Testing old wiring before arc fault protection

[mbrooke]

210.12(A)(4) (d) The combination of the overcurrent device and outlet branch-circuit AFCI shall be identified as meeting the requirements for a system combination–type AFCI and shall be listed as such. [/quote]
As far as I know there is no such listed combination.[/QUOTE]

When they say listed, is it the outlet AFCI?

 

[romex jockey]

I know that tune!!!!

I know that tune!!!!

Not even NEMA will say that the AFCI can prevent all electrical fires....they will just respond to the suit with the comment that the fire was caused by joule heating and not an arcing fault and their device is not intended to protect from fires caused by joule heating (also known as a glowing connection)

He's a real Nema man,
Sitting in his Nema Land,
Making all his Nema plans
for nobody.

Only has a profit view,
Doesn't want to pay his dues
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

Nema man please listen,
You got clout , with fools kissin'
Nema Man, the Cmp's are at your command!

He's as shill as he can be,
Just shows us what he wants to see,
Nema Man can you see me at all?

Nema Man, don't worry,
Take your time, don't hurry,
Leave it to the testing labs to
lend you a hand!

Only has a profit view,
Cloaked behind his safety spew
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

Nema Man please listen,
you don't know who you're dissing
Nema Man, the CSPC is at your command!

He's a real Nema Man,
Sitting in his Nema Land,
Making all his nema plans
for nobody.
Making all his nema plans
for nobody.
Making all his nema plans
for nobody!

~RJ~

 

[Tony S]

Indeed. :thumbsup: Somehow only a handful of states have been able to see beyond the fraud of the AFCI.

Im just hoping the rest of the world can see it. Check the links out here:

Its a dark day for the human race :happysad:

I don't know if that would help or hurt the reputation of AFCIs. On one hand the rest of the world would see what a nuisance these things are, but on the other hand the manufacturers would be raking in sooooooo much money they would be untouchable ( if they already aren't )

Although being pushed by the manufacturers to adopt AFDD’s (AFCI’s) the IET (UK regulations BS7671) seem to be resisting them for the moment.

AFDD = Arc Fault Detection Device to BS-EN6206, It’s identical to UL1699

The more evidence we can gather about the failings of these devices the better our chances are of avoiding them being introduced.

In the 14^th edition of BS7671 RCD’s (GFCI’s) were recommended for certain installations. No one over here will dispute they were a good thing.
Through subsequent editions and amendments of the regulations the RCD has moved on from being a recommendation to a requirement.

We’ve just had the 17^th edition amendment 3 forced upon us. As of yet no mention of AFDD’s but the IET are already putting the 18^th edition together. What will the future hold? That I don’t know, but I do know one thing, there’s going to be an outcry if AFDD’s get included.


One thing with the NEC, you know when the next thrilling instalment will be. I wish we did! I’m just waiting the 17^th edition amendment 3 corrigendum’s to be announced.

 

[GoldDigger]

My mistake. You are correct, that would be a series or "serial" arc fault.

However the word "arc fault" was first used to describe short circuits.


This and this:

http://paceforensic.com/pdfs/newsletter/KeepingPace-7.pdf

http://paceforensic.com/pdfs/Circuit_Breakers_The_Myth_of_Safety.pdf

Also notice how that point was proven (see vids):

http://paceforensic.com/videos

And my point is exactly that there may be a *series arc* signature, but there is no fault at all and it should not be part of the term.
The really hard job of signature analysis is to distinguish between a normal arc signature and an arc fault signature.
Because of the high current requirement, parallel arc detection can only cause a trip during a motor start or other inrush.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

210.12(A)(4) (d) The combination of the overcurrent device and outlet branch-circuit AFCI shall be identified as meeting the requirements for a system combination–type AFCI and shall be listed as such.

As far as I know there is no such listed combination.[/QUOTE]

When they say listed, is it the outlet AFCI?[/QUOTE]
The way I read it is that the combination of the breaker and the outlet AFCI must be listed.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

He's a real Nema man,
Sitting in his Nema Land,
Making all his Nema plans
for nobody.

Only has a profit view,
Doesn't want to pay his dues
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

Nema man please listen,
You got clout , with fools kissin'
Nema Man, the Cmp's are at your command!

He's as shill as he can be,
Just shows us what he wants to see,
Nema Man can you see me at all?

Nema Man, don't worry,
Take your time, don't hurry,
Leave it to the testing labs to
lend you a hand!

Only has a profit view,
Cloaked behind his safety spew
Isn't he a bit like you and me?

Nema Man please listen,
you don't know who you're dissing
Nema Man, the CSPC is at your command!

He's a real Nema Man,
Sitting in his Nema Land,
Making all his nema plans
for nobody.
Making all his nema plans
for nobody.
Making all his nema plans
for nobody!

~RJ~

Are you suggesting that I am in agreement with NEMA on the AFCI issue???????????????/

 

[romex jockey]

Are you suggesting that I am in agreement with NEMA on the AFCI issue???????????????/

No, you've merely pointed out their stance Don

And you may well be aware of the litigant shenanigans vying for position .

Billion $$ industries , in reality, have no shortage of confrontation.

But it takes $$$ to fight $$$

So , if i may ask, how would one ante' up w/o $$$ ?

~RJ~

 

[peter d]

Although being pushed by the manufacturers to adopt AFDD’s (AFCI’s) the IET (UK regulations BS7671) seem to be resisting them for the moment.

AFDD = Arc Fault Detection Device to BS-EN6206, It’s identical to UL1699

The more evidence we can gather about the failings of these devices the better our chances are of avoiding them being introduced.

I wouldn't get your hopes up. Unfortunately, you have those same "Big 4" companies that we have (Eaton, Schneider, GE, and Siemens.) In fact, I would guess that since both Schneider and Siemens are European based, you will just as intense intense lobbying for them in them in the UK and the rest of Europe. I believe the whole concept for the AFCI actually came from France in the first place.

 

[mbrooke]

I wouldn't get your hopes up. Unfortunately, you have those same "Big 4" companies that we have (Eaton, Schneider, GE, and Siemens.) In fact, I would guess that since both Schneider and Siemens are European based, you will just as intense intense lobbying for them in them in the UK and the rest of Europe. I believe the whole concept for the AFCI actually came from France in the first place.

It is worth the try. To sit and do nothing is asking for them.

True Schneider is the one behind the AFCI fiasco, but their trick will only work if people believe them. If people can see AFCIs for what they really are it will be a LOT harder for these corporations to get AFCIs mandated.

One thing in particular that irritates me is that Europeans are being told how successful AFCIs have been in the US when that couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[iwire]

It is worth the try. To sit and do nothing is asking for them.

But you are not doing a damn think except ranting on an Internet forum.

 

[bphgravity]

He's a real Nema man,
Sitting in his Nema Land,
Making all his Nema plans
for nobody.


~RJ~

The Beatles are great, but I'm more of an Elvis guy. Do you think you could write me into one of his songs? I am thinking "Suspicious Minds" or maybe "Just Can't Help Believing" or perhaps "Devil in Disguise". These titles fit your delusions of conspiracy and chasing bigfoot...

 

[mbrooke]

That aside, the laws of physics are not a conspiracy.

If you know the physics behind arc faults you can explain them, that could help clear up any misunderstanding.

 

[mbrooke]

Although being pushed by the manufacturers to adopt AFDD’s (AFCI’s) the IET (UK regulations BS7671) seem to be resisting them for the moment.

AFDD = Arc Fault Detection Device to BS-EN6206, It’s identical to UL1699

The more evidence we can gather about the failings of these devices the better our chances are of avoiding them being introduced.

In the 14^th edition of BS7671 RCD’s (GFCI’s) were recommended for certain installations. No one over here will dispute they were a good thing.
Through subsequent editions and amendments of the regulations the RCD has moved on from being a recommendation to a requirement.

We’ve just had the 17^th edition amendment 3 forced upon us. As of yet no mention of AFDD’s but the IET are already putting the 18^th edition together. What will the future hold? That I don’t know, but I do know one thing, there’s going to be an outcry if AFDD’s get included.


One thing with the NEC, you know when the next thrilling instalment will be. I wish we did! I’m just waiting the 17^th edition amendment 3 corrigendum’s to be announced.

What I find ironic is that minus series arc fault protection; RCDs, disconnect times and plug top fuses in the UK do everything an AFCI does. This has been verified over and over in NRTL testing and GFP is still the work engine in many AFCIs.

A few decades ago someone discovered that not all short circuits clear our breakers magnetically, and re-labelled that as "arcing short circuits" claiming them to be behind thousands of fires. He latter filed a patent for essentially the first AFCI, only discovering a year latter that your fixed magnetic trip breakers do the exact same thing. NRTL testing confirmed this. Because we dont do earth fault loop impedance testing to confirm fault current at the furthest point will trip our breakers magnetically, a worse case minimum short circuit current had to be assumed of 75amps by developers. A 75 amp mag trip will stop all "parallel arc faults" in home wiring, but will nuisance trip on motors due to inrush hence why that idea was abandoned for electronic circuitry. Thus the modern branch feeder AFCI was born. Instead of waiting 40 cycles to clear a short circuit this could do it in two cycles. Still yet to be confirmed if a those extra cycles set anything ablaze, especially when most short circuits occur inside enclosures.

For some odd reason plug top fuses for cords were not considered/abandoned but not something you guys have to worry about :lol:

As for series arc faults those are not behind most fires. The majority of loose connections take hold as glowing connections with arcing if anything being the end phase where combustion is starting to take. AFDDs will do little if anything. As is its already irrelevant, looks like a company called thermarestor has already begun working on the only realistic solution to glowing connections


http://thermarestor.co.uk/


So with that said the UK has already figured it out. 100% AFCI protection without a single AFCI

NEMA, please take notice. :thumbsup:

 

[peter d]

But you are not doing a damn think except ranting on an Internet forum.

:roll::roll:

At this point, now that the NEC has won its final victory with AFCI in the 2017, what do you propose we do? I see the value in these "rants" in that people become aware and educated.

 

[peter d]

These titles fit your delusions of conspiracy and chasing bigfoot...

In fact, you are the one who is deluded about AFCI's.

 

[mbrooke]

:roll::roll:

At this point, now that the NEC has won its final victory with AFCI in the 2017, what do you propose we do? I see the value in these "rants" in that people become aware and educated.

Our efforts are still worth it, for all you know AFCI could spread to 240 volt circuits.

 

[don_resqcapt19]

Our efforts are still worth it, for all you know AFCI could spread to 240 volt circuits.

And to non-dwelling occupancies.

 

[peter d]

Our efforts are still worth it, for all you know AFCI could spread to 240 volt circuits.

And to non-dwelling occupancies.

True, I had not thought of either of those possibilities, horrifying as they are.

 

[romex jockey]

Just for you....

Just for you....

The Beatles are great, but I'm more of an Elvis guy. Do you think you could write me into one of his songs? I am thinking "Suspicious Minds" or maybe "Just Can't Help Believing" or perhaps "Devil in Disguise". These titles fit your delusions of conspiracy and chasing bigfoot...

You look like an arc flash Walk like an arc flash
Talk like an arc flash But I got wiiiiiise
You're a ground fault in disguise
Oh yes you are, A ground fault in disguise

You fooled me with your tech talk And wave forms that you schemed
Heaven knows how you lied to me You're terms aren't what they seemed

You look like an arc flash Walk like an arc flash
Talk like an arc flash But I got wiiiiiise
You're a ground fault in disguise
Oh yes you are, A ground fault in disguise


I thought they cleared in cycles But I was sure surprised
Heaven help me, I didn't see That whole mag trip surprise

~R(w/apologies to the King)J~

 

[romex jockey]

Il est une grosse blague en France

Il est une grosse blague en France

That aside, the laws of physics are not a conspiracy.

If you know the physics behind arc faults you can explain them, that could help clear up any misunderstanding.

Mr Paschen did that a century ago. Ironic the french should define 'arc' , and then market for them here in direct conflict.

AFD , btw, is seen as a joke among the French .....

~RJ~