Omission of AFCI protection in Kitchens

Status
Not open for further replies.
H

HuaMeisMom

Member
Location
Midwest
Why does the expansion of AFCI protection in the 2008 NEC Section 210.12 (B) not include kitchens? If AFCI's prevent some electrical fires why wouldn't the NFPA want them to be included in kitchens? This is a very confusing omission. Can someone clarify intent here? :-?

Thanks in advance for educating me about this topic.
 
Probably because people generally don't sleep in kitchens. And most fires that start in kitchens are cooking/grease related.
 
It's probably coming in the '11......

Everyone is complaining about the cost of AFCI-protection in just those new areas.

Imagine the b***hing that would occur if, all of a sudden, ALL circuits must be AFCId, not just most of the 120v/15- & 20-a circuits?

And it's not just kitchens that are missing from the list. Baths, garages, unfinished areas, outside are not listed either.
 
Last edited:
480sparky said:
It's probably coming in the '11......

Everyone is complaining about the cost of AFCI-protection in just those new areas.

Imagine the b***hing that would occur if, all of a sudden, ALL circuits must be AFCId, not just most of the 120v/15- & 20-a circuits?
Click to expand...

At that point I will be moving to an area that does not require licensing or have inspections, because then we will have officially moved into the "nanny state" of the NEC. ;)

I think I've moved back across the fence to disliking AFCI's again. :roll:
 
Actually most dwelling unit fires are cooking or cooking equipment related. The NFPA says that for dwelling unit fires, 32% are cooking related, 16% heating related, 5% intentional, 4% smoking materials, and 3% electrical distribution or equipment. When you look at deaths or injuries, fires of electrical origin cause fewer deaths or injuries than any of the other causes listed above. Looks like there are a lot of other causes that should have been looked at before they required the AFCIs.
 
HuaMeisMom said:
Why does the expansion of AFCI protection in the 2008 NEC Section 210.12 (B) not include kitchens? If AFCI's prevent some electrical fires why wouldn't the NFPA want them to be included in kitchens? This is a very confusing omission. Can someone clarify intent here? :-?

Thanks in advance for educating me about this topic.
Click to expand...


They are waiting for the new AFCI/GFCI Combo 2000 series to be developed. :roll: :grin:
 
Combination AFCIs

Combination AFCIs

Thanks for the response. What would likely happen if a regular AFCI was installed on a kitchen circuit that also had GFCI protection?

Also, Would AFCIs trip off if a homeowner unplugged an appliance before it was turned off?
 
HuaMeisMom said:
Thanks for the response. What would likely happen if a regular AFCI was installed on a kitchen circuit that also had GFCI protection?
Click to expand...

Nothing, It would work just fine.
 
HuaMeisMom said:
Thanks for the response. What would likely happen if a regular AFCI was installed on a kitchen circuit that also had GFCI protection?

Also, Would AFCIs trip off if a homeowner unplugged an appliance before it was turned off?
Click to expand...

Yes AFCI's protect the whole circuit from panel to outlet, so it would trip if there were a problem on the wiring in the wall.
(edit) I missed the part about "before the appliance was turned off" it may trip if the unit draws an arc while being unplugged or it may hold. It is not a "for sure" going to trip or not in that case
 
Last edited:
Supposedly, AFCI's have arcing signatures programmed into their circuitry to avoid nuisance tripping from normal appliance arcing. Some of my students say unplugging or plugging in under load does not trip an AFCI. Hope so!
 
inspector141 said:
Supposedly, AFCI's have arcing signatures programmed into their circuitry to avoid nuisance tripping from normal appliance arcing. Some of my students say unplugging or plugging in under load does not trip an AFCI. Hope so!
Click to expand...

The problem with this is they only have a fraction of the "nuisance signatures" that exist in the real world.:mad: But at least they "fail safe".
 
don_resqcapt19 said:
Actually most dwelling unit fires are cooking or cooking equipment related.
Click to expand...
To that I will add that an AFCI breaker would not prevent such fires. In other words, it is not needed in the kitchen. Some would argue that it is not needed anywhere, but that is another topic.
 
Maybe AFCIs are not perfected yet and they don't want to be turning off fridges and such. Or maybe the're being sensitive to the home owner's expense:D (after all, all those other locations still require GFCIs)
 
HuaMeisMom said:
Also, Would AFCIs trip off if a homeowner unplugged an appliance before it was turned off?
Click to expand...

This is part of why it is so hard to protect against "series arcing" incidents.
 
crossman said:
It would seem, if we could save even a single child, that AFCIs should be required EVERYWHERE, regardless of the cost, inconvenience, or nuisance.
Click to expand...
Agreed.

Now show me how the brand new (so new it has not yet been invented but it is about to be required in the 2011 NEC) "QFCI" devices are going to save that one child. While you are at it, show me how an AFCI device in a kitchen is going to save that one child. Perhaps we should start with the present NEC requirements, and I should just ask you to show me how an AFCI device in a dining room is going to save that one child.

Please do not try to play the "universal love for children" card, when there is no technical basis for the assertion that a child who is otherwise in danger can be saved by an unproven technology.
 
I was hoping that my tongue would have been seen in my cheek, but I forgot it doesn't show up in the text on the internet.

:wink:

I think the AFCIs have been thrown on us a little too soon. They need a bit more testing and perfecting.

Actually, as for safety, why don't we just do away with electrical wiring in bedrooms altogether? To have lights and an alarm clock, maybe a TV, is putting convenience and luxury in front of a child's safety.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top