... topic drift overflow ...

R5 iirac
Years ago the topic of 12-3 Romex using Black @20 Amps, Red @20 Amps, BUT White, common for each seeming to handle 40 Amps.
The explanation I recall was that in such circuits, the energy is -spent- at the appliance, so a full 40 Amp capacity isn't needed.

That explanation might seem to apply to A/C & D/C as well. BUT !

I found this explanation which seems a little more reassuring.

The term for what you're describing is a "multi-wire branch circuit", so if you want to read more, that's the term to search for.

Alternating Current (AC) power operates by generating "waves" of voltage. In a normal North American residential system, the voltage will alternate from +120V to -120V (relative to neutral) 60 times per second. However, the power is supplied to your house in two legs, which have their alternations offset in time such that whenever Leg A is at +120V, Leg B is at -120V and vice-versa.

This is how we get 240V power in our houses. While each leg is 120V relative to neutral, they are 240V relative to each other, so if you put a load between the two legs, it experiences a 240V potential difference.

And that's also how two wires can share a neutral. If the black wire is drawing 20A at -120V and the red wire is drawing 20A at +120V, the neutral carries no current. You can think of this like destructive interference of the waves. If the loads on the two wires are mismatched, the neutral will carry only the imbalance between them, but that imbalance can't be any larger than 20A, since neither circuit can be less than 0A or greater than 20A.

Some of the details I recalled for the premise may be off. But I thought you might find this explanation interesting. AND !!

While the prior explanation might apply to both A/C & D/C this reddit explanation only applies to A/C.
 
R5 iirac
Years ago the topic of 12-3 Romex using Black @20 Amps, Red @20 Amps, BUT White, common for each seeming to handle 40 Amps.
The explanation I recall was that in such circuits, the energy is -spent- at the appliance, so a full 40 Amp capacity isn't needed.

That explanation might seem to apply to A/C & D/C as well. BUT !

I found this explanation which seems a little more reassuring.

The term for what you're describing is a "multi-wire branch circuit", so if you want to read more, that's the term to search for.

Alternating Current (AC) power operates by generating "waves" of voltage. In a normal North American residential system, the voltage will alternate from +120V to -120V (relative to neutral) 60 times per second. However, the power is supplied to your house in two legs, which have their alternations offset in time such that whenever Leg A is at +120V, Leg B is at -120V and vice-versa.

This is how we get 240V power in our houses. While each leg is 120V relative to neutral, they are 240V relative to each other, so if you put a load between the two legs, it experiences a 240V potential difference.

And that's also how two wires can share a neutral. If the black wire is drawing 20A at -120V and the red wire is drawing 20A at +120V, the neutral carries no current. You can think of this like destructive interference of the waves. If the loads on the two wires are mismatched, the neutral will carry only the imbalance between them, but that imbalance can't be any larger than 20A, since neither circuit can be less than 0A or greater than 20A.

Some of the details I recalled for the premise may be off. But I thought you might find this explanation interesting. AND !!

While the prior explanation might apply to both A/C & D/C this reddit explanation only applies to A/C.

Correct.
The 220 volt current flow is between the red and black power wires and the white neutral is only used if the circuit has a 110 volt component.

And interesting defect I have seen in Albuquerque home wiring many times now, is where a 110 volt circuit will keep burning out LED bulbs and read 220 volts at the socket.
The problem is caused by instead of electricians wiring two separate 110 volt circuits (black, white, green), they will run a 3 wire (black, red, white, green) for a distance until the circuit separates, after which then they run the separate 110 volts circuits (black, white, green).
The problem with this is that since the 2 branches share the same white neutral, if the white wire comes loose in the breaker box, the shared white wire will turn everything in the circuit into 220 volts and burn everything out.
To save a few pennies, electricians apparently use 220 wiring for the first leg of the circuit, and only change to 110 wiring after the 2 circuits diverge.
 
Last edited:
overflow from: https://citizenvoice.us/threads/below-the-fold.487/page-21 posts #417 & #418

I've long believed motor vehicle traffic laws including posted speed limits render otherwise law-abiding citizens criminals, perhaps more than any other laws.
Many public roadway posted speed limits were established well over a half century ago, when there were automobiles on our roadways with:
- bias ply tires
- drum brakes
- 2 wheel brakes in some cases
- etc.

In the new millennium our automobiles more commonly have:
- radial tires
- 4 wheel hydraulic / power disc brakes
- anti-lock brakes
among other innovations.

As a result stopping distances have approximately been cut in half. BUT !
Though our modern cars are much safer, these legacy posted speed limits have remained unchanged for generations.

As a conservative law-&-order libertarian I'm opposed to laws that render other otherwise law abiding citizens criminals arbitrarily.

There are a variety of legal approaches to this issue, many / most of which are disregarded.
And thus government arbitrarily criminalizing our countrymen, even on our 250th anniversary holiday weekend, continues.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Happy 250
 
overflow from: https://citizenvoice.us/threads/below-the-fold.487/page-21 posts #417 & #418

I've long believed motor vehicle traffic laws including posted speed limits render otherwise law-abiding citizens criminals, perhaps more than any other laws.
Many public roadway posted speed limits were established well over a half century ago, when there were automobiles on our roadways with:
- bias ply tires
- drum brakes
- 2 wheel brakes in some cases
- etc.

In the new millennium our automobiles more commonly have:
- radial tires
- 4 wheel hydraulic / power disc brakes
- anti-lock brakes
among other innovations.

As a result stopping distances have approximately been cut in half. BUT !
Though our modern cars are much safer, these legacy posted speed limits have remained unchanged for generations.

As a conservative law-&-order libertarian I'm opposed to laws that render other otherwise law abiding citizens criminals arbitrarily.

There are a variety of legal approaches to this issue, many / most of which are disregarded.
And thus government arbitrarily criminalizing our countrymen, even on our 250th anniversary holiday weekend, continues.

It doesn't have to be this way.

Happy 250

Since often you have to drive quite a distance on a road before you see a posted speed limit, what we really have to go by is what would seem appropriate, based on width of the lanes, whether there are parked cars, the general speed of other traffic, presence of pedestrians, etc.
When I was a teaching assistant, a student from India and his wife got me to speak for them at a speeding ticket case. They did not say a word, so I think they were pretending to not know English, but I got them off the ticket by saying how deserted the intersection was at midnight.
 
"Since often you have to drive quite a distance on a road before you see a posted speed limit" R5 #44
True. BUT !
The tradition in human law since ancient times has been: ignorantia legis non excusat: ignorance of the law is no excuse

""When I was a teaching assistant, a student from India and his wife got me to speak for them at a speeding ticket case. They did not say a word, so I think they were pretending to not know English, but I got them off the ticket by saying how deserted the intersection was at midnight." R5 #44
(y)
I hope they bought you a rib-eye.
 
True. BUT !
The tradition in human law since ancient times has been: ignorantia legis non excusat: ignorance of the law is no excuse


(y)
I hope they bought you a rib-eye.

But the point is that the legal speed limit should be then based on logical points of observation, such as road size, traffic volume, etc.
 
"the legal speed limit should be then based on logical points of observation, such as road size, traffic volume, etc." R5 #46
Safe & reasonable. Yes?
"... stopping distances have approximately been cut in half. BUT !" s #43
My intended point was:
stopping distances have been cut in half,
but the speed limits haven't changed.

Simpleminded analysis might suggest if 50 MPH is safe 40 MPH is safer.
And if that, 30 MPH safer still ... reductio ad absurdum:

At zero MPH the risk of collisions could be entirely eliminated. Right?

The practical reality is, vastly too high a speed would exceed the skill of most drivers to safely proceed in lane. BUT !
Too low a speed results in distracted driving, driver's multi-taking, driving a little, while simultaneously rummaging in the glove department, etc.
Government's job is to split that baby. BUT !
That number has probably wafted upward in the past half-century. The posted speed limits, mostly not.

"the legal speed limit should be then based on logical points of observation, such as road size, traffic volume, etc." R5 #46
One element of the complication of this, one single speed limit has to suit every vehicle, including the fully laden 16 year old garbage truck,
and the brand new Lambo. The accomplished 28 year old driver with over a decade of experience, excellent reflexes, eyesight, hearing, etc.
and the 90 year old great great gramma that clings to the steering wheel so she can see over the dashboard.

I've wondered whether States should grant special licenses that outside school & hospital zones allow (for example) speed 20% over what is posted.
To prevent enforcement complications, perhaps such automobiles should display special markings, or flashing lights, or whatever.
Such update could be operated revenue positive, so instead of cash register justice in our law courts, they could rake it in at the DMV.

Whatever else, criminalizing the populace does not seem to be the optimal solution.
And if there is a suite of laws violated more commonly in the United States than motor vehicle and traffic laws, I'd like to know.
 
Back
Top