New refrigerator trips AFCI

Status
Not open for further replies.
Xptpcrewx said:
It doesn’t. He thinks a tmag breaker and AFCI are the same and affords the same level of protection even though they trip on completely different principles.
Click to expand...

Except those exact claims are made by UL:

https://imgur.com/a/xQ0Mq2H

Which was further vindicated by the CMPs when 210.12 A 4 was voted affirmative.



He’s ignoring how the world works to push his point of view. He’s convinced everyone has it wrong except him. You won’t get anything useful out of that kind of mindset.
Click to expand...

If one chooses to ignore three decades of manufacturers, CMP members, NEMA, IEC, CPSC, UL, and other major players discussing the magnetic pickup of circuit breakers in relation to arc mitigation to the point magnetic pickup of all single pole breakers was lowered from by a factor of 20.

When it was realized that lowering this threshold to 75 amps would result in nuisance tripping only then was an electronic solution created, instead of a simpler solution discussed of adding a table to the code restricting how far #14, #12 and #10 could be run.
 
Last edited:
tortuga said:
Yawwwn....
yeah, this is a typical AFCI thread, the electrician has not been back to the job yet, we have no photos not even the make / model of the fridge.
The only troubleshooting has been done by a homeowner.

Yep same here with SQD and Siemens, Ill add poor quality defective appliances to the trip list.


Larry thats interesting might be worth haveing a few on the van for swapping in to shoot troubble.
Click to expand...
Yawn right back at you guy
 
We had issues on a few jobs with Sub Zero tripping AFCI breakers. The jobs were all SquareD so not sure if they were triggering the AF protection or GF protection circuit. All customers called Sub Zero support the same day were told its a know wiring issue in a number of appliances during manufacturing. They sent repair service out the following day who were able to resolve the issues. I have no idea what the actual issues were but was impressed with the quick resolution.
 
It ran fine on GFCI only for 48 hours .. it is a brand new Bosch. I will get you all the model number ASAP , as if it matters . The distance from panel to receptacle is about 30 ' tops . There are multiple kitchen counter circuits all the home runs are similar lengths. There are two different circuits adjacent to the circuit the refrigerator is on .. he plugged it into both of them and it tripped those two plus the original that has no other outlet presently. That's 3 dual function breakers tripping all new all with only one item utilizing electricity. I may have screwed up one circuit's termination but I refuse to believe I screwed three of them up . He plugged it back into the original circuit and he said it ran for an hour then tripped . I'm sorry I have no photos or that this is just some sort of run of the mill issue ... I guess my point is this should not be an issue nor should the proximity to an ocean or the wealth of the homeowner or quite frankly , the brand of the refrigerator come into play. It is obvious this technology is problematic.
 
mbrooke said:
The inverter ripple looks like an arc fault to the AFCI, but not to a standard thermal magnetic breaker. Yet both breakers provide arc fault protection.
Click to expand...
mbrook, does UL homework effort you shared involve UL 1699 arc fault testing?

I doubt short circuit functions of Standard breakers can meet U.S. – UL 1699, the Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupters

If anyone published such test results, withholding a UL 1699 Certificate would be unlikely, and AHJ's would be forced to accept it during inspected installations.
 
Unfortunately you are facing a all to common dilemma with no clear-cut answer. From a liability standpoint you can't revert to a standard breaker (despite mbrooke's smoke and mirrors) and your problem is magnified by the distance from the job. At this point I would think the next step would be (a) a new breaker; (b) plug the appliance into another AFCI circuit and if it trips it will help your case that's it the appliance, not the wiring; (c) contact Siemens with all the data.
When it is resolved, please report back.
 
ramsy said:
mbrook, does UL homework effort you shared involve UL 1699 arc fault testing?

I doubt short circuit functions of Standard breakers can meet U.S. – UL 1699, the Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupters

If anyone published such test results, withholding a UL 1699 Certificate would be unlikely, and AHJ's would be forced to accept it during inspected installations.
Click to expand...


See post #21. UL openly confirms in their test reports that magnetic pickup meets UL1699.
 
augie47 said:
Unfortunately you are facing a all to common dilemma with no clear-cut answer. From a liability standpoint you can't revert to a standard breaker (despite mbrooke's smoke and mirrors) and your problem is magnified by the distance from the job. At this point I would think the next step would be (a) a new breaker; (b) plug the appliance into another AFCI circuit and if it trips it will help your case that's it the appliance, not the wiring; (c) contact Siemens with all the data.
When it is resolved, please report back.
Click to expand...

210.12 A 5 may legally allow you to do so.
 
augie47 said:
Unfortunately you are facing a all to common dilemma with no clear-cut answer. From a liability standpoint you can't revert to a standard breaker (despite mbrooke's smoke and mirrors) and your problem is magnified by the distance from the job. At this point I would think the next step would be (a) a new breaker; (b) plug the appliance into another AFCI circuit and if it trips it will help your case that's it the appliance, not the wiring; (c) contact Siemens with all the data.
When it is resolved, please report back.
Click to expand...
So four brand new AFCI breakers need to trip? Every 120 outlet in a dwelling in Massachusetts requires AFCI. I think three separate brand new breakers tripping eliminates the run of the mill "try another breaker " approach.
 
Xptpcrewx said:
You can underline what you want, it doesn’t say what you think. This is simply giving you maximum lengths so you can trip on instantaneous.
Click to expand...

125% over instantaneous- peak arc impedance limits current to 80% of the available bolted fault current.

Once this met, parellel arcing is detected and mitigated.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top