AFDD's (Please sign this in case your house burns down)?

[spynage]

Hi.

Just completed my yearly asssement with Stroma.

The assesor suggested I have letter made up for customers to sign to confirm they have been told about the AFDD's if they still do not want to have them fit. (Because of cost presumably)

Fine I thought, but then no. Who wants to spend £500+ on a new consumer unit only to think they have paid for half a job and that their installation is not as safe as it could be? Am I expected to tell them that they probably wont need them but it would technically be safer if they did? Or lie and say they MUST have them or lie again and tell them they won't need them?
Or say I'm not sure but they are expensive so please sign this to relieve me of responsibility?

Seems like a very unsatisfactory situation to me. Does this not undermine me as an electrician?

Looks like the electricity council understand that AFDD's and SPD's are available but they are unwilling to make installation mandatory. Aren't they passing the buck with this and pushing responibilty all the way down the line to the customer?

What do you think? Should I draw a letter up?

If I don't explain this properly to clients then I can see myself being easily undercut in price by other electricians going down the RCD only route. Surely regs should be unambiguous in this respect?

cheers

Spynage

 

[UNG]

Good read. There has been a certain whiff in the air regarding AFDD, s which has not been pleasant to the nostrils. The manner they have been "marketed" has, nt helped. Now in time as you say we may be provided with a bit more background supporting the reasons for their introduction. But for now I think in many sparks mind, the jury is still out on them.
I have never had direct experience of an electrical fire. The cases I have heard of were either down to overloading at the DB (rare) or caused by appliances (most common) I have never heard for instance of a case involving arcing in the fixed wiring of an installation

I have been called to a few faults that have been caused overheating and burning of accessories although they have never got to the burning fire stage. I'm not sure any of them would have been detected any quicker than the RCD by an AFDD or even if the AFDD would have detected any of them at all

There are definitely other cause, including loose connections. A colleague of mine attended a consumer unit last week which had overheated and caused smoke damage and charring. Suspected loose connection at bus bar or main switch which had become worse over time.

The problem with consumer units is most of the loose connections and overheating are on the wrong side of an AFDD protected circuit and I doubt an upfront AFDD would be allowed for the same reasons an RCD isn't allowed

Agreed. When I used "overloading" in my post, I should have said overheating. All the cases I am aware of were caused by overheating due to high resistance points resulting from either loose connections or worn switches etc

To sight worn switches in a domestic setting as a cause of fires is somebody desperately clutching at straws to justify a expensive product IMO.

To prevent CU fires we were pushed into using metal CU's now we are gently (at the moment) being pushed into the fitting of AFDD's to prevent fires and the only common factor I can see is a cover up of poor workmanship and training

 

[7029 dave]

I have always said CU design is very poor, basically a skeleton board that you have to build from scratch. (modular system) No double screws on outgoing circuits/ dp main switch, not even a fixed busbar IMO all these factors have increased risk of fire, and now we are faced with more new technology.
I just think the older CU design were far better fitted 1000's, before modular.

 

[LastManOnline]

I have been called to a few faults that have been caused overheating and burning of accessories although they have never got to the burning fire stage. I'm not sure any of them would have been detected any quicker than the RCD by an AFDD or even if the AFDD would have detected any of them at all


The problem with consumer units is most of the loose connections and overheating are on the wrong side of an AFDD protected circuit and I doubt an upfront AFDD would be allowed for the same reasons an RCD isn't allowed


To sight worn switches in a domestic setting as a cause of fires is somebody desperately clutching at straws to justify a expensive product IMO.

To prevent CU fires we were pushed into using metal CU's now we are gently (at the moment) being pushed into the fitting of AFDD's to prevent fires and the only common factor I can see is a cover up of poor workmanship and training

Agreed. Good post

 

[UNG]

I have always said CU design is very poor, basically a skeleton board that you have to build from scratch. (modular system) No double screws on outgoing circuits/ dp main switch, not even a fixed busbar IMO all these factors have increased risk of fire, and now we are faced with more new technology.
I just think the older CU design were far better fitted 1000's, before modular.

The CU's we get these days are of a European design, over in Europe they tend to configure their CU's from a DIN rail box that as well as having the normal circuit protective devices has time switches, relays / contactors and other control devices and accessories all integrated into one unit, in the UK we have never really adapted to that concept although I did install some in some high end properties back in the late 80's that contained all the controls in one box. In the UK no doubt we could have preconfigured CU's but it all comes down to the manufacturing cost and the market size as to whether it is a viable cost effective option to the end user

 

[gazdkw82]

Great thread, I will have a read through the link provided at the start.

The cost outweighs the supposed unproven benefits. Asking the customer to make a decision will puts the responsibility on them and the decision will be based on cost, especially as little has been proven etc. You may get a customer who will do some research and base the decision on that but most will look to you for advice or a decision.

Until its mandatory I personally wont install them unless customer specifies.

 

[Spoon]

If these AFDD's are purely to prevent fires then it's a lot cheaper to fit one of these and then you are covered. £15.65 verses the price of a AFDD...

 

[Cookie]

AFDDs will not prevent a single fire. The US only created them to mimic the British wiring system.

No offense to anyone here, but UL literally understands British wiring better than you guys do.

[automerge]1597408599[/automerge]

If these AFDD's are purely to prevent fires then it's a lot cheaper to fit one of these and then you are covered. £15.65 verses the price of a AFDD...

Prevent fires according to whom though? Manufacturers (like Eaton) who bribed the NFPA code making panels in the 90s and the IEC through committees in the 2010s?

 

[telectrix]

Stick a footer on the end or your quote or in your T&Cs saying something like:

"Client was advised of the advantages of inclusion of an AFFD in their installation but chose not to include this additional protection. Client accepts liabliity for any later issues resulting in from the emission of this equipment."

just wondering what the emission levels are for AFDDs, and will they be subject to congestion charges.

 

[Cookie]

They seem to think us Electricians are culpable if someones house catches fire because we haven't recommended AFDD's. Really? If that is the case they should be mandatory..

Well over 90% of all electrical fires are the result of joule heating which produces no arcing signature. Any serial arc which does take place is the end stage of joule heating. That is assuming combustion hasn't already initiated.

 

[Sisyphus]

The article that lays it all out>>>>

http://www.combinationafci.com/resources/doc_ieee_combination_afci.pdf

~S~