Thanks for the video. But would it be a good idea to omit 'EEVBLOG' from the Youtube title? It has the potential to confuse.
He's got "Re:" in the title, so that's ok.
https://youtu.be/exn90L95dgIWhat do you use for a fork?
Thanks for the video. But would it be a good idea to omit 'EEVBLOG' from the Youtube title? It has the potential to confuse.
He's got "Re:" in the title, so that's ok.
1. there are tons of commercial solutions for consumer and industrial market employing this method. I can send you a picture of an industrial heater rated for 25kW used to either heat utility water or provide heating to HVAC systems (NB! directly coupled via conductive liquid to metal fixtures like radiators or kitchen taps). If you want, I can sell it to you for €300 + shipping, it's perfectly functional.It's functional but not allowed in many countries. Can you post us a photo of the label to see the safety marks ?
Very good.
Now, if you keep the electrodes close to each-other and otherwise isolated, like in the contraption starred in the original subject video, where is the conductive path formed?
In between the exposed electrodes.
The very effect (stirring the water) in your video demonstrates this admirably.
Consider the rate of flow in btw the electrodes vs. elsewhere and the resistor network this creates.
This is fluid dynamics and probability.
You're welcome to try and prove me wrong.
My point was that if the device is properly built and used, it is safe enough even if at some local level it seems otherwise (exposed electrodes!!!).
If the opposite were true, a user of the shower contraption would be killed as soon as one tries to start the water flow (touching metal presumably).
And the pictures posted in this thread form "the proof is in the pudding" evidence.
Or do we think that fellow Russians and Chinese are so tough that they just push the previous dead body next to the old pile of corpses and take shower without further hesitation???
The thing is that, if even the smacked together solutions seen on these photos are not regularly killing people, it's for a systemic reason, not for the lack of it (ie. massive persistent spike of luck in Russia and China???).
One more thing, these "contraptions" are certified in EU by EN 60335-1 and EN 60335-2-35
This, of course, presumes sound engineering in design and build, which was my original point.
Therefore, acceptably safe applications of the technology exist.
Therefore, the technology itself is not fundamentally "unsafe", (only the bad examples of application are unsafe, as with any other technology)
I rest my case. (damn, I sound like a lawyer, I best shut up...)
Wouldn't thad trip the RCCB in any modern building?
Since the drain is grounded the breaker would kick in immediately.If the bath was ungrounded, no.
Okay, lets make things more interesting
My claim is that the 'technology' is fairly safe and not as dangerous as you try to portray (when used properly, of course).
1. there are tons of commercial solutions for consumer and industrial market employing this method. I can send you a picture of an industrial heater rated for 25kW used to either heat utility water or provide heating to HVAC systems (NB! directly coupled via conductive liquid to metal fixtures like radiators or kitchen taps). If you want, I can sell it to you for €300 + shipping, it's perfectly functional.
2. falling water does not conduct due to formation of droplets (shower case). Else, everybody who walks out during thunderstorm would already be toast meat a'la hotdogger.
3. water is fairly poor conductor so the resistor network it forms in between the electrodes, human body and the grounding point (fault current) wont normally pass current or potential to matter (e.g. even to trip the RCCD fault current condition).
Obviously, using intrinsically unsafe device (i.e. broken or some hacked/smacked device) will be just as dangerous as with any other home appliance. So if you are stupid enough to heat water in your mouth with this method using two spoons in your mouth connected to mains, then you deserve to die and relieve us from further contamination in gene pool.
Hopefully this stirs things up a bit

Thanks for the video. But would it be a good idea to omit 'EEVBLOG' from the Youtube title? It has the potential to confuse.
He's got "Re:" in the title, so that's ok.
I've not come across that on Youtube. Is this a standard method to title a response video to another Youtuber's video - or just something you are OK with?
Well, that is a very facetious argument. The electric field emanates from both electrodes radially. It will be neutral if no other conductors are present, but we're not talking about that, we're talking about a human for instance sticking their finger in the baby's bathwater while this contraption is in there heating the water. That human creates a conductive path to ground and will get a serious shock at 1/2 mains voltage. Because the water is essentially a conductor.
Thanks for the video. But would it be a good idea to omit 'EEVBLOG' from the Youtube title? It has the potential to confuse.
He's got "Re:" in the title, so that's ok.
I've not come across that on Youtube. Is this a standard method to title a response video to another Youtuber's video - or just something you are OK with?
Holy cow, talking about boats leaking current into the water when using shore power
Holy cow, talking about boats leaking current into the water when using shore powerIf you're swimming, you wouldn't need enough current to actually kill, just cause enough muscle control problems to prevent you swimming properly. Coupled with the very good connection of water to the body, I wouldn't be surprised if it only took a few tens of mA
Sort of related :