Originally posted by: phantom9
I just wanted to add that my ever present questioning of the value of equipotential bonding has led me to concur that bonding is not safe and it would be better to not bond anything at all. I believe in theis case that had no bonding been in place Emma Shaw would still be alive. A bold statement to make but true.
Don't be silly - it would need what is effectively an all insulated system to save Emma Shaw from this fault
Draw out the circuit paths - the victim would have received a shock if she touched any earthed metalwork - the HWS cylinder, hot or cold pipework, a class 1 appliance with a functioning CPC etc etc
Are you seriously suggesting that the solution would be to remove earthing and bonding from the system (and to eliminate naturally earthy components as well).
If you doubt the value of both main and supplementary bonding, then do a bit of basic research into the concept of touch voltage - then tell me it has no value - and I'll tell you in no uncertain terms that it has significant value.
As a starting point, the touch voltage driving curent through the impedance of the human body will be
Vt = If x R2
Then think about what R2 comprises - as a hint it is the resistance of the CPC back to the point of equalization (ie the point of bonding)
Now take a TN or TT system and determine that with our without bonding If won't change mutch - but R2 changes from just the impedance of the CPC within the building to the impedance of the CPC both within the building and the earth path outside the building right back to the transformer.
At a simple level you should see that if we multiply If by a bigger number then Vt must increase ?
Regards
OMS
-------------------------
Let the wind blow you, across a big floor.