They limit the current by opening and clearing quicker.
They have used almost the same wording since the early 80s and it goes on to say:
You need to look at the industry standard definitions.
It does, theoretically at least. But the NEC does not allow it to be used for SCCR purposes without PE analysis. It's that simple.
Yes. I have done this.
It seems he NEC prohibits it for AIC purposes, but not for SCCR purposes. That is the way I read it anyway. I complain about this nearly every time this topic comes up, but I wish the NEC would be clearer that it is not allowed. Perhaps deleting the definition they provide for CL fuse, and I don't see what purpose that serves other than to confuse and mislead people.
Especially because the definition in 240.2 is not the same as the definition in the UL standards. Many of the new generation (past 20 years) of circuit breakers meets the simple definition of reducing the current magnitude. However the UL definition contains a speed requirement as well as a maximum magnitude, so the industry does not consider most breakers as being CL.
Does a fuse not self destruct when it blows? I thought the reason for a fuse to have a high enough kAIC rating was so that the fault current won't continue to arc through it after the element has melted.
Yes, similar to using the impedance of a transformer to reduce fault current. A reactor / inductor is similar.
Not if it is Listed. The internal element melts but the fuse barrel is supposed to remain intact.
Well, OK, but I would consider a blown fuse to be destroyed since it is no longer functional or reparable.
I would not say it self destructs. The element opens up but I am pretty sure the case is required to not rupture when the element opens by the product standards.