Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

4 way motion sensor (outdoor)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by sparkycoog View Post
    Since there is only one switch leg, paralleling the sensors is the only way I can see to hard wire this. Seems like a lot of work though.
    What is so hard about running one extra conductor between all the units?
    I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

    Comment


      #17
      Originally posted by desertwindpower View Post
      Yes, there will be a photocell as the power leaves the house panel.
      Will motion sensors have built-in photocels?

      When system works fine for a year, and suddenly lites stay on all nite, will homeowner believe you when you tell him its not your fault? Just wondering.
      Think for yourself, while its still somewhat legal!
      Clarkesville, Georgia

      Comment


        #18
        In my opinion putting the switches in parallel for that application is a violation of the NEC parallel conductor rules.

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by iwire View Post
          In my opinion putting the switches in parallel for that application is a violation of the NEC parallel conductor rules.
          That has been my belief for a long time also. I think that one argument for its compliance is that the routing of conductors is so different from compliant paralleled conductors, and the intent of the design is not to share the load as much as allow the control through the common (wire) bus, that they simply would not be considered to be in parallel. But not a good argument perhaps, as the load(s) are in fact running on wires that have both ends electrically connected.

          Another way to try to justify it may come from 310.10(H), which allows wires to be run in parallel for control power to control devices. That certainly should allow the outputs of the motions to be connected (all 110.3(B) thoughts aside ), but may not allow the lamps to be energized through such. Unless of course the light bulb can be considered an "indicating instrument".

          But I would be sure to at least comply with the backfeed warning shown in the exception of 404.6(C).
          With great power comes great resistance - times current squared, of course.

          Comment


            #20
            Originally posted by readydave8 View Post
            Will motion sensors have built-in photocels?

            When system works fine for a year, and suddenly lites stay on all nite, will homeowner believe you when you tell him its not your fault? Just wondering.
            If lights are staying on all night, it is likely that motion is being detected or at least one motion sensor is defective, not a photocell issue.
            I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by iwire View Post
              In my opinion putting the switches in parallel for that application is a violation of the NEC parallel conductor rules.

              This has been beat to death in the past with no real consensus as to whether or not it is a violation or not.

              I am not going to post any details as to why it is or isn't a violation, or it will just derail the thread, as it has at least two or three times in the past.

              If it is a violation then one must run the sensors as a part of a control circuit and control a contactor with them, and then slave the lights off the contactor, as it is clear you can parallel switches of a control circuit.
              I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by kwired View Post
                If lights are staying on all night, it is likely that motion is being detected or at least one motion sensor is defective, not a photocell issue.
                I also don't find it very uncommon for detectors to 'forget' what to do, and need to be either power cycled or simply go through a dusk to dawn period.
                With great power comes great resistance - times current squared, of course.

                Comment


                  #23
                  Originally posted by Volta View Post
                  I also don't find it very uncommon for detectors to 'forget' what to do, and need to be either power cycled or simply go through a dusk to dawn period.
                  Lets just say when it comes to outdoor motion detectors that are targeted at the residential market, there is a lot of cheap crap out there and I myself am not much of a fan of any of them. I usually make customer pick out their own unit and I will install it for them with no guarantee as to how it will perform. If they want something that I will stand behind they will usually balk at the price.

                  I would rather tell them to put lights on a dimmer and let them run all night for security purposes, and you can turn the dimmer up when you have activity going on where you need additional light. That is exactly what I have on my home, photocell turns them on at dusk, dimmers are set to a low level and usually stay there unless we want more light for some reason.
                  I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by kwired View Post
                    This has been beat to death in the past with no real consensus as to whether or not it is a violation or not.
                    That may be your take on it but I think the words in the code are pretty clear on it.



                    I am not going to post any details as to why it is or isn't a violation, or it will just derail the thread, as it has at least two or three times in the past.
                    The OP should know that what is being recommended is a potential code violation.

                    If it is a violation then one must run the sensors as a part of a control circuit and control a contactor with them, and then slave the lights off the contactor, as it is clear you can parallel switches of a control circuit.
                    I agree, and if you find that clear you must also find doing it to supply lighting outlets is a violation.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by kwired View Post
                      I would rather tell them to put lights on a dimmer and let them run all night for security purposes, and you can turn the dimmer up when you have activity going on where you need additional light. That is exactly what I have on my home, photocell turns them on at dusk, dimmers are set to a low level and usually stay there unless we want more light for some reason.
                      I have a dimmer on some of my outdoor lighting, I have not added a PC yet.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by iwire View Post
                        That may be your take on it but I think the words in the code are pretty clear on it.





                        The OP should know that what is being recommended is a potential code violation.



                        I agree, and if you find that clear you must also find doing it to supply lighting outlets is a violation.
                        Fair enough, but I will refer OP to some of the past discussion on this, as there is no winning the debate on either side.



                        http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthrea...t=ring+circuit

                        http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=138335 (nearly 200 posts in this one that got us nowhere)

                        Seems like there was another thread or two but am having trouble finding them, I either get too many results or none at all with my searches.
                        I live for today, I'm just a day behind.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by kwired View Post
                          This has [COLOR=#a52a2a]been beat to death in the past with no real consensus as to whether or not it is a violation or not.[/COLOR]

                          I am not going to post any details as to why it is or isn't a violation, or it will just derail the thread, as it has at least two or three times in the past.

                          If it is a violation then one must run the sensors as a part of a control circuit and control a contactor with them, and then slave the lights off the contactor, as it is clear you can parallel switches of a control circuit.

                          That would be an understatement.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            How does this constitute a paralleled installation? Which conductors are mechanically joined at both ends?
                            Peter A.

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Originally posted by kwired View Post
                              Fair enough, but I will refer OP to some of the past discussion on this, as there is no winning the debate on either side.


                              Again, that is your opinion of it, not mine.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by PetrosA View Post
                                How does this constitute a paralleled installation? Which conductors are mechanically joined at both ends?
                                The code says electrically joined at each end not mechanically joined.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X