3 way current carrying conductor

[wwhitney]

Like you said, that's weak.

Actually I said it is a little weak, and apparently I'm revised my opinion. It's only slightly weak, and still the best option.

Is your desk light bulb "electrically joined" to the PoCo Generator, even though they are BOTH outside of the Premises Wiring (System)?

Oh, so now transformers "electrically join" their primary and secondary sides?

Cheers, Wayne

 

[GoldDigger]

Actually I said it is a little weak, and apparently I'm revised my opinion. It's only slightly weak, and still the best option.


Oh, so now transformers "electrically join" their primary and secondary sides?

Cheers, Wayne

No, but the secondary joins the hot and the grounded conductor. It does not have to go all the way back to the generator to be joined.

 

[wwhitney]

No, but the secondary joins the hot and the grounded conductor. It does not have to go all the way back to the generator to be joined.

If the secondary "electrically joins" the hot and grounded that also leads to nonsense, e.g. with a downstream transformer, the hot and grounded are now parallel conductors.

So I don't think transformers can be part of "electrical joining".

Cheers, Wayne

 

[GoldDigger]

If the secondary "electrically joins" the hot and grounded that also leads to nonsense, e.g. with a downstream transformer, the hot and grounded are now parallel conductors.

So I don't think transformers can be part of "electrical joining".

Cheers, Wayne

And I say the same thing about loads and switches....

This is not going to be resolved by discussion. And if the CMP refuses to clarify it, because clarification is unnecessary, "the CMP is a Ass, and a Idiot." (with apologies to Dickens.)

 

[winnie]

I apologize for bringing in the 'electrically joined at both ends' verbiage, simply because it has been removed from the code and is thus a distraction in the current discussion.

I believe that the point about switches being 'devices' and not 'conductors' is highly relevant.

Clearly a switch _sometimes_ conducts electricity, and is thus sometimes an electrical conductor. But code is 'specialized language'. The question is: does a switch 'count' as a conductor for purposes of 310.10(H). As an analogy consider the discussion of the neutral counting as a 'current carrying conductor', when is _always_ carries some current.

Back to the current discussion: when current can follow parallel paths _via_ a switch, does it count as creating conductors in parallel for purposes of 310.10(H). I would argue 'no' because your the individual conductors start attached together, but are _not_ connected together where they end (at the separate switches). The switches _conduct_ electricity but are not 'conductors' for purpose of code.

A counter argument: if you actually intended to arrange a set of conductors to share current to a load, in exactly the fashion that we all agree are 'conductors in parallel', but you connected each individual indirectly via a set of switches, then you could you 'get around' the requirements of 310.10(H).

-Jon

 

[al hildenbrand]

Is your desk light bulb "electrically joined" to the PoCo Generator, even though they are BOTH outside of the Premises Wiring (System)?

Oh, so now transformers "electrically join" their primary and secondary sides?

My apologies, Wayne. You are correct to pick on my word "Generator".

Please substitute "Source".