I'm probably displaying my ignorance here, but fortunately I'm not one of those people who can't stand to be laughed at!
I've been thinking a bit about one of those things I've tended not to dwell on. The technical reason for equipotential bonding is obvious - if you create equipotential zones, such that everything rises to the same potential in the event of a fault, then we reduce the risk of shock from touching simultaneously accessible conductive parts.
Very well. But doesn't it run the risk of simply making lots of conductive parts live to Earth instead of just a few? So instead of a bit of cable tray over there being live, they all are. So unless you're wearing thick rubber shoes...!
Doesn't it risk solving one problem and creating another?
I've been thinking a bit about one of those things I've tended not to dwell on. The technical reason for equipotential bonding is obvious - if you create equipotential zones, such that everything rises to the same potential in the event of a fault, then we reduce the risk of shock from touching simultaneously accessible conductive parts.
Very well. But doesn't it run the risk of simply making lots of conductive parts live to Earth instead of just a few? So instead of a bit of cable tray over there being live, they all are. So unless you're wearing thick rubber shoes...!
Doesn't it risk solving one problem and creating another?