A recent article done by a news station showed that many children are not woken up at all by a blaring smoke alarm right by their bed. Neither are the hearing impaired. The claymore smoke alarm would be a regular smoke alarm, mounted at normal smoke alarm height right above one's bed. Upon activation, a replaceable cartridge would spray water, or, better yet, a non-conductive liquid out of an adjustable nozzle. The system would be designed to eject both a fine mist and large drops. The impact of the large drops would help, and the coldness of the atomized water would add that extra shock. A chemical that evaporates really fast, like alcohol, would be the perfect candidate. However, it would have to be non-flammable for obvious reasons. There should be about a 45 second time delay, coupled with an off button, to prevent firing of the system during false alarms.
-- fogfreak, Jun 27 2003

To Pay Out or Not to Pay Out; That is the Question. http://www.yourcomp...e.com/blackmold.htm
One reason why anything related to indoor sprinklers is significantly less enthusiastically endorsed by fire insurers than, say, 10 years ago. There has been lots of press on the toxicity and pervasiveness of black mold in California and Texas homes that have been subjected to moisture, warmth, and conducive growing conditions. And, as this article points out, many insurers are not writing new policies or have elected to exorbitantly jack up the price of existing policies to deal with the contingency. [jurist, Oct 05 2004, last modified Oct 17 2004]

How is this different from a regular fire sprinkler?
-- snarfyguy, Jun 27 2003


Houses don't have regular fire sprinklers, plus sprinkler systems only work if a flame actually touches a sprinkler head. This device would activate only with smoke.
-- fogfreak, Jun 27 2003


Many sprinkler systems work on smoke. I really think this is a me-too.

(NYC is now requiring that all new buildings, office or residential, be sprinklered, and many residential buildings are being retrofitted during renovations.)
-- DrCurry, Jun 27 2003


I know what a me-too is, and I beg to differ. This would still offer a way to retrofit homes with a simple device that sprinkles water on a person to wake, activated by the smoke alarm. Even if NYC or several other cities require that all buildings have sprinklers, this product could still exist. Maybe I shouldn't have made the name what it is. This would only sprinkle water, the machine's not designed to put a fire out.
-- fogfreak, Jun 27 2003


Note: The name of the idea has been changed, it was originally "Sprinkler Smoke Alarm". I was an idiot to come up with that name, and please note that the device is not designed to put out a fire, simply to wake up a sleeping person.
-- fogfreak, Jun 27 2003


To wake a sleeping person who is in a fire is almost as good as waking up a sleeping person in a fire AND putting out the fire. Your invention is taking one step forwards and two steps back. The sprinkler is a great idea, but it has already been invented.

What liquid is:
1) Non-conductive
2) Quick drying
3) and Non-flammable?
-- k_sra, Jun 27 2003


You didn't say that!
-- bristolz, Jun 27 2003


?
-- snarfyguy, Jun 28 2003


[k_sra] got me. That's all.
-- bristolz, Jun 28 2003


What's truly amazing is that [bristolz] knows of a fluid that meets those 3 requirements. I am impressed!
-- k_sra, Jun 28 2003


Easy, freon (long used in data centers, although revised regulations now ban it). On the basis of freon, however, this would be a very bad thing to dump onto sleeping children. It's not toxic, but the evaporating liquid would displace the oxygen the children need to beathe, and they would pass out. (Which is why freon-equipped data centers are plastered with signs warning that you have five seconds to leave if the fire alarms go off, no ifs, ands or buts.)

Water might fry your electronics, but as long as they're grounded, it won't do you any harm whatsoever. And I've seen chemical fires held back with water hoses, which is enough to save someone's life, even though water doesn't put them out.
-- DrCurry, Jun 28 2003


I know liquid could be a problem. At first I named the idea "Claymore Smoke Alarm" because I thought of using large ball bearings. However, I think water could be more efficient in waking a person up.
-- fogfreak, Jun 28 2003


Sheesh, you'll be throwing rocks next. Just stick to putting a wet sprinkler system in every room.
-- DrCurry, Jun 28 2003


Great idea, unless the problem is a malfunctioning electric blanket. (+)
-- FloridaManatee, Jun 28 2003


[FloridaManatee] That's why I said "non-conductive". Apologies to [k_sra] on forgetting that pure water IS non-conductive. That lesson in the class room didn't sink in too good because the distilled water we used was contaminated, and thus our experiments with it didn't work very good.
-- fogfreak, Jun 29 2003


Sprinkler systems are expensive to put in. A small resevoir of an unnamed liquid hung from the ceiling is not.

+
-- rapid transit, Jun 29 2003



halfbakery