AFDDs are a massive fraud

[Cookie]

Derailed another thread with AFDDs, so I am starting this one. I will simply say that UK RCDs and MCBs provide arc fault protection as is. UL not only knows that, but extensively researched UK power systems in an effort to emulate the very same concept 40 years. One the simply fact (growing concern) that the US National Electrical Code does not prohibit a maximum earth fault loop impedance.

 

[The Ghost]

Forget what bullies have done hiding behind conspiracy theories. I am not one of them.

On the other hand I and countless others in the states know the history and the fall out.

The above statements are a mystery as to what you are talking about they make no sense and in no way clarify your actual point, which is??????? Forget what bullies have done??? I was nowhere near thinking anything like that I was just trying to get my head around what you are banging on about. You are saying we don't need AFDD, and you and myriad others find them a problem as they keep tripping So? Where is this going? You are saying just use an RCD without any conclusive evidence that it is fine and safe and what will I do in court say you told me so and here are a couple of studies. I need a lot more than that my friend. And believe me if I was convinced of your propositions I would actually take effective action.

 

[GBDamo]

Because its not about credentials. Its about the facts I've posted.

Ultimately you are spot on. The facts, if they are facts, are in no way diminished by method of delivery.

Trying to put someone on the spot to revel details about themselves is unnecessary, in my humblest of opinions.

I'm hoping some of the technical heavyweights turn up to add a little meat to this thread.

 

[GBDamo]

.....Where is this going? You are saying just use an RCD without any conclusive evidence that it is fine and safe and what will I do in court.....

" well milud, them went and changed the electrickery din't they, RCDs were perfectly safe in 2017 but 2018's electrickery is different you see so nows we needs they AFDDs so we is all safe from the new electrickery, i thinks"

 

[The Ghost]

best offer I've had is a fiver

I'll double that if of any help?

 

[Devonchris]

I'll double that if of any help?

Note to our American friends.

The above is an example of irony.

I know he's not really going to double the offer. Because he knows I'm not really trying to sell a diesel. We all know that we were conned (well some of us) by the government to switch to diesel engines. Which came about because idiots in government were conned by dubious science and corrupt manufactures. I don't really not believe your statements, but say I do to make myself look stupid which, hopefully, people don't believe. Its called irony, it's very subtle and something that Brits spot intuitively.

As for your campaign, good luck with that. We, on the hand, tend to shrug our shoulders, move on, and think ourselves lucky that we live in a country that allows us to say what I have.

I will not tell you again.

 

[Cookie]

Now that is a classic! To which I will reply...NO they don't. That is most definitely a false statement. Why do I say that? My experience has showed me again and again having seen the results of arcing on neutrals mostly, that cable and boxes have melted down including MCBs' due to arcing and the MCB just stood and watched.

That to me sounds like a series arc fault, or more likely joule heating.

Franklin and UL allued to L-N and L-G.

So who will I beleive? You or my lying eyes? As to overcurrent despite all the theory and guff etc. about OCPD and its thermal ability to shut off the supply again not necessarily. On a ring final circuit (32a) someone thought to pop a 10Kw dishwasher. Rather than the MCB operating it preferred to completely melt down without switching off. Bear in mind as to BS7671 when I started out as a trainee it was common to find the neutral fused as well as the line. This was sanctioned by earlier regs. This showed me that they do not know or think about all the things they should! Since then I always have a weather eye as to, does this actually make sense in the real world. Bottom line here, what is the fraud? What is it you actually want help with? Why do you think the AFCI is such a problem with tripping? We here have conjectured that AFDDs' would be tripping out when a fridge compressor switches in or a light switch is switched on it is very much a case of Quod Ed Demonstrandum.

Sounds like a failed MCB. Or a loose connection at the MCB (series deal).

Fused neutrals? We had those those too 100 years ago and electricians still find them on rare occasions in century old homes. Half the time its a 2 wire 120 volt only service.

But that is exactly what he did say! But look above they do NOT always by any means at all in real life whatever your links say because personally I have witnessed (and I dare say many others on here) MCBs' complete (sometimes) inability to react as theory says they should.

Failures, joule heating and old designs are not parellel arcing.

 

[The Ghost]

Failures, joule heating and old designs are not parellel arcing

So there you shifted from the statement

UL and Franklin which openly say MCBs prevent arcing.

to "openly prevent parallel arcing" consistency man consistency!

 

[Cookie]

The above statements are a mystery as to what you are talking about they make no sense and in no way clarify your actual point, which is??????? Forget what bullies have done???

My point is I'm not a conspiracy theorist nor is my knowledge of AFDDs conjecture.

In the US (and I assume else where) "truthers" have given conspiracy theorists a bad reputation.

Case in point: mass shooting happens somewhere in the US. Nut bags claiming to know the "truth" come out of the wood work proclaiming no on died and its all crisis actors. Media somehow paid off by the government. They will call the family members of the victims and harass them to no end... I despise these people to end.

But sadly they've done the damage. In the states anyone thought to believe in conspiracies is now viewed as one of these bullies, or dumb enough to have taken their word.

I was nowhere near thinking anything like that I was just trying to get my head around what you are banging on about. You are saying we don't need AFDD, and you and myriad others find them a problem as they keep tripping So? Where is this going? You are saying just use an RCD without any conclusive evidence that it is fine and safe and what will I do in court say you told me so and here are a couple of studies. I need a lot more than that my friend. And believe me if I was convinced of your propositions I would actually take effective action.

The code should not mandate AFDDs. You don't need them.


Your breakers and RCDs detect parallel arcing already.

Series events can be mitigated through several other technologies. Code should not mandate technology. Otherwise its not impartial and in of itself shows bias.

 

[Cookie]

So there you shifted from the statement

If you mean that in my original post I was referring only to parallel arcing (L-N; L-G) then I guess you could say that.

But- my statement still stands. Your system is already beginning to take care of series arcs:

Thermarestor® - (Thermal Monitoring) - https://thermarestor.co.uk/

to "openly prevent parallel arcing" consistency man consistency!

As in will not keep an arc going longer then a few cycles.

Skepticism results in me using simple words, simple concepts and blanket statements so people can "get it"

 

[Edtwozeronine]

John Ward tested and wrote off AFDDs in a video on YouTube quite some time ago after testing them.

 

[The Ghost]

So really you think BEAMA is wrong in its contention that they do work and that RCD and MCB are not able to do what an AFDD does

BEAMA Guide to Arc Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs)

www.beama.org.uk

.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

John Ward tested and wrote off AFDDs in a video on YouTube quite some time ago after testing them.

My understanding, is that his test method was not up to par.
Apparently he should have used a larger load or something.

 

[Cookie]

So there you shifted from the statement

to "openly prevent parallel arcing" consistency man consistency!

And not to muddy the waters but I feel the need to mention this now before someone asks latter:

UL has a very broad range (blanket) of what they call arcing. Traditionally arcing has revolved around Paschen's Law. However, because continuous arcing is impossible to sustain at 120 volt unless heavy carbonization is present UL had to come up with their own definition of 'a luminous discharge between electrodes...' meaning that even a sputtering short circuit fits their definition of arcing.

They needed to do this because arcing is not a concern at 120 volts the way it is at 230 volts.

However- short circuit or an actual arc- UL testing has shown that MCBs and RCDs can mitigate all parallel events.

................................................


In other words they knew actual arcing is possible at 230 volts nominal.

They and the CMPs for years knew arcing is possible at higher voltages hence why for decades prior 277/480 volt services of 1000amps or greater required and still require a GFP main breaker.

UL knew arcing at 120 volts is typically not possible.

So UL changed the definition (twisted the definition) to say arcing can take place at 120 volts.

And came up with the over driven carbonized path staple theory as a backup should the definition be called out.

UL proves the European system detects arcing at all voltages. UL then says this system needs to be implemented in the US. UL then puts on a show telling the CMP this system needs to be replicated in the US.

But because we are to dumb to be educated on loop impedance and UL pontificates perspective fault current is far lower at the service then it typically is- we must us an electronic breaker instead.

That is an over simplified version of it.


All the while UL, CPSC and CMPs are following the beat of Eaton and other manufacturers.

 

[Deleted member 26818]

So really you think BEAMA is wrong in its contention that they do work and that RCD and MCB are not able to do what an AFDD does

BEAMA Guide to Arc Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs)

www.beama.org.uk

.

BEAMA.
British Electrotechnical and Allied Manufacturers Association

 

[Cookie]

My understanding, is that his test method was not up to par.
Apparently he should have used a larger load or something.

Of course!

What people should be asking is why AFDDs stop at a few amps when series arcing and joule heating take place below that. Why sell a half empty fire extinguisher?