Since the switch was added later the wiring was probably fished. He could use the 2 conductor to pull the 3 conductor, install a switch/outlet combo, and wire it either way....
Since the switch was added later the wiring was probably fished. He could use the 2 conductor to pull the 3 conductor, install a switch/outlet combo, and wire it either way....
How does that address my comment about two many wires in the box? Regardless of the method used to originally wire the switch, I don't think the switch box is big enough for all the wires.
The fact that the OP has said "run it to the outlet" my guess is that he does not want the receptacle in the same box as the switch.
You say in another message that the light was once wired hot all the time. If that is true, instead of going into the switch just run a two wire to the light. (BK,WT,G) You may have to use a hole saw to make another hole in the top of the light, but you will have much more room to make splices.
Exactly. If it's desired or at least acceptable that the switch control both the light and the outlet, then the outlet can be connected in parallel with the light, without running any additional wiring. The light should have a switched hot and a neutral.
Still not clear what he has and exactly what he's trying to do.
On 01/26/2014 10:51 AM, snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote: X
XI already told that to the OP but from his reply it's obvious he does not know what "in parallel" means and therefore should not be working on this.
It may not be, but he won't need the two conductor cable any miore if the swithc/outlet combo is used.
I don't try to guess what somebody wants....at one time, somebody wanted a light without a switch....
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 18:52:17 -0600, James wrote (in article ):
Um this was a switch loop and I failed to recognize it for what it was :( Anyhow I replaced the 2-conductor wiring from the light to the switch with
3-conductor so I would have a neutral in the switch box from the power source. From there of course it was easy to get a working outlet. Sheesh. Thanks to all who pointed out what I had would not work.On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 09:10:44 -0600, Rick wrote (in article ):
That's exactly what I did.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 23:17:13 -0600, Harry K wrote (in article ):
Thank you for the advice. I figured it out. I didn't realize I was looking at a switch loop so I needed a 3 conductor wire to replace the 2 conductor.
On Sat, 25 Jan 2014 23:48:21 -0600, DerbyDad03 wrote (in article ):
Your assumption was correct. No neutral in the switch box. Fixed that with
3 conductor.On Sun, 26 Jan 2014 03:30:47 -0600, Harry K wrote (in article ):
Wasn't remarked as it should have been hence the temporary confusion on my part.
So now you have a switch box stuffed with too many wires, right?
How so? He _replaced_ the 2wire with 3-wire A normal full-depth single gan g box is more than roomy enough for a switch/receptacle and 3 wires plus gr ound. Even had he puit the outlet in a separate box a single gang box with switch only still has enough room for 6 conductors plus ground.
Harry K
Unless I'm mistaken he now has:
3 wires from the light, 2 wires to the receptacle, all grounds count as 1, the switch counts as 2.3+2+1+2 = 8
_If_ the box is at least 3 x 2 x 3.5, and the wire is 14 g, then he is OK. It depends on the box installed by the electrician when the switch was added and the size of the used by the OP.
3 wires to the receptacle if remote.
He only has 6 conductors, 7 counting ground, if the receptacle is remote. You are counting pigtails which are not included in conductor count.
If he installed a combination receptacle/switch he only has 3 conductors and a ground.
Harry K
Let's assume for the time being that the receptacle is remote
You saw how I got my number via the breakdown of wires, switches, etc.
I'll now ask you to break your number of "6" and "7".
I had that all wrong, only two (plus ground) to the remote receptacle.
I had that wrong again, only 5 conductors for a remote box.
I had it wrong - somehow I was counting a 3 wire to the receptacle box, it is only 2 conductors and ground. for a total of 6
You are counting wires twice going to the switch.
3 coming in of which 2 go to the switch for a total of 3. 2 going out for a total of 5 + 1 to account for the grounds. Messy part is two wire nuts for the whites and ground (3 if he has to pigtail the blacks.Depending on how the switch is made he could stack the outgoing black to the hot side of the switch doing away with the need for one pigtail. An extra 2 conductors do not magically appear
According to your figures one could never wire a single gang box with a switch and power beyond with 12 guage. It is done every day.
Harry K
No, I am not. I am counting the _switch_ itself. Why aren't you? It's in the box, you can't ignore it.
See here, as well as many other sources. The switch itself counts as 2 conductors.
His 2 lengths of Romex (3+2) equals 5 conductors plus a single ground. That's 6. The switch itself counts as 2 conductors. 6 plus 2 equals 8.
Based on the chart above, if he is using 14 g wire the box must be 3.5 inches deep.
I'll humbly eat my hat (with hot sauce) if I'm wrong, but that's my understanding of what he has and how it works.
Looks like you are correct. I have at least two such boxes wired with 12 gauge and they were wired by a licensed electrician. Have seen such elsewhere as well.
Harry K
OK, now that we are in agreement, I have a question. I don't mean this as any type of gloat, but I just can't figure out where some of your comments came from.
In one response you said "You are counting pigtails." Since I detailed the exact elements I was counting, I'm wondering how you got the impression that I was counting pigtails.
In another response you said, "You are counting wires twice going to the switch." Once again, since I detailed the exact elements I was counting, I don't see where I ever did that.
I'm just trying to understand where the confusion came from. Perhaps I could have worded my explanation differently? Any thoughts?
HomeOwnersHub website 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.