ECN Electrical Forum - Discussion Forums for Electricians, Inspectors and Related Professionals

ECN Shout Chat
Top Posters(30 Days)
Admin 19
Recent Posts
fuse rejectors
by NORCAL. 03/29/17 01:44 AM
Old decora style outlets
by NORCAL. 03/29/17 01:41 AM
NFPA stuff
by gfretwell. 03/28/17 08:08 PM
Anyone hiring inspectors?
by HotLine1. 03/27/17 08:03 AM
ESA Arc flash course
by TheShockDoctors. 03/24/17 10:15 AM
New in the Gallery:
SE cable question
Popular Topics(Views)
231,742 Are you busy
166,641 Re: Forum
160,791 Need opinion
Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 76 guests, and 12 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#17532 - 11/27/02 10:32 PM Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
wired14961  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 13
Massachusetts
Just wondering if anyone has any suggestions as to which smokes are better. I know Firex makes a smoke with both capabilities but it is DC only and I'm looking for hard wired.


Work Gear for Electricians and the Trades

#17533 - 11/27/02 10:54 PM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
PJM  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 12
MD, USA
The following text is an extract from the Menvier-Cooper Fire Alarm Design Guide, which I hope explains things:

There are two principal methods of smoke detection: the ionisation chamber, and the optical scatter chamber. The detection method chosen will usually depend on the type of fire risk to be protected against. In the ionisation chamber, an electric current flows between two electrodes and is reduced by smoke. Ionisation detectors are particularly sensitive to small particle smoke such as that produced in rapidly burning fires but are relatively insensitive to large particle smoke such as that produced by overheated PVC or smouldering polyurethane foam. In the optical chamber, light is scattered, or in some cases absorbed by smoke. Optical detectors are more sensitive to large particles found in optically dense smoke, but are less sensitive to the small particle smoke.
Today, optical smoke detectors are more widely used than ionisation types due to the growing use of flame retardant materials in building construction, decoration and furnishings. Careful consideration must be given to any specific risks that might occur.

More info can be had at: http://www.cooper-ls.com/


#17534 - 11/28/02 02:53 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
Chris I  Offline
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 3
Brooklyn, New York, USA
Dear wired,

I too have been searching for a dual system AC wired smoke alarm. Haven't found one even though I have been searching pretty hard. No one seems to make one.

In any event, you would be well advised to check out the August 2001 issue of Consumer Reports magazine which includes an article with reviews of smoke alarms. They have a useful ratings section in which they break down smoke alarms in separate categories for DC vs AC and ionization vs. photoelectric.

If you really want to have both protection from ionization and photoelectric you will have to get two separate AC units. I have already decided to do that.

The ratings show that within each category the alarms are basically the same in overall performance. Some are rated better for resistance to false alarms though.

I would check out the respective websites of the various manufacturers to see the latest models that are on offer with the most up-to-date model numbers since old models are removed from the market and new models seem to come on to the market quite often.

I have chosen to get the Kidde PE120 photoelectric type smoke alarm and the Kidde 1275K ionization type smoke alarm. Both offer battery backup.

Other modells are available from Firex and BRK/First Alert. I suppose if you stick to a brand name then you can't go wrong. However, my hunch is it is probably best to stay with the same manufacturer if you do get two different models for the sake of compatibility.

The website for Firex is maplechase.com/firex

The website for BRK/First Alert is firstalert.com

The website for Kidde is kiddesafety.com

Wishing you all the best in your hunt.


#17535 - 11/28/02 11:11 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
Wirenuttt  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 267
Massachusetts
Seems like the smoke detectors has always been a subject of discussion, which style is better. I know here in Massachusetts the fire dept. now want photo electric installed. They have to all be interconnected with one on every level including the basement as well as one in every bedroom. I asked many fire depts why they chose photo over ion, their replys were that ion have nuscence alarms and people were removing them and forgetting they were removed.


#17536 - 11/28/02 03:17 PM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
j a harrison  Offline
Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 106
southampton, england
wired14961,
our company always reccommend that a residence is fitted with at least two smoke detectors,
hard wired 120v/230v optical type detector to the base of the stairwell,

hard wired 120v/230v ionisation to the first floor halway of the residence.

both units are powered from there own CB at the panel board and have a lithium ion battery back up, the aveage life span of the units is approx 10 years !!

the Kidde units are better, less false alarms and very easy to fit.

if you need any further information on fire detection and alarm systems, for use any were
e mail me and i will try to help.

john@empireconstructions.com


#17537 - 11/29/02 12:19 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
wired14961  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 13
Massachusetts
Thanks for all the usefull information. It's funny, I've installed plenty of smokes but never thought about which one is best untill it came to my own house.
I too live in Mass. and was unaware that the local fire departments had a preference as to which type to use. I'll have to check with my local fire department.
Thanks again for the information.


#17538 - 11/29/02 08:27 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
Electricmanscott  Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,457
Holden, MA USA
Mass here also and I am unaware of any requirements for smoke detector type requirements by local FD's. My understanding is the Mass building code requires photo electric if located within 10 feet of a bath or kitchen and ionization for the rest. And also NEVER on a dedicated circuit. Wirenutt feel free to st me straight on this.


#17539 - 11/29/02 10:12 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
Wirenuttt  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 267
Massachusetts
Elecmanscott;
Whenever I wired a new home in MAss. it was suggested by the ahj to have the smoke detectors located and approved by the local F.D. I would bring a set of plans to the F.D.. They would hi-lite location and type on the plans. After ahj inspected the home, the F.D. would come in and test the units with simulated smoke. If approved the F.D. would issue a certificate of approval. I would tell the homeowner to make a copy and send one to their home owners insurance policy.


#17540 - 12/01/02 10:59 PM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
wired14961  Offline
Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 13
Massachusetts
Wirenutt
now that you mention it, I recently did an addition to a single family ranch and the building inspector sent the homeowner to the local FD with the plans and they marked the locations they wanted. Although they did not specifiy which type to use they did want the rest of the house hard wired with smokes.


#17541 - 12/02/02 11:16 AM Re: Smokes, Ionization or Photoelectric?  
lbartel  Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 13
What about heat detectors? I thought it would be a good idea to install one, but after I got it, I noticed the label said it was not a "life safety device". Is this a waste of money? What about heat detectors in attics? I understand they make units designed for the high heat of an attic (where smoke detectors don't work well, I hear).

- les


Page 1 of 2 1 2

Member Spotlight
waymag
waymag
dallas, texas, USA
Posts: 67
Joined: January 2002
Show All Member Profiles 
Featured:

2017 NEC and Related
2017 NEC
Now Available!

Shout Box
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0
Page Time: 0.016s Queries: 15 (0.003s) Memory: 0.8170 MB (Peak: 0.9914 MB) Zlib enabled. Server Time: 2017-03-29 15:15:52 UTC