[[email protected]]

I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks

[RBM]

Nec requires you to use and install equipment as per manufacturers
directions, so technically it probably wouldn't meet code. I wouldn't
hesitate to do it anyway, but it would probably be more efficient and cost
effective to just buy a properly working sensor




wrote in message
...
I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks

[ValveJob]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:03:14 -0500, wrote:

I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks

In my part of Texas, if anyone mentions 'code' we immediately shoot
them dead. So not many people mention the word.

[** Frank **]

"RBM" rbm2(remove wrote in message
...
Nec requires you to use and install equipment as per manufacturers
directions, so technically it probably wouldn't meet code. I wouldn't
hesitate to do it anyway, but it would probably be more efficient and cost
effective to just buy a properly working sensor



I have couple of them you could switch the light on with just a fast flick
of the switch. I have a bunch of those 120V motion sensor lights from
various manufactures on various properties. In time, perhaps temperature
drift in the electronic circuit, non of them work - comes on when you don't
need it and off when you do. The only sensors that work are on my solar
flood lights. I'm switching to fluorescent flood lights with just the night
sensor so it would stay on when I need it.






wrote in message
...
I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks

[Tony Hwang]

wrote:
I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks
Hi,
Those things have minimum load to work properly. Try with two 60W bulbs
and see. Mine has two 25W bulbs and I found out that's the minimum load
it needs.

[Tony Hwang]

valvejob wrote:

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:03:14 -0500, wrote:


I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks


In my part of Texas, if anyone mentions 'code' we immediately shoot
them dead. So not many people mention the word.




Hi,
Those who love code is the ones who don't know anything. LOL!

[** Frank **]

"Tony Hwang" wrote in message
news:SEJpi.4280$_d2.1176@pd7urf3no...
wrote:
I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on. I only use one of the 2 bulbs to
save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want. Is this legal according to the code?

Thanks
Hi,
Those things have minimum load to work properly. Try with two 60W bulbs
and see. Mine has two 25W bulbs and I found out that's the minimum load
it needs.

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

[Chris Lewis]

According to ** Frank ** :

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?

Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[Chris Lewis]

According to :
I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

All sensor lights I've seen (not that I've seen that many... ;-)
have separate individual leads to each socket and the control
electronics.

Eg: in a two bulb fixture, each bulb has its own wire pair,
and the control circuit usually has three leads. Plus ground
screw or lead. Total of 7 or 8.

Which means that you could simply run the appropriate cable
(eg: 12/3) to the fixture. The red and black would go to two
switches. At the other end, you connect one hot (black say)
to the control circuit and one of the sockets, and the other hot
direct to the other socket. Connect neutrals to both.

If the were prohibited by code, I'd expect at least _some_ of the
devices I've seen have cable harnesses that prevent you from doing
that except by cutting cable. In other words, the fixture would
simply have one set of hot/neutral/ground leads (total of 2 or 3),
and no way (except by surgery) to connect to the bulbs independently.

While the installation instructions for sensor lights doesn't
explicitly allow/disallow that kind of connection, and hence
_might_ be considered violating the manufacturer's usage instructions,
I highly doubt that you'd ever get dinged for it. After all,
dual flood fixtures without sensor can be wired up this way,
and if it's a more-or-less standard pattern (metal plate, screws
to a J box, etc), they'd be hard pressed to justify it not
being code compliant.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:58:03 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to ** Frank ** :

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?

Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.

How di we get into talking about dimmers? This is about sensor lights
or security lights as some call them.....

Getting back ot the topic, I used to live with a relative who had a
light that seemed to do whatever it wanted. Sometimes it would stay
on forever, other times not work at all, etc......
I hated that thing. But it was not my house, so I could not change
it. Now, I have my own place and bought this fixture (another brand),
and find mine is pretty much the same useless P.O.S. I have tried all
kinds of adjustments and the light comes on everytime my cat gets
nearby, but sometimes will not come on until I am as close as 8 feet
away (and have tripped on the steps that are 12 feet away). I hate
these sensor lights. I dont think there are any that work as they
should, at least not in the lower priced ones.

I want to look into these remote switches that work on sending a
signal thru the power lines. This light is on a building that is
behind another building. The front bldg is visible from the house,
but the rear one is not, and has steps. If I could put a switch on
the front bldg it would solve all the problems. However, the wiring
would require digging trenches and be too costly and too much work.
Where can I get one of these remote switches that are wireless? That
would solve everything. I just found that stupid sensor ON and it's
noon and sunny. The stupid thing is costing a fortune in wasted
energy, and getting on my nerves real quickly.

[Chris Lewis]

According to :
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:58:03 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to ** Frank ** :

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?

Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.

How di we get into talking about dimmers? This is about sensor lights
or security lights as some call them.....

Whoops. Got postings confused, and said "dimmer" when I should have
said "sensor". Sensor light electronics need power when the bulb is
off. Electronic timers do to.

Dimmers don't.

Getting back ot the topic, I used to live with a relative who had a
light that seemed to do whatever it wanted. Sometimes it would stay
on forever, other times not work at all, etc......
I hated that thing. But it was not my house, so I could not change
it. Now, I have my own place and bought this fixture (another brand),
and find mine is pretty much the same useless P.O.S. I have tried all
kinds of adjustments and the light comes on everytime my cat gets
nearby, but sometimes will not come on until I am as close as 8 feet
away (and have tripped on the steps that are 12 feet away). I hate
these sensor lights. I dont think there are any that work as they
should, at least not in the lower priced ones.

It's been my experience that the cheapies are erratic. Sometimes
they work as advertised, but most of the time the controls aren't
very consistent, and we find that they get worse as they get older,
and eventually die, either fully on or fully off.

[I assume Canadian winters and power spikes may be the cause of
most of that.]

I want to look into these remote switches that work on sending a
signal thru the power lines. This light is on a building that is
behind another building. The front bldg is visible from the house,
but the rear one is not, and has steps. If I could put a switch on
the front bldg it would solve all the problems. However, the wiring
would require digging trenches and be too costly and too much work.
Where can I get one of these remote switches that are wireless? That
would solve everything. I just found that stupid sensor ON and it's
noon and sunny. The stupid thing is costing a fortune in wasted
energy, and getting on my nerves real quickly.

X-10 technology stuff. The transmitter and receiver are connected
to power, and communicate via the power wires, but they're not
necessarily even on the same circuit.

The other option is to use a solar switch, which simply means that
the light will be on all the time it's dark.

Note, however, that X-10 in complex systems with multiple panels (especially
multiple buildings with their own main feeds), or with very long
circuits may not work well or at all, because the transmitter might
not be strong enough to transmit that far, or through that much
intervening equipment (especially pole transformers). Otherwise,
there'd be madness in a society where everybody's X-10 transmitters
controlled everybody else's receivers.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[** Frank **]

"Chris Lewis" wrote in message
...
According to ** Frank ** :

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?


When the power is off there is no power to either to lamp or control
circuit. After all you want the lamp off.



Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.
--

After you turn on the switch there is power across the sensor control
circuit and a relay (depending on motion and/or night or day) would allow
full voltage across the lamp via the respective relay contact. This is one
way of doing it and is independent of the lamp wattage. Having the control
circuit dependent on lamp wattage is a poor design.






Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[mm]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 05:03:14 -0500, wrote:

I got a sensor light with a 2 bulb fixture. The light is really
annoying. It claims that if I shut it off and back on in 5 seconds or
less, it will remain on. Well, that dont work. When I am working
outside I want this light to remain on.

I only use one of the 2 bulbs to save energy. I plugged the other one
with a dead bulb. My idea is to remove the wires going to the second
light, where they attach to the sensor, and wire that socket directly
to the power line with a separate switch. In other words, the sensor
will control one bulb, while the other bulb will be connected to a
switch only. That way I can leave the second light turned on as long
as I want.

Is this legal according to the code?

Dunno.

I have two light sensor lights. The one with floods has two floods in
it. The door light has a 60 watt bulb.

To get them to go on automatic, each gives problems. IIU them C, I
have to do one of them at night and the other in the day to get them
on auto, or maybe both during the day, even though I usually want to
reset them when it's dark.

And if there is a power failure, they go on and stay on forever. I
gather the new ones only stay on until the next sunrise.

Try the two bulbs. It may work or may not. Othewise I think your idea
is a good one.

Thanks

[mm]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:00:46 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:


Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?

Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.

How di we get into talking about dimmers? This is about sensor lights
or security lights as some call them.....

Whoops. Got postings confused, and said "dimmer" when I should have
said "sensor". Sensor light electronics need power when the bulb is
off. Electronic timers do to.

Dimmers don't.

Two-wire dimmers (or 3-wire 3-way dimmers), don't have any power when
they are off.

But all (or most?) light sensors are 3 wire, and have power all the
time.


They should be designed to be independant of load, but in my other
post, I urged him to try the second bulb, just to know for sure about
his specific sensor.

[mm]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:10:55 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:


While the installation instructions for sensor lights doesn't
explicitly allow/disallow that kind of connection, and hence
_might_ be considered violating the manufacturer's usage instructions,
I highly doubt that you'd ever get dinged for it. After all,
dual flood fixtures without sensor can be wired up this way,
and if it's a more-or-less standard pattern (metal plate, screws
to a J box, etc), they'd be hard pressed to justify it not
being code compliant.

Very good point. I know nothing about the code or its enforcement, but
each individual piece would still be wired according to code. They
would be assembled the same and there would be almost no difference
in the wiring.

Chris Lewis,

[William Underhill]

Chris Lewis wrote:
According to :

I want to look into these remote switches that work on sending a
signal thru the power lines. This light is on a building that is
behind another building. The front bldg is visible from the house,
but the rear one is not, and has steps. If I could put a switch on
the front bldg it would solve all the problems. However, the wiring
would require digging trenches and be too costly and too much work.
Where can I get one of these remote switches that are wireless? That
would solve everything. I just found that stupid sensor ON and it's
noon and sunny. The stupid thing is costing a fortune in wasted
energy, and getting on my nerves real quickly.

X-10 technology stuff. The transmitter and receiver are connected
to power, and communicate via the power wires, but they're not
necessarily even on the same circuit.

They do have to be on the same step-down transformer from the utility.
If the two buildings are on different feeds, it won't work. If on
different circuits, the circuits have to be fed from the same phase
(there's ways to get around that, but costs more)

Note, however, that X-10 in complex systems with multiple panels (especially
multiple buildings with their own main feeds), or with very long
circuits may not work well or at all, because the transmitter might
not be strong enough to transmit that far, or through that much
intervening equipment (especially pole transformers). Otherwise,
there'd be madness in a society where everybody's X-10 transmitters
controlled everybody else's receivers.

As noted above, it won't transmit through the utility pole transformers.

Wikipedia has a pretty decent layman's writeup on it:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X10_%28...ry_standard%29

Yours aye,
W. Underhill

--
"Take sides! Always take sides! You may sometimes be wrong - but the man
who refuses to take sides must *always* be wrong! Heaven save us from
poltroons who fear to make a choice!" R.A. Heinlein, "Double Star"
--
Main homepage: http://members.shaw.ca/fog.locker/
SCA homepage: http://members.shaw.ca/uilliam/
LiveJournal: http://www.livejournal.com/users/jackytar/

[Chris Lewis]

According to mm :
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 17:10:55 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:


While the installation instructions for sensor lights doesn't
explicitly allow/disallow that kind of connection, and hence
_might_ be considered violating the manufacturer's usage instructions,
I highly doubt that you'd ever get dinged for it. After all,
dual flood fixtures without sensor can be wired up this way,
and if it's a more-or-less standard pattern (metal plate, screws
to a J box, etc), they'd be hard pressed to justify it not
being code compliant.

Very good point. I know nothing about the code or its enforcement, but
each individual piece would still be wired according to code. They
would be assembled the same and there would be almost no difference
in the wiring.

Right. The hazard is more in the area of how the wires going
into the box are "derived". Eg, for some reason the hots being
on a different circuit and sharing neutrals in cases where they
shouldn't be.

If the OP had his existing light set up with the power feed
going to the switch and not the fixture, then switching
the box over to a dual switch and replacing the cable going from
the switch to the fixture to be /3 with ground, and not screw
up things like color codes, the likelyhood of him being called
on it by a particularly grumpy and overly-anal inspector is
extremely low.
--
Chris Lewis,

Age and Treachery will Triumph over Youth and Skill
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

[[email protected]]

On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 19:00:46 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to :
On Wed, 25 Jul 2007 16:58:03 -0000, (Chris
Lewis) wrote:

According to ** Frank ** :

Control circuit should be independent of load, sounds like a poor design.
Would be interesting to see a schematic of this circuit.

Dimmers need to be able to operate the electronics when the light
is off. If the light is off, there's no current in the bulbs. Where
would the power come from then?

Instead, they leak a bit of current through the load and scavenge
what they need off that. If the bulbs are too small, there might
not be enough current flow to energize the electronics.

How di we get into talking about dimmers? This is about sensor lights
or security lights as some call them.....

Whoops. Got postings confused, and said "dimmer" when I should have
said "sensor". Sensor light electronics need power when the bulb is
off. Electronic timers do to.

Dimmers don't.

Getting back ot the topic, I used to live with a relative who had a
light that seemed to do whatever it wanted. Sometimes it would stay
on forever, other times not work at all, etc......
I hated that thing. But it was not my house, so I could not change
it. Now, I have my own place and bought this fixture (another brand),
and find mine is pretty much the same useless P.O.S. I have tried all
kinds of adjustments and the light comes on everytime my cat gets
nearby, but sometimes will not come on until I am as close as 8 feet
away (and have tripped on the steps that are 12 feet away). I hate
these sensor lights. I dont think there are any that work as they
should, at least not in the lower priced ones.

It's been my experience that the cheapies are erratic. Sometimes
they work as advertised, but most of the time the controls aren't
very consistent, and we find that they get worse as they get older,
and eventually die, either fully on or fully off.


This fixture is about 6 months old and keeps getting worse. Last
night it was on all night. I saw it on but did not want to get out of
bed and walk to the shed to shut it off. It's been turned off since,
and will stay off. This weekend it comes off the wall and goes back
ot the store. All it's doing is wasting power, and much of the time
it dont come on when I need it for safety at night on the steps.
Besides that, it's ****ing me off, and I dont need that.

[I assume Canadian winters and power spikes may be the cause of
most of that.]

I want to look into these remote switches that work on sending a
signal thru the power lines. This light is on a building that is
behind another building. The front bldg is visible from the house,
but the rear one is not, and has steps. If I could put a switch on
the front bldg it would solve all the problems. However, the wiring
would require digging trenches and be too costly and too much work.
Where can I get one of these remote switches that are wireless? That
would solve everything. I just found that stupid sensor ON and it's
noon and sunny. The stupid thing is costing a fortune in wasted
energy, and getting on my nerves real quickly.

X-10 technology stuff. The transmitter and receiver are connected
to power, and communicate via the power wires, but they're not
necessarily even on the same circuit.


This is what I am going to buy, but I do see a problem. All the units
that I see that are "home rated" and sell for $20 or less (on the
web), are plug in devices. In other words I have to plug the receiver
into an outlet, thus I'll have to put a cord on the yard light, run
the cord through the wall, and plug it into the receiver in the shed.
As far as I'm concerned, this is fine, but I have a feeling it wont be
up to the code. I did find one commercial unit that wires in the
circuit, but it looks like it dont fit into a common electrical box,
and they want around $130 for it, and thats more than I will pay. I
see some come with a hand held remote, others have a glue on wireless
switch as the transmitter. I'll probably get the remote so I can just
carry it around and / or turn the light on and off from the house.

The other option is to use a solar switch, which simply means that
the light will be on all the time it's dark.

I've used those (photocell) devices, but that would probably cost me
$10 a month in electric. I probably need this light on about 10
minutes per night, when I go to the shed to care for pets. Thats
about it. I just need the light because its very dark back there and
those steps can not be seen in the dark and I have fallen several
times on them, which is what made me buy this useless security light.

Note, however, that X-10 in complex systems with multiple panels (especially
multiple buildings with their own main feeds), or with very long
circuits may not work well or at all, because the transmitter might
not be strong enough to transmit that far, or through that much
intervening equipment (especially pole transformers). Otherwise,
there'd be madness in a society where everybody's X-10 transmitters
controlled everybody else's receivers.

The remote type say they transmit 100 feet. If I click the thing in
my hand about 30 feet away, thats about when I want the light to come
on. That security light can come on at 20 feet, or it waits until I
am right at the streps before coming on. Yet, a cat or wild critter
makes it go one and off all night long. Rain, snow, or wind moving
tree branches makes it come on and often stay on. Yet, when I want it
to stay on, it wont. To be perfectly honest, I'd like to take a
hammer to it, but I'll just return it.

Thanks for the advice.