Wiring for multiple control [4 switches control one set of lights] light switch !!!

[Robert Macy]

Ok Ok I know this is simple but it's irritating me beyond belief.

Leviton light switches.

In a dual box next to an outside door there are two light switches.
One is the single control for a porch light, the other is a one of
four switches that turn on/off the hall way lights.

Of course the installer put the hallway light switch adjacent to the
door opening and the porch light switch way on the inside. Plus, paid
no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up
in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to
change. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the
box is no problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the
cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but
still reaches.

Big problem is the best way to change the switching action of the
multiple control switch. Went to google, not much help there. as
usual. Did find that 4 wire means 3 switches, not four. and nothing
for 5-wire and found an interesting description of how a 'control'
switch is in the box that supplies wiring up to the fixture. That may
be this box, but doubt it, because this switch has four leads.

However *if* this is the cable that goes up to the light fixtures; why
there would be a RED and a BLACK going to the fixtures when all I need
is the BLACK power going up there. So, thought I'd ask.

Ignoring GND wiring that's all done correctly. There is a cable with
RED, BLACK, and WHITE, call it CABLE A. Another cable, call it CABLE B
has RED, BLACK, and WHITE. As expected the WHITE is simply bypassing
everything with a wire nut. BLACK A goes to IN at the top of the
switch. BLACK B goes to OUT at the top of the switch. RED A goes to IN
close to bottom of switch and RED B goes to OUT close to bottom of
switch.

What is the best way to rewire the switch to get the inverse from what
it is now and the 'proper' position?

[Metspitzer]

Before you do anything, take pictures of how it is now.

If what you have is 3 way or 4 way switches, sometimes the switch will
be up when the light is off. I think that is what you are asking.
Sorry I quit reading about half way down.

[hrho...@sbcglobal.net]

> Sorry I quit reading about half way down.- Hide quoted text -

Agreed. you can start by having the light off when all the switches
are down, but as soon as one switch is up to light the light, another
switch will have to go up to turn the light off. Now you will have
two switches down and two switches up, and the light will be off. Now
you will have to turn one up switch down or one down switch up to turn
the light back on. So can't dp what you seem to want to do - sorrry.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Jun 17, 10:27 pm, "hrhofm...@sbcglobal.net"

> the light back on.  So can't dp what you seem to want to do - sorrry.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

+1

Let's start with the simplest multiple switch system,
ie 3 way. That uses two switches. But the state of the
light and the position of the switches is not fixed. On
can be either up or down, depending on the position of
the other switch.

If you want them all to work the same way, there is
a solution. Look at Lutron Maestro series. Essentially
they are electronic dimmers. You have one master
one and up to 10 companion ones. They connect
very easily using the existing wire. They are really
cool dimmers. You can set the level you want and
when you push the switch they softly come up to
that level or softly go out. If you're leaving and want
the lights to go off in 15 secs or 2 mins, you just
push the switch like you're turning it off, but hold it.
A series of leds starts increasing, showing how
long until it turns off. When you get the amount of
time you want, you release the switch. There are also
versions with motion sensors too.

Downside is that they aren't cheap...... To do
4 you're probably looking at $125+

[John Grabowski]

*You can just turn the switches upside down without changing the wiring.

[The Daring Dufas]

The K.I.S.S. solution. I salute thee sir! ^_^

TDD

[Robert Macy]

LOL! chloroform in print?

[Robert Macy]

On Jun 17, 7:27 pm, "hrhofm...@sbcglobal.net"

It's a bit obsessive, but I like to be able to set ALL the switches at
some time to the 'proper' position. It's easier to tell which switch
had been turned on to control what light, especially when there are
racks of these switches EVERYWHERE!

[Robert Macy]

On Jun 18, 1:34 am, "trad...@optonline.net" <trad...@optonline.net>
wrote:

Interesting. Will this brand control *any* load?

[Robert Macy]

no, tried that. two reasons. wiring is 14 Awg and a b**** to fuss
with, usually marginally too short, and the GND wire appears to be
oriented downward.

Unfortunately, the minute I post a question, the solution becomes
evident. After measuring the voltages on the switch as I operated
several; I found the switch is a simple X reversal. so I only had to
swap the two 'input' lines and got the effect I wanted.

[tra...@optonline.net]

> Interesting. Will this brand control *any* load?- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

They have several different models that will work various LIGHTS,
including transformer driven ones. Being dimmers, they are targetted
to dimmable lights.

But I see in another post that you want to see the
switch position to tell if it's on or off. These use
a push paddle type of system, so there is no toggle
switch to look at. It might have an LED indicator
though that shows when it's on. Not sure about
that. Probably does though, because if you
have 6 of these Lutron dimmers it would be good to
know at each one that somebody has turned the
light on. When I'm back at the house I will check for
you.

[Robert Macy]

On Jun 18, 4:32 am, The Daring Dufas <the-daring-du...@stinky-

That was my first approach, but was NOT implementable.

[The Daring Dufas]

The pair that connects the 3way and 4way switches in series are called
"travelers" and you can install an unlimited number of 4way switches on
the pair. When I worked on a Core of Engineers job some years ago, I had
to explain and illustrate the operation of 3 and 4way switches to my
electrical foreman and superintendent because they were mystified by
their operation. So don't feel bad if you had a problem with them. ^_^

TDD

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Jun 18, 9:32 am, The Daring Dufas <the-daring-du...@stinky-

> TDD- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

Maybe you could explain what the issue is that Robert
seems to be having? I don't get it. He seems to be
saying that he wants up to be on and down to be off,
or vice-versa, for at least some of the switches. From my
experience with 3 way and 4 way, that isn't possible.
The switch position for on depends on the position of
the other switch or switches.
Does something change when you get to 5 way, or is he
tilting at windmills? Even more mysterious, in his
recent post he says he rewired it and solved the issue?
My guess is that to achieve what he wants is impossilbe
with conventional toggle switches. Or else I'm not
understanding the issue.

[jamesgang]

I believe he wants the lights to be off when all the switches are in the down position. Normally can be downe by just removing the switch and turning it 180deg and putting it back in the box. But it sounds like his wires are a bit short for that.

Frankly there is not much point to it anyway as the whole reason you have multiple switches is so you can turn the lights on or off from any of the locations. You enter the hall at one end in the dark so you turn the light on. When you exit the other end you turn the light off. Now you have two switches in the up position but the lights are off.

[tra...@optonline.net]

> Frankly there is not much point to it anyway as the whole reason you have multiple switches is so you can turn the lights on or off from any of the locations.  You enter the hall at one end in the dark so you turn the light on.  When you exit the other end you turn the light off.  Now you have two switches in the up position but the lights are off.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

I agree completely with the last part of what you said.
So, I still don't understand the talk about re-wiring,
turning switches upside down, etc. I think we agree it
would only "fix" the problem until another switch position
was changed.

[bud--]

On 6/18/2013 7:03 AM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> But I see in another post that you want to see the
> switch position to tell if it's on or off. These use
> a push paddle type of system, so there is no toggle
> switch to look at. It might have an LED indicator
> though that shows when it's on. Not sure about
> that. Probably does though, because if you
> have 6 of these Lutron dimmers it would be good to
> know at each one that somebody has turned the
> light on. When I'm back at the house I will check for
> you.

Along the lines of "LED indicator", I believe an old thread had a 3-way
switch with a pilot light. There was a resistor from each traveler to a
common point, with the pilot light from the common point to the neutral.
The common point would be 120V with the lights off and 60V with lights
(incandescent) on. Could do the same thing with a 4-way, and the
manufacturer probably did. (Switch lights up with the lights off.)

Can't do what the OP wants - multiple control positions with switch that
turned the light on in the up position. Actually you could by wiring all
single pole switches in parallel and the switch(es) that are 'up' turned
the light on, but not a useful solution.

Closest may center off, momentary contact up and down switches, as in
your post, where you don't have 'chaotic' random up and down switch
positions.

Lots of descriptions of 3-way, 4-way switches on the internet which the
OP should look at if he hasn't figured out how his switches work.

[nestork]

Robert:

I'm thinking that your best bet might be to simply replace your 4 way
switches with ones that have either lighted toggles or toggles of a
different colour than the rest of the switches in each "bank" of
switches. That will at least set them apart visually, so you're brain
recognizes that those switches are different, and the toggle being in
the up position doesn't mean that anything is "ON".

I'm not familiar with 4 way switches, but with 3 way switches there
really is no "OFF" position like you have with ordinary switches. With
3 way switches, you have two different "ON" positions where the switch
sends power down one conductor or another depending on the toggle
position, but no "OFF" position. But, in that case, toggle down doesn't
mean the light is off since whether or not electricity flows depends on
the position of BOTH three way switches, not just the position of one
three way switch.




--
nestork

[harry]

Even if he starts off with all the switched "aligned", operating any
two switches will put you back to square one but with the switches now
misaligned, so pointless pursuit even trying.

[harry]

On Jun 18, 4:03 pm, bud-- <remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:

The only way it can be done is to control the light with a device
similar to a motor starter with multiple start/stop buttons.

[harry]

This is how they are wired. Beware, different terminology to USA.

http://www.lightwiring.co.uk/tag/intermediate-light-switch-wiring/

[harry]

It's not possible with the conventional method of having more then two
switches. Even with just two switches it's possible to have the light
on with both switches up or down

I know how it all works but I don't know the terminology used in the
US.

[The Daring Dufas]

4way switches are installed anywhere on the traveler pair between the
two 3way switches. You need two 3way switches to make a circuit with the
power coming in at one 3way switch and the fixture connected at the
other 3way switch. The position of the toggle on one 3way switch feeds
power to or selects which wire in the traveler pair the fixture is
connected to. 4way switches can be installed anywhere on the traveler
pair between the two 3way switches since the 4way switch is like an X
across the pair and swaps the feed from one wire in the pair to the
other wire in the pair. I found an easy to understand illustrated web
page that will help you. ^_^

http://users.wfu.edu/matthews/courses/p230/switches.html

TDD

[Josh]

On Tue, 18 Jun 2013 07:10:53 -0700 (PDT), "tra...@optonline.net"
<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

>I agree completely with the last part of what you said.
>So, I still don't understand the talk about re-wiring,
>turning switches upside down, etc. I think we agree it
>would only "fix" the problem until another switch position
>was changed.

I suspect he wants both switches "same" to mean "off", so they can
both be down when off -- presumably if he's in a situation where he's
about to turn the light off and end up with them both up, he'd run
over and flip the other one instead. Sort of defeats the purpose of
the 3/4-way switches, but to each his own; my wife made me flip one of
our 3-ways because it bugged her that "different" was off, so you
could never have both down with the light off. She can deal with the
fact that "on" requires one up and one down (which will be true for OP
also), but this light isn't on very often.

Josh

[TimR]

When we lived in Europe courtesy of Uncle Sam all our switches were push buttons that toggled a change of state relay. There seemed to be no limit to the number of switches. It was very convenient to be able to turn the bedroom light on from the door, and off from the bed, and on from the desk, etc.

When you pressed the switch you heard a big clunk from the panel in the hallway.

[denni...@gmail.com]

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:10:53 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> So, I still don't understand the talk about re-wiring,
> turning switches upside down, etc. I think we agree it
> would only "fix" the problem until another switch position
> was changed.

It's not so complicated as you all are making it.

He simply wants the lights to be OFF when all four switches are in the down position.

In other words, if you run down the hall and flip all four switches to the down position, the lights will always end up OFF.

With an even number of switches, you will always have an even number of switches in a certain position with the lights off. Either four down, two down, or four up.

[bud--]

On 6/18/2013 11:36 AM, harry wrote:
> On Jun 18, 4:03 pm, bud--<remove.budn...@isp.com> wrote:
>> On 6/18/2013 7:03 AM, trad...@optonline.net wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> But I see in another post that you want to see the
>>> switch position to tell if it's on or off. These use
>>> a push paddle type of system, so there is no toggle
>>> switch to look at. It might have an LED indicator
>>> though that shows when it's on. Not sure about
>>> that. Probably does though, because if you
>>> have 6 of these Lutron dimmers it would be good to
>>> know at each one that somebody has turned the
>>> light on. When I'm back at the house I will check for
>>> you.
>>
>> Along the lines of "LED indicator", I believe an old thread had a 3-way
>> switch with a pilot light. There was a resistor from each traveler to a
>> common point, with the pilot light from the common point to the neutral.
>> The common point would be 120V with the lights off and 60V with lights
>> (incandescent) on. Could do the same thing with a 4-way, and the
>> manufacturer probably did. (Switch lights up with the lights off.)

Actually switch lights up with the lights on.

Another variation of pilot light at the switch uses a neon light between
the travelers. A neon light is used because it operates at very low
current. Switched lights probably have to be incandescent. Switch lights
up when the lights off. I believe these are available in 3-way and 4-way
switches.

>> Can't do what the OP wants - multiple control positions with switch that
>> turned the light on in the up position. Actually you could by wiring all
>> single pole switches in parallel and the switch(es) that are 'up' turned
>> the light on, but not a useful solution.
>>
>> Closest may center off, momentary contact up and down switches, as in
>> your post, where you don't have 'chaotic' random up and down switch
>> positions.
>>
>> Lots of descriptions of 3-way, 4-way switches on the internet which the
>> OP should look at if he hasn't figured out how his switches work.
>
> The only way it can be done is to control the light with a device
> similar to a motor starter with multiple start/stop buttons.

Probably still available is a low voltage relay system that uses center
off switches with momentary up for on and down for off.

There was also a low voltage scheme with a push button and a relay that
changed state, as in TimR's post.

[bud--]

The second 4-way circuit is kind of like a California 3-way with a 4-way
switch added. A California 3-way is very useful in very limited
applications. Harry's circuit does not have the useful features of a
California 3-way.

A simple 3-way is easy to troubleshoot. IMHO this is a monstrosity that
is difficult to troubleshoot and has no advantages over a simple 3-way.

[tra...@optonline.net]

>
> I believe he wants the lights to be off when all the switches are in the down position. Normally can be downe by just removing the switch and turning it 180deg and putting it back in the box.

No, it can't be done. Have you used a multi-way switch, eg 3-way?
That uses just two switches, but the system AFAIK is the same as with
his 5 way. With a 3-way, with switch A, whether the light is on or off
when switch A is up or down depends on the position of switch B. You
can turn them upside down all you want, it does not change that. As soon
as someone moves switch B, then the operation of switch A reverses again.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:35:16 PM UTC-4, denni...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 10:10:53 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> > So, I still don't understand the talk about re-wiring,
>
> > turning switches upside down, etc. I think we agree it
>
> > would only "fix" the problem until another switch position
>
> > was changed.
>
>
>
> It's not so complicated as you all are making it.
>
>
>
> He simply wants the lights to be OFF when all four switches are in the down position.
>
>
>
> In other words, if you run down the hall and flip all four switches to the down position, the lights will always end up OFF.
>
>

I never saw him saying anything even close to that. And
I can't imagine that it would make much sense. He said he
had 4 switches controlling a hallway light. Why on earth
would you need to run down the hall and check each switch?
All you need do is look if the light is on or off and then
hit the one switch located where you are exiting the hall.

>
> With an even number of switches, you will always have an even number of switches in a certain position with the lights off. Either four down, two down, or four up.

Which of course means you can't do what he wants to do.

[Robert Macy]

I've been pondering the idea of some relay logic combined and the
'main' ON/OFF relay in the attic. Sounds great. Except, I'm back to
the problem of turning ON/OFF only the correct switch when faced with
a bank of four switches. Worse, sometimes the light I want to turn
off isn't even controlled by this rack of switches. Oh, well, at
least if I can go around, turn all the switches to a known OFF
position, then in the middle of the night when I wish to turn off the
light I just turned on, it's obvious, because that light switch is the
only light switch in the whole rack that is in what looks like ON.
Thus, I don't turn ON/OFF a whole series looking to turn off that
single light. [Yeah, I know, memorize them, but this house is large,
has lots of multi switch panels, and sommme light swtich positions in
the rack are either NOT consistent, or plainly wrong location - which
I' in the process of changing.] hmmm, I'd need a small indicator that
illuminates at night when the light is OFF to show you the switch to
turn ON. but if another switch turn on the light... maybe two
indicators at each switch. arggg! wait, if the indicator is OFF when
the light is ON, that will suffice. Just hit the switch that is NOT
lit and the light goes out and of course the indicator then comes ON.
Nice feature. Although I'm not a fan of tiny little light dots around
my bedroom walls [approx 30 by 50 ft and some 15 light switches] it
could be made to work.

From all the replies there's not been much sympathy for the confusion
3,4,5-way switches can cause. I agree, if there's a single switch
controlling the light set, not a biggie, don't care about up or down
position, but when you have light switch panels containing 4 and
sometimes 5 switches it can be a bit daunting when you're half
asleep. and don't want to exercise every frigging light in the room
trying to find the right one.

Surprisingly, with a lot of switches running one set of lights,
swapping has been far easier than expected. The four conductor
switches that provide the X Cross [you can stack 20 of these switches
if you wanted to] are clearly labeled with two IN and two OUT and a
red and black wire to a single 'cable' goes to either IN or OUT.
Sadly, the switch manufacturers are not consistent in where on their
switches the IN and OUT's are located. So have to pay a bit of
attention. So far, with a lot of switches running a single light
section all I've had to do is swap either the IN or the OUT wire side
and done. Plus, with 14 Awg the switch wiring is not disturbed too
much so the switch goes right back in the box after the change.

The really difficult one has been to find the right wires to swap on
the 'simple' 2 switch controller set up. They only have 3 wires and
it's not obvious which two to switch. black, black, red for example.
I know one is common and I swap the other two, but... I actually had
to use an ohmmeter to find out on one switch and was VERY surprised as
to the two to swap. Didn't look right from the physical locations on
the switch, but worked out.

[Metspitzer]

https://www.google.com/search?q=Ptouch&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&channel=np&source=hp

Get one of these

[Doug Miller]

denni...@gmail.com wrote in
news:236992eb-437b-4e23...@googlegroups.com:

> With an even number of switches, you will always have an even
> number of switches in a certain position with the lights off.
> Either four down, two down, or four up.

This is untrue.

Want proof? Set it up so that the lights are off when all four switches are down.

Now turn one of the switches upside down. The lights are still off, but now there are three
switches down, and one up.

[Robert Macy]

On Jun 19, 9:16 am, Metspitzer <Kilow...@charter.net> wrote:
> ...snip...
>
> https://www.google.com/search?q=Ptouch&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org...
>
> Get one of these

Thanks, will be useful for labeling all the house TV coax, cat-5, and
security system cabling! Security system alone is daunting with 8
cameras and 20+ individual lines. Today is easy, but working a month
from now is not so easy - can't remember what is what.

For the light switches that still leaves three problems.
1. Doesn't look very elegant.
2. How to name them and still know what the labels mean ;)
3. This is a bit more difficult to overcome, adhesives don't stick
well, or long, here. Could seal with clear coat of something, but now
we're talking the first time the switch panels get cleaned, ALL that
comes off, single wipe.

[Metspitzer]

If you want it really professional, you can have the labels etched in
the covers.

[Metspitzer]

Btw You can also pick one color for security, one color for network
and one color for CATV.

You can also take a photo of your switch plates and then type on the
photo the location of the switch and the label you want etched.
(mspaint will do)

Or you can just write the info on the back of the cover when you take
them off. (sharpie)

[Metspitzer]

On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:26:11 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
<robert...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Jun 19, 9:16�am, Metspitzer <Kilow...@charter.net> wrote:
>> ...snip...
>>
>> https://www.google.com/search?q=Ptouch&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org...
>>
>> Get one of these
>
>Thanks, will be useful for labeling all the house TV coax, cat-5, and
>security system cabling! Security system alone is daunting with 8
>cameras and 20+ individual lines. Today is easy, but working a month
>from now is not so easy - can't remember what is what.
>
>For the light switches that still leaves three problems.

BTW Captain Kirk and his team managed to Trek the universe without
having their command console marked. I don't know why you can
navigate a house. :)

[denni...@gmail.com]

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:08:56 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:35:16 PM UTC-4, denni...@gmail.com wrote:
> > In other words, if you run down the hall and flip all four switches to the down position, the lights will always end up OFF.

> I never saw him saying anything even close to that. And
> I can't imagine that it would make much sense. He said he
> had 4 switches controlling a hallway light. Why on earth
> would you need to run down the hall and check each switch?
> All you need do is look if the light is on or off and then
> hit the one switch located where you are exiting the hall.

Obviously you weren't reading carefully because that's EXACTLY what he said.

Nobody's checking each switch. He just wants the "home position" to be all four switches DOWN, and light OFF. It's a form of OCD.

> > With an even number of switches, you will always have an even number of switches in a certain position with the lights off. Either four down, two down, or four up.
>
> Which of course means you can't do what he wants to do.

Yes, he can. All he wants is, "All four switches DOWN, lights OFF."

What you keep harping on and on about is "All four switches MUST be down for the lights to be OFF." That is not what he wants.

Clearly he was able to achieve it because he replied and stated such. All it required was swapping the wires on the first switch.

[denni...@gmail.com]

So do you wander through the house flipping switches over in electrical boxes on a daily basis?

If he wires it up so that all four are down and the lights are off, and LEAVES THEM ALONE, then the lights will be off with the switches in three states:

1. Four down.
2. Two down.
3. Four up.

[The Daring Dufas]

On 6/19/2013 1:33 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Jun 2013 10:26:11 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
> <robert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Jun 19, 9:16 am, Metspitzer <Kilow...@charter.net> wrote:
>>> ...snip...
>>>
>>> https://www.google.com/search?q=Ptouch&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org...
>>>
>>> Get one of these
>>
>> Thanks, will be useful for labeling all the house TV coax, cat-5, and
>> security system cabling! Security system alone is daunting with 8
>> cameras and 20+ individual lines. Today is easy, but working a month
>>from now is not so easy - can't remember what is what.
>>
>> For the light switches that still leaves three problems.
>
> BTW Captain Kirk and his team managed to Trek the universe without
> having their command console marked. I don't know why you can
> navigate a house. :)
>

Hey, The Next Generation had touch screens that beeped whenever they
touched them. ^_^

TDD

[Doug Miller]

denni...@gmail.com wrote in
news:d92de6c2-ab08-4bb7...@googlegroups.com:

> On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 12:57:58 PM UTC-4, Doug Miller
> wrote:
>> denni...@gmail.com wrote in
>>
>> news:236992eb-437b-4e23...@googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > With an even number of switches, you will always have an even
>> > number of switches in a certain position with the lights off.
>> > Either four down, two down, or four up.
>>
>> This is untrue.
>>
>> Want proof? Set it up so that the lights are off when all four
>> switches are down.
>>
>> Now turn one of the switches upside down. The lights are still
>> off, but now there are three switches down, and one up.
>
> So do you wander through the house flipping switches over in
> electrical boxes on a daily basis?

Do try to pay attention here. The *only* purpose of that statement was to point out your error.

>
> If he wires it up so that all four are down and the lights are
> off, and LEAVES THEM ALONE, then the lights will be off with the
> switches in three states:
>
> 1. Four down.
> 2. Two down.
> 3. Four up.

Yes, of course -- but that's not what you said at first. You said
"with an even number of switches, you will always have an even
number of switches in a certain position with the lights off" --
and that just is not true. It's quite possible to have three up
and one down, with the lights off.

[hrho...@sbcglobal.net]

Why not use a special color for the switches you are concerned about,
or always make them the left-hand most switch in a bank of adjacent
switches. Unless you are developing Alzheimers, you are making a big
deal out of what most of us do on a routine basis many times a day.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 2:36:07 PM UTC-4, denni...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 19, 2013 10:08:56 AM UTC-4, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> > On Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:35:16 PM UTC-4, denni...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > In other words, if you run down the hall and flip all four switches to the down position, the lights will always end up OFF.
>
>
>
> > I never saw him saying anything even close to that. And
>
> > I can't imagine that it would make much sense. He said he
>
> > had 4 switches controlling a hallway light. Why on earth
>
> > would you need to run down the hall and check each switch?
>
> > All you need do is look if the light is on or off and then
>
> > hit the one switch located where you are exiting the hall.
>
>
>
> Obviously you weren't reading carefully because that's EXACTLY what he said.
>

Then you should be able to provide the excerpt where he says EXACTLY that. Funny thing. You haven't.

And assuming it's true, what good does it do again?
If you only look at one or two switches, you still
don't know that the light is on or off. Doug tried
to make that point to you as well. So, you
have to walk around to check at least 3 switches. He's
so concerned, he'd probably check all 4. Does that
make any sense as opposed to just looking at the
hallway light to see if it's on or off? I've yet
to see a 3 way, 4 way, hallway light where whether
the light was on or off was not easily determinable
from each switch. That's kind of the whole purpose,
so that you can turn the light for that area on
or off from the various areas it serves.

>
> Nobody's checking each switch. He just wants the "home position" to be all four switches DOWN, and light OFF. It's a form of OCD.

Thanks for the diagnosis. You've confirmed that what he's
trying to do makes no sense.

>
>
>
> > > With an even number of switches, you will always have an even number of switches in a certain position with the lights off. Either four down, two down, or four up.
>
> >
>
> > Which of course means you can't do what he wants to do.
>
>
>
> Yes, he can. All he wants is, "All four switches DOWN, lights OFF."




>
>
>
> What you keep harping on and on about is "All four switches MUST be down for the lights to be OFF." That is not what he wants.

Seems I'm not the only one that interpreted it that way.

>
>
>
> Clearly he was able to achieve it because he replied and stated such. All it required was swapping the wires on the first switch.

I hope he's happy now. When leaving the hallway, he can
either go check 3 switches to make sure they are down and
the light is off. Me, I'd just look at the light as I'm
exiting the hallway. Good grief!

[jamesgang]

Yes, we all agree, what he wants makes no sense. But what he wants is for the light to be off when ALL the switches are down.

[Doug Miller]

jamesgang <james...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:d7de7a5e-5053-4536...@googlegroups.com:

> Yes, we all agree, what he wants makes no sense. But what he
> wants is for the light to be off when ALL the switches are down.
>

That's not difficult. All he needs to do is flip all the switches down, and then look at the light:
-- if the light is off, he's finished.
-- if the light is on, remove a faceplace and turn any one of the four switches upside down.

[Robert Macy]

On Jun 20, 10:54 am, Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_...@example.com>
wrote:
> jamesgang <jamesgan...@gmail.com> wrote innews:d7de7a5e-5053-4536...@googlegroups.com:

Again, I understand your lack of sympathy. When there's a single
switch in the panel at the ends of a hall; UP/DOWN makes NO
difference. However, I've got over 20 light panels containing racks of
up to 5 switches per panel! As I said, if light switches can be made
to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch
activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray
positions and all your lights are out but one...

Quoting from one of my replies to another:
"From all the replies there's not been much sympathy for the
confusion
3,4,5-way switches can cause. I agree, if there's a single switch
controlling the light set, not a biggie, don't care about up or down
position, but when you have light switch panels containing 4 and
sometimes 5 switches it can be a bit daunting when you're half
asleep. and don't want to exercise every frigging light in the room
trying to find the right one."

And again, turning a switch over is not a viable option. The wiring is
often too short, the boxes are FILLED with wiring, and the wiring
itself is NOT very flexible. This may have been 12 Awg wiring, will
have to check. So turning a switch over puts the GND wire at the top
and distorts everything so much that the switch never lies flat again
and cosmetically looks terrible after the cover plate is replaced.

[Metspitzer]

You can accomplish the same thing Doug suggests by swapping the
travelers at one switch. A 3-way switch will have one screw that has
a different marking than the other two. Swap the two wires on the
terminals that have the same markings.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in news:d35c507e-2439-4719-9411-
83cdc3...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com:

> On Jun 20, 10:54 am, Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_...@example.com>
> wrote:

>> jamesgang <jamesgan...@gmail.com> wrote innews:d7de7a5e-5053-4536-a165-43
> b6e2a...@googlegroups.com:

>>
>> > Yes, we all agree, what he wants makes no sense.  But what he
>> > wants is for the light to be off when ALL the switches are down.
>>
>> That's not difficult. All he needs to do is flip all the switches down, a
> nd then look at the light:
>> -- if the light is off, he's finished.
>> -- if the light is on, remove a faceplace and turn any one of the four sw
> itches upside down.
>
> Again, I understand your lack of sympathy. When there's a single
> switch in the panel at the ends of a hall; UP/DOWN makes NO
> difference. However, I've got over 20 light panels containing racks of
> up to 5 switches per panel! As I said, if light switches can be made
> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch
> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray
> positions and all your lights are out but one...

First -- why do you care which switch activated the light? When one light is controlled from
four different switches, any one of the four can turn it on -- and any one of the four can turn it
off, too. What possibile difference could it make, to know which switch turned it on? You can
turn it off from any of the other three. You don't have to turn it off using the same switch that
turned it on.

Second -- you're wrong about it being "easy to tell" anyway. Suppose you have four
switches controlling the same light; suppose further that you've succeeded in configuring
this so that the light is off when all four are down. If three of the four are *up*, which one turned
it on? For that matter, even if only *one* of them is up you *still * don't know which one turned
the light on most recently: flip switch 1 up, light goes on; flip switch 2 up, light goes off; flip
switch 1 *down*, light goes on. Switch 2 is up, but switch *1* turned the light on.

[Fred McKenzie]

In article
<d35c507e-2439-4719...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote:

> As I said, if light switches can be made
> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch
> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray
> positions and all your lights are out but one...

Robert-

I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion.

Do you want any one switch to be able to turn off the light if a
different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with
the end switches in a SPDT configuration. Any intermediate switches
would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal
switches intended for this function.) As mentioned, you could swap two
wires at any one of the switches to give you "All Down Equals OFF".

But that would be of little value if you want to know which one switch
was responsible for leaving the light on. For that, you would simply
connect all SPST switches in parallel. All switches in the up position
would need to be turned off for the light to go off. Then you would not
have "N-Way" switches where one of N switches could turn off a light
another switch turned on.

Fred

[Doug Miller]

Fred McKenzie <fm...@aol.com> wrote in news:fmmck-CB580A.22112020062013@
5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com:

> In article
> <d35c507e-2439-4719...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> As I said, if light switches can be made
>> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch
>> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray
>> positions and all your lights are out but one...
>
> Robert-
>
> I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion.

You're missing what Robert's *really* confused about... see below.

>
> Do you want any one switch to be able to turn off the light if a
> different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with
> the end switches in a SPDT configuration. Any intermediate switches
> would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal
> switches intended for this function.) As mentioned, you could swap two
> wires at any one of the switches to give you "All Down Equals OFF".
>
> But that would be of little value if you want to know which one switch
> was responsible for leaving the light on.

Knowing which switch is responsible for leaving the light on is of no value to begin with. If the
light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch
turned it on? It. Does. Not. Matter.

>For that, you would simply
> connect all SPST switches in parallel. All switches in the up position
> would need to be turned off for the light to go off. Then you would not
> have "N-Way" switches where one of N switches could turn off a light
> another switch turned on.

... thus completely defeating the purpose of having multiple switches.

[tra...@optonline.net]

Heh, I'm with you on this one Doug. I don't see the point to the
whole exercise. But there are others here like Dennis, that think
we shouldn't be asking the question about "why" he wants it, what
purpose it serves, just tell him how to do it.

He started off with:

"Plus, (original installer) paid
no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up
in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to
change. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the
box is no problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the
cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but
still reaches.

Big problem is the best way to change the switching action of the
multiple control switch. "

Which implies that there is an expectation of what the "proper
position is for 3-way, 4-way, 5-way switches should be to each other?
No electrician even considers this, because the light can be
on with some switches up, some down and no one that I know
cares. You just look at the light. If Robert rewires it so that
the light is off with all 4 down, then if you're standing at one
switch and the light is off, all you know is that the one
corresponding switch is also down. You still don't know what
position the other two switches are in. So, AFAIK, you would have to go
check one of those as well. Or you could just look at the light.
In every case I've seen, it's easier to look at the light for
a hallway, then check at least two switches....

If this really is an OCD thing, like Dennis says, that's fine, and
he can get all 4 down with the light off. It's just that if it
really solves something that we're missing, it would be nice to
know what that is. Like you, if someone wants to set about fiddling
with something that is work and seems to serve no purpose, I try
to understand the real objective, so that we're not just providing
steps in some process that doesn't solve anything.

[Robert Macy]

On Thursday, June 20, 2013 12:31:28 PM UTC-7, Metspitzer wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:01:05 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy < wrote: >On Jun 20, 10:54 am, Doug Miller <doug_at_milmac_dot_...@example.com> >wrote: >> jamesgang <jamesgan...@gmail.com> wrote innews:d7de7a5e-5053-4536...@googlegroups.com: >> >> > Yes, we all agree, what he wants makes no sense.  But what he >> > wants is for the light to be off when ALL the switches are down. >> >> That's not difficult. All he needs to do is flip all the switches down, and then look at the light: >> -- if the light is off, he's finished. >> -- if the light is on, remove a faceplace and turn any one of the four switches upside down. > >Again, I understand your lack of sympathy. When there's a single >switch in the panel at the ends of a hall; UP/DOWN makes NO >difference. However, I've got over 20 light panels containing racks of >up to 5 switches per panel! As I said, if light switches can be made >to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch >activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray >positions and all your lights are out but one... > >Quoting from one of my replies to another: > "From all the replies there's not been much sympathy for the >confusion >3,4,5-way switches can cause. I agree, if there's a single switch >controlling the light set, not a biggie, don't care about up or down >position, but when you have light switch panels containing 4 and >sometimes 5 switches it can be a bit daunting when you're half >asleep. and don't want to exercise every frigging light in the room >trying to find the right one." > >And again, turning a switch over is not a viable option. The wiring is >often too short, the boxes are FILLED with wiring, and the wiring >itself is NOT very flexible. This may have been 12 Awg wiring, will >have to check. So turning a switch over puts the GND wire at the top >and distorts everything so much that the switch never lies flat again >and cosmetically looks terrible after the cover plate is replaced. You can accomplish the same thing Doug suggests by swapping the travelers at one switch. A 3-way switch will have one screw that has a different marking than the other two. Swap the two wires on the terminals that have the same markings.

Thank you. I didn't see any such markings, but on the next set will look for them!

[Robert Macy]

On Thursday, June 20, 2013 7:11:20 PM UTC-7, Fred McKenzie wrote:
> In article <d35c507e-2439-4719...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>, Robert Macy wrote: > As I said, if light switches can be made > to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch > activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray > positions and all your lights are out but one... Robert- I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion. Do you want any one switch to be able to turn off the light if a different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with the end switches in a SPDT configuration. Any intermediate switches would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal switches intended for this function.) As mentioned, you could swap two wires at any one of the switches to give you "All Down Equals OFF". But that would be of little value if you want to know which one switch was responsible for leaving the light on. For that, you would simply connect all SPST switches in parallel. All switches in the up position would need to be turned off for the light to go off. Then you would not have "N-Way" switches where one of N switches could turn off a light another switch turned on. Fred

Fred, can't understand the source for this confusion. I want any switch to be able to turn ON/OFF the lights as before. It's just that I need to be able to 'set' them all up at least once in their lifetime so that late at night it's easier to figure out which switch turned on the light. Hopefully somebody read my replies and can see how it can get out of hand when you have MANY, up to 5 switches in a single row, as to figure it out easily. like second nature, oh that switch is up therefore that's the switch to turn it back off. don't have to think about it. You have no idea what it's like to be confronted with five switches all set to arbitrary positions to quickly shut the one you want off - without turning on one you don't want.

[Robert Macy]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 7:25:03 AM UTC-7, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2013 7:13:02 AM UTC-4, Doug Miller wrote: > Fred McKenzie wrote in news:fmmck-CB580A.22112020062013@ > > 5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com: > > > > > In article > > > <d35c507e-2439-4719...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>, > > > Robert Macy wrote: > > > > > >> As I said, if light switches can be made > > >> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch > > >> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray > > >> positions and all your lights are out but one... > > > > > > Robert- > > > > > > I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion. > > > > You're missing what Robert's *really* confused about... see below. > > > > > > Do you want any one switch to be able to turn off the light if a > > > different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with > > > the end switches in a SPDT configuration. Any intermediate switches > > > would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal > > > switches intended for this function.) As mentioned, you could swap two > > > wires at any one of the switches to give you "All Down Equals OFF". > > > > > > But that would be of little value if you want to know which one switch > > > was responsible for leaving the light on. > > > > Knowing which switch is responsible for leaving the light on is of no value to begin with. If the > > light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch > > turned it on? It. Does. Not. Matter. > > > > >For that, you would simply > > > connect all SPST switches in parallel. All switches in the up position > > > would need to be turned off for the light to go off. Then you would not > > > have "N-Way" switches where one of N switches could turn off a light > > > another switch turned on. > > > > ... thus completely defeating the purpose of having multiple switches. Heh, I'm with you on this one Doug. I don't see the point to the whole exercise. But there are others here like Dennis, that think we shouldn't be asking the question about "why" he wants it, what purpose it serves, just tell him how to do it. He started off with: "Plus, (original installer) paid no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to change. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the box is no problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but still reaches. Big problem is the best way to change the switching action of the multiple control switch. " Which implies that there is an expectation of what the "proper position is for 3-way, 4-way, 5-way switches should be to each other? No electrician even considers this, because the light can be on with some switches up, some down and no one that I know cares. You just look at the light. If Robert rewires it so that the light is off with all 4 down, then if you're standing at one switch and the light is off, all you know is that the one corresponding switch is also down. You still don't know what position the other two switches are in. So, AFAIK, you would have to go check one of those as well. Or you could just look at the light. In every case I've seen, it's easier to look at the light for a hallway, then check at least two switches.... If this really is an OCD thing, like Dennis says, that's fine, and he can get all 4 down with the light off. It's just that if it really solves something that we're missing, it would be nice to know what that is. Like you, if someone wants to set about fiddling with something that is work and seems to serve no purpose, I try to understand the real objective, so that we're not just providing steps in some process that doesn't solve anything.

...
I don't know why it's so difficult to understand WHY I'd like the switches to be at least once in their lives setting ALL in the proper position. You evidently don't have a house with a lot of lighting controls and multiple switch plates. I have agreed in previous posts that *if* this were a single light switch plate at four different locations to control an overhead light; no biggie. I don't care WHAT position they're in, because THAT light switch obviously controls THAT light, done. But when you have racks and racks of multi-controller switches running ?? around your bedroom; it would be nice to have the switches at least be 'settable' to a mnemonic configuration, where OFF is down, then when turn one on it's obvious which light switch to turn off to get back to ALL lights off. Else, you're stuck out there in the 30 by 50 ft room trying to remember exactly which one in the rack of 5 is the one to shut off! Results, you wake up and have to 'think' about the light switches. Don't want that, don't want to have to completely wake up, rather scan the switches and think, oh that's the one and OFF it goes - done and can go back to sleep.

I'm not even going to get into the problem of explaining the switches to a guest in the house! Or, I could say, "Yeah, feel free to play with the switches until you get the right one." A guest unfamiliar with the switch setup only has to look at the rack and notice which one is up to turn off a light.

[Robert Macy]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 4:13:02 AM UTC-7, Doug Miller wrote:
>...snip...

Knowing which switch is responsible for leaving the light on is of no value to begin with. If the light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch turned it on? It. Does. Not. Matter.

WRONG! Yes, it does matter. see other replies.

[Metspitzer]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:56:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
<robert...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Ok Ok I know this is simple but it's irritating me beyond belief.
>
>Leviton light switches.
>
>In a dual box next to an outside door there are two light switches.
>One is the single control for a porch light, the other is a one of
>four switches that turn on/off the hall way lights.
>
One other suggestion that may help you if you want to change the
location of the switches in the box would be to use stranded wire as a
jumper wire. If the wire connected to the switch goes to a wirenut,
replace that short wire with stranded wire.

To be able to splice stranded wire to solid wire, a little trick is to
twist all the solid wire together first. Then, when you add the
stranded piece, make sure the stranded wire is sticking up just a
little farther than the solid, so the wirenut grabs the strands of
copper just before it bites into the solid.

You also need a special type switch so that the stranded wire goes
behind a pressure plate instead of trying to twist it around a screw.

They also sell a stranded wire in green that comes with a screw on one
end and a terminal lug on the other. If there is a screw hole in the
box you can just screw the bonding wire directly to the box and attach
the switch screw directly to the green. (You need to make sure the
bundle of bare wires is bonded to the box)

Take pictures of what you have before you change anything. Mark
everything. A gang of 4 switches is going to be pretty confusing
unless you know where every cable in the box goes.

[Metspitzer]

On Fri, 21 Jun 2013 14:27:09 -0400, Metspitzer <Kilo...@charter.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:56:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
><robert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Ok Ok I know this is simple but it's irritating me beyond belief.
>>
>>Leviton light switches.
>>
>>In a dual box next to an outside door there are two light switches.
>>One is the single control for a porch light, the other is a one of
>>four switches that turn on/off the hall way lights.
>>
>One other suggestion that may help you if you want to change the
>location of the switches in the box would be to use stranded wire as a
>jumper wire. If the wire connected to the switch goes to a wirenut,
>replace that short wire with stranded wire.
>
>To be able to splice stranded wire to solid wire, a little trick is to
>twist all the solid wire together first. Then, when you add the
>stranded piece, make sure the stranded wire is sticking up just a
>little farther than the solid, so the wirenut grabs the strands of
>copper just before it bites into the solid.
>
>You also need a special type switch so that the stranded wire goes
>behind a pressure plate instead of trying to twist it around a screw.
>
>They also sell a stranded wire in green that comes with a screw on one
>end and a terminal lug on the other. If there is a screw hole in the
>box you can just screw the bonding wire directly to the box and attach
>the switch screw directly to the green. (You need to make sure the
>bundle of bare wires is bonded to the box)
>

The green bonding wire is probably not going to work for you. I am
used to working at hospitals where the boxes are metal. Your house
will probably not have metal boxes.

[dpb]

On 6/21/2013 12:35 PM, Robert Macy wrote:
...

> I don't know why it's so difficult to understand WHY I'd like the
> switches to be at least once in their lives setting ALL in the proper

> position. ...
> ... But when you have racks and racks of multi-controller

> switches running ?? around your bedroom; it would be nice to have the
> switches at least be 'settable' to a mnemonic configuration, where OFF
> is down, then when turn one on it's obvious which light switch to turn

> off to get back to ALL lights off....

But, as soon as one of these is switched from another location somewhere
else it screws it up anyway, so there's really no point--they'll be at
odd positions in the other panel(s), anyway.

Labels would seem to be the think if you really have so many you can't
recall which one is what...

The most there is in this house is one set of four at the outside door
but they're installed in a logical order from top to
bottom--yard,porch,entry,dining. Consequently it's no issue to know
which to hit; even visitors figure it out pretty quickly w/o formal
training. :)

It would seem like such an arrangement should be possible to at least
ameliorate the problem if not totally solve it. OTOH, I'd probably just
simplify and eliminate the switches if were so annoying as it sounds as
if were... :)

--

[TimR]

Okay.

If I'm understanding correctly, he wants to be able to tell if a circuit is on or off by looking at the switch.

The standard convention for switches is up for ON, down for OFF, but this doesn't work for multiple control switches.

So, why not solve the problem with a pilot light? A small indicator light by each switch would glow when that circuit has power. Or when it doesn't, either way.

I've seen this done for refrigeration equipment, maybe for boilers, I think a couple of other applications. If you have a freezer on a switch you like to know nobody turned it off.

The advantage of this is he could see the switch panel in the dark and know without turning anything on.

[dpb]

On 6/21/2013 2:50 PM, TimR wrote:
...

> So, why not solve the problem with a pilot light? A small indicator
> light by each switch would glow when that circuit has power. Or when it
> doesn't, either way.
>

...

> The advantage of this is he could see the switch panel in the dark
> and know without turning anything on.

Yeah, and w/ the number he's talking about it'll look like Christmas... :)

--

[Metspitzer]

On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 22:08:49 -0400, Metspitzer <Kilo...@charter.net>

wrote:

>On Mon, 17 Jun 2013 18:56:00 -0700 (PDT), Robert Macy
><robert...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Ok Ok I know this is simple but it's irritating me beyond belief.
>>
>>Leviton light switches.
>>
>>In a dual box next to an outside door there are two light switches.
>>One is the single control for a porch light, the other is a one of
>>four switches that turn on/off the hall way lights.
>>

>>Of course the installer put the hallway light switch adjacent to the
>>door opening and the porch light switch way on the inside. Plus, paid

>>no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up
>>in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to
>>change. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the
>>box is no problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the
>>cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but
>>still reaches.
>>

I never used any of these, but they make them in green, white and
black.
http://www.idealindustries.ca/products/wire_termination/twist-on/term-a-nut_grounding.php

>>Big problem is the best way to change the switching action of the

>>multiple control switch. Went to google, not much help there. as
>>usual. Did find that 4 wire means 3 switches, not four. and nothing
>>for 5-wire and found an interesting description of how a 'control'
>>switch is in the box that supplies wiring up to the fixture. That may
>>be this box, but doubt it, because this switch has four leads.
>>
>>However *if* this is the cable that goes up to the light fixtures; why
>>there would be a RED and a BLACK going to the fixtures when all I need
>>is the BLACK power going up there. So, thought I'd ask.
>>
>>Ignoring GND wiring that's all done correctly. There is a cable with
>>RED, BLACK, and WHITE, call it CABLE A. Another cable, call it CABLE B
>>has RED, BLACK, and WHITE. As expected the WHITE is simply bypassing
>>everything with a wire nut. BLACK A goes to IN at the top of the
>>switch. BLACK B goes to OUT at the top of the switch. RED A goes to IN
>>close to bottom of switch and RED B goes to OUT close to bottom of
>>switch.
>>
>>What is the best way to rewire the switch to get the inverse from what
>>it is now and the 'proper' position?
>>
>Before you do anything, take pictures of how it is now.
>
>If what you have is 3 way or 4 way switches, sometimes the switch will
>be up when the light is off. I think that is what you are asking.
>Sorry I quit reading about half way down.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 1:35:46 PM UTC-4, Robert Macy wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2013 7:25:03 AM UTC-7, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
>
> > On Friday, June 21, 2013 7:13:02 AM UTC-4, Doug Miller wrote: > Fred McKenzie wrote in news:fmmck-CB580A.22112020062013@ > > 5ad64b5e.bb.sky.com: > > > > > In article > > > <d35c507e-2439-4719...@9g2000yqq.googlegroups.com>, > > > Robert Macy wrote: > > > > > >> As I said, if light switches can be made > > >> to be all down when off; it's easy to tell which light switch > > >> activated the light. But, when you have a rack of switches in arbitray > > >> positions and all your lights are out but one... > > > > > > Robert- > > > > > > I missed the earlier comments, but I see a point of confusion. > > > > You're missing what Robert's *really* confused about... see below. > > > > > > Do you want any one switch to be able to turn off the light if a > > > different switch turned it on? That requires a string of switches, with > > > the end switches in a SPDT configuration. Any intermediate switches > > > would be in a DPDT configuration. (There may be some 4 terminal > > > switches intended for this function.) As mentioned, you could swap two > > > wires at any one of the switches to give you "All Down Equals OFF". > > > > > > But that would be of little value if you want to know which one switch > > > was responsible for leaving the light on. > > > > Knowing which switch is responsible for leaving the light on is of no value to begin with. If the > > light can be turned on OR OFF from any of multiple switches, WHO CARES which switch > > turned it on? It. Does. Not. Matter. > > > > >For that, you would simply > > > connect all SPST switches in parallel. All switches in the up position > > > would need to be turned off for the light to go off. Then you would not > > > have "N-Way" switches where one of N switches could turn off a light > > > another switch turned on. > > > > ... thus completely defeating the purpose of having multiple switches. Heh, I'm with you on this one Doug. I don't see the point to the whole exercise. But there are others here like Dennis, that think we shouldn't be asking the question about "why" he wants it, what purpose it serves, just tell him how to do it. He started off with: "Plus, (original installer) paid no attention to having all of the individual multiple switches end up in any proper position when the hallway light is off, so want to change. Swapping these two switches in their physical location in the box is no problem the wiring appears to be long enough, although the cabling comes down through the inlet holes in the wrong places. but still reaches. Big problem is the best way to change the switching action of the multiple control switch. " Which implies that there is an expectation of what the "proper position is for 3-way, 4-way, 5-way switches should be to each other? No electrician even considers this, because the light can be on with some switches up, some down and no one that I know cares. You just look at the light. If Robert rewires it so that the light is off with all 4 down, then if you're standing at one switch and the light is off, all you know is that the one corresponding switch is also down. You still don't know what position the other two switches are in. So, AFAIK, you would have to go check one of those as well. Or you could just look at the light. In every case I've seen, it's easier to look at the light for a hallway, then check at least two switches.... If this really is an OCD thing, like Dennis says, that's fine, and he can get all 4 down with the light off. It's just that if it really solves something that we're missing, it would be nice to know what that is. Like you, if someone wants to set about fiddling with something that is work and seems to serve no purpose, I try to understand the real objective, so that we're not just providing steps in some process that doesn't solve anything.
>
>
>
> ...
>
> I don't know why it's so difficult to understand WHY I'd like the switches to be at least once in their lives setting ALL in the proper position.

It's difficult because I don't see what that accomplishes. I think a lot
of folks here don't understand it either. The one or two that do, just
accept it as some kind of OCD thing.

You evidently don't have a house with a lot of lighting controls and multiple switch plates.

I have a house that has several switch plates that have
3 or 4 switches where some of the switches are 3 way. I
have one that is 4 way. And don't have a problem. The switches
that are 3 or 4 way control lights that are visible from
where the switches are. So, the position of the switch is
irrelevant to me.

I have agreed in previous posts that *if* this were a single light switch plate at four different locations to control an overhead light; no biggie. I don't care WHAT position they're in, because THAT light switch obviously controls THAT light, done. But when you have racks and racks of multi-controller switches running ?? around your bedroom; it would be nice to have the switches at least be 'settable' to a mnemonic configuration, where OFF is down, then when turn one on it's obvious which light switch to turn off to get back to ALL lights off.

That would be nice, but as has been explained several
times, it doesn't work that way. You have 4 switches on a
5-way circuit that control one light. You've rewired
or turned switches upside down so that the light is off
when all 4 switches are down. Let's call the switches
A, B, C, D. A is the one near you. You look at it and
see that it's down. That means there is a 50% chance the
light is off, because you don't know the position of the
other 3 switches. If you check switch B and it's also
down, then there is still a 50% chance the light is off,
because you don't know the position of C and D. If you
check switch C and it too is down, then you know the
light is off.

That's how I see it working. If I missed something, let
me know what it is.

Else, you're stuck out there in the 30 by 50 ft room trying to remember exactly which one in the rack of 5 is the one to shut off!

Yeah, that's a valid problem, if you can't remember which switch
does what and they are not marked. Let's say the third switch
is the one for the
light you want to turn off. How does what you did, rearranging
the other switches on the 5-way circuit solve that? Let's call
that switch A. Unless
you can not only see switch A in front of you, but also 2 of
the other switches on that same circuit, you still don't know
if the light is on or off. So whether the third switch, ie
switch A is up or down doesn't determine whether the light is
on or off. You need to know the position of two more switches.

Results, you wake up and have to 'think' about the light switches. Don't want that, don't want to have to completely wake up, rather scan the switches and think, oh that's the one and OFF it goes - done and can go back to sleep.

But it doesn't work that way. You've fixed it so that
when all four switches are down, light is out, right?

Case 1
Light out
A - down
B - down
C - down
D - down

Now Case 2
light on

A up
B down
C down
D down


You see A is up light is on. Just like you want, so you
can move it down to turn off the light.

Now Case 3

A down
B up
C down
D down

Now what? The light is on and A is down. How
do you know A is the switch there among the
others on the switchplate to turn off?

>
>
>
> I'm not even going to get into the problem of explaining the switches to a guest in the house! Or, I could say, "Yeah, feel free to play with the switches until you get the right one." A guest unfamiliar with the switch setup only has to look at the rack and notice which one is up to turn off a light.

Per the above, it doesn't work that way. I
would think you would have realized that by now.
Maybe I'm missing something here, but I don't
think so. Which is why some of us were questioning
what was the ultimate objective. Dennis came to the
conclusion that you just wanted all four of those
5 way switches to be down because of OCD and that you
should go ahead and do it. Others, like Doug and I
thought you must have some rational objective. From
what you just described, I don't see how flipping,
re-wiring, whatever achieves it. A couple of labels
stuck on the switchplate would identify which swithc
does what though.

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 3:50:23 PM UTC-4, TimR wrote:
> Okay.
>
>
>
> If I'm understanding correctly, he wants to be able to tell if a circuit is on or off by looking at the switch.
>
>
>
> The standard convention for switches is up for ON, down for OFF, but this doesn't work for multiple control switches.

Welcome to the club.... There are two views here. Most of us are
in your camp. Even those in the other camp, Dennis mostly, recognize
what you say. You can set up a N way switch system fo
the light is off with all the switches down. That is one state. You
can do that. But it's also obviously off with other combination, so,
like you, I think we all don't see it solving anything. I don'
think Dennis thinks it solves anything other than providing that
one all down position to solve some kind of OCD thing.

[Ralph Mowery]

"Robert Macy" <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9fe74aca-187e-44b2...@googlegroups.com...

>Fred, can't understand the source for this confusion. I want any switch to
>be >able to turn ON/OFF the lights as before. It's just that I need to be
>able to 'set' >them all up at least once in their lifetime so that late at
>night it's easier to figure >out which switch turned on the light.
>Hopefully somebody read my replies and >can see how it can get out of hand
>when you have MANY, up to 5 switches in >a single row, as to figure it out
>easily. like second nature, oh that switch is up >therefore that's the
>switch to turn it back off. don't have to think about it. You >have no idea
>what it's like to be confronted with five switches all set to >arbitrary
>positions to quickly shut the one you want off - without turning on one
> >you don't want.

I see and understand what you want.

Now you have to understand that it is not possiable to get you what you
want.

That is not in a simple way. You may be able to go to either a computer
(PLC) type controler or a bunch of relays to do that, but it will require a
lot of money and major rewiring.

[Fred McKenzie]

In article <43fdcb06-a415-4686...@googlegroups.com>,

"tra...@optonline.net" <tra...@optonline.net> wrote:

> I don'
> think Dennis thinks it solves anything other than providing that
> one all down position to solve some kind of OCD thing.

I believe Robert has the answer he was looking for by now - reverse
connection of two wires.

Someone once said, "I have CDO. CDO is like OCD, except it is in
alphabetical order as it should be!"

That was when I realized I had it too.

Fred

[dpb]

On 6/21/2013 4:31 PM, Fred McKenzie wrote:
> In article<43fdcb06-a415-4686...@googlegroups.com>,
> "tra...@optonline.net"<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
>> I don'
>> think Dennis thinks it solves anything other than providing that
>> one all down position to solve some kind of OCD thing.
>
> I believe Robert has the answer he was looking for by now - reverse
> connection of two wires.

...

That only solves the problem as long as none of the other switches
change _their_ position--as soon as any one of them is switched, he'll
have the same issue.

So, unless he no longer ever uses any of the others after they're all
put in some reference position, switching a traveler doesn't solve the
problem, either. Equivalently and less work, he can put them where he
wants them in the room in question then go turn off whatever is on at
one of the other locations--accomplishes just as much.

--

[tra...@optonline.net]

On Friday, June 21, 2013 6:33:56 PM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
> On 6/21/2013 4:31 PM, Fred McKenzie wrote:
>
> > In article<43fdcb06-a415-4686...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> > "tra...@optonline.net"<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> I don'
>
> >> think Dennis thinks it solves anything other than providing that
>
> >> one all down position to solve some kind of OCD thing.
>
> >
>
> > I believe Robert has the answer he was looking for by now - reverse
>
> > connection of two wires.
>
> ...
>
>
>
> That only solves the problem as long as none of the other switches
>
> change _their_ position--as soon as any one of them is switched, he'll
>
> have the same issue.

>
>
>
> So, unless he no longer ever uses any of the others after they're all
>
> put in some reference position, switching a traveler doesn't solve the
>
> problem, either.

That's exactly how I see it too.....

[dpb]

On 6/21/2013 7:06 PM, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2013 6:33:56 PM UTC-4, dpb wrote:
>> On 6/21/2013 4:31 PM, Fred McKenzie wrote:
>>
>>> In article<43fdcb06-a415-4686...@googlegroups.com>,
>>
>>> "tra...@optonline.net"<tra...@optonline.net> wrote:
>>

...

>>> I believe Robert has the answer he was looking for by now - reverse
>>> connection of two wires.
>>
>> ...
>>
>> That only solves the problem as long as none of the other switches

>> change _their_ position--...
>> ...unless he no longer ever uses any of the others ...
>> ...switching a traveler doesn't solve the problem, either.

>
>
> That's exactly how I see it too.....

'Cuz that's how it is... :)

As somebody else noted, the only way he can accomplish the goal is to
use a bunch of logic or a wireless controller or somesuch--it just is
simply not possible w/ conventional house wiring w/ multiway switches
unless the others on the circuit in question aren't changed from their
positions when the target one is as desired (there are combinations of
the others' positions that also leave the one unchanged, of course, by
switching them in pairs, for example, but not in general).

--

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:f49f3da1-97be-4810...@googlegroups.com:

> ...
> I don't know why it's so difficult to understand WHY I'd like
> the switches to be at least once in their lives setting ALL in
> the proper position. You evidently don't have a house with a lot
> of lighting controls and multiple switch plates. I have agreed
> in previous posts that *if* this were a single light switch
> plate at four different locations to control an overhead light;
> no biggie. I don't care WHAT position they're in, because THAT
> light switch obviously controls THAT light, done. But when you
> have racks and racks of multi-controller switches running ??
> around your bedroom; it would be nice to have the switches at
> least be 'settable' to a mnemonic configuration, where OFF is
> down, then when turn one on it's obvious which light switch to
> turn off to get back to ALL lights off.

And I don't know why it's so difficult for you to understand that:
(1) if one light is controlled by more than two switches, it is IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE
from the position of ONE of the switches, which of the remaining switches turned the light on
or off, and
(2) It doesn't MATTER which of the switches turned it on or off, you can use ANY of the
switches to turn it off or on again.

>Else, you're stuck out there in the 30 by 50 ft room trying to
>remember exactly which one in the rack of 5 is the one to shut
>off! Results, you wake up and have to 'think' about the light
>switches.

Nonsense. No 'thinking' required -- which appears to be a good thing, actually. Flip the first
switch in the rack of 5 -- did that make the light that I want to go out, go out, or did it turn
something else on instead? If it extinguished the light you wanted, fine, you're done.
Otherwise, flip the same switch again to make what you just turned on, go off, then repeat the
process for the next switch.

> Don't want that, don't want to have to completely wake
>up, rather scan the switches and think, oh that's the one and OFF
>it goes - done and can go back to sleep.

So label the switches on each faceplate. That way, you'll at least know which switch
controls which light.

>
> I'm not even going to get into the problem of explaining the
> switches to a guest in the house!

So label the switches on each faceplate. That way, your guests will know which switch
controls which light, too.

>Or, I could say, "Yeah, feel
> free to play with the switches until you get the right one."

In contrast to the plans you have in mind, that would actually work.

>A
> guest unfamiliar with the switch setup only has to look at the
> rack and notice which one is up to turn off a light.

False.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in news:70da9162-cf8f-48c8-8f27-
3ed712...@googlegroups.com:

OK, fine, explain why it matters -- why you [think you] need to turn a light off using the same

switch that turned it on.

Make sure your explanation takes into account the fact that, if a light is controlled from multiple
locations, it can be turned either on OR off by ANY of the switches.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:9fe74aca-187e-44b2...@googlegroups.com:

> Fred, can't understand the source for this confusion. I want any
> switch to be able to turn ON/OFF the lights as before. It's just
> that I need to be able to 'set' them all up at least once in
> their lifetime so that late at night it's easier to figure out
> which switch turned on the light.

(1) You CAN'T figure this out by looking at only one of the switches. It simply is not possible.
(2) If the light can be turned on by any of the switches, it can also be turned off by any of the
switches -- which means it does not matter which one turned it on. You can turn it off from ANY
of them, not just the one that turned it on.

[tra...@optonline.net]

This whole thing is amazing, isn't it? At one point, Dennis had me
half convinced that Robert knows how these switches work, but that
for some OCD reason, he just wants then arranged so that one possible
way for the lights to be off is for all of the switches to be down.
Like if all switches are down at every location, then he knows
everything is off without any further checking. There is actually
a usefullness to that. If, for example, you were leaving for a
trip you could just visually look at all the switches at every wall
plate involved. If they are all down, then everything is off.

But, from everything he's now saying, it sure looks like he
thinks he can just tell from the one switch plate which switch
controls the light because if the light is on, the switch must
be up. Of course it doesn't work that way. I think that was
what we were all questioning, before doing this re-arranging,
he should understand the very limited effect he's getting.

[Metspitzer]

This thread has made me convinced there is at least some use to
flipping 3-way switches. I am going to try it.

The house I live in now, I moved into when I was 12. I have since
inherited it from my parents as they are both dead. My sister and I
had a shared bathroom. On the door going into the bathroom from my
bedroom there is a 3-way switch for an overhead light and a single
pole switch for the medicine cabinet.

At the other door coming from my sister's bedroom there is only a
3-way switch for the overhead. With both lights off and both switches
in the down position on my side of the bathroom, the switch in my
sister's bedroom is off in the up position.

So for some 40 years now, the switch on my side of the door seems to
be in a constant state of one switch up and one switch down when both
lights in the bathroom are off. Although I have never asked her, it
seemed to me that she was intentionally causing the light switch to be
down in her room when the light is off.

I am going to flip the position of the switch on her side and see it
that changes how the order of switches ends up on my side of the
bathroom. My niece (her daughter) currently using her bedroom today.
My old bedroom is not being used, but guests still enter that bathroom
from my old bedroom side.

[dpb]

On 6/22/2013 12:07 PM, Metspitzer wrote:
...

> ... from my

> bedroom there is a 3-way switch for an overhead light and a single
> pole switch for the medicine cabinet.
>

> At the other door coming ... there is only a

> 3-way switch for the overhead. With both lights off and both switches
> in the down position on my side of the bathroom, the switch in my
> sister's bedroom is off in the up position.
>
> So for some 40 years now, the switch on my side of the door seems to
> be in a constant state of one switch up and one switch down when both

> lights in the bathroom are off. ...

>
> I am going to flip the position of the switch on her side and see it
> that changes how the order of switches ends up on my side of the

> bathroom....

For the case of only two 3-ways, sure, because there are only the two
cases. It will, however, still be the case that the two can be in
opposite positions on your side 'cuz after the flip the light will be
off when both are up as well as both down.

But, when more than two locations are on a circuit it is simply not
possible to have fixed orientation and allow the other switches to be
used individually moving any will change the direction sense of the
subject one.

There's a similar situation in the house here but it's never bugged me
enough to do anything about it--the basement has one long room that's
half the width and full length of the house that has the lights in two
banks and there are two doors. Obviously there are two switches at each
door. So, one pair is always in synch and one pair is always out of
synch when lights are on/off. I like to keep the pair at the middle
door in synch 'cuz that's the way I go in/out when heading to/from the
change room to outside and I always turn both on/off every time. The
wife is oblivious and almost always will get those switched every time
she is in/out. (The _really_ annoying thing is she has a penchant for
leaving one in the in-between state where one then has to go to the
other wall plate and turn it either on/off to make the circuit function
at all :) ).

--

--

[dpb]

On 6/24/2013 2:05 PM, khc wrote:
...

> I'm confused. You describe a room with two doors and then you refer
> to a "middle door."

OK, not, perhaps as clear as could have been--one door is at one end of
the room and the other is towards the middle of the room. It (the 2nd
door) is the one I was referring to but "middle" was referring to
location in general position along length of room rather than being in
middle of a group of doors.

> I think that I understand that your room has two groups of lights.
> Some of these lights are wired together all on one circuit and so turn
> on and off together. The remainder of the lights are wired together
> all on a second circuit and so turn on and off together. The two
> groups of lights are completely independent of each other.
>
> Further, the room has two doors and four light switches. Each door
> has two light switches. A switch at each of the two doors works
> together with a switch at the other door to control one of the groups
> of lights. The other two switches (one at each door) work together to
> control the second group of lights.
>
> Thus, one of the switches at each of the doors turns one of the groups
> of lights on and off. The remaining switch at each of the doors turns
> the other group of lights on and off. It is possible to turn a group
> of lights on at one door and off at the other door.

Yes

> Does your wife come in (and turn lights on) at one door then go out
> (and turn lights off) at the other door?
>
> Will you please say more about the "in between" state of the light
> switches where you have to go to the "other light plate" make things
> work?

On occasion she manages to flip one of the switches into a no-man's land
of be in between -- it's broken the contact so the light went out but
didn't actually go completely to the other position. Hence, it's open
between both sets of contacts. In that case, and if it's the one at the
other location from where one is, then ya' gotsta' go and flip that one
to one position or the other...some switches are difficult to get to
stay in a position like that, some less difficult.

--

[dpb]

On 6/24/2013 6:16 PM, pilgrim wrote:
...

> I'm sure that you're aware that the "no man's land" switch is broken
> and needs to be replaced.
...

No, it's not...it is just one which has a design in which there is if
one doesn't push it past half will stay on TDC. A brand new one of the
type will do the same. It's not being changed 'cuz it matches the
rest...and I'm sorta' AR that way about symmetry.

--

[nestork]

Robert:

Imagine this diagram with the middle "Four way switch" missing so that
the top yellow terminal on the left switch connects to the top yellow
terminal on the right switch and the bottom yellow terminals on both
switches are connected together too.

[image:
http://ezdiyelectricity.com/images/wiringdiagrams/switches/4-way-switch-wiring-diagram.jpg]

That is the wiring you have when you have two separate "three way
switches" controlling the same light. And, as you can see, no ONE
switch determines whether the light is on or off. Both switch toggles
have to be in the up position, or both in the down position, for the
light to be on. So, fliping EITHER switch toggle turns the light off,
and flipping it again, or flipping the other switch toggle, turns it
back on again. So, with two "three way switches", both switches have
two different "ON" positions instead of an ON and an OFF position like a
normal toggle switch. And, whether or not the light is ON or OFF
depends on the position of BOTH switches.

Now, if you want a third switch to control that same light, you still
need both three way switches, but you also need something called a "4
way switch" shown in the middle of that diagram.

If we number the contacts starting with #1 in the top left corner of the
4 way switch and going clockwise, when the toggle of a 4 way switch is
in one position, it connects contacts 1 and 2 together and 3 and 4
together. If you flip the toggle to the other position, it connects
contacts 1 and 3 together and 2 and 4 together. That way, regardless of
what position the two three way switches are in, flipping that middle 4
way switch will turn the light on, or turn it off.

In fact, of you wanted MORE than three switches, all of which would turn
the light on or off, you'd simply keep adding 4 way switches between the
two three way switches. That way, no matter what position the two three
way switches were in, flipping any of the 4 way switches between them
would turn the light on or turn it off.

So, it seems to me that you SHOULD be able to do what you're wanting
by:

1. Inspecting each switch that controls that light to determine which
are your two three way switches, and which are the 4 way switches.

2. Checking each of the intermediate 4 way switches to find out which
toggle position results in terminals 1 and 2 being connected and
terminals 3 and 4 being connected together. You want each intermediate
4 way switch to connect 1-2 and 3-4 when the toggle is in the down
position.

3. Now, just turn EITHER one of the two three way switches on the end
upside down. That way, when it's toggle is in the down position, the
light will be off, and flipping the toggle of ANY other switch will turn
the light ON.

Now, the wiring can get pretty hairy because the power won't necessarily
come into the electrical box at one end of the room. The power could
come in at the light's electrical box, or at the electrical box of any
of the switches.

But, as long as you understand the principle involved here which is to
set up all your switches so that the power goes through all the top
terminals when the toggles of the two three way switches are up, and
through all the bottom terminals when the toggles of the two three way
switches are down (and you may have to turn some 4 way switches upside
down to ensure they're all oriented the same). In that situation, with
the toggles of both 3 way switches on the end in the down position, the
light will be ON. By turning either three way switch upside down,
having the toggle in the down position will interrupt voltage getting to
the lamp, so that with one three way switch upside down, ALL toggles in
the down position means the light is OFF, and flipping ANY switch turns
the light ON.

Hope this helps.

Maybe draw the terminals of 4 switches (two three way switches on the
end and two 4 way switches between them) and connect the terminals with
lines to show where the electricity will flow, and you should see how
the above plan will work. Or, at least, it seems to me, how it should
work to accomplish what you want.




--
nestork

[dpb]

On 6/25/2013 3:26 AM, nestork wrote:
...

> 3. Now, just turn EITHER one of the two three way switches on the end
> upside down. That way, when it's toggle is in the down position, the
> light will be off, and flipping the toggle of ANY other switch will turn
> the light ON.
>

...

> set up all your switches so that the power goes through all the top
> terminals when the toggles of the two three way switches are up, and
> through all the bottom terminals when the toggles of the two three way
> switches are down (and you may have to turn some 4 way switches upside
> down to ensure they're all oriented the same). In that situation, with
> the toggles of both 3 way switches on the end in the down position, the
> light will be ON. By turning either three way switch upside down,
> having the toggle in the down position will interrupt voltage getting to
> the lamp, so that with one three way switch upside down, ALL toggles in
> the down position means the light is OFF, and flipping ANY switch turns
> the light ON.
>
> Hope this helps.

...

It doesn't, really... :)

You also have to add the condition that he also never uses the other
switches than the particular panel location in question to control the
light as would be normally done--for example, use one near an entry door
to turn on as entering and another near the exit door to turn off as
leaving. As soon as that is done, he's now got a case where one's up
and one's down and the light's off again. As the pattern ensues of
more-or-less random movement between locations, the states again become
also, more or less random as to which is up and which is down when the
light is off.

It's just not possible to have it wired conventionally no matter what
the initial configuration is w/o adding very heavy constraints on usage
and retain the possibility that turning any one switch in the down
position turns off an on light--the one closest by at the time may
already be 'down'.

--

[Nate Nagel]

Just came across this thread...

I remember switching the travelers on the 3-way switch in a friend's
condo's bathroom (there's a door from the bedroom hallway as well as
from the main entrance as there's only one bathroom) so that it would be
possible for both switches to be down when the lights are off. (of
course, it's also possible for both switches to be *up*, and I had to
explain that to her...)

I actually get it. I (and my friend) must have some light form of OCD.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

[dpb]

On 6/26/2013 9:21 AM, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On 06/26/2013 09:32 AM, dpb wrote:

...

>> You also have to add the condition that he also never uses the other
>> switches than the particular panel location in question to control the
>> light as would be normally done--for example, use one near an entry door
>> to turn on as entering and another near the exit door to turn off as
>> leaving. As soon as that is done, he's now got a case where one's up
>> and one's down and the light's off again. As the pattern ensues of
>> more-or-less random movement between locations, the states again become
>> also, more or less random as to which is up and which is down when the
>> light is off.
>>
>> It's just not possible to have it wired conventionally no matter what
>> the initial configuration is w/o adding very heavy constraints on usage
>> and retain the possibility that turning any one switch in the down
>> position turns off an on light--the one closest by at the time may
>> already be 'down'.
>>
>> --
>
> Just came across this thread...
>
> I remember switching the travelers on the 3-way switch in a friend's
> condo's bathroom (there's a door from the bedroom hallway as well as
> from the main entrance as there's only one bathroom) so that it would be
> possible for both switches to be down when the lights are off. (of
> course, it's also possible for both switches to be *up*, and I had to
> explain that to her...)
>
> I actually get it. I (and my friend) must have some light form of OCD.

Actually, the case above starts out w/ all down so when the second turns
the light off the case is that now there are two up in that room and the
rest are down. So, "off" is always going to be in pairs, but those
pairs are distributed semi-randomly owing to usage and so after a period
of time the state of any given on is indeterminate as is its control
action when changing state...the point still being that it takes severe
constraints on usage that make the point of having multiple switch
locations essentially moot to achieve the goal of always just turning
"off" a switch having the action of turning off the light.

--

[Robert Macy]

On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:26:07 AM UTC-7, nestork wrote:
>..snip...
>
> [image:
> http://ezdiyelectricity.com/images/wiringdiagrams/switches/4-way-switch-wiring-diagram.jpg]
>
>...snip...

That's greatest schematic I've ever seen! One glance and you easily see how the multi-switch works.

Exactly what I've got. The 'X' switch is a piece of cake to swap.
I'll have to examine the SPDT to see how they're marked, maybe it's obvious there too.

[dpb]

On 6/26/2013 9:46 AM, Robert Macy wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 1:26:07 AM UTC-7, nestork wrote:
>> ..snip...
>>

...

>
> That's greatest schematic I've ever seen! One glance and you easily
> see how the multi-switch works.
>
> Exactly what I've got. The 'X' switch is a piece of cake to swap.
> I'll have to examine the SPDT to see how they're marked, maybe it's obvious there too.

Of course they are; how else would anybody wire them? The common is
different from the two travelers; the location of which terminal is
common is _not_ necessarily the same physically on various switches.

But, see the comments earlier--it still doesn't matter how you arrange
the travelers or orient the switches themselves in the boxes _unless_
you're also willing to only use them under very restrictive operating
conditions--otherwise they'll migrate to alternate positions w/ time as
the various ones are operated to turn lights/appliances/whatever on/off
individually. Soon unless you again do the exercise of placing them all
individually back to the one known state you still don't have the
desired result in general. That result is just not possible(+) w/o
those kinds of restrictions (which pretty much defeats the whole point
of having multiple locations to begin with).

(+) Again, w/ conventional house wiring using 3- and 4-way switches. It
could be done as others have noted w/ additional relay logic or such.

--

[nestork]

dpb;3084483 Wrote:
> It's just not possible to have it wired conventionally no matter what
> the initial configuration is w/o adding very heavy constraints on usage
>
> and retain the possibility that turning any one switch in the down
> position turns off an on light--the one closest by at the time may
> already be 'down'.
>

No, you're never going to be able to wire it so that no matter what the
other switch toggle positions are, that you can always shut the light
off by flipping any switch's toggle down. That won't work.

But, you can always return to the original situation where the light is
OFF with all switch toggles down, and flipping ANY switch's toggle up
turns the light on, which is what I think he wanted.

> That's greatest schematic I've ever seen! One glance and you easily see
> how the multi-switch works.

Well, you're doing better than me. I had to look at it for a while to
understand that it couldn't "not work", and HAD TO work.

Think of it this way:

A) The two 3 way switches on the end are easy enough to understand.
You have two conductors connecting the same terminals on both switches,
and whether the light is on or off depends entirely on whether or not
the two 3 way switches are set to send and recieve power through the
same terminal on each switch or not.

B) The 4 way switches (however many you have of them) simply divert
power to the "other" conductor every time their toggles are flipped.

So, regardless of how the two end 3-way switches are set, flipping the
toggle of any of the intermediary 4 way switches will send power down
the "other" conductor to the "other" terminal on the end three way
switch, thereby turning the light on or off.

It's simple once you understand it. But, so is everything else on this
good Earth.




--
nestork

[bob haller]

Its probably easiest to run this setup on a X10 remote OR have momentary contact switches drive a relay.

both would cost less to install and be easier to trouble shoot in the future

[Doug Miller]

nestork <nestork...@diybanter.com> wrote in news:nestork...@diybanter.com:

>
> dpb;3084483 Wrote:
>> It's just not possible to have it wired conventionally no matter what
>> the initial configuration is w/o adding very heavy constraints on usage
>> and retain the possibility that turning any one switch in the down
>> position turns off an on light--the one closest by at the time may
>> already be 'down'.
>>
>
> No, you're never going to be able to wire it so that no matter what the
> other switch toggle positions are, that you can always shut the light
> off by flipping any switch's toggle down. That won't work.

Nonsense. Of course it will: changing the position of *any* of the switches changes the state
of the light. If it's on, and any switch is up, flipping that switch down will turn it off.

That, however, is not what the OP is asking to do.

>
> But, you can always return to the original situation where the light is
> OFF with all switch toggles down, and flipping ANY switch's toggle up
> turns the light on, which is what I think he wanted.

No, that is not what he wanted. He made it very clear that he wanted to know by looking
which specific switch turned it on, *and* turn it off using that specific switch -- and does not
(and apparently cannot) understand that the first of these is impossible and the second
unnecessary.

[tra...@optonline.net]

I'm amazed at how many people proceed with the "how to"
without understanding that they are tilting at windmills.
The most you can get with any of these rewiring attempts
is to get one defined position. If, for example you want
that one position to be that the light is off with all
switches in a down position, you can do that. Cool. But
just take out a piece of paper and make a table. With
4 switches, there are 16 possible combination of switch
position. List all 16 together with if the light is on
or off. With the rewiring or rotating of the switches,
you get ONE of those table entries to be all switches down,
light off. But that's all you get. There are other
table entries with the light off and the switches in
various states.

As I said previously, I can see achieving that to be of
some small value. For example, if you're leaving the
house for vacation and you want to look at each switchplate
in the house prior to leaving, if they are all down, then
all the lights are off. But you can't determine squat from
looking at one switch. And almost all of us would just look
at the light.

[Robert Macy]

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 6:38:30 AM UTC-7, tra...@optonline.net wrote:
> ...snip....

> I'm amazed at how many people proceed with the "how to"
> without understanding that they are tilting at windmills.
> The most you can get with any of these rewiring attempts
> is to get one defined position. If, for example you want
> that one position to be that the light is off with all
> switches in a down position, you can do that. Cool. But
> just take out a piece of paper and make a table. With
> 4 switches, there are 16 possible combination of switch
> position. List all 16 together with if the light is on
> or off. With the rewiring or rotating of the switches,
> you get ONE of those table entries to be all switches down,
> light off. But that's all you get. There are other
> table entries with the light off and the switches in
> various states.
>
> As I said previously, I can see achieving that to be of
> some small value. For example, if you're leaving the
> house for vacation and you want to look at each switchplate
> in the house prior to leaving, if they are all down, then
> all the lights are off. But you can't determine squat from
> looking at one switch. And almost all of us would just look
> at the light.

Glad they did. Learned a lot about wiring and potential wiring examples.

Being pedantic, four light switches yield 8 patterns ON and 8 patterns OFF for a 'total' of 16 patterns.

Of little value? I asked for factual help, not opinions, although opinions are of interest and appreciate hearing to better understand why the world is the way it is.

To better understand importance to me: again this home has many 'courtesy' light switches. There are multiple switches to turn ON/OFF the same light placed about home as a 'courtesy'. What I mean is, is that the likelihood of entering an area, using the light switch, exiting the area and using the SAME light switch is the most likely pattern of switch use. Many of the rooms have more than 3 such entrances/exits. and it is handy to be able to leave the switch in a known pattern. During the day, it is somehow pleasing to look about and see that all the light switches are in the OFF possitions, and all the little mounting screws are in the 12-6 position to add a touch of neatness and professionalism to the installation. [the screws were all placed in the identical positions by the original contractor, which I interpret as a sign of quality workmanship and attention to details]

As far as looking at the light to see if it is ON, yes, one can see the light is ON, but late at night in the attempt to turn that light OFF, I don't want to turn ON the major overhead lights, or one of the bedroom reading lights, or the ?? light as I fumble about at night trying to remember which switch will turn OFF the light [albeit I had just turned the light ON minutes before], which, yes, I can clearly see is now ON.

Maybe a better explanation is that, when in a hurry, when entering a room light switch panels have one order of control, but when exiting the room the order is reversed. Yes, I knnow that left is still left and right is still right, but that requres one to 'stop' and face the panel set, and 'think' about it. That's what I want to avoid. I want the simple menomic of a switch UP is ON and a swtich DOWN is OFF, then there is NO thinking, simply hit the switch when going by.

I understand that in smaller homes with 'tubular' hallways that have single switches in each panel that arbitrary positions of the switches are indeed a 'no never mind'

[tra...@optonline.net]

The problem is, that as the problem was described and as most of
us understood it, there was no factual way to achieve it. Also,
if someone asks something that seems odd, it would seem better
that we try to fully understand what it is they are trying to
accomplish, rather than just giving directions. If someone asked
how to best apply tar coating to the drywall in their living
room, what would you do?

>
> To better understand importance to me: again this home has many 'courtesy' light switches. There are multiple switches to turn ON/OFF the same light placed about home as a 'courtesy'. What I mean is, is that the likelihood of entering an area, using the light switch, exiting the area and using the SAME light switch is the most likely pattern of switch use. Many of the rooms have more than 3 such entrances/exits. and it is handy to be able to leave the switch in a known pattern. During the day, it is somehow pleasing to look about and see that all the light switches are in the OFF possitions, and all the little mounting screws are in the 12-6 position to add a touch of neatness and professionalism to the installation. [the screws were all placed in the identical positions by the original contractor, which I interpret as a sign of quality workmanship and attention to details]
>
>
>
> As far as looking at the light to see if it is ON, yes, one can see the light is ON, but late at night in the attempt to turn that light OFF, I don't want to turn ON the major overhead lights, or one of the bedroom reading lights, or the ?? light as I fumble about at night trying to remember which switch will turn OFF the light [albeit I had just turned the light ON minutes before], which, yes, I can clearly see is now ON.
>
>

And again, that works assuming the other switches that
control that light are in the down position, or one
of the other possible combinations.

>
> Maybe a better explanation is that, when in a hurry, when entering a room light switch panels have one order of control, but when exiting the room the order is reversed. Yes, I knnow that left is still left and right is still right, but that requres one to 'stop' and face the panel set, and 'think' about it. That's what I want to avoid. I want the simple menomic of a switch UP is ON and a swtich DOWN is OFF, then there is NO thinking, simply hit the switch when going by.
>
>

It's when you male statements like the last sentence above that we seem
to be heading back to square one. It works only if the other switches
are in the right position.

>
> I understand that in smaller homes with 'tubular' hallways that have single switches in each panel that arbitrary positions of the switches are indeed a 'no never mind'

It's that way in all homes. In fact, the larger the home the more
switches you have on an n-way, the more any or all of the
switches could be in any position.

In a previous post you said that the electrician didn't pay
any attention to which way the switches were oriented to
one another. I'll bet you can't find an electrician that
paid any attention, because of the reasons already discussed.

[dpb]

On 6/27/2013 10:03 AM, Robert Macy wrote:
...

> Maybe a better explanation is that, when in a hurry, when entering a
> room light switch panels have one order of control, but when exiting the
> room the order is reversed. Yes, I knnow that left is still left and
> right is still right, but that requres one to 'stop' and face the panel
> set, and 'think' about it. That's what I want to avoid. I want the

> simple m[n]enomic of a switch UP is ON and a swtich DOWN is OFF, then there

> is NO thinking, simply hit the switch when going by.

...

Can no be done other than by other logic (positions, that is) as has
been beat to death by now.

IMO the thing to do is to have the positions from left to right in the
gang switch boxes make physical sense as from "inside-out" be associated
from near-to-far (or vice versa, your choice, but to me it makes more
sense for the closer to be the outer simply because that's the way Dad
did it for the ones here so it's what I grew up with but either works
you just need to be consistent and learn the pattern) at each doorway.
Then, w/ time you should learn innately which is what and the thinking
part goes away.

--

[tra...@optonline.net]

+1

That's how I do it too. And it that regard, it would
be nice if electricians put them in that way to begin
with. A classic example is I have two switches here in
one spot. One controls the lights on the front porch. The other controls a ceiling light near the closet by the front door. I would have put them in so that the
switch for the porch light is closest to the front of
the house. It's the opposite. I was too lazy to move
it, but I know there are two such instances in the house
where they are like this, ie the opposite of what you
would expect. I have no problem identifying what switch
works what.

[Doug Miller]

Robert Macy <robert...@gmail.com> wrote in

news:07a60833-21f6-4f5c...@googlegroups.com:
[snip]
> To better understand importance to me:[...]During the day, it is

> somehow pleasing to look about and see that all the light
> switches are in the OFF possitions, and all the little mounting
> screws are in the 12-6 position to add a touch of neatness and
> professionalism to the installation.

And here, I think, we finally have the *real* issue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_personality_disorder

[Fred McKenzie]

In article <XnsA1EC84E4766...@78.46.70.116>,

Personally, I do not think it is a disorder! However, there may be
times when it could pose a problem.

Back in the 60s, I worked for a company that sold equipment to the
military for use in Viet Nam. They had a rash of problems in the field
with new equipment that had worked perfectly at final test. The
equipment would be returned, re-aligned, and then be defective again
when received back in the field. They finally traced the problem to a
mechanical inspector who lined up all the screw slots before it was
packed for shipment.

My stairway has three-way switches at the top and bottom, set so the
light is on when both switches are in the same position. I'm the only
one here, and always use the light when using the stairs. The switch
where I'm at is always up-for-on/down-for-off.

Fred

[Robert Macy]

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 9:58:34 AM UTC-7, Doug Miller wrote:
> Robert Macy wrote in

> [snip]
> > To better understand importance to me:[...]During the day, it is
> > somehow pleasing to look about and see that all the light
> > switches are in the OFF possitions, and all the little mounting
> > screws are in the 12-6 position to add a touch of neatness and
> > professionalism to the installation.
>
> And here, I think, we finally have the *real* issue.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsessive%E2%80%93compulsive_personality_disorder

I should have remembered the old rule, never complain, never explain.

Yes, I was wrong for even thinking about trying to change my light switches. After all, it's always better to live in this world by accepting everything presented. Instead of flailing at the impossible, it is always better to change one's own attitude towards the situation.

Wait, this wasn't 'impossible'! As a matter of fact, I now have not only what I wanted all along but additionally have some insights into light switch controllers not even thought of before, thanks to the many excellent contributions.

My 'problem' was solved *and* my horizons expanded. Talk about win, win. Well, almost, feathers slightly ruffled by the chidings, but small price to pay, eh?

Next time, I won't explain 'why' I want to tar the drywall in my living room.

[nestork]

Fred McKenzie;3085078 Wrote:
>
> My stairway has three-way switches at the top and bottom, set so the
> light is on when both switches are in the same position. I'm the only
> one here, and always use the light when using the stairs. The switch
> where I'm at is always up-for-on/down-for-off.
> Fred

Sorry Fred, but if you flip the other switch, you'll find that the
switch where you're at is always up-for-off/down-for-on.

That's just the nature of 3-way switches.




--
nestork

[bud--]

On 6/27/2013 9:03 AM, Robert Macy wrote:
>
> To better understand importance to me: again this home has many
> 'courtesy' light switches. There are multiple switches to turn ON/OFF
> the same light placed about home as a 'courtesy'. What I mean is, is
> that the likelihood of entering an area, using the light switch,
> exiting the area and using the SAME light switch is the most likely
> pattern of switch use. Many of the rooms have more than 3 such
> entrances/exits. and it is handy to be able to leave the switch in a
> known pattern. During the day, it is somehow pleasing to look about
> and see that all the light switches are in the OFF possitions,

So a few times a day go through the house and turn all the switches
down. If a light is on turn one of the controlling switches upside down
(only has to be done once).

If you want to know if the lights are on or off replace the switches
with switches that have pilot lights in the handle.

> andall the little mounting screws are in the 12-6 position to add a

> touch of neatness and professionalism to the installation. [the screws
> were all placed in the identical positions by the original contractor,
> which I interpret as a sign of quality workmanship and attention to details]

I certainly wouldn't interpret that as a sign of quality workmanship -
may or may not be.

[nestork]

bud--;3085463 Wrote:
>
>
> and all the little mounting screws are in the 12-6 position to add a

> touch of neatness and professionalism to the installation. [the screws
> were all placed in the identical positions by the original contractor,
> which I interpret as a sign of quality workmanship and attention to
> details]
>
> I certainly wouldn't interpret that as a sign of quality workmanship -
> may or may not be.

Yet one more good reason for Americans to finally recognize the inherent
superiority of the Robertson drive screw.

[image:
http://www.instructables.com/files/deriv/FYK/LN10/FOWZOS0I/FYKLN10FOWZOS0I.LARGE.jpg]

The Robertson drive has FOUR identical screw head positions with each
screw rotation, thereby doubling your chances of achieving perfect screw
head alignment amongst multiple screws.




--
nestork

[in...@carbidefinger.net]

A USA friendly version of 4 way switching:

http://www.howtowirealightswitch.com/4-way-switch-with-power-feed-via-the-light-switch/