I'm installing PS 1/PS 5 Air Seal Recessed Housing from Thomas Lighting
(purchased from Menards). I have two basic questions concerning the joining
of wires when wiring up these lights.

1) I know when you join two solid wires together you're supposed to wind
them clockwise around each other. Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire. My question, then,
is what do you do when you have two solid wires and 1 stranded wire to
connect together.

2) Also, concerning the particular lighting described above, when connecting
additional outl, a contractor friend of mine attaches (wraps) both ground
wires together, and then sends them back up through the knockout - as
opposed to doing what the directions say, namely, hook the ground to the
green wires, etc. What is the correct way to do this (or are they both
ok?), as well as advantages/disadvantages to each?

Thanks,

Wes

Some wirenuts require twisting and some don't. Just be sure that when you've
finished tightening the connector, that all wires are tight. Fixture grounds
should be continuous, which is, the one coming in, the one going out, and
the one attached to the fixture should be connected together. People do have
preferences about various methods and materials
"Wes Stebbins" wrote in message
...
I'm installing PS 1/PS 5 Air Seal Recessed Housing from Thomas Lighting
(purchased from Menards). I have two basic questions concerning the
joining of wires when wiring up these lights.

1) I know when you join two solid wires together you're supposed to wind
them clockwise around each other. Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire. My question, then,
is what do you do when you have two solid wires and 1 stranded wire to
connect together.

2) Also, concerning the particular lighting described above, when
connecting additional outl, a contractor friend of mine attaches (wraps)
both ground wires together, and then sends them back up through the
knockout - as opposed to doing what the directions say, namely, hook the
ground to the green wires, etc. What is the correct way to do this (or
are they both ok?), as well as advantages/disadvantages to each?

Thanks,

Wes

Wes wrote:

Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the
solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire.

If you bend the wires over like that, the wire nut won't work as well.
A good quality wire nut has a spiral springinside it that squeezes the
wires together and holds them under tension. If the wire nuts that
came with the fixtures don't have springs in them, throw them away and
go buy good wire nuts and use them. There are different size wire nuts,
get the right size for the wires that you are using. There is usually
a chart on the box showing how many of each size that you can join with
each wire nut. There are grounding wire nuts (Green) that have a hole
in the end. You leave one solid wire long, it goes through the end.
After you tighten the wire nut, the exposed wire end goes around the
ground screw.


Stretch

So, then, to expand my original questions

1) Is there not a "specific" technique for wiring 1 stranded wire to two
solid (14 gage) wires? (Of course, by "two solid" I mean the light's white
stranded wire to two white wires - one coming in, one going out - the same
for the black and ditto for the grounds.

2) Is either method for the ground wires ok, i.e., (a) my
contractor/friend's running the solid ground wires back up throught the
knockout (not even connecting to the light's green wire ground, but the two
solid ground wires, of course, touching the light's metal box in the
process) vs. (b, per instructions for the lights) connecting the two solid
ground wires to the light's green wire?

Thanks again,

Wes

"Wes Stebbins" wrote in message
...
I'm installing PS 1/PS 5 Air Seal Recessed Housing from Thomas Lighting
(purchased from Menards). I have two basic questions concerning the
joining of wires when wiring up these lights.

1) I know when you join two solid wires together you're supposed to wind
them clockwise around each other. Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire. My question, then,
is what do you do when you have two solid wires and 1 stranded wire to
connect together.

2) Also, concerning the particular lighting described above, when
connecting additional outl, a contractor friend of mine attaches (wraps)
both ground wires together, and then sends them back up through the
knockout - as opposed to doing what the directions say, namely, hook the
ground to the green wires, etc. What is the correct way to do this (or
are they both ok?), as well as advantages/disadvantages to each?

Thanks,

Wes

Use a good wirenut, do not "fold" any wires back. When joining stranded to
solid wire, leave the stranded wire about 1/16 longer than the solid, and
twist the wirenut on firmly. pull on the individual wires to make sure they
are connected well. Do not just shove the ground wires thru a knockout.
wirenut them to the ground wire in the fixture, or run a pigtail to the
grounding screw. you want to make sure that the ground wires are secured
well.

Wes Stebbins wrote:
I'm installing PS 1/PS 5 Air Seal Recessed Housing from Thomas Lighting
(purchased from Menards). I have two basic questions concerning the joining
of wires when wiring up these lights.

1) I know when you join two solid wires together you're supposed to wind
them clockwise around each other. Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire. My question, then,
is what do you do when you have two solid wires and 1 stranded wire to
connect together.

I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.

If you want something that can be taken apart later, you can also 'tin'
the stranded ends (with solder), effectively making them solid. That
gives the wire nut something to dig into, and keeps the corrosion in check.

In article , Robert Barr wrote:

I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.

Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

I always add a wire nut, but not for NEC -- more like sloth. It's
difficult to insulate the connection otherwise. Almost impossible with
just electrical tape.

I've examined the solder-dipped connections on my home (65 y.o.), and it
takes all day to pull off the fabric / tar taping. I have to use
pliers. Those guys didn't screw around, which is the way I like it, but
the connections are huge, about the size of my thumb or better. A wire
nut is so much easier...

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.

Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a
mechanical fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to
the solder. A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

What about electrical tape wrapped around a soldered connection? Is that a
"mechanical fastener"? It insulates the connection, at least.

Wes Stebbins wrote:

I'm installing PS 1/PS 5 Air Seal Recessed Housing from Thomas Lighting
(purchased from Menards). I have two basic questions concerning the joining
of wires when wiring up these lights.

1) I know when you join two solid wires together you're supposed to wind
them clockwise around each other. Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire. My question, then,
is what do you do when you have two solid wires and 1 stranded wire to
connect together.

As has already been mentioned, the correct method is to follow the
instructions for the particular brand of connector you are using.
Personally, I make it a point to use the kind that don't require (indeed
are compromised by) the twisting. The only thing special about joining
stranded wire (or smaller wire) to a solid wire is to let the stranded
(or smaller) wire protrude into the connector a tiny bit (maybe 1/16
inch) further into the connector. Also, some types are better at joining
solid wires, and others are better when all the wires are stranded.
Bottom line: follow the instructions.

2) Also, concerning the particular lighting described above, when connecting
additional outl, a contractor friend of mine attaches (wraps) both ground
wires together, and then sends them back up through the knockout - as
opposed to doing what the directions say, namely, hook the ground to the
green wires, etc. What is the correct way to do this (or are they both
ok?), as well as advantages/disadvantages to each?

Not sure what you mean by "sends them up through the knockout", but if
this means the ground wires protrude outside the fixture wiring box,
then it is just plain wrong, and is a violation of the NEC. The fixtures
you have are well designed and approved by the appropriate agencies to
be installed according to the instructions that came with the fixture.
Don't invent stuff even if it does get the lights to work. It never
saves any significant amount of either time or money.

Thanks,

Wes

--
Tony Electric
http://dotznize.com/electric

The Reticulan Museum Of Unnatural History
http://ouchouch.com/fancy.html

In article , Bert Byfield wrote:
I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.

Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a
mechanical fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to
the solder. A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

What about electrical tape wrapped around a soldered connection? Is that a
"mechanical fastener"?

No.

It insulates the connection, at least.

That's not the point. The Code requires that the connection be mechanically
and electrically secure even _without_ the solder. You can't achieve that with
tape.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Robert Barr wrote:


I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.


Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?


Can you quote me chapter and verse on that assertion. I am unaware of
any such provision in the code except that "Connections depending solely
on solder shall not be used" in attaching Equipment Grounding Conductors
to boxes. A splice that is made up mechanically and then soldered is
perfectly acceptable as is shown by the reference in 250.148 to 110.14.

250.148 Continuity and Attachment of Equipment Grounding Conductors to
Boxes.
Where circuit conductors are spliced within a box, or terminated on
equipment within or supported by a box, any separate equipment grounding
conductors associated with those circuit conductors shall be spliced or
joined within the box or to the box with devices suitable for the use.
Connections depending solely on solder shall not be used. Splices shall
be made in accordance with 110.14(B) except that insulation shall not be
required. ...

110.14 Electrical Connections.
Because of different characteristics of dissimilar metals, devices such
as pressure terminal or pressure splicing connectors and soldering lugs
shall be identified for the material of the conductor and shall be
properly installed and used. Conductors of dissimilar metals shall not
be intermixed in a terminal or splicing connector where physical contact
occurs between dissimilar conductors (such as copper and aluminum,
copper and copper-clad aluminum, or aluminum and copper-clad aluminum),
unless the device is identified for the purpose and conditions of use.
Materials such as solder, fluxes, inhibitors, and compounds, where
employed, shall be suitable for the use and shall be of a type that will
not adversely affect the conductors, installation, or equipment.

(B) Splices. Conductors shall be spliced or joined with splicing devices
identified for the use or by brazing, welding, or soldering with a
fusible metal or alloy. Soldered splices shall first be spliced or
joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder
and then be soldered.

--
Tom H

In article .net, HorneTD wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
In article , Robert Barr
wrote:


I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.


Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.

Can you quote me chapter and verse on that assertion. I am unaware of
any such provision in the code except that "Connections depending solely
on solder shall not be used" in attaching Equipment Grounding Conductors
to boxes. A splice that is made up mechanically and then soldered is
perfectly acceptable as is shown by the reference in 250.148 to 110.14.

That, of course, is _exactly_ what I said: a mechanical fastener must be used
in addition to the solder. And you cited the relevant portion of the Code
yourself:

110.14 Electrical Connections.
[...]
(B) Splices. [...] Soldered splices shall first be spliced or
joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder
and then be soldered.


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug Miller wrote:

In article .net, HorneTD wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , Robert Barr

wrote:


I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.


Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.


Can you quote me chapter and verse on that assertion. I am unaware of
any such provision in the code except that "Connections depending solely
on solder shall not be used" in attaching Equipment Grounding Conductors
to boxes. A splice that is made up mechanically and then soldered is
perfectly acceptable as is shown by the reference in 250.148 to 110.14.


That, of course, is _exactly_ what I said: a mechanical fastener must be used
in addition to the solder. And you cited the relevant portion of the Code
yourself:


110.14 Electrical Connections.

[...]

(B) Splices. [...] Soldered splices shall first be spliced or
joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder
and then be soldered.


Actually, this means that the wires should be twisted
together to make a solid connection prior to being soldered
as opposed to just having the wires next to each other and
soldered. The twisting together makes the joint mechanically
and electrically secure.

Waldo


--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

In article , Waldo wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:

In article .net, HorneTD
wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , Robert Barr

wrote:


I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.


Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.


Can you quote me chapter and verse on that assertion. I am unaware of
any such provision in the code except that "Connections depending solely
on solder shall not be used" in attaching Equipment Grounding Conductors
to boxes. A splice that is made up mechanically and then soldered is
perfectly acceptable as is shown by the reference in 250.148 to 110.14.


That, of course, is _exactly_ what I said: a mechanical fastener must be used

in addition to the solder. And you cited the relevant portion of the Code
yourself:


110.14 Electrical Connections.

[...]

(B) Splices. [...] Soldered splices shall first be spliced or
joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder
and then be soldered.


Actually, this means that the wires should be twisted
together to make a solid connection prior to being soldered
as opposed to just having the wires next to each other and
soldered. The twisting together makes the joint mechanically
and electrically secure.

But twisting together *without* solder is not an approved method of making a
splice - and since the splice must not rely on solder to be either
mechanically or electrically secure, the addition of solder cannot transform
an unapproved splice into an approved one.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug Miller wrote:
In article .net, HorneTD wrote:

Doug Miller wrote:

In article , Robert Barr

wrote:


I have never trusted stranded wire connetions. I've seen too many go
bad (mainly from corrosion over time) & cause problems. I solder. It
takes a few extra minutes, but in my view, it's always worth it.


Note, however, that the National Electrical Code requires that a mechanical
fastener (such as a wire nut) must be used _in_addition_ to the solder.
A connection made by solder alone is a Code violation.


Can you quote me chapter and verse on that assertion. I am unaware of
any such provision in the code except that "Connections depending solely
on solder shall not be used" in attaching Equipment Grounding Conductors
to boxes. A splice that is made up mechanically and then soldered is
perfectly acceptable as is shown by the reference in 250.148 to 110.14.


That, of course, is _exactly_ what I said: a mechanical fastener must be used
in addition to the solder. And you cited the relevant portion of the Code
yourself:


110.14 Electrical Connections.

[...]

(B) Splices. [...] Soldered splices shall first be spliced or
joined so as to be mechanically and electrically secure without solder
and then be soldered.



--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

Doug
I was trying to draw a difference between what you were saying and what
the code actually requires. I now understand that you believe that the
code forbids traditional soldered splices. I don't believe it does and
when I have had to do repairs and extensions of knob and tube wiring I
have made up mechanical splices by twisting or wrapping the conductors
around each other in the traditional manor creating at least three full
turns, then soldered, followed by taping. So far I have passed
inspection. I would like you to tell me how you would solder a splice
that is already covered with a solderless connector. The language of
section 110.14 requires that the conductors be spliced or joined first
and then soldered.

I think I'll just continue to use the traditional method, were it is
appropriate, and if an inspector ever refuses it I'll see what the state
board of appeals has to say. You see if your position were correct it
would be absolutely pointless to use solder. I have to believe that the
code making panel did not put in language on soldered splices just to
render the practice useless. If that was the intention they would have
simply forbid the use of soldering as a splicing technique.
--
Tom H

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 18:34:55 GMT, HorneTD
wrote:

inspection. I would like you to tell me how you would solder a splice
that is already covered with a solderless connector. The language of
section 110.14 requires that the conductors be spliced or joined first
and then soldered.

1. Strip wires
2. Use wirenut to twist & join wires
3. Remove wirenut
4. Solder the tightly twisted wires
5. Add wirenut back

Done

In article t, HorneTD wrote:

I was trying to draw a difference between what you were saying and what
the code actually requires. I now understand that you believe that the
code forbids traditional soldered splices.

If by "traditional soldered splices" you mean twisted together, soldered, and
taped, yes, I believe that *is* prohibited. Making a splice by twisting and
taping, *without* solder, is *not* an approved method of making a splice.
Since the Code *also* requires that splices not depend on solder, it's hard to
imagine how the addition of solder to an unapproved splice could transform it
into an approved splice.

I don't believe it does and
when I have had to do repairs and extensions of knob and tube wiring I
have made up mechanical splices by twisting or wrapping the conductors
around each other in the traditional manor creating at least three full
turns, then soldered, followed by taping. So far I have passed
inspection.

Passing inspection is not necessarily the same as being Code-compliant. :-)

I would like you to tell me how you would solder a splice
that is already covered with a solderless connector. The language of
section 110.14 requires that the conductors be spliced or joined first
and then soldered.

That language does not, however, require the use of any one specific type of
connector. As I read that, the Code would approve the use of a split-bolt
connector, for instance (making the splice mechanically and electrically
secure), followed by solder, followed by tape.

I think I'll just continue to use the traditional method, were it is
appropriate, and if an inspector ever refuses it I'll see what the state
board of appeals has to say. You see if your position were correct it
would be absolutely pointless to use solder. I have to believe that the
code making panel did not put in language on soldered splices just to
render the practice useless. If that was the intention they would have
simply forbid the use of soldering as a splicing technique.

The Code *does* forbid the use of soldering as a splicing technique. That's
what it means when it says that the connection shall be mechanically and
electrically secure without solder: that soldering, alone, as a splicing
technique, is forbidden, but _in_conjunction_ with other, approved methods it
is permitted.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

wrote:
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 18:34:55 GMT, HorneTD
wrote:


inspection. I would like you to tell me how you would solder a splice
that is already covered with a solderless connector. The language of
section 110.14 requires that the conductors be spliced or joined first
and then soldered.


If you apply a cutting torch to the wirenut, it would probably get hot
enough to allow you to apply the solder. The only problem i see with
this method is that the wire testicle would burn off it's insulating
part and only leave the little springy thingy on the wire, plus you'd
probably have to tape all of the wires for a few feet because of all
the burned off insulation. But if thats what it takes to comply with
the law, the hell with common sense. You know the law is always
right,


That is why the appeals process will presume that the authors of the
code intended it to make sense. It is a basic principle of law that the
writers of the rule in question did not mean to require what cannot be
done nor to forbid what must be done. Since you must apply solder to
the conductors in order to fuse it to the metal the code cannot be
construed to make that impossible. The code language is only intended
to prevent the use of solder as a means of mechanical attachment of a
conductor to a terminal or for the mechanical stability of a splice. A
mechanical splice is "mechanically and electrically secure" without
solder but it will not remain that way if you do not solder it. In the
absence of solder the connection will corrode and open due to thermal
cycling. Once soldered the connection is protected from corrosion and
the effects of thermal cycling are minimized by the heat sinking
qualities of the solder.
--
Tom H

In article t, HorneTD wrote:


That is why the appeals process will presume that the authors of the
code intended it to make sense. It is a basic principle of law that the
writers of the rule in question did not mean to require what cannot be
done nor to forbid what must be done. Since you must apply solder to
the conductors in order to fuse it to the metal the code cannot be
construed to make that impossible. The code language is only intended
to prevent the use of solder as a means of mechanical attachment of a
conductor to a terminal or for the mechanical stability of a splice. A
mechanical splice is "mechanically and electrically secure" without
solder but it will not remain that way if you do not solder it.

That's absurd. If it won't remain that way without solder, it isn't
"mechanically secure without solder".

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

According to Doug Miller :
In article t, HorneTD
wrote:

That is why the appeals process will presume that the authors of the
code intended it to make sense. It is a basic principle of law that the
writers of the rule in question did not mean to require what cannot be
done nor to forbid what must be done. Since you must apply solder to
the conductors in order to fuse it to the metal the code cannot be
construed to make that impossible. The code language is only intended
to prevent the use of solder as a means of mechanical attachment of a
conductor to a terminal or for the mechanical stability of a splice. A
mechanical splice is "mechanically and electrically secure" without
solder but it will not remain that way if you do not solder it.

That's absurd. If it won't remain that way without solder, it isn't
"mechanically secure without solder".

The CEC has similar wording to the NEC, and as per Knight, soldering _is_
permitted (but he makes quite a point about making sure you do it _right_).

Properly twisted (and undamaged) bare copper inside a box is mechanically
secure and pretty much electrically secure too. For a while at least.
Solder provides permanence.

The whole point behind the NEC and CEC sections is to ensure that you're
not bringing two bare pieces of wire in mid-air into rough proximity,
bridging the gap with a droplet of solder, covering it with scotch tape,
and calling it a day.

That said, soldering is hardly ever done these days simply because having
an iron and taking the time to do it right is generally not worthwhile.

But, there's nothing wrong with it. K&T connections are generally
more reliable than wirenut ones.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:23:58 GMT, (Doug Miller)
wrote:

In article t, HorneTD wrote:


That is why the appeals process will presume that the authors of the
code intended it to make sense. It is a basic principle of law that the
writers of the rule in question did not mean to require what cannot be
done nor to forbid what must be done. Since you must apply solder to
the conductors in order to fuse it to the metal the code cannot be
construed to make that impossible. The code language is only intended
to prevent the use of solder as a means of mechanical attachment of a
conductor to a terminal or for the mechanical stability of a splice. A
mechanical splice is "mechanically and electrically secure" without
solder but it will not remain that way if you do not solder it.

That's absurd. If it won't remain that way without solder, it isn't
"mechanically secure without solder".

Best stop making sense before you actually effect someone.

It's not absurd. I think HorneTD is absolutely right. (He is, I believe,
an electrician incidentally.)
My recollection, from dim history, is that for soldered connections at
boxes the wires were cleaned and twisted and pointed down. Then the
soldered connection was made by dipping the connection in a solder pot,
with all the connections soldered in sequence at the same time.

Bud (also an electrician)


Doug Miller wrote:
solder but it will not remain that way if you do not solder it.


That's absurd. If it won't remain that way without solder, it isn't
"mechanically secure without solder".

Doug Miller wrote:
In article t, HorneTD wrote:


I was trying to draw a difference between what you were saying and what
the code actually requires. I now understand that you believe that the
code forbids traditional soldered splices.


If by "traditional soldered splices" you mean twisted together, soldered, and
taped, yes, I believe that *is* prohibited. Making a splice by twisting and
taping, *without* solder, is *not* an approved method of making a splice.
Since the Code *also* requires that splices not depend on solder, it's hard to
imagine how the addition of solder to an unapproved splice could transform it
into an approved splice.


I don't believe it does and
when I have had to do repairs and extensions of knob and tube wiring I
have made up mechanical splices by twisting or wrapping the conductors
around each other in the traditional manor creating at least three full
turns, then soldered, followed by taping. So far I have passed
inspection.


Passing inspection is not necessarily the same as being Code-compliant. :-)


I would like you to tell me how you would solder a splice
that is already covered with a solderless connector. The language of
section 110.14 requires that the conductors be spliced or joined first
and then soldered.


That language does not, however, require the use of any one specific type of
connector. As I read that, the Code would approve the use of a split-bolt
connector, for instance (making the splice mechanically and electrically
secure), followed by solder, followed by tape.


I think I'll just continue to use the traditional method, were it is
appropriate, and if an inspector ever refuses it I'll see what the state
board of appeals has to say. You see if your position were correct it
would be absolutely pointless to use solder. I have to believe that the
code making panel did not put in language on soldered splices just to
render the practice useless. If that was the intention they would have
simply forbid the use of soldering as a splicing technique.


The Code *does* forbid the use of soldering as a splicing technique. That's
what it means when it says that the connection shall be mechanically and
electrically secure without solder: that soldering, alone, as a splicing
technique, is forbidden, but _in_conjunction_ with other, approved methods it
is permitted.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

I do understand that is your reading of it. If you were the inspector I
would appeal your decision and I am confident I would win. Just as you
are sure you are right. The NFPA electrical section staff has sided
with the traditional method in the past but since no formal
interpretation was rendered that is just another opinion. I suggest
that we just agree to disagree.
--
Tom H

In article t, HorneTD wrote:

I do understand that is your reading of it. If you were the inspector I
would appeal your decision and I am confident I would win. Just as you
are sure you are right. The NFPA electrical section staff has sided
with the traditional method in the past but since no formal
interpretation was rendered that is just another opinion. I suggest
that we just agree to disagree.

Fine by me.

--
Regards,
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

Nobody ever left footprints in the sands of time by sitting on his butt.
And who wants to leave buttprints in the sands of time?

wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 08:07:46 GMT, "Wes Stebbins"
wrote:


Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire.



This must have been popular with people from Indiana. My house in
Florida (homeowner was a snowbird) had a bunch of boxes made up that
way. No wire nut or anything. He just wrapped the stranded around the
solid, folded it over and crimped it with his pliers. Then taped up.
I think I have tracked them all down and reconnected with a listed
connector but I have to say I never saw any signs of heating, even on
a 1400w bathroom heater.

That technique was only supposed to be used before soldering. Without
solder they were taking a chance on thermal cycling or corrosion opening
the splice and causing arcing.
--
Tom H

On Tue, 05 Apr 2005 20:55:48 GMT, Takoma Park Volunteer Fire
Department Postmaster wrote:

wrote:
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 08:07:46 GMT, "Wes Stebbins"
wrote:


Also, when you join a single stand wire
to a solid you're supposed to first wrap the strand end around the solid
wire, then bend the solid wire over the stranded wire.



This must have been popular with people from Indiana. My house in
Florida (homeowner was a snowbird) had a bunch of boxes made up that
way. No wire nut or anything. He just wrapped the stranded around the
solid, folded it over and crimped it with his pliers. Then taped up.
I think I have tracked them all down and reconnected with a listed
connector but I have to say I never saw any signs of heating, even on
a 1400w bathroom heater.

That technique was only supposed to be used before soldering.

Ummm ... soldering has only been around for like 6,000 years
before the invention of electricity .....

I know, I know - you meant 'a few moments before soldering the
connection' - but my interpretation was funnier :-)

Without
solder they were taking a chance on thermal cycling or corrosion opening
the splice and causing arcing.


Click every day here to feed an animal !!! http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com/

Paul ( pjm @ pobox . com ) - remove spaces to email me
'Some days, it's just not worth chewing through the restraints.'

HVAC/R program for Palm PDA's
Free demo now available online http://pmilligan.net/palm/
Free Temperature / Pressure charts for 38 Ref's http://pmilligan.net/pmtherm/

OK, this is great for a splice. But I want to figure out how to
solder the wires to the screws on circuit breakers. The screws are
recessed and my 1000 watt soldering iron dont fit in there. It works

Don't do that. Don't even think about it.

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 04 Apr 2005 20:11:07 GMT, "Noozer" wrote:


I have to solder them while the power is
on. My soldering iron has a well insulated handle so thats not a
problem, and besides that, it's grounded. My problem is how to hold
the solder without getting a shock. Would cotton or rubber gloves be
ok, or should I hold it with an insulated plyers? The main neutral
wont be any problem, I'll just loosen the screw and let the solder
flow in there before I tighten the screw again.



I honestly thought you were joking!

FWIW, the soldering iron being grounded would propose a problem in the above
situation. If you're going to be working on live wires you don't want
anything touching the live wire to be grounded. More importantly you don't
want to ground yourself at all, or ever touch anything that IS grounded
while you're touching a live conductor (a fun task inside the breaker
panel). You are not harmed at all directly touching live wires as long as
you provide no path for the electricity to flow to ground through you (or
the other leg of the 220 circuit).

I hate to admit it, but I accidentally learned this from experience. I once
was working on a switched light circuit and began working on the wires with
only the light switch turned off. After working on a few fixtures and
miraculously never accidentally grounding myself I brushed the water line
with my elbow while working on the hot... that happened to be hot. Turns
out the circuit was reverse polarized and the neutral was switched. Good
thing 110 isn't so bad through the arm only....

A lesson to always turn off the breaker. G But since then I have been
(unwisely, I admit) more brave about working on live wires. As long as you
don't ever provide an electrical pathway through your body you're ok with
110 volts A/C. You won't feel a thing. It's weird the first few times...
intentionally touching a wire you know is live.

I like the oven mitt idea. You still don't want the soldering iron to be
grounded if you plan on touching it to a live conductor. Don't give yourself
a false sense of security just because you aren't touching a live conductor.
Your tools can short something out... and will if they're grounded.

Soldering inside the breaker panel... never would have thought.

wrote in message
...
On Sun, 03 Apr 2005 13:38:22 -0700, RMUH wrote:

The only 100% safe electrical connection is to ........ snip

I do hope you were kidding. It sure would be safe.... but I hope you were
kidding.