Is alternating current more dangerous or direct current?. And give me explanation for that.... Assume that 230v,50hz AC voltage and 230v DC voltage,Which is more hazard to human life...?
Which has more probability of risk?
|show 1 more comment|
As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or specific expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, see the FAQ for guidance.
AC has some time period - frequency. It repeats itself and periodically touches zero. However DC remains at a constant voltage level. Let me compare on different points:-
So both are dangerous under appropriate circumstances!
This is refered as "War of Currents" between Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse!
P.S. IN ANY CASE, DON'T PLAY WITH ANY.... BOTH ARE DANGEROUS!!
This is like the question, "Which is more dangerous, a pit full of spikes, or a giant swinging blade?"
You can argue about the different ways in which they may kill you, but it doesn't much matter when you are dead, does it?
|show 5 more comments|
AC is more dangerous for a human being. The common 50Hz may causes the heart to go in fibrillation. Without a quick medical attention you'll die in minutes.
It is true that it is the current that will cause the damage, but in AC only 30mA is sufficient to put you in fibrillation if endured for several second. It is also sufficient to block your lung muscle. Given the body resistance, it only need ~50V AC to have that much of potential.