Brendan.
Righto….you’re a manufacturer's rep right?
Know that I reserve the privilege of flogging the dead equestrian with my professional counterparts wherever cyberspace will have me & rest assured the fall
ROP's will fuel this far and beyond my rants, so i hope you can hang 'til the 05'
The AFCI (Arc-Fault-Circuit-Interrupter) has been a manufacturing coup for the NEC. They are pedaled under shady pretenses in that they allude to the mitigation of ALL arc-faults, the package says "ARC-Fault", the homeowner/consumer will assume expectations from this. They will also expect a performance from the end-sales contact which will usually be us, the Electrical Contractor. Would you feel comfortable if the onus was on you here, I see no gaurantee from CH or other maker, as you have all convienently isolated yourself(s). As a matter of discussion, how many contractors here have sold AFCI's under this assumption? Your assertion that all series arc's of dangerous caliber will simply ground out aids & abets this misleading definition, and quite frankly is an insult to any sparky worth his/her salt. The {glowing contacts, glowing wire nuts, back-wired push-in receptacle connections, shared neutrals, hot plugs, broken conductors beyond the receptacle, overheated cords and overheated cord-plug connections} are not going to all decide to go to ground before dialing 911…..
Further, how will all the AFCI's that I have installed in my service upgrades with K&T fare?
I have questioned Dave Dini of UL , who also sits on the CMP re; 210.12, who's politically correct answer was 'less efficient'. The same goes, I believe , for anything beyond the device due to lack of a third conductor, and I suggest you check your listing(s) for verification, however misworded.
To further compound this is to introduce a sensitive device, admitedly not meggable, into proximal X-former AIC, swells, sags, and all manner of 'lectrical havoc.
Thus the major fallacy…show me an AFCI with one wire to it, or a moneyback gaurantee and I'll change my tune here., otherwise it is a GFPE's cousin
210.12 would do better to be defined as an LCDI, as in 440.65
The other issue is stat's. as a former FF, the forensics' for precise diagnostics may exist, but are rarely called for, and I was never privy to such fanfare in my tenure. Insurance co's do not care, they simply pay off…and the stat's follow suit.....