Ripshod
Super Member
Music Man
Hug A Veteran!!
Joined:May 2014
Posts: 4,863
Location:
Likes: 3,469
Recent Posts
Last Online Mar 19, 2022 8:18:25 GMT
|
Post by Ripshod on May 15, 2015 21:35:45 GMT
It's an and/or situation tim. You can get all three options in either wired or battery. Other than in the kitchen I think it just comes down to a matter of price - I'll have to check the regs to be sure. Ionisation are slightly more expensive. It's becoming human nature to go for the cheapest option. And no, the detectors in my house were installed by the previous owner, and will soon be replaced with a wired system linked to the burglar alarm that's going in. ETA: iirc it's advised not to use ionisation detectors too close to the kitchen. Other than that the ionisation and optical are your own personal choice.
|
|
Postmodern Smoking
Super Member
Personal Mix Solver
( Dave )
Joined:October 2012
Posts: 7,143
Location:
Likes: 9,823
Recent Posts
Last Online Oct 1, 2024 18:12:50 GMT
|
Post by Postmodern Smoking on May 15, 2015 21:47:22 GMT
Out of interest, aren't all hard wired smoke detectors ionization type Postmodern Smoking? I thought the photoelectic ones were the battery powered ones. The job I'm doing atm, I have to replace both the detectors (upstairs and downstairs), and the kitchen one. But they are hard wired. I have never used battery ones. Nope as far as I'm aware there is a choice for hard-wired smoke detectors. Searching for "mains powered optical smoke detectors" (also known as photoelectric smoke detectors) comes up with products. I used to know the best type for each location (i.e. near kitchen, hallway, etc.), but can't remember off the top of my head... and am knackered tonight so don't want to dig out online application recommendations. But if you do a search you should get the info. ETA - Replied before realising Ripshod had responded, but think we're saying the same thing! More info here (Also this source says that ionisation cheaper than optical Ripshod!)
|
|
tim
Super Member
Joined:February 2015
Posts: 2,137
Location:
Likes: 1,516
Recent Posts
Last Online May 25, 2022 22:18:37 GMT
|
Post by tim on May 15, 2015 21:54:20 GMT
I'll personally stick with the ionisation Ripshod. With a heat detector in the galley. The extra few quid will either save my life or my sanity. Unexpected alarms fray my nerves..... ETA Cross posts. Thanks Postmodern Smoking Ripshod
|
|
Ripshod
Super Member
Music Man
Hug A Veteran!!
Joined:May 2014
Posts: 4,863
Location:
Likes: 3,469
Recent Posts
Last Online Mar 19, 2022 8:18:25 GMT
|
Post by Ripshod on May 15, 2015 21:58:05 GMT
Just popped back in to clarify one small thing. The ionisation type will still detect the particles in smoke. However they are a lot less sensitive to it, so they are recommended for dusty areas, or areas where people 'smoke' <<< would also apply to vaping.
To check a preinstalled detector open it up. If there's a radioactivity warning sticker inside it's an ionisation detector.
|
|
tim
Super Member
Joined:February 2015
Posts: 2,137
Location:
Likes: 1,516
Recent Posts
Last Online May 25, 2022 22:18:37 GMT
|
Post by tim on May 15, 2015 22:07:39 GMT
Just popped back in to clarify one small thing. The ionisation type will still detect the particles in smoke. However they are a lot less sensitive to it, so they are recommended for dusty areas, or areas where people 'smoke' <<< would also apply to vaping. Which is, IMHO, the best way to detect smoke. A fire ALWAYS sends smoke upwards. If my wife sets it off while using talcum powder, I don't need that! Off topic (slightly) anyway. But good to know. Ionisation type smoke detectors shouldn't detect vapour.
|
|