I think that arguing about the National Electrical Code doesn't
accomplish a lot. Understanding how the circuits work does. Encouraging
anyone to make modifications to their house wiring that will likely
violate their local code and inspection requirements still doesn't mean
the principle of operation isn't valid or that it can't be understood
and applied in a carefully controlled set of circumstances. That is
exactly what Rich is saying.
Most equipment that is designed to operate on 240 VAC only consumes
current between the two hot wires. The modification to the NEC that
required 4 wires be run and a new 4 wire receptacle be used in new
construction was because they couldn't predict whether an appliance or
piece of equipment might have need for 120 volts and therefore draw
current from one hot wire and the neutral. There are literally millions
of homes with 240 Volt wiring that has only two hot wires and a ground,
no neutral.
If one is smart enough to figure out which circuits are on opposite
sides of the 240 volt line, it is quite possible to get 240 volts
including neutral to the shack or other location. It is also possible to
use existing wiring to provide 240 Volts, no neutral, being sure to mark
the white as already stated and making sure the breaker is sized to the
wire. Of course we have to be cautious enough to make sure there are no
other connections to that wire (that it is a home run) and that we don't
need a neutral to draw current through. Is it possible to draw current
through that ground? Sure it is, but you sacrifice the intent of it
being there in the first place.
So, getting to the point, we can get 240 Volts to a location if we can
identify a dedicated circuit to that location. We could also get 240
Volts to that location if we can identify two separate circuits there
that are on opposite sides of the 240 Volt line. We MUST recognize that
the breakers must located adjacent in the panel and be changed to a
ganged 240 Volt breaker with the appropriate ratings. I think it is
obvious that no one without any experience in the field should do any of
this. As always, any electrical wiring you do is at your own risk
whether it's your electrical wiring or your amp wiring. Keep one hand in
your pocket. Better still, keep BOTH hands in your pockets!
Happy amping!
73, Tony W4ZT
R L Measures wrote:
> On May 30, 2006, at 9:29 AM, Gudguyham@aol.com wrote:
>
>> In a message dated 5/30/2006 9:02:24 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,
>> r@somis.org writes:
>>> If you own the abode, plus you have 600v-rated 3-wire romex
>>> MEANING YOU HAVE A BLACK,RED, AND WHITE WIRE???
>>> .
>> Any home with 3-conductor romex is do-able.
>>
>> AGAIN, DO YOU MEAN BLACK,RED, AND WHITE WIRES??
>> 3 wire Romex has that, but what do you mean?
>
> White (N), Black (L), Green or Cu (Gnd), standard for 120v circuits.
> For 240v use, the white wire should be marked red at the ends, and
> the Gnd becomes the 240 and 120 N-Gnd.
>>> I would fasten a 240v 3-wire outlet on the opposite side of the
>>> stud that holds the 120v 3-wire outlet and jumper the Gnd to the N
>>> on the 120v outlet. Also, when the conversion is done, red tape
>>> needs to be wrapped around the ends of the white wire since it
>>> will be carrying 120vac.
>> YOU CAN NOT CONNECT THE GROUND(BOND) TO NEUTRAL ...
>
> I guarantee that I can.
>
>> REMEMBER YOU CAN NOT HAVE A BARE WIRE IN A ROMEX CARRRING OTHER
>> THAN "FAULT" CURRENT.
>
> The bare wire in romex is insulated for 600v.
>> 3 WIRE MEANING BLACK, RED, AND WHITE?
>>
>>
>> As I see it, having two wires that carry zero current on a 240v
>> circuit is looneytunes.
>> HUH? WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THIS?
>
> In a 4-wire 240v circuit, the ground wire (Grn) as well as the
> neutral wire (Wht) carry zero current. Red and Blk carry all of the
> current.
>>> If done, it would be required to replace the separate breakers
>>> with a double pole breaker which has a tie bar between them.
>> Agreed, and it makes sense.
>> MAKES SENSE BECAUSE IT IS CODE!
>
> Makes sense because it is electrically reasonable. Sometimes the
> Code is, and sometimes it isn't. As I see it, not requiring a MOV
> across NEC / UL approved switches suggests that whoever wrote the
> present Code needs to take a course in Reactance/Susceptance/
> Impedance/Admittance.
>> Good electrical engineering and according to the latest NEC are not
>> necessarily the same thing.
>> I DON'T THINK WE WOULD WANT TO PROMOTE ANYONE TO DO ANYTHING THAT
>> IS NOT CODE REGARDLESS OF WHAT WE THINK IS RIGHT OR WRONG. BEST WE
>> STICK TO THE RULES.
>
> You would make a good Mormon or a good Catholic -- and I, for damn
> sure, would not.
>> R L MEASURES, AG6K. 805-386-3734
>> r@somis.org
_______________________________________________
Amps mailing list
Amps@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps
|