Experimental Analysis on False Alarms of Fire Detectors by Cooking Fumes
Source abstract
Abstract
Experiments were conducted to analyze the response of ionization and photoelectric detectors to the two typical Chinese cooking fumes simulated in the FE/DE. Four real fire smokes were also carried out for comparison with the nuisance cooking fumes. The outputs of the ionization and photoelectric detector, CO, CO2 and humidity were recorded throughout the six experiments and were compared. The results of these experiments show that the smoke detectors, especially the ionization detector, are sensitive to cooking fumes and nuisance alarms are easy to happen. It is also indicated that CO and CO2 concentration in the cooking fumes varied much less than those in the four real fire sources. The feasibility of reducing false alarms in kitchen through the use of multi-criteria algorithm, which combines the CO or CO2 with smoke, is discussed as well.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Fire Detection and Safety Systems · Fire dynamics and safety research · Risk and Safety Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
State Key Laboratory of Fire Science, University of Science and Technology of China, 230026, Hefei, Anhui Province, China
References (13)
Show source-provided references
1. 1. Rose-Pehrsson, S.L., Har, S.J. and Street, T.T. (2001). Real-Time Probabilistic Neural Network Performance and Optimization for Fire Detection and Nuisance Alarm Rejection , 12th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection.10.21236/ADA383627 ↗
2. 2. Cleary, T. and Donnelly, M. (2001). Aircraft Cargo Compartment Fire and Nuisance Source Tests in the FE/DE , In: Grosshandler, W. (ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection “ AUBE ’01”, March 26–28, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
3. 3. Mangon, P. (2001). Fire Detection for Aircraft Cargo Compartments, Reduction of False Alarms , 12th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection.
4. 4. Breen, D.E. (1985). False Fire Alarms in College Dormitories – The Problem Revisited, SFPE Technology Report 85-3, Society of Fire Protection Engineers, Boston, MA .
5. 5. Cleary, T., Grosshandler, W. and Chernovsky, A. (1999). Smoke Detector Response to Nuisance Aerosols , In: Luck, H. (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection “ AUBE ’99”, pp. 32–41 , March 16–18, Gerhard Mercator University, Duisburg, Germany.
6. 10.1016/S0379-7112(96)00031-810.1016/S0379-7112(96)00031-8 ↗
7. 7. Cleary, T., Donnelly, M. and Grosshandler, W. (2001). The Fire Emulator/ Detector Evaluator: Design, Operation, and Performance , In: Grosshandler, W. (ed.), Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection “ AUBE ’ 01”, March 26–28, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
8. 8. Cleary, T., Grosshandler, W. and Chernovsky, A. (1999). Smoke Detector Response to Nuisance Aerosols , In: Luck, H. (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automatic Fire Detection “ AUBE ’ 99”, pp. 32–41 , March 16–18, Gerhard Mercator University, Duisburg, Germany.
9. 9. (1998). EN54: Components of Automatic Fire Detection Systems European Committee for Standardization, Part 1–9.
10. 10.1016/S0925-4005(00)00481-010.1016/S0925-4005(00)00481-0 ↗
11. 10.1016/S0379-7112(01)00057-110.1016/S0379-7112(01)00057-1 ↗
12. 12. Cleary, T., Anderson, M., Averill, J. and Grosshandler, W. (June 1999). Evaluating Multi-sensor Fire Detectors in the Fire Emulator/Detector Evaluator , In: Proceedings of the 8th Inter. Conf. on Fire Science and Eng., Interflam ’ 99, Edinburg, Scotland.
13. 10.1023/A:101534300049410.1023/A:1015343000494 ↗