ECN Forum Forums Code Related Discussion NEC & other Code issues Smoke detectors in the bedroom

i went to a fire seminar and was supprised when i found out that certain types of smoke wont set off todays standard smoke detectors.

at this seminar they recomend putting the smokes closer to the doors in bedrooms so that they are in the air circulation path.

smokes alone are better then nothing, but they would strongly recomend combonations of heat detectors, smoke detectors and carbon monoxide detectors to cover all bases.

when customers complain about smoke detectors and such...remind them that its for their safty and their family's too.

h20

Watersparkfalls---I'd love to hear the specifics presented at that "seminar!"

UL tests detectors using two different "standard" fires; one is hot and clean, while the other is a "cold" smouldering fire. These tests are very standardised, and very repeatable. Every detector evaluated is exposed to these sources probably 50 times in the course of routine evaluation.
Additionally, UL conducts full-scale fire tests of building components. Often, detectors will be added to the test, as an additional check of the validity of their tests.

Feel free to e-mail me with the details, if you don't want to post them. I have been to "seminars" that were outright dishonest in the advocacy of their non-listed, unapproved, or irrelevant products. A certain "heat detector" sales force comes to mind.

CO detectors are another thing all together. Sure, fires can produce CO- but their performance in detecting "fire" is a complete failure. Period. Now, that CO itself presents an entirely different risk to address is another issue- let's not mix apples with oranges.

Heat detectors- of any type- have their uses. But, if you're going to tell me that I need to mount some wind-up item on my walls, in line with every stud bay, to "protect" me from the virtually non-existant "inside the wall" fire...well, it just won't happen.

Besides fire testing, UL testing also includes some testing to evaluate the effects of corrosion, humidity, vibration, and age on the detectors. There is an emphasis on reliability- which means minimising false alarms.
Under the "standard" tests, two entirely different methods of detection (photo-electric and ionization) have prooven themselves. Some other ideas- such as sound- have failed miserably.

I guess the real point is, if the detector is accessible it is more likely to be maintained.
The highest point in the room might make sense if the fire breaks out during the closing but 2 years later that detector will have failed (maybe from a bullet hole) and might not get replaced if it has always hung in that woman's craw.

+1 on the maintenance issue...with alarms in the hall, bedrooms, etc. it's likely one of them will alarm.

Remember, we're taught to crawl out of the home rather than walk because of the smoke. IMO it isn't important to be at the highest level, although I normally install them there.

Dave

Greg,

Around here the building and fire AHJ's want the detectors located in the highest part of the ceiling. Also they can't be within 3 foot of any HVAC outlet. They also require CO detectors now, however they will allow plug in stlye. Go figure!

hey renosteinke,
its true the seminar that i went to, was selling heat detectors and smokes too(for what was a very spendy $$). but the video they showed was actually filmed by 60 minuntes and it was here where i learned about smokes not going off.

i would also say that having a monitored heat,smoke, and CO detectors is truly the best way to go.

but for those of us who think brinks, adt, ect.. is an expense we will do without.
you should at least use smoke/co combos, a crack in the heat exchanger can cause headaches, and worse things yet.(exception #1 houses with small birds inhabiting it shall be suitable for co detection).

h20

If you have an all electric house and you wife won't let you tune up the Harley in the living room, where is the CO coming from?

I did put a heat detector in my garage tho.

... after the fire