GFP in AFCI breakers

Status
Not open for further replies.
4

414Mhz

Member
Location
Canada
Hello all !

I did some searching here and on the web, but couldn't find anything recent.

Are GE and BR breakers the only ones that currently have removed the GFP in arc fault breakers ?
 
414Mhz said:
I did some searching here and on the web, but couldn't find anything recent.

Are GE and BR breakers the only ones that currently have removed the GFP in arc fault breakers ?
Click to expand...

To my knowledge, GE is the only Combination-Type AFCI breaker that has a completely removed the requirement for a dedicated neutral in single pole AFCI breaker installations.

The classic case occurs in an existing multiwire branch circuit that is 15 A on one leg and 20 A on the other leg. Two GE single pole combination-type AFCI can be used (one a 15 and the other a 20), without connection of the shared neutral to one of the breakers, and with a handle tie for the required common disconnecting means.

Other manufacturers offer two-pole common trip combination-type AFCI, but not in a 15 A / 20 A configuration, AND the neutral has to be dedicated to the breaker.

Bottom line, GE is the only pure AFCI (100% non-GFP) solution that I have found.

GE documents this which you can read by clicking here.

Or one can read the GE Application Guide (with diagrams) by clicking here.

I have yet to read any other manufacturer's documentation of comparable capabilities.
 
The GF protection was removed from the BR series a few years ago. As far as I know the CH still includes it. Siemens includes it and even has indicator lights showing GF or AF trip. SquareD QO and HOM also have GF.
 
curt swartz said:
The GF protection was removed from the BR series a few years ago.
Click to expand...

I can't find documentation for this. In fact, in going to the BR AFCI page ( click here ), the trouble shooting guide ( click here ) tells one to clear neutral-EGC accidental contacts to prevent instantaneous tripping upon energization of the BR AFCI.
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
The document is dated 2009. BR removed the GFP after that.
Click to expand...

OK. But the link is from today's web site as set forth by the manufacturer. I think that is prim facie evidence to the contrary.

On the BR AFCI page, none of the other links give any hint of the "non-GFP" status.

If the BR AFCI truly has ground fault sensing removed, and is listed as an AFCI, that's a selling point as GE's promotion of its MOD 3 CAFCI demonstrates.

Again, I'd love to see the documentation of the BR. . .
 
Thanks to all of you for the replies.
Some of the spec sheets for certain breakers will list the GFP, others seem to omit to comment ??

I guess it's just GE and BR for now. Although it seems GE is the only one that documents it properly.

Thanks again

414
 
jumper said:
I think that anyone who decides to do residential work legally without AFCI, if required, is prolly living in a fantasy world. No one is forcing you work on dwelling units, it is your choice.
Click to expand...

Devices get replaced and circuits get extended without adding AFCI protection all the time. It happens constantly. That's how things are in the real world.
 
peter d said:
Devices get replaced and circuits get extended without adding AFCI protection all the time. It happens constantly. That's how things are in the real world.
Click to expand...

So, people break different laws all around the world. Does not change anything I said.

Is there a gun to your head making you do resi work? Are you a slave laborer being held hostage and forcibly made to do illegal acts or be cruelly punished?
 
jumper said:
So, people break different laws all around the world. Does not change anything I said.

Is there a gun to your head making you do resi work? Are you a slave laborer being held hostage and forcibly be made to do illegal acts or be cruelly punished?
Click to expand...

Illegal acts? :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

What about when the manufacturers lied about the AFCI's capability when they first introduced it, and then got the code to adopt it? That was an illegal act in my opinion.
 
peter d said:
Yeah, you got me there. :slaphead:
Click to expand...

You chose resi over commercial. I know you have commercial experience, you worked with Bob, so you are not limited in in a skill sets.

You are not an EC, so the financial aspect does not impact you directly. Take an an EC in the market who does resi, say Dennis: he does something about it. Got a code proposal accepted. He made a NEC change because it affects him directly.

Why do you live in an area that has AFCI rules you do not accept? The majority there must want them because if not, y’all would pass amendments. VA said that AFCI was not going past 2005 rules, because they did not want it. Majority makes the rules.

If you want change, do something about it. Whining on an internet forum solves nothing for you and your area.

Acting like you are some social crusader to protect the public against the evils of AFCI is BS IMO.
You ain’t Robin Hood.
Openly declaring that breaking the AFCI rules is a good thing in your opinion carries no weight as I see it.

You chose the field where they required, you live in an area that the people must want them, I see no action on your part for changes in the NEC that affect others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top