1. We are pleased to announce the 'Home Automation' forum. Click here to get involved!

Interlinking different brands of smoke alarms

Discussion in 'Electrics UK' started by Donkmeister, 9 Sep 2009.

  1. Donkmeister

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2008
    Messages:
    952
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    A bit of information you may or may not be aware of, but it would seem that interlinking different brands of smoke alarm may not work correctly.

    I'm planning to add in some interlinked mains-supplied battery backed-up smoke/heat/CO detectors. So, I went to the Kidde website to look at a few and found the following in the FAQ:

    Which seems a bit stupid, but that's the situation.

    So, if you are adding to an existing system or replacing the odd failed unit, you should probably aim to replace like with like.

    Does anyone here have any experience of Kidde's domestic products? Any good?

    I'm looking to put a CO alarm and heat alarm in the kitchen (the only room in my house with gas appliances), optical alarms in the bedrooms and ionisation alarms in the hallways and living room. I am planning on having a fireplace in the living room reinstated at a later stage to burn wood and/or coal... would ionisation be the correct choice?
     
  2. Taylortwocities

    Joined:
    28 Jul 2006
    Messages:
    13,753
    Thanks Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    This link tells you about the two types of alarm and which to fit and where. In summary, it says fit both (mind you, they do make them)! clickme.

    Kidde is a decent make.

    You cannot interconnect different makes of alarm, they have different signalling. Buy one of the same make and don't mess around. Smoke alarms provide a degree of safety - only fit and use them in accordance with the maker's instructions.

    PS AICO recommend that you do not interconnect CO and smoke alarms as the actions to be taken in the event of FIRE are different to the action you would take for a CO leak.
     
  3. ban-all-sheds

    Joined:
    27 Aug 2003
    Messages:
    51,685
    Thanks Received:
    2,021
    Location:
    London
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I would never in a million years have thought it would work.


    It seems perfectly reasonable, understandable and to be expected. It seems a bit stupid to expect otherwise.
     
  4. Donkmeister

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2008
    Messages:
    952
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Your opinion of course, but from an engineering point of view this is poor practice, from a safety point of view it is foolhardy. Smoke alarms of different brands are:

    1) constructed to perform the same function
    2) constructed with the same physical interface
    3) designed to be utilised with the same cabling
    4) certified against the same standards, which are embossed on the exterior.

    Whilst it would take a leap of stupidity or incompetence to connect a 3-core and earth from a dimmer switch to a smoke alarm (same physical interface and cabling), it is not unreasonable to expect one smoke alarm to be interchangeable with another of the same fit, form and function, with the same standards nos. written all over it.

    Speaking as an engineer, I would say that the standardisation bodies have missed a trick here. A standardised signalling scheme would eliminate the risk of someone replacing a non-functioning alarm with a functional alarm that will not interpret the interlink signal sent by one of the other alarms.

    If you still think it is stupid, consider this: what if Kidde decided that from 1st January 2010, all its new interlink alarms would have a completely different signal definition? The absence of a standard means there is nothing to stop them doing this, and they are under no obligation to put stickers all over the box saying "only interface this with other new Kidde alarms!!!". :eek:
     
  5. Donkmeister

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2008
    Messages:
    952
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I'll look into that, I just assumed that interlinking everything would be the best course of action i.e. it wakes me up, I leave the house and assess the situation. I'm a very heavy sleeper so would need a sounder in my bedroom (I have slept through fire drills in the past).

    Kidde do ones with a display that says "FIRE" or "CO", perhaps I'll go for those ones.
     
  6. Taylortwocities

    Joined:
    28 Jul 2006
    Messages:
    13,753
    Thanks Received:
    1,230
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    The link to the AICO advice is clicky check out page 9

    It says
    "There is merit in interconnecting CO and smoke/heat alarm
    systems, as it will improve audibility throughout the property
    However, it is generally considered that interconnecting CO
    alarms into a smoke/heat alarm system is not good practice, as
    the actions that should be taken in the different emergencies
    are quite unique:
    • If a fire occurs, you should keep doors and windows closed to
    contain the fire as much as possible.
    • If a CO leak occurs, you should open all doors and windows
    to ventilate the area as much as possible - at the same time
    turning off the appliance/s from where CO leak is being
    emitted.
    We believe that interconnection between the 2 types of systems
    may be considered if the user is able to determine which of the
    alarms has caused the system to operate (the smoke alarm or
    the CO alarm) so enabling them to make the correct decision
    on what action should be taken. The only foolproof method of
    achieving this is by having a means of silencing the remaining
    system i.e the alarms not actually sensing smoke or CO. The
    solution to this problem would be the addition of an Ei1529RC
    Alarm Control Switch into the system.."
     
  7. Donkmeister

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2008
    Messages:
    952
    Thanks Received:
    15
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    Excellent, thanks again. I've seen those alarm switches, I would suppose the safest place to put one is just inside the front door.

    Not sure I would want to sit squinting at an LED display on the ceiling anyway... if I was woken by the alarm at night, far more important to get out asap!
     
  8. bernardgreen

    Joined:
    3 Nov 2006
    Messages:
    12,217
    Thanks Received:
    1,028
    Location:
    Bedfordshire
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I think that irrespective of it being a smoke alarm or CO alarm the prime objective is to get the family OUT of the house away from the danger and into fresh air.

    If a person is found to be un-conscious or un-wakable in a room with no smoke then one can assume it is CO and act accordingly which still has the prime objective to get them out into fresh air.

    How many people fit smoke alarms but never practise an evacuation of the house in the dark. ( which is easy compared to a sudden evacuation when dis-orientated by smoke and fear )
     
  9. ban-all-sheds

    Joined:
    27 Aug 2003
    Messages:
    51,685
    Thanks Received:
    2,021
    Location:
    London
    Country:
    United Kingdom
    I agree that the industry has displayed very poor practice in not developing a de facto standard for interconnections, or pressing for a de jure one.


    What is foolhardy is to simply assume that different makes of detectors can be interconnected without checking first.


    It is also foolhardy to assume that a standard covers what you think it should, rather than checking that it does, if it's important to you.


    Your opinion of course, but from a common sense point of view this is poor practice.


    They have, and it would, but as an engineer you should know better than to assume that they haven't.


    I'm sure they would be obliged to make that fact known in the installation instructions.
     

Share This Page