Smoke alarms for rooms where people smoke
 

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

--
Chris Green

On 5 Dec 2004 21:25:39 GMT, wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

I used a CO detector .... very effective with an open fire, it goes
when stuff falls out the fire, but not with the normal smokes from the
fire.

Rick

wrote in message ...
Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Use the ones made with depleted uranium in the detector and hopefully the
problem will go away.

wrote in message ...
Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Chris Green


You need something like a rate of rise heat detector rather than a smoke
detector.

Rick Dipper wrote:
On 5 Dec 2004 21:25:39 GMT, wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

I used a CO detector .... very effective with an open fire, it goes
when stuff falls out the fire, but not with the normal smokes from the
fire.

.... but will it detect any fire? The situation I'm thinking about is
a bedroom or living room where people smoke, no open fires involved
(well not in all cases anyway).

--
Chris Green

Mike wrote:

wrote in message ...
Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Use the ones made with depleted uranium in the detector and hopefully the
problem will go away.

I don't have a problem, but I don;t want to crete one either. A smoke
alarm that goes off when there's not a fire (i.e. with cigarette
smoke) is useless.

When you say "the ones made with depleted uranium in the detector" is
this any sort of ionisation smake detector? That's the question I
originally asked really.

--
Chris Green

Steve Jones wrote:
wrote:
Mike wrote:

wrote in message ...

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Use the ones made with depleted uranium in the detector and hopefully the
problem will go away.


I don't have a problem, but I don;t want to crete one either. A smoke
alarm that goes off when there's not a fire (i.e. with cigarette
smoke) is useless.

When you say "the ones made with depleted uranium in the detector" is
this any sort of ionisation smake detector? That's the question I
originally asked really.


He was being sarcastic.

Hmmm, too subtle for me then! :-)

--
Chris Green

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Ours aren't.

Your ionisation alarms or your optical alarms (or both maybe!)?

--
Chris Green

wrote in message ...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Ours aren't.

Your ionisation alarms or your optical alarms (or both maybe!)?



My guess is that in decreasing order of sensitivity alarms go Ionisation,
Optical and Heat Detectors.

There's got to be some solution to this - after all many hotels have smoke
detectors and also have smoking bedrooms. Why not call a manufacturer and
see what the suggest, of failing that your area's fire prevention officer?

As you've already said, over-sensitive alarms can be just as bad as no
alarms at all - after the 2nd or 3rd false alarm people start to put any
trigger down to a false alarm, which is not really what you want!



--
Richard Sampson

mail me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

RichardS noone@invalid wrote:

There's got to be some solution to this - after all many hotels have smoke
detectors and also have smoking bedrooms. Why not call a manufacturer and
see what the suggest, of failing that your area's fire prevention officer?

My attempts at getting a response from either manufacturers or the
Suffolk fire service have failed completely so far. Maybe I could try
London fire service as the flat is in London.

--
Chris Green

wrote in message ...
The Natural Philosopher wrote:
wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Ours aren't.

Why not use a standard Kitchen type Heat Detector .. will react to a fire,
but not be triggered by smoke.

On 5 Dec 2004 21:25:39 GMT, wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

Hi,

IME ionisation alarms can detect a few molecules of singed toast,
optical are better in this regard.

cheers,
Pete.

wrote:

My attempts at getting a response from either manufacturers or the
Suffolk fire service have failed completely so far. Maybe I could try
London fire service as the flat is in London.

The trick is to spell ionisation as ionization when googling :-). Then
you get advice such as this, from
http://www.dps.state.mn.us/fmarshal/...etectors.html:

IONIZATION VERSUS PHOTOELECTRIC DETECTORS

In cases where smoke detectors are subject to frequent false alarming
due to cooking, smoking or similar causes, the State Fire Marshal
encourages the installation of photoelectric smoke detectors as they
are not as susceptible to these types of false activation.

Studies have shown that ionization detectors are better at detecting
small, invisible particles of combustion that are typically present
from fast, hot, flaming fires. These studies have also shown that
photoelectric detectors are better at detecting larger, visible smoke
particles that are more commonly seen from slow, smoldering fires. Both
types of smoke detectors have been shown to be effective in detecting
typical residential-type fires. Some research seems to indicate that
photoelectric detectors may activate slightly sooner as many
residential fires start out as slow, smoldering fires.

So photoelectric appears to be the way to go...

Ben.

Ben Schofield wrote:
wrote:

My attempts at getting a response from either manufacturers or the
Suffolk fire service have failed completely so far. Maybe I could try
London fire service as the flat is in London.

The trick is to spell ionisation as ionization when googling :-). Then
you get advice such as this, from
http://www.dps.state.mn.us/fmarshal/...etectors.html:

IONIZATION VERSUS PHOTOELECTRIC DETECTORS

In cases where smoke detectors are subject to frequent false alarming
due to cooking, smoking or similar causes, the State Fire Marshal
encourages the installation of photoelectric smoke detectors as they
are not as susceptible to these types of false activation.

OK, thanks, while everywhere describes the difference between
ionisation and photoelectric detectors this is the first I've seen
that specifically says photoelectric is less susceptible to false
alarms from cigarette smoke.

--
Chris Green

On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:25:26 +0000, Pete C
wrote:


IME ionisation alarms can detect a few molecules of singed toast,
optical are better in this regard.

Are there any good web sites aimed at the residential market that list
all the different types of detectors for sale?

Graham

wrote:
On Mon, 06 Dec 2004 21:25:26 +0000, Pete C
wrote:


IME ionisation alarms can detect a few molecules of singed toast,
optical are better in this regard.

Are there any good web sites aimed at the residential market that list
all the different types of detectors for sale?

The links from TLC direct (www.tlc-direct.co.uk) are quite helpful.
There's also quite a lot of useful information on the Kidde web site -
www.smoke-alarms.co.uk.

--
Chris Green

BigWallop has already given the correct answer. A rate of rise temperature sensor is the typr of thing that would be installed if you had a company come out and fit one...

dalep wrote:

Wrote:

Will ionisation smoke alarms be triggered by smokers? (I assume that
optical alarms almost inevitable will).

--
Chris Green



BigWallop has already given the correct answer. A rate of rise
temperature sensor is the typr of thing that would be installed if you
had a company come out and fit one...


Dunno. We smoke like chimneys, and the alarms have only ever ben
triggered by fat fires etc in the kitchen.

You're right Ion type will be more tolerant of fag smoke.
There are specific detectors to detect cigarette smoke;
pse post back if you need info on them.

"Gel" wrote in message
oups.com...
You're right Ion type will be more tolerant of fag smoke.
There are specific detectors to detect cigarette smoke;
pse post back if you need info on them.

I need info on them, I want the alarm to go off when SWMBO smokes a fag or
two, She's supposed to go outside but I frequently finds ash trays in the
livingroom and our office.....


And she had stopped smoking so many time it's unreal :-)


/Morten




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.830 / Virus Database: 565 - Release Date: 07/01/2005

Been unable to respond for days; now found way round, ignoring normal
hypalink.

See
http://www.radaltechnology.com/home....579e853950a 2

Here's right link without clutter!

http://www.radaltechnology.com/