ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals
ECN Shout Chat
ShoutChat
Recent Posts
Square D "All-In-One" Panelboard
by NORCAL - 11/30/21 12:48 PM
Where is Everyone?
by luckyshadow - 11/21/21 10:14 AM
It's been an interesting career
by The Watt Doctor - 11/19/21 09:56 AM
Well I am back to stay (nearly 6 years)
by The Watt Doctor - 11/19/21 09:17 AM
Motor Load Relationships Between Fans and Pumps
by The Watt Doctor - 11/18/21 09:24 AM
New in the Gallery:
240/208 to a house
240/208 to a house
by wa2ise, October 9
Now you know.
Now you know.
by Tom_Horne, September 7
Who's Online Now
1 members (Scott35), 48 guests, and 19 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
#178805 06/12/08 03:18 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32
W
wiking Offline OP
Junior Member
Say you have two j-boxes, A and B. The hot and neutral of a lighting circuit comes into A, goes to B and proceeds further where it feeds a switch. The switch leg makes a circular path around the ceiling, comes back to B by another route than the hot, goes thru B to A and leaves A by a route other than the original hot feed came in.
Would you require there to be a designated "hot" neutral and a designated "switch leg" neutral in the conduit between A and B?
If you used the original neutral that came thru with the hot between A and B to also serve as the neutral for the switch leg, since they are actually the same neutral, would you in reality create some kind of neutral loop that would balance and divide the current between the load on that switch leg and any other load that happened to be downstream of the switch?
A break time breakfast is riding on this.

wiking #178807 06/12/08 03:25 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 482
Z
Member
An interesting question, but if I understand you correctly, I would say no. The neutral would not "suffer" any "loop" problems unless you introduced another hot circuit. Even then, I haven't drawn in out, but I see no problems, except for some routing that is unnecessarily complicated.

Anybody else with a differing opinion? Would love to hear the other side...

Zapped #178809 06/12/08 03:44 PM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 947
T
twh Offline
Member
If there is a light on box B, it needs to use the neutral that accompanies the switch leg. From box A and beyond, the original neutral is fine. So, I agree with Zapped.

twh #178814 06/12/08 06:20 PM
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 32
W
wiking Offline OP
Junior Member
To be sure it's understood, I'll try to clarify if I can. There is a straight line run of conduit feeding a lighting circuit from a panel to jbox A, jboxB and the switch for the lights. The switch leg comes from the switch in mc and feeds a row of lights. At the end of the row it loops over and feeds the next row and at the other end of the row goes to B. For convenience sake, the switch leg goes through the conduit that carries to A. From A it feeds mc to the last row of lights.
I say that you need two neutrals in the conduit from A to B to keep it seperate even though it is the same neutral.

wiking #178817 06/12/08 07:04 PM
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 947
T
twh Offline
Member
Yes, I drew it out that way. Between boxes A and B, all conductors of the circuit are in one conduit. Adding another neutral doesn't change that. It just isn't necessary.

The mark of a good sport is how well he feeds his co-worker.


Link Copied to Clipboard
Featured:

Tools for Electricians
Tools for Electricians
 

* * * * * * *

2020 Master Electrician Exam Preparation Combos
2020 NEC Electrician
Exam Prep Combos:
Master / Journeyman

 

Member Spotlight
mxslick
mxslick
Atomic City, ID USA
Posts: 806
Joined: October 2004
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 3
dsk 2
Popular Topics(Views)
286,451 Are you busy
218,868 Re: Forum
204,978 Need opinion
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5