

Batteries Included
Location
United States
Occupation
Technician
This is the same argument that happened at the introduction of the AFCI requirement. Safety at any cost vs. quantifying loss (which the courts do ALL the time).

Bryan, we, the installers of AFCI's are still waiting to be shown how the technology actually works. . . so we can show our clients the value of their purchase.

A GFCI is does the EXACT same thing as an AFCI.
 

peter d

Senior Member
Location
New England
A GFCI is does the EXACT same thing as an AFCI.

:huh:

A GFCI operates on the principle of current differential, an AFCI (supposedly) performs waveform analysis and acts accordingly. I don't see how they do the exact same thing, other than interrupt the circuit when trouble strikes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top