CO detectors, marine or regular model?

[MikeHoncho]

Originally Posted by jbinbi

@Mike, seeing that you have quite a bit of expertise here, I am interested in your answer to my original question (unless I missed it somewhere).

Can I just buy a Kidde/First Alert etc at Home Depot, or should I be getting a marine model.

Thanks, and apologies for missing the thread from 3 years ago.

Short answer...I don't know. If what is being posted regarding a time-weighted-average regarding the CO levels over time and alarming at higher levels for the marine version compared to a non-marine - it wouldn't matter other than getting false alarms to go with a non-marine. The numbers being thrown out there associated to the marine version (I have no idea if they are correct) would make me lean towards a non-marine one for a more conservative approach. I have a regular detector/meter that alarms at 35 ppm and has a digital readout. Sensors get contaminated and age. I would replace a detector like the one I have every couple years when in a tight space and with limited redundancies and higher probability.

[David Mathis]

For many years we've had Home Depot CO alarms and smoke alarms in the salon, the galley, and each bedroom with no issues. The batteries are changed every spring and the date written on the batteries.

[Hoosiersailor]

I had one of these in my aircraft. It will be going on the boat with me.

https://sensorcon-sensing-products-b.../co-collection

[Tortuga's Lie]

I would say to stick with the major brands like Kidde or First Alert rather than some cheap POS from Amazon, but if you go for marine or Home Depot, it's better than non at all!

[MikeHoncho]

Originally Posted by Hoosiersailor

I had one of these in my aircraft. It will be going on the boat with me.

https://sensorcon-sensing-products-b.../co-collection

My son is a pilot, and he carries the same thing. I also take mine with me to hotels, especially if I am traveling outside the US.

[sv_pelagia]

We have both a marine CO AND a Kidde with 10-yr battery. Zero false alarms on the Kidde. The better Kidde version has a useful digital readout of CO levels.

[Bill_Giles]

Probably the marine ones will last longer, but how many domestic ones will you buy for the cost of the marine one?

[paul2884]

my understanding was that the domestic alarms used a sensor that wasn't well suited to damp envirments and a marine one was designed to work in a damp enviroment.
our saloon is pritty dry and i check / replace the CO alarm more frequently than to 10 years quoted...

[donradcliffe]

Originally Posted by rslifkin

I've seen cases (in person) where motoring (with the forward hatch open) out of a harbor behind a gas powered boat set off the older style CO detector in the forward cabin within 30 seconds after getting near the other boat. Get out from behind the other boat and the alarm stops. With the newer time weighted alarms I haven't seen that happen (as you're generally only behind the other boat for a minute or 2).

Placement of alarms is critical, just 1 isn't enough on most boats. As you mentioned, you can't count on the location of a single alarm always being in the area of highest concentration. Alarms with displays are useful as well as they'll give more info than just beeping or not.

How many potential sources for CO do you have on your boat and where are they??

[rslifkin]

Originally Posted by donradcliffe

How many potential sources for CO do you have on your boat and where are they??

3 sources. 2 engines (exhaust out the transom) and a generator (exhausts just forward of midship on the stbd side). CO detectors in each of the 3 cabin spaces (salon, forward, and aft cabins). Stove and all other appliances are electric, so no in-cabin sources.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Originally Posted by jbinbi

@Mike, seeing that you have quite a bit of expertise here, I am interested in your answer to my original question (unless I missed it somewhere).

Can I just buy a Kidde/First Alert etc at Home Depot, or should I be getting a marine model.

Thanks, and apologies for missing the thread from 3 years ago.

Back in 2011 there was a post that asked essentially the same question. I will post my answers, based upon documentation from the manufacturers and conversations with the same in a few moments.

In short, the answer is that there is a difference and the difference is manufacturing standards. There seems to be no difference in detection WHEN THE UNITS ARE NEW. Over time, non marine units MAY suffer due to their being built for use indoors and not in a marine environment.

Having said this, there is a significant cost difference and in theory, if one replaces non marine units every year or two, then that may be sufficient. As the ole Italian saying says, made popular by Voltaire, perfect is the enemy of good enough.

Also, a non marine unit is better than no unit.

[ArmyDaveNY]

Hello all. I called several manufacturers back in 2011 and asked this very question. Here is a link to that thread. https://www.cruisersforum.com/forums...se-236769.html

It should be noted that Underwriters' Laboratories has a standard, UL 2034, specifically for marine units.

Here are the answers I received and my comments. In the above thread they were posts 10, 13, 26, 29, 46, and 54, which I have copied here.

Post 10. First Alert technical support 1-800-323-9005 Option 1, then Option 2. Obviously this is unlikely to work outside of the U.S. or North America.

I'm on hold now and assuming someone answers I will update you as soon as I can.

I did not see an e-mail address for technical support although there is one for sales. I will try that if no one answers.

Post 13. Not surprisingly, there was no answer. Either they were very busy or they are not in the office due to the Wuhan virus. I sent an e-mail to the Sales@FirstAlertStore.com requesting an answer.

Post 26. My first post was #10 where I mentioned calling First Alert. I have not received a written answer but today I did speak to someone in tech support. This person was not terribly knowledgeable however she did ask someone in the office. The end result was no one was able to state what the difference was. A few took guesses and finally the answer was that they don't make marine units.

I called MTI and Fireboy, both of whom make and sell "marine" units. No one was in the office so I sent them each an e-mail asking what the difference is. I will post an update if and when I receive an answer.

Post 29. What is the difference between a UL "marine" rating and a standard rating?

If the difference is just a longevity issue then the home units will work just as well but perhaps not as long. If there is actually a performance difference then your comment is valid.

ANSI/UL 2034 standard covers electrically operated single and multiple station carbon monoxide (CO) alarms intended for protection in ordinary indoor locations of dwelling units, including recreational vehicles, mobile homes, and recreational boats with enclosed accommodation spaces and cockpit areas (per the standard). This implies that from a performance point of view there is no difference.

Is there actually a performance difference?

Post 46. This is a follow up to my earlier post (post 10) and my conversations with three manufacturers.
Summation: Per Fireboy, the difference is not really in the detection, but in both the manufacturing and testing.

Details: I wrote and called three manufacturers, Kiddie, MTI Industries, and Fireboy. Kiddie said they didn't know what if any difference there was and that they didn't manufacture marine units. I spoke to a "customer service" rep and she didn't seem terribly knowledgeable but said there was no difference in them except the marine units were certified as marine units. N.B. MTI makes and markets marine CO detectors. No one wrote back to me however all three did talk to me on the phone.

Fireboy has a technical hot line and the person I spoke to seem very technically proficient. He said the difference is not so much performance, but in the manufacturing and testing. On the manufacturing side, the circuit boards are built with coatings to resist corrosion, moisture, and temperature extremes. The detectors are also more robust as well as more sensitive and thus better able to avoid being affected by things such as volatile organic compounds, other gases, etc. He mention the use of electrical-chemical detectors versus metal oxide detectors (assuming I heard him correctly and remember correctly what he said!). Additionally, the entire unit is manufactured to a higher standard much better able to handle temperature extremes, humidity, shock, vibration, and corrosion. While the detection standards are the same (ANSI/UL 2034), the testing standards are much higher in order to meet the marine certification requirements.

Conclusions: Yes, a marine CO detector is a better unit in many ways, and yes, it is most likely gong to last longer while provide more assurance that it will continue to work over time. Having said that, a non marine unit is better than no CO detector, at least for the first few years.

Post 51. Hi SailorBoy,

You ask some good questions, and I think your questions are quite valid based upon my limited interaction with the three manufacturers.

"but said they aren't better at detecting. Did he acturally say there is a different standard?" No, he did NOT say there is a different detection standard. He (The tech support guy at Fireboy) said the manufacturing standards that his company used were higher. The lady I spoke to at MTI really didn't know what the difference was although her comments hinted that there was some sort of testing difference, but she really didn't know.

"Is it a given that "marine" CO detector from all different manufacturer of such has these coatings etc.?" I don't think we can assume that all manufacturers use the same coatings, sensors, etc. I suspect that some are better than others.

I think Jammer hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that safety gear is no good if one doesn't act in a wise manner. Whether in the Army, flying, sailing, racing cars, rock climbing, shooting, etc. I have found that safety gear is far less critical than the actions one takes. How many times have we seen people with the latest and greatest chart plotters, radar, etc. run aground? How many times have we seen boats collide despite AIS, radar, etc. When anti-lock brakes first appeared on cars, accidents increased.

Post 54. This post is a follow up to my post #46 where I list the differences between a marine unit and a non marine unit, as relayed to me by a technician from Fireboy.

Just now, I received an e-mail from Fireboy with an Excel document that describes the difference in testing standards between a marine unit and a non marine unit. They liked my suggestion that they post this and indicated this will soon be on their website. This is NOT to suggest that a less expensive home unit will not work. Rather, this suggests that a marine unit will last longer under more extreme conditions. Sadly, I didn't think to ask them on a comparison or contrast in length of service between the units.

Anyway, I hope this provides some clarity on the subject. As always, only you can determine what is adequate for your needs.

UL 2034 Technical Standards Testing Comparisons between MARINE and RESIDENTIAL CO Alarms

Water Resistance Marine Unit Only
79.1.3 These alarms shall be constructed to be watertight or drip-proof. See 79.3 and 79.4 79.4.2 One sample alarm from the humidity conditioning, 79.2.16 and 79.2.17, is to be used for this test. The alarm is to be energized and mounted in accordance with the manufacturer’s installation instructions beneath a drip pan that produces both splashing and dripping and that extends beyond all exposed sides of the enclosure. The bottom of the drip pan is to be equipped with uniformly distributed spouts; one spout for each 20 square inches (129 cm2) of pan area. Each spout is to drip water at a rate of 20 drops per minute. The enclosure is to be subjected to continuously dripping water for 30 minutes.

Corrosion Marine Unit Only
One sample alarm from the Abnormal Operation Tests, Section 79.5, shall operate as intended and its mounting means shall show no signs of structural deformation after exposure for 48 hours to a salt spray in accordance with the procedure specified in the Standard for Salt Spray (Fog)

Temperature Marine Unit
The environmental chamber is to be set to minus 40 ±2°C (minus 40±4°F) with a relative humidity of 45 +10 percent/ -5 percent for 24 hours. The environmental chamber temperature and relative humidity are to be controlled to ensure that the transition between temperatures does not result in a condensing environment.
79.2.3 Three sample alarms are to be placed in an air-circulating oven maintained at 70 ±2°C (158 ±4°F) with a relative humidity of 20 ±2.5 percent for 24 hours.

Temperature Residential Unit
48.1.1 An alarm shall operate for its intended signaling performance and there shall be no false alarms (or pre-alarms) during the exposures when tested at ambient temperatures of 0°C and 49°C (32°F and 120°F) at 50% RH. Two alarms, one at maximum and one at minimum sensitivity, are to be maintained at both ambient temperatures for at least 3 hours then tested for sensitivity

Shock Marine Unit
79.2.13 The samples are to be subjected to 5000 shock impacts of 10 g acceleration (98 m/s2) and having a shock duration of 20 – 25 milliseconds as measured at the base of the half-sine shock envelope. 77.2 Two alarms, one at maximum and one at minimum sensitivity, are to be subjected to vibration The frequency of vibration is to be varied from 10 to 35 cycles per second in increments of 5 cycles per second until a resonant frequency is obtained. The samples are then to be vibrated at the maximum resonant frequency for a period of 120 hours.

Shock Residential Unit 77.2 Two alarms, one at maximum and one at minimum sensitivity, are to be subjected to vibration The frequency of vibration is to be varied from 10 to 35 cycles per second in increments of 5 cycles per second until a resonant frequency is obtained. The samples are then to be vibrated at the maximum resonant frequency for a period of 4 hours.

End of original posts.

I should add that in the thread linked to above, several members noted ABYC standards which reaffirm the marine standards I noted above.

PERHAPS MOST IMPORTANT, there is a link to an aerosol spray specifically designed to test any CO detector. Whether you have a cheap unit that you replace regularly, or a marine unit designed to last longer, one should verify that it still works.

Any unit is no good if it doesn't work, and any cheap unit is better than no unit, provided it is still working.

[LargeMarge]

In our ExpeditionVehicle, we have:
* two CO detectors from different manufacturers
* two smoke detectors from different manufacturers
* two propane detectors from different manufacturers.
We also have seven extinguishers.
Weird, eh?