Code Question For Closet Lights

Page 2 of 3  
wrote:

re: "The OP mentioned inadequate light in a closet"
Actually, the OP (me) asked about running Wiremold from a box-extender to a switch in order to replace the pull chain fixture.
Somebody else brought up the code related to the types of bulbs allowed in a storage space, which led to a discussion regarding CFL vs. incandescents, which reminded me that some CFLs take a while to come to full brightness, which made me worry about wearing a blue shirt with green socks.
If my concerns about a CFL taking time to come to full brightness equates to "The OP mentioned inadequate light in a closet" then I guess I did, but that would be a stretch.
The whole yellow vs. blue vs. white light is interesting, none the less.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 16:16:20 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03

My comment referred to your statement in a later post that "Meanwhile, these old eyes make me grab a blue shirt and green socks cuz the light is too dim.". Sorry, did not mean to misrepresent you.
Also sorry if this appears twice. I thought I sent it but can find no evidence that I did.
Edward
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

But not by much. The two $12.60 bulbs from HD turned out to be aesthetically unpleasing because the ballast shifts the center of the illumination (the brightest point of the bulb) about 2 inches above the old (incandescent) one. I failed to think about this at the time so to remedy the problem I bought two 25 watt incandescent with medium base at my local 99 cent store. Cost = $0.99 (duh); at the same store a packet of two 60 watt bulbs also costs 99 cents. Now to be fair I could have bought a packet of four 60 watts for the same 99 cents; I presume there's a quality difference but I don't really know. However even if CFL's followed the same premium my original HD purchase should have only been $8 and change and I suspect if CFL's were to follow most other products the premium should only be a fixed amount to cover the slightly lower sales. IOW the mfgs are gouging the non-loss-leader customer.

Yikes! Millions of people use candelabras. Just look around the average lighting store including HD and Lowes.

But he's not and nor are you. I believe he works in the CFL industry and his attitude, like yours, is "except for these special tasks like refrigerators and stove lights... etc" not accepting that there are far more applications that are not CFL-appropriate (e.g. my candelabra, my crystal chandeliers, my instant-on closet lights, my much more appropriate color rendition incandescents for make-up, etc)

If they're at eye level of course you do.

Nah, they're not appropriate for any fixture built for incandescent lighting unless they're completely hidden and function the same as an incandescent (time to full light, color temp, etc).

I have no dimmers. As I said before I match the lights to the requirements for illumination. My kitchen, for example, has one four bar fluorescent for general illumination; one two bar over the sink used while washing up, one two bar over the laundry area used... well, guess, one single bar in the range hood. and one square two U bar over the kitchen/dining table (each bar is 32W). I also have a mess of halogens under the top cabinets. No CFL's in the kitchen. When they're all on you can do open-heart surgery <g>. My point is that by turning on or off individual lights in the room you can produce an appropriate level of lighting: you don't need dimmers.
Since the OP is bitching about us not addressing his issue I'll give my two cents on that: you can easily get a $10 box-mount fixture with an opalescent shade which will satisfy the one-in-a-zillion-years risk of explosion of the bulb be it incandescent or CFL. Mount it above the door and supply it with wiremold or other conduit or bury NM or AC in the wall. Don't forget to use 90 degree rise cable for the last two feet to cover that other one-in-a-zillion risk of fire. All these depend on how strong the unions are in your locality. As to bulb, most closets function fine on 40 watt incandescent within that $10 fixture. The fact that it's incandescent automatically gives it a CRI of 1.00 (or 100, I forget which). You don't need to worry about degrees Kelvin or other rubbish we pay others to look after for us.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sep 25, 10:30 pm, snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.gov wrote:

==
==
Turning on or off individual lights in the *bath* room isn't as easy as in most other rooms, at least not in my case.
As I mentioned to aem above, I have always had dimmers in all of my bathrooms. I've never had a bathroom big enough for "task lighting" with multiple switches. It's either a couple of sconces next the mirror in the main bath or couple of cans in the secondary one.
Dimmers allows us to have lots a light when we need it and just a little for midnight bathroom breaks and romantic showers.
==

==
Kindly point out where I bitched about anything. My question about using Wiremold was answered to my complete satisfaction in a post by Wayne Whitney very early in this thread.
==

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Bitching may be too strong a term... I took it as complaining:
From DerbyDad03 in an earlier post:

and some more...
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sep 26, 10:55 pm, snipped-for-privacy@nowhere.gov wrote:

re: "I took it as complaining"
That wasn't a complaint at all..it was just a time line.
When it was posted that the "OP mentioned inadequate light in a closet", I simply pointed out that the OP (me) had actually asked about Wiremold and that the thread had morphed into a discussion on CFL's, etc. etc.
Not a complaint, just a clarification about what the OP (me) had originally asked about - which had already been answered, so I had nothing to complain about.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:56:34 -0400, Edward Reid wrote:
[snip]

I used to think the yellowish light from standard bulbs was OK. That was before I saw fluorescent lights that were actually white. The same thing applies to the smaller lights that use LEDs. When I need to replace the low voltage outdoor lights, I'll look for LED.
[snip]
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 10:45:47 -0700, DerbyDad03 wrote:
[snip]

Most CFLs I've used reach full brightness in less than a second. The only exception being enclosed floodlights. I'm not using any in really cold places.

Incomplete statement. I suppose you don't like blue and green.
--
91 days until The winter celebration (Saturday December 25, 2010
12:00:00 AM).
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

==
==
Well, the ones I have in the fixtures for my landing lights - 3 of them - take much longer than 1 second. I'll try one in the closet and see if I like them.

==
= Incomplete? Did you mean grammatically or fashionably?

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 16:20:26 -0700, DerbyDad03 wrote:
[snip]

Sorry if I missed something, but the statement seemed to be saying there was something wrong with blue and green, but never said anything to justify that. Maybe it was a personal preference, which does not apply to everyone.
[snip]
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Thanks for the info on the fixture itself.
Let's assume the specs for the fixture and clearances can be met.
What about the use of Wiremold so the chain can be replaced with a switch?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

There's nothing wrong with using Wiremold, it is a listed surface raceway governed by NEC Articles 386 (metallic) and 388 (nonmetallic). I don't see anything in those NEC articles that would restrict its use in a clothes closet.
Just use all the proper fittings, boxes, etc. and follow the manufacturer's directions for raceway size (based on the conductors inside) and supporting requirements. Also check the box fill on the ceiling box with box extender.
Cheers, Wayne
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/23/2010 12:22 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

did you ask your local code guys? Why are you involving them?
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Who said I was I was involving them?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

re: Who said I was I was involving them?
I gotta work on that stutter! ;-)
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/23/2010 7:56 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

if you're not, then it doesn't matter about the code issues.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Oh, I see. If no one is watching then we don't have to follow the rules?
Let try this logic...
As bizarre as the code might be in some cases, I kind of believe that by following it we're somewhat safer than if we just nail some wires to the ceiling and duct tape a switch to the wall. After all, who's ever going to look in the closet, right?
If the NEC has something to say about extender boxes, Wiremold and surface mount switches in a closet, that might be good to know, if only for safety reasons.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 9/23/2010 10:50 PM, DerbyDad03 wrote:

Sometimes you have to rely on common sense. I personally don't need a code book to tell me if something is safe or not. I do read the NEC from time to time just out of curiosity, but I've not seen a whole lot in it that i wouldn't have done that way anyway. And there are parts of it that are down right ridiculous.
--
Steve Barker
remove the "not" from my address to email
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Value (of personal liberty gained by allowing everyone to pick and choose which NEC requirements make sense and which can be ignored) < Cost (in decreased safety of resulting electrical installations).
Yours, Wayne
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

re: "Sometimes you have to rely on common sense." re: "And there are parts of it that are down right ridiculous."
Are the parts that you find "down right ridiculous" ever in conflict with what you would consider "common sense"?
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.