Do RCDs save lives

[JohnW2]

Give me a sensible 3rd option and I will add if I can

About the only sort of option I could consider voting for would be something along the lines of "maybe", "possibly" or something like that.

I can't see how anyone can really vote for 'No' or 'Yes' (let alone "Oh Yes!"), since that implies knowledge that they can't possibly have.

Kind Regards, John

 

[stillp]

How about "It doesn't matter, they reduce the risk of electrical incidents".

 

[JohnW2]

Produce your own poll and options if you like and I'll close this one.

I personally don't really see the point. As stillp and myself (and I suspect many others) have agreed, no-one can know whether or not RCDs have ever saved a life, either by preventing a shock from happening or by preventing a shock being fatal - so the only answers one could get to a poll would just be guesses.

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

How about "It doesn't matter, they reduce the risk of electrical incidents".

Do undesirable consequences of incorrect ('nuisance') trips of RCDs count as 'electrical incidents' (e.g. being 'plunged into darkness' whilst up ladders or holding pan of hot oi!)? If so, one would probably have to say "...reduce the NET risk of electrical incidents..."!

Kind Regards, John

 

[PBC_1966]

Obviously based upon an educated guess, or just call it a hunch if you like, but I'm happy to go with "Must have saved one or two," since to me it seems logical that in the years they've been in use there's a reasonable chance that somebody, somewhere ended up on a live connection with sufficient current going through him to earth to trip the RCD which might otherwise have resulted in a shock of sufficient intensity and duration to prove fatal.

 

[AndyPRK]

It's about your opinion john.

The truth isn't known so we can only give informed opinions

 

[PBC_1966]

Er...... So given the four options we now have, what's the difference between "Oh Yes!" and "Yes many deaths have been prevented" in overall meaning?

 

[stillp]

Slightly off-topic, but I suspect that over the holiday period we'll be told by the media that "this tragedy would have been prevented if only the family has working smoke alarms", although smokes have no direct protective function.

 

[JohnW2]

It's about your opinion john. The truth isn't known so we can only give informed opinions

When there isn't, and can't be, any 'information', an opinion cannot be "informed". The "informed" answer I can give is that RCDs clearly have the potential to save lives - so, if it hasn't already happened, it will presumably happen eventually, even if we have to wait 50 or 100 years!

However, there is no way that I would translate that opinion into a "Yes" vote, let alone an "Oh Yes" one!

Kind Regards, John

 

[JohnW2]

Obviously based upon an educated guess, or just call it a hunch if you like, but I'm happy to go with "Must have saved one or two," since to me it seems logical that in the years they've been in use there's a reasonable chance that somebody, somewhere ended up on a live connection with sufficient current going through him to earth to trip the RCD which might otherwise have resulted in a shock of sufficient intensity and duration to prove fatal.

I totally agree - although I wouldn't personally vote for that unless the "must have" were changed to "probably has" or "may have", or even "very probably has". "Must" implies knowledge which I do not have

Kind Regards, John

 

[Adam_151]

Cast your minds back, it is 2007, the 17th is on the horizon but not out yet....

Would you consider it appropiate design practice to omit 30mA RCD protection to the following situations:

1) First floor sockets in a domestic house
2) The sockets around a church hall
3) A ring circuit serving classrooms and corridor workspaces in a primary school
4) A kichenette facility in an office
5) Bench mounted sockets around a fabrication shop
6) Corridor sockets in the communial corridors of a block containing many sub let offices
7) A socket below a DB in a commercial installation
8) Sockets in a hotel room
9) Sockets in a uni halls room
10) Sockets in a high school / college CDT room

It'll be interesting to see how the answers vary

 

[JohnW2]

I wonder if, in 5 or 10 years' time, we will see a poll about whether non-combustible CUs 'save lives'?

Kind Regards, John

 

[ericmark]

I am sure there must be cases where the 40 ms disconnection time has saved lives. But I would also expect the number to be very very low. Do remember question states;- "In the case of electric shocks" so not counting where the device trips before anyone gets an electric shock only where it trips as they get an electric shock. So all the RCD does is reduce the time to 40 ms it does not reduce the current.

To my mind the idea is for the RCD to trip before anyone gets a shock and I am sure it does prevent many electric shocks. We are looking at a total of 22 deaths in 2010. So maximum it could save is 22 per year. I have not found any data on deaths where a RCD was fitted. There must be people with existing medical conditions where even with a RCD they will still die. But of those 22 deaths I have notes on three total since I stopped work. It seems very few are recorded as to how they died so we simply don't know.

As to electric shocks and fires the number are much higher but for pole only asking about deaths.

 

[ross94]

it won't protect you from a shock between live and neutral. but if its just the live itself that you come in contact with or the live and earth you will definitely get a shock you will probably feel a lot, but most of the time the rcd will trip out before anything too serious happens just leaving you shaken and feeling like an idiot for not turning the power off and double checking. bear in mind though an rcd DOES NOT guarantee protection against electrocution. there is always a possibility so don't take any chances.

 

[PBC_1966]

an rcd DOES NOT guarantee protection against electrocution. there is always a possibility so don't take any chances.

And this is where I feel that some people have been misled by much of the "hype" surrounding the RCD, and really do believe that the presence of one somehow completely prevents the possibility of dangerous electric shock or electrocution.

So as a side question to that of how many people have been saved by the RCD, I wonder if anyone has actually lost his life through its presence leading him into carelessness and an erroneous belief that he can't be hurt by an RCD-protected circuit?