Talk:Switch

message: it might be useful to extend the discussion to other significant aspects of switches such as voltage and current ratings, design life, environmental requirements, etc.
:And we could use photos of switches.  A knife switch would be a good introductory picture.  A mercury bulb switch would be an unusual twist, a common wall switch (though styles differ around the world) would also be meaningful.  Perhaps someone can come up with a picture of a big electric company switch.  On the other side of the spectrum, we have micro switches for all sorts of mundane tasks like determining if there's paper in the paper tray. -- Ke4roh 12:16, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: ratings etc

message: It seems that we don't have anything to do with network switches. If we already have it, then we need a link to it on this page. --huwr
:I also overlooked it the first time.  The link is in the second sentence. -- Ke4roh 12:16, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I've now created a full disambiguation page, so hopefully the other meanings are more prominent. - IMSoP 06:23, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: network switches?

message: Is it true that underwater cameras use reed switches ?
-- DavidCary 17:19, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: underwater cameras and reed switches

message: it would be great to include the schematic symbols to illustrate the various configurations too. --Hooperbloob 05:14, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: schematic symbols

message: I think it pretty straightforward -- the "low energy" output of the switch corresponds with the "low physical" position of the toggle. High voltage = on = up. Low voltage = off = down = low. Fairly intuitive, no? Ergonomic principle.
Here's a British switch where the "on" position is clearly "over" the off position 
I will quote from "Fitting the Task to the Man" 4th edition by Etienne Grandjean  page 140:
"... to switch to 'off' it is instinctive to pull the lever towards the body or move it to the left, or downwards."
The US NEC National Electric Code mandates which way a light switch is oriented, although it doesn't explain "why"Feldercarb (talk) 15:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: ... And the Answer Is

message: Please explain a terminal block and backbox and explain how cable is saved. You seem to need three cables between the boxes in both cases, in addition to the circuit from one box through the light and the power supply back to that box.--Patrick 20:43, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
:not sure how to put this.
:terminal block is this stuff http://www.tlc-direct.co.uk/Products/TLCON5.html (i belive americans use wirenuts instead) a backbox is simply the box your switch is mounted in.
:as for cable saving it depends on which switches the live and switched lives arrive at perhaps the follwoing diagram will better explain what i mean (i drew this feel free to use it how the hell you like). its uk color code so possiblly not so approprite for an article here (i deliberately kept the diagrams on the switch page free of cable color codes to avoid confusion)
:
:i think it needs to be said (but im not sure how best to say it) that there are many wiring LAYOUTS for two way switching but electrically they are all one of the cuircuits that i currently show on the switch page.
I have written out the wiring needed. It seems the second method always needs more. I wonder if it has any advantage.--Patrick 08:56, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
:the MAIN reason for using the second method is to avoid the need to use a terminal block (wirenut in the usa) in the backbox of the first switch when live and switched live arrive at the same box. http://www.mywatergarden.com/diy/2way-switching.gif shows such a configuration. 
:http://www.umist.ac.uk/personal/student/Peter.Green/lamps.png is another more unusual case where the second method shown wins.
:i see you also added a link to Three-way circuit which shows a HUGE degree of national bias, is written in far too much of a howto style and specifies FAR too much locally variable detail (such as cable size). Plugwash 11:47, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: A terminal block in the backbox

message: i have redirected Three-way circuit to here. The old content there was a very us centric howto. If you wish to move that content to a more appropriate place feel free to get it from the history and add an external or sisterproject link to its new home from here. Plugwash 17:34, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Three-way circuit redirected here

message: This page could use a section on switch bounce— Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.112.84.15 (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2005
:Multivibrator linked to Contact bounce, which does not exist. Perhaps there should be a separate page for contact/switch bounce? For now I have changed the link to the subsection within this page, since the information is here.W 13:35, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Switch bounce 

message: I would suggest that the first two columns of the table listing the various switch types be swapped since abbreviations are generally introduced after the concept is described. This would also make the titles easier to grok going from the unwieldy "Electronics Abbreviation | Expansion of abbreviation" to just "Type | abbreviation" --
Hooperbloob 19:53, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Table column ordering

message: I do not think the switching article should be merged with switch. In my opinion, the former should cover the different ways of breaking a current (in air, oil, SF6, vacuum) and so on, together with the difficulties in swithing inductive currents, small capacitive ones....These are differente topics.
xareu_bs
: I would agree, the issues involved would make the current article grow considerably larger than it is already.--Hooperbloob 16:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  What happened? At the moment, switching is a mere disambiguation page, mentioning "For electrical switching in general, see switch". Was there ever information on the difficulties of switching inductive currents, etc. in the "switching" article, and if so, where did that information go? --68.0.124.33 (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: switching not to be merged with switch

message: Shouldn't this be here too? Found this text online: The "knife switch"  (rarely seen nowadays) is the type that most easily demonstrates the functioning of a switch. Old sci-fi movies ("Frankenstein (1931)" or "Young Frankenstein (1974)" , for example), made extensive use of these switches in the laboratory scenes. Today, use of knife switches has been confined to 1) heavy-duty industrial applications and 2) demonstration purposes - science projects for example. The knife switch has a metal lever, insulated at the 'free end' that comes into contact with a metal 'slot'. Since the electrical connections are exposed, knife switches are never seen in household wiring. Wadsworth 22:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Wow, old message.  I just created the page for Knife switch, it should either be expanded, or merged into this one (probably merged), but I don't have the knowledge to do so.  If anyone wants to merge and delete the KS page, feel free but be sure to correct the wikilinks (that's wat made me create the page in the first place).  WLU 15:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knife Switch 

message: Looking at the hefty 'toggle switches' depicted here, confirms my belief that the name originated from the (fastening) toggle-like external lever. However the article attributes the name to the mechanism ... is there any evidence for the stated name origin ? Or even my suggested origin ? 217.24.204.11 (talk) 15:00, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of Toggle Switch 

message: There is a mistake in diagrams "3-way switches position 2.svg" and "3-way switches position 4.svg".  These both show the neutral line as red, indicating presumably that it's live.  But of course it's not. I don't know how to edit pictures so I can't fix this.  Occultations (talk) 23:16, 27 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Mistake in diagrams 

message: The article has a number of undefined abbreviations that may be unfamiliar to a general audience.
* NEC
* CEC
There may be other abbreviations that also need to be examined.
--<SPAN STYLE="font-family:monospace; color:#008800; background-color:#ffffcc; border:1px solid #ff4444;"> B.D.Mills </SPAN> (T, C) 04:25, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I have corrected this. NEC = National Electrical Code (USA), CEC = Canadian Electrical Code. As far as I can tell, all other abbreviations are explained. Biscuittin (talk) 12:59, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for your corrections. --<SPAN STYLE="font-family:monospace; color:#008800; background-color:#ffffcc; border:1px solid #ff4444;"> B.D.Mills </SPAN> (T, C) 12:24, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abbreviations 

message: Are there really such things as a Mindy switch and a Jamie switch? Biscuittin (talk) 13:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Possible vandalism in "Others" 

message: When were electrical switches invented? -- Beland (talk) 22:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhere around Y2k, as part of researching the history of telegraphy and early electrical communication, I did an extensive Web search using all available search engines in a quest to identify the inventor of the first electrical switch. No luck. There's a lot more information on the Web now and the information might now be available. But I had a strong sniff that interruption of an electrical current to end a physical shock may have been so intuitive that this bit of history may never have been recorded. I'd still like to know. :-) Marbux (talk) 05:21, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Somewhere around Y2K??  And there was me using them for most of the 20th century not realising they hadn't been invented. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 18:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Not relevant?  So you think the switch was invented circa 2000.  So not only do you not know how switches are rated, you don't know when they were invented either. DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

text: I Googled for about 2 seconds and found, "1884 by a man named John Holme". Someone may be able to find a good reference of this. -- JTsams  (talk) 20:27, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: It was long before that.  Joseph Henry invented the relay in 1836 1 so the switch must have been around before that.  You can see an early form of switch in this picture of Sturgeon's first electromagnet in 1823, consisting of a metal arm (d) that dipped into a cup of mercury from which the wire to the electromagnet emerges.  These "mercury cup" contacts are visible in other pictures of early devices.  A "current reverser" switch is visible in this picture of a Henry electromagnet from the 1830s.  Volta invented the voltaic pile, the first source of DC current, and showed that current could be conducted by wires in 1800 2.  Before that there were just electrostatic sources, so there wouldn't have been much need of a switch. The toggle light switch was invented in 1916 3 by William J. Newton and Morris Goldberg.  Cheers --ChetvornoTALK 21:36, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Now that I think about it you're right. The switch must have been invented with the first voltage source, a switch is nothing more than a mechanism for bringing two conductors into contact to allow for the flow of electrons. I'd say the voltaic pile or Ben Franklin is probably the era of the first switch... at least as far as North American history is concerned. -- JTsams  (talk) 21:53, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Franklin just experimented with static electricity, which doesn't flow continuously so probably didn't require switches.   I'd guess between 1800 when the first experiments with "galvanic" (DC) electricity from the voltaic pile created a need for a switch, and the 1820s when switch mechanisms appear in pictures of electromechanical devices. --ChetvornoTALK 02:49, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: "When a strongly inductive load such as an electric motor is switched on, an input surge current exists that may be several times larger than the steady-state current. When switched off, the current cannot drop instantaneously to zero; a spark will jump across the opening contacts."  The high current that most types of motors draw when switched on has nothing to do with its inductance.  Rather it is due to the lack of back-EMF from the stopped motor.  Whatever inductance exists actually retards the rise of current for a short time.  I propose to edit out all mention of motor starting, which is in any case irrelevant to the matter of arcing when the motor is switched off.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.86.92.198 (talk) 19:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Inductive loads 

message: expert needed. Manually-operated and electrically-operated switches. Limit switches. "Microswitch".  Signal, control and power switches. Switch enclosures. Ratings. Actuators - push button, toggle, selector, whisker, lever arm. Pressure switches. float switches. flow switches. temperature switches. AC and DC ratings, physics of contact break. High voltage issues. High current issues. Light switches. History. Reed switch. explosion proof switches. contact wetting phenomena. Industrial, commercial, household wiring applications. Mercury switches and the environment (car bodies, noiseless wall switches). One minute's free-association on the topic shows there's a lot more to be added. --Wtshymanski (talk) 18:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It's useful to sign your contributions with four tildes. the details of contact debouncing I think properly belong in a discussion of digital logic design, not so much in a general discussion of switches. Methods vary depending on the targeted system, whereas the origins of the problem come from the electromechanical nature of the switch. --Wtshymanski (talk) 03:20, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Notes

message: Now that a lot of relays are latching, traditional ordinary (non-latching, non-rotary, non-centering) relays are sometimes described as 'single side stable'  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.162.148 (talk) 05:26, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Single Side Stable, Latching 

message: Looking at those 60617 symbols I don't see where the wires connect. I've seen a large number of European electrical drawings ranging from steel mills to hydro plants to VW cars, and I have never seen these "flag" symbols used in a schematic.  Unluckily our office doesn't have access to this IEC standard, but I don't think these are meant for use in electrical schematics.  Perhaps they are meant for architectural layout drawings, that is, to show where a light switch would be in a room; not for use in a schematic diagram. Can anyone authenticate the use of these symbols? They look very wrong. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  I've pulled them all. Some of them were described as "circuit breaker" symbols, again, though, I've never seen them. This file  , among others, convinces me that these "flagged" circles were not IEC 60617 switch symbols. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  IEC 60617 symbols? 

message: Where in the main page it says 
Similar to SPDT. Some suppliers use SPCO/SPTT for switches with a stable off position in the centre and SPDT for those without.[citation needed]
In common practice, just check any vendor, a switch of this kind is liste as a *PDT, P.E. SPDT, or DPDT, and in no other way. If there is a stable central position its indicated in a note or an ON-OFF-ON switch function is indicated.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Omblauman (talk • contribs) 03:37, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  SPDT - SP3T confusion 

message: I had a look though the article and didn't see any mention of 2 stage switches like those in a camera or some torches neither did I see the kind of switch like the buttons on the gamepads of the playstation 2 or 3 has.Pleasetry (talk) 03:00, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  2 stage switches/pressure switches 

message: A sewing machine pedal is a poor example of a switch, since any modern sewing machine has variable speed control so the pedal is anything but a mere switch, yeah?
217.13.7.24 (talk) 14:47, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sewing machine 

message: Does anyone know where I might find a free / CC-by / public domain image of this device, so it can be included here?
History: Motorized rotary switch, rotary solenoid, LEDEX
http://forum.allaboutcircuits.com/showthread.php?t=74358
DMahalko (talk) 05:51, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rotary switch, with rotary ratcheting solenoid to change position 

message: not to merge. </br> </br>
It is proposed that the article Whetting current be merged into this article as it already contains a (brief) section under the US spelling of 'wetting current'.  This proposal is a result of a lengthy discussion on the source article's talk page  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.159.159.194 (talk) 14:13, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge proposal from wetting current 

message: There should be a picture near ‘tipping-point mechanism’.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.139.82.82 (talk) 11:26, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  tipping-point mechanism 

message: You both have a point: as Wtshymanski says, the paragraph is an important part of the article; as Voidxor says, it is unsourced.  Instead of reverting each other, why not collaborate and source it? --ChetvornoTALK 04:07, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Although we may both have a point, only one of us is citing policy, whereas the other is . This is the part where I go outdoors. You can deal with 'em. Once again the bullies win while the admins stand by doing nothing. – voidxor 04:42, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: The policy does say that you should attempt to source the material if possible.  A source took me all of 200 milliseconds to find. 86.174.156.254 (talk) 12:40, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

text: Absolutely, it would have been almost as easy to improve the encyclopedia as to fight.   I know how tempting the snark is, but its kind of a cheap shot, isn't it? --ChetvornoTALK 16:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: "Competence is required" is not a policy? --Wtshymanski (talk) 01:35, 6 October 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reverts of [[Switch#Inductive loads|Inductive loads]] 

message: Thanks for your involvement in my edit about open and closed terminology and for assuming good faith.  While the present text is indeed "already very clear" as you state, in teaching electronics for 50+ years I have found some newcomers initially confused by the use of these terms.  Would you be amenable to footnotes at the same location as follows?
This use of the adjectives "open" and "closed" for electrical switches is universally accepted as described, but can cause some confusion as it seems to reverse the definition of those terms when referring to water valves, doors and gates, roads, venues, enrolment, etc.   https://www.macmillandictionary.com/us/dictionary/american/open_1  https://www.theautomationstore.com/electrical-contacts-normally-open-and-normally-closed-contacts/ 
If this is going too far, how about only using the last mentioned reference, which addresses this. 
JNRSTANLEY (talk) 19:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I've moved this here so other editors can join the discussion. — I'm not at all sure whether the sudden reference to water valves makes anything clearer. The exact previous sentence "Each set of contacts can be in one of two states: either "closed" meaning the contacts are touching and electricity can flow between them, or "open", meaning the contacts are separated and the switch is nonconducting." is as clear as can be, while a surprising reference to water might rather cause more confusion imho. It's common and quite useful to use water and pipe analogies when explaining electrical concepts that students can't easily grasp, but the article doesn't do this and so the water analogy is no potential source of confusion. I appreciate your professional experience but have got some of my own from training IT professionals with a fair share of physics and electricity. ;-) If you insist I'd be OK with a footnote though, pointing out the differences to the common water analogy. Thoughts? --Zac67 (talk) 20:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

text: Does no-one show the children a dirty great kinfe switch and say "Here, switch closed, current flows...here, switch open, no current.  Right? ".  Unfortunate confusions in other languages are best dealt with in other Wikipedias, not here on .en. --Wtshymanski (talk) 17:20, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: That’s good.—  Harshil want to talk? 10:31, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Open and closed usage 

message: , present lead section is too much uninformative and unstructured and was added by IP editor. I am restructuring it because it doesn't reflect article. Kindly, know your opinion on this after I am done with it.-- Harshil want to talk? 13:17, 9 December 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay --ChetvornoTALK 18:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)

text: I have some problems with the new lead section. I don't see that the new version is better than the old.  It seems to me it is longer and mentions more individual applications, but is more vague and not as understandable for non-technically-oriented readers.   There is no explanation of how a switch works.  The technical jargon "make" and "break" in the lead sentence are not explained and are not going to be understood by general readers (does "breaking" a circuit mean damaging it?). Similarly for "pole" and "throw".   Most importantly, the English is poor, with many confusing sentences and grammatical mistakes.  I rewrote it to correct some of these problems. --ChetvornoTALK 09:21, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Reframing LEAD 

message: network switch is networking hardware that connects devices on a computer network by using packet switching to receive and forward data to the destination device. A network switch is a multiport network bridge that uses MAC addresses to forward data at the data link layer of the OSI model. 2001:8F8:1735:1C67:35E6:7374:6B51:3111 (talk) 13:34, 18 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Switch 

message: I moved most of this article's "Electronic switches" section to an already-existing article Electronic switch, and am having just a small paragraph in this article that points to that article. So let's try to keep the scope of this article limited primarily to mechanical switches, and put switches that are electronically-controlled or are solid-state or use active devices or are otherwise are better categorized "electronic" in that other Electronic switch article. Em3rgent0rdr (talk) 21:07, 28 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Put "electronic" switches in the article [[Electronic switch]]