Big_Spark said:
Are you two being deliberately stupid or simply being obtuse?
I, and I expect a number of others, have noticed something. I wonder if you have?
I wonder if you have noticed how many times over the years you've come out with stuff that a lot of others have argued with (as in saying you are factually wrong rather than arguing over opinions and beliefs) and you've ended up complaining that everyone has deliberately misunderstood or misinterpreted what you've said?
The FULL LOAD OF THE CIRCUIT IS THE TOTAL OF ALL RESISTANCES (ETC) FORMING THAT CIRCUIT...
So the body resistance PLUS the normal circuit resistance IS THE FULL LOAD CURRENT OF THE CIRCUIT...remember you have become part of the circuit....by completing the circuit you are becoming part of the circuit..as I have said...thus the full load is as I have said...
Yes, and you've consistently said it in a way that meant you were claiming that this "full load current" was the current that would have flowed in the circuit if there'd been the normal conductor connection to complete it:
But your forgetting that electrical circuits do not exist in a state of zero current. Usually when people recieve a shock, the circuit is under load and when you short that circuit you recieve a full shock equivilent to the load on the circuit and some.
What I should have pointed out is that the majority of fatal shocks occur not from touching the phase conductor, but from creating a circuit across the neutral or acroos the load of an appliance, so that the person recieves the full load shock....
however if the circuit is energised, connecting the neutral would allow the full load being drawn to flow
IF YOU connected the neutral across your body then you have completed an electrical circuit, the circuit would energise as if you were not forming the bridge (assuming the neutral was intact) and at that time the load of the circuit would flow through you, just as if you were a piece of wire in the circuit..albeit with a lot higher resistance than wire...
I have not said that you would necessarilly recieve a shock greater than normal..I simply said the full load current of the circuit...
You may try to wriggle out of it now, but I doubt that anyone will believe that you were not at the time intending to claim that completing a circuit by joining a broken neutral would result in a more severe shock than you'd get if you bridged P-N or P-E.
This disbelief stems from two things.
1) The fact that when you initially claimed it, and people said "no it doesn't work that way, it's just ohms law, and the resistance of your body will determine the current", at no time did you say "that's what I meant, the full resistance of the normal load plus the resistance of the body", you kept on arguing and going on about this "full load current".
2) Your assertion that there is some different mechanism:
I appreciate that this situation is one most people never find themselves in, 95% of electric shocks are phase to earth and in that situation, as everyone agrees, the current flowing would be determined by the resistance of your own body and the potential difference flowing across it, this is the same for Phase to neutral shocks.
It's also the same for shocks that you get if you join a broken neutral or a broken phase. But you would not have written what you did if you didn't think it was different.
In neither situation do you become part of the electrical circuit, you ARE the electrical circuit,
In all situations you become part of the circuit. You may become the only path or you may become a parallel path, but you are part of the circuit.
but if you bridge the neutral via your body, and the circuit is energised, at the moment of energisation, the full potential current of the circuit will flow across you
There you go again with this "full potential current" as if it is something wholly different to the current that you'd receive via some other way of connecting yourself into the circuit.
I thought I was typing it wrong, but I am not, it is you lot not reading what I am typing...
Sometimes you remind me of the soldier in a column of marching men who thought that he was the only one in step, and all the others were out of it...
Big_Spark said:
I never said the current would be more, I simply said the full load current of the circuit...
You did say it would be more:
It is often not realised by many that the shock hazard of the neutral conductor is far higher than that of the phase conductor.
To my way of thinking a higher shock hazard means that you'll get more current flowing in you when you touch the neutral than if you touch the phase, not less.
BAS..the point I was making is that there is a significant difference between a shock from Phase to earth, where the current flowing in your body will be determined by your body's resistance, as for any electrical circuit, BUT if you complete a circuit by making the connection ACROSS A BROKEN NEUTRAL, then the shock you recieve will be the current flowing in the circuit at that time..you will effectively become part of the circuit rather than a seperate circuit..(as with a Phase to neutral or Phase to earth shock)
An explicit statement to the effect that if you make yourself "part of the circuit" by putting yourself across a broken neutral, that there will be a significant difference between the shock you get, and the shock you would get if you put yourself between phase and earth. Given that you've said the shock hazard is higher, you
are saying that the current that would flow in you would be significantly higher than the current that would flow in a phase-neutral or phase-earth shock.
Why did you say "
a shock from Phase to earth, where the current flowing in your body will be determined by your body's resistance, as for any electrical circuit, BUT if you complete a circuit by making the connection ACROSS A BROKEN NEUTRAL, then the shock you recieve will be the current flowing in the circuit at that time" if you didn't mean to say that the current flowing would not be determined by your body's resistance but would be determined by some other mechanism?
Even your example contradicts what you were claiming.
First a quick re-cap:
95% of electric shocks are phase to earth and in that situation, as everyone agrees, the current flowing would be determined by the resistance of your own body and the potential difference flowing across it, this is the same for Phase to neutral shocks.
OK - in your motor example, a body at 1500 ohms:
Phase to earth (do you mind if I ignore Ze??) 230/1500 = 153.3mA
Phase to neutral 230/1500 = 153.3mA
Completing a broken neutral in series with the motor 230/1530 = 150.3mA
3mA less
It is often not realised by many that the shock hazard of the neutral conductor is far higher than that of the phase conductor.
I've just realised that you were right all along - that indeed is not realised by many...