Electrical Engineering - Info to backup safety of aluminum wiring?

Author

Info to backup safety of aluminum wiring?

Harry Muscle

2005-08-09, 4:21 pm

I've moved into a house build in 1971 which is wired mainly with
aluminum wiring. I've read a handful of published information that
states that aluminum wiring (or more correctly, the connections made
with aluminum wiring) do in fact create a fire hazard greater than
copper wire. I also know that a lot of people state that aluminum
wiring does not pose any greater risk than copper if done properly.
What I'm interested in is what is "done properly" and have there been
tests done on such "proper" wiring methods to prove that they do in
fact pose no increased fire hazard?

So in other words, what I'm looking for is published (on paper,
internet, etc.) information from reputable sources that would refute
the claims made by the information that I've already read making
aluminum out to be a fire hazard. A lot of the information I've read
so far can be found at www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm

Thanks for the input,
Harry

TokaMundo

2005-08-09, 5:21 pm

On 9 Aug 2005 11:29:34 -0700, "Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com>
Gave us:

>I've moved into a house build in 1971 which is wired mainly with
>aluminum wiring. I've read a handful of published information that
>states that aluminum wiring (or more correctly, the connections made
>with aluminum wiring) do in fact create a fire hazard greater than
>copper wire. I also know that a lot of people state that aluminum
>wiring does not pose any greater risk than copper if done properly.
>What I'm interested in is what is "done properly" and have there been
>tests done on such "proper" wiring methods to prove that they do in
>fact pose no increased fire hazard?
>
>So in other words, what I'm looking for is published (on paper,
>internet, etc.) information from reputable sources that would refute
>the claims made by the information that I've already read making
>aluminum out to be a fire hazard. A lot of the information I've read
>so far can be found at www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm
>
>
>Thanks for the input,
>Harry

Pay the money to change out the house to copper. It will increase
the value of the house, and will make you a lot safer.

It isn't so much that Al is unsafe. I would just say that Al *that*
old may be prone to some rather "resistive" terminations.

The new build is a worthy investment all the way around.

night soil dalits

2005-08-09, 7:21 pm

"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
news:1123612174.109126.138550@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I've moved into a house build in 1971 which is wired mainly with
> aluminum wiring. I've read a handful of published information that
> states that aluminum wiring (or more correctly, the connections made
> with aluminum wiring) do in fact create a fire hazard greater than
> copper wire. I also know that a lot of people state that aluminum
> wiring does not pose any greater risk than copper if done properly.
> What I'm interested in is what is "done properly" and have there been
> tests done on such "proper" wiring methods to prove that they do in
> fact pose no increased fire hazard?
>
> So in other words, what I'm looking for is published (on paper,
> internet, etc.) information from reputable sources that would refute
> the claims made by the information that I've already read making
> aluminum out to be a fire hazard. A lot of the information I've read
> so far can be found at www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm
>

It is a safety hazard, you won't find a credible person/source to refute
that.
That is why the entire industry switched back over to copper in the 70's.
"done properly" doesn't last over time, that is the problem.

SQLit

2005-08-10, 12:21 pm

"night soil dalits" <invalids@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:42f92413$0$32365$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
>
> "Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
> news:1123612174.109126.138550@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> It is a safety hazard, you won't find a credible person/source to refute
> that.
> That is why the entire industry switched back over to copper in the 70's.
> "done properly" doesn't last over time, that is the problem.

The entire industry,,, you mean residential. Even then your wrong. New
tract, custom and semi homes all have AL wiring in them. A/c, stove,
cooktop, any load above 30 amps

Utilities use AL almost exclusively.

There is nothing wrong with the wire it was/and is the lack of craftsmen and
the terminiations that caused the problems. A properly trained electrician
knows how to install AL. The right devices do not have a problem when
terminating AL. Wrong device, then there can be problems.

In the late 1960's copper prices were on the way UP. So contractors turned
to AL to save money and keep housing affordable in the 1970's. There was
even a conductor call copper clad AL that was sold for a while. Did not work
correctly like they thought it should, it did not last long. When the
copper prices fell there was a return to it.

Most contractors did not provide any training when shifting over to AL
romex. The one I worked for sent all of us to a training class for 2 days. I
had the responsibility of wiring the first apartment complex, 180 units all
in AL back in 1971. The place is still standing and there has never been a
fire.
Do not blame the material. Blame the lack of training and experence. Did
anyone blame the gun that shot Kennedy, Regan, or Lennon? No they blamed
the guy behind the gun.

stevenal

2005-08-10, 1:21 pm

There used to be info at the CPSC on the subject. "Proper" means using the
receptacles and switches that are rated and marked CO/ALR, or pigtailing
copper wires to the aluminum before connecting to the devices. There is a
wire nut listed for joining the two metals, but CPSC had an issue with it.
There are also compression sleeves and specail tooling for the purpose which
can only be used by electricians that have been specially trained to do the
work. Non of these "proper" methods was available when your house was built.
If it wasn't rewired using either of these methods, you are at risk. These
methods have been tested by UL and the CPSC, though they do not agree on the
safety of the wire nut. I don't think you'll find much to refute. The homes
and lives lost are real.

"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
news:1123612174.109126.138550@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> I've moved into a house build in 1971 which is wired mainly with
> aluminum wiring. I've read a handful of published information that
> states that aluminum wiring (or more correctly, the connections made
> with aluminum wiring) do in fact create a fire hazard greater than
> copper wire. I also know that a lot of people state that aluminum
> wiring does not pose any greater risk than copper if done properly.
> What I'm interested in is what is "done properly" and have there been
> tests done on such "proper" wiring methods to prove that they do in
> fact pose no increased fire hazard?
>
> So in other words, what I'm looking for is published (on paper,
> internet, etc.) information from reputable sources that would refute
> the claims made by the information that I've already read making
> aluminum out to be a fire hazard. A lot of the information I've read
> so far can be found at www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm
>
>
> Thanks for the input,
> Harry
>

Harry Muscle

2005-08-10, 2:21 pm

So the only pigtailing method approved by both agencies is with the
compression sleeves (I'm assuming you're referring to the COPALUM
tool)?

Do both agencies agree that using the CO/ALR marked devices is a
permanently safe solution? However, I'm assuming that one would have a
hard time finding certain parts with this mark (GFCI, light fixtures,
etc.).

Thanks,
Harry

SQLit

2005-08-10, 2:21 pm

"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
news:1123690936.073495.147640@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> So the only pigtailing method approved by both agencies is with the
> compression sleeves (I'm assuming you're referring to the COPALUM
> tool)?
>
> Do both agencies agree that using the CO/ALR marked devices is a
> permanently safe solution? However, I'm assuming that one would have a
> hard time finding certain parts with this mark (GFCI, light fixtures,
> etc.).
>
> Thanks,
> Harry

I have used the CO/ALR marked devices with out incident for many years.
Finding them gets to be a challenge. I have had to go to the wholesale house
to order a box. Your probably not going to find devices dual labeled at the
box stores.

I did a search at the Leviton site and did not find an GFCI that was dual
rated.
Light fixtures are dependant on the connections and temperature. Using the
dual rated wire nuts solves the problem.

I believe that a tight connection is needed for any termination. It all
goes back to the craftsman.

gfretwell@aol.com

2005-08-10, 5:21 pm

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 07:39:47 -0700, "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> wrote:

>Do not blame the material. Blame the lack of training and experence

I second SQLs opinion. The mere fact that there are millions of
aluminum wired homes that never had a problem seems to confirm it.

This is certainly a lot less forgiving to hacks and handymen but if it
was properly installed and nobody screws with it, you will probably be
OK.
Just be vigilent to unusual sounds, smells and static on the TV/radio.
If you suspect a problem call a pro to investigate.

Bud

2005-08-10, 5:21 pm

SQLit wrote:
> "night soil dalits" <invalids@invalid.com> wrote in message
> news:42f92413$0$32365$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
>
>
>
>
> The entire industry,,, you mean residential. Even then your wrong. New
> tract, custom and semi homes all have AL wiring in them. A/c, stove,
> cooktop, any load above 30 amps
>
> Utilities use AL almost exclusively.
>
> There is nothing wrong with the wire it was/and is the lack of craftsmen and
> the terminiations that caused the problems. A properly trained electrician
> knows how to install AL. The right devices do not have a problem when
> terminating AL. Wrong device, then there can be problems.
>
> In the late 1960's copper prices were on the way UP. So contractors turned
> to AL to save money and keep housing affordable in the 1970's. There was
> even a conductor call copper clad AL that was sold for a while. Did not work
> correctly like they thought it should, it did not last long. When the
> copper prices fell there was a return to it.
>
> Most contractors did not provide any training when shifting over to AL
> romex. The one I worked for sent all of us to a training class for 2 days. I
> had the responsibility of wiring the first apartment complex, 180 units all
> in AL back in 1971. The place is still standing and there has never been a
> fire.
> Do not blame the material. Blame the lack of training and experence. Did
> anyone blame the gun that shot Kennedy, Regan, or Lennon? No they blamed
> the guy behind the gun.
>
>
>
After problems developed, UL removed listing on wire and devices in
7-1971. In 9-1971 they started listing devices which are marked CO/ALR.
I havn't heard of problems with these devices. The problem was more than
just skill.

Bud--

tlbs

2005-08-10, 6:21 pm

I can't site any references that you are asking for (without doing alot
of research, anyway).

I can speak from experience.

I have lived in apartments with aluminum wiring and I have found many
faulty terminations at duplex outlets, switches, and light fixtures.
Faulty terminations are usually "heard" as arcing when appliances are
plugged-in. I have seen way too many charred fixtures, outlets, and
switches for my taste. I have also found it difficult to find fixtures
rated for CO/AL (and I would have replaced all of these poorly
installed fixtures on my own dime had I been able to find CO/AL).

I have experienced a house-fire caused by faulty wiring -- copper
wiring. It seems that the contractor pulled the wire so tight that the
wire kinked and caused a hot-spot, that over the years finally ignited
the wood 2x4. (Fortunately no one was injured, and we did get a much
needed roof replacement, along with a new HVAC unit from the
insurance.)

I currently live in a house built in 1973 and it has aluminum wiring.
When we moved in 12 years ago, the first thing my wife and I did, was
to pigtail every aluminum termination with a wire-nut, a 3" piece of
copper wire (with the correct insulation color), and anti-oxidant
compound to fill the wire-nuts. I was very very careful not to nick
any aluminum and I very carefully sanded each termination with 600-grit
sandpaper. We then bought and installed brand new outlets and switches
(rated for copper). (We left most of the light fixtures alone.)

I have not had any problems with any of the stuff we replaced. In 12
years only one ceiling lamp fixture has caused problems when I put in
compact flourescent light bulbs. I had occasion to examine some of the
replacement outlets last year. Everything looked great. The only
'problem' I saw -- the anti-oxidant compound had become "gummy" in the
wire nuts.

I don't know if what we did was "code", or "above code", but I feel
safer than if the house was wired, "pure" aluminum.

Hope this helps
Tom P.

daestrom

2005-08-10, 7:21 pm

"SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> wrote in message
news:VkoKe.1043$hv5.1207@news.uswest.net...
>
<snip>
>
>
> The entire industry,,, you mean residential. Even then your wrong. New
> tract, custom and semi homes all have AL wiring in them. A/c, stove,
> cooktop, any load above 30 amps
>
> Utilities use AL almost exclusively.
>
> There is nothing wrong with the wire it was/and is the lack of craftsmen
> and
> the terminiations that caused the problems. A properly trained
> electrician
> knows how to install AL. The right devices do not have a problem when
> terminating AL. Wrong device, then there can be problems.
>
> In the late 1960's copper prices were on the way UP. So contractors turned
> to AL to save money and keep housing affordable in the 1970's. There was
> even a conductor call copper clad AL that was sold for a while. Did not
> work
> correctly like they thought it should, it did not last long. When the
> copper prices fell there was a return to it.
>
> Most contractors did not provide any training when shifting over to AL
> romex. The one I worked for sent all of us to a training class for 2 days.
> I
> had the responsibility of wiring the first apartment complex, 180 units
> all
> in AL back in 1971. The place is still standing and there has never been a
> fire.
> Do not blame the material. Blame the lack of training and experence. Did
> anyone blame the gun that shot Kennedy, Regan, or Lennon? No they blamed
> the guy behind the gun.
>
>

I agree with most all you said. But ISTR that when Al first came into
residential use, there wasn't a lot of separate Cu/Al UL listed devices.
Using Al on devices that were just 'UL listed' led to some trouble. Later,
UL started listing devices specifically for Al or Cu/Al.

Once contractors and home-owners 'got edumacated' about only using 'Al' or
'Cu/Al' listed devices with Al wire, things got settled pretty well.

daestrom

>

stevenal

2005-08-10, 7:21 pm

"daestrom" <daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> wrote in message
news:eiuKe.7713$EX.7392@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
> "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> wrote in message
> news:VkoKe.1043$hv5.1207@news.uswest.net...
> <snip>
turned[color=darkred]
days.[color=darkred]
a[color=darkred]
Did[color=darkred]
blamed[color=darkred]
>
> I agree with most all you said. But ISTR that when Al first came into
> residential use, there wasn't a lot of separate Cu/Al UL listed devices.
> Using Al on devices that were just 'UL listed' led to some trouble.
Later,
> UL started listing devices specifically for Al or Cu/Al.
>
> Once contractors and home-owners 'got edumacated' about only using 'Al' or
> 'Cu/Al' listed devices with Al wire, things got settled pretty well.
>
> daestrom
>
The story is not quite done. It seems there were problems with the CU/AL
devices with the smaller wire sizes. The replacement was designated CO/ALR.

stevenal

2005-08-10, 8:21 pm

"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
news:1123690936.073495.147640@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> So the only pigtailing method approved by both agencies is with the
> compression sleeves (I'm assuming you're referring to the COPALUM
> tool)?

Yes

> Do both agencies agree that using the CO/ALR marked devices is a
> permanently safe solution?

I think so.

However, I'm assuming that one would have a
> hard time finding certain parts with this mark (GFCI, light fixtures,
> etc.).
>
Straight 120 V switches and receptacles only the last time I looked. No
GFCIs, dimmers, etc. Individual light fixtures are usually small loads. If
you open them up, though, you'll likely find the copper and aluminum wire
nutted together with a nut that is not listed for that application and
technically illegal. In my own case, I found receptacles used to power heavy
loads like vacuum cleaners and heaters to be the crispy ones.

NunYa Bidness

2005-08-10, 9:21 pm

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:26:34 GMT, "daestrom"
<daestrom@NO_SPAM_HEREtwcny.rr.com> Gave us:

>I agree with most all you said. But ISTR that when Al first came into
>residential use, there wasn't a lot of separate Cu/Al UL listed devices.
>Using Al on devices that were just 'UL listed' led to some trouble. Later,
>UL started listing devices specifically for Al or Cu/Al.
>
>Once contractors and home-owners 'got edumacated' about only using 'Al' or
>'Cu/Al' listed devices with Al wire, things got settled pretty well.
>
>daestrom

Just ask some of the members of the Beverly Hills Supper Club in
Northern Kentucky... oh... that's right... you can't. They're dead.

NunYa Bidness

2005-08-10, 9:21 pm

On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:49:35 -0700, "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> Gave us:

>
>"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
>news:1123690936.073495.147640@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
>I have used the CO/ALR marked devices with out incident for many years.
>Finding them gets to be a challenge. I have had to go to the wholesale house
>to order a box. Your probably not going to find devices dual labeled at the
>box stores.
>
>I did a search at the Leviton site and did not find an GFCI that was dual
>rated.
>Light fixtures are dependant on the connections and temperature. Using the
>dual rated wire nuts solves the problem.
>
>
>I believe that a tight connection is needed for any termination. It all
>goes back to the craftsman.
>

It goes to the industry heads declaring components susceptible to
oxidation as safe without providing a method for gas tight high
current capable connections.

Do wire nuts get an anti oxidant paste shoved in them before the nut
gets twisted on?

There is a big difference between the connectors and terminations
used at the power providers' facilities and those which have been
approved for residential use.

Copper is where it is at. Use copper and improve the value and
safety of your home. Replacing Aluminum installations with Copper
yields multiple value improvements. Pretty simple.

Let the power companies use Aluminum. Their hardware and there
safety maintenance is much higher. The terminations aren't locked
away in a wall surrounded by flammable materials.

Homes should ALL be Copper, and the industry should keep the
Aluminum where it belongs on large, high pressure, practically gas
tight terminations.

Bud

2005-08-10, 11:21 pm

Harry Muscle wrote:

> I've moved into a house build in 1971 which is wired mainly with
> aluminum wiring. I've read a handful of published information that
> states that aluminum wiring (or more correctly, the connections made
> with aluminum wiring) do in fact create a fire hazard greater than
> copper wire. I also know that a lot of people state that aluminum
> wiring does not pose any greater risk than copper if done properly.
> What I'm interested in is what is "done properly" and have there been
> tests done on such "proper" wiring methods to prove that they do in
> fact pose no increased fire hazard?
>
> So in other words, what I'm looking for is published (on paper,
> internet, etc.) information from reputable sources that would refute
> the claims made by the information that I've already read making
> aluminum out to be a fire hazard. A lot of the information I've read
> so far can be found at www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm
>

The site is run by a home inspector. His interest is that home
inspectors encounter conditions that may be a hazard and should be
reported in an inspection report. The site collects information and has
web links on a number of issues.

On aluminum a lot of the information comes from the US Consumer Product
Safety Commision and Jesse Aronstein, PH.D., P.E., who was a vice
president at Wright-Malta Corp. Wright-Malta is a test laboratory that
did extensive testing on aluminum wiring and associated devices for the
CPSC and others. I see no evidence that the inspect-ny web site is other
than an honest attept to furnish unbiased information.

One of the sites linked from inspect-ny is

http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm

*********************************************************************
IF YOU HAVE ALUMINUM WIRING I STRONGLY SUGGEST YOU LOOK AT THIS SITE.
*********************************************************************

It is a paper writen by Jesse Aronstein, referenced above.

The paper includes:
- aluminum wiring systems, including those installed after UL changed
the standards for wire and devices about 1971, are potential hazards
- information on COPALUM crimp connections referred to in other posts
(these probably can only be made by a electrician trained by the
manufacturer)
- what the problem is with wire nuts
- very specific information on using wirenuts to make connections to
a copper pigtail to connect to a device.
- existing wirenuts in an aluminum should be replaced
- very specific information on connections of aluminum wire to
switches and receptacles
- information on connecting aluminum wire to circuit breakers

Also other very useful information. It should be emphasized that this
information is based on extensive tests, not conjecture. The paper was
writen in 2000.

In information on FPE breakers, inspect-ny says that the CPSC tried to
regulate aluminum wire systems but was sued by the aluminum industry.
The courts found that aluminum wiring systems were not consumer products
and not subject to CPSC regulation (consumers do not buy significant
aluminum system products).
---------------------
Does anyone know what wirenuts, if any, are listed for aluminum and copper?

Bud-

Harry Muscle

2005-08-11, 10:21 am

Newsgroups: misc.consumers.house
From: Mark Fineman <mfine...@alum.mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:30:08 -0400
Local: Wed, Aug 10 2005 9:30 pm
Subject: Re: Info to backup safety of aluminum wiring?

Does anyone know if using (and regularly testing) AFCI (Arc Fault
Circuit Interrupers) increases reliability aluminium wiring to
that of copper wiring when the current connection mechanisms are used?

***

A very good question. I'd love to know the answer too.

Thanks,
Harry

Harry Muscle

2005-08-11, 11:21 am

What about connection devices that are designed for larger aluminum
wiring ... but there happens to be a version of them that accepts
smaller wires? There's a whole bunch of such connectors shown in this
catalog: www.nsipolaris.com/pdf/connectors.pdf . I'm assuming some of
these would normally be found inside of a breaker panel to attach the
aluminum wire comming in from outside. As well as used to make
connections for larger aluminum wire that supplies ovens, etc.
However, a lot of these connectors accept 14 awg wire too, therefore,
would using such connectors be safer than using wirenuts. After all
the safety of wirenuts is not agreed upon by all, but how about the
safety of such connectors?

Thanks,
Harry

Bud

2005-08-11, 1:21 pm

Harry Muscle wrote:

> Newsgroups: misc.consumers.house
> From: Mark Fineman <mfine...@alum.mit.edu>
> Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2005 21:30:08 -0400
> Local: Wed, Aug 10 2005 9:30 pm
> Subject: Re: Info to backup safety of aluminum wiring?
>
> Does anyone know if using (and regularly testing) AFCI (Arc Fault
> Circuit Interrupers) increases reliability aluminium wiring to
> that of copper wiring when the current connection mechanisms are used?
>
> ***
>
> A very good question. I'd love to know the answer too.
>
> Thanks,
> Harry
>

Tests show that failure in wire nuts result from no contact between the
wires because of oxide on the aluminum. The steel spring breaks through
the oxide to make contact with the aluminum conductors. This means all
the current is going through the spring. A CPSC report at
http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/pl2p2.htm
shows a 2 volt drop across the wire nut at 17 amps. This is only about
0.1 ohm resistance but is a 34 watt heater. At this current level the
spring is red hot. This destroys the insulation on the wires and the
wire nut and can start a fire. But the voltage drop is low and constant
so lights are not dim and do not flicker. Since there is no arc, there
is nothing for the AFCI to see.

Later in the deterioration the the connection can totally fail, possibly
with arcing that generates a lot more heat. Arcing here would be picked
up by an AFCI.

(The link above is part of a slide show that goes forward and back.)

http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm links to this site and others
of interest.

Bud--

stevenal

2005-08-11, 1:21 pm

Note the split bolt connector is not UL aprroved for aluminum. I used the
2-SR in this application. Bulky even before taping, it required the use of
box extenders.
"Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com> wrote in message
news:1123768370.375299.134660@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> What about connection devices that are designed for larger aluminum
> wiring ... but there happens to be a version of them that accepts
> smaller wires? There's a whole bunch of such connectors shown in this
> catalog: www.nsipolaris.com/pdf/connectors.pdf . I'm assuming some of
> these would normally be found inside of a breaker panel to attach the
> aluminum wire comming in from outside. As well as used to make
> connections for larger aluminum wire that supplies ovens, etc.
> However, a lot of these connectors accept 14 awg wire too, therefore,
> would using such connectors be safer than using wirenuts. After all
> the safety of wirenuts is not agreed upon by all, but how about the
> safety of such connectors?
>
> Thanks,
> Harry
>

Harry Muscle

2005-08-11, 6:21 pm

Are split bolt connectors in general not UL approved for aluminum to
copper connections? Or just the ones in the link I've provided?

Thanks,
Harry

Harry Muscle

2005-08-11, 6:21 pm

I just did a search on split bolt, aluminum, and UL, and it looks like
you must have been refering to just the link that I provided above,
since this page for example lists split bolt connectors designed for
joining aluminum to copper and it says that they are UL and CSA
certified:
www.gardnerbender.com/whats_new/pro...Connectors.html . So
I've just answered my own question as to what you were refering too ...

Thanks,
Harry

P.S. Maybe I should start a new thread about this whole idea of using
larger connectors with aluminum wire ... since this is totally off
topic from where this thread started.

night soil dalits

2005-08-11, 6:21 pm

"NunYa Bidness" <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote in message
news:ms4lf1pmprk7otnl8usf5ojpctnphn1prm@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 10 Aug 2005 09:49:35 -0700, "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> Gave us:
>
> It goes to the industry heads declaring components susceptible to
> oxidation as safe without providing a method for gas tight high
> current capable connections.
>
> Do wire nuts get an anti oxidant paste shoved in them before the nut
> gets twisted on?
>
> There is a big difference between the connectors and terminations
> used at the power providers' facilities and those which have been
> approved for residential use.
>
> Copper is where it is at. Use copper and improve the value and
> safety of your home. Replacing Aluminum installations with Copper
> yields multiple value improvements. Pretty simple.
>
> Let the power companies use Aluminum. Their hardware and there
> safety maintenance is much higher. The terminations aren't locked
> away in a wall surrounded by flammable materials.
>
> Homes should ALL be Copper, and the industry should keep the
> Aluminum where it belongs on large, high pressure, practically gas
> tight terminations.

Agreed!

SQLit

2005-08-11, 8:21 pm

"night soil dalits" <invalids@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:42fbb7f8$0$58844$892e7fe2@authen.white.readfreenews.net...
>
> "NunYa Bidness" <nunyabidness@nunyabidness.org> wrote in message
> news:ms4lf1pmprk7otnl8usf5ojpctnphn1prm@4ax.com...
>
> Agreed!

I do not even think you can purchase AL romex any more. If you can I would
like to know the source.

SE and SER cables are completely different and I do not believe they are
offered only above #8.

Replacing the AL wiring in your home is an expense that you will recover
only if you find the right buyer. Just my opinion check with a realtor in
your area to be sure.

If you would please explain
"Aluminum where it belongs on large, high pressure, practically gas
tight terminations. "

High pressure and gas tight? Are you referring to electrical work? Cause
high pressure sure does not make any sense to me. High voltage might.

stevenal

2005-08-11, 9:21 pm

Your other link showed the certification labels too, just took space to
mention the exclusion. Better sources might be the manufacturer's sites.
Burndy, Anderson, etc. The split bolts are pretty bulky too.

From: "Harry Muscle" <fake.e-mail@stonyx.com>
Subject: Re: Info to backup safety of aluminum wiring?
Date: Thursday, August 11, 2005 1:24 PM

I just did a search on split bolt, aluminum, and UL, and it looks like
you must have been refering to just the link that I provided above,
since this page for example lists split bolt connectors designed for
joining aluminum to copper and it says that they are UL and CSA
certified:
www.gardnerbender.com/whats_new/pro...Connectors.html . So
I've just answered my own question as to what you were refering too ...

Thanks,
Harry

P.S. Maybe I should start a new thread about this whole idea of using
larger connectors with aluminum wire ... since this is totally off
topic from where this thread started.

TokaMundo

2005-08-12, 1:21 pm

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:14:23 -0700, "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> Gave us:

>
>Replacing the AL wiring in your home is an expense that you will recover
>only if you find the right buyer. Just my opinion check with a realtor in
>your area to be sure.

ANY home will get a higher appraisal in ANY locale with copper in
the walls, PARTICULARLY it is in a development where all the homes
were originally wired in Al. It is a quality improvement, plain and
simple.

TokaMundo

2005-08-12, 1:21 pm

On Thu, 11 Aug 2005 16:14:23 -0700, "SQLit" <sqlit@qwest.net> Gave us:

>
>If you would please explain
>"Aluminum where it belongs on large, high pressure, practically gas
> tight terminations. "

If you don't know what a gas tight termination is, you do not belong
in this discussion.
>
>High pressure and gas tight?

Actually, you shouldn't be doing any wiring either, if you do not
understand these terms.

> Are you referring to electrical work?

Do you work in this industry?

> Cause
>high pressure sure does not make any sense to me.

Large terminations have specific torque levels required to cinch
them. There is also a problem with conductor creepage, a term used in
this case to describe a metal fatigue issue. In HV, creepage is about
air ionization issues.

> High voltage might.
>

You might need to get back into an education program if you actually
work in this industry but are unfamiliar with those terms.

Gerald Newton

2005-08-12, 9:21 pm

>
> Tests show that failure in wire nuts result from no contact between the
> wires because of oxide on the aluminum. The steel spring breaks through
> the oxide to make contact with the aluminum conductors. This means all the
> current is going through the spring. A CPSC report at
> http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/pl2p2.htm
> shows a 2 volt drop across the wire nut at 17 amps. This is only about 0.1
> ohm resistance but is a 34 watt heater. At this current level the spring
> is red hot. This destroys the insulation on the wires and the wire nut and
> can start a fire. But the voltage drop is low and constant so lights are
> not dim and do not flicker. Since there is no arc, there is nothing for
> the AFCI to see.
>
> Later in the deterioration the the connection can totally fail, possibly
> with arcing that generates a lot more heat. Arcing here would be picked up
> by an AFCI.
>
> (The link above is part of a slide show that goes forward and back.)
>
> http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum.htm links to this site and others of
> interest.
>
> Bud--
In northern Alaska where I am at, aluminum wire is rarely used. The extreme
temperatures cause too many problems with cold flow.

But the AFCI problem you bring up is interesting because according to the
Zlan site the inventor of the AFCI chip had to find a way to distinguish
good arcs like a light switch turning on and off from a bad arc. I wonder
if he analyzed all the possible combinations of aluminum to copper
connections.

petersonra@aol.com

2005-08-16, 7:21 pm

the utility of afcis is somewhat dubious to begin with.

it is supposed to detect an arc, such as might happen when an extension
cord is damaged.

whether they actually do or not is not clear.

in any case they will not detect the heating that occurs on an aluminum
conenction that has started to oxidize.

TokaMundo

2005-08-16, 7:21 pm

On 16 Aug 2005 14:20:41 -0700, petersonra@aol.com Gave us:

>in any case they will not detect the heating that occurs on an aluminum
>conenction that has started to oxidize.

It will if it gets "noisy" enough.

Bob Peterson

2005-08-17, 12:21 am

No it won't. AFCIs detect arcs, and at fairly high current levels. The
oxidation that forms on aluminum connections reduces the current due to the
resistance of the connection, thats what causes the heat, and the fires.

"TokaMundo" <TokaMundo@weedizgood.org> wrote in message
news:nno4g11et1173f8r3ub7569d3fstn51hf0@4ax.com...
> On 16 Aug 2005 14:20:41 -0700, petersonra@aol.com Gave us:
>
>
> It will if it gets "noisy" enough.

Member TPVFD

2005-08-18, 11:21 pm

TokaMundo wrote:
> On 16 Aug 2005 14:20:41 -0700, petersonra@aol.com Gave us:
>
>
>
>
> It will if it gets "noisy" enough.

The manufacturers do not make it clear that AFCIs cannot detect series
arcs, such as those resulting from an oxidizing connection, until they
progress to a ground fault which draws at least thirty milliamperes. If
the arcing connection does not cause a ground fault the AFCI cannot
detect it and the heat it generates can kindle a fire. They can detect
a parallel arc such as when a screw penetrates a cable and causes a high
resistance arcing fault between the current carrying conductors. Such
parallel arcs are not that common.
--
Tom Horne

"This alternating current stuff is just a fad. It is much too dangerous
for general use." Thomas Alva Edison

Bud

2005-08-19, 1:21 pm

Member TPVFD wrote:
>
> The manufacturers do not make it clear that AFCIs cannot detect series
> arcs, such as those resulting from an oxidizing connection, until they
> progress to a ground fault which draws at least thirty milliamperes. If
> the arcing connection does not cause a ground fault the AFCI cannot
> detect it and the heat it generates can kindle a fire. They can detect
> a parallel arc such as when a screw penetrates a cable and causes a high
> resistance arcing fault between the current carrying conductors. Such
> parallel arcs are not that common.
> --
> Tom Horne
>
I keep forgetting that.

The 2005 NEC requires AFCIs with series AND parallel protection starting
1-1-2008. I don't know of any on the market now.

Bud--

Den Corfield

2005-08-20, 8:21 am

Aluminium was used for a few years back in the 70s due to a copper shortage
and hence gross increase in price caused by some war in africa Rhodesia I
think. There is no problem with aluminium other than it is softer and more
brittle than copper - if the terminals were overtightned it crushed the
aluminium and broke it hence leaving a loose connection. If not tightned
enough - you obviously got a loose connection. Hence a special Torque
screwdriver was used to ensure exactly the right pressure.

Perhaps cable manufacturers could advise on the exact torque settings.
Commonest problem with it nowadays is that something will suddenly stop
working due to a wire having broken off at the termination usually due to
some disturbance etc. There is a fire risk but slight cause all the
enclosures are fire resistant.
"Bud" <remove.BudNews@isp.com> wrote in message
news:1b3ac$42fa60c9$4213ea70$16927@DIALUPUSA.NET...
> SQLit wrote:
70's.[color=darkred]
and[color=darkred]
electrician[color=darkred]
turned[color=darkred]
work[color=darkred]
days. I[color=darkred]
all[color=darkred]
a[color=darkred]
Did[color=darkred]
blamed[color=darkred]
> After problems developed, UL removed listing on wire and devices in
> 7-1971. In 9-1971 they started listing devices which are marked CO/ALR.
> I havn't heard of problems with these devices. The problem was more than
> just skill.
>
> Bud--

gfretwell@aol.com

2005-08-20, 1:21 pm

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:07:09 GMT, "Den Corfield"
<den.corfield@virgin.net> wrote:

>There is no problem with aluminium other than it is softer and more
>brittle than copper -

This was the problem with the 1350 alloy of the early 70s but the AA
8000 series of alloys don't have this problem. In fact an aluminum
conductor might actually perform better than copper in the aluminum
lugs that are common these days. Testing seems to demonstrate that.

Proper torque is the biggest issue. That is not "as tight as you can
get it"

daestrom

2005-08-20, 3:21 pm

"Den Corfield" <den.corfield@virgin.net> wrote in message
news:x9ENe.10254$4y6.4217@newsfe7-gui.ntli.net...
> Aluminium was used for a few years back in the 70s due to a copper
> shortage
> and hence gross increase in price caused by some war in africa Rhodesia I
> think. There is no problem with aluminium other than it is softer and
> more
> brittle than copper - if the terminals were overtightned it crushed the
> aluminium and broke it hence leaving a loose connection. If not tightned
> enough - you obviously got a loose connection. Hence a special Torque
> screwdriver was used to ensure exactly the right pressure.
>

I think it was more than that. Al has a different coefficient of expansion
than Cu. So when a connection warmed up, the Al would 'extrude' it self out
from under the screw. Then when it cooled, you had a loose connection with
all the hazards that go with that. A couple of friends had houses built
with Al wiring. Whenever that reported a 'flickering' light or 'staticcy'
radio, we would check the wall outlet and find the connections 'lose'.
Could usually get between a quarter and half turn (no, we weren't
overtorquing, the things were just lose).

Proper devices rated for Al are able to accomodate the expansion/contraction
of Al better without loosening over time.

daestrom

TokaMundo

2005-08-20, 8:21 pm

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:07:09 GMT, "Den Corfield"
<den.corfield@virgin.net> Gave us:

>Aluminium was used for a few years back in the 70s due to a copper shortage
>and hence gross increase in price caused by some war in africa Rhodesia I
>think. There is no problem with aluminium other than it is softer and more
>brittle than copper - if the terminals were overtightned it crushed the
>aluminium and broke it hence leaving a loose connection. If not tightned
>enough - you obviously got a loose connection. Hence a special Torque
>screwdriver was used to ensure exactly the right pressure.

Ever heard of metallic creepage? Malleable metals creep away from
impingement over time. It is not merely a too tight or too loose
scenario.

TokaMundo

2005-08-20, 8:21 pm

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 11:07:09 GMT, "Den Corfield"
<den.corfield@virgin.net> Gave us:

>Commonest

Not even a word.

"The most common..."

John Gilmer

2005-08-23, 7:21 am

> I keep forgetting that.
>
> The 2005 NEC requires AFCIs with series AND parallel protection starting
> 1-1-2008. I don't know of any on the market now.

Sounds like the AFCI folks sold the NEC a bill of goods!

Bud

2005-08-23, 1:21 pm

John Gilmer wrote:

>
>
> Sounds like the AFCI folks sold the NEC a bill of goods!
>
>
>

From http://www.cpsc.gov/volstd/afci/AFCIFireTechnology.pdf

As part of the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC's) 1994
and 1995 efforts to reduce residential electrical system fires, the CPSC
sponsored work on detecting and monitoring conditions that could lead to
or cause fires in homes. The work was performed by Underwriters
Laboratories Inc. (UL) and was documented in a report entitled,
"Technology for Detecting and Monitoring Conditions that Could Cause
Electrical Wiring System Fires." The study uncovered several possible
technologies and concluded that arc-fault detection combined with
ground-fault protection was the most promising technology to reduce the
risk of fire when combined with conventional circuit breakers. At that
time, such an arc-fault circuit breaker did not exist as a commercial
device. Additional research has led to the development of the AFCI as a
commercial product.
-------------------
Series arcs, protection for which is being added to AFCIs, include loose
connections. The current is limited by the load current downstream from
the arc, so they won't trip breakers. They can, however, generate a lot
of heat.

The NEC is a pretty pragmatic code. Changes usually require a
demonstration that the change will improve safety.

Bud--

magic

2005-08-23, 4:21 pm

LinkBot