| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Battery question???
Hi Gents
Sorry for offtopic question in your forum, but you folks know more about marine batteries than any of the boating newsgroups, for my purpose anyway. I have a half dozen marine deep cycle batteries. I get about 8 years usefullness from them when I store them properly, I slow charge them once per month while in my garage for winter storage and I try and never leave them sitting without being charge. I try to never drain them completely, I keep them filled with RO water and don't over boil them. Etc etc etc. My question is I am coming up on the 8th year and might have neglected this winter's long storage time. I have two that are my concern. Two Nautalis 12v Deep Cycle, they are the bigger ones. One only holds the 12v charge for about an hour. Battery charger "intelligent automatic charger" Will charge them both, and shut off automatically when fully charged, then a week later one is still 12v, the other is 10v. I needed to fill about 15% or 20% of the fluid with RO water. My question is about de-sulfating. I bought the one for $20.00 bucks that connects and blinks the red light while it is desulfating with an electronic pulse (reverse) and while I did this for about 2 months now on the batteries, one shows very very good response but one still only holds the 12v charge for a week then goes down to 10v. What I want to try is replacing the sulfuric acid. I think that could super charge the lead acid reaction. The auto stores in Ontario no longer sell the replacement battery acid (sulfuric acid) but just over the border in NY state they all do. Very cheap. So I want to know what you folks think about doing a 2 month de-sulfation then replacing the very grey and thick old acid with some very clear and new sulfuric acid. Replacement batteries would run me about $300.00. The Sulfuric Acid is about $12.00 per gallon. The folks at the Auto Supply Stores say it is good idea to do, but some say not good idea. I am happy to hear you folks opinion of the matter. Feel free to fling the mud. Just give me lots of advice. I ended up having to replace the entire Fish Finder Extension for Transducer, took about 2 days. I didn't end up splicing like I thought, however when I removed all the panels to replace the old transducer cables (there were 2 old ones in there) one was simply a regular hunk of coax for mobile ham radio. With splices, with electrical tape. So for years I have been using the old fish finder (Eagle Supra) 170mhz with a 25 foot piece of radio coax spliced into the old transducer. O well. But thank you folks for any advice on the sulfuric acid replacing in deep cycle marine batteries. I live in Ontario so we store these batteries for 6 or 7 months per year. Thanks, 73s |
Battery question???
On 01/06/15 15:58, Tom wrote:
Hi Gents Sorry for offtopic question in your forum, but you folks know more about marine batteries than any of the boating newsgroups, for my purpose anyway. I have a half dozen marine deep cycle batteries. I get about 8 years usefullness from them when I store them properly, I slow charge them once per month while in my garage for winter storage and I try and never leave them sitting without being charge. I try to never drain them completely, I keep them filled with RO water and don't over boil them. Etc etc etc. My question is I am coming up on the 8th year and might have neglected this winter's long storage time. I have two that are my concern. Two Nautalis 12v Deep Cycle, they are the bigger ones. One only holds the 12v charge for about an hour. Battery charger "intelligent automatic charger" Will charge them both, and shut off automatically when fully charged, then a week later one is still 12v, the other is 10v. I needed to fill about 15% or 20% of the fluid with RO water. My question is about de-sulfating. I bought the one for $20.00 bucks that connects and blinks the red light while it is desulfating with an electronic pulse (reverse) and while I did this for about 2 months now on the batteries, one shows very very good response but one still only holds the 12v charge for a week then goes down to 10v. What I want to try is replacing the sulfuric acid. I think that could super charge the lead acid reaction. The auto stores in Ontario no longer sell the replacement battery acid (sulfuric acid) but just over the border in NY state they all do. Very cheap. So I want to know what you folks think about doing a 2 month de-sulfation then replacing the very grey and thick old acid with some very clear and new sulfuric acid. Replacement batteries would run me about $300.00. The Sulfuric Acid is about $12.00 per gallon. The folks at the Auto Supply Stores say it is good idea to do, but some say not good idea. I am happy to hear you folks opinion of the matter. Feel free to fling the mud. Just give me lots of advice. In my less affluent days, I tried all kinds of ways to recover batteries, mainly lead acid ones. Success was, at best 'limited' and invariably short lived, even with TLC. I wasn't using the batteries in situations where, if they let me down, it would be more than a matter of not being able to 'play radio' etc. I now have what you call an RV, which has a couple of Leisure/Marine Batteries in addition to the main Battery. Based on my experience of recovering batteries, I'd not use a recovered battery in that even though it remains safely on dry land. 8 years seems good service, I'd expect maybe 5. Having said that, I replaced the battery in my MX5 after about 13 years and it hadn't failed, I just decided I'd pushed it too far (my luck, not the car). The battery is still good, I use it for odd things out of interest more than anything. It is a 'glass mat' battery, made by National Panasonic. |
Battery question???
On 2015-06-01, Tom wrote:
My question is about de-sulfating. I bought the one for $20.00 bucks that connects and blinks the red light while it is desulfating with an electronic pulse (reverse) and while I did this for about 2 months now on the batteries, one shows very very good response but one still only holds the 12v charge for a week then goes down to 10v. What I want to try is replacing the sulfuric acid. I think that could super Look at this link and notice on first page (2nd column, right) where it talks about dendrites and then later the part about reconditioning. The de-sulphanation can work but there is a point of damage where it will not. My guess (purely a guess) is that you will have to replace the battery showing 10v. You probably have too much damage in one cell with deposits on the positive plate and the above mentioned dendrites through the porus plate separators. This can all be rather confusing, but maybe anything is worth a try. ha Here is link: http://www1.electusdistribution.com....ded/nicads.pdf ....Edwin __________________________________________________ __________ "Once you have flown, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, there you long to return."-da Vinci http://www.kd5zlb.org |
Battery question???
On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 10:58:48 -0400, "Tom" wrote:
I have a half dozen marine deep cycle batteries. Battery manufacturer and model number please? I want to get a clue as to the size and weight to determine if they're quality or junk as well as whether there's a sump at the bottom to catch the flaked off sulfates. Also, what is your use for these batteries and approximate load requirements? I get about 8 years usefullness from them when I store them properly, I slow charge them once per month while in my garage for winter storage and I try and never leave them sitting without being charge. I try to never drain them completely, I keep them filled with RO water and don't over boil them. Etc etc etc. Many "marine" batteries were NOT designed for stationary use. The motion of the vessel (or automobile) agitates the electrolyte, which helps remove surface sulfate accumulation. The "marine" batteries may also have been designed for starting service, as in an automobile or vessel, which is quite different from stationary service, such as a home solar power system. Just about everyone who has built their own solar power system had tried using cheap automotive batteries which fail after a few charge cycles. Then, they graduate to the somewhat better "marine" grade batteries, which fail after a few more charge cycles. Eventually they go to batteries designed for stationary service, such as those made by Trojan Battery. http://www.trojanbattery.com At various radio sites, the requirement are even more difficult, so large flooded "telco" batteries are used: http://members.cruzio.com/~jeffl/k6bj/K6BJ%20Repeater/slides/Batteries.html Note that these batteries are over 30 years old and still running at about 90% of their original capacity. My question is about de-sulfating. I can't help you with desulfation. I've tried a few random gadgets. None of them worked for me. So, I gave up. What I want to try is replacing the sulfuric acid. That will do next to nothing useful. Lead sulfate is normally produced during the discharge of a battery. What happens is that during recharge, some of the lead sulfate does not get converted back into lead and sulfuric acid. By adding overly concentrated sulfuric acid to the electrolyte, you prevent the remaining lead in solution from being replated to the battery plates. You would do better adding water, which is what is commonly done. When the battery is NOT agitated, it also creates lead sulfate through stratification. Some details: http://www.progressivedyn.com/battery_basics.html More reading: http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_restore_and_prolong_lead_acid_batteries -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Battery question???
On Mon, 1 Jun 2015 10:58:48 -0400, "Tom" wrote:
Hi Gents Sorry for offtopic question in your forum, but you folks know more about marine batteries than any of the boating newsgroups, for my purpose anyway. I have a half dozen marine deep cycle batteries. I get about 8 years usefullness from them when I store them properly, I slow charge them once per month while in my garage for winter storage and I try and never leave them sitting without being charge. I try to never drain them completely, I keep them filled with RO water and don't over boil them. Etc etc etc. My question is I am coming up on the 8th year and might have neglected this winter's long storage time. I have two that are my concern. Two Nautalis 12v Deep Cycle, they are the bigger ones. One only holds the 12v charge for about an hour. Battery charger "intelligent automatic charger" Will charge them both, and shut off automatically when fully charged, then a week later one is still 12v, the other is 10v. I needed to fill about 15% or 20% of the fluid with RO water. My question is about de-sulfating. I bought the one for $20.00 bucks that connects and blinks the red light while it is desulfating with an electronic pulse (reverse) and while I did this for about 2 months now on the batteries, one shows very very good response but one still only holds the 12v charge for a week then goes down to 10v. What I want to try is replacing the sulfuric acid. I think that could super charge the lead acid reaction. The auto stores in Ontario no longer sell the replacement battery acid (sulfuric acid) but just over the border in NY state they all do. Very cheap. So I want to know what you folks think about doing a 2 month de-sulfation then replacing the very grey and thick old acid with some very clear and new sulfuric acid. Replacement batteries would run me about $300.00. The Sulfuric Acid is about $12.00 per gallon. The folks at the Auto Supply Stores say it is good idea to do, but some say not good idea. I am happy to hear you folks opinion of the matter. Feel free to fling the mud. Just give me lots of advice. I ended up having to replace the entire Fish Finder Extension for Transducer, took about 2 days. I didn't end up splicing like I thought, however when I removed all the panels to replace the old transducer cables (there were 2 old ones in there) one was simply a regular hunk of coax for mobile ham radio. With splices, with electrical tape. So for years I have been using the old fish finder (Eagle Supra) 170mhz with a 25 foot piece of radio coax spliced into the old transducer. O well. But thank you folks for any advice on the sulfuric acid replacing in deep cycle marine batteries. I live in Ontario so we store these batteries for 6 or 7 months per year. That's how our grandpas did it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5qA-pqBffWg w. |
2x what Jim Higgins said!
I worked for a Automotive Salvage Yard and at one time the owner of the junk yard allowed the employees to keep all the used batteries that did not have a full charge or that had a hole in them. I myself and my friend would bring these batteries home - in the trunk of a Lincoln Continental and stack them on pallets until we got enough to make a trip to the scrap yard, where they would pay $1.50 each for the used batteries. I had at times patched some of the batteries - with everything from Bondo - not a good idea, to JB Weld, to Blue Goo - Blue or Red Permatex. I had a sewage problem at my QTH - home septic not city and I took the tops off of several batteries and poured the acid inside of the commode and when I was done, the porcelain shined like new. It did a good job of cleaning out the pipes. We once needed a battery, short term for a demolition derby car and didn't want to use one of our good ones, so we found a car battery with a dead cell and we took a 3 lbs dead blow hammer and we beat on the bottom of the battery and eventually it broke up the sludge on the bottom and broke the short and held a charge. Marine Battery - 8 years old, PLLLEEEESSSSE give me a break. Quit being so cheap and go buy a new battery. As a matter of fact, if the two batteries are ganged in parallel, you need to buy two new batteries, else the weaker of the two will rob power from the newer battery and the old battery will kill the new battery! Only a moron would post a battery question in an antenna forum. My guess is that the boating people gave you the same answer, you just didn't want to listen. If you have no Denero - then you aren't going to be going boating this year with two dead batteries. The folks that gave the advice that the batteries does not like to be stationary is dead on. Maybe you could build a battery tray in the trunk of your vehicle and haul them around while connected to a battery isolator all winter, and you could connect something to them, maybe a car stereo or something, that way the batteries would cycle each time you drove the vehicle and it would keep them from going dead prematurely. That is what I like about people. When the sun shines, they don't think about their batteries, then when winter comes, they drag their battery out of their boat and they put it on a float charger and they think that they can perpetuate it by charging it once in a while. Eventually they forget about the battery for a month or two, or they place it directly on the cement floor and it goes dead and then in the spring they run out to their shed or their basement and go to grab their battery from last year - and it is dead! Then they cry, moan and complain until they pony up the bucks to go buy new ones! You would be better off to buy a vehicle that has a battery tray large enough to hold those batteries and rotate them on a schedule in your vehicle and use them once every 3 months for a month to keep them charged then you would just setting them on your work bench on a charger. |
Battery question???
Thanks folks for more advice.
Great advice and knowledge. Thanks much. Yes, I read your advice and decided not to change the acid. I bought the new battery for 150.00 and they gave me 20 dollars for the old core. If I didn't have the old core they would have charged me additional 20. Now they have at Canadian Tire the new Nautalis Advanced battery for $200.00 and it is same cranking amps and RC and has new technology using a sock technolgy that eliminates the sulfating. The secret is not to let the battery discharge for any lengths of time (eg one month). Getting 6 or 7 or 8 years out of the battery is excellent. Thanks for all the tips and advice, I will care for my batteries much more focused now. So the chap at the C.T. store tells me this new battery will last decades and wont de-sulfate (which is the reason most deep cycle batteries die). http://www.canadiantire.ca/en/pdp/gr...l#.VXl-mlJ_9Cg Thanks again gents, very much appreciate your words. 73s "Channel Jumper" wrote in message ... 2x what Jim Higgins said! I worked for a Automotive Salvage Yard and at one time the owner of the junk yard allowed the employees to keep all the used batteries that did not have a full charge or that had a hole in them. I myself and my friend would bring these batteries home - in the trunk of a Lincoln Continental and stack them on pallets until we got enough to make a trip to the scrap yard, where they would pay $1.50 each for the used batteries. I had at times patched some of the batteries - with everything from Bondo - not a good idea, to JB Weld, to Blue Goo - Blue or Red Permatex. I had a sewage problem at my QTH - home septic not city and I took the tops off of several batteries and poured the acid inside of the commode and when I was done, the porcelain shined like new. It did a good job of cleaning out the pipes. We once needed a battery, short term for a demolition derby car and didn't want to use one of our good ones, so we found a car battery with a dead cell and we took a 3 lbs dead blow hammer and we beat on the bottom of the battery and eventually it broke up the sludge on the bottom and broke the short and held a charge. Marine Battery - 8 years old, PLLLEEEESSSSE give me a break. Quit being so cheap and go buy a new battery. As a matter of fact, if the two batteries are ganged in parallel, you need to buy two new batteries, else the weaker of the two will rob power from the newer battery and the old battery will kill the new battery! Only a moron would post a battery question in an antenna forum. My guess is that the boating people gave you the same answer, you just didn't want to listen. If you have no Denero - then you aren't going to be going boating this year with two dead batteries. The folks that gave the advice that the batteries does not like to be stationary is dead on. Maybe you could build a battery tray in the trunk of your vehicle and haul them around while connected to a battery isolator all winter, and you could connect something to them, maybe a car stereo or something, that way the batteries would cycle each time you drove the vehicle and it would keep them from going dead prematurely. That is what I like about people. When the sun shines, they don't think about their batteries, then when winter comes, they drag their battery out of their boat and they put it on a float charger and they think that they can perpetuate it by charging it once in a while. Eventually they forget about the battery for a month or two, or they place it directly on the cement floor and it goes dead and then in the spring they run out to their shed or their basement and go to grab their battery from last year - and it is dead! Then they cry, moan and complain until they pony up the bucks to go buy new ones! You would be better off to buy a vehicle that has a battery tray large enough to hold those batteries and rotate them on a schedule in your vehicle and use them once every 3 months for a month to keep them charged then you would just setting them on your work bench on a charger. -- Channel Jumper |
Battery question???
On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:31:19 -0400, "Tom" wrote:
So the chap at the C.T. store tells me this new battery will last decades and wont de-sulfate (which is the reason most deep cycle batteries die). http://www.canadiantire.ca/en/pdp/gr...l#.VXl-mlJ_9Cg I think you mean "won't sulfate". Hint. Find out how much the battery weighs. Presumably both the old and this battery are both the same size. If you find that one is substantially lighter, you're getting ripped off for that much in lead. In general, the more lead, the better the battery. With all due respect, I don't think you read or understood much of what people have advised you to do. You also failed to disclose how you are using this battery, which prevents selecting an appropriate battery. I think you should reconsider your purchase of what looks like a marine/RV engine starting motor and possibly ask your well informed salesman how a magic sock is suppose to prevent battery damage. I'll try again, although it's probably futile. Sulfation is a normal part of the charge/discharge cycle of a battery. When a battery is discharged, it produces lead sulfate on the plates: http://www.progressivedyn.com/battery_basics.html "This chemical reaction also begins to coat both positive and negative plates with a substance called lead sulfate also known as sulfation (shown as a yellow build-up on plates). This build-up of lead sulfate is normal during a discharge cycle. As the battery continues to discharge, lead sulfate coats more and more of the plates and battery voltage begins to decrease from fully charged state of 12.6-volts..." Got it? Lead sulfate production is a normal part of battery operation. Where you get into trouble is when the lead sulfate crystalizes. Amorphous lead sulfate is rather soft and is easily dissolved back into solution during recharge. Crystaline lead sulfate is more like a rock and just sits there. As more and more of the plates are coated with the crystaline form of lead sulfate, less and less lead plate surface area is exposed, causing a reduction in battery capacity. In other words, you're not trying to prevent suflation. You're trying to prevent lead sulfate crystalization. I would be interested in how a sock can do that. In my never humble opinion, the best way to prevent crystalization is to not leave the battery in a discharged condition for very long. Deep discharge is also a problem. http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/sulfation_and_how_to_prevent_it -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Battery question???
Yes, thanks for the correction on the wont sulfate.
And thanks for all the advice. But that is what the chap claimed, the sulfating is what is killing these deep cycles very early. And I will follow your advice very much, I will never allow these batteries to fully discharge or to not be topped up monthly. I will top them up monthly. I always have paid close attention to my batteries when in storage for winter season, now I will pay closer attention. Interesting the chap there at C.T. told me that the new battery will not desulfate. Interesting enough also that when I put the two batteries side by side and the new advanced ultra model was actually the same weight yet smaller in size. Just like any other industry, especially marine, they will not make me a battery to last a lifetime, they need me to replace my batteries regularly. Their accounting and marketing departments bank on it. Same as the smoke detectors in the home, our firedepartment is going door to door in my neighborhood inspecting and if you do not have they will sell you for $45.00 one for each floor (also a carbon monoxide detector) for same price, yet if you check ebay they are only $8.00 . But I am sure smoke detectors and CO2 detectors can last longer than 5 years and function properly, but if they lasted a lifetime or the lifetime of the house, the smoke/CO2 detector businesses would hurt. So industry leaders bribe political leaders and so goes a nanny state. O well,, Thanks a lot for all the advice, much appreciated 73s "Jeff Liebermann" wrote in message ... On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 08:31:19 -0400, "Tom" wrote: So the chap at the C.T. store tells me this new battery will last decades and wont de-sulfate (which is the reason most deep cycle batteries die). http://www.canadiantire.ca/en/pdp/gr...l#.VXl-mlJ_9Cg I think you mean "won't sulfate". Hint. Find out how much the battery weighs. Presumably both the old and this battery are both the same size. If you find that one is substantially lighter, you're getting ripped off for that much in lead. In general, the more lead, the better the battery. With all due respect, I don't think you read or understood much of what people have advised you to do. You also failed to disclose how you are using this battery, which prevents selecting an appropriate battery. I think you should reconsider your purchase of what looks like a marine/RV engine starting motor and possibly ask your well informed salesman how a magic sock is suppose to prevent battery damage. I'll try again, although it's probably futile. Sulfation is a normal part of the charge/discharge cycle of a battery. When a battery is discharged, it produces lead sulfate on the plates: http://www.progressivedyn.com/battery_basics.html "This chemical reaction also begins to coat both positive and negative plates with a substance called lead sulfate also known as sulfation (shown as a yellow build-up on plates). This build-up of lead sulfate is normal during a discharge cycle. As the battery continues to discharge, lead sulfate coats more and more of the plates and battery voltage begins to decrease from fully charged state of 12.6-volts..." Got it? Lead sulfate production is a normal part of battery operation. Where you get into trouble is when the lead sulfate crystalizes. Amorphous lead sulfate is rather soft and is easily dissolved back into solution during recharge. Crystaline lead sulfate is more like a rock and just sits there. As more and more of the plates are coated with the crystaline form of lead sulfate, less and less lead plate surface area is exposed, causing a reduction in battery capacity. In other words, you're not trying to prevent suflation. You're trying to prevent lead sulfate crystalization. I would be interested in how a sock can do that. In my never humble opinion, the best way to prevent crystalization is to not leave the battery in a discharged condition for very long. Deep discharge is also a problem. http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/sulfation_and_how_to_prevent_it -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Battery question???
On 6/12/2015 8:19 AM, Tom wrote:
Yes, thanks for the correction on the wont sulfate. And thanks for all the advice. But that is what the chap claimed, the sulfating is what is killing these deep cycles very early. And I will follow your advice very much, I will never allow these batteries to fully discharge or to not be topped up monthly. I will top them up monthly. I always have paid close attention to my batteries when in storage for winter season, now I will pay closer attention. Interesting the chap there at C.T. told me that the new battery will not desulfate. Interesting enough also that when I put the two batteries side by side and the new advanced ultra model was actually the same weight yet smaller in size. Just like any other industry, especially marine, they will not make me a battery to last a lifetime, they need me to replace my batteries regularly. Their accounting and marketing departments bank on it. Same as the smoke detectors in the home, our firedepartment is going door to door in my neighborhood inspecting and if you do not have they will sell you for $45.00 one for each floor (also a carbon monoxide detector) for same price, yet if you check ebay they are only $8.00 . But I am sure smoke detectors and CO2 detectors can last longer than 5 years and function properly, but if they lasted a lifetime or the lifetime of the house, the smoke/CO2 detector businesses would hurt. So industry leaders bribe political leaders and so goes a nanny state. O well,, Thanks a lot for all the advice, much appreciated 73s No, they aren't just trying to sell you things. Lead-acid batteries, like all rechargeable batteries, do deteriorate over time - scientists have never found a way to prevent it. I usually figure 5 years on car and boat batteries; I don't want to be caught with a dead battery. As for the smoke detectors - the $8.00 units you find on ebay are crap. They are unreliable and may not work when required. Also, replacing every 5 years isn't a bad idea; the longest any fire detector lasts is about 10 years, mainly due to dust buildup in the sensor cavity. Commercial grade detectors monitor dust buildup and can notify the installer when the sensor degrades enough to be replaced; in a typical installation this is around 7-8 years. My question here is - how much are your family's lives worth? P.S. Please don't top post. Thanks. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
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. On the other hand, I have not seen a CO2 detector for near the price of a smoke detector. Are they really so inexpensive? Rick On 6/12/2015 8:19 AM, Tom wrote: Yes, thanks for the correction on the wont sulfate. And thanks for all the advice. But that is what the chap claimed, the sulfating is what is killing these deep cycles very early. And I will follow your advice very much, I will never allow these batteries to fully discharge or to not be topped up monthly. I will top them up monthly. I always have paid close attention to my batteries when in storage for winter season, now I will pay closer attention. Interesting the chap there at C.T. told me that the new battery will not desulfate. Interesting enough also that when I put the two batteries side by side and the new advanced ultra model was actually the same weight yet smaller in size. Just like any other industry, especially marine, they will not make me a battery to last a lifetime, they need me to replace my batteries regularly. Their accounting and marketing departments bank on it. Same as the smoke detectors in the home, our firedepartment is going door to door in my neighborhood inspecting and if you do not have they will sell you for $45.00 one for each floor (also a carbon monoxide detector) for same price, yet if you check ebay they are only $8.00 . But I am sure smoke detectors and CO2 detectors can last longer than 5 years and function properly, but if they lasted a lifetime or the lifetime of the house, the smoke/CO2 detector businesses would hurt. So industry leaders bribe political leaders and so goes a nanny state. O well,, Thanks a lot for all the advice, much appreciated 73s -- Rick |
Battery question???
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. 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. 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. -- Jim Pennino |
Battery question???
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. Have you actually tested it with (real or artificial) smoke, to make sure that the sensor still senses? The test button does not test the entire sensor chain, so you can have a smoke detector which passes the button test but fails to alarm on actual smoke or ionization. Most of what I see on the Net says that replacing smoke detectors after 8-10 years is recommended. Likely a dusty environment. Pretty common problem. The Americium in ionization-type detectors has a very long lifetime, but dust and debris and etc. can cause the sensitivity to degrade. 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. 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. 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. |
Battery question???
|
Battery question???
Dave Platt 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. Have you actually tested it with (real or artificial) smoke, to make sure that the sensor still senses? The thing was constantly alarming. Hitting it with a canned air duster blew out a cloud of dust. The chirping went intermittant. I then tossed the thing and went to Lowes. $20 every 5 to 10 years is a trivial expense. 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. Which reminds me that my portable CO monitor for the airplane is likely at or near its end of life and they are quite a bit more than $20. -- Jim Pennino |
Battery question???
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 |
Battery question???
On 6/12/2015 3:26 PM, Dave Platt 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. Have you actually tested it with (real or artificial) smoke, to make sure that the sensor still senses? The test button does not test the entire sensor chain, so you can have a smoke detector which passes the button test but fails to alarm on actual smoke or ionization. Most of what I see on the Net says that replacing smoke detectors after 8-10 years is recommended. Likely a dusty environment. Pretty common problem. The Americium in ionization-type detectors has a very long lifetime, but dust and debris and etc. can cause the sensitivity to degrade. Ionization detectors are seriously frowned upon. Tests by independent laboratories show that photoelectric alarms are much more sensitive (1-5 minutes vs. 50+ minutes) to most fires. NFPA is now recommending photoelectric alarms as a minimum; dual alarms may be used. But I don't expect it will be long before ionization alarms alone are not approved. 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. 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. 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. Very true. It also is quite sensitive to chemicals. Also, in the U.S., the governing body is the NFPA. UL/ASCII can set standards - but NFPA requirements is what most jurisdictions follow. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
"Dave Platt" wrote in message ... Most of what I see on the Net says that replacing smoke detectors after 8-10 years is recommended. =============================================== I agree in principle. However, this past Wednesday, we cooked hamburgers in the kitchen. One of two side-by-side smoke detectors in the hallway (~20 ft) went to alarm. The one that didn't alarm is three years old. The one that did alarm was bought in 1978. I remember the year because I bought it for my barracks room while I was still in the Navy. 37 years and still kicking. I buy it a new battery every year on my birthday -- sort of a reverse present. Based on failure data, an 8 - 10 year replacement cycle may be advisable but they do last longer. "Sal" (KD6VKW) |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 1:19 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:
"Dave Platt" wrote in message ... Most of what I see on the Net says that replacing smoke detectors after 8-10 years is recommended. =============================================== I agree in principle. However, this past Wednesday, we cooked hamburgers in the kitchen. One of two side-by-side smoke detectors in the hallway (~20 ft) went to alarm. The one that didn't alarm is three years old. The one that did alarm was bought in 1978. I remember the year because I bought it for my barracks room while I was still in the Navy. 37 years and still kicking. I buy it a new battery every year on my birthday -- sort of a reverse present. Based on failure data, an 8 - 10 year replacement cycle may be advisable but they do last longer. "Sal" (KD6VKW) Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms. It's not a matter of them working or not - it's a matter of them working *correctly* or not. This means not only sounding when there is a fire, but *not sounding* when there is *no fire*. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 11:41 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 12:26:15 -0700, (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. The lifetime of the smoke detector is determined by the battery life, not the sensor life. Kidde and others make them with a 10 year life. In order to do that, the battery is not replaceable. This requirement was designed to prevent the all too common smoke detector with a dead battery installed problem. Kidde uses "sealed battery" as their buzzwords for non-replaceable battery. http://www.kidde.com/home-safety/en/us/products/fire-safety/smoke-alarms/ (Click the "10 year battery" box) Note that all of them are photo-electric, not ionization type sensors. Photo-electric detectors will detect the smoldering beginnings of a fire long before an ionization detector. However, once flames start, both work equally well. You should only open your mouth when you can talk about something you have knowledge of. But then you wouldn't be able to say ANYTHING, would you? Battery life is NOT the only determinant of smoke detector lifetime. Dust buildup is more important. The commercial smoke detectors we install follow NFPA requirements for commercial installations. They are hard wired to the control panel (no batteries) and have a replaceable sensor. It will notify us when sensor operation exceeds design limits. This is typically 6-7 years, although in dusty environments it can be as low as 2-3 years. And no, ionization detectors will NOT detect a flame fire as quickly as a photo-electric detector. Tests by independent laboratories prove ionization detectors typically take 50 minutes after a fire starts, even if it is a flaming fire. Photoelectric usually less than one minute. Additionally, ionization detectors are more sensitive to aerosols and the like. It is why photoelectric detectors are now required in new commercial installations. The industry would love to get 10 years for CO detectors, but the technology is not quite there yet. The currently fashionable electro-chemical type CO detectors have about a 5 years life, and then must be replaced. There have been CO detectors sold with replaceable sensors, but since the sensor is the largest part of the cost, they were deemed uneconomical. There are CO detectors available that can last 10 or more years, but they're complex, expensive, and/or power hogs. There was one patent (that I can't seem to find) that was essentially a gas chromatograph. There are also one-time sensors, that change color when exposed to CO, but do not change back. These have their uses, but not in the home. The main advantage is that they are far more sensitive than the common electro-chemical detectors, which require 10 minutes at 400 ppm to produce a reading. The change color detectors are commonly used in airplane cockpits, where they are visible all of the time. They are inexpensive and require no power. And the 10 minutes at 400ppm is within the limits set in UL 2034 (between 4 and 15 minutes). Short term exposure to low levels of carbon monoxide are not life-threatening. This standard is also endorsed by NFPA. Some detail on the different type of sensors: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_monoxide_detector#Sensors Don't believe everything you read in wikipedia. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
Battery question???
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 |
Battery question???
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! -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
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 |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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! :-) What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? -- Rick |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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 No, one who installs commercial smoke detectors as part of my job. It's one of the things I have to be trained and licensed to do. But then - it's YOUR family, not mine. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 8:26 PM, rickman wrote:
On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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! :-) What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? UL specs. And yes, brand new units must work within the stated specifications, or they would not get UL certified. And it's why they have limited lifetimes. But then, like Irv, you can risk your family's life on an old, probably not working right, smoke detector. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
Battery question???
On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:26:02 -0400, rickman wrote:
What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? The performance specs are in UL 217. http://ul.com/code-authorities/fire-code/smoke-alarms-and-smoke-detectors/ I couldn't find a current copy online. The best I can do is a 22 year old copy. Obviously, things have changed but it's still interesting reading. Section 38 starts the sensitivity testing section. ftp://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/006/ul.217.1993.pdf Installation requirements and testing are under NFPA 72. http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=72&tab=questions You should be able to read NPFA-72 for free. If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? Dunno. -- Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 9:04 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
On 6/13/2015 8:26 PM, rickman wrote: On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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! :-) What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? UL specs. And yes, brand new units must work within the stated specifications, or they would not get UL certified. And it's why they have limited lifetimes. But then, like Irv, you can risk your family's life on an old, probably not working right, smoke detector. You are so weird. -- Rick |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 9:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:26:02 -0400, rickman wrote: What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? The performance specs are in UL 217. http://ul.com/code-authorities/fire-code/smoke-alarms-and-smoke-detectors/ I couldn't find a current copy online. The best I can do is a 22 year old copy. Obviously, things have changed but it's still interesting reading. Section 38 starts the sensitivity testing section. ftp://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/006/ul.217.1993.pdf Installation requirements and testing are under NFPA 72. http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=72&tab=questions You should be able to read NPFA-72 for free. If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? Dunno. Exactly! -- Rick |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 10:05 PM, rickman wrote:
On 6/13/2015 9:04 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: On 6/13/2015 8:26 PM, rickman wrote: On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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! :-) What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? UL specs. And yes, brand new units must work within the stated specifications, or they would not get UL certified. And it's why they have limited lifetimes. But then, like Irv, you can risk your family's life on an old, probably not working right, smoke detector. You are so weird. You are so stoopid. No wonder you don't use your real name. You aren't even a ham. BTW - why doesn't UMD have any record of the MSEE you claim to have gotten from them in 1982? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
On 6/13/2015 9:28 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 20:26:02 -0400, rickman wrote: What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? The performance specs are in UL 217. http://ul.com/code-authorities/fire-code/smoke-alarms-and-smoke-detectors/ I couldn't find a current copy online. The best I can do is a 22 year old copy. Obviously, things have changed but it's still interesting reading. Section 38 starts the sensitivity testing section. ftp://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/006/ul.217.1993.pdf Installation requirements and testing are under NFPA 72. http://www.nfpa.org/codes-and-standards/document-information-pages?mode=code&code=72&tab=questions You should be able to read NPFA-72 for free. If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? Dunno. A better question would be - If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for one which is certified according to UL standards? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ... =============================================== I agree in principle. However, this past Wednesday, we cooked hamburgers in the kitchen. One of two side-by-side smoke detectors in the hallway (~20 ft) went to alarm. The one that didn't alarm is three years old. The one that did alarm was bought in 1978. I remember the year because I bought it for my barracks room while I was still in the Navy. 37 years and still kicking. I buy it a new battery every year on my birthday -- sort of a reverse present. Based on failure data, an 8 - 10 year replacement cycle may be advisable but they do last longer. "Sal" (KD6VKW) Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms. It's not a matter of them working or not - it's a matter of them working *correctly* or not. This means not only sounding when there is a fire, but *not sounding* when there is *no fire*. ================================================== ======== That old detector always was that sensitive. Burnt bacon and burnt toast always have set it off, too. I guess I need to move it further from the kitchen. "Sal" |
Battery question???
On 6/14/2015 2:10 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote:
"Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ... =============================================== I agree in principle. However, this past Wednesday, we cooked hamburgers in the kitchen. One of two side-by-side smoke detectors in the hallway (~20 ft) went to alarm. The one that didn't alarm is three years old. The one that did alarm was bought in 1978. I remember the year because I bought it for my barracks room while I was still in the Navy. 37 years and still kicking. I buy it a new battery every year on my birthday -- sort of a reverse present. Based on failure data, an 8 - 10 year replacement cycle may be advisable but they do last longer. "Sal" (KD6VKW) Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms. It's not a matter of them working or not - it's a matter of them working *correctly* or not. This means not only sounding when there is a fire, but *not sounding* when there is *no fire*. ================================================== ======== That old detector always was that sensitive. Burnt bacon and burnt toast always have set it off, too. I guess I need to move it further from the kitchen. 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. -- Rick |
Battery question???
On 14/06/15 00:57, 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! ======= 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. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH in IO87AT |
Battery question???
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 |
Battery question???
On 14/06/15 01:26, rickman wrote:
On 6/13/2015 8:20 PM, 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! :-) What spec would that be? Do brand new units work to this nebulous spec? If you can't test it, then why swap one untested unit for another untested unit? ======== Precisely ! Frank , GM0CSZ / KN6WH in IO87AT |
Battery question???
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. 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. |
Battery question???
On 6/14/2015 2:28 AM, rickman wrote:
On 6/14/2015 2:10 AM, Sal M. O'Nella wrote: "Jerry Stuckle" wrote in message ... =============================================== I agree in principle. However, this past Wednesday, we cooked hamburgers in the kitchen. One of two side-by-side smoke detectors in the hallway (~20 ft) went to alarm. The one that didn't alarm is three years old. The one that did alarm was bought in 1978. I remember the year because I bought it for my barracks room while I was still in the Navy. 37 years and still kicking. I buy it a new battery every year on my birthday -- sort of a reverse present. Based on failure data, an 8 - 10 year replacement cycle may be advisable but they do last longer. "Sal" (KD6VKW) Which proves it needs replacement. It's calibration is off. False alarms are almost as bad as missing real alarms. It's not a matter of them working or not - it's a matter of them working *correctly* or not. This means not only sounding when there is a fire, but *not sounding* when there is *no fire*. ================================================== ======== That old detector always was that sensitive. Burnt bacon and burnt toast always have set it off, too. I guess I need to move it further from the kitchen. 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. You would you know? You've never proven ANYONE wrong. Lots of other people have proven YOU wrong, though - even though you never admit it. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry, AI0K ================== |
Battery question???
On 6/14/2015 7:25 AM, highlandham wrote:
On 14/06/15 00:57, 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! ======= 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. Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH in IO87AT And, of course, you know that ionization detectors are not recommended. Testing by independent labs show that a photoelectric detector will detect most fires within a minute, while ionization detectors can take over 50 minutes to detect the same fire. Virtually every month the fire-related newsletters have stories of families injured or killed in fires due to old fire detectors. But once again, it's your family. Mine is worth a couple of $50 detectors every few years. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle ================== |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:43 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com