Arc fault option - Page 9 - Electrician Talk - Professional Electrical Contractors Forum
CLICK HERE AND JOIN OUR COMMUNITY TODAY, IT'S FREE!
Go Back   Electrician Talk - Professional Electrical Contractors Forum > Electrical Forum > General Electrical Discussion


Like Tree59Likes
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-11-2016, 04:24 PM   #161
Very Long Vacation
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: united states of america
Posts: 11,766
Rewards Points: 5,262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lighterup View Post
An EC I worked for when learning the trade was also a Fireman as well
as the chief of the department. His sons were also fireman.

This guy used to say , "if we can't figure out what caused the fire ,
then it's an electrical fire"

Oh yahhh. And that is then used by various entities to justify their own agenda. People say all the time "but statistics say.." I cut them off and tell them statistics mean nothing. I then get the 'you are insane' look. But truth be told most fires never see any in depth investigation and are pure guesses.
meadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Join Contractor Talk

Join the #1 Electrician Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

ElectricianTalk.com - Are you a Professional Electrical Contractor? If so we invite you to join our community and see what it has to offer. Our site is specifically designed for you and it's the leading place for electricians to meet online. No homeowners asking DIY questions. Just fellow tradesmen who enjoy talking about their business, their trade, and anything else that comes up. No matter what your specialty is you'll find that ElectricianTalk.com is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally free!

Join ElectricianTalk.com - Click Here JOIN FOR FREE


Warning: The topics covered on this site include activities in which there exists the potential for serious injury or death. ElectricianTalk.com DOES NOT guarantee the accuracy or completeness of any information contained on this site. Always use proper safety precaution and reference reliable outside sources before attempting any construction or remodeling task!

Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-11-2016, 04:27 PM   #162
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: IL
Posts: 3,838
Rewards Points: 1,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicken steve View Post
So many variables in any statistical analysis Don.....

AFCI instructions state right on them they are NOT to be megged

Apparently they incorporate sensitive electronica

So my statistical query would be not so much 20 yr old wiring, as it would be 20 yr old afci's...

I do have some installs almost that old , but suspect the test button tests no more than the test button

~CS~
It is interesting that some of the old CPSC documents called for self testing and circuit lock-out on a failed test....as far as I know none of the AFCIs have that feature.

That being said, my point is that it will take decades before there would be enough information to get a statistical number. The number of dwelling unit fires of electrical origin is between 29,500 and 47,700 per year.

Even after 20 years of building one million new homes per year, in that 20th year you could expect to prevent just short of 1100 fires, assuming that the AFCI can prevent 100% of dwelling unit fires that are of electrical origin. Even the AFCI supporters say they cannot prevent 100% of those fires.

There has also been a steady long term decline in the number of dwelling unit fires that are said to be of electrical origin. This decline started in 1980.

It will be difficult to ever prove by fire cause stats ir AFCIs are effective.
don_resqcapt19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 04:28 PM   #163
Can't sign em..forget em
 
lighterup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,361
Rewards Points: 10,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by AcidTrip View Post
Oh yahhh. And that is then used by various entities to justify their own agenda. People say all the time "but statistics say.." I cut them off and tell them statistics mean nothing. I then get the 'you are insane' look. But truth be told most fires never see any in depth investigation and are pure guesses.
Oh and by the way...just FYI..the above employer / Fire Chief and his sons
used to chuckle at this cause they knew then that something had to be
documented in the fire investigation and they were "tounge & cheek" on how
they would use the "electrical fire" as a way of closing the book on an investigation.

Also , this was in the early to mid 90's when I worked for them ..BEFORE
afci's were in the picture.
readydave8 likes this.
lighterup is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 06-11-2016, 04:43 PM   #164
Very Long Vacation
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: united states of america
Posts: 11,766
Rewards Points: 5,262
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lighterup View Post
Oh and by the way...just FYI..the above employer / Fire Chief and his sons
used to chuckle at this cause they knew then that something had to be
documented in the fire investigation and they were "tounge & cheek" on how
they would use the "electrical fire" as a way of closing the book on an investigation.

Also , this was in the early to mid 90's when I worked for them ..BEFORE
afci's were in the picture.

I wonder how it got that way, someone got what they wanted
meadow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 06:08 PM   #165
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Allentown,PA
Posts: 73
Rewards Points: 10
Default

Not sure what arc fault receptacles cost but I pay 35. for arc fault breakers. Considering cost of cabinet, fabrication, extra material not sure it's feasible. Also, looks like you are using the panel for a wire way and may be above height requirements. The breakers I use snap on the neutral bar so no additional wiring.
Electek inc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2016, 07:27 PM   #166
Can't Remember
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 9,038
Rewards Points: 956
Default

That sounds like a more typical price. I'll use a plug neutral panel new from time to time. I have a couple of the receptacles on the truck, but I'd rather use the breaker. Forgotten what they cost.
nrp3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 07:23 AM   #167
Retired Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: the Green Mountain state
Posts: 39,722
Rewards Points: 14,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
It is interesting that some of the old CPSC documents called for self testing and circuit lock-out on a failed test....as far as I know none of the AFCIs have that feature.

That being said, my point is that it will take decades before there would be enough information to get a statistical number. The number of dwelling unit fires of electrical origin is between 29,500 and 47,700 per year.

Even after 20 years of building one million new homes per year, in that 20th year you could expect to prevent just short of 1100 fires, assuming that the AFCI can prevent 100% of dwelling unit fires that are of electrical origin. Even the AFCI supporters say they cannot prevent 100% of those fires.

There has also been a steady long term decline in the number of dwelling unit fires that are said to be of electrical origin. This decline started in 1980.

It will be difficult to ever prove by fire cause stats ir AFCIs are effective.

Knowing you're adept as statistical analysis , i'd like to post this for your (et al) perusal Don>


Quote:
2-81a Log #2705 NEC-P02 Final Action: Reject
(210.12)
__________________________________________________ ______________
Submitter: Steven Orlowski, National Association of Home Builders
Recommendation: Delete text as follows:{all of 210.12}
<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>

Quote:
Substantiation: According to the May 2010 Home Electrical Fires Report
(John R. Hall, Jr.), annually there are an estimated 15,790 home structure fires were the result of wiring and related equipment. For the past decade NAHB has argued that the mandatory requirement for Arc-fault Circuit Interrupters has been fraught with invalidated research study and testing procedures that has yet been able to justify any effectiveness of these devices preventing fires
originated by an arc fault
.
NAHB has continuously attempted to remove the
AFCI requirement from the National Electrical Code, repeatedly showing that
these devices do not pass the litmus test when you consider the annual
installation cost compared to the estimated direct and societal cost associated
with fires in the branch circuit wiring. The Code Panel 2 has continuously
dismissed NAHB and other AFCI opponent’s arguments without providing any
justified technical or statistical evidence that there have been any fires that
were prevented by the inclusion of these devices.
<<<<<<<a good page & 1/2 of subsequent stats follow>>>>>>>>>

Quote:
Panel Statement: See the panel statement on Proposal 2-81.
The panel would like to point out to the submitter that the historical records
providing all of the data that has been reviewed by the panel on this issue may be found in the ROP and ROC that are available online at www.nfpa.org/70.

Oddly enough , CMP2 alludes to nfpa doc's , even though J Hall jr's offerings are nfpa docs.

~CS~
chicken steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2016, 07:30 AM   #168
Retired Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: the Green Mountain state
Posts: 39,722
Rewards Points: 14,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lighterup View Post
An EC I worked for when learning the trade was also a Fireman as well
as the chief of the department. His sons were also fireman.

This guy used to say , "if we can't figure out what caused the fire ,
then it's an electrical fire"
That there's a national bureau for the collection of those stats that follows suit creates a statistical vortex of invalidation any one paying attention would have issue with Light dude.

Bottom line, it's simply not funded ,save for those bigger FD's who may have the manpower to accommodate unfunded federal mandates. Rumor is most smaller FD's don't even send back the paperwork.....

Even then, we're relying on a profession that possesses little in the way of electrical forensics ,anecdotally i've know sorts with a sheepskin in fire sciences that wouldn't know an outlet from an omlet....~CS~
lighterup and AcidTrip like this.
chicken steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 06:59 PM   #169
Retired Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: the Green Mountain state
Posts: 39,722
Rewards Points: 14,650
Default

This is a good one.....the Cutler Hammer crew forwarding their investigation(s) toward a doc filed by UL


SPECIAL SERVICES INVESTIGATION
ON
BRANCH/FEEDER ARC FAULT CIRCUIT INTERRUPTER
INCORPORATING EQUIPMENT GROUND FAULT PROTECTION





Quote:
INTRODUCTION
At the present time the UL Standard for Arc-Fault Circuit-Interrupters (AFCIs)
does not require AFCIs to detect a high-impedance fault condition known as a
"glowing connection". Paragraph 1.3 of UL 1699 states:
These devices are not intended to detect glowing connections.
The glowing connection has been documented by a number of technical
investigators as a potential ignition mechanism. The purpose of this investigation
was to assess the ability of a Branch/Feeder AFCI incorporating ground fault
protection to respond to a glowing connection occurring at a wiring device
termination. The ability to interrupt such a thermal event is seen as an additional
mechanism by which AFCIs may be used to reduce the risk of electrical ignition.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<pages of techno blather>>>>>>>>>


Quote:
By virtue of this worst case configuration*, it was demonstrated that a Branch/Feeder AFCI incorporating equipment ground fault protection (30 mA trip) is capable of terminating a glowing connection and the associated heating effects by sensing the differential current associated with thermal degradation of the wiring device insulating material(s)

~CS~
chicken steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 07:26 PM   #170
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: IL
Posts: 3,838
Rewards Points: 1,224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chicken steve View Post
That is interesting as there is a paper from David Dini that says glowing connections are joule heating and there is no reason to expect an AFCI to detect them


That being said, I expect that there are many cases where the heat from a glowing connection would result in a ground fault that trips the GFP part of the AFCI prior to causing a fire.

It is also interesting that UL acknowledges that the GFP is an important part of the AFCI, yet UL 1699 does not and has never required a GFP function for the AFCI device.
don_resqcapt19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 07:31 PM   #171
Senior Member
 
sbrn33's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: middle america
Posts: 11,438
Rewards Points: 3,276
Default

This whole code is Dennis and Don's fault. Man am I pissed at them.
sbrn33 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 07:58 PM   #172
Retired Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: the Green Mountain state
Posts: 39,722
Rewards Points: 14,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by don_resqcapt19 View Post
That is interesting as there is a paper from David Dini that says glowing connections are joule heating and there is no reason to expect an AFCI to detect them


That being said, I expect that there are many cases where the heat from a glowing connection would result in a ground fault that trips the GFP part of the AFCI prior to causing a fire.

It is also interesting that UL acknowledges that the GFP is an important part of the AFCI, yet UL 1699 does not and has never required a GFP function for the AFCI device.
Most of what i've read has loads of technical gargon that seems to go on forever about arc fault technology vs. glowing connections

The general consensus seems a GC will degrade to a ground fault ,although some colorful wordsmiths that may leave one with the impression they may be detected at an earlier stage.

That said, i'm confused as to why the 30ma GF protective listings were not mandated via cmp2, especially when the device seemed to incorporate it

Further, it was the UL seat {'14 cmp2}that forwarded the tie break vote to tank the rop request for it to be GF

I guess i just don;t understand UL.....

~CS~
chicken steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2016, 08:00 PM   #173
Retired Account
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: the Green Mountain state
Posts: 39,722
Rewards Points: 14,650
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sbrn33 View Post
This whole code is Dennis and Don's fault. Man am I pissed at them.
Then you'd be really pissed finding out how many rop's they've written ~CS~
chicken steve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 06:16 PM   #174
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 798
Rewards Points: 1,810
Default

All the technical and cost / benefit stuff aside. Have you ever been to a house fire and seen the effect it has on the people who loose all their possessions? what do you think the personal cost is to these people? If it was you would you also balk at the extra $$$ AFCI protection might have prevented? yes many houses have pennies instead of fuses and have not yet burned down. what it is the calculated loss of a child?
the trouble with safety measures is they are worthless right up to the point you fall off your bike without a helmet. the helmet might save you or not depending on myriad of factors but I am pretty sure that on the way to the ground you are going to wish you are wearing 1 and it will matter.
Insurance does not replace personal possessions and often does not even pay for replacement of those things that can be replaced.
Mshea is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 06:27 PM   #175
Mensa Player
 
HackWork's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: -
Posts: 33,227
Rewards Points: 1,621
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mshea View Post
All the technical and cost / benefit stuff aside. Have you ever been to a house fire and seen the effect it has on the people who loose all their possessions? what do you think the personal cost is to these people? If it was you would you also balk at the extra $$$ AFCI protection might have prevented?
Yes, we have seen house fires. But your little drama rant is meaningless without proof that AFCI's actually work.

Replace AFCI with a $1,000 "magic horseshoe". Would you balk over the price of that magic horseshoe if it could prevent all that heartache from a fire?

Remember, there is just as much real, unbiased proof that the magic horseshoe will prevent a fire as there is with AFCI's.
HackWork is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2016, 06:35 PM   #176
nbb
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Midwestland
Posts: 400
Rewards Points: 516
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mshea View Post
All the technical and cost / benefit stuff aside. Have you ever been to a house fire and seen the effect it has on the people who loose all their possessions? what do you think the personal cost is to these people? If it was you would you also balk at the extra $$$ AFCI protection might have prevented? yes many houses have pennies instead of fuses and have not yet burned down. what it is the calculated loss of a child?
the trouble with safety measures is they are worthless right up to the point you fall off your bike without a helmet. the helmet might save you or not depending on myriad of factors but I am pretty sure that on the way to the ground you are going to wish you are wearing 1 and it will matter.
Insurance does not replace personal possessions and often does not even pay for replacement of those things that can be replaced.
I don't think that people here are condoning cutting corners in electrical safety as you are suggesting. They are saying that these magic AFCI breakers are no substitute for proper wiring practices. It is these practices that have kept 20+ year old homes from burning down, some of them much older than 40 years.

To me, it is both comical and sad, that we need these magic devices that cost extra money, in order to get lower bids from sub-standard contractors who use cheap and sometimes illegal labor. Get it done as fast as possible, and it is on to the next one.

It is a systemic problem, that is expanding, not shrinking. Trying to invent new ways of making proper electric work safe for people that have no business doing it, is a fools errand, in my opinion. I'm sure the manufacturers are happy to make a quick buck, and people get to be up in arms about how dangerous electricity is. The fact of the matter is that it is very mature technology, the main thing that has changed is the labor costs to install it in a home.
nbb is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Another arc fault problem Paul S. General Electrical Discussion 2 06-04-2016 01:29 PM
Ground fault, ship dwong General Electrical Discussion 0 05-22-2016 01:44 PM
Very odd ground fault on 3 phase delta Stew985 Linework 23 05-15-2016 11:58 AM
Converting Fault Current Into Calories Lone Crapshooter Workplace Safety 4 04-17-2016 07:33 PM
Arc Fault issues Tim46466 General Electrical Discussion 11 02-12-2016 03:00 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Our Pro Sites Network
ContractorTalk.com | DrywallTalk.com | HVACSite.com | PaintTalk.com | PlumbingZone.com | RoofingTalk.com