Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Welcome to our site! Electro Tech is an online community (with over 170,000 members) who enjoy talking about and building electronic circuits, projects and gadgets. To participate you need to register. Registration is free. Click here to register now.
Hero999 You got that wrong DC is more up to chook you pretty good. Actualy AC is safer because at some time there is no voltage and no current flow .If you are lucky you could disconnect during that time. DC on the other end it will hold on to you and pass current internaly. And hi frequency is also much safer because the current will have a detency to remain to skin level. Your skin resistance does not vary with voltage not until you have reached breakdown of the skin resistance then avalanche occurs just like an SCR.
Hero999 said:
It also depends on the whether the current is DC or AC and frequency also has an effect, 50Hz is more deadly than DC but 50kHz AC is safer than DC.WHAT DO I KNOWi am novice right.
Also not that the resistance of your skin generally drops at higher voltages, so you may measure your resistance a 1M with a multimeter and think you'll be alright if you're connected to 500V DC as only 0.5mA will flow though you but you're wrong your resistance is likely to drop to <5k so >100mA will flow which is deadly.
Hero999 You got that wrong DC is more up to chook you pretty good. Actualy AC is safer because at some time there is no voltage and no current flow. If you are lucky you could disconnect during that time. DC on the other end it will hold on to you and pass current internaly.
I don't think this part is right. Edison discovered that it takes a lower AC voltage to electrocute you than a DC voltage. Also, according to Wikipedia (questionable) it claims the minimum current where you can no longer let go of the line as 15mA for AC, and 45mA for DC. Wouldn't that make low frequency AC (where the skin effect doesn't come in) much more dangerous than an equivelant DC line since it could shock you more easily and hold you onto the line more easily? It seems (if the Wiki claim is accurate) that AC is will hold you onto the line more easily than DC. It also seems that AC having no voltage and no current flow at some times has no effect on making it easier to let go of AC...in fact it would seem to make it harder to let go.
It would seem that an AC line will pull you in more easily because it takes less current than DC to do so, but it's harder to let go of an DC line than AC because it contracts your muscles in one direction only, and causes no convulsions. AC- easier to get stuck on but easier to pull away. DC- harder to get stuck on, but once you are stuck it's harder to pull away. A strange kind of balance between dangerousness.
DON I am glad that your research only mention current. Voltage is consequencial. I can cook humburgers with the microwave with not nearly 10 amps. And in the hospitals the revive shock machine the meter reads 100ma max 20ma is nominal and last for seconds 10amps we have lunch.
DON I am glad that your research only mention current. Voltage is consequencial. I can cook humburgers with the microwave with not nearly 10 amps. And in the hospitals the revive shock machine the meter reads 100ma max 20ma is nominal and last for seconds 10amps we have lunch.
What has the mains consumption of a micro-wave oven got to do with electrical shocks? - for that matter a defribulater (which I presume is what you meant?) is calibrated in joules, NOT mA.
Although perhaps a defribulater is worth mentioning?, as it's designed to stop the heart!.
what you say is true enough as an experiment type of thing in actuality dc since it is solidly passing current through your body it will burn tissue and make it easy to pass more current consequently more current and more current.
ac on the other end will as you say cause tremors in your body whereby you cannot let go. however an external force like a buddy can disconnect you from the source with a belt or rope nuch easily because as some time there is no potential.
dknguyen said:
I don't think this part is right. Edison discovered that it takes a lower AC voltage to electrocute you than a DC voltage. Also, according to Wikipedia (questionable) it claims the minimum current where you can no longer let go of the line as 15mA for AC, and 45mA for DC. Wouldn't that make low frequency AC (where the skin effect doesn't come in) much more dangerous than an equivelant DC line since it could shock you more easily and hold you onto the line more easily? It seems (if the Wiki claim is accurate) that AC is will hold you onto the line more easily than DC. It also seems that AC having no voltage and no current flow at some times has no effect on making it easier to let go of AC...in fact it would seem to make it harder to let go.
It would seem that an AC line will pull you in more easily because it takes less current than DC to do so, but it's harder to let go of an DC line than AC because it contracts your muscles in one direction only, and causes no convulsions. AC- easier to get stuck on but easier to pull away. DC- harder to get stuck on, but once you are stuck it's harder to pull away. A strange kind of balance between dangerousness.
What are you talking about? 100mA would kill you for sure!
Most batteries can supply more than 100mA but thier voltage is to low to overcome your body's resistance an allow a lethal current to flow, but the 120V AC is a high enough voltage to allow a deadly current to flow.
Mythbuster (TV show) did a episode on throwning appliances in a tub and it was pretty easy to make the circuit, (the metal drain is a ground and the salt in your body helps conduct)
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
