DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum

DIY Chatroom Home Improvement Forum (http://www.diychatroom.com/)
-   Electrical (http://www.diychatroom.com/f18/)
-   -   Doorbell Transformer (http://www.diychatroom.com/f18/doorbell-transformer-58152/)

fpeikin 11-29-2009 03:30 PM

Doorbell Transformer
 
My doorbell transformer primary hot wire is stuffed into the closest breaker along with a #12 black wire. The doorbell wire is about a #18 tinned copper. The doorbell wire is loose with the breaker terminal screw torqued against the #12 black wire.

Yoyizit 11-29-2009 05:43 PM

And. . .?

fpeikin 11-29-2009 06:33 PM

Looking for a solution. Thanks!

Yoyizit 11-29-2009 07:09 PM

Lightly sand both wires and wrap the smaller wire around the larger wire
http://www.web3d.org/x3d/specificati...ages/helix.gif
and solder the joint so the screw puts pressure on both?

Billy_Bob 11-29-2009 07:39 PM

Do you have a question?

Or is there a problem?

Etc.

Jim Port 11-29-2009 07:49 PM

Just pigtail a short length of #12 to the lead and cap with a wirenut. Attach the other end under the breaker screw.

Jim Port 11-29-2009 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fpeikin (Post 359052)
My doorbell transformer primary hot wire is stuffed into the closest breaker along with a #12 black wire. The doorbell wire is about a #18 tinned copper. The doorbell wire is loose with the breaker terminal screw torqued against the #12 black wire.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoyizit (Post 359110)
And. . .?

So is someone to assume that you believe a loose connection is proper and would not lead to problems?

Are you aware that unless breakers are listed for use with multiple conductors that this is a violation? Even breakers that can accept 2 conductors require the conductors to be the same size and material.

Yoyizit 11-30-2009 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Port (Post 359168)
So is someone to assume that you believe a loose connection is proper and would not lead to problems?

In this case, the likelihood that this particular loose connection, soldered or unsoldered, usually carrying only the magnetizing current of a bell 'frmr, would lead to a fatality is probably less than 1 in 100,000, per year. Driving a car, per year, is 10x as dangerous. Smoking, 100x.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt sells a lot of stuff.

Some of what the NEC tells you is reasonable and prudent. As for

the bucks you pay for the equipment
vs.
the extra safety your dollars buy. . .? "I believe" that's a different story.

Have you seen how many industry reps are on the code panels? Did you ever hear of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
?

DownRiverGuy 11-30-2009 02:15 PM

Also would like to add that Solder shouldn't ever be in the equation there.

With very few exceptions there is no install method that would require/permit soldering wires and still be NEC compliant...


Jim Port 11-30-2009 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoyizit (Post 359404)
In this case, the likelihood that this particular loose connection, soldered or unsoldered, usually carrying only the magnetizing current of a bell 'frmr, would lead to a fatality is probably less than 1 in 100,000, per year. Driving a car, per year, is 10x as dangerous. Smoking, 100x.

Fear, uncertainty and doubt sells a lot of stuff.

Some of what the NEC tells you is reasonable and prudent. As for

the bucks you pay for the equipment
vs.
the extra safety your dollars buy. . .? "I believe" that's a different story.

Have you seen how many industry reps are on the code panels? Did you ever hear of
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatory_capture
?

I don't know where you came up with those "statistics" nor do I care. I feel it is irresponsible to give misleading and potentially dangerous advice.

FWIW, 1 out of 100,00 equates to more deaths that I would like to think about given that the population in this country is over 300 million. Using fuzzy math that sounds like 3000 people per year could die from following your advice. Do you find that acceptable? I would not want that on me.

I am well aware that the code making panels have industry reps on them. They also have contractors and other professionals on them. While I might not agree with some of the trends that seem to becoming more predominant like the design issues, overall I feel that the true purpose of providing a safe system is still foremost in them minds of the CMPs.

Scuba_Dave 11-30-2009 05:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DownRiverGuy (Post 359408)
Also would like to add that Solder shouldn't ever be in the equation there.

With very few exceptions there is no install method that would require/permit soldering wires and still be NEC compliant...

So you are saying that soldering wires is not allowed by the NEC ?
Could you please quote the code section for that ?

I'd never solder the connections & then attach to the breaker
I would solder it to a pigtail, cap it & then attach the pigtail to the breaker

Yoyizit 11-30-2009 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Port (Post 359515)
I don't know where you came up with those "statistics" nor do I care. I feel it is irresponsible to give misleading and potentially dangerous advice.

FWIW, 1 out of 100,00 equates to more deaths that I would like to think about given that the population in this country is over 300 million. Using fuzzy math that sounds like 3000 people per year could die from following your advice. Do you find that acceptable? I would not want that on me.
1

I am well aware that the code making panels have industry reps on them. They also have contractors and other professionals on them. While I might not agree with some of the trends that seem to becoming more predominant like the design issues, overall I feel that the true purpose of providing a safe system is still foremost in them minds of the CMPs.
2

1 It's fatal house fires per year in the US from all causes so it is a max.
How many fatal house fires per year, or per decade, would be caused by twisting these wires together, or just leaving them as they were?

It's not "on" me. It's on the OP. The OP ultimately makes, or should be making, his/her own risk/benefit tradeoffs.
That's one problem with the NEC; it decides for us.

Of course, as illustrated with this recent mammogram screening dustup, the public may react with confusion or rage if you give them data and let them decide.

2 Good, and optimistic, answer. What bothers me is that there is no disincentive to not pile one costly [to the consumer] safety measure on top of another. When is it safe enough? The Stigler guy who thought up the idea of regulatory capture believed it was an inevitable outcome.

Jim Port 11-30-2009 06:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yoyizit (Post 359522)
It's not "on" me. It's on the OP. The OP ultimately makes, or should be making, his/her own risk/benefit tradeoffs.
That's one problem with the NEC; it decides for us.

Sure, but how much of an informed decision can be made when the data used to form that decision is flawed?

Maybe the fact the the NEC makes those decisions for us is a saving grace. Otherwise there would be more fatalities.

Yoyizit 11-30-2009 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Port (Post 359524)
Sure, but how much of an informed decision can be made when the data used to form that decision is flawed?

Maybe the fact the the NEC makes those decisions for us is a saving grace. Otherwise there would be more fatalities.

The defense rests.

Scuba_Dave 11-30-2009 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jim Port (Post 359167)
Just pigtail a short length of #12 to the lead and cap with a wirenut. Attach the other end under the breaker screw.

This is the method to use, not solder
While solder may work....wires under a breaker or bus in the panel must be the same gauge


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:21 AM.


Copyright 2003-2014 Escalate Media LP. All Rights Reserved