Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
JasonMcQueen  
#1 Posted : 30 August 2014 19:22:47(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
JasonMcQueen

This has been the bone of much consternation at work lately so apologies if this seems to be an obvious question but the argument thats been going on is whether 110v is actually safer than 240v? The accepted wisdom is that 110v in the event of electrocution is 55v across the earth and so much less likely to cause cardiac fibrillation and resulting death. But, the argument has been put that in order to make 110v tools effective, the amperage is usual double that of 110v and its the amps that do the real damage. There is so much contradictory opinion and I'm not an electrician, only having a slight increase of awareness of a 'lay person' so looking for an education from the more knowledgeable members here.
Jane Blunt  
#2 Posted : 30 August 2014 19:39:19(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Jane Blunt

While it is true that to get the same power the current is doubled, that does not mean that, if the person touches the live parts, they will receive double the current. The current that will pass through the person depends on the resistance of the person and the potential difference. Lower the latter and you lower the current.
Roundtuit  
#3 Posted : 30 August 2014 21:39:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Grandfather worked for many years on the High Voltage pylons - his training always led to the amps being the killer, and making sure he was not a link to ground. Fusing and distribution board protections rate similarly in the work environment regardless of 110 or 240 so it then becomes a question of how much force (voltage) is pushing the current from the supply. Given the choice we prefer cordless tools, 110V second and 240V as an absolute last resort even though 240 is the standard in our homes and offices! Back to Physics "101" and Ohms Law where Volts = Amps x Ohms If Ohms are the same human body then 240 Volts is more than double the Amps of 110 Volts The real issue comes from involuntary muscle spasm due to the "let go threshold" I.e. the point at which muscles involuntarily contract tightly gripping the source of electrical supply - another of Grandads gems was to validate a supply isolation with the back of the hand before continuing work. Not properly isolated your arm would jerk away from the supply rather than tightly gripping it. It is here the lower voltage of 110 shows its benefit as the route a cross the body is by skin conduction - increase the voltage to 240 and it shorts through the body including potentially the heart resulting in fibrillation.
Roundtuit  
#4 Posted : 30 August 2014 21:39:31(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Grandfather worked for many years on the High Voltage pylons - his training always led to the amps being the killer, and making sure he was not a link to ground. Fusing and distribution board protections rate similarly in the work environment regardless of 110 or 240 so it then becomes a question of how much force (voltage) is pushing the current from the supply. Given the choice we prefer cordless tools, 110V second and 240V as an absolute last resort even though 240 is the standard in our homes and offices! Back to Physics "101" and Ohms Law where Volts = Amps x Ohms If Ohms are the same human body then 240 Volts is more than double the Amps of 110 Volts The real issue comes from involuntary muscle spasm due to the "let go threshold" I.e. the point at which muscles involuntarily contract tightly gripping the source of electrical supply - another of Grandads gems was to validate a supply isolation with the back of the hand before continuing work. Not properly isolated your arm would jerk away from the supply rather than tightly gripping it. It is here the lower voltage of 110 shows its benefit as the route a cross the body is by skin conduction - increase the voltage to 240 and it shorts through the body including potentially the heart resulting in fibrillation.
tony.  
#5 Posted : 31 August 2014 20:01:12(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
tony.

So what about 400 volt tools such as 3 phase circular saws for sawing intoconcrete slabs? Before we can discuss, we need more information. Are we in a clean workshop environment, a muddy constructionmsite.......
RayRapp  
#6 Posted : 31 August 2014 20:53:15(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
RayRapp

'Given the choice we prefer cordless tools, 110V second and 240V as an absolute last resort even though 240 is the standard in our homes and offices!' As above plus RCD with 240V.
stephenjs  
#7 Posted : 01 September 2014 13:17:59(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
stephenjs

I wold permit them all and ensure that 240V has an RCD fitted. Stephen
stillp  
#8 Posted : 03 September 2014 15:17:17(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
stillp

Jason, the issue is not so much that the tools use 110 volts, as the fact that they are supplied via a 55 - 0 - 55 V transformer, which limits the voltage difference to earth to 55 volts. HSE used to insist on the use of these "reduced low voltage" transformers to BS4363, but I believe they will now accept the use of 230V tools. It is indeed the current that kills you, and a lower voltage will 'push' less current through the body. It is generally accepted that 30 mA is the limit of current at which 95% of adults will survive. The current (amperage) used by the tool is not relevant to the possibility of a harmful electric shock, although the greater current means the cable will get hotter, but should not get hot enough to cause a fire risk. Roundtuit, your grandfather should have used an approved 2-terminal testing device, not the back of his hand! Whether the current flows through the body or through skin conduction does not depend on the voltage, but on the points of contact and on the frequency. The muscle spasm issue is a real danger, especially if working at height.
walker  
#9 Posted : 03 September 2014 15:26:21(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
walker

Roundtuit wrote:
another of Grandads gems was to validate a supply isolation with the back of the hand before continuing work. Not properly isolated your arm would jerk away from the supply rather than tightly gripping it.
I'd not spotted this until stillp's post I'm not THAT old, but this was exactly what I was taught when I was an apprentice! I prefered to use my AVO though ....... most of the time. Was a good way to clear an hangover ;-))
Roundtuit  
#10 Posted : 03 September 2014 17:49:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Retired many years before the appearance of HASAW - no meter but a tester knocked up by the company workshop, the back of the hand being a double check just in case the tester broke between making sure it was working and then testing the isolation.
Roundtuit  
#11 Posted : 03 September 2014 17:49:37(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Roundtuit

Retired many years before the appearance of HASAW - no meter but a tester knocked up by the company workshop, the back of the hand being a double check just in case the tester broke between making sure it was working and then testing the isolation.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.