Re: mum's the word on howto tweak smoke detector

["FIRETEK" <firetech(change-the-ch-to-k)@telus.net>]

I would never trust my family to an $8.00 detector purchased at Walmart.
Invariably they are ionization type, and I'd recommend using photo-electrics
for most residential applications.


<hapticz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:G1aqh.34080$Gr2.24551@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> average fire allowed to go unchecked will usually run you abt $4000  to
> $120,000 to repair and rebuild.
>
> avg cost of new walmart fire detector is abt $8.00
>
> no brainer to figure  cost /risk advantage !
>
>
> "Frank Winans" <fwinans@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:12qef7ts7kbfod4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > I'm a computer geek, and am about to discard
> > another cheap ionization smoke detector that
> > has gotten too sensitive to put up with.  Cleaning
> > the little chamber didn't help much, though yes,
> > that often worked in years past, on other units
> > I've had.
> >
> > Actually, I'm thinking of tweaking the sensitivity
> > with unauthorized do-it-yourself circuit mods.
> > I'll want to destroy the unit before I let it fall into
> > another's hands, but I'll accept the increased
> > risk of myself dying in a home fire that using
> > such a device entails.  Maybe I'll disguise it as
> > an abstract sculpture or something, so nobody
> > else would ever come to rely on it to detect
> > smoke ;-)
> >
> > But this brings up some issues;
> >
> > a) how can I properly calibrate it, and later
> > retest it, using actual smoke?  Like using a
> > measured amount of tobacco on a red-hot
> > heater, and ducting that into a known volume
> > trash bag or box... I've never seen this topic
> > discussed, and wonder if the old TEST button
> > is a credible witness of sensitivity, now that I
> > think about it...
> >
> > b) If this works out, should I ever admit it to my
> > friends?   We're all just a few degrees away
> > from the most monstrously inept/stupid/deranged
> > person one might ever envision, and I'd be
> > enabling that "friend of a friend of a friend" to
> > construct a passively hazardous device {or
> > large assemblage of same.}
> >
> > c) And why doesn't there seem to be any prior
> > postings on this HOWto ?  Do they get
> > censored by somebody eventually?   Sure, it
> > may be <unwise> to discuss in a public forum,
> > from a strictly personal-legal-liability standpoint,
> > but that wouldn't normally prevent the topic arising,
> > judging from the blatantly unwise / illegal things
> > I see out on the internet already. {Porno sites,
> > prescription drugs offered by correspondance. Ech!}
> >
> >
>
>