Faulty Residential Circuit Breakers—A Persistent Fire Safety Problem

IF 7.9 Q1 ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC
Jesse Aronstein
{"title":"Faulty Residential Circuit Breakers—A Persistent Fire Safety Problem","authors":"Jesse Aronstein","doi":"10.1109/OJIA.2023.3237956","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Circuit breakers for residential branch circuits must trip at or below 135% of rated current. A breaker that fails that requirement is defective. Samples of two brands, purchased from retail sources, are tested for that basic calibration. Both brands were tested 4 years ago. Previous samples of one brand were 50% defective, and new samples manufactured in 2021 are 28% defective. The second brand, previously defect-free, is again defect-free. The test results, past and present, imply that some manufacturers are calibrating breakers to trip too close to the allowable upper current limit, and are checking calibration by testing at higher current. The standard calibration test at 200% of rated current is shown to be incapable of indicating whether or not a breaker will trip properly, as required by the applicable standard, at 135% of rated current. A third brand tested came on the market recently. Its thermal-magnetic breakers trip correctly, but the brand's hydraulic-magnetic breakers are erratic, with 38% of the samples malfunctioning. The malfunctions are attributed to thermal distortion that causes mechanical binding of the triggering mechanism. Some breaker brands with a high defect rate have been in the distribution chain for many years and are permanently installed in homes. The increased risk of fire and injury for the occupants of these dwellings is significant. The long-standing history of this problem and the fire safety consequences are discussed.","PeriodicalId":100629,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Open Journal of Industry Applications","volume":"4 ","pages":"75-86"},"PeriodicalIF":7.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel7/8782707/10008994/10021241.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Open Journal of Industry Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10021241/","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Circuit breakers for residential branch circuits must trip at or below 135% of rated current. A breaker that fails that requirement is defective. Samples of two brands, purchased from retail sources, are tested for that basic calibration. Both brands were tested 4 years ago. Previous samples of one brand were 50% defective, and new samples manufactured in 2021 are 28% defective. The second brand, previously defect-free, is again defect-free. The test results, past and present, imply that some manufacturers are calibrating breakers to trip too close to the allowable upper current limit, and are checking calibration by testing at higher current. The standard calibration test at 200% of rated current is shown to be incapable of indicating whether or not a breaker will trip properly, as required by the applicable standard, at 135% of rated current. A third brand tested came on the market recently. Its thermal-magnetic breakers trip correctly, but the brand's hydraulic-magnetic breakers are erratic, with 38% of the samples malfunctioning. The malfunctions are attributed to thermal distortion that causes mechanical binding of the triggering mechanism. Some breaker brands with a high defect rate have been in the distribution chain for many years and are permanently installed in homes. The increased risk of fire and injury for the occupants of these dwellings is significant. The long-standing history of this problem and the fire safety consequences are discussed.
住宅断路器故障——一个持续存在的消防安全问题
住宅分支电路的断路器必须在额定电流的135%或以下跳闸。不符合该要求的断路器是有缺陷的。从零售渠道购买的两个品牌的样品进行了基本校准测试。这两个品牌都在4年前进行了测试。一个品牌以前的样品有50%的缺陷,2021年生产的新样品有28%的缺陷。第二个品牌,以前没有缺陷,现在又没有缺陷了。过去和现在的测试结果表明,一些制造商正在校准断路器,使其跳闸过于接近允许的电流上限,并通过在更高电流下进行测试来检查校准。根据适用标准的要求,在额定电流的200%下进行的标准校准试验无法表明断路器在额定电流为135%时是否会正确跳闸。第三个经过测试的品牌最近上市了。其热磁断路器跳闸正确,但该品牌的液压磁断路器不稳定,38%的样本出现故障。故障归因于导致触发机构机械结合的热变形。一些缺陷率高的断路器品牌已经在分销链中存在多年,并永久安装在家中。这些住宅的住户发生火灾和受伤的风险大大增加。讨论了这个问题的长期历史和消防安全后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
13.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信