What would be the next step in testing an innoperable electrical
outlet?
All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still nothing.
what should be done next

There are several logical steps available for someone with limited
troubleshooting skills.
1) Replace all the wiring
2) Learn how to troubleshoot
3) Find someone who knows how to troubleshoot

wrote in message
oups.com...
What would be the next step in testing an innoperable electrical
outlet?
All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still nothing.
what should be done next

If all of the outlets on the entire circuit are dead, you need to find the
break in the cable between the panel and the first outlet or run a new cable



wrote in message
oups.com...
What would be the next step in testing an innoperable electrical
outlet?
All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still nothing.
what should be done next

How are you determining the outlets are "dead?"

How did you know which breaker to change?

Has there been any rewiring lately?

Did the outlets EVER work?

Do you have a multimeter or an ohmmeter?

I think a little more info would bein order here. IFF you've
replaced the right breaker, and done so properly, then the
problem is going to be an open wire someplace between the breaker
and the first "dead" outlet in the line.

HTH,

Pop



wrote in message
oups.com...
: What would be the next step in testing an innoperable
electrical
: outlet?
: All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
: I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still
nothing.
: what should be done next
:

wrote in message
oups.com...
What would be the next step in testing an innoperable electrical
outlet?
All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still nothing.
what should be done next

Is there a voltage drop across the breaker?...If so, it is open....good
luck, Mac

I had some lights plugged into them which worked at one point, but now
do not work
they work when plugged into an outlet in another room.
there is a breaker designated for the room that the outlets are in
no rewiring has been done recently
i have a multimeter, A voltage test reveals .4 volts across the outlet
plugs

Pop wrote:
How are you determining the outlets are "dead?"

How did you know which breaker to change?

Has there been any rewiring lately?

Did the outlets EVER work?

Do you have a multimeter or an ohmmeter?

I think a little more info would bein order here. IFF you've
replaced the right breaker, and done so properly, then the
problem is going to be an open wire someplace between the breaker
and the first "dead" outlet in the line.

HTH,

Pop



wrote in message
oups.com...
: What would be the next step in testing an innoperable
electrical
: outlet?
: All the outlets connected to one circuit breaker do not work.
: I've replaced the circuit breaker and outlets, but still
nothing.
: what should be done next
:

The first step is to ensure you are actually working on the correct
wiring.

Labels in the breaker box are not reliable (just my opinion) .

You may pick up stray current on your meter.

First check that the breaker is working. Multimeter from breaker
connection to neutral.

I would ensure the breaker is off and do a continuity test for the
wiring to the first box.

You can do this single handed by joining the wires at the box with a
nut and testing at the breaker box.

A non-contact voltage sensor is a worthwhile investment. About $10 and
will alert you to hot wiring without actually touching the bare wires.

If you are not comfortable with doing this stuff call an electrician.

Set your multimeter to read AC volts. Remove all the cover plates from
the non-working outlets and test each terminal to the other within the
receptacle, and each to ground (the metal box and the ground screw).
If you don't find any that read 120V then your problem is a break in
the wire or the breaker.

If you have a main breaker you can throw that, yank the suspect
breaker, and test it for continuity in open and closed positions. If
you don't feel confident doing this and/or don't know what you're doing
then call a professional; he'll solve it in a few minutes.

Mike

On 27 Dec 2005 17:24:44 -0800, wrote:

The first step is to ensure you are actually working on the correct
wiring.

Labels in the breaker box are not reliable (just my opinion) .

You may pick up stray current on your meter.

First check that the breaker is working. Multimeter from breaker
connection to neutral.

I would ensure the breaker is off and do a continuity test for the
wiring to the first box.

You can do this single handed by joining the wires at the box with a
nut and testing at the breaker box.

Before joing the wires together, measure the voltage between them.
After all, you just said t hat he might not be working with the right
breaker.

A non-contact voltage sensor is a worthwhile investment. About $10 and
will alert you to hot wiring without actually touching the bare wires.

If you are not comfortable with doing this stuff call an electrician.


Remove NOPSAM to email me. Please let
me know if you have posted also.

Lots of good advice already given. Another thing to consider is that there
may be another outlet, receptacle or light, wired between the ones you have
checked and the breaker box. It could be located in another nearby room.
Replacing breakers or outlets without first locating the fault is not a good
idea. Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.
Don Young
wrote in message
oups.com...
Set your multimeter to read AC volts. Remove all the cover plates from
the non-working outlets and test each terminal to the other within the
receptacle, and each to ground (the metal box and the ground screw).
If you don't find any that read 120V then your problem is a break in
the wire or the breaker.

If you have a main breaker you can throw that, yank the suspect
breaker, and test it for continuity in open and closed positions. If
you don't feel confident doing this and/or don't know what you're doing
then call a professional; he'll solve it in a few minutes.

Mike

Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

Mike

In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith

wrote:

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts,
not current, so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters can give misleading readings due to
their high input impedance. Capacitive coupling from
adjacent wires can cause so-called "ghost voltages" to
appear in wires that are not connected to a power source. A
low-impedance voltage tester, such as a test light or a
Wiggy, will draw enough current to eliminate these "ghost
voltages."


--
-- Steve

Keith Williams wrote:
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith
I love my non contact tester, I think it's a GC. I have noticed one
thing and that is you can get a false positive if you're holding the
tester and near or standing on an extension cord. I guess it
capacitively couples to the voltage source. Still better than a false
negative :).
Richard

Keith Williams wrote:
In article .com,
says...

Don Young wrote:

Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.


Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.


A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

Hi,
That's why I still have an old Simpson 260 analog multi meter.
Also have Fluke DVM, Tek 'scope, etc.
Tony

In article .com,
says...

Keith Williams wrote:
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith
I love my non contact tester, I think it's a GC. I have noticed one
thing and that is you can get a false positive if you're holding the
tester and near or standing on an extension cord. I guess it
capacitively couples to the voltage source. Still better than a false
negative :).

Indeed. I'm pretty careful even with the NC tester. A false-
negative could ruin one's day.

--
Keith

In article EtBsf.92824$2k.40435@pd7tw1no,
says...
Keith Williams wrote:
In article .com,
says...

Don Young wrote:

Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.


Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.


A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

Hi,
That's why I still have an old Simpson 260 analog multi meter.

I never really liked the '260s, certainly not enough to buy one.
The light bulb may be more accurate. ;-)

Also have Fluke DVM, Tek 'scope, etc.

A scope for an AC line? ;-) I have a couple of Fluke (77?)
multimeters left (some have sprouted legs) and a bunch of Harbor
Freight $2.99 specials. The latter gets loaned out these days. ;-)

--
Keith

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith

Hi Keith,

Good advice as usual....I am assuming you are the same Keith that posts over
at alt.engineering.electrical.
Hope you had a great Christmas season and all is well out here in Central
Florida....Mac

"Steve" wrote in message
...
wrote:

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts,
not current, so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters can give misleading readings due to
their high input impedance. Capacitive coupling from
adjacent wires can cause so-called "ghost voltages" to
appear in wires that are not connected to a power source. A
low-impedance voltage tester, such as a test light or a
Wiggy, will draw enough current to eliminate these "ghost
voltages."


--
-- Steve
Buy good multimeters (Fluke works) and many nightmares disappear. I have
many from my previous life/occupation and they have served me well. The
cheap ones will ultimately lead you astray and are not worth the "powder to
blow them up"....Happy New Year to All....Mac

In article ,
lid says...

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith

Hi Keith,

Good advice as usual....I am assuming you are the same Keith that posts over
at alt.engineering.electrical.

Yep, the same. I've noticed you back around the Usenet for a
while. ;-)

Hope you had a great Christmas season and all is well out here in Central
Florida....Mac

Great holiday here! We've been visiting my mother (92YO) In
Central Illinois for the last week and are on our way back tomorrow
and Friday. Long drive (1100mi.). ugh


--
Keith

Ross Mac wrote:


Buy good multimeters (Fluke works) and many nightmares
disappear.

This is generally good advice but won't solve the problem of
"ghost voltage" measurements. High input impedance is, for
most purposes, a desirable characteristic in a meter to
keep from loading the circuit under test. However, low
impedance is needed to determine whether a power circuit is
really energized or just capacitively coupled to an
adjoining wire. This is one job where a relatively
inexpensive electrical tester can outperform an expensive
meter. (I am not talking about the $2.99 Harbor Freight
meter here, but testers such as Klein's Wiggy, Ideal's
Vol-Con, or Fluke's 7-600.)


--
-- Steve

"Steve" wrote in message
...
Ross Mac wrote:


Buy good multimeters (Fluke works) and many nightmares
disappear.

This is generally good advice but won't solve the problem of
"ghost voltage" measurements. High input impedance is, for
most purposes, a desirable characteristic in a meter to
keep from loading the circuit under test. However, low
impedance is needed to determine whether a power circuit is
really energized or just capacitively coupled to an
adjoining wire.

True!

This is one job where a relatively
inexpensive electrical tester can outperform an expensive
meter.

Also true!

(I am not talking about the $2.99 Harbor Freight
meter here,

True, and that's a relief! So many posts about that meter/door stop. I
usually pay more than $2.99 for a good set of test leads.

but testers such as Klein's Wiggy, Ideal's
Vol-Con, or Fluke's 7-600.)

Good suggestion.....Mac



--
-- Steve

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article ,
lid says...

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not
current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith

Hi Keith,

Good advice as usual....I am assuming you are the same Keith that posts
over
at alt.engineering.electrical.

Yep, the same. I've noticed you back around the Usenet for a
while. ;-)

Hope you had a great Christmas season and all is well out here in Central
Florida....Mac

Great holiday here! We've been visiting my mother (92YO) In
Central Illinois for the last week and are on our way back tomorrow
and Friday. Long drive (1100mi.). ugh


--
Keith
Hi Keith,

I'll have to shoot you an email....been busy with the biz I purchased back
in March and finally have more time for Usenet....Yup...retirement is over
and I don't miss it.....Ross
And for the other readers....that was early retirement and does not equal
old.... :)....Ross....well, not that old!

In article ,
lid says...

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article ,
lid says...

"Keith Williams" wrote in message
T...
In article .com,
says...
Don Young wrote:
Troubleshooting with a digital voltmeter is also not a good idea; a
test lamp is much better.

Why isn't a multimeter a good idea? He's measuring volts, not
current,
so it won't blow the meter.

Digital multimeters have a very high input impedance and can read
high values on open circuits because of the capacitive coupling
between wires. A test lamp is a low impedance device so any
capacitive coupling becomes insignificant. If you really need to
know what the voltage is, use both (load the circuit and read with
the meter).

A test lamp is a good idea. He could also pick up one of those outlet
testers for a few dollars.

A "three-light tester" should be in everyone's toolbox. Another
tool I've found to be quite valuable is a non-contact voltage
probe.

--
Keith

Hi Keith,

Good advice as usual....I am assuming you are the same Keith that posts
over
at alt.engineering.electrical.

Yep, the same. I've noticed you back around the Usenet for a
while. ;-)

Hope you had a great Christmas season and all is well out here in Central
Florida....Mac

Great holiday here! We've been visiting my mother (92YO) In
Central Illinois for the last week and are on our way back tomorrow
and Friday. Long drive (1100mi.). ugh


--
Keith
Hi Keith,

I'll have to shoot you an email....been busy with the biz I purchased back
in March and finally have more time for Usenet....Yup...retirement is over
and I don't miss it.....Ross

Damn! Don't tell me that! I wanna get out as soon as possible
('06?). Do drop a line when you get a chance.

And for the other readers....that was early retirement and does not equal
old.... :)....Ross....well, not that old!

Uh, me too! ;-)

Have a merry new year!


--
Keith