Combination CAFCI & GFCI on lighting circuits

[seaton]

There is a "tidiness" to having all the "Test" and "Reset" buttons scattered throughout the modern home all combined into the service center branch circuit overcurrent protective devices. One doesn't have to hunt to find the source of the trip, one simply only goes to the service center. Very pre-Seventies.

While that simplifies trouble shooting for the non-technical homeowner, it does, in my opinion, reduce the reliable operation of the energized wiring without interruptions.

I do love tidy, and not searching for tripped outlets is a plus.
I can see your point though, especially bathrooms you want the best protection possible.

I would love to see a test and some numbers behind the idea that it is a slower or less effective trip.

 

[ptonsparky]

I'm looking at doing the same thing. A combo afci/gfci is no more expensive than either single function the last I looked. Maybe even less. Save the time of putting in GFCI devices and get both types of protection. (Being optimistic that the AFCI portion works). I don't do tract homes and this one may be our only new home this year.

Disadvantage is tripping the whole dang circuit.

 

[al hildenbrand]

I would love to see a test and some numbers behind the idea that it is a slower or less effective trip.

The Class A GFCI has to trip in a fixed amount of time, so it doesn't trip slower . . . that's the first thing. Whether a GFCI trips on a 1.0 milliamp current measured at a distant outlet on a multioutlet branch circuit (where 4.5 milliamps leakage to ground is already happening along the branch circuit and in the utilization equipment before the "distant" outlet), the GFCI mechanism will trip at the same speed that it would if it supplied a dedicated single receptacle a foot away with a 5.5 milliamp ground fault current.

Off the top of my head, I recall that the interrupter must open within six cycles (please post the correction, folks, if I've got it confused.)

The GFCI is for protection of personnel. So, let's look at the two examples I just made up.

1) The "distant" outlet having a leakage (maybe thru a person) of 1.0 milliamp causes the GFCI breaker to trip because of the other 4.5 milliamps of loses along the branch circuit BEFORE the "distant" outlet. Now, in point of fact, this is probably a leakage that is caused by a person's simply plugging in an appliance of some kind like a razor or blow dryer, and the circuit goes dead on them. That's a classic nuisance trip. The breaker trips in six cycles when the 1.0 milliamp leak pushes the total milliamp leak back at the breaker to 5.5 milliamps.

2) Now consider a single receptacle with only one foot of branch circuit to the same GFCI breaker. Now there are no other outlets. And there is only what gets plugged into the single receptacle. Now, that single receptacle will see all 5.5 milliamps travel through it alone before the interrupter is triggered. The breaker still clears its trip in six cycles, but now one can plug in the "leaky" appliance without it causing a trip all by itself.

The problem with the long multioutlet branch circuit with a GFCI breaker is that the farther away one gets from the breaker, the greater the "preloading" of the Ground Fault trip sensor. And in some extreme cases, the length of the branch circuit and its environmental conditions and the connected loads on it will simply leak too much to even turn on the GFCI breaker and have it hold at all.

 

[Coppersmith]

SABC's, laundry, bathroom, garage (new in 2017 FWIU) are a few.

I'm working under NEC 2011. I have mixed lighting and receps in laundry, bathroom and garage. Am I in violation (code reference please)? Or is this requirement new to 2017? Note that bathroom is always on it's own circuit.

 

[seaton]

I'm working under NEC 2011. I have mixed lighting and receps in laundry, bathroom and garage. Am I in violation (code reference please)? Or is this requirement new to 2017? Note that bathroom is always on it's own circuit.

I believe you are in the laundry
Laundry Branch Circuit - One 20 amp branch circuit must be provided for the
laundry. This circuit is limited to receptacles within the laundry room. No lighting
outlets are permitted on this circuit.[210.11(C)(2)]
also see
http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=161214

I believe the garage is a new 2017 requirement.

Bathroom, it depends. There is an exception allowing lighting
210.11(C)(3) to be on the same circuit as the bathroom receptacles.
There are limitations, for example it can not leave the room.

Everyone please correct me if I am wrong, I believe all of that is correct:angel:

 

[tom baker]

I would use 20A/12 AWG for receptacles and 15A/14 AWG for lighting. Lighting will have 3 ways, etc and this makes box fill easier to comply with.
I understand you don't want help with your layout...

 

[kwired]

I'm working under NEC 2011. I have mixed lighting and receps in laundry, bathroom and garage. Am I in violation (code reference please)? Or is this requirement new to 2017? Note that bathroom is always on it's own circuit.

AFCI requirements have changed in some of those areas in 2014, I think they stayed mostly the same in 2017.

Other outlets permitted on same circuit as certain items has changed in 2014 as well - in particular the garage. 2014 any receptacle outlets inside the garage can not have any outlets outside of the garage on the same branch circuit, something many of us have been doing for a long time.

 

[Sierrasparky]

So what do you do when you run into a situation like this?

JAP>

What can I do? I don't own the project. I just write down what happened send it off to the owner and move on.

One time the GC refused to pay to troubleshoot and it was a whole big to do. They want to use 16d nails for plywood sheathing, I can't stop them. They want to turn up the pressure on the nail gun and pierce a nail plate and then drive it all the way home , can't stop that either.

Once had a boss that I suggested to check nailing in areas where the wires could be before we leave. Nope refused.

That is why we are stuck with AFCI everywhere now.

 

[kwired]

What can I do? I don't own the project. I just write down what happened send it off to the owner and move on.

One time the GC refused to pay to troubleshoot and it was a whole big to do. They want to use 16d nails for plywood sheathing, I can't stop them. They want to turn up the pressure on the nail gun and pierce a nail plate and then drive it all the way home , can't stop that either.

Once had a boss that I suggested to check nailing in areas where the wires could be before we leave. Nope refused.

That is why we are stuck with AFCI everywhere now.

Not exactly, but is one reason they developed them in the first place. We are stuck with them everywhere because those that manufacture them spent a lot of money convincing the code making panels it was necessary, and nobody spent similar money trying to convince them not to put them in code, so it sort of comes down to marketing techniques is what put them in code.

 

[Sierrasparky]

Originally Posted by Sierrasparky
What can I do? I don't own the project. I just write down what happened send it off to the owner and move on.

One time the GC refused to pay to troubleshoot and it was a whole big to do. They want to use 16d nails for plywood sheathing, I can't stop them. They want to turn up the pressure on the nail gun and pierce a nail plate and then drive it all the way home , can't stop that either.

Once had a boss that I suggested to check nailing in areas where the wires could be before we leave. Nope refused.

That is why we are stuck with AFCI everywhere now.

Not exactly, but is one reason they developed them in the first place. We are stuck with them everywhere because those that manufacture them spent a lot of money convincing the code making panels it was necessary, and nobody spent similar money trying to convince them not to put them in code, so it sort of comes down to marketing techniques is what put them in code.

The industry gave them the proof and ammunition of shoddy workmanship and also shoddy manufacturing which led to the rules we have. Look at the early discussions as to why the industry was asked to develop such a product.

Look where we are today with GFCI. They came into being in the late 70's and only recently are required to protect dishwasher and disposals. Why because of cheap manufacturing that has led to electrical issues. The AFCI has moved into more locations much faster than the GFCI ever did.

 

[jap]

What can I do? I don't own the project. I just write down what happened send it off to the owner and move on.

One time the GC refused to pay to troubleshoot and it was a whole big to do. They want to use 16d nails for plywood sheathing, I can't stop them. They want to turn up the pressure on the nail gun and pierce a nail plate and then drive it all the way home , can't stop that either.

Once had a boss that I suggested to check nailing in areas where the wires could be before we leave. Nope refused.

That is why we are stuck with AFCI everywhere now.

Your saying they do this to your wiring after you've installed it and before your off the job?
Or going on service calls to troubleshoot and not getting paid for it ?


JAP>

 

[jap]

I would personally not use Dual function breakers on all the circuits. it might just become a nightmare for you. Or it might find all the Nails from poor framing practices ie - too long a nail. Nails beaten in through a nail protective plate, Nails that missed a stud ...... :happysad:

This is the whole purpose for having them in the first place.
Just wondering why you wouldn't use them ?

Jap>

 

[Sierrasparky]

Not exactly, but is one reason they developed them in the first place. We are stuck with them everywhere because those that manufacture them spent a lot of money convincing the code making panels it was necessary, and nobody spent similar money trying to convince them not to put them in code, so it sort of comes down to marketing techniques is what put them in code.

Your saying they do this to your wiring after you've installed it and before your off the job?
Or going on service calls to troubleshoot and not getting paid for it ?


JAP>

Several instances. One was my job, Clearly the tile installer placing backer board over the studs used very long screws that pierced the wire.( ie the wire was more than 1 1/4 back) tile man pulled the screw and called it good. I Notified the owner and they refused to allow me to fix stating that it works now.

Another was a troubleshoot call from the owner after she resided. Found the short and she refused to pay, told me to collect from the Siding company. Finally got paid took over a month. This was not my original install or project.

This is the whole purpose for having them in the first place.
Just wondering why you wouldn't use them ?

Jap>

Because we spend countless hours of troubleshooting and never seem to be able to collect for all the time spent. It's great to have a device that detects that you have a potential wiring issue it's a whole other thing trying to locate the problem. I think in my own mind that I am pretty good at troubleshooting, but how do you charge for hours of time and cannot show proof without tearing up things to expose.

Tell me how do you deal with installing some recessed lighting and then need to install a AFCI device. There is no receptacle ahead of the switch box so you install a a breaker it and it tripps. The wire hits several switches or ceiling lights first so no place to install a AFCI receptacle. So you tell me how much time you can spend on this for free. I say free as the customer will always say it worked fine before you got here.
These devices may detect issues but at what price. If someone is truly paying my bill , all the hours spent i will gladly troubleshoot! I am not a charity!

 

[jap]

I don't near the issues with them as that, but, If a breaker is tripping because a tile layer drove a long screw into the wiring or a siding guy drove a nail into it, I'd say it's doing its job.

If someone calls me to troubleshoot something, I collect. That's just business.
There are other avenues available to collect if need be, but nobody hopes that it comes to that.

Usually I will let them know up front what we may be up against if it's an AFCI tripping issue, and use my own judgment of how much time to spend on it.
I will usually discuss it with them as to how much of my time and their money we're going to spend on it if it looks like its going to get entailed.

If something worked prior to me adding something, and then didn't afterwards, I'd have to say something I installed is causing the problem and try and figure it out.

Point is, If it is adopted and enforced by the NEC, we as electricians are required install it as such and face the consequences.

This is not any different than years ago when fuse boxes were changed out to breaker panels and the 14 and 12 guae wiring that was once on 30 amp fuses
"Worked fine for years until you changed it" or the vacuum cleaner that trips now that AFCI's are installed when "I never had this problem before", or
"My favorite 1970's model radio has static in it now that you've changed my lights to T8's with the electronic ballasts" which didn't have that issue with the old magnetic ballasts.

Modern times.
I could go on and on.

I don't know of anyone who don't breathe a sigh of relief when they turn on an Arc Fault Breaker and it doesn't trip, yet pull out of the driveway wondering how long it will be before they get the call that one has.

The biggest problem with them is that it makes good electricians look like they don't know what they're doing. We all think we're pretty sharp and it's embarrassing when something makes us look bad when we don't know actually know what or where the problem is.

As far as the frustration, hang in there, I'm with you, and believe me, we're not alone.


JAP>

 

[kwired]

Several instances. One was my job, Clearly the tile installer placing backer board over the studs used very long screws that pierced the wire.( ie the wire was more than 1 1/4 back) tile man pulled the screw and called it good. I Notified the owner and they refused to allow me to fix stating that it works now.

Another was a troubleshoot call from the owner after she resided. Found the short and she refused to pay, told me to collect from the Siding company. Finally got paid took over a month. This was not my original install or project.



Because we spend countless hours of troubleshooting and never seem to be able to collect for all the time spent. It's great to have a device that detects that you have a potential wiring issue it's a whole other thing trying to locate the problem. I think in my own mind that I am pretty good at troubleshooting, but how do you charge for hours of time and cannot show proof without tearing up things to expose.

Tell me how do you deal with installing some recessed lighting and then need to install a AFCI device. There is no receptacle ahead of the switch box so you install a a breaker it and it tripps. The wire hits several switches or ceiling lights first so no place to install a AFCI receptacle. So you tell me how much time you can spend on this for free. I say free as the customer will always say it worked fine before you got here.
These devices may detect issues but at what price. If someone is truly paying my bill , all the hours spent i will gladly troubleshoot! I am not a charity!

Sounds like it would be good self policy to not extend existing circuits as much as possible, then at least you aren't stuck with some existing problem like you mentioned that trips an AFCI after adding it.

 

[Sierrasparky]

I don't near the issues with them as that, but, If a breaker is tripping because a tile layer drove a long screw into the wiring or a siding guy drove a nail into it, I'd say it's doing its job.

If someone calls me to troubleshoot something, I collect. That's just business.
There are other avenues available to collect if need be, but nobody hopes that it comes to that.

Usually I will let them know up front what we may be up against if it's an AFCI tripping issue, and use my own judgment of how much time to spend on it.
I will usually discuss it with them as to how much of my time and their money we're going to spend on it if it looks like its going to get entailed.

If something worked prior to me adding something, and then didn't afterwards, I'd have to say something I installed is causing the problem and try and figure it out.

Point is, If it is adopted and enforced by the NEC, we as electricians are required install it as such and face the consequences.

This is not any different than years ago when fuse boxes were changed out to breaker panels and the 14 and 12 guae wiring that was once on 30 amp fuses
"Worked fine for years until you changed it" or the vacuum cleaner that trips now that AFCI's are installed when "I never had this problem before", or
"My favorite 1970's model radio has static in it now that you've changed my lights to T8's with the electronic ballasts" which didn't have that issue with the old magnetic ballasts.

Modern times.
I could go on and on.

I don't know of anyone who don't breathe a sigh of relief when they turn on an Arc Fault Breaker and it doesn't trip, yet pull out of the driveway wondering how long it will be before they get the call that one has.

The biggest problem with them is that it makes good electricians look like they don't know what they're doing. We all think we're pretty sharp and it's embarrassing when something makes us look bad when we don't know actually know what or where the problem is.

As far as the frustration, hang in there, I'm with you, and believe me, we're not alone.


JAP>

It's nice to be able to give a quote that "yea these Arc faults might detect a prior wiring issue and it might take a few minutes or hours to find.

The guy who does not use AFCI will win all the time.
I know that for a lot of cases the AFCI is detecting a wiring issue.
I know I am not alone.

Sounds like it would be good self policy to not extend existing circuits as much as possible, then at least you aren't stuck with some existing problem like you mentioned that trips an AFCI after adding it.

Kind of difficult to just start a new branch circuit in most cases. Panel too far, panel on wrong floor, no attic or crawl space........

 

[jap]

It's nice to be able to give a quote that "yea these Arc faults might detect a prior wiring issue and it might take a few minutes or hours to find.

If you have to bid a lot of work, I'd suggest this very sentence in big bold letters at the top of your quote.

JAP>