Re: smoke detector recommendation

["Crash Gordon" <webmaster@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

a delayed fire zone...hmmm that don't sound good...personally I don't even
like the "fire verify" type fire zone

--
**Crash Gordon**







"JoeRaisin" <joeraisin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:cqxKj.359$eC1.77@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
| carlbernardi@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
| > Hi,
| >
| > I was wondering if some one could recommend a few smoke detectors that
| > are interconnected and are not very sensitive to thinks like steam or
| > making toast.  Since I need the detectors to work for two dwellings I
| > was hoping to find ones that work on a delay such as 30 seconds to 1
| > minutes before the other detector starts to sound.
| >
| > Thanks,
| >
| >
| > Carl
| >
| >
| > http://www.gaihosa.com
|
| As far as I know the smoke detectors for one side of a duplex do not
| have to trigger the ones on the other side if the separation between the
| two dwellings is an adequate fire barrier - I live in Michigan, check
| your local codes.
|
| That said, I don't know of any detectors that have such a delay and
| wouldn't use them if I did.  In a fire every second counts and you want
| as much noise in the house as soon as possible so that folks have the
| best chance to escape.
|
| As for steam & cooking errors:  Our code calls for smoke detectors to be
| at least three feet away from a bathroom door and twenty feet from a
| cooking appliance.  We stretch that out as far as we can whenever
| possible.  That said, at twenty feet from the stove we have falsed our
| smokes twice in the past six years.
|
| When trying to reduce false alarms you should consider placement and
| living habits along with acceptance that anything can and will likely
| happen.
|
| What I would counsel against is considering equipment that could kill
| someone.