I recently replaced the outlets in my livingroom. Prior to the replacement,
one plug in each outlet in the room was controlled by a light switch. Now--
none of the outlets/plugs is controlled by the switch. I removed one of the
outlets to see if the small metal bridge between the to plugs in the switch
had been snapped out (removed) as it should have been--- it was. Would I be
correct in presuming that in one of the remaining six outlets the bridge has
not been removed causing all outlets to function with the switch in the on
or off position? As it is (no switch control, all outlets hot), is it a
hazard?

Hi,
If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.
Tony

Pelorus wrote:

I recently replaced the outlets in my livingroom. Prior to the replacement,
one plug in each outlet in the room was controlled by a light switch. Now--
none of the outlets/plugs is controlled by the switch. I removed one of the
outlets to see if the small metal bridge between the to plugs in the switch
had been snapped out (removed) as it should have been--- it was. Would I be
correct in presuming that in one of the remaining six outlets the bridge has
not been removed causing all outlets to function with the switch in the on
or off position? As it is (no switch control, all outlets hot), is it a
hazard?

On 18 Jan 2004, Pelorus wrote:

I recently replaced the outlets in my livingroom. Prior to the
replacement, one plug in each outlet in the room was controlled
by a light switch. Now-- none of the outlets/plugs is
controlled by the switch. I removed one of the outlets to see
if the small metal bridge between the to plugs in the switch had
been snapped out (removed) as it should have been--- it was.
Would I be correct in presuming that in one of the remaining six
outlets the bridge has not been removed causing all outlets to
function with the switch in the on or off position? As it is
(no switch control, all outlets hot), is it a hazard?

Yes, you are correct. All of the bridges must be removed. If
even one remains, it effectively feeds power to the other plug
in that duplex, and since that is connected to all of the others
that would normally be switched, then they all get fed too.

If both the switched power and the constant power are coming from
the same side of the neutral, then there is no problem, it's a
parallel supply from the same source. If the two were being fed
by opposite phases, you would have a dead short across the 240V
at the metal bridge. You would know that by now g.

--
Baisez-les s'ils ne peuvent pas prendre une plaisanterie
--------------------------------------------------------
Tom Pendergast e-mail is for sissies, say it on line

If both the switched power and the constant power are coming from
the same side of the neutral, then there is no problem, it's a
parallel supply from the same source. If the two were being fed
by opposite phases, you would have a dead short across the 240V
at the metal bridge. You would know that by now g.

Then why bring it up? Although it is certainly possible to do otherwise for
special purposes, most switched/unswitched outlets are on the same circuit.

In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang wrote:
Hi,
If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.
Tony

Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.

Pelorus wrote:

I recently replaced the outlets in my livingroom. Prior to the replacement,
one plug in each outlet in the room was controlled by a light switch. Now--
none of the outlets/plugs is controlled by the switch. I removed one of the
outlets to see if the small metal bridge between the to plugs in the switch
had been snapped out (removed) as it should have been--- it was. Would I be
correct in presuming that in one of the remaining six outlets the bridge has
not been removed causing all outlets to function with the switch in the on
or off position? As it is (no switch control, all outlets hot), is it a
hazard?




--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

On 18 Jan 2004, Toller wrote:

If both the switched power and the constant power are coming
from the same side of the neutral, then there is no problem,
it's a parallel supply from the same source. If the two
were being fed by opposite phases, you would have a dead
short across the 240V at the metal bridge. You would know
that by now g.

Then why bring it up?

Uhhh, just trying to teach somebody something? Sorry that offends
you for some reason.

Although it is certainly possible to do otherwise for special
purposes, most switched/unswitched outlets are on the same circuit.

No argument there. Lots of people reading this group are trying
to educate themselves. Maybe somewhere down the road somebody
will remember that answee as a reason *not* to do it that way.

--
Baisez-les s'ils ne peuvent pas prendre une plaisanterie
--------------------------------------------------------
Tom Pendergast e-mail is for sissies, say it on line

Doug Miller wrote:

In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang wrote:

Hi,
If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.
Tony


Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.

Hi,
At least not in my house. I don't want to lose both at the same time.
My doing.
Tony

Pelorus wrote:


I recently replaced the outlets in my livingroom. Prior to the replacement,
one plug in each outlet in the room was controlled by a light switch. Now--
none of the outlets/plugs is controlled by the switch. I removed one of the
outlets to see if the small metal bridge between the to plugs in the switch
had been snapped out (removed) as it should have been--- it was. Would I be
correct in presuming that in one of the remaining six outlets the bridge has
not been removed causing all outlets to function with the switch in the on
or off position? As it is (no switch control, all outlets hot), is it a
hazard?




--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

In article 2SFOb.167249$ts4.5106@pd7tw3no, Tony Hwang wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:

In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang
wrote:

Hi,
If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.
Tony


Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.

Hi,
At least not in my house. I don't want to lose both at the same time.
My doing.
Tony

Just because that's how you did it, doesn't mean that's the only way it can be
done.


--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

Doug Miller wrote:

In article 2SFOb.167249$ts4.5106@pd7tw3no, Tony Hwang wrote:


Doug Miller wrote:


In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang

wrote:

Hi,
If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.
Tony


Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.

Hi,
At least not in my house. I don't want to lose both at the same time.
My doing.
Tony


Just because that's how you did it, doesn't mean that's the only way it can be
done.

Hi,
Why put all the eggs in one basket? That was my ligic.
Tony

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

According to Tony Hwang :

Doug Miller wrote:

In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang wrote:

If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.

Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.

At least not in my house. I don't want to lose both at the same time.
My doing.

Are they on tied breakers?

If not, it's a code violation.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

According to Tony Hwang :

Why put all the eggs in one basket? That was my ligic.

So if an electrician comes in, pulls the breaker, they get zapped
by the other leg?

Bad idea.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

I don't believe that it is a code violation. I don't like to see
multiple breakers feeding one box but the last time I looked it was
within what the NEC permitted for 120 volts.

RB

Chris Lewis wrote:
According to Tony Hwang :


Doug Miller wrote:



In article akDOb.164501$X%5.104400@pd7tw2no, Tony Hwang wrote:


If the receptacle is split, they're fed by different circuit.


Complete and utter nonsense. They could just as easily be fed by a different
leg of the same circuit.



At least not in my house. I don't want to lose both at the same time.
My doing.


Are they on tied breakers?

If not, it's a code violation.

Chris Lewis wrote:

According to Tony Hwang :


Why put all the eggs in one basket? That was my ligic.


So if an electrician comes in, pulls the breaker, they get zapped
by the other leg?

Bad idea.

Hi,
What electrician is dumb enough to be zapped? Turning breaker off is not
a guarantee in a real life. Ever heard of double checking with tester B4
touching it? Why is it a code violation? I am not an electrician.
I am an EE. I did all my wiring with home owners DIY permit when house
was built. Inspector asked me if I was a licenced electrician. Passed
everything with flying colors. That was in 1994.
I am retired now.
Tony

In article s%%Ob.174716$JQ1.86704@pd7tw1no, Tony Hwang wrote:


Chris Lewis wrote:

According to Tony Hwang :


Why put all the eggs in one basket? That was my ligic.


So if an electrician comes in, pulls the breaker, they get zapped
by the other leg?

Bad idea.

Hi,
What electrician is dumb enough to be zapped? Turning breaker off is not
a guarantee in a real life. Ever heard of double checking with tester B4
touching it? Why is it a code violation? I am not an electrician.

It's a code violation because the Code prohibits it. I think everyone here
knows you are not an electrician.

--
Doug Miller (alphageek at milmac dot com)

How come we choose from just two people to run for president and 50 for Miss America?

According to RB :
I don't believe that it is a code violation. I don't like to see
multiple breakers feeding one box but the last time I looked it was
within what the NEC permitted for 120 volts.

Look a little more carefully w.r.t. "same strap".

The CEC is pretty anal about insisting on single disconnects for all
power feeding a box. Failing that, you need metal partitions between
sections and/or seals, labeling, and "unlikely to be accessible to
non-licensed personnel" - the latter won't generally fly in residential
installations.

Ie: residential main panels in Canada have metal partitions between the
main feed connection/main breakers and the branch breaker section. Most
panels have two covers so you can open the branch breaker section and swap
breakers without exposing the main feed.

While the US NEC is somewhat looser in this regard than the CEC,
they do insist on single common disconnect for all circuits feeding
the "same strap". I've never been 100% sure what "same strap" means
in this context, but it should cover this because the two circuits
are on the same _device_ (split outlet), especially if they shared
neutrals (only cut the hot jumper, not both. If you did that, I _hope_
that the two hots are on opposite panel legs, otherwise, you could
melt the neutral without tripping a breaker).

I'm sure that a US inspector would fault it even if it wasn't quite
a code violation if you didn't have a very good reason for it. Because
the next person opening it may not be as careful as you.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

From: (Chris Lewis)


According to RB :
I don't believe that it is a code violation. I don't like to see
multiple breakers feeding one box but the last time I looked it was
within what the NEC permitted for 120 volts.

Look a little more carefully w.r.t. "same strap".

The CEC is pretty anal about insisting on single disconnects for all
power feeding a box. Failing that, you need metal partitions between
sections and/or seals, labeling, and "unlikely to be accessible to
non-licensed personnel" - the latter won't generally fly in residential
installations.

Ie: residential main panels in Canada have metal partitions between the
main feed connection/main breakers and the branch breaker section. Most
panels have two covers so you can open the branch breaker section and swap
breakers without exposing the main feed.

While the US NEC is somewhat looser in this regard than the CEC,
they do insist on single common disconnect for all circuits feeding
the "same strap". I've never been 100% sure what "same strap" means
in this context, but it should cover this because the two circuits
are on the same _device_ (split outlet), especially if they shared
neutrals (only cut the hot jumper, not both. If you did that, I _hope_
that the two hots are on opposite panel legs, otherwise, you could
melt the neutral without tripping a breaker).

I'm sure that a US inspector would fault it even if it wasn't quite
a code violation if you didn't have a very good reason for it. Because
the next person opening it may not be as careful as you.
--
Chris Lewis, Una confibula non set est
It's not just anyone who gets a Starship Cruiser class named after them.

Uh, that's "Same Yoke."

A Yoke refers to the (usually) metal strap that serves as the actual bracket a
moulded plastic or phenolic device is mounted to.

A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away, devices were interchangable on
yokes. You could build your own custom devices consisting of any 3 combinations
of: 2-prong outlets, single pole and 3-way switches, pilot lights, push buttons
and even pull-chain switches.

During this combination device heyday (Late 40's to late 60's) residential
tract housing was booming and developers PAID per device YOKES, not per device.
(Or per single-gang box) and in many tract homes there might be only 2 or 3
locations with 2 or 3 switches, like the front door might have the outside
light, kitchen light, and livingroom light or outlet switch all on one yoke.

This also made 3-wire cable a necessity to keep the number of conductors in a
1-gang box with 3 switches on the yoke to a minimum.