@paul4 Please excuse the shameless plug:
2 Likes
HATE those tiny boxes which tend to be metal and have dry-rotting cloth wrapped wiring for extra fun.. 
edit: thanks for the size comparisons though!!!! I missed that post.
5 Likes
Could this be useful to you?
I just ordered one for a project to install lighting inside a closet that does not have a pre-existing switch, or anything else.
SONOFF BASICZBR3 Zigbee Smart Switch, Zigbee Home Smart Controller, Compatible with Amazon Alexa, Works with SmartThings
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B088SZNGSY/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o03_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
1 Like
Looks like it might. Have to make sure it fits. Old building, small boxes.
Check the INDUCTIVE load rating on any switch that will control a motor. It's not just the amps.....
2 Likes
The smallest out there are the Qubino Flush relays. They are both the same size. The Flush 1 has a single 10A relay. The Flush 2 has two 4A relays. Here's the size:
3 Likes
We had a lot of switches in the house that controlled single outlets somewhere else in the room which ended up being an outlet we didn't need switched or wanted the switch to control other devices, so most of the time I just replaced the switch with a smart switch, tied all of the hot wires together for the switch, switched outlet and then tied the common wires for the switch and the switched outlet together, and then capped off the load wire on the smart switch--so it didn't actually physically switch anything and just got mains power, and then the outlet was always hot.
From that point I just used other plug-in outlet relays and had the switch control those wirelessly. In some cases where there was a single switch, I did this, but replaced with switch with a multi-button scene controller, and then had those buttons turn on and off different devices throughout the room.
You might be able to do this without having to have another relay behind your existing switch, and just replace the switch altogether perhaps. The load could be plugged into a plug-in outlet relay, and controlled that way.
Then you could also have remote switches elsewhere interact with the same load device whether they be battery operated, or other wired remote switches.
I'm not sure if that helps at all, but I hope so 
1 Like
That's why I think removing the dumb switch and replacing the dumb outlet/receptacle with a smart one is the way to go unless I've missed something.
2 Likes
Haven't missed a thing. Leaving the outlet permanently hot, will permit the use of a smart receptacle. And provide the space needed to mount a Pico .....
2 Likes
Another perspective. If you have anyone else in the house, it's all fun and games till stuff stops working. I prefer , if at all possible, to leave some remnants of manual control, cuz when the automation fails(and it will fail), having a manual switch backup is priceless. If it was just me, and an automation fails, no big deal. The wife & kids are another story. The aeotec mini or micro relays are great. I have the older non plus Z-wave versions, and they are rock solid, 4 years in. And when the automation fails, I just hit the switch.
1 Like
I have two G2's left after ?6? years.. They are still working as well. Am on the fence as to whether I should replace them or not. They are not ZW+ so that is one factor. The other is I now have a bunch of smart switches installed so the "always centered" behavior is now a known thing in our house.
There are also Zigbee controllers out there - I am using an older model of RGBGenie's in wall/lamp microcontrollers in 2 of our downstairs closet lights.. they have been working great too.
1 Like
This is a good point. There isn’t a smart device platform in the world that can match the 100.00% reliability people have come to expect with a physical light switch (except maybe Lutron).
When there are others in the house, tread lightly when you consider messing with that basic assumption! (ask me how I know that 
)
1 Like
In a remodel/new-build situation I wonder how much the Electrical Code is holding back the potential cost/labor savings in not having to run "switch legs" and "switch controlled outlets" of yesteryear in a Smart Home.
It's not hard to envision a WHOLE LOTTA wire, wall boxes, and switches not having to go where they might have had to go before to satisfy the lowest common denominator wiring layout.
In other words... when will, or has, "Smart Stuff" preclude wiring a home like somebody might someday take it all out and need things ...."wired like it's 1999".
EDIT: For the sake of argument and future-talk; one could suggest that some significant % of the wiring complexity, routing, and terminations could be saved/simplified in a Smart Home even while we know the communication challenges and single point-of-failure complexities increase. But...there are other trade offs, including operational safety, to having less physical wiring, fewer terminations (switches etc.). What if you could lay things out so that there was Redundancy in the Smarts so that while there might be more vulnerable single-points-of-failure those points were more robust (and could afford to be because they replaced X wired switch runs).
1 Like
Hasn’t the NEC changed over time to account for increased use of smart devices?
Increased requirements for neutral wiring in switch boxes, for example.
If you’re remodeling now, what does the current NEC require re: switched outlets?
1 Like
Hasn't code now changed to now require neutrals in a gang boxes? I think this is specifically for smart switches / low voltage gizmos..
What's less clear to me is low voltage distribution systems and safely running things in the bays behind the walls.
edit: ninja'd by @marktheknife !!!!
1 Like
1 Like
About a month ago, I was going through a new build house at the electrical "rough in" stage and wondered how much could be changed if I were laying out a smart house. Rough estimate == at least 30% decrease in wiring, maybe 50%.
Wow, that high side number is eye opening. And all of that reduction, consolidation of control, and reliance on a hub(s) would have been acceptable to local code & inspector?
Think about these things:
Many rooms have 3-Way switches. Those can be reduced, maybe eliminated.
The need to have switched plugs is no longer necessary using a smart plugs.
If you use Pico switches, you can pretty much do away with in-wall switches, but I think retaining minimum switches to control lighting in the event of a hub failure is prudent.
I am sitting here looking at this room, a bedroom converted to office. The wall switch is a 2-gang box. Switch #1 controlled the light fixture in ceiling. Switch #2 controls the upper half of a wall plug. A few years ago, I hung a ceiling fan with a light. The wall switch controls both (single switch).
A smart home would do away with the switched plug and need for two runs of cable.
I doubt if an inspector will care about a smart hub. They are going to look at wiring connections and sizes.
Also, we are assuming the use of a Hubitat hub. 
1 Like
Unfortunately code still has a bunch of "you will haves" that combine expected use and safety hold-overs from YEARS of code development. I just don't know how many of those are being seen in a new light (and alternatives allowed) with the advent of HA.
1 Like
