"Just because a dangerous practice was acceptable in the 1980's did not make it safe back then, nor acceptable now - perception and acceptance of risk has changed in the intervening 30 years (for the better IMO)."I would disagree. In those days a lot of equipment was live chassis, and bench engineers took their own safety very seriously. More so than today, when people have gotten complacent thanks to much safer gear. In those days it was projectors with 35kV on the anodes, or Marshall guitar amps with a 1kV supply that could deliver 250mA. Either could kill you stone dead if you weren't careful enough.
The insistence of manufacturers on earthing 'scope inputs arises, I suspect, from a misunderstanding of the purpose of a protective earth conductor, which is to form a Faraday cage
around and
enclosing live connections. However, if the live connections are not inside the Faraday cage, then no protection is given. In that case, an earthed object which is liable to be touched by the operator is actually a
safety hazard in its own right, and the interests of safety would be best served by eliminating that object from the testbench.
Building site practices have clearly identified that hand tools with insulating cases and NO earth have a much better safety record than earthed metal tools. If the case has to be metal then earthing is the lesser of two evils compared to a floating case, but the least hazard is achieved by eliminating the touchable metal.
I mean, we have DMMs with fully isolated data ports. That is to prevent hazardous situations arising though the test prods being earthed via the data cable.
I daresay that isolated scope inputs might be a little harder to design since they handle much higher frequencies than meter prods, but it would be a really big safety advantage if they were isolated from earth, and from each other. Although, with modern opto-isolators and PSU modules I really don't think it would be that hard to provide post-preamp earth isolation.
-How many lives does it have to save, for the design effort to be worth it?
"Tektronix was still selling the A6901 Ground Isolation Monitor in 1991 although it only allows floating an oscilloscope or other test instrument to 40 volts. I have noticed before that where manufacturers bothered to specify it, the floating voltage specification is usually 40 to 50 volts and I wonder where that number comes from over such a long period of time. It is suspiciously close to the common definition of the maximum of 'low voltage'. "I recall that device, and thinking what an incredibly dangerous gadget it was. It gave the impression that the 'scope was isolated, but had the operator held a probe outer and touched a live terminal, once 50V appeared on the scope it would then have proceeded to complete the circuit and electrocute him.
Might add that the practice of earthing 'scope inputs dates from the valve era when 'scopes themselves contained some truly eye-watering voltages. Even the preamps would have run from maybe 150v, so
not earthing the input on that kind of beast would have invited having an internal fault put a dangerous voltage onto the probe. That is long-gone history though. The modern LCD scope is basically no different from a bench DMM as regards operator safety. It would be better if the same safety principles were applied.