LED light in bathroom flashes when extractor fan TP pole switch is closed.

[HappyHippyDad]

I have just fitted the manrose humidity/timer remote unit into a bathroom (see pic below)



When I switch the LED bathroom light off, it starts flashing. If I switch the TP switch for the extractor fan off it stops flashing. This only started happening when I introduced the humidity/timer remote unit.

I could understand if the LED light stayed on dimly, but why is it flashing? My idea was to fit a 230V snubber across L-N of the light, would this work? Is there a particular rated snubber that I need?

Could I just fit 2 x 160Kohm 1/4w (230V) resistors across L-N at the lamp?

Would these be suitable:

1. https://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Produc...Vf7l0_PK95NUwqfCbCLK7uDq1xrzYX9EaArUHEALw_wcB

2. https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LED-Snub...ED-Bulbs-STOPS-Nausea-Migraines-/324163668142

3. https://cpc.farnell.com/ampohm-woun...-100/contact-suppressor-0-1uf-100r/dp/FT00715

Cheers

 

[telectrix]

seems likely it's the fan controller causing the problem. snubber would be your first shot. maybe a comined R/C snubber.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

seems likely it's the fan controller causing the problem. snubber would be your first shot. maybe a comined R/C snubber.

Do you fit them as shown in my diagram Tel? I.e across line and neutral at the lamp? Any particular snubber you use?

 

[telectrix]

across L and N feeding lamp. various snubbers available. used a couple of these in the past:
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/0-1uF-10...243494?hash=item1cecd19926:g:fAMAAOSwpRRWnC90

 

[pc1966]

I would go with the CPC one myself, no metal tag to fix and they are generally light enough to sit in any back box or similar quite happily.

 

[telectrix]

onlyproblem with cpc is if that's all you need ( as in not part of a larger order) the postage is 10x the value of the item.

 

[pc1966]

Yes, that is a good point.

 

[Marvo]

Depending how the circuit is wired you could use a d/pole light switch and switch both the live and the neutral.

If you're really brave you could fit a 2-way light switch, put the switched live on the 'common' terminal, the live on one of the other terminals and an earth on the last terminal. The earth is functional as well as protective after all...

The emoji's seem to have disappeared so imagine the smiley one at the end of the last sentance or maybe the smiley one that's winking. Not sure if the UK regs will allow the second option but on the off-chance you can use it I'd suggest you leave a note in the switch box for the next sparky, it might save him soiling his underwear.

 

[Dartlec]

Depending how the circuit is wired you could use a d/pole light switch and switch both the live and the neutral.

If you're really brave you could fit a 2-way light switch, put the switched live on the 'common' terminal, the live on one of the other terminals and an earth on the last terminal. The earth is functional as well as protective after all...

The emoji's seem to have disappeared so imagine the smiley one at the end of the last sentance or maybe the smiley one that's winking. Not sure if the UK regs will allow the second option but on the off-chance you can use it I'd suggest you leave a note in the switch box for the next sparky, it might save him soiling his underwear.

Smileys still work if you use the shortcuts I believe - I'm sure the colon codes worked the other day, but seem not to now - but colon and then right bracket for smiley face, colon and P for tongue,,,

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Depending how the circuit is wired you could use a d/pole light switch and switch both the live and the neutral.

If you're really brave you could fit a 2-way light switch, put the switched live on the 'common' terminal, the live on one of the other terminals and an earth on the last terminal. The earth is functional as well as protective after all...

The emoji's seem to have disappeared so imagine the smiley one at the end of the last sentance or maybe the smiley one that's winking. Not sure if the UK regs will allow the second option but on the off-chance you can use it I'd suggest you leave a note in the switch box for the next sparky, it might save him soiling his underwear.

I've just been reading one of your past posts from a few years back Marvo, which said exactly the same thing with regards the earth. You got a minor telling off from @Lucien Nunes

 

[happysteve]

If you're really brave you could fit a 2-way light switch, put the switched live on the 'common' terminal, the live on one of the other terminals and an earth on the last terminal. The earth is functional as well as protective after all...

Won't that lead to a N-E resistance equal to the load being switched (when then switch is in the "off" position)? We tend to frown on such things (though it makes interesting fault-finding)...

 

[Lucien Nunes]

And could put 500V across the fan trigger input with an otherwise innocent-seeming L+N - E insulation test.

I could understand if the LED light stayed on dimly, but why is it flashing?

Other than cheap low-wattage ones that use a capacitive dropper, LED lamps have a switched-mode power supply as a driver. When stray capacitance in the wiring or a control device like your humidistat leaks a small current into the switched line, it passes through the rectifier and slowly charges up the reservoir capacitor in the driver until the voltage is high enough for the circuit to start up. It delivers a brief pulse of output to the LEDs, but in a few milliseconds the charge stored in the capacitor is used up and it shuts down. The capacitor begins to charge again...

 

[Pretty Mouth]

If you're really brave you could fit a 2-way light switch, put the switched live on the 'common' terminal, the live on one of the other terminals and an earth on the last terminal. The earth is functional as well as protective after all...

I suppose if the N was brought to the last terminal instead of the earth, that would equalise any potential across the lamp when switched off? Not sure it's a good idea/compliant though, something to do with switching neutrals

 

[pc1966]

I suppose if the N was brought to the last terminal instead of the earth, that would equalise any potential across the lamp when switched off? Not sure it's a good idea/compliant though, something to do with switching neutrals

Using a change-over switch to short out the lamp is perfectly OK as you are not switching the neutral, you are switching the live feed to the lamp (i.e. at no point would both lamp terminals be live due to an open on the neutral path).

But...I would worry about the next one changing the switch getting a nasty surprise as it is so common/normal to have unsleeved blue (or black) as the switched live to a light (not really neutral)!

 

[Marvo]

I've just been reading one of your past posts from a few years back Marvo, which said exactly the same thing with regards the earth. You got a minor telling off from @Lucien Nunes

Yeah, quite possibly and quite rightly so, hence the smileys. As mentioned by Pretty Mouth it would be a considerably more legitimate remedy if you used the neutral rather than the earth. Creating a path between neutral and earth, even a very resistance path, within an installation isn't a good idea for several reasons and it's forbidden in my local regs so I'm guessing it's also forbidden in the UK regs.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

There's another aspect to using a changeover (2-way) switch to short the lamp which is that L and N are present on N/O and N/C contacts (L1 and L2). In a functional switch that is not designed as an isolator, and made for AC only, the contact separation when open is very small, only a millimetre or two; too small to guarantee that the separation alone will extinguish any arc that forms when a load is switched off. This is deliberate, because the arc will extinguish itself at the next current-zero in the AC cycle and the smaller it is in the meantime, the less heat it will dissipate.

Consider first what will happen with a normal switching configuration, either 1- or 2-way, the effect is the same. When the current-carrying contacts open, an arc forms that behaves like a conductor, continuing to pass current through to the lamp across the contact gap. It doesn't matter whether the common contact then makes contact with another other fixed one, perhaps bringing another strapper into circuit. The current flows through the arc and lamp until, not more than 1/100 of a second later, it drops to zero in the AC cycle, the arc extinguishes and the lamp goes out.

Now consider this lamp-shorting arrangement when you switch it off. The common contact separates from the line at L1, drawing an arc with it that keeps feeding current to the lamp. But then the common makes contact with L2 which is connected to neutral, and the arc that is conducting from L1 to common now forms a short-circuit between line and neutral. It will almost certainly extinguish before the MCB trips, but not before chewing a chunk out of the contact.

Back in the bad old days there was a 2-way switching scheme that had line and neutral across each 2-way (called Carter 2-way, look it up if not familiar). It had a serious disadvantage that one of the off combinations made both terminals of the lamp live, but it worked. However, in those days, the contact separation of switches designed for DC was more like half an inch so that the separation alone was sufficient to extinguish any arc, i.e. the switch design avoided drawing an arc from L to N when used in the Carter configuration. I would not trust a modern micro-break AC-only light switch to achieve this, so would never put L and N on opposite contacts of the same pole.

You could however use the 2-way switch to connect the snubber / dummy load, so that it is not always in circuit when the lamp is on. Save a few pence per year!

 

[HappyHippyDad]

There's another aspect to using a changeover (2-way) switch to short the lamp which is that L and N are present on N/O and N/C contacts (L1 and L2). In a functional switch that is not designed as an isolator, and made for AC only, the contact separation when open is very small, only a millimetre or two; too small to guarantee that the separation alone will extinguish any arc that forms when a load is switched off. This is deliberate, because the arc will extinguish itself at the next current-zero in the AC cycle and the smaller it is in the meantime, the less heat it will dissipate.

Consider first what will happen with a normal switching configuration, either 1- or 2-way, the effect is the same. When the current-carrying contacts open, an arc forms that behaves like a conductor, continuing to pass current through to the lamp across the contact gap. It doesn't matter whether the common contact then makes contact with another other fixed one, perhaps bringing another strapper into circuit. The current flows through the arc and lamp until, not more than 1/100 of a second later, it drops to zero in the AC cycle, the arc extinguishes and the lamp goes out.

Now consider this lamp-shorting arrangement when you switch it off. The common contact separates from the line at L1, drawing an arc with it that keeps feeding current to the lamp. But then the common makes contact with L2 which is connected to neutral, and the arc that is conducting from L1 to common now forms a short-circuit between line and neutral. It will almost certainly extinguish before the MCB trips, but not before chewing a chunk out of the contact.

Back in the bad old days there was a 2-way switching scheme that had line and neutral across each 2-way (called Carter 2-way, look it up if not familiar). It had a serious disadvantage that one of the off combinations made both terminals of the lamp live, but it worked. However, in those days, the contact separation of switches designed for DC was more like half an inch so that the separation alone was sufficient to extinguish any arc, i.e. the switch design avoided drawing an arc from L to N when used in the Carter configuration. I would not trust a modern micro-break AC-only light switch to achieve this, so would never put L and N on opposite contacts of the same pole.

You could however use the 2-way switch to connect the snubber / dummy load, so that it is not always in circuit when the lamp is on. Save a few pence per year!

Could you explain how to use the snubber at the switch without the neutral Lucien?

 

[Lucien Nunes]

I didn't say without a neutral!

 

[Pretty Mouth]

@happyhippydad , another way you might tackle this problem is by using a dp switch. Both commons connected to PL, with SL1 going to the light, and SL2 to the fan isolator SL. When open, there will be no way for the stray current to make its way through the light.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

@happyhippydad , another way you might tackle this problem is by using a dp switch. Both commons connected to PL, with SL1 going to the light, and SL2 to the fan isolator SL. When open, there will be no way for the stray current to make its way through the light.View attachment 61326

Thanks for that Pretty Mouth
You've got a table just like mine!

 

[Lucien Nunes]

But the snubber load will probably work OK though. You could fit it in the isolator, lamp or humidistat, since all have access to SL and N.

One reason we use a snubber (RC network) is that for a given ability to dispose of leakage current, it dissipates less heat when the SL is energised. The capacitor stands most of the 230V, passing a current 230/Xc where Xc is its capacitive reactance. The resistor limits peak currents at sudden changes in voltage e.g. to stop it welding switch contacts. As per the OP, it is possible to use pure resistance instead, but to achieve the same leakage-sinking ability there will be more heat in your back box when live.

 

[pc1966]

There's another aspect to using a changeover (2-way) switch to short the lamp which is that L and N are present on N/O and N/C contacts (L1 and L2). In a functional switch that is not designed as an isolator, and made for AC only, the contact separation when open is very small, only a millimetre or two; too small to guarantee that the separation alone will extinguish any arc that forms when a load is switched off. This is deliberate, because the arc will extinguish itself at the next current-zero in the AC cycle and the smaller it is in the meantime, the less heat it will dissipate.

But said switches are rates at 10A, so there could well be a load on the other pole that would sustain an arc of at least 10A when cold, possibly more. So while it is a risk with a historic precident I would be most surprised if any switch rated at 230V/10A was so designed that it could not safely switch from pole to pole without an arc jumping them.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

In the scenario you describe, if the switch only handles the line, the arc will always be in series with one or other of the loads, limiting its current to within the switch rating. OTOH if L & N are both present on one pole, any arc that forms can transfer to directly between them, bypassing the load resistance, therefore could rise to the short-circuit current.

I agree that very little arc is likely to form in this low-load scenario but if it does, there is nothing to stop it escalating.

 

[Lucien Nunes]

It's not altogether unlike crossfire in a controlled bridge. Doesn't often happen but can cause immediate destruction if it does. Crossfire can happen in Mercury Arcs too under both controlled and passive rectification. They usually had surge protection across the anodes to minimise the risk of a transient setting it off.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Well the 100nF 100r snubber didn't work so I changed the design as per @Pretty Mouth 's diagram. Thanks again PM

 

[Lucien Nunes]

Excellent. It's a pity there are so many products that pass the buck as far as compatibility is concerned. You would hope that the makers of the humidistat would acknowledge that low power LED lighting might be connected to the SL and take the necessary (simple) steps to prevent the unit leaking current back out of its control input, and that lighting manufacturers would acknowledge that sometimes the SL gets a bit of inward leakage that should not be allowed to start the lamp. But they are under pressure to squeeze every possible component out of the design to save a few pence, so it becomes a 'system-level' problem to solve.

 

[Pretty Mouth]

Well the 100nF 100r snubber didn't work so I changed the design as per @Pretty Mouth 's diagram. Thanks again PM

Glad it worked for you mate

 

[HappyHippyDad]

I thought I would ask 'why' the snubber didn't work? I have just read another thread by @gazdkw82 where he fitted what looks like the same snubber, but in his case it worked and stopped the LED flashing. Why did it not work in my case?

This is the contact suppressor I fitted, which looks the same as gazdkw's and has the same ratings.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/AMPOHM-W...K:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649#rwid

 

[pc1966]

Do you have a multimeter that can measure capacitance? It might be worth checking that the snubber you got is actually working!

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Do you have a multimeter that can measure capacitance? It might be worth checking that the snubber you got is actually working!

Just measured it. It was 95NF so 5% less than it's rated farad which I'm guessing is fine?

 

[pc1966]

Just measured it. It was 95NF so 5% less than it's rated farad which I'm guessing is fine?

Yes, mostly they are 10% or even 20% tolerance.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Yes, mostly they are 10% or even 20% tolerance.

So any thoughts on why the snubber did not work in this case. Would you then need more than 1 snubber or a different rated one?

 

[pc1966]

Did the snubber change anything?

Some DC leakage by a controller would not be shunted off by a snubber, so this might just be a reason for it.

 

[HappyHippyDad]

Did the snubber change anything?

Some DC leakage by a controller would not be shunted off by a snubber, so this might just be a reason for it.

No, it did absolutely nothing. Thanks for all the input pc1966