Neutral at switch locations exception c5

Status
Not open for further replies.
ritelec

ritelec

Senior Member
Location
Jersey
As per 404.2C5

Am I to understand it that if there is an open room with a light that is controlled from 2 or more switches, each of those switches would not need a neutral at those switch if you can see all the switches that control that light?

If you install a wall or two and a switch or more is not in sight of the others, then those switches would require a neutral at the switch locations.

correct?

Reason I'm asking is, I think the canceling out of phase to neutral (skin ) isn't considered too bad in residential with wood and nm and plastic boxes, but I like to observe that "canceling out" type of wiring.

Unless someone sees a different way to get the neutrals at each switch, I'm hoping C5 applies.


senario: light/fan, light switched from 3 locations, fan switched from 1 location.
3 boxes left to right.
Single gang with 3 way on left (light), two gang with 4 way (light) and single pole (fan) in center, Single gang with 3 way on right (light).

Power into center 2 gang box, 3 wire center to left, 3 wire center to right, 3 wire to fan.

Can I wire these 3 and 4 ways the old fashion way (just switch legs) or do I need a neutral at the left and right 3 ways?

If I wired it a couple of different ways and went through the boxes with the neutral for the 3 ways, with the single pole I would have two neutrals (2-2wres) entering the fan box to the One neutral at the fan. Or another way have two neutrals together in the center box from different directions going up to the light/fan with 1- 3wire.


I could use a 4 wire from the center to the left and right single gang 3 ways to switch as normal and bring a neutral over but...
if this C5 applies I would rather not.

Nutty as it sounds, I have staples on my mind, I think everyone at the supply house just grabs and uses the staples (like me) but I'm thinking about it.

The staples... one type is rated for 2 conductor. The other is rated for 3 conductor.

Doesn't say anything about 2- 2 conductors or a 4 conductor or any combinations of...


The floor plan is open and theres an unfinished attic above so C2 might also apply. But If it was closed on top (no attic ) with all switches in sight would C5 apply.


(if it were closed and it does apply, I still can't see the rational of these switches in C5 not requiring the neutral?? How does seeing all the switches changes things if someone wants to add a timer or motion switch that needs a neutral?)


Sorry for the lengthy post... to such a simple question...

thank you
 
Rephrase question without all the nonsense.

Is 404.2C5 saying that if you have several switches controlling a light outlet, and can see the light and the several switches that control that light, a neutral is not required at the switch locations.

Thank you
 
ritelec said:
Rephrase question without all the nonsense.

Is 404.2C5 saying that if you have several switches controlling a light outlet, and can see the light and the several switches that control that light, a neutral is not required at the switch locations.

Thank you
Click to expand...
I think that the intention is that if there is at least one box into which an occupancy sensor could be installed such that that OS can cover the entire area covered by the light(s), then only one such box requires a neutral.
Hard to express correctly in few words.
 
GoldDigger said:
I think that the intention is that if there is at least one box into which an occupancy sensor could be installed such that that OS can cover the entire area covered by the light(s), then only one such box requires a neutral.
Hard to express correctly in few words.
Click to expand...


Nice. That was good and now makes perfect sense.

Thank you !!
 
GoldDigger said:
I think that the intention is that if there is at least one box into which an occupancy sensor could be installed such that that OS can cover the entire area covered by the light(s), then only one such box requires a neutral.
Hard to express correctly in few words.
Click to expand...
Now throw in OS located at the ceiling, with maybe a wall switch for manual "OFF":roll:. IMO this is design issue more then safety issue and shouldn't be in the code.
 
kwired said:
Now throw in OS located at the ceiling, with maybe a wall switch for manual "OFF":roll:. IMO this is design issue more then safety issue and shouldn't be in the code.
Click to expand...
To the extent that there is a safety issue, I would say it is to remove the temptation to connect a three wire OS to the EGC when no neutral is available.
 
GoldDigger said:
To the extent that there is a safety issue, I would say it is to remove the temptation to connect a three wire OS to the EGC when no neutral is available.
Click to expand...
Still a design issue, it is the ignorant that will connect it this way sort of no different then those that bootleg a EGC from a neutral conductor. I believe there was some conflict between OS manufacturers, listing requirements, and NEC that contributed to having this rule in the NEC as well though.
 
My understanding is that this rule was a compromise between the NFPA and UL.

UL would not stop listing the devices that used the EGC as a circuit conductor unless the NFPA required a neutral.

It seems the NFPA did so but provided so many loopholes not to that the section has little teeth to it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top