Electrical question (I know this is a WW forum)

<[email protected]> wrote:

> Yep .
> In my post, I meant "equipment" to mean " non people " things ...
> ... oh well. :-)

LOL... Know the feeling. No harm, no foul. ;)

--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)

"SonomaProducts.com" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Of course - I don't consider spelling ability to be a sign of
>>
>> intelligence...
>>
>
> If we can include grammar, usage and punctuation along with that I am
> 100% in agreement. ;^)
>
> I remember in the early days of the internet there were a slew of Mensi
> and other intelligence tests floating around. It always annoyed me that
> some percentage of the questions would in fact be something like spelling
> or geography. I did very well on the logic and quizical math but felt it
> was wrong to have other such items which indicated level or type of
> education and not innate intelligence.

You spelled Mensa wrong. LOL

--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:55:20 -0500, Swingman wrote:

> On 8/16/2013 9:45 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>
>>> IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>>> still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly
>>> dangerous situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>>>
>>> Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to
>>> lose his license, and be shot.
>>
>> Amen! I'll provide the ammo...
>
> Can you buy ammo where you live?
>
> Damned hard to find around here, and the ammo scalpers are out in force.
>
> I have taken up target shooting again, with a pistol, and my favorite
> weapon of choice is a .22LR target pistol that is generally easy on the
> pocket book for practice, but no longer the case with .22LR ammo
> approaching .10/round.
>
> I refuse to buy it at that price ...

I saw (and bought) some .22lr in Gander Mountain about a week ago,
first .22 I have seen on a store shelf in over a year.
They were indeed $.10 each.

The supply may improve but I susupect the pricing will be the new normal.

basilisk

>
>Did you notice that if you shift the periodic graph to the left or
>right, i.e. do a "phase-shift"), that the graphs will coincide. That's
>where the terminology comes from.
>

.. OK is that a Phase Angle ? or a Load Angle ?
..... now let's move on and discuss reactive power !
- just kidding - this has been flogged to death - I hope.
jt



--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---

>=20
> Safety-wise, a device ("certainly") should not have two breakers, right?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Bill

Uhhh yeah. Guess how I found out there were two breakers? The switches are =
not tied together at the box. They aren't labeled either. I flipped one off=
and checked a piece of equipment. It didn't start so I figure the circuit =
is off. Luckily I am so scared of electrical I treat all wires like they ar=
e live regardless. I didn't have my tester with me either or I would have d=
ouble checked. I push some wires out of the way at one point and one of the=
m sparked off the junction box.

I retrieved my gonads from somewhere up in my stomach and flipped off all t=
he breakers and worked with a flashlight thereafter.

This is a 100 year old barn, out on a farm with wiring patched in over the =
years. I plan on moving out by December if I can sell of the humongous pile=
of Cherry I have in stock. I'll start working on that project in a month o=
r so.

Hopefully we don't torch up before then. My insurance guy was kind of vague=
about fire and wanted to see the landlords policy before he could give a d=
efinitive answer. It is not your typical industrial lease, just a basic ren=
tal agreement between the farmers daughter (really) and I.

On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:44:04 PM UTC-7, dpb wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 4:18 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>=20

> As for the box, all code says is that you _must_ use a junction box w/ a=
=20
>=20
> cover and that box then must remain accessible -- and "accessible"=20
>=20
> doesn't mean back under the drywall even when you know where it is--it=20
>=20
> must be available w/ nothing structural in the way of access...it can be=
=20
>=20
> a panel door, or somesuch, just must be able to get to it w/o demolition.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> There are some rules about load limits and outlets used depending on=20
>=20
> whether it is 15 or 20A circuit.
>=20

Thanks so much for the answer and explanation.

Yes I am aware of the code about junction boxes, accessibility, max loading=
, etc. Of course I thought I knew the code and once did all my splices in b=
oxes and blithely covered them with sheet rock during my last home renovati=
on but have since learned more about this area when I recently pulled a per=
mit for a remodel of a rental property and studied up a bit.

This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented barn\shop so=
no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky when my (sub-lease) =
tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment in time a pinched wire star=
ted a fire. So after a full inspection of the electrical system I am rewiri=
ng some 110 outlets that are pulled from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem =
to be throwing off the phase or some sort of imbalance when they get a big =
draw.

<[email protected]> wrote:
> < snips >
>>
>> While you can indeed use two single pole circuit breakers to make up the
>> necessary voltage for a 240v circuit, one circuit breaker on each of the
>> HOT bars (and possibly nowhere near each other in the panel), both
>> circuit breakers have to be tripped at the same time _if they are to
>> provide the safety that comes from using circuit breakers in the first
>> place_ (to protect the wiring first and foremost; and very importantly,
>> to protect you when working on the receptacle, and/or the equipment
>> plugged into the receptacle).
>> IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>> still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly dangerous
>> situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>> Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to lose
>> his license, and be shot.
>
>
> I appreciate your posts, Swingman, and I hate to nitpick - but -
> - in case anyone misunderstands - fuses/breakers are not there
> to protect people from electrocution - it's just equipment protection.
> They do protect people from the resultant fires & such.
> Even GFIs are not fail-safe in protecting people.

Actually, the purpose of circuit breakers is to protect the wiring, NEVER
the equipment.

You will note that in the case of single pole circuit breakers powering a
240v circuit, where allowed, following code by using a tie/ handle, where
allowed, does indeed serve an ancillary purpose in protecting the unwary
from flipping one breaker and assuming that circuit is no longer live.

To argue otherwise is ignoring reality.

I broke a rule never to engage in a wRec electrical thread, mainly because
of ill informed nitpicking. Go figure. :)

--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)

O
> I'm really not trying to insult your inteligence here, or to insult your=
=20
>=20
> abilities. It's just that from what I've read, it seems that you're eith=
er=20
>=20
> short cutting information (in the interest of cutting to the chase), or t=
hat=20
>=20
> you don't really understand electrical wiring. No insult intended, but i=
t=20
>=20
> seems the latter is the case, and I think you'll be better served by gett=
ing=20
>=20
> someone more knowledgeable in there. You can hack things together that s=
eem=20
>=20
> to work without even knowing or understanding a miriad of other problems =
you=20
>=20
> are introducing.
>=20

Funny\ironic that you spelled intelligence wrong.

Nope, not offended at all and appreciate all the required reading to keep u=
p with my story and all the intelligible advice. I didn't leave any pertine=
nt facts out but didn't go into all the boring detail. I am pretty much uni=
ntelligent in terms of most of the aspects of electrical systems such as th=
ese. I know previously and have learned enough in this thread to feel very =
confident I have not introduced any new problem. I also know I need to have=
my own electrician come and take a look. My landlord is a general contract=
or and the electrician he has consulting is a licensed electrical contracto=
r. I'm not sure I related all of his info correctly here but I also get the=
distinct impression he will not touch a single wire in this place ever aga=
in for fear of being liable for the next fire.

At least this provided some interesting discussion and reading for me. This=
forum has been pretty dry lately. Can only handle so much complaining abou=
t Harbor Freight again and watching consultation on novices "sanded through=
the veneer" questions before I long for some real meaty (woody) WW topics.=

Bill wrote:

>> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy"
>> (one breaker from each leg)?
>
> Safety-wise, a device ("certainly") should not have two breakers,
> right?
---------------------------------------------------------------
2 pole c'bkrs have a COMMON trip.

ie: If one leg becomes overloaded, both legs clear.

Some people choose to go CHEAP.

They use two (2), one pole c'bkrs located adjacent to one another and
a handle tie to quasi duplicate a common internal trip 2 pole c/bkr.

Some inspectors will accept it, some prefer not to.

The inspector ALWAYS gets his way<G>.

Two (2), one pole c'bkrs NOT located adjacent to one another is
strictly a NO-NO.

Check your area.

Lew

"Ray" wrote:

> Is there a difference between a 2 pole 240 volt breaker and 2 120
> volt
> breakers that have a proper rod to tie the two trip handles
> together?
--------------------------------------------------------------
Most definitely there is a difference.

A 2 pole, 240 V c'bkr has an internal common trip and a mechanical
interference that will reject allowing the c'bkr to be improperly
installed in the wrong location in the panel.

Two (2), 1 pole, 240 V c'bkrs, mounted adjacent to one another in the
panel and equipped with a factory approved, field mounted handle tie
is supposed to clear both legs of a 240 V circuit; however, it does
not provide the mechanical interference that will reject allowing the
c'bkr to be improperly installed in the wrong location in the panel.

It is still possible to incorrectly install the field assembled handle
tie package which results in only delivering 120V rather the desired
240 V.

Lew

<[email protected]> wrote:

> < snips >
> I appreciate your posts, Swingman, and I hate to nitpick - but -
> - in case anyone misunderstands - fuses/breakers are not there
> to protect people from electrocution - it's just equipment
> protection.
> They do protect people from the resultant fires & such.
> Even GFIs are not fail-safe in protecting people.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, the NEC, NFPA, etc could give a rat's ass less about the
"Equipment".

The sole purpose of a circuit protective device is to protect the
insulation of the distribution system.

Nothing else matters.

If a load (equipment) exceeds it's rated electrical capacity and in
the process destroys itself but does not exceed the rated insulation
temperature of the distribution system, so be it, the circuit
protective device is happy and continues to protect the insulation.

If you want to protect the equipment, then an overload relay is
required.

A classic example is a magnetic motor starter which is nothing more
than a magnetic contactor and an overload relay mounted on a common
base plate and wired in series.

Lew

Somebody wrote:

> .22LR was up to around $120 per brick here not too long ago.
> That's insane!
> Not sure what it's at now.
------------------------------------------------------------
Just to put things in perspective, back when I was shooting (Ike was
POTUS), 22LR, HP, were sold in 10 boxes of 50 rounds or 500 rounds in
a "Brick".

Price was less than $5.00/500 rounds.

Since I was only making about $15/week at the hardware store, price of
ammo was of prime interest to me.

If nothing had changed, would expect 500 rounds to sell for $35-$40
range today.

Obviously, something other than inflation is in play.

Lew

On 8/16/2013 7:10 PM, Swingman wrote:
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:08:26 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>>> .22LR was up to around $120 per brick here not too long ago. That's insane!
>>> Not sure what it's at now.
>>
>> Just for interest's sake. How many rounds are in a brick? 1000?
>
> Don't know that this is standardized in any manner, but a "brick" of .22lr
> around here is generally 500 rounds, or ten boxes of 50, although I've seen
> 1000 rounds, and 1400 rounds referred to as a "brick".
>
> Might well be a regional thing ...

I think that today, it's a marketing thing.

Like you, I grew up (though there's continued debate on that point<g>)
in Ike's time and was buying my own .22's around the time of JFK.

IIRC, a "good" price for .22's was just a bit less than $0.50/box of 50
and I certainly wasn't "rich enough" to go out and buy a brick of 500
all at once.

I always understood a brick to be 500 rounds. Then they started putting
the bricks into tins... generally still 500 rounds. Once they dispensed
with the individual boxes of 50 rounds, it all went to tell. Bulk packs
were the rage. 500, 525, 530 and, I think, even 550 and/or 575 round
would come loose packed in a sealed box or something like a milk carton
from 3rd grade<g>

Of late, what I see (on those rare occasions somebody has them in stock)
it's either 500 rounds or I think I've got a small "milk carton" with
333 or 335 rounds sitting out in the ammo locker.

Swingman, I don't think that I've ever seen or heard tell of a brick of
.22's that contained 1000 or 1400 rounds though.

Crap! If only we could find some bricks to compare<g>

"Lew Hodgett" wrote:

>> Actually, the NEC, NFPA, etc could give a rat's ass less about the
>> "Equipment".
>>
>> The sole purpose of a circuit protective device is to protect the
>> insulation of the distribution system.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Doug Miller" wrote:

> In a strictly literal sense, this is true...
>>
>> Nothing else matters.
>
> ... but I don't think I agree with *that* -- after all, who gives a
> rat's ass about the insulation as
> insulation? What people give a rat's ass about is the hazards posed
> by live conductors
> after their insulation has failed -- hazards which include fire (and
> its attendant risks to life,
> limb, and property) and electrocution.
>
> I think a more informative statement would be "The sole purpose of a
> circuit protective
> device is to prevent the hazards that result from failure of the
> insulation of the distribution
> system, such as fire and electrocution."
--------------------------------------------------------------
Protect the insulation of the distribution and everything outline
above becomes a non event, which is why the code is written the way it
is.

Lew

<[email protected]> wrote:

> .. OK is that a Phase Angle ? or a Load Angle ?
> ..... now let's move on and discuss reactive power !
> - just kidding - this has been flogged to death - I hope.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Not until 208Y/120V/3PH/60HZ/4 wire Y is addressed and flogged to
death.

Lew

<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:08:26 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>> .22LR was up to around $120 per brick here not too long ago. That's insane!
>> Not sure what it's at now.
>
> Just for interest's sake. How many rounds are in a brick? 1000?

Don't know that this is standardized in any manner, but a "brick" of .22lr
around here is generally 500 rounds, or ten boxes of 50, although I've seen
1000 rounds, and 1400 rounds referred to as a "brick".

Might well be a regional thing ...

Caveat Emptor, in Latin, really means "define your terms before doing
business". ;)

--
www.ewoodshop.com (Mobile)

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:43:58 -0700 (PDT), "SonomaProducts.com"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>O
>> I'm really not trying to insult your inteligence here, or to insult your
>>
>> abilities. It's just that from what I've read, it seems that you're either
>>
>> short cutting information (in the interest of cutting to the chase), or that
>>
>> you don't really understand electrical wiring. No insult intended, but it
>>
>> seems the latter is the case, and I think you'll be better served by getting
>>
>> someone more knowledgeable in there. You can hack things together that seem
>>
>> to work without even knowing or understanding a miriad of other problems you
>>
>> are introducing.
>>
>
>Funny\ironic that you spelled intelligence wrong.
>
>Nope, not offended at all and appreciate all the required reading to keep up with my story and all the intelligible advice. I didn't leave any pertinent facts out but didn't go into all the boring detail. I am pretty much unintelligent in terms of most of the aspects of electrical systems such as these. I know previously and have learned enough in this thread to feel very confident I have not introduced any new problem. I also know I need to have my own electrician come and take a look. My landlord is a general contractor and the electrician he has consulting is a licensed electrical contractor. I'm not sure I related all of his info correctly here but I also get the distinct impression he will not touch a single wire in this place ever again for fear of being liable for the next fire.
>
>At least this provided some interesting discussion and reading for me. This forum has been pretty dry lately. Can only handle so much complaining about Harbor Freight again and watching consultation on novices "sanded through the veneer" questions before I long for some real meaty (woody) WW topics.

I tried to spot read this thread so forgive me if I missed some
points. On your worring about unbalancing the load if your on a
single phase system all you have to do is be sure the nuetral is large
enough to carry the unbalanced load. Code is pushing toward nuetral
sized to the maximum unbalance load. So assuming single phase in a
200 amp service and your not balancing the load then the nuetral has
to be sized the same as the hot phase. You mentioned feeding thru the
receptacle, this isn't a good practice, best to make up each box so
each receptacle is connected so a receptacle can be removed without
interrupting the circuit or nuetral. In boxes with mudrings the
person behind you will appreciate it if you tape up the terminals so
they can pull the receptacle without risk of a ground. If you don't
know your load you can use 180VA per receptacle for circuit
calculation. If your getting into larger loads other rules apply. On
commercial jobs where we don't know what might happen we try to keep
the load around 50% on the circuit. This is usually on a TI where the
property manager realizes this will save money down the road.

Mike M

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

> On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:44:04 PM UTC-7, dpb wrote:
>> On 8/14/2013 4:18 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>
>
>> As for the box, all code says is that you _must_ use a junction box w/ a
>>
>> cover and that box then must remain accessible -- and "accessible"
>>
>> doesn't mean back under the drywall even when you know where it is--it
>>
>> must be available w/ nothing structural in the way of access...it can be
>>
>> a panel door, or somesuch, just must be able to get to it w/o demolition.
>>
>>
>>
>> There are some rules about load limits and outlets used depending on
>>
>> whether it is 15 or 20A circuit.
>>
>
> Thanks so much for the answer and explanation.
>
> Yes I am aware of the code about junction boxes, accessibility, max
> loading, etc. Of course I thought I knew the code and once did all my
> splices in boxes and blithely covered them with sheet rock during my last
> home renovation but have since learned more about this area when I
> recently pulled a permit for a remodel of a rental property and studied up
> a bit.
>
> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented barn\shop
> so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky when my
> (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment in time a
> pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of the electrical
> system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled from one leg of a
> 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase or some sort of
> imbalance when they get a big draw.


In a normal breaker box, you come in with 230 and branch out with your 110
legs (and/or 230).

I would do the same on this installation and NOT take all the circuits off
one leg of the 230. As you said, it can cause problems, beside which, you
are only utlizing one half of what is available to you.

Deb

On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 4:18:50 PM UTC-5, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> I don't frequent any other forums and have a basic electrical question so=
thought I would try it here.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire "through" ev=
ery outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T off of an existing c=
ircuit?
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across the=
top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would like to cl=
ip the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of two wire romex =
running down to a new outlet box and splice the clipped ones back together =
so the original ones keep working.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see circ=
uits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down to the new=
outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other side of the outl=
et with more romex back up to the other side of the clip so the circuit run=
s "through the outlet, instead of branching.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Questions.=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> To code? Don't really care, just wonder.
>=20
> Safe? Do care.
>=20
>=20
>=20
> Of course I also run the ground wire as well.

I don't see a problem with your plan, although I can't speak for "code," an=
d that may well be different in different areas. However, why not run 3 wi=
re Romex down, and ground the thing?

Markem <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:46:48 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On 8/16/2013 9:37 AM, Markem wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:21 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing phase,
>>>> if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit _from the
>>>> same leg,_ you will get no voltage.
>>>
>>> The phase is not opposing, but it is the same cycle on each leg. If it
>>> were opposing there would be a cancelling effect.
>>
>> Practically, residential 120/240 volt service in the US uses a
>> center-tapped source on the supply transformer.
>>
>> Because of this, the voltages between the two hot legs add algebraically
>> - they are 180 degrees out of phase.
>
> A signal with 180 degrees difference cancel out to zero potential
> between the two legs, the two legs are in phase with each other they
> add together.
>
> This can be proven to be true with an oscilloscope, and I have done
> just that many times.
>
> Think about noise cancelling headphone which inverts the signal to
> cancel out noise, if your household electric was 180 degrees out of
> phase your 240V would be at zero potential.

Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)

--
www.ewoodshop.com

>=20
> Of course - I don't consider spelling ability to be a sign of=20
>=20
> intelligence...
>=20

If we can include grammar, usage and punctuation along with that I am 100% =
in agreement. ;^)

I remember in the early days of the internet there were a slew of Mensi and=
other intelligence tests floating around. It always annoyed me that some p=
ercentage of the questions would in fact be something like spelling or geog=
raphy. I did very well on the logic and quizical math but felt it was wrong=
to have other such items which indicated level or type of education and no=
t innate intelligence.

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:46:48 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 8/16/2013 9:37 AM, Markem wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:21 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing phase,
>>> if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit _from the
>>> same leg,_ you will get no voltage.
>>
>> The phase is not opposing, but it is the same cycle on each leg. If it
>> were opposing there would be a cancelling effect.
>
>Practically, residential 120/240 volt service in the US uses a
>center-tapped source on the supply transformer.
>
>Because of this, the voltages between the two hot legs add algebraically
>- they are 180 degrees out of phase.

A signal with 180 degrees difference cancel out to zero potential
between the two legs, the two legs are in phase with each other they
add together.

This can be proven to be true with an oscilloscope, and I have done
just that many times.

Think about noise cancelling headphone which inverts the signal to
cancel out noise, if your household electric was 180 degrees out of
phase your 240V would be at zero potential.

On 8/16/2013 9:45 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
> Swingman wrote:
>
>> IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>> still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly
>> dangerous situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>>
>> Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to
>> lose his license, and be shot.
>
> Amen! I'll provide the ammo...

Can you buy ammo where you live?

Damned hard to find around here, and the ammo scalpers are out in force.

I have taken up target shooting again, with a pistol, and my favorite
weapon of choice is a .22LR target pistol that is generally easy on the
pocket book for practice, but no longer the case with .22LR ammo
approaching .10/round.

I refuse to buy it at that price ...


--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Ray <[email protected]> wrote in news:[email protected]:

> Is there a difference between a 2 pole 240 volt breaker and 2 120 volt
> breakers that have a proper rod to tie the two trip handles together?

Lew already answered this question, so I'll answer the next one.
>
> Whu would some one use two non adjacent circuit breakers for 240 when
> all they have to do is to move some breakers to get two adjacent?

Because that person is a lazy, incompetent hack.

"Lew Hodgett" <[email protected]> wrote in news:520ebd12$0$61297$c3e8da3
[email protected]:

> Actually, the NEC, NFPA, etc could give a rat's ass less about the
> "Equipment".
>
> The sole purpose of a circuit protective device is to protect the
> insulation of the distribution system.

In a strictly literal sense, this is true...
>
> Nothing else matters.

... but I don't think I agree with *that* -- after all, who gives a rat's ass about the insulation as
insulation? What people give a rat's ass about is the hazards posed by live conductors
after their insulation has failed -- hazards which include fire (and its attendant risks to life,
limb, and property) and electrocution.

I think a more informative statement would be "The sole purpose of a circuit protective
device is to prevent the hazards that result from failure of the insulation of the distribution
system, such as fire and electrocution."

[email protected] (Larry W) wrote in news:[email protected]:

>
> I guess we can agree to disagree here. To me, the 2 120 volt conductors
> are in phase, just at equal and opposite polarity at any given time.

But that is *by definition* out of phase.

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:21 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing phase,
>if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit _from the
>same leg,_ you will get no voltage.

The phase is not opposing, but it is the same cycle on each leg. If it
were opposing there would be a cancelling effect.

On Sat, 17 Aug 2013 20:58:16 -0700, "Lew Hodgett"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"Lew Hodgett" wrote:
>
>>> Actually, the NEC, NFPA, etc could give a rat's ass less about the
>>> "Equipment".
>>>
>>> The sole purpose of a circuit protective device is to protect the
>>> insulation of the distribution system.
>-----------------------------------------------------------
>"Doug Miller" wrote:
>
>> In a strictly literal sense, this is true...
>>>
>>> Nothing else matters.
>>
>> ... but I don't think I agree with *that* -- after all, who gives a
>> rat's ass about the insulation as
>> insulation? What people give a rat's ass about is the hazards posed
>> by live conductors
>> after their insulation has failed -- hazards which include fire (and
>> its attendant risks to life,
>> limb, and property) and electrocution.
>>
>> I think a more informative statement would be "The sole purpose of a
>> circuit protective
>> device is to prevent the hazards that result from failure of the
>> insulation of the distribution
>> system, such as fire and electrocution."
>--------------------------------------------------------------
>Protect the insulation of the distribution and everything outline
>above becomes a non event, which is why the code is written the way it
>is.
>
>Lew
>
>
Use to be that way Lew but the way they do the code now is much more
political. Now the Manufactures are looking for advantages, and the
growth of Arc Fault and GFI in many flavors they are trying to do more
then protect the infrastructure.

Mike M

Is there a difference between a 2 pole 240 volt breaker and 2 120 volt
breakers that have a proper rod to tie the two trip handles together?

Whu would some one use two non adjacent circuit breakers for 240 when
all they have to do is to move some breakers to get two adjacent?

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:45 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:

>On 8/15/2013 3:57 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>
>> <snip> He said they had to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar. There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is controlled by two breakers. Go figure.
>
>Although this was not an uncommon practice in the old days of fuse box
>panels, his word "tricks" was shorthand for "we had to violate code AND
>sacrifice your safety to get you a 240 circuit".
>
>Assuming (and don't ASSUME anything when you're dealing with
>electricity) you have single phase 240v at your service entry, there are
>TWO, separate, 120v "legs", of opposing phase, attached to TWO,
>separate, HOT bus bars in your service and sub panels.
>
>Single pole circuit breakers provide 120 volts and connect to just one
>of these hot bus bar.
>
>Double pole circuit breakers provide 240 volts to a circuit and plug
>into both hot of these bus bars.
>
>While you can indeed use two single pole circuit breakers to make up the
>necessary voltage for a 240v circuit, one circuit breaker on each of the
>HOT bars (and possibly nowhere near each other in the panel), both
>circuit breakers have to be tripped at the same time _if they are to
>provide the safety that comes from using circuit breakers in the first
>place_ (to protect the wiring first and foremost; and very importantly,
>to protect you when working on the receptacle, and/or the equipment
>plugged into the receptacle).
>
>IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly dangerous
>situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>
>Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to lose
>his license, and be shot.

O
> Be careful - it seems like you are guessing at things that you don't=20
>=20
> understand well. You're not going to "throw off the phase" with a load=
=20
>=20
> imbalance - whatever "throw off a phase" is intended to mean. If you're=
=20
>=20
> guessing, then I'd suggest you don't do so, and perhaps consider the smal=
l=20
>=20
> expense of an electrician on-site to really look at what you have and=20
>=20
> suggest what you should do. You can get into real trouble guessing at=20
>=20
> things you don't understand and making changes that you believe are going=
to=20
>=20
> be effective, but really are not.
>=20


Thanks all. A few clarifications.

1. The fire problem was a beam had shifted on a column (post) and pinched s=
ome romex and started a fire. We fixed that.

2. That made me hincky so I started looking at the rest of the electrical.

3. My tenant had attached his 18 amp cutoff saw to a 110 box that was pulle=
d from the 220 circuit. I don't understand exactly how this all worked. Whe=
n my landlord had an electrician add the 220 box I told him I wanted 110 at=
the same location. The electrician installed hard conduit with the 220 wir=
es attached to a 220 outlet and also one white and one blue 12g wire capped=
off in the box and he told me it was from one leg of the 220 and I could u=
se it for my 110. So I put in a 110 outlet using those available wires.

3a.=20

4. When my tenant uses his 18 amp saw, the radio on the same 110 circuit wo=
uld stop working and come back on when he was done sawing. This worried me =
even though now I think the problem was probably just too many amps being d=
rawn, regardless of how things were wired.

5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me it was =
a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had to do some tr=
icks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a sub-panel pulled from t=
he main panel in another section of the bar. There is something weird becau=
se I think the 220 circuit is controlled by two breakers. Go figure.

6. I rewired the 110 circuit so it no longer pulls from the blue and white =
wires in the 220 conduit but rather comes from the branch off another exist=
ing 110 circuit.

7. I am having the electrician come back and look at my work but if you see=
me listing slightly toasted ww equipment for sale you'll know that things =
didn't go well at all.

< snips >
>
>While you can indeed use two single pole circuit breakers to make up the
>necessary voltage for a 240v circuit, one circuit breaker on each of the
>HOT bars (and possibly nowhere near each other in the panel), both
>circuit breakers have to be tripped at the same time _if they are to
>provide the safety that comes from using circuit breakers in the first
>place_ (to protect the wiring first and foremost; and very importantly,
>to protect you when working on the receptacle, and/or the equipment
>plugged into the receptacle).
>IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly dangerous
>situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to lose
>his license, and be shot.


I appreciate your posts, Swingman, and I hate to nitpick - but -
- in case anyone misunderstands - fuses/breakers are not there
to protect people from electrocution - it's just equipment protection.
They do protect people from the resultant fires & such.
Even GFIs are not fail-safe in protecting people.
John T.


--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: [email protected] ---

On 8/16/2013 9:37 AM, Markem wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:21 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing phase,
>> if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit _from the
>> same leg,_ you will get no voltage.
>
> The phase is not opposing, but it is the same cycle on each leg. If it
> were opposing there would be a cancelling effect.

Practically, residential 120/240 volt service in the US uses a
center-tapped source on the supply transformer.

Because of this, the voltages between the two hot legs add algebraically
- they are 180 degrees out of phase.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 11:08:26 -0400, "Mike Marlow"
>.22LR was up to around $120 per brick here not too long ago. That's insane!
>Not sure what it's at now.

Just for interest's sake. How many rounds are in a brick? 1000?

On 8/18/2013 7:20 PM, Larry W wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
>> positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
>> are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
>> wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)
>>
>
> I'd rather look at it this way... When one wire is negative,
> the other is positive. so the 2 wires complete the circuit together
> becasue they are IN PHASE with each other. Guaranteed. :)

Nope.

In the US the transformer for most residential power taps one of the 3
phases in the power distribution system, which is why it is called
single phase, even though there are 2 hot legs.

The transformer center tap on the pole is grounded and also connected to
a wire called neutral. This provides two output voltages relative to
ground or neutral. Each is 120 V, but they are 180 degrees out of phase
with respect to each other.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 8/15/2013 3:57 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:

> <snip> He said they had to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar. There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is controlled by two breakers. Go figure.

Although this was not an uncommon practice in the old days of fuse box
panels, his word "tricks" was shorthand for "we had to violate code AND
sacrifice your safety to get you a 240 circuit".

Assuming (and don't ASSUME anything when you're dealing with
electricity) you have single phase 240v at your service entry, there are
TWO, separate, 120v "legs", of opposing phase, attached to TWO,
separate, HOT bus bars in your service and sub panels.

Single pole circuit breakers provide 120 volts and connect to just one
of these hot bus bar.

Double pole circuit breakers provide 240 volts to a circuit and plug
into both hot of these bus bars.

While you can indeed use two single pole circuit breakers to make up the
necessary voltage for a 240v circuit, one circuit breaker on each of the
HOT bars (and possibly nowhere near each other in the panel), both
circuit breakers have to be tripped at the same time _if they are to
provide the safety that comes from using circuit breakers in the first
place_ (to protect the wiring first and foremost; and very importantly,
to protect you when working on the receptacle, and/or the equipment
plugged into the receptacle).

IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly dangerous
situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.

Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to lose
his license, and be shot.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 8/15/2013 4:56 PM, Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>>> controlled by two breakers.
>>
>>
>> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
>> breaker from each leg)?
>
> Answering my own question, if nothing else, it seems like a good way to
> confuse people who open the box!

Why indeed ... because you can't get a 240v circuit any other way.

Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing phase,
if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit _from the
same leg,_ you will get no voltage.

With today's half height c'brkrs panels, and despite the fact that the
lugs on some circuit breakers are designed to make it impossible,
position is important when putting double pole circuit breakers in a
panel, therefore it is not uncommon to see even electricians put them in
improperly with regard to position ... wish I had a dollar for every
time I have seen this in new construction.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On Mon, 19 Aug 2013 20:51:27 +0000 (UTC), [email protected]
(Larry W) wrote:

>In article <[email protected]>,
>Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>On 8/18/2013 7:20 PM, Larry W wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
>>>> positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
>>>> are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
>>>> wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'd rather look at it this way... When one wire is negative,
>>> the other is positive. so the 2 wires complete the circuit together
>>> becasue they are IN PHASE with each other. Guaranteed. :)
>>
>>Nope.
>>
>>In the US the transformer for most residential power taps one of the 3
>>phases in the power distribution system, which is why it is called
>>single phase, even though there are 2 hot legs.
>>
>>The transformer center tap on the pole is grounded and also connected to
>>a wire called neutral. This provides two output voltages relative to
>>ground or neutral. Each is 120 V, but they are 180 degrees out of phase
>>with respect to each other.
>>
>
>I guess we can agree to disagree here. To me, the 2 120 volt conductors
>are in phase, just at equal and opposite polarity at any given time. Which
>is not the case when compared to conductors from either of the other
>2 power distribution conductors, which truly are out of phase.
You can look at it that way if it makes sense to you, but the
maximum deflection from neutral at any point in time is NOT the same
on each wire. The positive and negative deflection from neutral AT A
POINT IN TIME - is NEVER equal, which it would be if the 2 sign waves
were "in phase" The maximum deflection + of neutral occurs 1 /120th
of a second before or behind the maximum - deflection from neutral in
a 60 hz sine wave - which is exactly 180 degrees out of "phase" or
"synch"

On 8/14/2013 4:18 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
...

> When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire
> "through" every outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T
> off of an existing circuit?

In principle, "yes", that's all the original circuit is doing...

> I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across
> the top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would
> like to clip the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of
> two wire romex running down to a new outlet box and splice the
> clipped ones back together so the original ones keep working.
>
> If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see
> circuits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down
> to the new outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other
> side of the outlet with more romex back up to the other side of the
> clip so the circuit runs "through the outlet, instead of branching.
>
> I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.
>
> Questions.
>
> To code? Don't really care, just wonder. Safe? Do care.

That makes a parallel connection of that outlet w/ the rest; afaik
there's no prohibition in the Code to doing that. Wne would run cable
down and back and just connect in series to keep it that way.

As for the box, all code says is that you _must_ use a junction box w/ a
cover and that box then must remain accessible -- and "accessible"
doesn't mean back under the drywall even when you know where it is--it
must be available w/ nothing structural in the way of access...it can be
a panel door, or somesuch, just must be able to get to it w/o demolition.

There are some rules about load limits and outlets used depending on
whether it is 15 or 20A circuit.

> Of course I also run the ground wire as well.

Of course...

--

SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> I don't frequent any other forums and have a basic electrical question so thought I would try it here.
>
> When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire "through" every outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T off of an existing circuit?
>
> I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across the top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would like to clip the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of two wire romex running down to a new outlet box and splice the clipped ones back together so the original ones keep working.
>
> If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see circuits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down to the new outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other side of the outlet with more romex back up to the other side of the clip so the circuit runs "through the outlet, instead of branching.
>
> I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.
>
> Questions.
>
> To code? Don't really care, just wonder.
> Safe? Do care.
>
> Of course I also run the ground wire as well.
And you would "pigtail" the ground wires to the junction box. I think
that both of the wiring options you describe are fine. "Branching" gets
3 less wires, and 3 fewer wire nuts, in the junction box and uses less
wire. I have *no* qualifications to dispense any information which
should be relied upon. Especially whether it is better to "branch" or
"go through" the receptacle. However I am leaning towards the branching
solution for the rationale given. There are probably others here who
would be happy to assess for you my knowledge of matters electrical..
But I hope they recognize that I am coming along! : )

Bill

On 8/14/2013 6:35 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
...

> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented
> barn\shop so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky
> when my (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment
> in time a pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of
> the electrical system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled
> from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase
> or some sort of imbalance when they get a big draw.

That's _bad_...

Can't tell from afar w/ no info how to most effectively deal with it,
but there definitely shouldn't be that much of a potential load
imbalance between the two legs of the 230 service.

Sounds like the side outlet is the least of your problems.

--

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

> I don't frequent any other forums and have a basic electrical
> question so thought I would try it here.
>
> When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire
> "through" every outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T
> off of an existing circuit?

To be more accurate, the wire is run to a box, it is then either pig tailed
to the feed to the next box as well as the wires to actually hit the outlet
(device) in the first box, or (frequently, but not desireable), the feed in
and the feed out to the next box are both connected to the device using the
upper and lower screws on each side of the device. The second uses the
device to make the circuit a parallel circuit and is not desireable because
a broken device will most likely kill everything downstream. Pig tails
continue to feed all downstream devices even if an outlet gets broken. The
important distinction here is that the wire is not run through every outlet.
That would be a series connection and you don't want that. You want a
parallel connection. These are electrical terms and do not describe the
physical layout of your wiring.

>
> I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across
> the top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would
> like to clip the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of
> two wire romex running down to a new outlet box and splice the
> clipped ones back together so the original ones keep working.

You'll need to have at least a foot of slack to do this. You need to have
6" of conductor inside your junction box in order to make your connections
and wrap the wire in the box. If you have that much slack, then you can
indeed go this route. Use 12/2 (assuming a 20 amp circuit) which will also
contain a ground wire in the sheath. So that you get better help in a
supply store, use the term two conductor rather than two wire.

>
> If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see
> circuits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down
> to the new outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other
> side of the outlet with more romex back up to the other side of the
> clip so the circuit runs "through the outlet, instead of branching.

Nope. You could do that, but you'd have to make two connections in your
junction box instead of just one. Just drop a length of 12/2 down from the
new junction box to the new outlet box. Make the connection in the outlet
box as usual - black to brass, white to silver and ground (bare) to green.
Screw in the outlet and that box is done.

Back up at your junction box - twist all three of the blacks together (feed
in, new drop down to new outlet, and feed out to other existing box) and
wire nut them. Do the same with the whites. Likewise with the grounds
except that if you're using a metal box, leave one of the ground wires long
so you can screw it to the box to ground it. You can either use crimp
sleeves to do this, or you can use green wire nuts with a hole in the top
that the long strand can run through.

>
> I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.
>
> Questions.
>
> To code? Don't really care, just wonder.
> Safe? Do care.

Safe if you keep all the colors grouped together and make sure you ground
all metal boxes. Wise? No - as stated, you're suggesting to run an
unessary wire.

>
> Of course I also run the ground wire as well.

12/2 will have a ground in the romex sheath - no extra ground run required.


--

-Mike-
[email protected]

dpb wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 4:18 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> ...
>
>> When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire
>> "through" every outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T
>> off of an existing circuit?
>
> In principle, "yes", that's all the original circuit is doing...
>
>> I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across
>> the top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would
>> like to clip the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of
>> two wire romex running down to a new outlet box and splice the
>> clipped ones back together so the original ones keep working.
>>
>> If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see
>> circuits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down
>> to the new outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other
>> side of the outlet with more romex back up to the other side of the
>> clip so the circuit runs "through the outlet, instead of branching.
>>
>> I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.
>>
>> Questions.
>>
>> To code? Don't really care, just wonder. Safe? Do care.
>
> That makes a parallel connection of that outlet w/ the rest; afaik
> there's no prohibition in the Code to doing that. Wne would run cable
> down and back and just connect in series to keep it that way.

You are correct that there is no prohibition of parallel circuits - in
fact... they are the required circuit. Series circuits - not so much.
Branch circuits as he is describing are required to be in parallel. All he
needs is one 12/2 run down from the junction box to the new outlet. The
parallel connection is made in the junction box and the outlet is just a
simple termination.

>
> As for the box, all code says is that you _must_ use a junction box
> w/ a cover and that box then must remain accessible -- and
> "accessible" doesn't mean back under the drywall even when you know
> where it is--it must be available w/ nothing structural in the way of
> access...it can be a panel door, or somesuch, just must be able to
> get to it w/o demolition.
> There are some rules about load limits and outlets used depending on
> whether it is 15 or 20A circuit.
>
>> Of course I also run the ground wire as well.

If he's using romex (or what we all refer to as romex) it will have a ground
in the sheath. I'm not sure you could find a romex-type wire today that did
not contain a ground - or at least easily.


--

-Mike-
[email protected]

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

>
> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented
> barn\shop so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky
> when my (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment
> in time a pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of
> the electrical system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled
> from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase
> or some sort of imbalance when they get a big draw.

Did someone advise you that they are "throwing off the phase or some sort of
imbalance"? Not to say that a heavy draw could not cause you problems if
the loads are imbalanced, but adding an outlet to that branch is going to
absolutely nothing to address a load balance problem if one indeed exists.
Something is sounding very wrong here.

All 120v outlets are fed off of one leg of a 240v service. That's how you
get 120v. You haven't described any planned work that is going to relieve
any possible load imbalance. Maybe you're just not sharing the complete
scope of work in the interest of your specific question?

Be careful - it seems like you are guessing at things that you don't
understand well. You're not going to "throw off the phase" with a load
imbalance - whatever "throw off a phase" is intended to mean. If you're
guessing, then I'd suggest you don't do so, and perhaps consider the small
expense of an electrician on-site to really look at what you have and
suggest what you should do. You can get into real trouble guessing at
things you don't understand and making changes that you believe are going to
be effective, but really are not.


--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Dr. Deb wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:44:04 PM UTC-7, dpb wrote:
>>> On 8/14/2013 4:18 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>>
>>
>>> As for the box, all code says is that you _must_ use a junction box
>>> w/ a
>>>
>>> cover and that box then must remain accessible -- and "accessible"
>>>
>>> doesn't mean back under the drywall even when you know where it
>>> is--it
>>>
>>> must be available w/ nothing structural in the way of access...it
>>> can be
>>>
>>> a panel door, or somesuch, just must be able to get to it w/o
>>> demolition.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There are some rules about load limits and outlets used depending on
>>>
>>> whether it is 15 or 20A circuit.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks so much for the answer and explanation.
>>
>> Yes I am aware of the code about junction boxes, accessibility, max
>> loading, etc. Of course I thought I knew the code and once did all my
>> splices in boxes and blithely covered them with sheet rock during my
>> last home renovation but have since learned more about this area
>> when I recently pulled a permit for a remodel of a rental property
>> and studied up a bit.
>>
>> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented
>> barn\shop so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky
>> when my (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment
>> in time a pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of
>> the electrical system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled
>> from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase
>> or some sort of imbalance when they get a big draw.
>
>
> In a normal breaker box, you come in with 230 and branch out with
> your 110 legs (and/or 230).
>
> I would do the same on this installation and NOT take all the
> circuits off one leg of the 230. As you said, it can cause problems,
> beside which, you are only utlizing one half of what is available to
> you.
>

Actually - he is utilizing all of what is available to him. Yes there can
be load balance issues if one is not careful, but he has described nothing
of that sort. More importantly - he's absolutely not using one half of what
is available to him.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

dpb wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 6:35 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> ...
>
>> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented
>> barn\shop so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky
>> when my (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment
>> in time a pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of
>> the electrical system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled
>> from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase
>> or some sort of imbalance when they get a big draw.
>
> That's _bad_...
>
> Can't tell from afar w/ no info how to most effectively deal with it,
> but there definitely shouldn't be that much of a potential load
> imbalance between the two legs of the 230 service.
>
> Sounds like the side outlet is the least of your problems.

Agreed. SonomaProducts has described in only partial ways, more than one
issue. The fire was one issue and that is not a load imbalance issue.
Rewiring some of the outlets that are on a particular leg may or may not
even be applicable. If a big draw isn't tripping a breaker, then it's
either not a big draw, or something else is very wrong.

This is exactly the kind of problem and question that is best served by
shelling out a couple of bucks for an electrician to come in and take a real
look. Not a good foundation for a usenet newsgroup solution.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me it
> was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had to
> do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is controlled
> by two breakers.


Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
breaker from each leg)?

Bill wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>> controlled by two breakers.
>
>
> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
> breaker from each leg)?

Answering my own question, if nothing else, it seems like a good way to
confuse people who open the box!

On 8/15/2013 4:43 PM, Bill wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me it
>> was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had to
>> do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is controlled
>> by two breakers.
>
>
> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
> breaker from each leg)?

Doesn't meet Code unless the two are physically tied w/ an
interconnection for the purpose--if they're designed/listed for the
application they'll have the facility to be "ganged". Generally that
consists of there being a small hole drilled through the trip levers
that a small rod goes into so that when you flip one you flip 'em both...

--

Bill wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>> controlled by two breakers.
>
>
> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
> breaker from each leg)?

Safety-wise, a device ("certainly") should not have two breakers, right?

Bill

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

> Thanks all. A few clarifications.
>
> 1. The fire problem was a beam had shifted on a column (post) and
> pinched some romex and started a fire. We fixed that.
>

Ok - thanks for that clarification.

> 3. My tenant had attached his 18 amp cutoff saw to a 110 box that was
> pulled from the 220 circuit. I don't understand exactly how this all
> worked. When my landlord had an electrician add the 220 box I told
> him I wanted 110 at the same location. The electrician installed hard
> conduit with the 220 wires attached to a 220 outlet and also one
> white and one blue 12g wire capped off in the box and he told me it
> was from one leg of the 220 and I could use it for my 110. So I put
> in a 110 outlet using those available wires.

As long as he followed code (which I'm assuming he did), then he gave you a
neutral (white) and one leg of the 240v panel. Nothing wrong in that at
all. It's essentially the same thing as wiring in a 120v circit in a
panel - just a few feet away.

> 4. When my tenant uses his 18 amp saw, the radio on the same 110
> circuit would stop working and come back on when he was done sawing.
> This worried me even though now I think the problem was probably just
> too many amps being drawn, regardless of how things were wired.

I'd think the problem was interference from the saw motor - RF interference.
Don't think that it was too many amps being drawn. If that were the case,
the breaker should have tripped. Unless... the breaker...

>
> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
> controlled by two breakers. Go figure.

He's blowing smoke clear up your ass and taking your money while he does it.
He had to "do tricks"? Sorry but that is pure bullshit and you need to drop
that guy like a hot potato as soon as you can. If your 240v feed is
interupped by two separate breakers then you've really got a clown of an
electrician on your hands. Is this guy really an electrician or just a guy
who has hacked a couple of wiring jobs together for friends, and does not
even really know if he did it correctly? I'll tell ya again - from what he
said to you - he's the latter and is dangerous to you.

I'm going to repeat myself here - you really need to pay just a couple short
bucks and let a real electrician take a look. You don't have to hire him to
do the repair work, but you really need to understand what the previous hack
blundered his way through to "make it work". Ya know what - if you were
near Syracuse NY, I'd stop by and fix it for you for free, just to help you
through this, but unless you can afford to move...


>
> 6. I rewired the 110 circuit so it no longer pulls from the blue and
> white wires in the 220 conduit but rather comes from the branch off
> another existing 110 circuit.

Why? And... to what effect? Maybe to no real problematic effect, but you
really can't just start jumping in and "moving" things around until, or in
such a manner that they seem to work - if you really do not understand the
existing wiring, and what you need to do, should do, and the reasons behind
these decisions.

I'm really not trying to insult your inteligence here, or to insult your
abilities. It's just that from what I've read, it seems that you're either
short cutting information (in the interest of cutting to the chase), or that
you don't really understand electrical wiring. No insult intended, but it
seems the latter is the case, and I think you'll be better served by getting
someone more knowledgeable in there. You can hack things together that seem
to work without even knowing or understanding a miriad of other problems you
are introducing.

There's more than one right way to wire, but there's even more wrong ways to
wire.


>
> 7. I am having the electrician come back and look at my work but if
> you see me listing slightly toasted ww equipment for sale you'll know
> that things didn't go well at all.

Kudos to ya for the intention of having your work reviewed, but do yourself
a favor and bring in a different electrician. As described, this guy is not
an electrician and you really should not trust anything he tells you.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Bill wrote:
> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>> controlled by two breakers.
>
>
> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
> breaker from each leg)?

Against code, dangerous and blatently stupid. Clearly the work of a hack
who thinks he knows more than he really does.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>>> controlled by two breakers.
>>
>>
>> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
>> breaker from each leg)?
>
> Answering my own question, if nothing else, it seems like a good way
> to confuse people who open the box!

Or kill them or the other people working with them.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Bill wrote:
> Bill wrote:
>> SonomaProducts.com wrote:
>>> 5. The (same) electrician came back, reviewed the issue and told me
>>> it was a problem having that 110 pulled from there. He said they had
>>> to do some tricks to pull a 220 circuit from my panel which is a
>>> sub-panel pulled from the main panel in another section of the bar.
>>> There is something weird because I think the 220 circuit is
>>> controlled by two breakers.
>>
>>
>> Just curious--what do those in the know think of that "strategy" (one
>> breaker from each leg)?
>
> Safety-wise, a device ("certainly") should not have two breakers,
> right?

You'll need to re-phrase that question Bill.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

>
> Uhhh yeah. Guess how I found out there were two breakers? The
> switches are not tied together at the box. They aren't labeled
> either. I flipped one off and checked a piece of equipment. It didn't
> start so I figure the circuit is off. Luckily I am so scared of
> electrical I treat all wires like they are live regardless. I didn't
> have my tester with me either or I would have double checked. I push
> some wires out of the way at one point and one of them sparked off
> the junction box.
>
> I retrieved my gonads from somewhere up in my stomach and flipped off
> all the breakers and worked with a flashlight thereafter.
>
> This is a 100 year old barn, out on a farm with wiring patched in
> over the years. I plan on moving out by December if I can sell of the
> humongous pile of Cherry I have in stock. I'll start working on that
> project in a month or so.
>

It's really a very common sort of find in a structure like that. Farmers
are as farmers do. They are the worst of hacks. Lord knows how things are
wired in there. You're wise to kill the whole damned building in a
situation like that. As for that cherry - I should think that all of my
humble, yet freely given advise in this thread is worth a few hundred board
feet delivered shipping fees covered, to my house in the Syracuse NY area.
All right - a couple of hundred board feet...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Mike Marlow wrote:
> It's really a very common sort of find in a structure like that. Farmers
> are as farmers do. They are the worst of hacks.
Of the sample I have met, I would say "ingenius"! They don't stand
around and wait for someone else to solve their problems.
One tried to convince me I needed a small bulldozer. You would have
like him Mike!


> Lord knows how things are
> wired in there. You're wise to kill the whole damned building in a
> situation like that. As for that cherry - I should think that all of my
> humble, yet freely given advise in this thread is worth a few hundred board
> feet delivered shipping fees covered, to my house in the Syracuse NY area.
> All right - a couple of hundred board feet...
>

Bill wrote:
> Mike Marlow wrote:
>> It's really a very common sort of find in a structure like that. Farmers
>> are as farmers do. They are the worst of hacks.

> Of the sample I have met, I would say "ingenius"! They don't stand
> around and wait for someone else to solve their problems.
> One tried to convince me I needed a small bulldozer. You would have
> like him Mike!
>


Oh yeah - quite ingenius. I come from farming roots - I know very well how
ingenius farmers can be. Cob attists extrordinaire. Ya had to be - could
afford to pay to get everything done that needed repair, etc. But man - can
they ever cob up a task!

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On 8/15/2013 9:39 PM, Mike Marlow wrote:
...

> It's really a very common sort of find in a structure like that. Farmers
> are as farmers do. They are the worst of hacks. ...

I resent that strongly... :(

--

Swingman wrote:

> IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
> still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly
> dangerous situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>
> Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to
> lose his license, and be shot.

Amen! I'll provide the ammo...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Markem wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2013 09:17:21 -0500, Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Since each hot leg of a single phase/240v service has an opposing
>> phase, if you connect the two hot wires needed for a 240v circuit
>> _from the same leg,_ you will get no voltage.
>
> The phase is not opposing, but it is the same cycle on each leg. If it
> were opposing there would be a cancelling effect.

I believe what Karl was trying to say - as he did indicate that the feed was
a single phase feed, was the each leg is 180 degrees out of phase with each
other due to the transformer being center tapped. He is correct in that
statement.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

Swingman wrote:
> On 8/16/2013 9:45 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
>> Swingman wrote:
>>
>>> IOW, if only one of the single pole circuit breakers trips, there is
>>> still 120v being fed to the plugged in equipment ... a highly
>>> dangerous situation for the unwary DIY'er, to say the least.
>>>
>>> Any "electrician" who would do this to an unwary public deserves to
>>> lose his license, and be shot.
>>
>> Amen! I'll provide the ammo...
>
> Can you buy ammo where you live?
>
> Damned hard to find around here, and the ammo scalpers are out in
> force.
> I have taken up target shooting again, with a pistol, and my favorite
> weapon of choice is a .22LR target pistol that is generally easy on
> the pocket book for practice, but no longer the case with .22LR ammo
> approaching .10/round.
>
> I refuse to buy it at that price ...

Ammo in general is getting harder and harder to find, between retailers
either dropping it or limiting what they carry or will sell in one sale,
Homeland Security buying up all they can get, etc. .22LR of all things, is
suffering the biggest impact. Doesn't make a bit of sense. I load all of
my own for my handgun and for my rifles, but not for my shotguns. I've got
enough powder, primers, bullets and brass to load up all I'll ever need for
those. I don't even know what it's like trying to buy reloading supplies
now. Primers were like gold only a short time ago, but I think that has
settled down some.

.22LR was up to around $120 per brick here not too long ago. That's insane!
Not sure what it's at now.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

It is safe to "tie into" an existing circuit, and if you want to get
technical, it really matters what the main circuit is used for.
If the 2 receptacles are on a high watt appliance say, and you want to run
another, it may pop the circuit.
More than likely not, and you are fine. Most of the times many of the
receptacles on any given circuit are not being use.
rarely are they ever on all at the same time unless a workshop, business,
lighting, computer, tv...
So, I would put in a junction box, and pig tail the circuit coming in and
going out to allow the original circuit to be operating, and then using the
pigtail, tie into the new receptacle.
Make sure the grounds are all the same, the neutral, and of course the hot.
john

"SonomaProducts.com" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

I don't frequent any other forums and have a basic electrical question so
thought I would try it here.

When I look at circuits for outlets they always run the wire "through" every
outlet until the end. Is it OK to just branch or T off of an existing
circuit?

I have an outlet at each end of a wall. There is romex running across the
top of the wall from one to another. It has some slack. I would like to clip
the romex, add in a junction box and tie in one piece of two wire romex
running down to a new outlet box and splice the clipped ones back together
so the original ones keep working.

If I follow all the circuit maps I see and the traditional way I see
circuits done I would clip the romex, run one piece of two wire down to the
new outlet from one side of the clip. Then come out the other side of the
outlet with more romex back up to the other side of the clip so the circuit
runs "through the outlet, instead of branching.

I know branching works because I have done it a few times before.

Questions.

To code? Don't really care, just wonder.
Safe? Do care.

Of course I also run the ground wire as well.

That is my first impression. The breaker is too large for the receptacle,
and is not tripping.
john

"Mike Marlow" wrote in message news:[email protected]...

dpb wrote:
> On 8/14/2013 6:35 PM, SonomaProducts.com wrote:
> ...
>
>> This little branching project is to fix a problem in my rented
>> barn\shop so no inspections, just want it safe. I was pretty lucky
>> when my (sub-lease) tenant happened to be in the barn at the moment
>> in time a pinched wire started a fire. So after a full inspection of
>> the electrical system I am rewiring some 110 outlets that are pulled
>> from one leg of a 220 circuit and seem to be throwing off the phase
>> or some sort of imbalance when they get a big draw.
>
> That's _bad_...
>
> Can't tell from afar w/ no info how to most effectively deal with it,
> but there definitely shouldn't be that much of a potential load
> imbalance between the two legs of the 230 service.
>
> Sounds like the side outlet is the least of your problems.

Agreed. SonomaProducts has described in only partial ways, more than one
issue. The fire was one issue and that is not a load imbalance issue.
Rewiring some of the outlets that are on a particular leg may or may not
even be applicable. If a big draw isn't tripping a breaker, then it's
either not a big draw, or something else is very wrong.

This is exactly the kind of problem and question that is best served by
shelling out a couple of bucks for an electrician to come in and take a real
look. Not a good foundation for a usenet newsgroup solution.

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

SonomaProducts.com wrote:

>
> Funny\ironic that you spelled intelligence wrong.

Not at all - my spelling sucks!


Of course - I don't consider spelling ability to be a sign of
intelligence...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

On 8/16/2013 1:25 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
...

> It is still possible to incorrectly install the field assembled handle
> tie package which results in only delivering 120V rather the desired
> 240 V.
>
...

It'll be pretty apparent, pretty quickly, if so... :)

--

dpb wrote:
> On 8/16/2013 1:25 PM, Lew Hodgett wrote:
> ...
>
>> It is still possible to incorrectly install the field assembled
>> handle tie package which results in only delivering 120V rather the
>> desired 240 V.
>>
> ...
>
> It'll be pretty apparent, pretty quickly, if so... :)

Not to mention that it's a lot more preferable to deliver half the voltage
than it is to disconnect only half the voltage...

--

-Mike-
[email protected]

In article <[email protected]>,
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
>positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
>are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
>wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)
>

I'd rather look at it this way... When one wire is negative,
the other is positive. so the 2 wires complete the circuit together
becasue they are IN PHASE with each other. Guaranteed. :)



--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

In article <[email protected]>,
Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>On 8/18/2013 7:20 PM, Larry W wrote:
>> In article <[email protected]>,
>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
>>> positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
>>> are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
>>> wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)
>>>
>>
>> I'd rather look at it this way... When one wire is negative,
>> the other is positive. so the 2 wires complete the circuit together
>> becasue they are IN PHASE with each other. Guaranteed. :)
>
>Nope.
>
>In the US the transformer for most residential power taps one of the 3
>phases in the power distribution system, which is why it is called
>single phase, even though there are 2 hot legs.
>
>The transformer center tap on the pole is grounded and also connected to
>a wire called neutral. This provides two output voltages relative to
>ground or neutral. Each is 120 V, but they are 180 degrees out of phase
>with respect to each other.
>

I guess we can agree to disagree here. To me, the 2 120 volt conductors
are in phase, just at equal and opposite polarity at any given time. Which
is not the case when compared to conductors from either of the other
2 power distribution conductors, which truly are out of phase.




--
Better to be stuck up in a tree than tied to one.

Larry W. - Baltimore Maryland - lwasserm(a)sdf. lonestar.org

Larry W wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 8/18/2013 7:20 PM, Larry W wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> Swingman <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Look at it this way ... when one hot wire is negative, the other is
>>>> positive, so the two hot wires complete the circuit together because they
>>>> are "out of phase". IOW, 240 volt wiring is powered by 2 - 120 volt hot
>>>> wires that are 180 degrees out of phase. Guaranteed. :)
>>>>
>>> I'd rather look at it this way... When one wire is negative,
>>> the other is positive. so the 2 wires complete the circuit together
>>> becasue they are IN PHASE with each other. Guaranteed. :)
>> Nope.
>>
>> In the US the transformer for most residential power taps one of the 3
>> phases in the power distribution system, which is why it is called
>> single phase, even though there are 2 hot legs.
>>
>> The transformer center tap on the pole is grounded and also connected to
>> a wire called neutral. This provides two output voltages relative to
>> ground or neutral. Each is 120 V, but they are 180 degrees out of phase
>> with respect to each other.
>>
> I guess we can agree to disagree here. To me, the 2 120 volt conductors
> are in phase, just at equal and opposite polarity at any given time.
I think we may be better off if you turn your keyboard upside down. It
will still be in phase, it will just have opposite polarity.

Did you notice that if you shift the periodic graph to the left or
right, i.e. do a "phase-shift"), that the graphs will coincide. That's
where the terminology comes from.

> Which
> is not the case when compared to conductors from either of the other
> 2 power distribution conductors, which truly are out of phase.
>
>
>
>