On 6/14/2015 7:56 AM, Rob wrote:
highlandham wrote:
The smoke detector fitted in the corridor next to our kitchen ,after 22
years, still responds to the ionised vapours (invisible and hardly
smelled) from the gas cooker when cooking/frying food.
Whatever the specification I consider the device and 2 others ,fitted
near the bedrooms and utility room still performing as intended.
All are battery operated (PP3-9V) . When batteries nearing end of life
the devices bleep at decreasing time intervals, such that they will be
replaced.

Those are probably still the ones with a radioactive source that are
now illegal to sell for consumer use. In my experience they cause fewer
false alarms than the newer types that use an optical principle and
probably temperature as well.

It has happened here that a newer detector issued a false alarm on a
hot day. I arrived home and heard it beep when arriving (before opening
the door). That is scary!
It was at least 35 degrees C in the house, but to me that is not a reason
for triggering a fire alarm.
It also happened on other occasions, but fortunately only when I was
at home, and during the day.


Are you sure your detector doesn't also have a temperature sensor? Some
do, and if the temperature exceeds a preset value, it will go off. It's
designed into some detectors in case of a virtually smokeless fire. It
doesn't make for a primary sensor, but can be a useful backup one.

Without such a sensor, a properly operating smoke detector should not do
this, whether it is photoelectric or ionization.

The radioactive ones never do that. Indeed they sometimes trigger
when frying food, but to me that is an indication they actually work.
The optical one has never actually detected something. Useless.


This is one reason why ionization detectors are not recommended any more
- too many false alarms. That, plus photoelectric detectors are much
faster at detecting real fires.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

highlandham wrote:
On 14/06/15 01:20, Irv Finkleman VE6BP wrote:
Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 6/13/2015 12:43 PM, highlandham wrote:
On 12/06/15 20:26, Dave Platt wrote:
My understanding is that the sensor in the CO detectors, being
chemically based, does have a limited lifetime. As of 2009, ANSI/UL
specs require that such alarms begin chirping an "end of lifetime"
signal after 5 years of operation... and a couple of weeks after
this,
you can no longer turn off the chirp.
==============================
Perhaps OK for CO detectors , but Americium type smoke detectors
have a
very long life ; the ones in my house still work well (tested with
smoke) after 22 years, cleaned with a vacuum cleaner,every 2 years.

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH in IO87AT

But do they work WITHIN SPECS? A simple smoke test does not tell
that.

A smoke detector is not an on/off switch. It is built to trigger on a
certain level of smoke. Both too sensitive and not sensitive
enough are
problematic.

I would NOT risk my family's lives on a 22 year old smoke detector!


A 'highland' ham -- sounds scottish to me and that would explain
the 22 years! :-)

de Irv VE6BP
=======
Thank you Irv for the compliment.

BTW ,not Scottish but originally from PA-land

Frank , GM0CSZ / KN6WH

Yes -- I caught it with the callsigns, but thought it was worth a
smiling jibe!

Irv

Thanks all,

My idea was the push or the big brother (in receivith of a bribith) to force
us here in Ontario to change our smoke detectors every 5 years. It may even
be so written into the insurance laws (or fine print on page 62 on bottom of
incurance form) (in japanese) that the insurance company will not pay out
in the event of fire and your detectors are out of date according to the
provincial code. The insurance agents always inspect for cause to back out.

But what is happening in Ontario (in my city now) is the fire department
going door to door inspecting. Now get this. If you do not have a Carbon
Monoxide Tester on Every floor and IN Garage (if attached) then they cannot
leave until you do. Now they will sell you them off their truck and it is
$41.00 Canadian each. I know this because they are in my friend's
neighborhood and he has single floor and was forced to buy one. $41.00 on
the spot. Now, he gave me name and model number and exact same one can be
shipped to your door from the Ebay or Amazon for $12.00 Canadian.

Smoke detectors as well. Our big brother nanny state, the now most expensive
on the planet, is growing at an alarming rate and I could tell you a hundred
more ridiculous and expensive stupidity my govt is doing but this is an
idea.

So why would a Deep Cycle Battery Manufacturer make a batter last longer
than time frame that they couldn't calculate within their projected income
reports? I mean you own a boat. And why would a Smoke Detector Company
manufacture you a detector that would last the lifetime of the home? It
wouldn't be prudent.

You don't think that the big pharma companies are counting on our big
brother health care team of doctors here in Ontario to continue pushing big
pharma pills and keeping the people swallowing these pills at an alarming
rate? We have a prescription pill for everything today and our insurance
govt regulated and created companies pay for it all, after borrowing of
course etc etc. Same ole same ole. I guarantee the pharma giants are
banking on us swallowing hand fills of their hugely profitable pills for
decades and quarters to come. I mean how do you stop a 2 trillion per year
industry. Answer, you don't.

Thanks boys, sorry about the long wind, love what I learned about smoke
detectors. Thanks. But here in Ontario, the need for replacement is
different than your need down south. It is not solely how much value or
price you would put on your families head. A Huge waste factor is there.
That is the scare marketing the teams will use. And use successfully.

73s



wrote in message
...
rickman wrote:
On 6/12/2015 2:25 PM, wrote:
rickman wrote:
So what makes you think you need to replace a smoke detector every 5
years? I had units in my house that lasted over 20 years.

Likely a dusty environment.

You mean *not* a dusty environment? These were AC units and most likely
died from a power surge. This house is in the boonies where voltage
surges are more common because of the long reaches.

I mean a dusty environment causes a shorter life.

Aren't most houses about the same level of dust? Being upside down on
the ceiling helps keep the crap out. My PCs pick up tons more dust.

The dust level in any given house is going to depend on a whole bunch
of factors; where it is, local winds, what is in the interior, presence
or absence and efficiency of whole house filters, number of people, number
of pets, etc.

On the other hand, I have not seen a CO2 detector for near the price of
a smoke detector. Are they really so inexpensive?

You mean CO detector.

Yes, of course.

My detector rolled over yesterday; full of dust and crap.

In Lowes I found battery powered, stand alone CO and smoke detectors
starting out at about $20, battery powered, stand alone combo CO/smoke
detectors starting at about $50.

High end, network enabled models for a bit more, hardwired dumb models
a bit less.

I have always been able to find battery powered smoke detectors for $10.
Walmart, Lowes, Home Depot...

So was I until yesterday...

--
Jim Pennino

On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 15:32:33 -0400, "Tom" wrote:

But what is happening in Ontario (in my city now) is the fire department
going door to door inspecting. Now get this. If you do not have a Carbon
Monoxide Tester on Every floor and IN Garage (if attached) then they cannot
leave until you do. Now they will sell you them off their truck and it is
$41.00 Canadian each. I know this because they are in my friend's
neighborhood and he has single floor and was forced to buy one. $41.00 on
the spot. Now, he gave me name and model number and exact same one can be
shipped to your door from the Ebay or Amazon for $12.00 Canadian.

Yikes. Y'er right:
http://www.oafc.on.ca/carbon-monoxide
Well, you can be thankful they don't just issue you a smoke/CO
detector, and then send you a bill.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On 6/14/2015 3:32 PM, Tom wrote:
Thanks all,

My idea was the push or the big brother (in receivith of a bribith) to
force us here in Ontario to change our smoke detectors every 5 years. It
may even be so written into the insurance laws (or fine print on page 62
on bottom of incurance form) (in japanese) that the insurance company
will not pay out in the event of fire and your detectors are out of date
according to the provincial code. The insurance agents always inspect
for cause to back out.

But what is happening in Ontario (in my city now) is the fire department
going door to door inspecting. Now get this. If you do not have a Carbon
Monoxide Tester on Every floor and IN Garage (if attached) then they
cannot leave until you do. Now they will sell you them off their truck
and it is $41.00 Canadian each. I know this because they are in my
friend's neighborhood and he has single floor and was forced to buy one.
$41.00 on the spot. Now, he gave me name and model number and exact same
one can be shipped to your door from the Ebay or Amazon for $12.00
Canadian.

Smoke detectors as well. Our big brother nanny state, the now most
expensive on the planet, is growing at an alarming rate and I could tell
you a hundred more ridiculous and expensive stupidity my govt is doing
but this is an idea.

So why would a Deep Cycle Battery Manufacturer make a batter last longer
than time frame that they couldn't calculate within their projected
income reports? I mean you own a boat. And why would a Smoke Detector
Company manufacture you a detector that would last the lifetime of the
home? It wouldn't be prudent.

You don't think that the big pharma companies are counting on our big
brother health care team of doctors here in Ontario to continue pushing
big pharma pills and keeping the people swallowing these pills at an
alarming rate? We have a prescription pill for everything today and our
insurance govt regulated and created companies pay for it all, after
borrowing of course etc etc. Same ole same ole. I guarantee the pharma
giants are banking on us swallowing hand fills of their hugely
profitable pills for decades and quarters to come. I mean how do you
stop a 2 trillion per year industry. Answer, you don't.

Thanks boys, sorry about the long wind, love what I learned about smoke
detectors. Thanks. But here in Ontario, the need for replacement is
different than your need down south. It is not solely how much value or
price you would put on your families head. A Huge waste factor is there.
That is the scare marketing the teams will use. And use successfully.

I've never read so much BS in my life.

--

Rick

On 6/14/2015 3:32 PM, Tom wrote:
Thanks all,
he
My idea was the push or the big brother (in receivith of a bribith) to
force us here in Ontario to change our smoke detectors every 5 years. It
may even be so written into the insurance laws (or fine print on page 62
on bottom of incurance form) (in japanese) that the insurance company
will not pay out in the event of fire and your detectors are out of date
according to the provincial code. The insurance agents always inspect
for cause to back out.

But what is happening in Ontario (in my city now) is the fire department
going door to door inspecting. Now get this. If you do not have a Carbon
Monoxide Tester on Every floor and IN Garage (if attached) then they
cannot leave until you do. Now they will sell you them off their truck
and it is $41.00 Canadian each. I know this because they are in my
friend's neighborhood and he has single floor and was forced to buy one.
$41.00 on the spot. Now, he gave me name and model number and exact same
one can be shipped to your door from the Ebay or Amazon for $12.00
Canadian.

Smoke detectors as well. Our big brother nanny state, the now most
expensive on the planet, is growing at an alarming rate and I could tell
you a hundred more ridiculous and expensive stupidity my govt is doing
but this is an idea.


Very interesting. Glad that's not happening down here; if they don't
have a legal reason to be on your property (i.e. fire or a search
warrant), you don't have to let them in your house. There is no way
they can search your house to determine if your smoke/CO detectors are
out of date or not. And if they refuse to leave, they can be arrested
for trespassing. It may be hard to get the DA to prosecute, but a
little news coverage can change that quite quickly.

So why would a Deep Cycle Battery Manufacturer make a batter last longer
than time frame that they couldn't calculate within their projected
income reports? I mean you own a boat. And why would a Smoke Detector
Company manufacture you a detector that would last the lifetime of the
home? It wouldn't be prudent.


Because science has its limits. And while they *could* build batteries
which last longer, the added expense would make the batteries more
expensive than people are willing to pay. Everything's a trade-off,
somewhere.

unrelated rant snipped

wrote in message
...
rickman wrote:
On 6/12/2015 2:25 PM, wrote:
rickman wrote:
So what makes you think you need to replace a smoke detector every 5
years? I had units in my house that lasted over 20 years.

Likely a dusty environment.

You mean *not* a dusty environment? These were AC units and most likely
died from a power surge. This house is in the boonies where voltage
surges are more common because of the long reaches.

I mean a dusty environment causes a shorter life.

Aren't most houses about the same level of dust? Being upside down on
the ceiling helps keep the crap out. My PCs pick up tons more dust.

The dust level in any given house is going to depend on a whole bunch
of factors; where it is, local winds, what is in the interior, presence
or absence and efficiency of whole house filters, number of people,
number
of pets, etc.

On the other hand, I have not seen a CO2 detector for near the
price of
a smoke detector. Are they really so inexpensive?

You mean CO detector.

Yes, of course.

My detector rolled over yesterday; full of dust and crap.

In Lowes I found battery powered, stand alone CO and smoke detectors
starting out at about $20, battery powered, stand alone combo CO/smoke
detectors starting at about $50.

High end, network enabled models for a bit more, hardwired dumb models
a bit less.

I have always been able to find battery powered smoke detectors for $10.
Walmart, Lowes, Home Depot...

So was I until yesterday...

--
Jim Pennino





--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle

==================

On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 15:54:19 -0400, rickman wrote:

I've never read so much BS in my life.

http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/FireMarshal/CarbonMonoxideAlarms/QuestionsandAnswers/OFM_COAlarms_QandA.html

59. Can a fire department serve an Inspection Order under Subsection
21(1) of the FPPA to address a CO alarm related Fire Code violation in
the building?

Yes. Since the definition of "fire safety" under the FPPA has been
revised to address "unsafe levels of carbon monoxide", CO alarm
related OFC violations can be addressed through an Inspection Order.


54. If I don’t comply with the OFC, can I be charged?

Yes. Once the compliance dates for CO alarms have passed, anyone found
to be in contravention of these requirement can be charged and if
convicted would be subject to penalties.

55. Is there a Part I ticketable offence for CO alarm violations?

Yes. The ministry has developed new short form wording to increase the
number of ticketable offences under the Provincial Offences Act for a
number of OFC violations, including those relating to CO alarms.

56. What are the set fines and total payable for Part I OFC offences
related to CO alarms?

The set fines for Part I OFC offences have recently increased. Those
relating to CO alarm offences are set at either $195 or $295 depending
on the violation. The victim fine surcharge has also increased to $60
while court costs have remained the same at $5. Hence, total payable
for CO alarm ticketable offences are now $260 or $360 depending on the
violation.


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

"rickman" wrote in message ...

On 6/14/2015 2:10 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:


"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ...



Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False
alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms.

Don't worry about Jerry. He is always like that. Once he takes a
position he will defend it to the bitter end no matter how much you
prove him wrong.

==============================================

Oh, I've spent enough time here that I know about Jerry. He's free to speak
his mind and I'll be fine.

"Sal" (just an online nickname)

On 6/14/2015 8:19 PM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:


"rickman" wrote in message ...

On 6/14/2015 2:10 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:


"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ...



Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False
alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms.

Don't worry about Jerry. He is always like that. Once he takes a
position he will defend it to the bitter end no matter how much you
prove him wrong.

==============================================

Oh, I've spent enough time here that I know about Jerry. He's free to
speak
his mind and I'll be fine.

"Sal" (just an online nickname)

Yes, it seems many of the nym'd trolls hate me.

And it doesn't bother me a bit. I understand why you use 'nyms - I
wouldn't want anyone to know how stoopid I was if I were you, either.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry, AI0K

==================

On 6/14/2015 6:47 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 15:54:19 -0400, rickman wrote:

I've never read so much BS in my life.

http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/FireMarshal/CarbonMonoxideAlarms/QuestionsandAnswers/OFM_COAlarms_QandA.html

59. Can a fire department serve an Inspection Order under Subsection
21(1) of the FPPA to address a CO alarm related Fire Code violation in
the building?

Yes. Since the definition of "fire safety" under the FPPA has been
revised to address "unsafe levels of carbon monoxide", CO alarm
related OFC violations can be addressed through an Inspection Order.


54. If I don’t comply with the OFC, can I be charged?

Yes. Once the compliance dates for CO alarms have passed, anyone found
to be in contravention of these requirement can be charged and if
convicted would be subject to penalties.

55. Is there a Part I ticketable offence for CO alarm violations?

Yes. The ministry has developed new short form wording to increase the
number of ticketable offences under the Provincial Offences Act for a
number of OFC violations, including those relating to CO alarms.

56. What are the set fines and total payable for Part I OFC offences
related to CO alarms?

The set fines for Part I OFC offences have recently increased. Those
relating to CO alarm offences are set at either $195 or $295 depending
on the violation. The victim fine surcharge has also increased to $60
while court costs have remained the same at $5. Hence, total payable
for CO alarm ticketable offences are now $260 or $360 depending on the
violation.

They'll get my old CO detector when they pry it from my cold, dead hands!

--

Rick