If a three-way switch loop controls the lighting in a space, and the switches
both see the room, why force a grounded conductor into every switch location?
Very frequently three-way switches will be arranged in a two-gang arrangement
where one of them will be on the opposite side of a wall from the illuminated
space it controls; how could that switch ever be replaced by an occupancy
detector? Note that 210.70 requires switch control of lighting loads in a space,
but the switch does not need to be in that space.
Nice !!!! Thank you
You are welcome, I often ponder the global price of donuts late at night.![]()
:weeping:
I keep tabs on it and the news is unsettling.
Bad news, doughnut lovers! Prices are soaring
Note that 210.70 requires switch control of lighting loads in a space,
but the switch does not need to be in that space.
anyone's thoughts on 404.2(C)(4)2014 -I assume you mean 404.2(C)(5) 2014.
(5) Where multiple switch locations control the same lighting
load such that the entire floor area of the room or
space is visible from the single or combined switch
locations
The substantiation from the 2014 ROP contained this:
anyone's thoughts on 404.2(C)(4)2014 -
(4) Where a switch does not serve a habitable room or bathroom.
Would that exclude switches for lighting in/at hallways, stairways, garages, basements (unfinished), closets, utility rooms, pantry's, porches, etc. from this requirement?