For us safety nerds, grounding provides an equipotential environment, which means no current through the body.  And, the grounding circuit provides a return path for fault current.  We don't pay attention to Gnd0, Gnd1, Gnd2, Gnd-Iso, etc.; for safety purposes, they are all at the same potential -- ground.  While Gnd-Iso may not be at ground potential, current from Gnd-Iso to ground should be inconsequential.  So, for us safety nerds, "ground" is our (lazy) way of referring to an equipotential environment.

Best regards,
Rich



On 7/13/2019 2:31 PM, Doug Powell wrote:

This is purely speculation on my part but it seems to me that the single syllable "ground" is a lazy way of referring to anything that is a common return line, whether bonded to earth or not. I've seen circuits with references to Gnd0, Gnd1, Gnd2, Gnd-Iso, etc.

Of course, this shorthand way of referring to circuits does cause a lot of confusion. And, I personally classify this as falling into the same category as when people with an inexperienced eye say this bit of failed electronics "/must have a short somewhere/" .

Doug

--
Douglas E Powell
[email protected]
https://www.linkedin.com/in/dougp01



-
----------------------------------------------------------------
This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion 
list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]>

All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at:
http://www.ieee-pses.org/emc-pstc.html

Attachments are not permitted but the IEEE PSES Online Communities site at 
http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ can be used for graphics (in well-used 
formats), large files, etc.

Website:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/
Instructions:  http://www.ieee-pses.org/list.html (including how to unsubscribe)
List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html

For help, send mail to the list administrators:
Scott Douglas <[email protected]>
Mike Cantwell <[email protected]>

For policy questions, send mail to:
Jim Bacher:  <[email protected]>
David Heald: <[email protected]>

Reply via email to