Big oops ... need suggestions

[jwelectric]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Boy we are close to the big 400

edited to add

This is number 400 and still going strong

[ October 25, 2005, 03:05 PM: Message edited by: jwelectric ]

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Al I am confused as to why controller keeps coming up, I like things simple.

210.12(B) Dwelling Unit Bedrooms. All branch circuits that supply 125-volt, single-phase, 15- and 20-ampere outlets installed in dwelling unit bedrooms shall be protected by an arc-fault circuit interrupter listed to provide protection of the entire branch circuit.

Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.

IMO at this point we are done, there is no reason (or requirement) for me to go digging deeper into what a switch is.

If you where to be in some sort of litigation over this IMO the overwhelming accepted trade opinion expressed by UL, NEC consultants, instructional books and the majority of electricians would be on your side.

I understand there is no guarantee you would win, there is never a guarantee you will prevail in civil litigation even if you are in the right.

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by jwelectric:
Would a no fuse disconnect at an AC unit be an outlet?

IMO it could be if utilization equipment was connected to this switch via an factory installed whip between the disconnect and the equipment.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Bob,

The lack of physical location of the UE with respect to the Outlet as defined by Article 100 Outlet give rise to there being no way to differentiate between current taken at a controller and current taken at a outlet.

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

It is my opinion that the outlet is the point between the NEC and the NTLs (or the AHJ).

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by jwelectric:
I would like to see more debate brought forth or at least six more post.

Okie-dokie!

Originally posted by charlie b:
I am not going to reveal whether anyone succeeded in paying me off to not close this at 299, nor the identity of the person who offered the alleged bribe, nor the make and model of car I just bought. But the bids are open for allowing this thread to go beyond 399.

You're arguments not with me! To wit:

Originally posted by ryan_618:
I'm going to lock this thread as soon as it hits 399...just on principle

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
The current is LET OUT of the wiring system at the point that the current is taken.

A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.

Yes, but that (to supply utilization equipment) does not occur at switches, only load attachemnt/connection points.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by iwire:

Originally posted by jwelectric:
Would a no fuse disconnect at an AC unit be an outlet?

IMO it could be if utilization equipment was connected to this switch via an factory installed whip between the disconnect and the equipment.

I go one step further, and say, if it is recognized as the controller for the AC unit, then regardless if the whip is factory or installer assembled, the switch is and outlet.

Almost all the time the no fuse disconnect is just that, a disconnect, and the thermostat, low voltage wiring and relay in the AC unit is the controller.

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
The lack of physical location of the UE with respect to the Outlet as defined by Article 100 Outlet give rise to there being no way to differentiate between current taken at a controller and current taken at a outlet.

I doubt we will ever see that the same way.

When I read the definition I see it as when the current leaves the premises system for good, not when it leaves and comes back.

That said this thread has been interesting.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Mike,

Congradulations on achieving the 400th!

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by LarryFine:
Yes, but that (to supply utilization equipment) does not occur at switches, only load attachemnt/connection points.

Show me where the language talks about "load attachemnt/connection points."

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
I am not saying the current is taken from the switch.

No, but, unless I'm mistaken, you have been saying that current is taken by the switch. That's where we disagree. I say that whatever a switch does, and wherever within or without the wiring system it does it, a switch does not utilize current.

If no voltage is dropped across the switch, then no power is expended within it, and no work is done. Thus, no current has been utilized. If the switch is open, the no current flows, and again, no power expended.

In other words, Ohm's and Watt's Laws infer that, with either no voltage or no current, no power is expended. Utilization of electricity (power, current, whatever term you like) requires some expenditure of power: motion, heat, light, etc.

One more thing: when a switch is open, no current is taken, even by your definition. Does a switch's qualification as an outlet depend on the switches position? A receptacle or other outlet does not stop being an outlet if the load is deenergized.

Thusly, a switch may control an outlet, but the switch does not qualify as one, as much as it wants to. I do not agree with the "takes and returns current" idea. Unless power is utilized at the switch, its enclosure, etc. isn't an outlet.

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:

Originally posted by LarryFine:
Yes, but that (to supply utilization equipment) does not occur at switches, only load attachemnt/connection points.

Show me where the language talks about "load attachemnt/connection points."

Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment.

At a switch, current might be "taken" to supply the switch, and then fed back into the system, but it definitely is not "utilized" by the switch, unless the switch depends on electricity to operate.

If not "load attachemnt/connection points", how would you define the point where utilization equipment receives its current?

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

In "Outlet" the "point" is not a specified physical location tied to specific things like </font>

• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">box</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">wire nut</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">this or that end of a whip</font>
• <font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">etc.</font>

<font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">because the exact materials and appliances that make up an assemby determine where, on the conductive path (that is the wiring system), the point is located that the Premises Wiring (System), the NEC, ends and the NRTLs take over.

This fluidity of physical location in the definition, with respect to point, has to be to avoid the definition describing specifics of assembly that would exclude common physical solutions.

The same lack of specificity about the physical location of the utilization equipment is necessary for my submission in this thread to work.

 

[al hildenbrand]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by LarryFine:
unless I'm mistaken, you have been saying that current is taken by the switch.

You are mistaken.

The utilization equipment takes the current.

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Larry I think I can summarize Al's position.

I do not believe he is saying that current is used by the switch.

The definition of controller, which many times a switch is, says that it is not part of the PWS (premises wiring system).

So the PWS supplies this switch which is not part of the PWS.

So at this point the current is taken from the PWS into the switch, it then leaves this switch back into the PWS to eventually supply the UE.

There is no doubt that the switch supplies the UE with current.

As far as the open or closed switch question I do not think it matters.

Is a duplex receptacle an outlet when nothing is plugged into it?

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by iwire:
Is a duplex receptacle an outlet when nothing is plugged into it?

Yes! However, a switch is neither taking nor returning current when it is open.

 

[iwire]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
Mike,

Congradulations on achieving the 400th!

Personally I am waiting for 420.

 

[charlie b]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand: I submit that the creation of the Definition of Premises Wiring (System) was created with full knowledge that a switch controlling a light is, in fact, a controller.

It was also made with full knowledge that a switch does not contain internal wiring. So when the definition excludes the wiring internal to controllers, it is not excluding a switch.

Within the broad category of controllers, there are some that have internal wiring, and others that do not. The wiring that is part of the premises wiring system does not include the wiring internal to the controllers that have wiring. You have taken the broad category of "controllers" and inferred that it includes one specific type of controller: a switch. That is a breach of the rules of logical reasoning, as I have said before.

Please tell me why you are not accepting this: A switch is not excluded from the definition. Your entire line of reasoning seems to be relying on controllers (including switches) being excluded from the premises wiring system. They are not. Read the definition again. Controllers are not excluded. The wiring internal to controllers is excluded, but not controllers, and not switches.

And let's be clear about this. When the definition excludes the wiring internal to controllers, it is explicitly excluding it from being part of "such wiring." That phrase refers back to the "interior and exterior wiring" in sentence one. It would be nonsense to say "such wiring excludes switches." So the definition is not saying that. The definition is saying that "interior and exterior wiring" does not include wiring internal to controllers.

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by al hildenbrand:
The utilization equipment takes the current.

Then why have you been saying that "Outlet. A point on the wiring system at which current is taken to supply utilization equipment." applies to a switch?

 

[LarryFine]

Re: Big oops ... need suggestions

Originally posted by iwire:
Personally I am waiting for 420.

I don't have to ask! 23 minutes to go!