Neutral at swich box

[brother]

In resindential how many of you are running 14/3. Romex for your projects. Have there been much more cost on these jobs ?

Im also trying to remember the original reason the Nec required this dont have my code book in front of me right now. I haven't done resi in a while.

 

[iwire]

Im also trying to remember the original reason the Nec required this

This is what I have read.

For years manufacturers have been making replacement switches that need power. Occupancy sensors, timers etc.

Because they need power to operate and they wanted to be able to sell them to anyone they used the EGC as the return path. (milliamps but still)

The NEC wanted this practice to stop but was powerless over UL to have them stop listing them with a current carrying EGC.

So a deal was reached, the NEC would require neutrals at switch boxes and UL would stop listing devices that used the EGC as a current carrying conductor.

 

[kwired]

In resindential how many of you are running 14/3 for your projects. Have there been much more cost ob these jobs ?

Im also trying to remember the original reason the Nec required this dont have my code book in front of me right now. I haven't done resi in a while.

Though I don't do nearly as much residential work as I once did, it doesn't change how I do things all that much. I generally never ran power to the light and switch loop to the switch but usually did run power from switch to switch and then to the light - so the neutral was already in the switch box. There were occasional exceptions though. Multiple switches for the same light throws a wrench into the gears, but I think you now only need a neutral at one switch if they are all in the same area.

The reason for these requirements is more usage of automated controls that replace the traditional toggle switch that may require a connection to the neutral conductor.

 

[jumper]

Informational Note: The provision for a (future) grounded
conductor is to complete a circuit path for electronic lighting
control devices.

The section was added because UL, in violation of the NEC, was approving occupancy sensors that used the EGC as a neutral.

 

[I-learns]

Where is the specific code section that requires this?

 

[Dennis Alwon]

Where is the specific code section that requires this?

404.2(C)

 

[Dennis Alwon]

All contractors around here fed the switch and not the light so that is not an issue except for perhaps 3 ways. We feed one 3 way and switch leg from the other and we have no issues with complying with this section

 

[JFletcher]

All contractors around here fed the switch and not the light so that is not an issue except for perhaps 3 ways. We feed one 3 way and switch leg from the other and we have no issues with complying with this section

Same here. I only see light boxes fed in older homes (60s and earlier) and a few oddballs here and there since, long before it became code.

 

[user 100]

Same here. I only see light boxes fed in older homes (60s and earlier) and a few oddballs here and there since, long before it became code.

One method that was done a bit then was where they would run 14/2 from panel/receptacle to the light, then 14/3 from light to sw box (red was sw leg), then 14/2 from sw box to feed receptacles- so in a lot of old places wired that way there is indeed a noodle at the switch.

I've never cared for the way they often did this method/ octopus/ hub & spoke in general. It's not a bad way to wire things but they went nuts w/ it- apart from the 14/2 and 14/3, you will often find a couple of extra 14/2's that feed still other devices also ran from the same small ceiling box, so the box was overfilled to begin with. Now add in 60 years of insulation damage due to overlamping, 3 inch conductors that are crimped together.......:rant:

 

[JFletcher]

One method that was done a bit then was where they would run 14/2 from panel/receptacle to the light, then 14/3 from light to sw box (red was sw leg), then 14/2 from sw box to feed receptacles- so in a lot of old places wired that way there is indeed a noodle at the switch. I've never cared for the way they often did this method/ octopus/ hub & spoke in general. It's not a bad way to wire things but they went nuts w/ it- apart from the 14/2 and 14/3, you will often find a couple of extra 14/2's that feed still other devices also ran from the same small ceiling box, so the box was overfilled to begin with. Now add in 60 years of insulation damage due to overlamping, 3 inch conductors that are crimped together.......:rant:

Having to yank a ceiling fan 8' up vs a switchplate at 4' makes it bad imo. Making up connections on a ladder vs the ground too. Also impossible to tap a switch for a receptacle, and you have to use gfi breakers if you need ground fault protection, or a ton of gfci receptacles. And yes, every one of those old, small ceiling boxes is overloaded (even without egcs in old 2 wire nm). Gets worse when the travellors for a 3 way go thru them as well.

The older ceiling fan boxes used a heavy metal bracket that went into notches cut into the joists- a bear to cut w/o damaging the ceiling.

Octopus/spider wiring is called "star topology" in the data world, and oddly enough its the best method many times.

 

[kwired]

Same here. I only see light boxes fed in older homes (60s and earlier) and a few oddballs here and there since, long before it became code.

Until the code required a grounded conductor at switches - I wired them both ways - probably majority of time to switch first but if it seemed to be easier or material saving at the time, I would hit the light first on occasion. Still do ocasionally, but now need to run a cable with a grounded conductor to the switch if doing so.