Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Smoke/CO detector lifespan?

D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi,

One of the combo CO/smoke detectors here started acting up.

After consulting the 14 (!) different conditions that can
be signaled by appropriate combinations of lights and horns,
it seems this one boils down to:
"System error. You're SOL"
OK, fine. Buy a replacement (of course, this particular model
is no longer sold so that means researching *current* offerings).

But, it begs the question: what *is* the useful life of such
a device? IIRC, it was O(10) years -- so, this unit comes in
at roughly that point (9 years to the day?).

Also, am I correct in noting that the ionization type detectors
can't be "stock-piled"? I.e., buying extra for the future
just means any *unused* units will be dying at the same time
the *used* units crap out... (?)

However, that is *not* true of the photoelectric units?

Any similar consequences for the CO detection?

(of course, anything with a "built-in" battery is suspect...
"freshness seal"?)

--don
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Jeff,

Probably the carbon monoxide section, which has a short useful life.
However it might also be the ionization chamber that needs cleaning.
<http://www.fire.nsw.gov.au/page.php?id=444>
If it's in the kitchen, clean the grease out with alcohol or solvent.

It was located in the bedroom hallway.

(curiously, it's damn near impossible to get an *authoritative*
answer regarding where detectors are allowed *and* prohibited!)
Any reason you didn't bother disclosing the maker and model so that I
can determine which sensor it uses and which has failed?

I'd have to fetch it out of the trash. It's a cheap enough item
that I'm not going to try to pinch pennies to avoid replacing it!
Nope. With a half life of 432 years, methinks stockpiling ionization
detectors is quite practical. One of mine is about 30 years old, and
still works fine.

But it doesn't do CO as well (?)
The problem with photoelectric detectors is that they suck more power
than an ionization detector. Most run on central power from an alarm
panel. Ionization detectors will detect smaller particles, which
means they'll detect a fire faster. Unfortunately, that also means it
will detect my burning dinner or chemistry experiment gone awry, which
was roughly what happened a few days ago.

All of the detectors, here, are AC+DC backup. Local fire department
had claimed photoelectric good for smokey fires (i.e., before visible
flame) while ionization good for open flame. And, in the typical
"never wanting to be pinned down" fashion, advocated using *both*
technologies (even in the same detector!).

Yep. There are 4 different types of sensors, each with their own
issues. The lifetimes are limited. 5-10 year is typical.
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_monoxide_detector#Sensors>
Wikipedia says the fuel cell variety is the most common in the USA.
I've only seen a few with replaceable sensors.

This might help with your shopping spree:
<http://www.alarmspecs.com>

Yeah, my first glance at available devices told me this wasn't going
to be a *quick* decision. :< *Talking* detectors? Ick! It's
annoying enough listening to it chirp when the battery needs
to be replaced; I think I'd beat it with a baseball bat if it
started telling me "replace the battery; replace the battery;
replace the battery..." :>
(of course, anything with a "built-in" battery is suspect...
"freshness seal"?)

These days, they put expiration dates on everything.
[Insert conspiracy theory here].

Of course, any expiration dates are carefully hidden in a place
that can't be observed while the product is in its blisterpack!

The unit I discarded only had a manufactured date (I assume that
is what it was as it said "SEP xx, 2004" -- hard to imagine it
*expired* 10 years ago as I distinctly recall installing it to
replace one of the previous units -- and we've only been here
~20 years)

I should pull down the other units and see what they have by way
of dates (replace everything at the same time as I probably
*installed* them all at roughly the same time!)
 
B

Bill Gill

Jan 1, 1970
0
Yeah, my first glance at available devices told me this wasn't going
to be a *quick* decision. :< *Talking* detectors? Ick! It's
annoying enough listening to it chirp when the battery needs
to be replaced; I think I'd beat it with a baseball bat if it
started telling me "replace the battery; replace the battery;
replace the battery..." :>
Well, the main thing about talking detectors is that I can hear
the one I have in the hall. The other ones that just beep are
almost out of my hearing range. I have very poor high frequency
hearing now days, so the talking ones are useful.

Bill
 
S

Syd Rumpo

Jan 1, 1970
0
On 03/09/2013 14:09, Bill Gill wrote:

Well, the main thing about talking detectors is that I can hear
the one I have in the hall. The other ones that just beep are
almost out of my hearing range. I have very poor high frequency
hearing now days, so the talking ones are useful.

Bill

What sound do they make? Coughing?

Cheers
 
E

Ecnerwal

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don Y <[email protected]> said:
One of the combo CO/smoke detectors here started acting up. ....
But, it begs the question: what *is* the useful life of such
a device? IIRC, it was O(10) years -- so, this unit comes in
at roughly that point (9 years to the day?). .....
Any similar consequences for the CO detection?

CO detectors typically have a 5-7 year useful lifespan. Some older ones
keep merrily pretending they work after that, but don't. False sense of
security and all that.

Newer ones loudly proclaim that they are dead when the time is up
(presumably a statistically secure period _before_ they actually stop
working utterly.) Presumably someone got sued over the old version not
admitting it was not longer functional.

Stockpiling is not a good plan, AFAIK.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Bill,

Well, the main thing about talking detectors is that I can hear
the one I have in the hall. The other ones that just beep are
almost out of my hearing range. I have very poor high frequency
hearing now days, so the talking ones are useful.

Oh, so it's not that the little crickets are too *far* to
be heard but, rather, just operating in the wrong freq range?
Do they talk *loud*? I.e., loud enough to awaken you from a sleep?

I figured there would be some value to "the battery is low"
vs. "CO detected" vs. "false alarm" vs. "<whatever>" instead of
2 blue flashes + 1 beep = fire; 3 yellow flashes + 2 beeps = CO;
1 red + 1 yellow + 1 blue = lunch is ready...

But, I hadn't considered the fact that the chirps might be
hard to hear. I seem to be able to hear them through concrete
walls!! :(
 
E

Ecnerwal

Jan 1, 1970
0
Don Y <[email protected]> said:
All of the detectors, here, are AC+DC backup. Local fire department
had claimed photoelectric good for smokey fires (i.e., before visible
flame) while ionization good for open flame. And, in the typical
"never wanting to be pinned down" fashion, advocated using *both*
technologies (even in the same detector!).

It's not a matter of "not wanting to be pinned down", it's a matter of
detecting fires, and there is a significant difference in detection time
WRT detector type and fire type. Unless you don't care about one type of
fire, there is no "best" type of detector, other than both. On the third
hand, for locations where you expect smoke without fire, a heat detector
may be best. There's one about 3 feet from my stove, for instance.
Directly over the oil-fired boiler, as well. Smoke detectors are a bit
further away from those items, so there is less trouble with having your
steak interrupted, or the oil-burner service guy setting off the smoke
detector.

For photoelectric detectors, you would prefer one with good bug
exclusion - bad ones are great for detecting spiders.
 
M

mike

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi,

One of the combo CO/smoke detectors here started acting up.

After consulting the 14 (!) different conditions that can
be signaled by appropriate combinations of lights and horns,
it seems this one boils down to:
"System error. You're SOL"
OK, fine. Buy a replacement (of course, this particular model
is no longer sold so that means researching *current* offerings).

But, it begs the question: what *is* the useful life of such
a device? IIRC, it was O(10) years -- so, this unit comes in
at roughly that point (9 years to the day?).

Also, am I correct in noting that the ionization type detectors
can't be "stock-piled"? I.e., buying extra for the future
just means any *unused* units will be dying at the same time
the *used* units crap out... (?)

However, that is *not* true of the photoelectric units?

Any similar consequences for the CO detection?

(of course, anything with a "built-in" battery is suspect...
"freshness seal"?)

--don
Not clear it makes much difference.
I have multiple detectors replaced on a staggered schedule.
You can check a smoke detector.
Most of us don't have the tools to check a CO detector without
hurting it.
I asked myself...self...is it worth $20 every five years to not be dead?
I'm really cheap, but the answer to that one doesn't take a genius.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Jeff,

Don't cook in the hallway.

We don't -- usually! :> It was the most convenient place to
locate detectors without having to add wiring *in* each of the
bedrooms.
I am not an authority. The recommended location is in doorways,
hallways, and along the natural escape route for hot air and smoke.
For example:
<http://www.dummies.com/how-to/content/where-to-install-a-smoke-detector.html>
Since no two homes are identical, some guidelines are helpful.

There doesn't seem to be a concensus on many of the "problem areas"...
places where a fire is actually *likely* to get started!

E.g., garage, laundry room, furnace room, water heater, kitchen, etc.
Some places advise certain *types* of detectors in these locations
(e.g., "heat" instead of "smoke" or "CO"). Other places (regs)
prohibit them -- presumably because of false alarms or being replaced
with the "wrong" type of detector for that particular locations.

:<
CO has about the same density as air. Therefore, it can be located
almost anywhere. Hot air and smoke rise, so it needs to be near the
ceiling. Hot air increases the inside air temperature causing the
smoke to try and escape via open windows and vents. If you start a
fire in, for example, the bedroom, try to visualize where the smoke
will accumulate and where it will travel if the windows and vents are
open. Put the smoke detector in that path.

The usual screwup is to put the smoke detector too high, such as in a
cathedral ceiling. If the windows are closed, the smoke will soon
rise to the ceiling. However, if the windows are even slightly open,
the smoke will prefer to exit out the window, and leave the ceiling
area alone for a while. Eventually, it will get to the ceiling, but
only after a delay.

You have to avoid "corners" (including where ceiling meets wall).
And, in direct airflows for vents, etc.

My issue was far more basic: do I put one in the kitchen or do I
*not*?

Most code regs intimidate even the "experts".

E.g., here, a vent is not required in the kitchen. OTOH, if one is
*installed*, then it must have a specified minimum flow rate.
("Huh? *0* is OK but nothing ELSE less than XXX CFM is??")
If all else fails, ask your local fire department. Locally, they
offer safe advice, such as more smoke detectors are better. Oh well.

I tried that. "One for each bedroom". When pressed regarding
the other likely places for fire/CO, they avoided answering.
Incidentally, don't put one near the house phone. I heard a story
where someone was trying to phone 911 and the noisy buzzer prevented
them from hearing the 911 operator.


Trash? Don't throw radioactive anything in the trash or landfill.
It's considered hazardous waste. First Alert will allegedly accept
them in the mail for disposal and recycling of the electronics.
<http://www.stopwaste.org/home/index...ctionstep=3&Go2DropDown=0&Mat=smk&Vendor=5897>
<http://www.epa.gov/radiation/sources/smoke_dispose.html>

Argh! I'll have to go fetch it out, then. I think this saturday
is hazardous waste day so that will be good timing!
These days, they put expiration dates on everything.
[Insert conspiracy theory here].

Of course, any expiration dates are carefully hidden in a place
that can't be observed while the product is in its blisterpack!

The unit I discarded only had a manufactured date (I assume that
is what it was as it said "SEP xx, 2004" -- hard to imagine it
*expired* 10 years ago as I distinctly recall installing it to
replace one of the previous units -- and we've only been here
~20 years)

It's worse than that. Manufacturers of everything from wireless
routers to automobiles retain the same outside and packaging
appearance of their products, while drastically modifying the
contents. Such changes can usually be identified only by a single
digit change in the serial number, or something equally obscure. Lots

Yup. Got screwed buying a USB hub, recently, with "slightly
different guts" -- causing it to work slightly different in
the application! :<
of advantage based on the assumption that the buyer has no idea if
it's the latest greatest version, or some antique that's been slowly
depreciating on the shelf. The dealers love it because they're no
longer stuck with obsolete inventory. The manufacturers love it
because they can now tell the dealers that they don't need to return
old stock every time a new product is released. I suspect that smoke
alarms are much the same way. Same outsides, same package, different
electronics.

As I am unable to evaluate the effectiveness of these devices
(short of a real fire event!), cosmetics and serviceability are
my main concerns. E.g., can I replace battery without having
to take unit down? Can they be interconnected? How ghastly
do they *look*? etc.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
CO detectors typically have a 5-7 year useful lifespan. Some older ones
keep merrily pretending they work after that, but don't. False sense of
security and all that.

Ah, then the "alert" this one gave shouldn't be interpreted as
"I'm broke" but, rather, "Time to replace me!"
Newer ones loudly proclaim that they are dead when the time is up
(presumably a statistically secure period _before_ they actually stop
working utterly.) Presumably someone got sued over the old version not
admitting it was not longer functional.

Stockpiling is not a good plan, AFAIK.

Agreed. Though it means having to go through the selection
exercise every "5-7 years". <frown>
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
It's not a matter of "not wanting to be pinned down", it's a matter of

In *their* case, I suspect it actually *was* "not wanting to be pinned
down" -- see my other post regarding how noncomittal they were in
indicating where detectors should, could and could NOT be located!
(who am I supposed to ask, the dog catcher??)
detecting fires, and there is a significant difference in detection time
WRT detector type and fire type. Unless you don't care about one type of
fire, there is no "best" type of detector, other than both. On the third
hand, for locations where you expect smoke without fire, a heat detector
may be best. There's one about 3 feet from my stove, for instance.
Directly over the oil-fired boiler, as well. Smoke detectors are a bit

I had considered a heat detector above the furnace. However, the
"enclosure" (room?) for the furnace has particular fire ratings.
Putting a hole in the ceiling for the wiring for the detector
compromises that rating.

(things are never as obvious as they should be! :< )
further away from those items, so there is less trouble with having your
steak interrupted, or the oil-burner service guy setting off the smoke
detector.

For photoelectric detectors, you would prefer one with good bug
exclusion - bad ones are great for detecting spiders.

Ha! I'd never have considered that!
 
C

Cydrome Leader

Jan 1, 1970
0
mike said:
Not clear it makes much difference.
I have multiple detectors replaced on a staggered schedule.
You can check a smoke detector.
Most of us don't have the tools to check a CO detector without
hurting it.
I asked myself...self...is it worth $20 every five years to not be dead?
I'm really cheap, but the answer to that one doesn't take a genius.

I have to agree with this. Smoke detectors cost less then the batteries
you install in them over a few years.

These all seem to take an obnoxious mix of batteries, like a 9 volt and
some AAs for some lights, like an old ohmmeter.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Mike,

I have multiple detectors replaced on a staggered schedule.

Argh! That would drive me crazy! Do them all at the same time
and forget about it. E.g., replace *all* the batteries on
New Year's Day. Even if they aren't "bad". Batteries are
cheap in the grand scheme of things. Ditto smoke/CO detectors!
Buy a "set" and replace them all at the same time (instead of
trying to remember which will need to be replaced next year,
and the year after that, etc.)

[I do the same sort of thing with clothes: they all tend to
see similar wear so as soon as one set of shoes/pants/shirts/socks
starts to look ratty, toss them all and buy new! *One* shopping
trip instead of *continual* shopping trips! :> ]
You can check a smoke detector.
Most of us don't have the tools to check a CO detector without
hurting it.
I asked myself...self...is it worth $20 every five years to not be dead?
I'm really cheap, but the answer to that one doesn't take a genius.

Well, it's more than $20 if you have more than one. But, I
agree -- "cost of doing business" (where the "business" is
*living*! :> )
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Jeff,

Find a store with a very liberal return or credit policy, such as
Costco. Take it home, fire it up, see how it works, and then decide
if you want to keep it.

I don't like abusing that sort of "generosity" on their part. :<
I just need to do my research before making a purchase!
Most such smoke detectors have some kind of seperate mounting clip or
contrivance. A few degrees anti-clockwise rotation, and the whole
unit comes down. That's somewhat better than climbing a ladder and
working over my head (usually dropping the battery). Don't worry if
it's good or bad. Y're suppose to replace the batteries at regular
intervals no matter what condition.

Yes, as do all of the units here. I just find it easier to
open a "door" on the exposed surface and swap a battery out/in
than having to remove the detector (for a battery compartment
accessed from the rear)
Cosmetics? The uglier the product, the better it works.

Remind me not to ask what your *wife* looks like!!! ;-)
Serviceability? If it's any good, it won't need repair. Beware of
companies that have fabulous service departments.

I don't want service. Or a warranty. I want to *know* it will work
(for some period, "X"). I get annoyed with companies that provide
liberal warranties... but you have to be hassled by returning a
defective product (esp if more than once!).

We need a word beyond "warranty" and "guarantee" that means,
"this REALLY *WILL* work for a period of X" (not "or we'll replace
it free of charge")
Interconnected? What for? Do you want all the alarms to go off
simultaneously, creating even more noise and confusion? I can just

Yes. I want to be sure there is no way in hell you could sleep
through a fire!

*I* will wake up if I hear water running in the bathroom down the
hall. OTOH, SWMBO won't wake up in the presence of police, fire
and ambulance immediately outside bedroom window! (I have verified
this :> )
imagine all of them saying "Your house is on fire" without any
synchronization. How will you know which one had detected a fire?

For the "chirpers", this isn't a problem. Just one REALLY LOUD
alarm!

The units we have currently will indicate which unit(s) is/are
"signaling" the alarm and which are merely "repeating" it.
How
do you turn off ALL the alarms? With AC powered, there's usually an
"alarm" output. Wire each to an alarm panel.

Only "output" is one intended for interconnect. With CYA warning that
*you* aren't supposed to connect anything to it (other than *certain*
products made by the same manufacturer)

Press the "silence alarm" (aka "Test") button on any unit and only
the "signaling" alarm(s) keep screaming (unless the unit whose button
you pressed was the only signaling unit in which case it, too, is
silenced -- temporarily). So, you can at least sort out *where*
the condition is being sensed.

You can also use the "Test" button to test a single station (i.e.,
the station whose button you are pressing) *or* all stations that
are interconnected with it. Gives you an idea of just how *loud*
any such alarm will actually be!

We've actually been happy with the units we have. Annoying to know we
now have to "roll the dice", again.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi David,

Oh? As I read it, the cited regulations (California Health and Safety
Code, section 13114) do continue to allow battery-powered smoke
alarms, as long as they "contain a nonreplaceable, nonremovable
battery that is capable of powering the smoke alarm for a minimum of
10 years."

This would mean that a hefty lithium battery would likely be allowed.

Yes, they are already on the market. "Coming to a landfill near you!"
It does seem to spell the end of smoke detectors which are powered by
ordinary 9-volt alkaline batteries, which seem to have a nominal
service life of a year or so in this application.

"Hardwired" (i.e., mains powered) units still have replaceable
batteries.

Apparently, a big problem with smoke detectors *is* the batteries!
They *do* run down. And, people defer replacing them once they
*have* run down. The "reminder" (chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp...)
is so annoying that the battery gets removed to silence the
damn "cricket" -- rendering the smoke detector useless.

Similarly, when the battery dies in an "AC w/battery backup" unit,
this same characteristic causes folks to *unplug* the detector
to rid themselves of the perpetual "chirp". Also rendering the
detector useless.

E.g., when the first unit, here, started chirping (system error,
not "replace battery"), I removed it from the system (we have
other units that continue to provide protection in that same
part of the house). But, I promptly purchased new units to
replace (all!) of the units here to get us back to our normal
"coverage level".

Curiously, had these been *battery* (only) powered units, it would
have been much easier to replace them -- slap a new unit on in
place of the old (apparently, manufacturers can't agree on a
common mounting bracket!). Being "(hard)wired in" meant having
to rewire each detector -- cuz manufacturers can't agree on a
common *wiring* connector, either! (and, previous model is no
longer available!)

How many folks are going to call an electrician out "next day"
to replace such detectors? Ineffective regulations... :<
 
S

Spehro Pefhany

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi David,



Yes, they are already on the market. "Coming to a landfill near you!"


"Hardwired" (i.e., mains powered) units still have replaceable
batteries.

Apparently, a big problem with smoke detectors *is* the batteries!
They *do* run down. And, people defer replacing them once they
*have* run down. The "reminder" (chirp, chirp, chirp, chirp...)
is so annoying that the battery gets removed to silence the
damn "cricket" -- rendering the smoke detector useless.

Similarly, when the battery dies in an "AC w/battery backup" unit,
this same characteristic causes folks to *unplug* the detector
to rid themselves of the perpetual "chirp". Also rendering the
detector useless.

E.g., when the first unit, here, started chirping (system error,
not "replace battery"), I removed it from the system (we have
other units that continue to provide protection in that same
part of the house). But, I promptly purchased new units to
replace (all!) of the units here to get us back to our normal
"coverage level".

Curiously, had these been *battery* (only) powered units, it would
have been much easier to replace them -- slap a new unit on in
place of the old (apparently, manufacturers can't agree on a
common mounting bracket!). Being "(hard)wired in" meant having
to rewire each detector -- cuz manufacturers can't agree on a
common *wiring* connector, either! (and, previous model is no
longer available!)

How many folks are going to call an electrician out "next day"
to replace such detectors? Ineffective regulations... :<

Maybe they need to connect the smoke detectors to Wifi.. that way they
can report their condition and alert the authorities and/or insurance
company if they're not kept in top condition. Maybe use a MEMS sensor
to detect various *kinds* of smoke, and report appropriately.
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Maybe they need to connect the smoke detectors to Wifi.. that way they
can report their condition and alert the authorities and/or insurance
company if they're not kept in top condition. Maybe use a MEMS sensor
to detect various *kinds* of smoke, and report appropriately.

They already have wireless detectors. And, in commercial
establishments, I suspect all of these alarm types are far
more capable. (someone is *paid* to maintain them -- even
if he/she doesn't see their value)

You can't legislate to cause people to *assume* (personal)
responsibility (you can *impose* it, after-the-fact -- but that
still doesn't mean they will "learn"). If people don't see the
value in protecting *their* property, lives, etc. then crafting
rules/regulations that try to force folks to be responsible isn't
going to work, either.

Making a smoke detector that deliberately annoys its users to
ensure the battery gets replaced isn't necessarily going to
get the battery replaced!

I had a vehicle in the late 70's (?) that wouldn't start without the
seat belts fastened (this was prior to current seat belt laws).
Can you spell "nuisance"? I kept the seat belts buckled *behind*
the driver/passengers and installed a N.O. pushbutton in series with
the interlock switches in the buckles. Get in car; push button
once (i.e., effectively unbuckling and then re-buckling all the belts);
turn key; drive away. Repeat next time you need to start the car.

The "right" solution came when I learned the *value* of the belts
and *wanted* to wear one (get to know a few friends with metal plates
in their heads and your outlook changes real quick! :> )
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Jeff,

Of course. I snoozed through a lecture on fire safety a few years
ago. I vaguely recall the speaker mention that they found far too
many smoke alarms with dead batteries at fires. I'm guilty of much
the same when I forgot and let my batteries run down for about 9
months before I remembered.

Yup. Smoke alarms were a relatively new idea to me when they came
out (having not "grown up" with them). So, I dealt with them
*reactively* -- when they started chirping The Dead Battery Minuet,
I'd *find* a battery (from "stock on hand") to appease them.

It was only after having my chain yanked for many years that I
adopted the *proactive* approach: replace the battery regularly
BEFORE it starts annoying you! New Year's Day being as good a day
as any other to remember to do this... And, to purchase *fresh*
batteries in anticipation of this (instead of hoping that some
3 year old stock on hand is still up for the challenge!)

The chirping of this other detector, recently, was confusing!
First, I assumed it was one of the 11 or 12 UPS's around the house
either warning that it had switched to "battery backup mode"
*or* had detected a failed battery (seems they "chirp" from
time to time -- just once or twice and then shut up). After
wandering around trying to localize the chirp to one of these,
I finally realized it was one of the smoke/CO detectors.

"Why the hell is it complaining *now*? I replaced the battery
8 months ago!" But, I dutifully replaced the battery (assuming
that's what it was complaining about). This kept it quiet for
a day or two. Then, it started up again.

"Hmmm, that battery can't be 'dead' -- unless YOU KILLED IT!"
And, I tend to doubt that...

Of course, no one remembers what every possible alert means other
than:
chirp = attend to my needs
horn = attend to YOUR safety!
So, I had to dig out the manual to read what this particular alert
meant. (I've never lived in a single house long enough for a
smoke detector to "wear out")
I guess this is a way to take human error
and unreliability out of the equation.

Most "regulations" try to do exactly this. And, often fail because
you can't force people to do things that they *should* want to do
(for their own self-interests!).

Why do folks forget to perform maintenance on their vehicles?

Why do people smoke, drink-to-excess, use recreational drugs, etc.?

Why do people fail to "eat healthy", exercise, etc.?

Why do infants die from exposure in car seats (while mommy/daddy
"just runs in" to bar/store/etc. "for a minute")?
All this because nobody remembers to replace the battery. Maybe a
good application for a coulomb counting power meter and a voice
annunciator. "At the tone, you have two thousand three hundred and
fifteen days left on your smoke alarm... ding". Human intelligence
replaced by machine intelligence. Sigh.

Then they'll just find a way to silence the annunciator. Either
by removing the unit entirely or jabbing a pencil through the
"speaker cone".

"Paternalism" vs. "self responsibility". :<

A long time ago, I designed a "maritime autopilot". Tell the
autopilot where you want to go (lat,lon) and it would get the
boat to that location! I argued for adding an alarm to ensure
the skipper would attend to the helm when the boat approached
its destination (otherwise, I would dutifully keep turning the
boat around each time it passed the destination -- I had no
control over throttle -- nor did I have any awareness of what
might be located in or near the waters in that area!).

Boss just shook his head: "We add a klaxon and the skipper
will just cut the wires to it the first time it goes off!"
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Tom,

Yup, you cannot make anything foolproof cos fools are so damn foolish!

And *creative*! :-/
And why is it when an alarm "goes off" it actually goes on? Probably
need a new phrase for this phenomenon.

Oh, that can start an **incredibly** long digression! ;-)

[PARK in the DRIVEway, DRIVE on the PARKway, etc.]

My personal favorite was my first visit to England: seeing a
sign on a door that said "Way Out". And, being naive enough
to ask "what's that (mean)?" :-/
 
D

Don Y

Jan 1, 1970
0
Hi Jeff,

Official wisdom suggests that you replace the battery at the beginning
of daylight savings time (approx March 10). I think the logic is that

We don't have Daylight Savings Time. :>
most people will be too hung over on New Years day to successfully
replace the battery without falling off the ladder.


Ummm... perhaps use a battery tester? Works nicely for alkaline but
not so nicely for lithium.

Hardly likely that it was "killed" in that short a period of
time -- and still worked well enough to chirp, etc. More
likely (as was then verified) that something else was causing
the chirp!
I hadn't heard that one.

Haven't seen the news stories in recent years?
True. I worked on a device with a similar alarm. The spec required
that we shove some DC through the speaker to make sure that it was
present. A short or open circuit would create an alarm condition,
which caused all the lights and displays to flash. Given the choice
of noise or flashing lights, most users chose the noisy alarm.

Solution isn't to force this sort of behavior on the user but,
rather, hope the user learns to *want* to behave that way. Or,
finds a solution that *allows* him to be incompetent (e.g., hire
someone to take on those responsibilities on your behalf!)

I recall a dental hygenist I had many years ago. After my first
cleaning, she said "see you in 6 months". I asked if their office
would be *calling* vs. *mailing* me a reminder. She said, "Neither.
Their *your* teeth. If you don't want them, then you don't have
to worry about making that appointment!" Interesting attitude! :>
 
Top