• 1 Post
  • 507 Comments
Joined 3 年前
cake
Cake day: 2023年8月18日

help-circle



  • Yes, but no. You really should replace your detectors every decade. They will likely work perfectly for twice that, but is it worth the risk over like $100 in smoke detectors?

    So it does sort of force you to replace it after a decade, but you should anyhow.

    It’s also well worth it, because getting on a chair or ladder and buying new overpriced 9v batteries every year (if you’re all proper about changing them) is a pain in the ass compared to once a decade. The more of a pain it is to get to your detectors, the more a 10 year one becomes worth it.

    You’re supposed to hit your test button once a month to check their functions, but I dont think anyone anywhere actually does that. If they tell me they do I’ll just assume they’re a liar.


  • I know exactly how they work. I’m a firefighter and a hazmat technician. Plus I work on and repair electronics as a hobby. Your smoke detector failing after 10 or 30 years has zero to do with radioactive decay. It’s from contamination (dust) and sensor degradation. Once the metal plates inside get enough buildup from dust (like smoke dust and regular dust) and contamination from humidity, the charge that’s supposed to be detected between those plates from the ionization stays lower all the time. That means less actual “smoke” is needed to drop it below the threshold. This happens MUCH faster than radioactive decay reducing what it will ionize.


  • There’s no radiation drop after just 30 years from americium 241. It has a 450 year half life. After decades electric components start to fail and\or things get dirty. After 30 years of getting smoke in it, there was probably a layer of dust\smoke over where the radiation is at that were blocking some of the radiation all the time, that made it more sensitive.

    Same issues will happen with photoelectric detectors. It’s recommended to replace both types after no longer than 10 years. I have no idea where the person you responded to got the information about them not needing replaced as often as ionization detectors. If anything, it’s actually the opposite.






  • People in their mid 20’s at 1:30 in the morning crashing while exiting the freeway sounds fishy to you? Because that looks like drunk driving to me.

    Plus it sounds like he was the only one in the car of several people who died and it doesn’t infer anything about their being any other vehicles involved.

    Then, if you went out to try and kill someone, would you really think a car wreck would be your best chance to do it? Like 95%+ of wrecks aren’t fatal anymore. It’d be like the dumbest most inconsistent way to try.

    If your going to make conspiracy theories; they have to still be a little bit plausible. Not like wrecking a car that leaves three survivors\witnesses