I have a question to do with the aluminum wiring I have in my house ...

There doesn't seem to be much objection to the safety of CO/ALR devices
(switches and oulets), unlike twist ons (read P.S.) The biggest
objection being that you can only change your switches and oulets, not
your lights, GFCI, etc.

My main problem that I still need a solution for in my home is
connecting my CU approved lighting to the AL wiring. What do you think
of the idea of using a CU/ALR outlet to make the transition between AL
and CU. I'd place an oulet box in my attic (all the lights I'm
concerned about have an attic above them), put an CU/ALR outlet in it,
connect the AL wire to two of the screws and connect the CU wire to the
other set of screws. The only thing left is the grounding wires which
I could connect to two seperate gounding screws in the box or if code
requires it use a twist on.

So has anyone ever tried this? Any comments, feedback, etc?

Thanks,
Harry

P.S. I know the Ideal-65 purple twist on connectors are considered safe
by some for pigtailing aluminum to copper wire, however, there's also
others who still consider them fire hazards. I'm hoping to stay away
from these if possible and would rather make any aluminum to copper
connections in some other way. Hence my question.

If I was doing it, I would use wire-nuts, but I would use the procedure
in the paper at
http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm
(This is a paper writen by a PhD Professional Engineer based on
extensive testing of aluminum connections done for the Consumer Product
Safety Commission. It includes a wide range of fixes for aluminum wiring
based on that research.)

In addition to a detailed procedure for connecting to CO/ALR devices,
the paper has a detailed procedure for using wire-nuts with aluminum
wire - including brand names. My impression is that wire-nuts, when
installed in accordance with the procedure, are more reliable than
CO/ALR devices (particularly in a wire-through configuration that has 2
connections to the device per wire splice).

Ideal #65 wire-nuts, which are probably the only UL listed ones for
aluminum wire, are definitely not recommended by the paper.

bud--



Harry Muscle wrote:
I have a question to do with the aluminum wiring I have in my house ...

There doesn't seem to be much objection to the safety of CO/ALR devices
(switches and oulets), unlike twist ons (read P.S.) The biggest
objection being that you can only change your switches and oulets, not
your lights, GFCI, etc.

My main problem that I still need a solution for in my home is
connecting my CU approved lighting to the AL wiring. What do you think
of the idea of using a CU/ALR outlet to make the transition between AL
and CU. I'd place an oulet box in my attic (all the lights I'm
concerned about have an attic above them), put an CU/ALR outlet in it,
connect the AL wire to two of the screws and connect the CU wire to the
other set of screws. The only thing left is the grounding wires which
I could connect to two seperate gounding screws in the box or if code
requires it use a twist on.

So has anyone ever tried this? Any comments, feedback, etc?

Thanks,
Harry

P.S. I know the Ideal-65 purple twist on connectors are considered safe
by some for pigtailing aluminum to copper wire, however, there's also
others who still consider them fire hazards. I'm hoping to stay away
from these if possible and would rather make any aluminum to copper
connections in some other way. Hence my question.

According to Harry Muscle :
My main problem that I still need a solution for in my home is
connecting my CU approved lighting to the AL wiring. What do you think
of the idea of using a CU/ALR outlet to make the transition between AL
and CU. I'd place an oulet box in my attic (all the lights I'm
concerned about have an attic above them), put an CU/ALR outlet in it,
connect the AL wire to two of the screws and connect the CU wire to the
other set of screws.

It'd _work_, but it'd get old fast, and you can't do any branching.

Note also that there is now some code requirements about pigtailing
neutrals, but you can't do that this way.

The only thing left is the grounding wires which
I could connect to two seperate gounding screws in the box or if code
requires it use a twist on.

Need to pigtail the grounds too.

You really can't escape having to use some sort of wirenut or
crimpon.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

Thanks for the responses. I've read that website
(http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm) before, however,
there's a very good post a few years back that challanges some of what
it says there. It's called "Aluminum Wiring Question" and here's a
link to it on google:

http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.en...3f5718fcfe8c08

Post 18 especially, 16 is good too. In that thread it does talk a bit
about some possible alterations to the methods mentioned in the
original site. I might use those on aluminum to aluminum connections,
however, the copper to aluminum connections still scare me due to the
different thermal expansions of these two metals and due to the fact
that it's a bad idea to have these two dissimilar metals touching each
other.

Also thanks for pointing out the code requirements that I might be
breaking if I go with my original idea.

I have however stumbled accross another product that I'm thinking of
using. I've started another thread called "Using Splicers and Tap
Connectors with Aluminum Wiring instead of Twist On Wire Nuts?" to talk
about it. It sounds quite promising ... I hope.

Thanks again,
Harry

I'm planning on rewiring the kitchen and bathrooms, however, I was
thinking of just improving the safety in the bedrooms, hallway,
livingroom, and other such areas.

Thanks,
Harry

wrote in message
...
On 27 Oct 2005 11:06:50 -0700, "Harry Muscle"
wrote:

Thanks for the responses. I've read that website
(http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm) before, however,
there's a very good post a few years back that challanges some of what
it says there. It's called "Aluminum Wiring Question" and here's a
link to it on google:


http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.en...se_frm/thread/
ae33d8b47a48128c/503f5718fcfe8c08?lnk=st&q=14+awg+aluminum&rnum=3&h l=en#503f
5718fcfe8c08

Post 18 especially, 16 is good too. In that thread it does talk a bit
about some possible alterations to the methods mentioned in the
original site. I might use those on aluminum to aluminum connections,
however, the copper to aluminum connections still scare me due to the
different thermal expansions of these two metals and due to the fact
that it's a bad idea to have these two dissimilar metals touching each
other.

Also thanks for pointing out the code requirements that I might be
breaking if I go with my original idea.

I have however stumbled accross another product that I'm thinking of
using. I've started another thread called "Using Splicers and Tap
Connectors with Aluminum Wiring instead of Twist On Wire Nuts?" to talk
about it. It sounds quite promising ... I hope.

Thanks again,
Harry

Consider replacing all the alum wiring. By the time you screw around
with all these special (and costly) devices, it might be cheaper and
easier to just replace it. Just do one piece at a time. I realize
that at times it's hard to get into walls, etc., but consider the
consequences of a fire...

Alum wiring is garbage....

At least replace the lines that go to outlets which have loads. A
simple light fixture uses minimal amperage, so you could probably
leave them, and just check the connections.

Mark

Very expensive when you have to rip open all the walls to get access. Much
cheaper to have an electrician put in those copalum crimps on all outlets.

http://www.alwirerepair.com/copalum_crimp_method.htm

A 1972-1973 home may have a better grade of Aluminum wire.

Unfortunately there's no one in all of Canada that does the Copalum
stuff. I already checked.

Harry

Harry Muscle wrote:

Thanks for the responses. I've read that website
(http://www.inspect-ny.com/aluminum/alreduce.htm) before, however,
there's a very good post a few years back that challanges some of what
it says there. It's called "Aluminum Wiring Question" and here's a
link to it on google:

http://groups.google.ca/group/alt.en...3f5718fcfe8c08

Post 18 especially, 16 is good too. In that thread it does talk a bit
about some possible alterations to the methods mentioned in the
original site. I might use those on aluminum to aluminum connections,
however, the copper to aluminum connections still scare me due to the
different thermal expansions of these two metals and due to the fact
that it's a bad idea to have these two dissimilar metals touching each
other.

If I remember right, dissimilar metals are a problem when in contact
with an electrolye. Antioxide paste should prevent that.

The thread is interesting reading. #18 makes a major point about not
using emery paper, which should not be used on any electrical apparatus,
but the Aronstein paper says "#240 grit "wet-or-dry" abrasive paper",
which is probably not available in emery. #18 specifically recomends
silicon carbide, which sounds like a good idea.

#18 does not like the idea of using a wire brush, likely steel, to clean
oxides off of wire. The Ilso site in your other post, by coincidence,
says the "cable should then be cleaned with a wire brush". Aronstein
says abrasive paper.

#18 also talks about active (which break down oxides) and passsive
antioxidants. Anyone heard of "active" antioxidants? Would be nice to
know which (if any) are.

My main observaiton, however, is that #18s comments are based more on
theory (some of it specifically related to welding aluminum). Aronsteins
recommendations are based on extensive research testing aluminum
connections, at one time involving 7500 connections with aluminum wire.
There may be better information around, but I havn't seen it.

bud--