This section is from the book "Cyclopedia Of Architecture, Carpentry, And Building", by James C. et al. Also available from Amazon: Cyclopedia Of Architecture, Carpentry And Building.
Fig. 26. Method of Supporting a Small Conductor.
Fig. 28. Conductors Protected by Wooden Guard Strips on Low Ceiling.
In low-ceiling rooms, where the conductors are liable to injury, it is usually required that a wooden guard strip be placed on each side of the conductors, as shown in Fig. 28.
All conductors on the walls for a height of not less than six feet from the ground, either should be boxed in,or,if they be rubber-covered, should (preferably) be run in iron conduits; and in conductors having single braid only, additional protection should be provided by means of flexible tubing placed inside of the iron conduit.
Where conductors cross each other, or where they cross iron pipes, they should be protected by means of porcelain tubes fastened with tape or in some other substantial manner that will prevent the tubes from slipping out of place.
As both the two-wire and the three-wire system are extensively used in electric wiring, it will be well to give some consideration to the advantages and disadvantages of each system, and to explain them somewhat in detail.
Relative Advantages. The choice of either a two-wire or a three-wire system depends largely upon the source of supply. If, for example, the source of supply will always probably be a 120-volt, two-wire system, there would be no object in installing a three-wire system for the wiring. If, on the other hand, the source of supply is a 120-240-volt system, the wiring should, of course, be made three-wire. Furthermore, if at the outset the supply were two-wire, but with a possibility of a three-wire system being provided later, it would be well to adapt the electric wiring for the three-wire system, making the neutral conductor twice as large as either of the outside conductors, and combining the two outside conductors to make a single conductor until such time as the three-wire service is installed. Of course, there would be no saving of copper in this last-mentioned three-wire system, and in fact it would be slightly more expensive than a two-wire system, as will be shortly explained.
The object of the three-wire system is to reduce the amount of copper - and consequently the cost of wiring - necessary to transmit a given amount of electric power. As a rule, the proposition is usually one of lighting and not of power, for the reason that by means of the three-wire system we are able to increase the potential at which the current is transmitted, and at the same time to take advantage of the greater efficiency of the lower voltage lamp. If current for power (motors, etc.) only were to be transmitted, it would be a simple matter to wind the motor, etc., for a higher voltage, and thereby reduce the weight of copper. If, however, we increase the voltage of lamps,, we find that they are not so efficient, nor is their life so long. With the standard carbon lamp, it has been found that the 240-volt lamp, with the same life, requires about 10 to 12 per cent more current than the corponding 120-volt lamp. Furthermore, in the case of the more efficient lamps recently introduced (such as the Tantalum lamp, Tungsten lamp, etc.), it has been found impracticable, if not impossible, to make them for pressures above 125 volts. For this reason the three-wire system is employed, for by this method we can use 240 volts across the outside conductors, and by the use of a neutral conductor obtain 120 volts between the neutral and the outside conductor, and thereby be enabled to use 120-volt lamps. Furthermore, if a 240-volt lamp should ever be placed on the market that was as economical as the lower voltage lamp, the result would be that the 240-480-volt system would be introduced, and 240-volt lamps used. As a matter of fact, this has been tried in several cities - and particularly in Providence, Rhode Island. As a rule, however, the 120 volt lamp has been found so much more satisfactory as regards life, efficiency, etc., that it is nearly always employed.
The two-wire system is so extremely simple that no explanation whatever is required concerning it.
The three-wire system, however, is somewhat confusing, and will now be considered.
Fig. 29. Three-Wire System, with Neutral Conductor between the Two Outside Conductors.
Fig. 30. Lamps arranged in Pairs in Series, dispensing with Necessity for Third or Neutral Conductor.
Details of Three-Wire System. The three-wire system may be considered as a two-wire system with a third or neutral conductor placed between the two outside conductors, as shown in Fig. 29. This neutral conductor would not be required if we could always have the lamps arranged in pairs, as shown in Fig. 30. In this case, the two lamps would burn in series, and we could transmit the current at double the usual voltage, and thereby supply twice the number of lamps with one-quarter the weight of copper, allowing the same loss in pressure in the lamps. The reason for this is, that, having the lamps arranged in series of pairs, we reduce the current to one-half, and, as the pressure at which the current is transmitted is doubled, we can again reduce the copper one-half without increasing the loss in lamps. We therefore see that we have a double saving, as the current is reduced one-half, which reduces the weight of copper one-half, and we can again reduce the copper one-half by doubling the loss in volts without increasing the percentage loss. For example, if in one case we had a straight two-wire system transmitting current to 100 lamps at a potential of 100 volts, and this system were replaced by one in which the lamps were placed in series of pairs, as shown in Fig. 30, and the potential increased to 200 volts - 100 lamps still being used -we should find, in the latter case, that we were carrying current really for only 50 lamps, as we would require only the same amount of current for two lamps now that we required for one lamp before. Furthermore, as the potential would now be 200 instead of 100 volts, we could allow twice as much loss as in the first case, because the loss would now be figured as a percentage of 200 volts instead of a percentage of 100 volts. From this, it will readily be seen that in the second case mentioned, we would require only one-quarter the weight of copper that would be required in the first case.