Smoke detectors for the elderly

Posted by Robert Green on October 4, 2009, 11:08 pm

>I wouldn't call $159 per unit "gouging" for such a specialized product

It just depends on your perspective I guess. What are the technical and
manufacturing differences between the mass-produced $20 smoke detector and
one of these "specialized" low-frequency units?

I don't want to deny anyone a living, but the problem seems to be that the
mass-manufacturers are making the wrong product. It doesn't work for
perhaps as many as 1 in 5 Americans.

As for costing out the differences, the worst price difference I can see is
that it might take some AA batteries instead of 9V one to create as loud a
sound at the lower frequency. I just don't see where it should cost over
10X the cost of a Wal-mart or Target special. At $159 each, it's not likely
that a lot of elderly people will be able to properly cover their house with
them.

I believe I read somewhere that 9V batteries are very high on the list of
items shop-lifted by the elderly. That's no surprise to me when I read
about the living conditions of some of the older people in America. I've
been shocked at how much they're charging for 9V's ($4!!!!) lately so maybe
the switch to AA based alarms, if that's what it takes to make a loud enough
noise with them, is a blessing, too. AA's seem to be available at more
reasonable prices than 9V cells in general.

Considering that those needing such alarms are most likely to be the same
elderly adults asked to bail out Wall St.'s Richie Richkids with their
million dollar bonuses, I think what you get for $159 v. $20 is a valid
question. If 70 million people can't hear these units well enough to be
awakened by them, there was a BIG basic mistake in the selection and
approval of the frequencies used. That's what Mr. Morgan's URL attested to.
Fire experts are beginning to look at the statistics and have realized the
high frequencies originally chosen as attention-getters doesn't work as well
at rousing people as lower tones, especially when natural old-age hearing
attrition becomes a factor.

In fact, because some of the sites I looked at said that bed shakers are the
best at awakening people, I am thinking about taking the very loud bass unit
from a pair of Creative PC speakers I have lying around and hooking it into
my home alarm system to "shake the bed" with something like a recording from
a disaster movie. The literature I've been reading is that every second
counts in escaping a fire and that a combination tone and a bedshaker alarm
would give us the best possible warning and be very affordable as well since
I already have an alarm panel in the house.

As for being "specialized" I think the whole point here is that
low-frequency tone alarms shouldn't be considered something special. From
what Mr. Morgan's referral said, they won't be a high dollar, specialized
product with a few years as the new rules come into play.

There's very little design or cost difference between an alarm with a low
frequency sounder than one with a high frequency. High frequency was the
wrong choice, now that's getting fixed. I guess someone in the CPSC was
standing next to someone elderly and noticed what I did. Finally. Everbody
msistakes mkes. (-:

Oops, was that a rant? I guess so. Sorry. It just amazes me that this
problem has existed for so long without anyone doing a damn thing about it.
Who needs death panels when we have Underwriter's Laboratory approving smoke
alarms that elderly and hard of hearing people can't hear? Maybe they need
to change their name to "Undertaker's Labs."

Thanks for your input!

--
Bobby G.

Posted by Robert Green on October 4, 2009, 11:43 am

> You've probably seen the outrageously overpriced detectors from

"LoudnLow" --

> a company that makes it's money by gouging hearing deficient victims.

There's

> a company that makes a low-frequency sounder which responds to the

high-pitch

> noise from conventional smokes. It's called Telex. Their product is also
> pricey but at least you won't be out $1200. I can't speak for the quality

> their product as I haven't tried one. Here's a link:
> http://www.teltex.com/Home.asp

Thanks for the link but I need to find something less pricey. I just CAN
NOT believe that with all the smoke detectors out there, that there isn't
anything except multi-hundred dollar units that can make a sound that
hard-of-hearing people can hear. I'd like to do this for $120 max. The
larger issue is the millions of older Americans on tight budgets who can
hardly afford to eat. They're definitely NOT going to spend $1000's or even
$100's on fancy smoke detectors, nor should they.

Thanks for your input. I'm betting that if I had to go that route, I could
get out some copper-clad perf board and my soldering iron and build
something very similar to what you are describing for a lot less. But
still, I shouldn't have to. Fortunately, the industry seems to have finally
realized the problem and are taking steps to correct it. I just hope my
friend doesn't turn himself into a crispy critter before then. He likes to
sit in his armchair, smoking a pipe and he tends to doze off a lot.

--
Bobby G.

Posted by Nate Nagel on October 4, 2009, 12:54 pm

Robert Green wrote:

>
>

>> You've probably seen the outrageously overpriced detectors from

> "LoudnLow" --

>> a company that makes it's money by gouging hearing deficient victims.

> There's

>> a company that makes a low-frequency sounder which responds to the

> high-pitch

>> noise from conventional smokes. It's called Telex. Their product is also
>> pricey but at least you won't be out $1200. I can't speak for the quality

> of

>> their product as I haven't tried one. Here's a link:
>> http://www.teltex.com/Home.asp

>
> Thanks for the link but I need to find something less pricey. I just CAN
> NOT believe that with all the smoke detectors out there, that there isn't
> anything except multi-hundred dollar units that can make a sound that
> hard-of-hearing people can hear. I'd like to do this for $120 max. The
> larger issue is the millions of older Americans on tight budgets who can
> hardly afford to eat. They're definitely NOT going to spend $1000's or even
> $100's on fancy smoke detectors, nor should they.
>
> Thanks for your input. I'm betting that if I had to go that route, I could
> get out some copper-clad perf board and my soldering iron and build
> something very similar to what you are describing for a lot less. But
> still, I shouldn't have to. Fortunately, the industry seems to have finally
> realized the problem and are taking steps to correct it. I just hope my
> friend doesn't turn himself into a crispy critter before then. He likes to
> sit in his armchair, smoking a pipe and he tends to doze off a lot.
>
> --
> Bobby G.
>
>

There's a lot of liability when it comes to fire safety. "Good" and
"cheap" do sometimes occur together, but less often than not.

There are plug-in Gentex models with strobes as well, I know you are
focused on audible notification appliances, but visual appliances have
been the traditional solution for the hard of hearing. 177cd is pretty
freaking bright. However, those do run about $100 apiece retail, and
there's not much getting around that.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Posted by Robert Green on October 4, 2009, 11:36 am

> Robert,
> That issue has been addressed by the NFPA. See here:
> http://www.hearinglossweb.com/tech/alrt/smoke/code.htm

Thanks. I knew the problem was bad, but apparently as many as 70 million
Americans having high-frequency hearing loss, according to that site.
That's a pretty big chunk of people to leave out of the design process.
Maybe there was a patent issue involved.

I never thought about the problem until I was standing next to someone who
couldn't hear a peep of what I thought was ear-drum damaging loud, but then
again, I don't design smoke detectors. I'm glad that after 20 or 30 years
worth of sales, something's finally being done to address the problem as
indicated by the URL you posted.

I'd still like to find 3 or 4 battery powered smokes or combo smoke/CO's
that don't need hardwiring and don't cost more than $50 each. Hopefully
someone can tell me for sure which brands make that lower frequency
squarewave 520Hz sound that's being mandated.

It sounds like I need to keep my fingers crossed until the new models come
out and hope that he doesn't burn himself up before then . . . naw . . .
couldn't live with myself if something bad happened in the mean time. I'll
keep looking. At least I have a new search term: 520Hz. I expect that to
help a lot in finding what I am looking for. Thanks again for the URL.
(time passes) - not as helpful as I thought. It seems only two alarm makers
have such units, and they're way overpriced compared to traditional battery
detectors. And I mean waaaaay over. I can get 10 normal alarms for the
price of one of the specialized low frequency units. If there's anything I
hate, it's gouging the sick and disabled. This is a perfect example. Smoke
detectors, as the new rules make clear, should be able to wake most people
up, not just one demographic.

--
Bobby G.

Posted by Don Phillipson on October 3, 2009, 2:15 pm

> I was at an elderly friend's house the other day when the smoke alarm went
> off. It was quite loud and I reacted instantly to the noise. My friend,

> former Army marksman in his 70's, who's suffering from profound high
> frequency hearing loss, heard nothing!!!
> Then I started looking around for alarms that used lower frequency

sounders

> but the only thing I could find were specially converted smoke detectors
> that cost $300!!!!

Can you not find an optical alarm, that indicates by blinking
a strobe light on/off slowly (at whatever frequency is likeliest
to catch the attention of deaf people)?

--
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Page 4 of 23 < 1 2 3 > last >>

Similar Threads	Posted
Smoke Detectors	February 10, 2005, 3:10 pm
Smoke detectors	October 24, 2009, 8:53 am
Cleaning smoke detectors?	March 3, 2006, 3:53 pm
replacing smoke detectors	June 19, 2006, 8:51 pm
Disposal of smoke and co2 detectors	May 6, 2007, 5:23 am
Smoke detectors - How to test	April 28, 2008, 5:59 pm
Wireless Smoke Detectors ?	November 13, 2009, 1:40 pm
wireless interconnected AC smoke detectors	June 30, 2007, 11:51 pm
question about interconnected smoke detectors	December 14, 2005, 2:15 pm
Hardwired smoke detectors wiring	July 13, 2009, 2:24 pm

Smoke detectors for the elderly - Page 4