Hello everyone,

I recently discovered something a bit annoying I wanted to share on here.  Another member had previously expressed that their GE 175W MV 201SA tripped their Siemens AFCI/GFCI combo breaker.  I was intrigued in seeing this, as I had never heard reports of HID fixtures tripping AFCI breakers.  And, at least with modern AFCIs, I had figured that 1) the technology would be able to differentiate that type of arcing from a "hazardous" one, and 2) that having the power run through a ballast would "lessen" the intensity of startup arc waveforms that could possibly cause "nuisance tripping."

But, I was proven wrong the other day.  In my bedroom, I have a Leviton dual function AFCI/GFCI receptacle installed in one location, as it is old, ungrounded wiring, and I wanted to attain full code compliance when replacing the (unsafely-installed) regular three-prong receptacle that was previously there.  So, now curious, I decided to bring in my 100W Lithonia PSMH/MV converted flood (it was sold as a PSMH fixture, but truly just has a modified HX 100W H38 MV ballast).

Anyways, I plugged it in, turned it on with the switched plug I have attached, and it initially seemed to ignite.  But, a few seconds into initial fire-up (as the swirling magenta "startup" flashes occurred), the outlet suddenly tripped off - "SNAP!!"  And, afterwards, the outlet's indicator light (which is usually green) flashed twice red, followed by a pause (which is the "flash code" for tripping on an arc fault).  Not knowing if this was a "glitch," I reset the outlet, and tried a couple more times - but with the same, annoying result.

My best guess for this tripping is that when the startup arc occurs, the AFCI's microprocessor sees this as a sustained and "hazardous" (pulsating and sputtering) arc that is of a frequency close enough to arcing that may occur within damaged wiring, for example.  In any case, though, it annoys me that it can't even stay on when no REAL hazard exists and the fixture is simply operating as intended. 

One "solution" (albeit expensive) was to plug the fixture into a very high-end power filter.  I recently bought a "Zero Surge" branded power filter for the "low" price of $250, as it is the one and only type of surge protector that will function on non-grounded wiring (through a proprietary method known as "series mode filtering," as opposed to MOVs that rely on the ground line to divert surges).  And, currently, none of the other circuits in our home have AFCI breakers, but for those who have no other option (if not comfortable working on a service panel oneself to swap out breakers) and will stop at nothing to power their lighting collection, I simply wanted throw this out there.  I can post a website link to Zero Surge if anyone is interested.  So, long story short, the Zero Surge filter seems to not only suppress interference and "noise" on the incoming line, but has such good-quality power filtering that it even cuts the "waveform signature" of the startup arc to such a level that the outlet no longer detects it (causing it to nuisance trip).

I guess if there is any one way to force LED lighting on people, this is one way to do it - by mandating breakers that are inherently "incompatible" with that light fixture type by virtue of how they function - by producing an arc, of course! 

This is a side effect of the AFCI breakers. They weren't intended to force people to go to LED; these breakers were developed long before such a thing existed. Furthermore, most people would just swap the breaker for a non-AFCI one, especially in commercial settings where the boss wants to be extra cheap. Not up to code, yes, but a lot of people out there don't know about or don't care about the codes. If they think they can get away with it, they will do it. 
EDIT: I just remembered a story: An electrician went out to a house that had AFCI breakers. They were called out due to the breakers tripping frequently. The electrician changed the breakers from AFCI to standard non-AFCI breakers. Not legal, and could be dangerous, but neither the homeowner or the electrician cared.

This is a side effect of the AFCI breakers. They weren't intended to force people to go to LED; these breakers were developed long before such a thing existed. Furthermore, most people would just swap the breaker for a non-AFCI one, especially in commercial settings where the boss wants to be extra cheap. Not up to code, yes, but a lot of people out there don't know about or don't care about the codes. If they think they can get away with it, they will do it. 
EDIT: I just remembered a story: An electrician went out to a house that had AFCI breakers. They were called out due to the breakers tripping frequently. The electrician changed the breakers from AFCI to standard non-AFCI breakers. Not legal, and could be dangerous, but neither the homeowner or the electrician cared.

Yeah, I get that.  Nevertheless, it still crossed my mind, anyways.  No offense intended, and my apologies for any misunderstanding.

Yeah, I get that.  Nevertheless, it still crossed my mind, anyways.  No offense intended, and my apologies for any misunderstanding.

None taken. It’s understandable why you would think that way about AFCIs. We’re cool. 

[...]

I guess if there is any one way to force LED lighting on people, this is one way to do it - by mandating breakers that are inherently "incompatible" with that light fixture type by virtue of how they function - by producing an arc, of course! 

Even that seems to be hit-or-miss. By pure coincidence just yesterday I commented on a picture that popped up from random older files, which showed a Philips LED lamp. I have three of those and they trip my bedroom's AFCI.    Oddly enough said AFCI doesn't mind powering HID loads, carbon arcs, or even arcs from a microwave oven transformer. Go figure!


I think early AFCIs were more prone to this kind of undesired tripping.

This is permanent problem between parasitic behavior of old equipment causing incompatibility problems with new protections.
Normally the related standards mandate the parasitic behavior to be below certain limit, so the protection equipment designers have something to count on.
All uses to be somehow balanced so it allows reasonable safety at a reasonable cost (people are willing to pay without compromising the safety by people trying to go around en masse).
And as the technology evolves, the cost of different measures changes, so the standards do shift, often making the limits for parasitic behavior stricter and (with some delay; usually the expected useful life of the equipment) allowing the protection devices to be more sensitive, so "catch" a wider range of dangerous defects.
Often an assumption is made: The older, offending, equipment is expected to be installed only in the older installations, which are made (protection equipment,...) according to the older code version, so no problem there.
And the new protection equipment is assumed to be installed only with "bigger" overhaul, which replaces the old, offending, equipment as well.

So it happens, when parasitic behavior of some older equipment becomes too much for some way more modern protection devices.
It was a problem in the past (already the inrush currents of motors and wiring losses vs fuses already more than 100 years ago, when consumer installations start to see other appliances than just lightbulbs).

The introduction of GFCI has been plaqued with very similar problems: Many old space heaters (mainly of the heat accumulation type, which use high power rating) exhibit rather significant ground leakage because the used materials just became slightly conductive when hot (in order to accumulate enough heat energy to provide space heating for the whole day, the operating temperatures were really high, around orange hot inside). At the time of their design no big deal, it is grounded (1st protection) and the leakages are expected to cancel out sufficiently enough (these were strictly 3 phase, due to the power rating), so the voltage would be safe even when the grounding failed (2nd protection), plus strictly fixed installation (no socket,...; so PE open fault considered as unlikely). But with everything in perfect order, PE currents were in the 50..500mA range and assumed OK for a 6kW device at that time. But once a GFCI gets involved, it false trips on it.


Same happens to your MV (already obsolete for more than a decade, for tge older designs even two decades): Parasitic RF emissions false trip the AFCI. Here other factor is, nobody ever expected any HID to be used anywhere inside of a living quarters, where the AFCIs are mandatory.

Is it bad that my house has no AFCI/GFCI breakers at all? My house is 71 years old and has an old breaker panel that can't accomodate AFCI/GFCI breakers.

Is it bad that my house has no AFCI/GFCI breakers at all? My house is 71 years old and has an old breaker panel that can't accomodate AFCI/GFCI breakers.

It is an extra safety layer, mainly when just light touching intermittent shorts are happening or double point failures.
The danger the AFCI are addressing is mainly with damaged thinner cords, which have rather high resistance, so wont form enough fault current to trip the normal breakers instantly.
The GFCIs then address compromised insulation or grounding connection towards user. Normally the grounding or double insulation should maintain the safety even with a single point failure. But when such failure is not detected in time (e.g. open PE grounding connection, one layer of double insulation,...) and the device is still operated, it becomes dangerous once other fault develops (insulation get compromised). The GFCIs do address that (they trip once you touch the double-faulty thing so the shocking current flows).

 So do regular inspection on all your devices and their cords for damage and handle them with care and you should be safe.

Some AFCI/breaker combos do fit into one standard breaker position, so you may upgrade by using these. Mainly in the bedrooms, as there you have the least amount of time to respond when the fire happens...
Other option is to use lower current rated breakers, at least for the bedrooms (where you don't need that high power loads), so even such intermittent short circuit fault trips the fadt electromagnet trigger in the breaker. Of course, you then can not use any higher power device there (some more powerful computers or vacuum cleaner could be a problem, notebooks or TVs should be OK). Better to test the smaller breaker on the devices you want to use there in some test setup (plug, wires, the breaker, socket for the device to be used for the test).