DIYbanter - View Single Post - Adding second 4-way switch...

=?iso-8859-15?Q?Tekkie=AE?=

posted for all of us...

On Sat, 29 Jun 2019 11:39:46 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 6/27/2019 3:08 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 12:58:27 -0500, dpb wrote:

On 6/27/2019 11:09 AM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:19:37 -0500, dpb wrote:

...

The power is fed to the 3-way switch that was at that location (exterior
door/wall) with three wire cable running whither I cannot discern
precisely. Opening the boxes, the 4-way is on N door, the other 3-way
on the W. I made the hope that the 3-way cable went next to the 4-way
so put the two travelers between the existing 3-way and a new 4-way and
connected the 3-way cable travelers to the other side of the 4-way...

Unfortunately, that apparently is not the actual path as the new 4-way
now acts as straight on-off: in one position all other locations work
as normal; in other position none work.

...

If the travelers all go through the J box you can add as many 4 ways
as you like. Essentially they just reverse the travelers. (2 wires in
2 out).
Just be sure this is really a 4 way and not a DPST.

Well, it's brand new out of the box just brought home last night, but I
suppose it's possible could have been swapped by somebody. Not likely,
methinks, but I'll double-check--admit that thought had not crossed my
mind altho that's the way it acts.

There are pictures on the web if you are not sure how it gets wired.

I've done enough previously that I'm aware of that for the normal
configuration -- I know there are some "West Coast" ways that are no
longer allowable by Code but the ones I recall even if I couldn't
reproduce them w/o head-scratching to remember exact configuration were
being fed at the load instead of the first 3-way.

Since the one 3-way I have access to in the new construction is
definitely the feed, I was "just hoping" the two travelers from it did
just go straight to the existing 4-way; if that were the case I put the
new in for trial according to the conventional wiring a la that shown at
(rummag around for link...ah! there's a nice legible one)
http://www.electrical101.com/4way-switches.html.

I guess the next step is as trader says, ring it out to find how Dad
actually did it, or, I'm liking the idea of just moving this existing
location and not having it on the outside door location at all more and
more as I think about it. Reduces count there besides. I'll have to
see what SWMBO thinks about that idea.

Am somewhat curious how this is done, though, it doesn't come to me
otomh how else could be...

There are essentially 2 ways to run a 3 way. One is where you are
taking the neutral along with you and the switches are basically in a
straight line. These days the code is pretty much forcing that method
since you need a neutral at all switch locations (since 11 or 14 I
think).
The other method is a switch loop where the neutral stops at the 1st 3
way and you run the 3 ungrounded conductors in a switch loop. In that
case all 3 wires in the cable will connect yo the 3 terminals on the
switch and the white should be reidentified some other color,
connected to the common terminal. That is a down and back method
where the reidentified white connects to the hot in the first box. You
always reidentify the white to a hot conductor in a switch loop.

There may be slight variations on this theme but that is the 2 basic
methods and it is identified by all 3 wires in the cable on the switch
at one switch location (the loop) or 2 neutrals tied together (the
straight run)
I have some better pictures somewhere but I don't see them right now
I don't think they are on my web site

The mystery is solved -- the 4-way contacts are top/bottom not side-side
so the way I had it it was exactly a DPST. If I pay attention to the
markings (colors almost indistinguishable, couldn't really tell which
were bright/not bright but it is fairly dark out there w/o lights on)
more closely, then everything works as expected.

DOH! Sorry for the confusion; should have looked more carefully before...

Good deal,
Any resolution that doesn't involve firemen and a water damage
recovery company is a success

Yup!

--
Tekkie