Why can't I test a smoke detector with smoke?

  • Context: High School 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Uszak
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Detector Smoke Test
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proper testing methods for smoke detectors, specifically highlighting that testing with smoke, flame, or heat is not recommended according to manufacturer guidelines. The self-test button on smoke detectors primarily checks the circuitry and alarm functionality, not the sensor components. Users express concerns about the reliability of smoke detectors, citing experiences where devices falsely triggered alarms due to environmental factors like sunlight. The British Kitemark certification does not guarantee performance, raising questions about the effectiveness of these devices in real-world scenarios.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of smoke detector types: ionization, optical, and heat detectors.
  • Familiarity with smoke detector testing protocols and manufacturer guidelines.
  • Knowledge of environmental factors affecting smoke detector performance.
  • Awareness of safety certifications like the British Kitemark.
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the differences between ionization and optical smoke detectors.
  • Learn about proper maintenance and testing procedures for smoke detectors.
  • Investigate the impact of environmental factors on smoke detector functionality.
  • Explore safety standards and certifications for smoke detection devices.
USEFUL FOR

Homeowners, landlords, safety inspectors, and anyone responsible for maintaining or testing smoke detection systems.

Paul Uszak
Messages
84
Reaction score
7
I just came across the user instructions for my smoke detectors and am surprised. I've attached a small section of the instructions. They're from a mainstream manufacturer and labelled with a British Kitemark. You can see that I'm not supposed to test it with flame, smoke nor heat, and the results might be misleading! How can this be?

The self test button clearly doesn't introduce ionised particles into the chamber of an ionisation type, lumps of smoke into the sight line of an optical type, nor heat up the sensor of a heat type detector. I assume that it only tests the output circutry and the thingie that makes the annoying noise when I cook. So if cooking sets it off, why can't I test it so? How else can I reliably test that the sensor components are actually working and not full of paint /spiders? I bet that they test smoke detectors at the factory in a real /well simulated fire environment...
 

Attachments

  • smoke.png
    smoke.png
    19.1 KB · Views: 499
Physics news on Phys.org
I have found that some of those so called smoke detectors are pretty useless, I don't know how much veracity is to be expected of the 'Kitemark'.
A while ago all of the 'smoke detectors' in my flat were replaced by my landlord as 'routine maintenance'.
Every one of them eventually detected 'smoke' when nothing even vaguely like smoke was around.
One of them, (the first one). started to raise an alarm just because of bright sunlight, closing the window curtain would shut it up.
 
Paul Uszak said:
You can see that I'm not supposed to test it with flame, smoke nor heat, and the results might be misleading! How can this be?
I guess, if done too often, it could cover the sensors with soot.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DrGreg

Similar threads

High School Infrared Detectors & The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics
  • · Replies 152 ·
6
Replies
152
Views
11K
Can You Stomach These Extreme Global Delicacies?
  • · Replies 78 ·
3
Replies
78
Views
13K