Is alternating current more dangerous than direct current?
And give me explanation for that... Assume that 230 V, 50 Hz AC voltage and 230 V DC voltage. Which is more hazardous to human life?
Which has more probability of risk?
Electrical Engineering Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for electronics and electrical engineering professionals, students, and enthusiasts. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
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:-
Due to such nature of AC, there is a "Let go" thing with AC, At a specific point it may let you go and you could be safe. However, in case of DC, there isn't any chance.
It also depends on factors like Skin Moisture. Moisture conducts!!
When you are shocked with AC, it generates ripple in your body of 50Hz (In this case) which contracts your muscle and you get heart-attack. When you are shocked with DC, it electroculates your body i.e It separates chemicals from your cells. (In both cases, You Die!)
For DC, Path Matters! If DC passes from say one finger to other, you might feel burns that's it... But AC spreads across body.
At High frequency, AC is comparatively safe... Yes.. Due to Skin effect, it flows from your skin! :) No such case for DC (0 Hz)
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!!
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.