ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
UL 508A SPACING
by ale348 - 03/29/24 01:09 AM
Increasing demand factors in residential
by tortuga - 03/28/24 05:57 PM
Portable generator question
by Steve Miller - 03/19/24 08:50 PM
Do we need grounding?
by NORCAL - 03/19/24 05:11 PM
240V only in a home and NEC?
by dsk - 03/19/24 06:33 AM
New in the Gallery:
This is a new one
This is a new one
by timmp, September 24
Few pics I found
Few pics I found
by timmp, August 15
Who's Online Now
1 members (ale348), 302 guests, and 14 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#83757 02/20/03 02:58 AM
A
Anonymous
Unregistered
I put 2-15A AFCI breakers in a panel yesterday. What exactlly is the reason for only useing them on bedroom circuits? Is this a fire safety reason? and how are they different than a regular breaker? I guess a regular breaker would not trip if an arc was produced. Thanks.

Stay up to Code with the Latest NEC:


>> 2023 NEC & Related Reference & Exam Prep
2023 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides

Pass Your Exam the FIRST TIME with the Latest NEC & Exam Prep

>> 2020 NEC & Related Reference & Study Guides
 

#83758 02/20/03 08:08 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
WildTurkey101,
do a search on this BB for 'AFCI', the debate is ongoing, and probably will be for some time....

#83759 02/20/03 09:09 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 53
L
Member
WildT,

They work by electronically picking up the "arc signature" (voltage/current distortions). I think the "bedroom only" requirement comes from the unique nature of the "occupancy". i.e. for approx 16 hours a day the rooms are not occupied or "supervised", and when they are occupied the occupants are usually unconscious (I have a very boring life -- what a great set-up line though...). During the debate over requiring AFCI's, there were loads of stories about drapes, bedding, etc. hanging in front of receptacles, and catching on fire. Many electrical experts were sharply divided over whether they: worked as advertised; should be required; should be feed through device types vs breaker types, etc. My personal opinion is that they were shoved down the consumers throat by the insurance and manufacturing industries, who had everything to gain and nothing to lose. My personal rant on the subject can be read at the following thread: http://www.mikeholt.com/forum/Forum1/HTML/005799.html (Len Bonosevich)

Some links to info: http://www.ecmweb.com/ar/electric_basics_arcfault_protection/ http://www.zlan.com/arc.htm http://www.ul.com/auth/tca/fall02/Print/Print3.pdf http://www.ul.com/regulators/afci/AFCI_scenarios020502.pdf http://www.arcfault.org/index.htm

Len

edit: spellin'

[This message has been edited by Len_B (edited 02-20-2003).]

#83760 02/20/03 01:46 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 67
C
Member
Len:
Nice rant, I'm with you 100%. I would like to look back at this situation in about 10 years, and see what difference these really make.
The fact that these things we have now (breakers) only protect against permanent wiring defects and not what 'holly homeowner' plugs in has really got "me undies in a bunch"
Jim

#83761 02/21/03 05:14 AM
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 5,392
S
Member
have you noticed the trade mag articles gaining clarity on specific's that were avoided a year ago?

manipulative bas****s...

#83762 02/22/03 12:46 AM
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 53
L
Member
The prime focus of trade magazines is making money selling magazines and selling advertising(not necessarily in that order). The freebie zines make it by selling advertising only.
The fact that they may provide competent technical information from "experts" is secondary, and only necessary as far as it supports the prime focus.

Quote: "...and this surprises you?"


Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5