FCU for Shower pump

[JohnW2]

Reduced body resistance in bathrooms due to removal of clothing.

Are you perhaps talking about the reduction in the 'protection' afforded by clothing?

Removal of clothes, alone, would, per se, tend to make the surface of one's body colder - hence probably less sweating, with a consequent increase in skin resistance.

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Reduced body resistance in bathrooms due to removal of clothing.

I'm sure that t'interwebby is awash with photos of naked people in kitchens.

But we won't go there, instead I'll ask "reduced body resistance when the body is between what and what?"

 

[securespark]

Now you're getting saucy!

Use your imagination!

 

[securespark]

Are you perhaps talking about the reduction in the 'protection' afforded by clothing?
Removal of clothes, alone, would, per se, tend to make the surface of one's body colder - hence probably less sweating, with a consequent increase in skin resistance.

Oh, come on.

You're as bad as Ban!!

What is it that you are far more likely to do in a bathroom than a kitchen?

Yes, very funny..... Not only do you get your kit off but you are often soaking wet!

Ban...I'm sure there are pictures on the net of people naked in all kinds of places, but you are not usually naked and dripping wet in a kitchen. Or, put differently, you are very very often naked and soaking wet in a bathroom.

Indeed, that is why you are naked, generally...in order to get into a bath or shower.

 

[JohnW2]

Oh, come on. You're as bad as Ban!! What is it that you are far more likely to do in a bathroom than a kitchen? Yes, very funny..... Not only do you get your kit off but you are often soaking wet!

Maybe you didn't notice, but we had already discussed the fact that one was much more likely to have 'wet bar feet' in a bathroom than in a kitchen. Hence, when you talked about the effect (on body resistance) of "removal of clothing", I genuinely thought that you were trying to make some different point!

Kind Regards, John

 

[securespark]

Yes, you get more parts of your body wet than feet in a bathroom.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Oh, come on.

You're as bad as Ban!!

What is it that you are far more likely to do in a bathroom than a kitchen?

Yes, very funny..... Not only do you get your kit off but you are often soaking wet!

https://www.diynot.com/diy/threads/consumer-unit-in-a-bathroom.279375/#post-2026884

Ban...I'm sure there are pictures on the net of people naked in all kinds of places, but you are not usually naked and dripping wet in a kitchen. Or, put differently, you are very very often naked and soaking wet in a bathroom.

Indeed, that is why you are naked, generally...in order to get into a bath or shower.

Indeed.

But people do not interpose their wet body between two items with a PD between them.

If I'm going to operate a switch, how does being wet and naked make that dangerous?

 

[JohnW2]

Yes, you get more parts of your body wet than feet in a bathroom.

True, but in terms of the risk of electric shock, all that matter are parts likely to come in contact with live parts and a return path to earth - which usually just means hands and feet.

However, given your reference to 'body resistance', I wonder if you were actually suggesting that having a 'totally wet body' might 'worsen' the effects of a shock between, say, a hand and a foot, or between two hands? If so, I don't think that is the case. In fact, if a person had 'totally wet skin', that would mean that the resistance through the skin would be considerably reduced, so that an increased proportion of shock current would flow just through skin, hence less going through the deeper parts of the body (where it could produce fatal results).

Getting back on-topic, although intuition tends to tell us that a bathroom is the most 'dangerous' place (because of 'wet naked bodies etc.), and more 'dangerous' than a kitchen, I do wonder how many electric shocks (let alone electrocutions) happen in bathrooms (particularly in countries which allow sockets etc.), as compared with kitchens. I may be wrong, but I would suspect that there probably are more such incidents in kitchens.

Kind Regards, John

 

[John D v2.0]

Even where they allow sockets in the bathroom, people probably don't have kettles, microwaves, fridges, ovens in there.
Maybe hair dryer and shaver, and maybe a radio, but it's hard to compare kitchens and bathrooms fairly.

 

[JohnW2]

Even where they allow sockets in the bathroom, people probably don't have kettles, microwaves, fridges, ovens in there. Maybe hair dryer and shaver, and maybe a radio, but it's hard to compare kitchens and bathrooms fairly.

That's really my point. I think one can 'compare them', but the conclusion of that comparison is, I would suspect, going to be that the average kitchen has far more potential sources of electric shock than the average bathroom - more than enough difference, I suspect, to cancel the 'wet naked bodies' consideration in bathrooms.

One of my bathrooms has a ('backup') electric shower (although I have yet to hear of anyone receiving a shock from one), but all of the others have either no touchable electrical items at all (light switches are all pull switches), or have ('isolated') shaver sockets as the only touchable electric items (Ah - and two have ELV mirror/shaving lights). In contrast, I hate to think how many sockets, 'portable electrical appliances' and 'permanently plugged in' electrical items there are in my kitchen!

Kind Regards, John

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Even where they allow sockets in the bathroom, people probably don't have kettles, microwaves, fridges, ovens in there.

No they don't.

Now please explain why those items are hazardous when touched by someone with dry hands and a wet body.

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Indeed, that is why you are naked, generally...in order to get into a bath or shower.

You just posted evidence that this may not necessarily be true ...

 

[ban-all-sheds]

Now you're getting saucy!

Use your imagination!

That's all I can do these days.