Two comments –
The idea behind the 10 year life batteries in sealed detectors is that the
battery and the sensor element both need to be retired at the 10 year point.
It is not a good idea to put new batteries in any detector at around the 10
year point as the sensor needs replacement, too.
...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of K9ZTV
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2020 4:49 PM
To: Elecraft Reflector
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] Smoke detectors
For what it’s worth, the American Red Cross is recommending installation of
units that have 10-year lithium ion batteries which are sealed and not
replaceable
I second the motion to replace ALL the older smoke detectors, not only in YOUR
home BUT IN YOUR CHILDREN’S HOMES! My daughters husband is not that bright and
I replaced all their smoke detectors and monitor them when we visit. They live
in a 112 year old run down mansion (fire trap) with kids
On 10/30/2020 2:49 PM, K9ZTV wrote:
> For what it’s worth, the American Red Cross is recommending
> installation of units that have 10-year lithium ion batteries which
> are sealed and not replaceable. History has shown that kids tend to
> remove the batteries for their toys and games.
The
The smoke detectors we have here are wired into the security system - no
replaceable batteries - except for one which is standalone in the
bedroom and was required to be added by the inspector when we built the
house even with the whole house system in place. No RFI problems observed.
We do
For what it’s worth, the American Red Cross is recommending installation of
units that have 10-year lithium ion batteries which are sealed and not
replaceable. History has shown that kids tend to remove the batteries for
their toys and games.
They also say the test button tests only the
Exactly. Here in Folsom, Sacramento County, we are required to have wired smoke
detectors AND battery powered carbon monoxide detectors. In fact, we had our
roof replaced a few years ago and the building inspectors would not pass it
unless those carbon monoxide detectors were installed. For
It's important to understand that these safety codes are LOCAL --
usually by state, but also by county and/or city. There are "guideline"
codes, like the National Electric Code, that are adopted by most local
authorities, and those guideline codes are updated every few years.
Often the local
Every AHJ is different. Find out what yours says.
Jim ab3cv
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 10:16 PM Hank via Elecraft
wrote:
> We switched to wireless alarm connected, internal battery detectors due to
> the occasional RFI interference caused by running a little power on 80
> meters. Our alarm
We switched to wireless alarm connected, internal battery detectors due to the
occasional RFI interference caused by running a little power on 80 meters. Our
alarm company actually had some experience with RFI issues and made the
recommendation. I installed them and have a calendar reminder to
I would also check with my insurance agent before making such a switch.
73, Lou KE1F
On 10/29/2020 5:45 PM, Jim Miller wrote:
Strongly suggest contacting county fire marshal before selecting wireless
only detectors.
You don’t want to violate code and have any insurance claim denied if these
Strongly suggest contacting county fire marshal before selecting wireless
only detectors.
You don’t want to violate code and have any insurance claim denied if these
is an event.
Jim ab3cv
On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 5:38 PM Jim Brown wrote:
> Most RFI to/from ham radio and "devices" is caused
Most RFI to/from ham radio and "devices" is caused by poorly designed
electronics using interconnected wiring as TX/RX antennas. Because of
the frequencies on which they operate, WiFi-connected devices with no
exterior wiring are inherently FAR less likely to create or receive RFI
IF they
Dave, I totally agree. I am sure the “problem” the manufacturer is cautioning
about is RF, since my original post was about “wireless connected” detectors.
My gripe was nothing in the sales literature warned against it. Not till I
bought the units and read the installation guide
Sent from my
Well, RF (AKA "Radio Waves") can falsely trigger all sorts of equipment
that was not "designed" to work with, or be influenced by them.
That is the classic EMC Susceptibility or Immunity problem. Basically,
poor design and/or implementation of the affected (or sometimes bad
installation of an
Radio waves are non-Ionizing. I hope we all know that and know one another
know that. However the near field is an electrical field. The smoke
detector compares the ionization between two chambers, both with the same
radioactive source. One is exposed to the environment (smoke) and the other
is
Radio waves are non-ionising radiation, so there is no fundamental
reason why radio frequencies should trigger ionisation detectors.
Also, at least in Europe, ionisation detectors are no longer the
preferred type. Optical detectors are the generally preferred type, and
ones which combine heat
I had a battery-operated smoke detector that was set off by my
transmissions. I totally wrapped it in aluminum foil and punched holes
in the foil to match the openings in the plastic housing. No more trouble.
Of course this wouldn't work with a WiFi unit. But in my experience,
WiFi appliances
About 12 years ago we had a carbon monoxide detector in the upstairs hallway
not far from the shack. Every time I was on a 2m net (could have been 6m, I
forget...)the detector would start chirping, I even lowered power from 65 to 25
watts, same issue. Eventually the thing wouldn’t stop chirping
The reason to keep smoke detectors from Amateur Radios is that they detect
smoke by ionization from a radioactive source. A strong near field will set
them off. The good news is that this is your indication that all is not
right at the feed line (Or the antenna is unhealthy close). I have had
20 matches
Mail list logo
