No AFCI's in New Hampshire

Status
Not open for further replies.
bphgravity said:
...I have a bunch of old IAEI documents dating back to the early 30's where members were saying the same thing about manufacturers back then. They claim the codes of the 20's were so much better. I recently came across and article written in the 70's that claim the NEC has declined since WWII when the code was "pure"....
Click to expand...
That is a fair argument, and it's definitely something to keep in mind when criticizing additional code requirements.

But it doesn't by itself negate the argument that by a lot of appearances AFCIs seem to be a very questionable technology put into place by very questionable science.

I'm not a fan of AFCIs for that reason, but to be clear, if I saw sound evidence that these things were significantly reducing home fires I would champion their use.

I haven't seen that. Not even anecdotally. I think I can count on one hand without running out of fingers the number of times in the last decade where I've heard someone report that an AFCI found a loose or arcing fault.

And in the interest of being objective, I'll even start a poll about it, because maybe my bias is coloring my opinion.
 
Last edited:
big john said:
That is a fair argument, and it's definitely something to keep in mind when criticizing additional code requirements.

But it doesn't by itself negate the argument that by a lot of appearances AFCIs seem to be a very questionable technology put into place by very questionable science.

I'm not a fan of AFCIs for that reason, but to be clear, if I saw sound evidence that these things were significantly reducing home fires I would champion their use.

I haven't seen that. Not even anecdotally. I think I can count on one hand without running out of fingers the number of times in the last decade where I've heard someone report that an AFCI found a loose or arcing fault.

And in the interest of being objective, I'll even start a poll about it, because maybe my bias is coloring my opinion.
Click to expand...


You can detect all arc conditions minus a series fault without an AFCI. Further keep in mind one of the biggest causes of electrical fires is glowing connections, not arc faults.



While people debate code superiority (not saying the debate is invalid, its really good) one must remember that electricity follows the laws of physics. Older codes appeared to be more lax because back then there seemed to be more qualified people doing electrical. Or at least it seemed that way as todays code looks to be protecting unqualified personnel.


Some just seem to go against the NEC's mission statement. For example, why do I need to run a dedicated circuit to a range hood if its cord and plug connected?
 
mbrooke said:
Wait, they ditched AFCIs? Do you have a link?
Click to expand...





Well i just googled to check on old news . Idaho rejected the AFCI requirement as far as I know and Indiana never did have that requirement , as far as I know .

New Hampshire is getting on the band wagon , and that is Great News .

I am going third world so I do not think I will have a problem with wiring my place with Edison Fuses ... Still the best protection .




Don
 
donaldelectrician said:
Well i just googled to check on old news . Idaho rejected the AFCI requirement as far as I know and Indiana never did have that requirement , as far as I know .

New Hampshire is getting on the band wagon , and that is Great News .

I am going third world so I do not think I will have a problem with wiring my place with Edison Fuses ... Still the best protection .




Don
Click to expand...


They most definitely are :D
 
iwire said:
I think the more you see the NEC become a sales tool of the manufacturers the more you will see this type of action. It would be wise of the NFPA to take note.
Click to expand...

Let's hope so.

I personally think NH is making a good decision.

Roger
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top