# Lotus Lights - Don't do this.



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

I tried an experiment and it was way too time consuming. It would have been much faster to do it the old fashioned way.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I did something similar, I mounted 6 of the Lithonia drivers to a piece of wood and wired them up together with romex, then mounted the board in an attic. That saved some time on the job, but I lost the time it took to cut up and resplice the wiring. The factory extensions would have made it much faster, but they are expensive. So I decided to just wire them up conventionally unless I can't fit a driver thru the hole.


----------



## Navyguy (Mar 15, 2010)

Not being a Lotus Light guy... what is the "old fashioned way"? Is that a 120 volt line out to where the lights are and then the drivers are grouped in that area?

Cheers
John


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> I did something similar, I mounted 6 of the Lithonia drivers to a piece of wood and wired them up together with romex, then mounted the board in an attic. That saved some time on the job, but I lost the time it took to cut up and resplice the wiring. The factory extensions would have made it much faster, but they are expensive. So I decided to just wire them up conventionally unless I can't fit a driver thru the hole.


It would work better if you could get one big driver with screw terminals. I wouldn't mind that for attics because it keeps the driver out of the insulation. The Lotus drivers can be buried in insulation, I just don't like it.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Navyguy said:


> Not being a Lotus Light guy... what is the "old fashioned way"? Is that a 120 volt line out to where the lights are and then the drivers are grouped in that area?
> 
> Cheers
> John


Just daisy chaining 120V, driver at the fixture.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> It would work better if you could get one big driver with screw terminals. I wouldn't mind that for attics because it keeps the driver out of the insulation. The Lotus drivers can be buried in insulation, I just don't like it.


I hear ya.

It's probably a logistics thing. You still need to have separate drivers for when you are snaking in from below with no attic access. So they would need to offer it both ways. They would also need to make various sized multi-drivers for 4, 6, 8, etc. lights.

In the end it's much easier for them to just include a driver with each light.


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

No, that doesn't look efficient. 

Wouldn't help that (if they were wired where they are) the doors would be 
hinged on top and would be in the way constantly. 

We had disagreement on another thread. As I understand it modifying the 
ELV harnesses voids the CSA/ULc rating for the unit. Will the inspector be 
seeing this? 
P&L


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

PlugsAndLights said:


> No, that doesn't look efficient.
> 
> Wouldn't help that (if they were wired where they are) the doors would be
> hinged on top and would be in the way constantly.
> ...


That would make every one of my undercabinet jobs wrong.

Hinge on top doesn't matter. I pre-wired it on the floor.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

What gauge wire does the factory extensions use?


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

HackWork said:


> I hear ya.
> 
> It's probably a logistics thing. You still need to have separate drivers for when you are snaking in from below with no attic access.


Walk me through that, I am not following. 

I have been thinking the first manufacturer that cracks and makes a screw terminal power supply, they will all have to, nobody would want one with proprietary cables any more.


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

99cents said:


> That would make every one of my undercabinet jobs wrong.
> 
> Hinge on top doesn't matter. I pre-wired it on the floor.


So will the inspector be seeing it? Why don't you ask him/her this 
question at the same time? 
P&L


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

splatz said:


> Walk me through that, I am not following.
> 
> I have been thinking the first manufacturer that cracks and makes a screw terminal power supply, they will all have to, nobody would want one with proprietary cables any more.


Think of a typical living room on a first floor of a 2 story house. You snake romex up from a light switch into the ceiling and to the multiple light openings making minimal holes. 

In this instance you would want a small driver that could fit into each hole. A large multi-driver wouldn't work.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

HackWork said:


> Think of a typical living room on a first floor of a 2 story house. You snake romex up from a light switch into the ceiling and to the multiple light openings making minimal holes.
> 
> In this instance you would want a small driver that could fit into each hole. A large multi-driver wouldn't work.


I see, thanks. 

In new construction, you could easily enough locate the power supply in the basement, but for a retrofit ... this opens up a can of worms for me. What if you brought two cables from the switch box into the basement? (Assuming that box isn't already fed from the basement. You would feed the power supply with one, and feed back to the lights with the other.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

splatz said:


> I see, thanks.
> 
> In new construction, you could easily enough locate the power supply in the basement, but for a retrofit ... this opens up a can of worms for me. What if you brought two cables from the switch box into the basement? (Assuming that box isn't already fed from the basement. You would feed the power supply with one, and feed back to the lights with the other.


That would overcomplicate it and require much more work. It would also require an accessible basement with a place to put the driver that isn't going to get covered up if they finish it.

I like the idea of a single driver for some situations, but in retrofitting these lights it's very easy and quick to just shove the separate drivers into the ceiling and be done with it.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

I have extended a lead to get to a tough spot. That meant having two drivers at one location.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> I have extended a lead to get to a tough spot. That meant having two drivers at one location.


Yup, that's what I meant when I said "_So I decided to just wire them up conventionally unless I can't fit a driver thru the hole._"

Sometimes if the joist is in the wrong position the driver won't fit thru.


----------



## billyhunter (Mar 31, 2016)

Good thoughts. Never catch that point, I will try next time for retrofit


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

I had a GC come back after my inspection. He put a flat 2 X 4 dead center over my Lotus location. After mangling the 2 X4 with a Hackzall I had no choice but to run #18 to the fixture  .


----------



## PlugsAndLights (Jan 19, 2016)

99cents said:


> That would make every one of my undercabinet jobs wrong.


Decided to put this question to Lotus. Following is question 
emailed to [email protected]: 

*>Hello,
> Is it permissible to extend extra low voltage cable between the 
> lotus light and the driver? Specifically, can the screw connectors 
> be cut off and a piece of LVT cable added in between? This
> would be done with standard wire nuts. Would doing this void the 
> CSA and/or ULc approval for the unit as a whole?
> If it matters, I’m in Canada.* 

And here's their reply:

*Hello,

Yes, you can extend the cable, we provide 6 ft and 20 ft extensions, maximum run should be 40 feet.

If you cut off the connectors and use your own wire the fixture would work fine, however you would lose the warranty and the UL approval.
*
So there's only two explanations why an inspector would pass lighting 
modified in this manner. One is that they didn't know it was modified and
the other is they don't know this voids the approvals. 
P&L


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

PlugsAndLights said:


> Decided to put this question to Lotus. Following is question
> emailed to [email protected]:
> 
> *>Hello,
> ...


Going right to the source, great post!:thumbsup:


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

It passed no problem but, like I say, I wouldn't do it again. It's too time consuming. I do like the fact that there's no driver resting on the suspended ceiling. For a drywall ceiling it doesn't matter.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> It passed no problem but, like I say, I wouldn't do it again. It's too time consuming. I do like the fact that there's no driver resting on the suspended ceiling. For a drywall ceiling it doesn't matter.


Tiewrap the driver to the ceiling hanger wire. That will help keep the wires off the tile and out of the way too.


----------

