Infernal IDIOTS!

[unixronin]

I replaced a pair of "three-way" switches today.  (Why the US calls them three-way when they're two-way, I don't know.)  I wanted to replace a three-way dimmer at the top of the stairs with a regular three-way switch because the track light it controls now has all CFLs in it, which are non-dimmable and may be damaged by dimming them.  Since people walk past it going up and down the stairs, I wanted a flat decor-type switch that nobody would scrape their shoulder on, and it then made sense to replace the other of the pair (at the bottom of the stair) to match.

Now, the switches contain a handy little wiring diagram inside the package.  The wiring diagram has pretty accurate representations of the switches, with the terminals all to proper scale and in the right places, and even the ears on the ground tag are visible.  Makes it real straightforward, you just wire everything in accordance with the diagram, right?

...Wrong.  Because if you can squint hard enough to read the little tiny, grey, sideways fine print next to the diagram, you will discover that even though the switch as represented in the diagram looks exactly like the physical switch, the arrangement of the terminals on the diagram does not match the contacts on the switch.

In other words, if you carefully and conscientiously wire the circuit exactly as shown in the wiring diagram, YOU WILL WIRE IT WRONG.

I want to know whose stupid idea it was to make a precise, accurate-looking diagram that does not reflect reality.  To all practical purposes, the wiring diagram is booby-trapped.  Fortunately, me being a careful sort when it comes to electrical wiring, the only consequence was several minutes of "WTF?" until I noticed — and managed to read — the fine print.

Comments

[sammyd.livejournal.com]

I found that to be the case for the switches and electrical outlets I had to replace when doing our bathroom remodeling recently. The diagrams were backwards to reality.

My understanding is that there is supposedly mercury in CFL light bulbs. Although, the amount is small, there have been tests done on them and they do present a risk:

"Although initially dismissed as an overreaction, subsequent scientific studies by the Maine DEP [44] and also Brown University in 2008 have confirmed that - contrary to earlier belief - the amount of mercury released by a broken CFL bulb greatly exceeds EPA safety standards."
(Quoted from the Wiki page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compact_fluorescent_lamp)

[unixronin.livejournal.com]

Yes, this is true. But until LED lighting becomes cost-effective, I'm willing to tolerate the slight risk in exchange for the lower power consumption, the reduced waste heat, and the brighter, better quality light.