Re: [Phys-l] home wiring catastrophe

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

  "b) convince you that a fault in the neutral wire is a bad, bad thing."


That's why I've read in many places  (paraphrased)  Do not install a 
switch here.

bc, switches to safety.

p.s  Somehow I think three wires are a waste of copper.  It would make 
more sense to use four * of smaller diameter since the third carries 
current only when the load is unbalanced. 

* and then only when 240 is desired.

John Denker wrote:

> On 05/17/2007 06:35 PM, Carl Mungan wrote:
>
>  
>
> > <>While working on one of those cubical boxes that distribute power 
> > into local houses (for
> > underground wiring, as we have in our subdivision), the power company 
> > accidentally severed the
> > neutral line. This fried the circuit panels (and possibly the entire 
> > 120-V wiring system) in 5
> > houses, actually lighting one of them on fire. Sadly, these 5 houses 
> > have been declared unsafe
> > and the residents have been living since then in hotels.
> > ...
> >
> > I'm of
> > course unhappy with the idea of voltage being carried and prefer to think about currents.
> >    
>
> 1) To specify the circuit condition, you need to know two
> things:
>  -- voltage and current
>  -- voltage and resistance
>  -- current and resistance
>  -- whatever
>  

> <>cut


> <>
> ===============
>
> That isn't the whole story, but it should be enough to:
> a) put you on the right track if you want to do a fuller analysis, and
> b) convince you that a fault in the neutral wire is a bad, bad thing.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Forum for Physics Educators
> Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
> https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l