Wiring for multiple control [4 switches control one set of lights] light switch !!!

[Metspitzer]

I never used any of these, but they make them in green, white and black.

[trader4]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 1:35:46 PM UTC-4, Robert Macy wrote:

Kenzie wrote in news:fmmck-CB580A.22112020062013@ > > 5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com:

t switches can be made > > >> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell wh ich light switch > > >> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of s witches in arbitray > > >> positions and all your lights are out but one... > > > > > > Robert- > > > > > > I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion. > > > > You're missing what Robert's *really* confused about... see below. > > > > > > Do you want any one switch to be able to t urn off the light if a > > > different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with > > > the end switches in a SPDT configuration. A ny intermediate switches > > > would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal > > > switches intended for this function.) As mentione d, you could swap two > > > wires at any one of the switches to give you "A ll Down Equals OFF". > > > > > > But that would be of little value if you w ant to know which one switch > > > was responsible for leaving the light on . > > > > Knowing which switch is responsible for leaving the light on is o f no value to begin with. If the > > light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch > > turned it on? It. Does. N ot. Matter. > > > > >For that, you would simply > > > connect all SPST swit ches in parallel. All switches in the up position > > > would need to be tu rned off for the light to go off. Then you would not > > > have "N-Way" swi tches where one of N switches could turn off a light > > > another switch t urned on. > > > > ... thus completely defeating the purpose of having multi ple switches. Heh, I'm with you on this one Doug. I don't see the point to the whole exercise. But there are others here like Dennis, that think we sh ouldn't be asking the question about "why" he wants it, what purpose it ser ves, just tell him how to do it. He started off with: "Plus, (original inst aller) paid no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to cha nge. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the box is n o problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but still reaches. Big pr oblem is the best way to change the switching action of the multiple contro l switch. " Which implies that there is an expectation of what the "proper position is for 3-way, 4-way, 5-way switches should be to each other? No el ectrician even considers this, because the light can be on with some switch es up, some down and no one that I know cares. You just look at the light. If Robert rewires it so that the light is off with all 4 down, then if you' re standing at one switch and the light is off, all you know is that the on e corresponding switch is also down. You still don't know what position the other two switches are in. So, AFAIK, you would have to go check one of th ose as well. Or you could just look at the light. In every case I've seen, it's easier to look at the light for a hallway, then check at least two swi tches.... If this really is an OCD thing, like Dennis says, that's fine, an d he can get all 4 down with the light off. It's just that if it really sol ves something that we're missing, it would be nice to know what that is. Li ke you, if someone wants to set about fiddling with something that is work and seems to serve no purpose, I try to understand the real objective, so t hat we're not just providing steps in some process that doesn't solve anyth ing.

s to be at least once in their lives setting ALL in the proper position.

It's difficult because I don't see what that accomplishes. I think a lot of folks here don't understand it either. The one or two that do, just accept it as some kind of OCD thing.

You evidently don't have a house with a lot of lighting controls and multi ple switch plates.

I have a house that has several switch plates that have

3 or 4 switches where some of the switches are 3 way. I have one that is 4 way. And don't have a problem. The switches that are 3 or 4 way control lights that are visible from where the switches are. So, the position of the switch is irrelevant to me.

I have agreed in previous posts that *if* this were a single light switch plate at four different locations to control an overhead light; no biggie. I don't care WHAT position they're in, because THAT light switch obviously controls THAT light, done. But when you have racks and racks of multi-cont roller switches running ?? around your bedroom; it would be nice to have th e switches at least be 'settable' to a mnemonic configuration, where OFF is down, then when turn one on it's obvious which light switch to turn off to get back to ALL lights off.

That would be nice, but as has been explained several times, it doesn't work that way. You have 4 switches on a

5-way circuit that control one light. You've rewired or turned switches upside down so that the light is off when all 4 switches are down. Let's call the switches A, B, C, D. A is the one near you. You look at it and see that it's down. That means there is a 50% chance the light is off, because you don't know the position of the other 3 switches. If you check switch B and it's also down, then there is still a 50% chance the light is off, because you don't know the position of C and D. If you check switch C and it too is down, then you know the light is off.

That's how I see it working. If I missed something, let me know what it is.

Else, you're stuck out there in the 30 by 50 ft room trying to remember ex actly which one in the rack of 5 is the one to shut off!

Yeah, that's a valid problem, if you can't remember which switch does what and they are not marked. Let's say the third switch is the one for the light you want to turn off. How does what you did, rearranging the other switches on the 5-way circuit solve that? Let's call that switch A. Unless you can not only see switch A in front of you, but also 2 of the other switches on that same circuit, you still don't know if the light is on or off. So whether the third switch, ie switch A is up or down doesn't determine whether the light is on or off. You need to know the position of two more switches.

Results, you wake up and have to 'think' about the light switches. Don't want that, don't want to have to completely wake up, rather scan the switch es and think, oh that's the one and OFF it goes - done and can go back to s leep.

But it doesn't work that way. You've fixed it so that when all four switches are down, light is out, right?

Case 1 Light out A - down B - down C - down D - down

Now Case 2 light on

A up B down C down D down

You see A is up light is on. Just like you want, so you can move it down to turn off the light.

Now Case 3

A down B up C down D down

Now what? The light is on and A is down. How do you know A is the switch there among the others on the switchplate to turn off?

a guest in the house! Or, I could say, "Yeah, feel free to play with the sw itches until you get the right one." A guest unfamiliar with the switch set up only has to look at the rack and notice which one is up to turn off a li ght.

Per the above, it doesn't work that way. I would think you would have realized that by now. Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't think so. Which is why some of us were questioning what was the ultimate objective. Dennis came to the conclusion that you just wanted all four of those

5 way switches to be down because of OCD and that you should go ahead and do it. Others, like Doug and I thought you must have some rational objective. From what you just described, I don't see how flipping, re-wiring, whatever achieves it. A couple of labels stuck on the switchplate would identify which swithc does what though.

[trader4]

or off by looking at the switch.

doesn't work for multiple control switches.

Welcome to the club.... There are two views here. Most of us are in your camp. Even those in the other camp, Dennis mostly, recognize what you say. You can set up a N way switch system fo the light is off with all the switches down. That is one state. You can do that. But it's also obviously off with other combination, so, like you, I think we all don't see it solving anything. I don' think Dennis thinks it solves anything other than providing that one all down position to solve some kind of OCD thing.

each switch would glow when that circuit has power. Or when it doesn't, either way.

couple of other applications. If you have a freezer on a switch you like to know nobody turned it off.

without turning anything on.

[Ralph Mowery]

I see and understand what you want.

Now you have to understand that it is not possiable to get you what you want.

That is not in a simple way. You may be able to go to either a computer (PLC) type controler or a bunch of relays to do that, but it will require a lot of money and major rewiring.

[Fred McKenzie]

I believe Robert has the answer he was looking for by now - reverse connection of two wires.

Someone once said, "I have CDO. CDO is like OCD, except it is in alphabetical order as it should be!"

That was when I realized I had it too.

Fred

[dpb]

...

That only solves the problem as long as none of the other switches change _their_ position--as soon as any one of them is switched, he'll have the same issue.

So, unless he no longer ever uses any of the others after they're all put in some reference position, switching a traveler doesn't solve the problem, either. Equivalently and less work, he can put them where he wants them in the room in question then go turn off whatever is on at one of the other locations--accomplishes just as much.

[trader4]

That's exactly how I see it too.....

[dpb]

...

'Cuz that's how it is... :)

As somebody else noted, the only way he can accomplish the goal is to use a bunch of logic or a wireless controller or somesuch--it just is simply not possible w/ conventional house wiring w/ multiway switches unless the others on the circuit in question aren't changed from their positions when the target one is as desired (there are combinations of the others' positions that also leave the one unchanged, of course, by switching them in pairs, for example, but not in general).

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy wrote in news: [e-mail]:

And I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand that: (1) if one light is controlled by more than two switches, it is IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE from the position of ONE of the switches, which of the remaining switches turned the light on or off, and (2) It doesn't MATTER which of the switches turned it on or off, you can use ANY of the switches to turn it off or on again.

Nonsense. No 'thinking' required -- which appears to be a good thing, actually. Flip the first switch in the rack of 5 -- did that make the light that I want to go out, go out, or did it turn something else on instead? If it extinguished the light you wanted, fine, you're done. Otherwise, flip the same switch again to make what you just turned on, go off, then repeat the process for the next switch.

So label the switches on each faceplate. That way, you'll at least know which switch controls which light.

So label the switches on each faceplate. That way, your guests will know which switch controls which light, too.

In contrast to the plans you have in mind, that would actually work.

False.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy wrote in news:70da9162-cf8f-48c8-8f27- [e-mail]:

begin with. If the light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch turned it on? It. Does. Not. Matter.

OK, fine, explain why it matters -- why you [think you] need to turn a light off using the same switch that turned it on.

Make sure your explanation takes into account the fact that, if a light is controlled from multiple locations, it can be turned either on OR off by ANY of the switches.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy wrote in news: [e-mail]:

(1) You CAN'T figure this out by looking at only one of the switches. It simply is not possible. (2) If the light can be turned on by any of the switches, it can also be turned off by any of the switches -- which means it does not matter which one turned it on. You can turn it off from ANY of them, not just the one that turned it on.

[trader4]

simply is not possible.

turned off by any of the

turn it off from ANY

This whole thing is amazing, isn't it? At one point, Dennis had me half convinced that Robert knows how these switches work, but that for some OCD reason, he just wants then arranged so that one possible way for the lights to be off is for all of the switches to be down. Like if all switches are down at every location, then he knows everything is off without any further checking. There is actually a usefullness to that. If, for example, you were leaving for a trip you could just visually look at all the switches at every wall plate involved. If they are all down, then everything is off.

But, from everything he's now saying, it sure looks like he thinks he can just tell from the one switch plate which switch controls the light because if the light is on, the switch must be up. Of course it doesn't work that way. I think that was what we were all questioning, before doing this re-arranging, he should understand the very limited effect he's getting.

[Metspitzer]

simply is not possible.

turned off by any of the

turn it off from ANY

This thread has made me convinced there is at least some use to flipping 3-way switches. I am going to try it.

The house I live in now, I moved into when I was 12. I have since inherited it from my parents as they are both dead. My sister and I had a shared bathroom. On the door going into the bathroom from my bedroom there is a 3-way switch for an overhead light and a single pole switch for the medicine cabinet.

At the other door coming from my sister's bedroom there is only a

3-way switch for the overhead. With both lights off and both switches in the down position on my side of the bathroom, the switch in my sister's bedroom is off in the up position.

So for some 40 years now, the switch on my side of the door seems to be in a constant state of one switch up and one switch down when both lights in the bathroom are off. Although I have never asked her, it seemed to me that she was intentionally causing the light switch to be down in her room when the light is off.

I am going to flip the position of the switch on her side and see it that changes how the order of switches ends up on my side of the bathroom. My niece (her daughter) currently using her bedroom today. My old bedroom is not being used, but guests still enter that bathroom from my old bedroom side.

[dpb]

On 6/22/2013 12:07 PM, Metspitzer wrote: ...

For the case of only two 3-ways, sure, because there are only the two cases. It will, however, still be the case that the two can be in opposite positions on your side 'cuz after the flip the light will be off when both are up as well as both down.

But, when more than two locations are on a circuit it is simply not possible to have fixed orientation and allow the other switches to be used individually moving any will change the direction sense of the subject one.

There's a similar situation in the house here but it's never bugged me enough to do anything about it--the basement has one long room that's half the width and full length of the house that has the lights in two banks and there are two doors. Obviously there are two switches at each door. So, one pair is always in synch and one pair is always out of synch when lights are on/off. I like to keep the pair at the middle door in synch 'cuz that's the way I go in/out when heading to/from the change room to outside and I always turn both on/off every time. The wife is oblivious and almost always will get those switched every time she is in/out. (The _really_ annoying thing is she has a penchant for leaving one in the in-between state where one then has to go to the other wall plate and turn it either on/off to make the circuit function at all :) ).

[khc]

enough to do anything about it--the basement has one long room that's

dbp,

I'm confused. You describe a room with two doors and then you refer to a "middle door."

I think that I understand that your room has two groups of lights. Some of these lights are wired together all on one circuit and so turn on and off together. The remainder of the lights are wired together all on a second circuit and so turn on and off together. The two groups of lights are completely independent of each other.

Further, the room has two doors and four light switches. Each door has two light switches. A switch at each of the two doors works together with a switch at the other door to control one of the groups of lights. The other two switches (one at each door) work together to control the second group of lights.

Thus, one of the switches at each of the doors turns one of the groups of lights on and off. The remaining switch at each of the doors turns the other group of lights on and off. It is possible to turn a group of lights on at one door and off at the other door.

Does your wife come in (and turn lights on) at one door then go out (and turn lights off) at the other door?

Will you please say more about the "in between" state of the light switches where you have to go to the "other light plate" make things work?

khc

[dpb]

On 6/24/2013 2:05 PM, khc wrote: ...

OK, not, perhaps as clear as could have been--one door is at one end of the room and the other is towards the middle of the room. It (the 2nd door) is the one I was referring to but "middle" was referring to location in general position along length of room rather than being in middle of a group of doors.

Yes

On occasion she manages to flip one of the switches into a no-man's land of be in between -- it's broken the contact so the light went out but didn't actually go completely to the other position. Hence, it's open between both sets of contacts. In that case, and if it's the one at the other location from where one is, then ya' gotsta' go and flip that one to one position or the other...some switches are difficult to get to stay in a position like that, some less difficult.

[pilgrim]

I'm sure that you're aware that the "no man's land" switch is broken and needs to be replaced.

I have no idea what you can do to prevent your wife from entering (and turning the lights on) at one door and exiting (and turning the lights off) at the other door, thus getting the switches "out of sync."

When I was younger I had troubles with my wife. I tried many things, but none of them worked. Finally, I tried a divorce, and that worked very well indeed.

[dpb]

On 6/24/2013 6:16 PM, pilgrim wrote: ...

...

No, it's not...it is just one which has a design in which there is if one doesn't push it past half will stay on TDC. A brand new one of the type will do the same. It's not being changed 'cuz it matches the rest...and I'm sorta' AR that way about symmetry.

[nestork]

Robert:

Imagine this diagram with the middle "Four way switch" missing so that the top yellow terminal on the left switch connects to the top yellow terminal on the right switch and the bottom yellow terminals on both switches are connected together too.

[image:

That is the wiring you have when you have two separate "three way switches" controlling the same light. And, as you can see, no ONE switch determines whether the light is on or off. Both switch toggles have to be in the up position, or both in the down position, for the light to be on. So, fliping EITHER switch toggle turns the light off, and flipping it again, or flipping the other switch toggle, turns it back on again. So, with two "three way switches", both switches have two different "ON" positions instead of an ON and an OFF position like a normal toggle switch. And, whether or not the light is ON or OFF depends on the position of BOTH switches.

Now, if you want a third switch to control that same light, you still need both three way switches, but you also need something called a "4 way switch" shown in the middle of that diagram.

If we number the contacts starting with #1 in the top left corner of the

4 way switch and going clockwise, when the toggle of a 4 way switch is in one position, it connects contacts 1 and 2 together and 3 and 4 together. If you flip the toggle to the other position, it connects contacts 1 and 3 together and 2 and 4 together. That way, regardless of what position the two three way switches are in, flipping that middle 4 way switch will turn the light on, or turn it off.

In fact, of you wanted MORE than three switches, all of which would turn the light on or off, you'd simply keep adding 4 way switches between the two three way switches. That way, no matter what position the two three way switches were in, flipping any of the 4 way switches between them would turn the light on or turn it off.

So, it seems to me that you SHOULD be able to do what you're wanting by:

1. Inspecting each switch that controls that light to determine which are your two three way switches, and which are the 4 way switches.

1. Checking each of the intermediate 4 way switches to find out which toggle position results in terminals 1 and 2 being connected and terminals 3 and 4 being connected together. You want each intermediate

4 way switch to connect 1-2 and 3-4 when the toggle is in the down position.

1. Now, just turn EITHER one of the two three way switches on the end upside down. That way, when it's toggle is in the down position, the light will be off, and flipping the toggle of ANY other switch will turn the light ON.

Now, the wiring can get pretty hairy because the power won't necessarily come into the electrical box at one end of the room. The power could come in at the light's electrical box, or at the electrical box of any of the switches.

But, as long as you understand the principle involved here which is to set up all your switches so that the power goes through all the top terminals when the toggles of the two three way switches are up, and through all the bottom terminals when the toggles of the two three way switches are down (and you may have to turn some 4 way switches upside down to ensure they're all oriented the same). In that situation, with the toggles of both 3 way switches on the end in the down position, the light will be ON. By turning either three way switch upside down, having the toggle in the down position will interrupt voltage getting to the lamp, so that with one three way switch upside down, ALL toggles in the down position means the light is OFF, and flipping ANY switch turns the light ON.

Hope this helps.

Maybe draw the terminals of 4 switches (two three way switches on the end and two 4 way switches between them) and connect the terminals with lines to show where the electricity will flow, and you should see how the above plan will work. Or, at least, it seems to me, how it should work to accomplish what you want.

[dpb]

On 6/25/2013 3:26 AM, nestork wrote: ...

...

...

It doesn't, really... :)

You also have to add the condition that he also never uses the other switches than the particular panel location in question to control the light as would be normally done--for example, use one near an entry door to turn on as entering and another near the exit door to turn off as leaving. As soon as that is done, he's now got a case where one's up and one's down and the light's off again. As the pattern ensues of more-or-less random movement between locations, the states again become also, more or less random as to which is up and which is down when the light is off.

It's just not possible to have it wired conventionally no matter what the initial configuration is w/o adding very heavy constraints on usage and retain the possibility that turning any one switch in the down position turns off an on light--the one closest by at the time may already be 'down'.