Burning Wirenut

Status
Not open for further replies.
edward, i disagree, i worked in the electrical trade for years and did lots of service work. often we'd go out to do a "lighting repair" lights don't work for what ever reason, pull apart a j-box, wire nuts are loose, .ac (reverses direction) wire nuts will vibrate, you and i can't see, but it happens. i've had lengthy discussion about twisting wires before wire nutting or not twisting, if you twist the wire, wire nut can come loose, but you don't loose connection, you don't know there is a proble. if you don't twist the wires, if the wire nut come s loose, the wire (may) separate and you see a problem (you lose power somewhere. all sorts of weird things happen. never count out that "it" can't happen to you or on your job or in your work.
 
Somebody send me one of those AFCI things and I'll test it for series arc protection. I'll rig up a couple of carbon electrodes with an adjustment to control the gap and put them it in series with some kind of load. Even if i have to put them in a fish bowl and pull a vacuum on it to get a nice series arc going.

I'd do it just for the heck of it, but I'm not investing money in one of those useless things.
 
Joethemechanic said:
Somebody send me one of those AFCI things and I'll test it for series arc protection. I'll rig up a couple of carbon electrodes with an adjustment to control the gap and put them it in series with some kind of load. Even if i have to put them in a fish bowl and pull a vacuum on it to get a nice series arc going.

I'd do it just for the heck of it, but I'm not investing money in one of those useless things.
Click to expand...

The first time I encountered an AFCI was in a bedroom addition. Just for grins, I 'tested' the breaker by putting a 500 watt shop light on the load and then flashing the hot conductors, making a rather impressive spark. I could do it all day long. The breaker never tripped. So, at least that breaker was useless for a series fault. In order to make a parallel fault, wouldn't I have had to flash the hot and neutral, which would trip a normal breaker? (The light would be of no use in a parallel fault).

Hopefully, they work a lot better now....
 
K8MHZ said:
The first time I encountered an AFCI was in a bedroom addition. Just for grins, I 'tested' the breaker by putting a 500 watt shop light on the load and then flashing the hot conductors, making a rather impressive spark. I could do it all day long. The breaker never tripped. So, at least that breaker was useless for a series fault. In order to make a parallel fault, wouldn't I have had to flash the hot and neutral, which would trip a normal breaker? (The light would be of no use in a parallel fault).

Hopefully, they work a lot better now....
Click to expand...
I would not expect it to trip with that experiment. As I understand it, the device does not look for an arc unless the current exceeds 5 amps. Your load was too small.
 
kwired said:
I don't know if it loosens wire connectors but conductors can and do vibrate - especially during motor starting or short circuit conditions.
Click to expand...

I'm sure Bob is aware of that - but like Bob, I am skeptical of a professionally-installed wirenut falling off due to the phases of the moon or the gentle hum of 60 hertz through it's spring. :happyno:
 
Such a strange world, all worried about hot connections in boxes, they require a device that doesn't detect high series resistance, but yet they let you use plastic boxes. :happysad:
 
Code Panels and special interests

Code Panels and special interests

Sierrasparky said:
Wake UP people Wake UP..


If you think these panels are made up of impartial technical minded folks. You need to wake up and smell the foul odor. I canot even fathom that the boards and commitees that I sit on or am consult with are any different than the UL , NFPA, CPSC, or any other agency.

There is a quote that I look at on my wall in my office every day

" It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salery depends upon his not understanding it" Upton Sinclair.........
Click to expand...

As a principal voting member of a different Panel, I can state categorically that there are many special interests, driven by profit, that exist on the NEC Panels. Dr. Ingel's conservative estimate of $1 billion in increased cost to the consumer by requiring combination-type AFCI devices as opposed to branch circuit AFCI devices (which are not allowed to be installed according to the current Code) shows the magnitude of the profit we're talking about. A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon you're talking real money. UL - the more I learn about them, the more disappointed I become. Guess what - they're in it for one reason only - and of course, that's THE MONEY.

I sent a proposal to Panel 2 saying to remove the wording "combination type" from the requirements for AFCIs, and provided video evidence to the Panel showing that these devices absolutely will not trip in a series arcing conditon. Rejected. Absolutely amazing. I can't believe that it's all done out of ignorance, as the evidence is so overwhelming.

We need a device that can detect the overheated connections that do occur in the real world, and prevent our houses from burning down from the resulting fires.
 
rhud12345 said:
As a principal voting member of a different Panel, I can state categorically that there are many special interests, driven by profit, that exist on the NEC Panels. Dr. Ingel's conservative estimate of $1 billion in increased cost to the consumer by requiring combination-type AFCI devices as opposed to branch circuit AFCI devices (which are not allowed to be installed according to the current Code) shows the magnitude of the profit we're talking about. A billion here, a billion there - pretty soon you're talking real money. UL - the more I learn about them, the more disappointed I become. Guess what - they're in it for one reason only - and of course, that's THE MONEY.

I sent a proposal to Panel 2 saying to remove the wording "combination type" from the requirements for AFCIs, and provided video evidence to the Panel showing that these devices absolutely will not trip in a series arcing conditon. Rejected. Absolutely amazing. I can't believe that it's all done out of ignorance, as the evidence is so overwhelming.

We need a device that can detect the overheated connections that do occur in the real world, and prevent our houses from burning down from the resulting fires.
Click to expand...

And I see the AFCI as a start for detecting this but they spent a lot of money and know they are not going to get any of it back if the device is optional - make it required and you are set. Spend more money on reasearch find an improvement and make it required and you are still set. Your product does not do what it really needs to do but is closer to doing so than anything else. Like any other business ride it as long as you can, things eventually change.
 
kwired said:
And I see the AFCI as a start for detecting this but they spent a lot of money and know they are not going to get any of it back if the device is optional - make it required and you are set. Spend more money on reasearch find an improvement and make it required and you are still set. Your product does not do what it really needs to do but is closer to doing so than anything else. Like any other business ride it as long as you can, things eventually change.
Click to expand...

I was kind of thinking the same thing, but I have a real problem with everyone paying for their research and development by way of this scheme of forcing this product on us before it is fully functional. This is a sneaky way of getting a subsidy for R&D costs
 
And the worst part is this thing isn't going to help the people who need it the most. Most electrical fires of this type are in older dwellings occupied by those of of very limited financial resources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top