I don't really understand. Light Y's neutral side is already "connected directly to neutral" - why does it matter where it is connected to neutral?
Yes both sides would be Live, as they would be if the Neutral in a standard set up went open circuit. So while for the un-wary person the 230 volts on the Neutral might be a bit of a shock the more aware person would treat the Neutral as a live conductor.
No, I confess I hadn't noticed - I suppose I subconsciously 'trusted' BAS to have posted a light vs. voltage curve! So my original suggestion (which I also confess I haven't yet checked) that light output is roughly proportional to voltage to the power 3.4 may have been correct. Whatever, I think it is clear that connecting more than two incandescent lamps across a voltage source equal to the nominal working voltage of one of them will not result in a particularly useful amount of light output!
I don't think they exist. However, that is moot, because nor do I think that 2p2w ones exist (as ';electrical accessories), either - and, as I said, use of a 2p2w switch is crucial with the circuit I posted, since having separate 1p2w switches would be disastrous!
My point is that in the diagram the N at switch B looks separate, were the light Y N connected to the switch then its purpose would not be as confusing.
Yes, but you are now talking about a fault which could arise. Actually 'designing in' a switch, operation of which would emulate such a fault would surely be dangerous, irresponsible and probably non-compliant with regs?
I don't think so. Having a separate switch in the L (or L+N) would not make the switch in the neutral itself any more compliant - after all, operation of that switch in the neutral would still create a hazardous situation (light off but L still connected to one or both sides of lamp) if the 'isolator' were 'on'.
I still don't really understand - what matters in service is that both lamp and switch B are connected to neutral, regardless of how/where they are connected. It remains the case that with separte switches B and C, the arrangement "A down, B up, C down" would be hazardous - hence the reason why switch B is non-compliant.
That's a totally different matter, and nothing to do with what we are discussing. The fact remains that your switch B, if independent from switch C, would create an unnecessary hazard and, presumably for the same reason, would seemingly not be compliant with regulations.
I don't think that any worse, per se, than switches with two or more circuits; it is up to the person to isolate and test for dead.
I'm not sure that a lot of householders wanting to change a lamp/bulb would even know what "isolate and test for dead" means, and I certainly wouldn't get rich if I got a £ for every householder who 'tested for dead' when changing a lamp/bulb (and they'd probably have to expose themselves to risk by removing the lamp/bulb before thay could do such a test!)
Well, we're not talking about 'within appliances' - but, even if we were, where do you think that neutral (only) switching occurs within appliances?
I don't disagree with, and never have disagreed with, any of that (but see below**) but I still don't understand what bearing it has on what we are discussing - which is the danger created by having a SP switch in any neutral (as in your diagram).
If you need to find a tradesperson to get your job done, please try our local search below, or if you are doing it yourself you can find suppliers local to you.
Select the supplier or trade you require, enter your location to begin your search.
Are you a trade or supplier? You can create your listing free at DIYnot Local
