Big oops ... need suggestions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

switch is an outlet or not. I've heard it go both ways. I don't think it's an outlet. But others, particularly one fellow from Minnesota, see it differently. I don't know who to believe. :confused:
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by marc deschenes:
Holy crap!!!!!!! AL, a switch is not an outlet.
Click to expand...
Well....DUUHHHH!!!!

Oh wait, on second thought, I don't know. I'll get back to you on that one.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Yesterday I did nothing but play on this computer. Today I have an eight hour class and can not be here to keep an eye on this thread. I must leave it in the ?trusted? hands of those who are members of this forum. When I get home this evening I shall come straight in here and I am expecting to see post number 299.

Now I leave this thread in your hands to do what is right. Remember number 300 I have already claimed.
:D :D :D
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Do not worry .............I will keep the vigil watch going and going and going (OK where is that bunny when you need him :D )Anyway when that magic # is reached,the band will play and shout outs will be heard.Alas ,all to bad the answer will still be in limbo ;)
So what we have is several sides that say a switch is in fact an outlet or part of.Then there is the other side that says an outlet is an outlet is an outlet but with a switch never the two shall meet.
When in fact we use a breaker that encompasses the entire circuit (afci) and I have not seen yet where one would add a non afci circuit to a closet so as to keep it off the almighty afci circuit that has kept this debate going for sooooooooooooooooooooooo many pages.
Al stands in the town square on a soap box preaching that a switch is a switch and also an outlet.Charlie says a switch is a switch and as long as my stamp is affixed it is up to others to hash it out.JW waits and waits for the magic # to hit the site.
It`s been real it`s been fun but has it been real fun :confused:
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by marc deschenes:
Holy crap!!!!!!! AL, a switch is not an outlet.
Click to expand...
Well, Marc, in this thread, I have never said that a switch is an outlet.

You better go back and read it.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Can somebody bring me a lemonade?

This soap box is dusty, and the work is hot.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Al, please explain

quote:
Originally posted by don_resqcapt19:
"I never had someone insist that a switch is an outlet before".

this was your reply


"Hey! I resemble that remark!"


"Two points. You meant 210.12, right?

I would summarize the switch / outlet equation as: An outlet occurs when a switch, on the premises wiring, is used to control utilization equipment at another outlet on the premises wiring."

Was I wrong ? you seem to suggest they are one in the same.
I took the slash to mean that you are suggesting they are one in the same, or interchangeable. Then you refer to another outlet as if the switch is the first one.

[ October 22, 2005, 12:55 PM: Message edited by: marc deschenes ]
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Marc,

I'm serious. You need to read this thread. Your question has been thoroughly hammered into the ground.

Pay particular attention to the point as used in the definition of Outlet. This has nothing to do with a switch or receptacle. The "point" is where current is let out, as opposed to let into the premises wiring system.
Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
Don,
The outlet is where the current supplies equipment
Click to expand...
An outlet is where current is taken, at a point on the premises wiring system, to supply utilization equipment.

The location of the utilization equipment is not specified. This leaves an ambiguity. Until the language is changed to some other meaning, presumably less ambiguous, the Definition of Outlet will remain ambiguous as to location of the utilization equipment.

This, alone, has not been an issue with the understanding of a switch being a device, not utilization equipment, and therefore a "switch is not an outlet". . .a very confused result, but, one that has not really been examined carefully in my experience. I have to believe the explanation I am laying out is not original to me, however.

Until the advent of 210.12 in its present form, any discussion could be dismissed as academic at the point it became tiresome, having no bearing on wiring practice.

In 1978 the Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) appeared for the first time. It appeared with System in parenthesis, as it is now. Controller was used then, as it is now. Controller was a Device then, as it is now. Beginning with the original 1978 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) wiring internal to a controller has by definition not been part of the premises wiring. The current in a snap switch used to control a luminaire has to be taken from the premises wiring at the point that the switch (controller) is connected. This current cannot "supply" the snap switch ("supply" as used by the Outlet definition) because the switch is a Device and cannot utilize energy by definition. But the current, taken at the point on the premises wiring that the controller is, is to supply the luminaire. . .if there were no utilization equipment, there would be no current supplied and the switch would no longer be a controller.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

I have read the entire thread. There seems to be more than a few things being discussed. I still don't understand why you responded to don that way, but thats ok. This question was asked of Mike Holt; this was his response and I agree with it.


Is AFCI protection required for switches located in the bedroom that controls a lighting outlet in another space?

If the switch controls utilization equipment in the bedroom, then it will be AFCI protected. However, if the switch operates lighting outlets for outdoor luminaire, closets or other loads not terminated in bedroom space then AFCI protection is not NEC required, because a switch is not considered an outlet*.

*According to Article 100, an outlet is defined as a point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply equipment that utilizes electric energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or similar purposes [100]. This would include a receptacle outlet, a lighting outlet, but not a switch.
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

*According to Article 100, an outlet is defined as a point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply equipment that utilizes electric energy for electronic, electromechanical, chemical, heating, lighting, or similar purposes [100]. This would include a receptacle outlet, a lighting outlet, but not a switch.

I agree. ;)
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

OK, Marc,

Fire away, I'll do the best that I can. I am without NEC at this terminal, so. . .bear with me. My ability to post specific Code is limited at this terminal.

Read, carefully, the last sentence of Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System). This sentence describes what is not premises wiring. The key word in this last sentence is controller, seperated by commas and by itself.

Controller is also defined in Article 100. Read that next. Pretty general, eh? And the definition of controller doesn't include switch any where.

But, look at 404.14. Snap switches are controllers. Control is used a bunch in 404.14.
Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
Originally posted by LarryFine
Likewise, a switch (unless it contains a pilot light) does not utilize any electricity.
Click to expand...
A receptacle does not utilize energy either. It is merely the point at which the Premises Wiring (System) is bounded, stops. For that matter, an outlet does not utilize energy. I think this is part of where we are hoodwinking ourselves in this distinction between switch and outlet.

Utilization equipment current passes from and to the Service Point to the Premises Wiring (System).

The utilization equipment current passes from and to the Premises Wiring (System) at an outlet.

Article 100 Definition of Premises Wiring (System) is clear to tell us that a controller (a switch) is not part of the Premises Wiring (System) even though the controller is connected to the Premises Wiring (System). Current in the controller is utilization equipment current which is passing from and to the Premises Wiring (System).

The Code does not prohibit having two outlets in series with each other.

A receptacle and a switch are both terminated to the ends of the Premises Wiring (System). Neither of them utilize energy. The current in them is that of utilization equipment, equipment that is not part of the Premises Wiring (System). Both the receptacle and switch look like, to me, that they are installed at outlets to the Premises Wiring (System) and the only current in them is utilization equipment current.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Following on what I just posted, before quoting myself (sorry for that):

Premises Wiring (System) defines the wiring internal to a controller as not part of the Premises Wiring. The current flowing, then, in a switch connected to the premises wiring and used as a controller, in the switch cannot be in the Premises Wiring (System).

The only reason that current is there, in that switch, is because there is utilization equipment drawing the current.

The current is "let out" of the premises wiring inside the switch. This "letting out" is an outlet. . .a point on the premises wiring where current is taken to supply utilization equipment. The current is not "given" to the wiring system. The current does not "supply" the switch (the switch does not utilize energy so it cannot "take" current).

In my opinion, the definition of Outlet is so old that we have lost sight of it's simplicity.

The Service Point is the inlet. Where the current comes out of the Premises Wiring (the point) is the outlet. . .unless it is a fault.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top