Joe, I can't disagree with your approach ... whatever this "amptector" is!
Yes, "temporary" is very often abused. Helectric is describing a tightly controlled use, in a protected location. Using another breaker to verify that the problem is within a breaker, or in the circuit, is a valid procedure.
The problem is, nobody is going to tie up $10K just on a 'maybe.' He stated he has already tried monitoring the circuit, and has not found any transients. Does he continue looking at the circuit - or does he first eliminate the breaker from the list of possibilities.
That brings us to testing the breaker. My tool belt certainly has no means of testing a breaker ... that has been something left to the manufacturer. Even then, many of the tests are performed on a sampling basis, as the test itself destroys the breaker.
If this "amptector" is some sort of way to field test the breaker, and identify any problems with the breaker .... I think it's a great idea.
In the meantime, things need to be kept running. If the reliability of the breaker is itself the question, then I maintain that poses a greater hazard than the risk posed by the temporary bypass for trouble-shooting purposes.
Naturally, the dishonest use of 'temporary' makes this judgment invalid.
