This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

AFDDs - when do they work?

I'm struggling to see the benefots of fitting AFDD's.

I've searched the web, but cannot find any compelling evidence that they actually help in safety.

 The Proffesional Journals all say they are a good thing, but with little content to show the data used to show they make a difference.

As we know, many fires are not caused by arcs, the build up of fluff in a tumble dryer is a typical example.

When I did my Social Housing work, I found many burnt out shower switches, along with washing machine sockets and occasional cooker switches that were totally burnt around the terminals, yet, in many cases would still work until the switch finally fell apart. Clearly some of these switches had been arcing, then had fused the cable to the terminal, others showed black terminals with only a small contact area, thus heating the terminals and causing the 'fishy' smell, which was quite typical.

Is there any evidence that AFDD's would stop these failures?

What about internal appliance faults?

Wasnt Grenfell started in a fridge? If so, would AFDD detect that fault?

And, what are appliance manufacturers doing to make their goods safer? From what I see, there are still thin tin plate terminals on cookers,and poor, loose spade terminals inside firdges and other appliances.They are made to be as cheap as possible, and it shows when you tighten up a terminal, and it bends the back plate as it is so thin.   

  • But with R.C.Ds the test button tests the whole gadget, the electrical and mechanical aspects of the device. No test gear needed.

    People still didn't believe they worked, so that's why the RCD testing on initial and periodic verification was introduced.

    The software in AFDDs could have self-check routines, but it would also be valid to say "how do we know?", "my laptop crashes sometimes" etc.

  • Nothing journalistic about it Graham. Just a mere attempt at getting answers to some questions.

    Can you highlight the errors in my previous post and perhaps correct them?

  • RCDs, SPDs, Fuses, MCBs etc are merely passive components. We know how they are supposed to work and can test them up to a point. They are 'dumb' and just sit there until the condition they are designed to address occurs.

    AFDDs are active devices which contain a cpu and are driven by algorithms. One might say they are semi-'smart'.

    AFDDs are a completely different ballgame to the other passive devices I have mentioned.

    We have all witnessed how good algorithms are when it comes to writing and applying them into real world problems.

    I recall a certain now-infamous Professor predicting something like half a million deaths in the UK at the beginning of the pandemic..................

    Then of course, we have algorithm-driven 'bots' which drive search engines and the like. Type certain words into a search engine and you might not get what you were looking, but something embarrassingly different!

    It wouldn't take a great leap into the unknown to predict 'smart' consumer units, which would be capable of monitoring a preloaded load profile for every appliance in your house. Couple this via some metadata to your smart meter and your supplier could look up what you have switched on at any time.

    "Flashing red light on Supplier's control room console summons the attention of the keyboard operative  - Mrs Gumby has her washer and dryer on and the windmill isn't turning - switch her off NOW!"

    Down the wire goes the 'Make It Dead' signal to the relevant 'smart' circuit breaker in Mrs Gumby's cu  and off goes her washing until the wind blows again.

    Just because we might be able to do something doesn't always mean that we should.

  • I recall a certain now-infamous Professor predicting something like half a million deaths in the UK at the beginning of the pandemic

    That was the predicted death toll for if the government took no action. So the government took lots of actions - lockdowns etc - and the actual death toll was reduced to about a third of that.

  • H.M.O.s are often privately owned. The question is WHEN do these unproven "fire preventing" devices have to be installed? In existing installations?

    Z.

  • Then when Mrs. Gumby's clothes get smelly and mouldy in the machine she has to put them on at least one or maybe two new wash cycles to remove the smells.

    Z.

  • And she can't dry them outside because it's raining and the wind isn't blowing!

    Never mind eh, Mrs Gumby is delighted to be doing her bit for the environment despite being charged a hefty premium to put up with regular supply interruptions.

  • I wonder which of his algorithms told him it was ok to visit his German mistress despite his own advice to the rest of us?

  • AFDDs are a completely different ballgame to the other passive devices I have mentioned.

    Circuit-breakers have, for some time, had intelligence in them. Granted, not the "for use by ordinary persons" breakers, but it's nothing new to me to see "computers" in protective devices.

    I think you're dead right, that there's way more mileage out of "SMART" devices to be marketed in the future.

  • Wife phoning husband who is at work.

    "George there's an  arc fault on our wiring I'm worried about a possible fire"

    George; "Are you sure dear?"

    Wife. "Yes George there are flashing lights."

    George. "Can you see or smell smoke?"

    Wife. "No George, but the lights are still flashing."

    George. "I have an important meeting in 30 minutes here."

    Wife. "Can't you come home George, I'm very worried."

    George rushes home.

    George upon inspecting consumer unit.

    "Oh, dear, there's nothing wrong. It's just the flashing lights on the smart meter dear."

    Wife. "Well they were signalling a fault dear. They were. Honestly."

    Z.