3 ms·

The feature I really want in a smoke alarm is a "snooze" button which I can pre-register. I don't have a good fume hood over my kitchen stove, and the smoke de

by rdl 13y ago

The feature I really want in a smoke alarm is a "snooze" button which I can pre-register. I don't have a good fume hood over my kitchen stove, and the smoke detector is essentially in the kitchen (it's an open kitchen/living room), and the smoke alarm is on the kitchen side of the living room). I want a way to easily hit a button prior to cooking and not have any smoke alarm (but maybe a CO alarm still) for the next 15-30 minutes. As long as I'm still in the kitchen cooking, I don't need the smoke alarm to tell me if there's a fire. On the other hand, it's also entirely likely someone could step out of the kitchen for a few minutes, kitchen could catch fire, and bad stuff would ensue if the alarm were disabled. One option might be a pre-alarm for 5-10 seconds, during which you can snooze it. Unfortunately, if anyone ever died in a fire where 5-10 seconds might have made a difference, massive liability would ensue. The right solution is to move somewhere with a proper high-flow external-venting hood, of course, and only heat/CO alarms in the kitchen area.

existencebox 13y ago
I thought about this for a bit. Best solution i came up with would involve sensing the room a person is in and deactivating it locally, but even then there's the "edge case" of a fire happening "behind your back" (e.g. in a closed stove) and you don't notice. Basically, even though the possibility of a fire going unnoticed will become increasingly small, the cost if it does happen is so high that IMHO it doesn't balance the amortized cost of having to deal with an annoying fire alarm. (unless that serves to "train" you to ignore/disable it... This may actually be an interesting behavioral question)
dfc 13y ago
When I first red the snooze idea I thought the UL guidelines would say that it is not kosher but from a quick scan it looks like a "presnooze" button might be acceptable. UL 217 Smoke Alarms: https://ia600608.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.law.ul.217.1993/ul.217.1993.pdf https://ia600608.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.law.ul.217.1993/... Carl Malamud is fighting the good fight. Without resource.org that doc would set you back $400-900. CAVEAT: That is the 1993 edition. It looks like there is a 2005 update.
- rdl 13y ago
  I just want something which is 1) not designed by utter morons 2) reasonably modern in UI/UX 3) priced above "contractor cheapest minimum compliance option", with value to match. This seems impossible -- I can get absurd commercial fire alarm systems, or I can get stuff like Nest which isn't really designed for life safety, or I can get the cheapest things from Home Depot. What I really want is someone like Assa Abloy to make a high-end residential/small office product. Generally I want this for building management, access control, security, life safety, etc.
  - CCengineer 13y ago
    Like I said in another thread, I'm an engineer for a smoke alarm company; so my advice may be biased.... There are smoke alarm alternatives available, but they're very expensive. Nest is a high priced gadget / toy that must be thrown out after 7 years. You're better off buying a First Alert or Kidde photoelectric smoke alarm with a 10 year battery. Then you'll never have to worry about it for 10 years. They'll cost around $30-$40 each. If you want a higher-end serious fire protection system, there are alternatives if you look around. Crossfire alarms are very good (although their website may not be...) They are made in USA (even the plastic injection molding, circuit board assembly, etc). They are wirelessly interconnected, photoelectric smoke alarms with a 10-year battery. They have a heat alarm for the garage, kitchen, furnace closet, attic, etc. These are places you can't put a smoke alarm, but also places where fires actually begin. You have smoke alarms in your bedrooms, hallway, and living room; but fires rarely start there. They also have a carbon monoxide alarm; and all the alarms set each other off. If there's a fire in your garage, the alarm in your bedroom goes off. They're also coming out with products that will send you a text message and call the fire department, and products for the elderly, children, and hearing impaired. These are very high-end systems, and are very expensive (even more than Nest). They're sold only by dealers who professionally evaluate the home and install them. This also adds to their cost - you're buying an alarm plus a salesman plus an installer. Companies like ADT and AT&T offer good systems that can call the fire department and have other features. But, they're expensive, have a monthly fee, and are usually based on normal cheapo alarms. There's a few options; but none of them are perfect...
sfall 13y ago
consider moving it the current rule of thumb is 19 feet to reduce/eliminate a nuisance alarm
k-mcgrady 13y ago
Why spend time developing a feature when the solution (moving it to a different position in the room) is relatively simple and also safer? How many people are going to hit snooze and then be called away for something and not get alerted when their kitchen catches fire?
- cr3ative 13y ago
  In the UK smoke alarms are generally permanently installed to a ceiling. Moving it isn't an option.
  - k-mcgrady 13y ago
    Really? I'm in the UK and they're just fixed up with a couple of screws.
- rdl 13y ago
  Only has to happen once for big liability. Doesn't even need to actually happen, just "preponderance of the evidence" could have been a factor in a major fire, or enough risk of that to force a settlement.
CCengineer 13y ago
First, I'll preface this that I'm an engineer for a smoke alarm company, so I may be a bit biased. The simple answer is that the rules forbid a smoke alarm feature like you (and many others) would like. Fortunately, if you switch to a photoelectric alarm in a proper location, you should not get false alarms from cooking. Now here's the long answer: Essentially all smoke alarms in the United States are tested and listed to UL217, which has specific requirements and restrictions for smoke alarms. UL217, Section 7 discusses alarm silencing means. Among many other things, it says "It is not prohibited that each single and multiple station smoke alarm be provided with an automatically resettable alarm silencing means that has a fixed or variable time setting which desensitizes the alarm for a maximum of 15 minutes. Alarm silencing shall not disable the smoke alarm. Sensitivity shall not be reduced to more than 4 percent per foot of obscuration." So we're only allowed to slightly desensitize the alarm for up to 15 minutes; never disable it. Fortunately, the whole problem is moot if you switch to a photoelectric alarm (around $25) instead of an ionization alarm (<$10). Ionization alarms will false alarm from cooking byproducts far too quickly; photoelectric alarm generally do not. You also should not place a smoke alarm in the kitchen (this is a perfect location for heat alarms). While ionization alarms will go off far too quickly from cooking, they also fail to response to slow smoldering fires. There are many videos of rooms and test boxes filled with smoke that fail to trigger an ionization alarm, while the photoelectric alarm is working fine. Some states have even outlawed ionization alarms. Buy a decent photoelectric alarm with a 10-year battery, like the ones made by First Alert or Kidde, and you probably won't have to worry about your smoke alarms for 10 years. That's even better than Nest that needs to be thrown away after 7 years. I don't work for any of the companies mentioned above either...

by rdl 13y ago

existencebox 13y ago

I thought about this for a bit. Best solution i came up with would involve sensing the room a person is in and deactivating it locally, but even then there's the "edge case" of a fire happening "behind your back" (e.g. in a closed stove) and you don't notice. Basically, even though the possibility of a fire going unnoticed will become increasingly small, the cost if it does happen is so high that IMHO it doesn't balance the amortized cost of having to deal with an annoying fire alarm. (unless that serves to "train" you to ignore/disable it... This may actually be an interesting behavioral question)

dfc 13y ago

When I first red the snooze idea I thought the UL guidelines would say that it is not kosher but from a quick scan it looks like a "presnooze" button might be acceptable. UL 217 Smoke Alarms: https://ia600608.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.law.ul.217.1993/ul.217.1993.pdf https://ia600608.us.archive.org/3/items/gov.law.ul.217.1993/... Carl Malamud is fighting the good fight. Without resource.org that doc would set you back $400-900. CAVEAT: That is the 1993 edition. It looks like there is a 2005 update.

rdl 13y ago
I just want something which is 1) not designed by utter morons 2) reasonably modern in UI/UX 3) priced above "contractor cheapest minimum compliance option", with value to match. This seems impossible -- I can get absurd commercial fire alarm systems, or I can get stuff like Nest which isn't really designed for life safety, or I can get the cheapest things from Home Depot. What I really want is someone like Assa Abloy to make a high-end residential/small office product. Generally I want this for building management, access control, security, life safety, etc.
- CCengineer 13y ago
  Like I said in another thread, I'm an engineer for a smoke alarm company; so my advice may be biased.... There are smoke alarm alternatives available, but they're very expensive. Nest is a high priced gadget / toy that must be thrown out after 7 years. You're better off buying a First Alert or Kidde photoelectric smoke alarm with a 10 year battery. Then you'll never have to worry about it for 10 years. They'll cost around $30-$40 each. If you want a higher-end serious fire protection system, there are alternatives if you look around. Crossfire alarms are very good (although their website may not be...) They are made in USA (even the plastic injection molding, circuit board assembly, etc). They are wirelessly interconnected, photoelectric smoke alarms with a 10-year battery. They have a heat alarm for the garage, kitchen, furnace closet, attic, etc. These are places you can't put a smoke alarm, but also places where fires actually begin. You have smoke alarms in your bedrooms, hallway, and living room; but fires rarely start there. They also have a carbon monoxide alarm; and all the alarms set each other off. If there's a fire in your garage, the alarm in your bedroom goes off. They're also coming out with products that will send you a text message and call the fire department, and products for the elderly, children, and hearing impaired. These are very high-end systems, and are very expensive (even more than Nest). They're sold only by dealers who professionally evaluate the home and install them. This also adds to their cost - you're buying an alarm plus a salesman plus an installer. Companies like ADT and AT&T offer good systems that can call the fire department and have other features. But, they're expensive, have a monthly fee, and are usually based on normal cheapo alarms. There's a few options; but none of them are perfect...

sfall 13y ago

consider moving it the current rule of thumb is 19 feet to reduce/eliminate a nuisance alarm

k-mcgrady 13y ago

Why spend time developing a feature when the solution (moving it to a different position in the room) is relatively simple and also safer? How many people are going to hit snooze and then be called away for something and not get alerted when their kitchen catches fire?

cr3ative 13y ago
In the UK smoke alarms are generally permanently installed to a ceiling. Moving it isn't an option.
- k-mcgrady 13y ago
  Really? I'm in the UK and they're just fixed up with a couple of screws.
rdl 13y ago
Only has to happen once for big liability. Doesn't even need to actually happen, just "preponderance of the evidence" could have been a factor in a major fire, or enough risk of that to force a settlement.

CCengineer 13y ago

First, I'll preface this that I'm an engineer for a smoke alarm company, so I may be a bit biased. The simple answer is that the rules forbid a smoke alarm feature like you (and many others) would like. Fortunately, if you switch to a photoelectric alarm in a proper location, you should not get false alarms from cooking. Now here's the long answer: Essentially all smoke alarms in the United States are tested and listed to UL217, which has specific requirements and restrictions for smoke alarms. UL217, Section 7 discusses alarm silencing means. Among many other things, it says "It is not prohibited that each single and multiple station smoke alarm be provided with an automatically resettable alarm silencing means that has a fixed or variable time setting which desensitizes the alarm for a maximum of 15 minutes. Alarm silencing shall not disable the smoke alarm. Sensitivity shall not be reduced to more than 4 percent per foot of obscuration." So we're only allowed to slightly desensitize the alarm for up to 15 minutes; never disable it. Fortunately, the whole problem is moot if you switch to a photoelectric alarm (around $25) instead of an ionization alarm (<$10). Ionization alarms will false alarm from cooking byproducts far too quickly; photoelectric alarm generally do not. You also should not place a smoke alarm in the kitchen (this is a perfect location for heat alarms). While ionization alarms will go off far too quickly from cooking, they also fail to response to slow smoldering fires. There are many videos of rooms and test boxes filled with smoke that fail to trigger an ionization alarm, while the photoelectric alarm is working fine. Some states have even outlawed ionization alarms. Buy a decent photoelectric alarm with a 10-year battery, like the ones made by First Alert or Kidde, and you probably won't have to worry about your smoke alarms for 10 years. That's even better than Nest that needs to be thrown away after 7 years. I don't work for any of the companies mentioned above either...