Dwelling unit lighting loads

[George Stolz]

You will get pelted with rocks if you try to exercise 90.4 here.

Exercise or "mention"?

I agree with Charlie B, 210.23 closes the door on unlimited lights on a circuit.

Now, if all lighting outlets in the place were blanked, and we put every lighting outlet on the same circuit, then what?

 

[tallgirl]

Sorry, I wasn't clear. Ryan's original question had to do with whether a code article exists that would prohibit putting any number of lights on a residential circuit. I submit that 210.23 does, in fact, prohibit putting an unlimited number of lights on a residential circuit. That is the "case" that I have declared "closed."

Now if you want to discuss a limit, a maximum number of luminaries, or perhaps a maximum number of receptacle outlets, then I would agree that that question remains open.

I don't understand how 210.23 limits the number of lights without knowing the load per light.

210.23 limits the load, not the number of lights. It even says so -- "In no case shall the load exceed the branch circuit ampere rating". As soon as you declare a limit on the number of lights, the response is "Now, how many if the load per light is half that?" Because that little exercise can be repeated (almost) definitely, there is no limit on the number of lights, only on the total load. That's how I read Ryan's point.

Can I put 1,000 lights on a 20A circuit? Yes, so long as each light takes 16mA or less, on average.

 

[roger]

George are you just sucking up? It seems to me the door had already been closed on unlimited luminaires on a circuit?

Roger

 

[wilsa]

ighting

ighting

in my opinion is the higest bolb tha the fixture can take

 

[tallgirl]

But isn't a luminaire connected to a lighting outlet?

Yes, but then don't you immediately run afoul of 210.23 (D)?

 

[stickboy1375]

I'm staying out of this thread....

 

[celtic]

You will get pelted with rocks if you try to exercise 90.4 here.

.

...or bricks...whatever is at hand...

...INCOMING!!!

 

[guschash]

Tall girl
What does 210.23 (D) have to do with it. It talks about branch circuits larger than 50 amps. shall supply only nonlighting outlet loads. Am I missing something?

 

[tallgirl]

Tall girl
What does 210.23 (D) have to do with it. It talks about branch circuits larger than 50 amps. shall supply only nonlighting outlet loads. Am I missing something?

Wow, =that's= embarassing. I meant 220.14 (D).

 

[macmikeman]

I have two things to comment. Code aside. Not very often does the electrician get to know the actual lighting load in a residential job, until the owners finaly pick and deliver the lights. Tracs and super spec houses are the exception to that. I think that was considered by the code fellows in the way that the code got written. Second, if you do put too many lights on one circuit and then the circuit repeatedly trips from overload, you are going to have to face Mrs homebuyer. This can be a fate worse than death, I do not recommend it to any fool. So any fool who reads all this thread and then feels that he has alowance via code to run less home runs than prudence allows, then the ultimate AHJ - The Missus- will be dealing with him directly. Feets don't fail me now....

 

[al hildenbrand]

If you put 1000 luminaries on a 15 amp circuit, dwelling unit or otherwise, you will have overloaded the circuit. Case closed.

Charlie,

I agree with your expressed intent behind this sentence. . .BUT. . .your work (edit to correct to word) in your intent is "unlimited". As I consider 1000 luminaires I note a finite number that could actually be accomplished, and not overload a 15 A OCPD.

The reality of the installation labor aside (really aside. . .its got to be ignored), I believe I can install a 1000 porcelain keyless lampholders at a 1000 lighting outlets, and use an edison base 1 Watt LED lamp, and control the 1000 lighting outlets by a single snap switch, and it is a code approved install.

It may well be a performance art piece.

I have read (published in print) clear statements to the effect that a keyless is "defined" as a 660 Watt load (or whatever the max is, that is stamped into the side of the particular lampholder one is holding), NOT the actual lamp installed at the time of AHJ inspection.

I agree with your intended point, Charlie, "the load that is connected can't exceed the branch circuit capacity".

Nothing in the Code tells us to do a calc for a residential dwelling's possible future load. The Code is even clear to warn us that the circuit built, as calculated, may not even be practical to "live with", BUT, it will be safe.

So, I agree, 210.14(J)(3) simplifies the math, that is, there are no restrictions on the actual number of lighting outlets installed beyond overloading the circuit with the lamps that are present at the time of inspection.

 

[George Stolz]

So any fool who reads all this thread and then feels that he has alowance via code to run less home runs than prudence allows...

This has happened to me. A fool wired a house with 14 65W cans, a 500W chandelier, three 120W mushrooms, a 500W vanity, and a fluorescent light in the laundry on one 15A circuit. He later quit, and I got the warranty call when the lights dimmed when the homeowner plugged in the vacuum.

I learned to never whip out a calculator in front of a homeowner.

Adding a homerun in the finished basement was a treat, let me tell ya...