ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade General Discussion Area AFCI's and Fires

Don.,

Sorry to bother you but Did the UL or someone else did have the statement written sometime back ?? I did know couple of manufacter did make a statement but only issue I am looking is long term useage like you mention 20 years how many oringal AFCI will be functioning after X amout of years before failure.

Merci,Marc

I've been following this discussion since it started and have been surprised that I haven't heard anyone repeat what I heard about 5 years ago.

In Canada we only require AFCI breakers on bedroon receptacles. I heard (from another electrician) that the reasoning was due to somebody having determined that bedroom receptacles have a greater buildup of dust inside of them, then receptacles in other parts of the house. This greater dust buildup was due to people spending more time in bedrooms than any other room in a house and dust containing a high percentage of human skin. This buildup of dust can cause arcing and therefore fires.

Has anybody else heard this as well?

I'm only asking as it was actually the best reason I ever heard of why we only require AFCI protected circuits on bedroom receptacles. If the intent of AFCI's was to protect against over driven staples and loose connections, then that could happen on any circuit.

Bruce

Well, that's a new on on me!

I can't say I understand the 'only the bedrooms' requirement either, except to look at it as a toehold for future expansion of the requirement. After all, there is no code requirement to segregate the circuits by room.

I think that 'explanation' was vreative in the extrems.

I always understood the "bedroom" thing that if a fire started there while you were sleeping you had less time to get out of the house and more of a chance of being overcome by smoke. I was never sure that was true either.
I did understand the example of the cord, under the bed, covered in dust bunnies and pinched under the bed wheel but that would also be true behind the couch.

I am waiting for a call from the electrician at my wife's place about a real life arc incident. It was a warming element in a soup tureen that was "shooting fire". I am curious what he actually found and if he thinks an AFCI would have cleared the fault. (20a single breaker)

So i guess there's nothing new under the sun here fella's.

No supporting stats, no produce specifics, nothing from the powers that be at all.

I guess the afci steamroller trudges on....

Now in the grander scheme i have to ask, is there really any unbiased entity , some sort of electrical consumer reports (per se') that rates the products we install?

In fact, can you show me a pundit in Electrical Contractor, EC&M, NEC news, IAEI (et all trade mags) that suck up manufacturing ads like a cream fed kitten?

Honestly, Sisyphus had it easy...

~S~

Marc,
I don't recall any statement from UL or anyone else on the expected life of the AFCI. They are an electronic device and subject to damage by surges, but I don't really have any idea on how long they will actually remain functional. I know the the manufacturers expect the home owner to push the test button once a month to find out if the device still works, but I don't think that too many home owners will actually do that.

Don.,

Thanks for your reply with the answer and I do agree with your last part how many time do the homeowner ever check the GFCI breaker ?? almost never check unless they assumed the breaker is tripped I am pretty sure it will be the same thing with AFCI.

I think one reason why many homeowners kinda reclunet { hestanite } to hit the test button due they have to reset the electronic clock etc.,,

As far for European verison there is talk going on but nothing is written yet due we have good proctal allready set in is we have to megger everything before it can be engerized but as far you and I know noting is foolproof something will show up.

Anyway Don thanks again.

Merci,Marc

Perhaps, I add with tounge in cheek, that a 'self-testing' AFCI and GFCI will be on the horizon?

As to leaving the HO's to test monthly, good luck. I encounter the occasional 'final' upon which it is plain as day that the electrician/EC didn't do any 'testing'!

Don (Resqcapt)....thanks for the input & it's nice to 'hear' from you!!

Tongue in cheek? Too late

GFCI's made since 2003 have had some manner of 'self test' in them. The problem is, this electronic wizardry doesn't actually make any parts move, so the innards can rust solid and never work.

2003 also increased corrosion requirements, but there is still the need to actually trip the things.

Now we are faced with all manner of counterfeit breakers. With this push to get away from affordable devices, and rely upon brand-specific breakers (meaning more expensive), expect the problem to get worse.

What is to prevent some counterfeiter from simply making the 'test' button an 'off' switch - saving the trouble of counterfeiting the intricate innards?

With GFCI's, in most circumstances we can use a simple plug-in tester. Yet, there is no 'acceptable' tester for AFCI's. We are forced to rely upon that same test button - that is part of what might be a counterfeit breaker.

Folks, I have a problem with this situation.

As I read threads about AFCI's over the years, the discussions led me to believe that AFCI's being a good idea in theory their time has not come yet, and they are snake oil. I am wondering if a fire occurs in a AFCI equipped house & there is a loss of life/lives + the cause being deemed electrical in origin, if the trial lawyers are going to come crawling out from under the cow patties & go after the maunfacturers in court & the NFPA in the court of public opinion.......


Post Script: If it had been decided to expand GFCI requirements to everywhere, I do not have a issue w/ that, they work and are cheap too