Bathroom wiring

[jumper]

If the things do what the makers say they will do cost should not be a factor as far as code is concerned.

I can only state why VA stayed with the 2005 AFCI requirements, I neither agree or disagree with the decision.

In a nut shell:

Builders did not want 2008 AFCI rules. Cost.

Fire Marshalls wanted 2008 AFCI rules. Safety.

Inspectors did not care one way or another. Cost was not their concern and safety was debatable.

Builders won.

 

[ActionDave]

They are all shaded pole motors. Most motors people have complaints about tripping AFCI's are motors with brushes. Makes sense there is an arc in these motors in normal operation.

While one would hope that arcs would trip an arc-fault breaker it doesn't seem to work that way.

The first time I ran into a problem it was a Homline, combo AFCI and a Makita saw. I started this thread.

Just this week I have had the same problem come up only this time it is a GE combo AFCI and the same type of saw. The saw is a Makita LS103. Something about the soft start and the AFCI don't get along. A Plain Jane universal motor works fine, big blue sparks a mile long don't trip it. Try and start a saw with what I presume to be SCR's and the breaker trips before a spark can even start to glow.

Two different brands of breaker, the same problem. The breaker is the problem, not the saw.

How do I know this? Because it was two different saws, the same model, and neither of them tripped a GFCI.

 

[augie47]

I didn't go to the meeting when this was discussed, so I don't know for sure what the reasoning was. Gus would probably know though.

One never knows what happens behind the State's closed doors
We were told it was a decision based partly on increasing construction costs and partly due to the "combination" type breakers being relatively new without a field performance history.

 

[kwired]

I can only state why VA stayed with the 2005 AFCI requirements, I neither agree or disagree with the decision.

In a nut shell:

Builders did not want 2008 AFCI rules. Cost.

Fire Marshalls wanted 2008 AFCI rules. Safety.

Inspectors did not care one way or another. Cost was not their concern and safety was debatable.

Builders won.

Cost should not be a consideration for amending code to remove the requirements. Safety should be. Is safety of these devices proven? I don't necessarily believe so. The intent of these devices is good, but they are far from being perfected.

What kind of cost increase are we going to see from no AFCI at all to current AFCI reqirements on a $300K or even more home. If you spend $300 more for AFCI than you otherwise would have spent, that is only 1/10 of 1 percent change in cost for a $300K home. Fluctuations in copper prices or other building materials can easily have a bigger impact than that.

 

[iMuse97]

I cannot see how adding all required AFCIs to a 300K home could only add $300. to the cost of the job. The breakers alone could cost nearly that much. Then all the added wiring and terminations... we are already over a $1,000.

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

Cost should not be a consideration for amending code to remove the requirements. Safety should be.

Cost has to be a consideration. The purpose of the code is "Practical Safeguarding". You could probably eliminate all electrical accidents completely with unlimited funds but it simple isn't practical.

 

[kwired]

I cannot see how adding all required AFCIs to a 300K home could only add $300. to the cost of the job. The breakers alone could cost nearly that much. Then all the added wiring and terminations... we are already over a $1,000.

Aside from not being able to use MWBC's (until they have two pole versions or something that will work with MWBC) what is so different? I don't do anything different besides land the neutral on the terminal on the breaker and land the breaker neutral pigtail on the panel neutral bar.

$300 could be a little low for some homes, may be a little high on others. Or do you put in 25 AFCI's in your new homes (that are $300K or less) Remember to deduct the cost of a standard breaker when figuring the cost difference.

Cost has to be a consideration. The purpose of the code is "Practical Safeguarding". You could probably eliminate all electrical accidents completely with unlimited funds but it simple isn't practical.

You could cut a lot of cost in a gasoline refinery by not using any of the wiring methods required by articles 500-510 also.

 

[George Stolz]

Practical is in the eye of the beholder. If the AHJ decides it's practical to pipe a house in EMT and delete 334, then voila, it is so.

I think the $1000 mark is a little high for the average home where cost is an issue. Why worry about it, we mark up the AFCI and make more with it anyway, right?

 

[Twoskinsoneman]

You could cut a lot of cost in a gasoline refinery by not using any of the wiring methods required by articles 500-510 also.

If you do not believe these safeguards to be practical then be active and write a proposal that backs up your belief.:roll:

 

[Little Bill]

One never knows what happens behind the State's closed doors
We were told it was a decision based partly on increasing construction costs and partly due to the "combination" type breakers being relatively new without a field performance history.

When I said meeting, I meant the local one that we have to discuss code changes and local/state amendments. I was so glad to know that the state had kept the 05 rules for AFCIs, I didn't even ask why.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

If the things do what the makers say they will do cost should not be a factor as far as code is concerned. ....

I don't agree,,,,there should be a cost benefit analysis required for every code rule.
This is done all the time by manufacturers even for things related to safety, and if the NEC was a federal law, a cost benefit analysis would be required.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

What is your reasoning to avoid AFCI protected bath fans ? Is it nusiance

tripping ? Would you say that AFCI were pushed upon the market before all

of the bugs were worked out ? Sometimes the CMP reminds you of polticans.

I am not sure that the CMP is the one to blame. The substantiations used for the original AFCI required were outright lies in some respects. The original proposals by the manufacturers said that they had a device that would do what they now say the combination AFCI device will do. Those original proposals were some 13 years before the combination device actually was available.

 

[kwired]

I don't agree,,,,there should be a cost benefit analysis required for every code rule.
This is done all the time by manufacturers even for things related to safety, and if the NEC was a federal law, a cost benefit analysis would be required.

I guess that is a reason that allows each AHJ the authority to amend or delete NEC requirements. The NFPA is not making laws they are writing a book with suggested safe design practices. Local jurisdictions are the ones that decide to adopt it as a law, sometimes with amendments.

If you do not believe these safeguards to be practical then be active and write a proposal that backs up your belief.:roll:

The AFCI requirements or the 500 articles?.

I have no problem with the 500 articles, but I believe there is more substantiation that using those methods is worth the safeguards they provide. Cost is another issue. You will save a lot of $$ on installation cost at a refinery by not following these requirements, you do have a pretty large safety risk by not doing so. IMO the same is true with the AFCI requirements if the safeguards are what the manufacturers say they are. They have not done a very good job of proving that if it is true. They have taken a little more of a 'trust us they work' attitude on this one.

 

[gotmud]

For years I have been telling everyone I never had an issue with GE afci breakers. Two weeks ago I had just finished a new home. There was problems in the living room, master bedroom and 2nd floor bedrooms. All rooms had ceiling fans bought from lowes - I believe.

Every AFCI tripped. It was odd because the fans worked fine by themselves but when the lights in the hall outside the bedroom were turned on it would trip. I finally realized that the AFCI needs 3 amps before it can detect an arc fault. I got a seimens afci and stuck it in the panel and everything worked.

Called GE and they sent me 6 free older generation afci breakers to try- I only needed 3 but they sent 6 free of charge and overnight. They worked like a charm.

My fear of the bathroom fans is unfounded but I can usually wire both master bath and kids bath together to avoid afci. I also try and wire the laundry room and kitchen area together to avoid afci.

I am not sure why the afci is not required in those areas so I assumed it was because of fans--- better safe then sorry.

I am very glad ge had great tech support specifically for the AFCI. I am sure they have seen their share of problems.

Here we can not get by with no arc fault for laundry and kitchen because our AHJ says a laundry room has to be arc faulted...:rant: