electrical injury's

[maguire]

No you have mistaken my intentions Lets look at it this way there are more RCD's in use now as opposed to when they first became compulsary way back when any socket likely to be used blah blah blah. so I wanted to know given all the variables is there conclusive proof that since RCD's is there any less, the same or more incidents of people experiencing shock, and since rospa are as far as I know the only orginisation collecting data it's their data I used,christ talk about shooting the messenger.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

No you have mistaken my intentions Lets look at it this way there are more RCD's in use now

How many?

as opposed to when they first became compulsary way back when any socket likely to be used blah blah blah.

How many were there then?

As the 17th is only 2 years old, how many extra ones are there now?

so I wanted to know given all the variables is there conclusive proof that since RCD's is there any less, the same or more incidents of people experiencing shock,

There is no way to find out.

and since rospa are as far as I know the only orginisation collecting data it's their data I used,christ talk about shooting the messenger.

Nobody is shooting the messenger, just pointing out that your quest is pointless.

 

[maguire]

Ban
1, Unless I phoned all the suppliers in UK to see how many they sold since 1981 no way of telling
2, Lets say none since they were not compulsary.
3,Your propably right,
4, Not pointless I would eventually get some data, but yeah time consuming.
Dev

 

[ColJack]

you have to take into account also the increase in people, installations and number of points in an average installation, all of which have gone up as well as the number of RCD's..

lets go way back to the first installation..
if no one had an accident that year it can be statistically proven that not having an RCD is safer than having one since in that first year no accidents were reported where as last year 180 odd were reported..

 

[maguire]

True i think there is too many variables to draw any usefull conclusions
Dev

 

[ban-all-sheds]

4, Not pointless I would eventually get some data, but yeah time consuming.
Dev

You need to study the statistical concept known as "significance".

Basically the numbers of casualties are so low that even if you had the most perfectly accurate data you would not be able to show any significant change in casualties.

 

[holmslaw]

..

 

[maguire]

Cheez wish I'd never mentioned it

 

[1john]

Hey Maguire, I didn't mean to pi$$ on your bonfire, and the answer or statistic you are looking for intrigues me also, although sadly there will never be a constant to compare any statistics against. This kinda reminds me when the misses was preggers and everyone was saying to drink raspberry leaf tea, go for a curry, drive over speed bumps as it brings on labor, but there is no sense in it as it can be neither prooven or disprooven

If my comment has angered you, I apologise.

John

 

[maguire]

Hi 1john not at mate I seldom take the hump, things like 0847 numbers and flat ale **** me of a bit but generally I am fairley laid back and certainly thick skinned enough to take a slagging, being 61 this month and my hair as long as when I was 21 I get the usuall "Hey hippy was you the tea boy when stone henge was built" So no I did not take offence.
DM

 

[securespark]

When did the requirement for RCD's come in?

Most folk recall the 16th requiring any s/o that could supply equipment for use outdoors needed RCD protection.

Before that? The 15th. Some installers under the 15th fitted RCD incomers. Yet more installed SRCD's at the external doors.

Before that? The 14th. IIRC, RCD's became mainstream in 1974/5.

I don't have a copy of the 14th for that period, but the 14th Ed of 1966 has mention of current-operated ELCB's.