# Smoke Detector Placement....



## jmon (Nov 5, 2012)

I agree with you norplan. 

I would check all detectors. Remove detector and check the back, the date of manufacture is usually on the back somewhere. If older than 7 years, I would definitely replace it with a new one of the same type so it's an easy swap out. They are not that expensive. See if that solves your problem. Just a suggestion.


----------



## ChuckF. (Aug 25, 2013)

You can get smoke detectors made for Kitchen apps, they have a pause button on them that shuts off the false alarm for two minutes or so.


----------



## NorPlan (Nov 24, 2014)

jmon said:


> I agree with you norplan.
> 
> I would check all detectors. Remove detector and check the back, the date of manufacture is usually on the back somewhere. If older than 7 years, I would definitely replace it with a new one of the same type so it's an easy swap out. They are not that expensive. See if that solves your problem. Just a suggestion.


Smoke Detector is Definitely Older than 7 yrs..:wink2:


----------



## NorPlan (Nov 24, 2014)

ChuckF. said:


> You can get smoke detectors made for Kitchen apps, they have a pause button on them that shuts off the false alarm for two minutes or so.


:glasses: I'm going on the theory of the present Smoke Detector being Outdated considering how Technology has tweaked them and Improved on How They Operate Today..lol.... There has been considerable Remodeling Projects prior to our Moving In.. Taking Down a wall here and Moving a Wall there and of course with the Smoke Detector Hardwired previous to all that.. Point is I feel it's kinda out in the open for a direct hit from the Kitchen..:vs_mad:


----------



## FrodoOne (Mar 4, 2016)

NorPlan said:


> :surprise: Got a Smoke Detector that came with the House , anytime some serious Baking / Cooking is undertaken the S/D starts screaming (No Food is Being Burnt...lol..) s Smoke Detector is, maybe replacing it altogether would be the Ticket ?? Thoughts & Opinions Appreciated, Cheers Thanks


Please checkout "Photoelectric" smoke detectors.

What you now have is (probably) an "Ionization" smoke detector. These are sensitive to small particles which come from flame combustion (and toasters.)
However, "Photoelectric" smoke detectors are responsive to larger particles which result from "smoldering", which occurs before an actual "flame" is produced, and are less subject to "false triggering" in association with "normal" kitchen activities.

While I do not know what the situation is in North America, is is now a REQUIREMENT in several Australian States that at least one Photoelectric smoke alarm be installed and the Fire Services in most States RECOMMEND Photoelectric smoke detectors.
(See http://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=441








etc.


----------



## NorPlan (Nov 24, 2014)

@ FrodoOne .:glasses: With Carbon Manoxide Detectors available today and with a few other Detectors out there on the Market.... Our Hardwired Unit obviously has a few years on it and looks rather Crusty..lol.. :smile: Probably would be Best to Upgrade.. :vs_cool:


----------



## FrodoOne (Mar 4, 2016)

NorPlan said:


> @ FrodoOne .:glasses: With Carbon Manoxide Detectors available today and with a few other Detectors out there on the Market.... Our Hardwired Unit obviously has a few years on it and looks rather Crusty..lol.. :smile: Probably would be Best to Upgrade.. :vs_cool:


While carbon monoxide detectors have their place, if you have a heating device which uses a flame, they are NOT a substitute for "Smoke Detectors".


----------



## Nik333 (Mar 1, 2015)

Sometimes smoke detectors are just in the wrong place. ( Not to say a new one isn't indicated) I had a strange situation where the heater vent @ the top of the wall would blow smoke away from the smoke alarm, even when the kitchen was smoky. 

The local Fire Chief kindly came out & specified the new requirements & the alarm was moved. The alarm was moved from the ceiling to a few inches below the ceiling & away fr. the vent. It worked much more effectively.

Found this: http://www.canadianconsultingengine...-code-requires-visual-fire-alarms/1002836697/

The building code link @ the bottom of the page may tell you the proper placement for your area.

Like this: http://www.mcscs.jus.gov.on.ca/english/FireMarshal/FAQ/SmokeAlarms/OFM_FAQ_Smoke_Alarms.html


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

Smoke detectors can become more sensitive as they age. 

I also second the comment on ionization detectors.

Photo electric is better especially near a kitchen. Fewer false trips.

Ionization is only used because it's cheap; photo-electric responds better to the type of fire encountered in a residential application. It's the smoke from smoldering fires that causes the most deaths; most home fires start as smoldering -> the ones that aren't (ie kitchen grease fires) aren't likely to start unattended.

Are your alarms hard wired and interconnected? if yes, you can't just change one, they have to be compatible with each-other.


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

> While I do not know what the situation is in North America, is is now a REQUIREMENT in several Australian States that at least one Photoelectric alarm be installed and the Fire Services in most States RECOMMEND Photoelectric detectors.
> (See http://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=441


North america is far behind.

There are still fire departments handing out new ionization alarms. Builders still use 'em.

When confronted about this issue the fire marshals, etc just claim that the most important thing is making sure people have any detector and that recommending photo just confuses people. 

The manufacturers fight tooth and nail against any legislation mandating photo-electric alarms.

Ionization alarms marketed to the general public are dangerous products which offer a false sense of security. they aren't real smoke detectors.


----------



## FrodoOne (Mar 4, 2016)

user_12345a said:


> The manufacturers fight tooth and nail against any legislation mandating photo-electric alarms.


I should imagine that it would be only manufacturers which made only ionization alarms which would "fight tooth and nail against any legislation mandating photo-electric alarms."

In addition to my previous reference to some Australian States requiring Photoelectric alarms, all States now require newly constructed dwellings to have "mains" operated "smoke" alarms, with battery back-up, and some States require these to be retro-fitted before any property without them may be is sold.


----------



## GrayHair (Apr 9, 2015)

In response to those who decry ionization detectors, please see *this* *post*.

Thank you!!


----------



## user_12345a (Nov 23, 2014)

FrodoOne said:


> I should imagine that it would be only manufacturers which made only ionization alarms which would "fight tooth and nail against any legislation mandating photo-electric alarms."


They make both but love to defend the faulty technology that should be only available to fire designers who understand the limitations.

Wanna detect grease or other flammable liquid fires quick in commercial applications? ionization is better for that purpose.

the problem comes when you have cheap builders and homeowners doing the minimum allowed.



> In addition to my previous reference to some Australian States requiring Photoelectric alarms, all States now require newly constructed dwellings to have "mains" operated "smoke" alarms, with battery back-up, and some States require these to be retro-fitted before any property without them may be is sold.


We have had same here for over 20 years, minus the photo electric requirement.

With the advent of wirelessly interconnected alarms requiring retrofit to sell a property is a little silly. they should just be grandfathered.


----------



## craig11152 (Jun 20, 2015)

Personally, in my house I have photoelectric and ionization detectors installed in pairs side by side. I have read conflicting information about the standards, or lack of standards for dual sensors so I opt for one of each instead of a dual.


----------



## Handylassie (Jul 1, 2016)

Mine were old. The electrician replaced them with Carbon Monoxide/smoke detectors which is code in Florida. Theres a monitor outside bedrooms and one inside (with dim light). One bedrm is close to kitchen. When it goes off with my cooking a 'voice' says if its fire or carbon monoxide.


----------



## Bob Sanders (Nov 10, 2013)

Handylassie said:


> Mine were old. The electrician replaced them with Carbon Monoxide/smoke detectors which is code in Florida. Theres a monitor outside bedrooms and one inside (with dim light). One bedrm is close to kitchen. When it goes off with my cooking a 'voice' says if its fire or carbon monoxide.


I would imagine you have gas hence the need for CO detectors. But it's worth mentioning that if you do not have an attached garage, gas appliances, or open flame devices such as a fireplace, then CO detectors are not code and you do not have to put them in.

I'm an all electric house with no attached garage, and I therefore have no need or requirement for CO detectors


----------



## DIYknot (Oct 2, 2016)

Does anyone put them in attics these days.


----------



## GrayHair (Apr 9, 2015)

Look at the smoke detector's specs; attic temps can easily go over the upper limit. I used mechanical heat detectors (NOT 135 degree models).


----------



## Bob Sanders (Nov 10, 2013)

Detectors in attics are common but you should use 'rate of rise' detectors.


----------

