Poll: Have you seen happenings which an AFDD might have prevented?

[JohnW2]

Why a fear?

Because I have spend virtually all of my working life in disciplines which are highly 'evidence-based' and risk-assessment-based, and hence am intellectually opposed to the concept of 'solutions' which are looking for evidence of a significant problem for them to address - or even solutions to problems which are so rare that the 'cost' (in the very widest sense) of the solution cannot reasonably be justified on the basis of risk assessment.

If "intellectual opposition" is not enough for you, there are other considerations. Given the tens of millions of electrical installations in the UK (and, I would guess, billions in the world), no matter how cheap AFDDs become, there is bound to be a very appreciable (financial and environmental etc.) 'cost' of having AFDDs as compared with not having them.

However, that's just me. Others will obviously disagree!

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

It's obviously for you to decide whether you can/could vote, but I thought that the question was sufficiently clearly worded that a "no" vote from you would be appropriate ...

.... if you have never "seen/heard of consequences of electrical faults which might have been prevented by an AFDD" then that would seem to me to clearly justify a "No" answer - even if you have seen situations indicating a potential downside of AFDDs?

As I've just written to secure, we've all seen situations in which poor/loose connections etc. have resulted in overheating, hence potential fire risk, but ....

... as I also wrote to secure, I personally would not "imagine" that but, although I suppose it would be strictly true to say that an AFDD "could have the potential" to detect such a situation, I personally would suspect ('imagine'?!) that it's very rare for the situations of loose/poor connections (resulting in overheating) be associated with any arcing.

A big problem with my desire to see "!evidence" is that it is probably essentially impossible to determine whether any particular incident of overheating, thermal damage or overt fires was associated with any arcing and, if so, whether the incident would have been avoided (or, at least, mitigated) had there been an AFDD in 0lace which detected any arcing that might have happened.

Kind Regards, John

This is the sort of thing I've experienced which I feel an AFDD could have found and would have voted 4 (Yes other) In my view the fault was the switch contact, not the wiring.

This was one of my rental properties,what doesn't show is the bit of T&E to the left of the shower switch had been connected directly to the top immersion heater by the tenant (who had moved his girlfriend in then moved on, leaving her in place) and left permanently on, it also feeds the shower.

 

[SUNRAY]

This is the sort of thing I've experienced which I feel an AFDD could have found and would have voted 4 (Yes other) In my view the fault was the switch contact, not the wiring.
View attachment 276972
This was one of my rental properties,what doesn't show is the bit of T&E to the left of the shower switch had been connected directly to the top immersion heater by the tenant (who had moved his girlfriend in then moved on, leaving her in place) and left permanently on, it also feeds the shower.

So I've just discovered I can, and have, cast both votes.
No sorry. reading #1 again I've changed my mind and taken the NO vote away.

 

[JohnW2]

This is the sort of thing I've experienced which I feel an AFDD could have found and would have voted 4 (Yes other) In my view the fault was the switch contact, not the wiring.

On the face of it, that looks like the typical situation of thermal damage (hence potential fire) due to overheating of conductors/terminals/whatever due to poor/loose connections. What makes you think that 'arcs' were involved?

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

So I've just discovered I can, and have, cast both votes.

As I said in my initial post, such was not my intention. On reflection, the first answer offered probably should have been "None of the below" (or "None of the above" if I moved it down ) - but, unlike the case with previous forum software, it seems that I can't edit the poll (or am I missing a way?).

If the software were ideal, it would also enable one to prevent any of the other boxes being ticked if "None of the above/below" was ticked - but it isn't that ideal

No sorry. reading #1 again I've changed my mind and taken the NO vote away.

That has become totally appropriate, since you have moved the goalposts with post #17. Since you are now saying that you have seen a situation in which an AFDD might have prevented what happened 9even though I'm rather sceptical about that), it is clearly not appropriate that you should answer "No" (or "None of the below").

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

I was living in a house with only 2 RCD's and it cost me dear when the RCD tripped, and the freezer defrosted, as to the danger when a freezer defrosts and you have not realised not sure, but on moving I went all RCBO as did not want of a repeat of what happened in the old house.

If a RCBO trips to reset I have to go outside, and down a set of steps, and back into the flat under the house, and in the winter months with frost, snow, or ice there is clearly a danger if a device needs resetting, as well as cost in lost food, I see the devices are made for my consumer unit but at £98.39 and I have 14 RCBO's that's £1377.46 not including fitting.

And no idea on how often they will trip. Even the RCBO when they trip, leaves a question as to why, was it an overload, or an earth leakage, add a third and fault finding would be nearly impossible. I can see where for electric showers which seem to be prone to faults which a AFDD would trip with, that they may be a good idea, but the price at moment is silly.

 

[JohnW2]

I was living in a house with only 2 RCD's and it cost me dear when the RCD tripped, and the freezer defrosted, as to the danger when a freezer defrosts and you have not realised not sure, but on moving I went all RCBO as did not want of a repeat of what happened in the old house.

As I've said so many times, I think you must have been very unlucky. What you describe is presumably only going to happen when the house is unoccupied for a significant time (since half the circuits in the house would be affected by an RCD trip), and there are relatively few reasons why and RCD should trip whilst a house is unoccupied.

Furthermore, as I've often said, whenever I have 'lost a freezer' it has been because the freezer has died, not because of loss of power, so one really does need to have (audible!) over-temp alarms. That is particularly important if one has a freezer on a dedicated RCBO.

.... I can see where for electric showers which seem to be prone to faults which a AFDD would trip with, that they may be a good idea, but the price at moment is silly.

That doesn't really answer the question of what the AFDD might achieve. Are you suggesting that it might stop a shower catching on fire and,if so, how common do you believe that to be?

Kind Regards, John