ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Arc Fault Breakers

Don, Tom,

It's my understanding that a signifigant number of failed GFCIs were also reported to be due to exposure to the weather. As a result manufacturer instructions will now include the installation of 'in use' covers where the GFCIs are installed in wet (or damp?) locations.

Bill

Bill,
If that is true, how come the study found similar failure rates for both breakers and receptacles?
Don(resqcapt19)

The 02' ROP's were swampped with requests , mostly from what looked like inspectors,for what leviton now offers in a lockout GFI.

Leviton did'nt surprise me in that most manufacturer's are probably privy to, or somehow involved in the ROP,ROC process.

GFI's track record will probably be paralleled to AFCI's, and i hav'nt seen a tester yet, have you?

The AFCI deal is by far a 'tail waggin' the dog' deal to me , a cheap fix bandaid for future mishaps at best, or those bad installs that are blamed on our trade despite circumstances.
Anyone who's been on scene whatching accelerants ruled out of a smoking cellarhole only to have the guys with the white helmets shrug it off as electrical know stat's lie.
I have nothing against safety,i can pass these costs on, but i'd like to orate without a shred of vocal doubt the justifications to my customers.
Know that safety is BIG biz in this country. And if safety is everyone's biz, then everyone should be looking into the biz of safety.
{anyone what to beat up UL2200???}
I find the AFCI ad's showing a fireman hauling a little girl out of a fire offensive to this end.

Don,

Hmm, .. I have no explanation as to why the failure rates would be the same. I didn't realize it said that. I was repeating something I had heard that sounded plausable. I did hear a UL rep say that the 'in use' covers will be required and that the purpose is to protect the GFCI itself.


Bill


[This message has been edited by Bill Addiss (edited 12-01-2001).]

I hope more states opt out of the AFCI requirement. As i related before the AFCI breakers i used before were junk. Maybe some day, if more reliable breakers are made I'll feel confident enough to recomend them. As for now I will NOT warrent them or use them. When I am forced to install them, I will plan for callbacks and bid accordanly.

VT has updated 210-12 to include 'all living areas', to the point where ONE 40-50A AFCI run subpanel may be more economical than 1/2 dz 20A breakers. There is also some talk of a combo unit AFCI/GFCI, which would allow meeting the $#@% code even easier in this respect.

anyone found this widget yet??



An ammended 215.9 would allow this.
or is the end result the same???

At least it would amount ot one funky device, one callback, one part to eat, with the list growing it becomes a point to entertain;

All Kit circ's
All outside rec's, pools, outbuildings...
All Bath circ's
All Liv circ's
All Bed circ's
Any Hot tub circ's

anyone wish to elude to 2005 or beyond?

[This message has been edited by sparky (edited 12-03-2001).]

I kind of like the ideas of POU [Point Of Use], or POC [Point Of Connection] type AFCI equipment - similar to the GFCIs intregally used with cord caps on things like Blowdryers, etc.

Houses with existing K&T could [maybe??] benifit from AFCI breakers - to protect against arc faults from chipped off insulation and random contacting metallic items, or even the "Wannabe Sparky Rodents"

The concept is a good one. They just need to be perfected, so the nuicance tripping events can be highly limited - otherwise consumers will do as they have with nuicance tripping GFCIs; "Bypass That Darn Thing!!!"

We all have gone through major discussions concerning personal safety equipment in various forums [IAEI, MHE and here at ECN], so we're all aware of the other persons' feelings and ideas of just what to do.

So once again, I'll make my statements of being pro safety items which either reduce or eliminate Electrical Hazards to persons - ranging from Fires to Electrocution.
In order for this to exist, the protecting devices must be as failsafe as possible and as reliable as possible. This means extensive testing, reliability and "Crowbarring" themselves if they fail.

Lastly, these devices should be cost controlled, so it doesn't become an issue between "Can I Afford It" and "I Can't Replace It Because It's Too Expensive"

That's the views from me - Mr. Liberal!!!

Scott SET

With any change, there is always some confusion. I will try to provide some insight into some of the issues that I see in this string. I'm sure I will get a lot of replies, and will try to check back once a day to try to clarify.

First, by means of introduction, I am Eaton | Cutler-Hammer's Product Manager for residential circuit breakers including AFCI. I have been deeply involved in demonstrating, presenting and advocating for the use of AFCI for more than 3 years. I have lived this product, and have heard many of these issues before.

Last week, I was at a meeting that was attended by the President of the National Association of State Fire Marshalls. He said that he was told by an instructor at an early age that all he could ever hope to do was fight a fire...that he could never prevent one. He then went on to say that in all of his years in public fire service that "This was the first product that he has ever seen that has the ability to prevent fires."

NASFM, CPSC and others have endorsed the technology. We have endeavored to get this into the code not because we "want to sell expensive breakers on the premise of safety" as someone in this string has written, but rather because there is a significant problem of electrical fires in the U.S.

40,000 residential electrical fires each year
350 deaths in those fires
1,400 injuries
$700 million in property losses

Even if you do not have a fire in your home, you are paying for this in your insurance premiums. Due to the aging of the installed base of homes (many of which were built after WWII and are now reaching 60 years of age) the problem will get worse before it gets better.

Now to the issues:

Why in new homes? We have to start somewhere, and since you cannot mandate the retrofit into all the existing homes, the logical start is in new construction. This is how buildings are changed, although the process is far too long (18 years for GFCI). Also these new homes will not be new forever. How long do builders hope their new homes will be around? 70-80-90-100+ years? The new homes are larger with more wire in them than 3, 4 or 5 homes that are 70 years old now.

In commercial construction, you install wires in conduit so that when that wire reaches the end of its useful life, you simply pull it out, and pull new wire. What options does a homeowner have to rewire the home? This is an expensive, dirty job that few homeowners and electricians want to get into. So how do you protect those old wires whose insulation is cracked and broken with no barrier to prevent it from arcing?

Over the years, surges, overvoltages, homeowner abuse (have you ever put a nail in a wall to hang a picture without knowing what's behind the drywall?) all create potentially dangerous situations, and contribute to the 40,000 fires each year.

Clearly the terminology of "new construction" needs to be removed from serious dialog regarding AFCI. The purpose of the code is not to protect the home for the first few years of existence, but for the life of the building.

Receptacle AFCI's:

Someone stated that the receptacle type device would provide better protection. This is a false, and dangerous statement. 40% of electrical fires occur behind the walls, in the ceilings and in the floors between the loadcenter and the receptacle. The arcs in this area tend to be the more dangerous parallel arcs that have much higher energy and capacity to create a fire. How does a receptacle hope to prevent an upstream event?

Additionally, there is not a receptacle device on the market. We've been selling AFCI breakers since January of 1997, and have a vast amount of experience engineering and manufacturing the product.

GFCI Failures:

There are two main causes of the failures of both GFCI receptacles and circuit breakers.
> electrical surges
> failure to properly follow manufacturer's instructions for testing

UL has addressed the surge issue by requiring integral surge protection of the devices. As electrical professionals, we need to educate homeowners that they should push their test buttons monthly, and exercise their circuit breakers yearly. Homeowners maintain the mechanical systems in their home, they need to understand what is required to maintain their electrical system. Manufacturers put the test reminder in each GFCI device. I wonder how many of them are put in the loadcenter or at the receptacle?


Reliability:

With over 500 million cumulative hours of operation, the nuisance tripping issue is behind us (I cannot speak to the experience of other manufacturers). What we see when we hear nuisance tripping issues are false grounds downstream, improperly wired three-way switches, shared neutrals, bad wiring in fixtures from the plant etc. These are the types of issues that you would hope the breaker would find.

AFCI/GFCI:

We have the devices available in our warehouse. Whether they are on our distributors' shelves or not is a different issue. Typically, the wholesale industry takes a "chicken and egg" approach to stocking new products. They will not put it on their shelves until customers ask for them.

States issues:

Vermont has taken the high road and amended the code to be as it should be: in all living areas. Arcs can and do occur anywhere, and they realize that. Unfortunately, some states have bowed to the homebuilding industry and have removed this life-saving device because of cost. However, with contractor costs in the $30 range for each breaker, whole house protection can be provided for about $300 contractor cost. Amortized over a 30 year mortgage, works out to pennies a month.

I am passionate about the possibilities of this product, I have them in my home, and as professionals in the electrical industry I would encourage you to put them in your home so you can see and sell the real benefits of electrical safety.

So we require the use of a device that may prevent 40% of the fires as oposed to 60%???

Don(resqcapt19)

Mr. Foley,

Welcome to the group!!!

Very good job on your posted report! Thanks for taking the time to post some information from the Manufacturer's viewpoint.

Please contribute more if you can, or when it's available.

Scott SET