On Tue, 06 Nov 2007 07:26:23 -0800, DerbyDad03
wrote:

A co-worker, who should *not* be doing his own wiring attempted to add
a 2nd light fixture in his mudroom this weekend. Here is the situation
he presented to me this morning.

Light Fixture 1 (LF1) is an existing ceiling fixture in the mud room.
An existing Switch (S1) controls LF1.

He added LF2, a second ceiling fixture in the mud room, and wants to
control it with S1.

LF1 holds an incandescent bulb and LF2 holds a compact fluorescent.

He took the cover off of S1 and found a black and white from length of
Romex attached to S1. That's all that was in the box. So far, nothing
out of the ordinary, as far as I can tell. I'm assuming this length of
Romex is the switched hot from LF1.

His simple mind told him that if S1 controls LF1 via the black and
white from LF1, then all he had to do was run a length of romex from
LF2 and attach black to black and white to white at S1.

Here's the reported result of his ignorance: He says that if S1 is
on, LF1 is on and LF2 is off. That makes sense to me. However, he
says that if he turns S1 off, LF1 goes off and LF2 comes on.

If this is wired the way I think it is, then shouldn't *both* LF1 and
LF2 come on when S1 is off? LF2 is in parallel with an open S1 and
LF1 is now in series with LF2? Wouldn't that create a complete circuit
through both fixtures?


If could be that LF2 is drawing insufficient current to light LF1. In
this case, unscrewing the bulb in LF1 will make LF2 go out.

Does the fact that LF2 holds a compact fluorescent enter into this?

I don't remember ever knowing as little about electricity as some
people.

BTW, this should be fixable by wiring LF2 across LF1 rather than the
switch.
--
49 days until the winter solstice celebration

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.laughingsquid.com

"Unlike biological evolution. 'intelligent design' is
not a genuine scientific theory and, therefore, has
no place in the curriculum of our nation's public
school classes." -- Ted Kennedy