AFiremanFirst Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 So I recently had a Super II go out. No big deal right? So I go to make the repair, and the power center is not the typical nice neat orderly electrical installation I'm used to seeing (17 wire nuts, are you tracking with me...). As I'm removing all the birds nest of wire and "doing it right" I see that the installer has stolen a leg of 220v from one of the line sides of a relay (power for the control board/transformer) and tied the neutral back to the line side of a GFCI. Naturally I run a hot and a neutral from (not through) the GFCI to the transformer and resolve the short cut the installer took to save 20" of copper. Naturally I thought to myself... Lazy installer. (different pool) Two days later while tracking down a broken leg of 220v I notice that intermatics wiring diagram has the very same "theory" to wire a 125v time clock on a 220v system, just take a leg from the line of 220v and run the neutral back to 110v. Of course you're going to ask which intermatic, and I'll get you that info, but this simply doesn't seem like a good practice? I have purchased a 220v time clock to replace the 125v clock and intend to wire it properly. Isn't it true that if you steal a leg from 220v, then the load on that 220 system is unequal. And couldn't this difference, even though small, cause problems in the long run. So what is my question... Did I overkill by correcting the problem or is this a common/acceptable way of wiring 110 when 220 is present? Anyone have experience with seeing it done one way or the other. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Spa Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 Almost ALL portable spas are factory wired and UL listed operating this way. They pull one leg and a neutral to get 110v to operate the controls and any 110v equipment. This is why the GFCI's used have a line/load neutral (any neutral used in the controls HAS to wire back to the load side of the GFCI or it will [should] trip) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Clown Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 I see this all the time too. Usually, the stolen leg is to run a light or an outlet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugman1400 Posted February 23, 2012 Report Share Posted February 23, 2012 So I recently had a Super II go out. No big deal right? So I go to make the repair, and the power center is not the typical nice neat orderly electrical installation I'm used to seeing (17 wire nuts, are you tracking with me...). As I'm removing all the birds nest of wire and "doing it right" I see that the installer has stolen a leg of 220v from one of the line sides of a relay (power for the control board/transformer) and tied the neutral back to the line side of a GFCI. Naturally I run a hot and a neutral from (not through) the GFCI to the transformer and resolve the short cut the installer took to save 20" of copper. Naturally I thought to myself... Lazy installer. (different pool) Two days later while tracking down a broken leg of 220v I notice that intermatics wiring diagram has the very same "theory" to wire a 125v time clock on a 220v system, just take a leg from the line of 220v and run the neutral back to 110v. Of course you're going to ask which intermatic, and I'll get you that info, but this simply doesn't seem like a good practice? I have purchased a 220v time clock to replace the 125v clock and intend to wire it properly. Isn't it true that if you steal a leg from 220v, then the load on that 220 system is unequal. And couldn't this difference, even though small, cause problems in the long run. So what is my question... Did I overkill by correcting the problem or is this a common/acceptable way of wiring 110 when 220 is present? Anyone have experience with seeing it done one way or the other. I'm a bit confused by your question of stealing a leg from 220 causing an imbalance. This practice is done all the time in 220 devices that also contain the neutral and 110 devices. This allows the 220 L1 & L2 to supply the 110 (L1 or L2) to the 110 devices inside the 220 device (like contactors, fans, displays, etc.) This will cause an imbalance across the 220 but, does no harm at all. As a point of reference, half your house 110 outlets and lighting is wired on one leg of 220 and the other half is wired to the other leg. So, you could easily have half the house using the power off just the one 220 leg without any ill-effects. Make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoolGuyNJ Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 If it is done before the GFCI, it usually is not a problem as long as the load when the stolen 120V doesn't cause an excessive current draw on the feeder line. This is usually seen is portable spas. I prefer to see it done right though, two 120V legs, a common and a ground feeding the sub panel. A 240 breaker(s) to the pump(s) and heater, and 120V breaker to the other devices, be they the board's transformer(s), lights, outlets, etc... Keeping everything separate just makes troubleshooting that much easier, especially for the next guy that sees it. Scott Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bugman1400 Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 If it is done before the GFCI, it usually is not a problem as long as the load when the stolen 120V doesn't cause an excessive current draw on the feeder line. This is usually seen is portable spas. I prefer to see it done right though, two 120V legs, a common and a ground feeding the sub panel. A 240 breaker(s) to the pump(s) and heater, and 120V breaker to the other devices, be they the board's transformer(s), lights, outlets, etc... Keeping everything separate just makes troubleshooting that much easier, especially for the next guy that sees it. Scott How in the world can a 120V leg be stolen post GFCI.....if the GFCI is operating properly? In theory, this does not seem possible since GFCIs operate on milliamp difference. It seems to me anything operating at 120V off of a "stolen" leg downstream of a GFCI would cause the GFCI to operate immediately because of the return current on the 120V through the NEUTRAL would not be returned through the other 220V hot leg. Please explain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Spa Posted February 24, 2012 Report Share Posted February 24, 2012 GFCI's used for spas have a neutral line/load built into them to calculate for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pool Clown Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 I see this all the time too. Usually, the stolen leg is to run a light or an outlet. But when i see this, the neutral goes back to the neutral buss, not continued on in series. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AFiremanFirst Posted February 26, 2012 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Bug man, It's not being stolen post GFCI. The neutral was coming from the line side of the GFCI not the load, or yes, it would have tripped. However your point does make sense about 1/2 the house being wired on 1 leg and 1/2 on the other. I am glad to see that I'm not crazy and this is more common than I thought. But like scott, I just feel better about it being done "right". There is already a hot 110v, and a Neutral. Run both, then 2 legs for 220, and a ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.