A multi-signature early warning fire detection system is being developed to provide reliable warning of actual fire conditions in less time with fewer nuisance alarms than can be achieved with commercially available smoke detection systems." (Rose-Pehrsson, 325)
The research conducted on this subject also supports the claim that while there is a value to establishing legal standards requiring the use of smoke detectors in all homes, there is also some effectiveness in the cultural and informational sway inclining private residents to employ this method of detection. As sophisticated technology becomes available for business facilities, public buildings and newer residential apartment buildings, the battery-operated sound-alarm smoke detector remains a standard presence in many American homes. However, it was not until 1985 that the first county in the United States responded to the proven benefits of smoke detector by mandating their usage. Interestingly, the findings yielded would produce a mixed outlook with respect to the effectiveness of or need for such regulatory imposition. According to the research, "Montgomery County, Maryland was the first major jurisdiction to pass a law requiring smoke detectors in all homes. Smoke detector coverage in the county was evaluated five years after the law's implementation and compared to the coverage in neighboring Fairfax County, Virginia, which has no such law. Firefighters visited 651 randomly selected owner-occupied homes and tested each detector. While a similar percentage of homes in Montgomery and Fairfax counties complied with detector codes (42 per cent vs. 44 per cent, respectively), Montgomery County had a significantly lower percentage of homes with no working detectors (17 per cent vs. 30 per cent) and with no detectors at all (6 per cent vs. 16 per cent)." (McLoughlin et al., 858)
These reported findings would suggest that though most residential households already had smoke detectors even without the imposition of legal standards, those subjected to these legal standards were more likely to be aware of the current status of their smoke detector and to take pains to replace batteries, ensure functionality and ensure presence in the necessary strategic locations. Such research on smoke detectors indicates something of a cultural or social penetration, with a difference between the two examined counties standing as statistically significant but not substantial enough to qualify as a dominant social pattern. Indeed, the final observation of the research process indicates that "analyses of 12 years of fire data suggest that as a county approaches complete detector coverage, the risk of residential fire deaths decreases. An essentially unenforced law seems to be obeyed because it conforms to community values." (McLoughlin et al., 858)
One of the reasons that this research is compelling is that is points to an improved degree of effectiveness invoked by greater regulatory oversight concerning the installation of smoke detectors. Considering the correlation between socio-economic status and access to facilities with proper and modern fire safety or fire suppression methods, regulatory conditions requiring the fixture of smoke alarms to all residential facilities could have a beneficial impact. Indeed, Towner et al. (2009) make the point that "people living in deprived areas suffer a disproportionately high level of fires." (Towner et al., 1) the imposition of more pervasive requirements in this area would subject builders, neighborhood and property developers, landlords and realty companies to laws that might protect the less economically fortunate from this type of general and dangerous neglect.
Unfortunately, make of the greatest innovations in smoke detection technology are far from affordable for average builders and for homeowners or renters alike. Researchers throughout the industry describe a number of technological leaps that are can significantly improve the resident's ability to respond quickly and intelligently to a fire situation but are more accessible to larger facilities. An example is the continued application of smart-design detection systems to factories, university halls, hotels and luxury apartments. For instance, the Cerberus PRO-created by Siemens Building Technologies accords with the highest standards in fire safety and fatality prevention but largely applies these technological advances to the fire needs of bigger structures. Here, such devices have proven markedly effective in channeling the most frequently cited ambitions in terms of technological advance. Primarily, this technology meets the aims of the article by Rose-Perhsson et al., which indicates the requirement for detectors which simultaneously reduced the danger of false alarms while heightening the effectivesness fo the relationship between fire detection and fire suppression. According to the informational site describing the emergent technology, the Cerberus PRO "fire detectors also increase safety thanks to their distributed...
Such systems are also armed with various methods of physical detection with smoke detectors reflecting a more nuanced response to various environmental conditions indicating the presence of smoke, fire or a danger related to either.
Still, it remains a core challenge and area of shortcoming in public safety and administration that in both residences and in public or occupational facilities, implicit dangers have remained unaddressed by technological innovation. In just the last two decades, the United States has experienced something of a lag compared to other nations in its wake. According to a Conference Report regarding an annual meeting of fire safety and fire prevention industrial professionals, fire safety innovation "is an example of American enterprise being asleep at the switch. While U.S. researchers have developed some of the most advanced fire technology in the world, it's the European, Japanese, and Australians who are making sweeping changes in the way they go about achieving fire safety in buildings. The American fire problem creates an unnecessary drag on the economy and gives U.S. businesses another handicap on the playing field of international trade." (CR, 359)
This bleak finding would be underscored by the events occurring within the same year of the conference, illustrated the failure of the United States to exploit its own technological advances. This could likely be seen as a result of economic inequalities in the U.S., making both residents of lesser financial means and laborers more vulnerable to fire dangers than their wealthier counterparts. Indeed, our recent history suggests that there are yet facilities, even in this day and age, which do not abide the properly articulated legal standards for prevention of fires or the diminishment of casualties resulting from fires. In 1991, a poultry plant in Hamlet, North Carolina would illustrate the dangers still present in the negligence of facility owners. Due to improperly sealed exits -- a circumstance which ominously recalls the terrible events in the Triangle Factory -- 49 people were injured and 25 were killed in a fire that ripped through the chicken-packing plant. "In the aftermath of the disaster, N.C. asst. Commissioner of Labor Charles Jeffress, said that the eleven (11) year old food processing plant had not been subjected to state safety inspections due to a lack of inspectors in the state." (ERRI, 1) the casualties here suggest that in spite of heightened legal and practical interest in fire safety standards, proper precautions have not always been taken. One of the major obstacles to universal adherence proper fire safety standards is the availability of resources for the public to adopt those technologies where are available.
This discussion indicates that present research is pushing us toward higher standards in fire safety. However, few of these advances have been economically democratized or fitted to meet the needs of the private residence. Moreover, all indications are that while harsher legal restrictions would improve this imbalance, these are not necessarily enforced in an effective way today. Smoke detection technology has remained static and unchanging in the residential setting for many years. But research indicates that technology is available to could save lives and improve fire safety in the home, provided that it is eventually fitted to those needs.
Bellis, M. (2006). Fire Sprinkler System. About Inventors. Online at http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blfiresprinkler.htm>
Bosch Corp. (BC). (2008). Smoke Detector Offers Early Fire Detection, Localization. ThomasNet Industrial News.
Conference Report (CR). (1991). Worcester Polytechnic Institute Conference calls for Firesafety Innovations. Fire Technology, 27(4), 359-361.
EHS. (1991). Workplace Fire Safety. Oklahoma State University Physical Plant. Online at .
ERRI. (1991). Hamlet, NC Chicken Plant Fire Kills 25. Emergency Response and Research Institute. Online at http://www.emergency.com/nc-fire.htm.
McLaury, J. (2005). The Occupational Safety & Health Administration: A History of its First 13 Years. U.S. Department of Labor. Online at
McLoughlin, E.; Marchone, M.; Hanger, L.; Germann, P.S. & Baker, S.P. (1985). Smoke Detector Legislation: its effect on owner-occupied homes. American Journal of Public…
The documents we provide are to be used as a sample, template, outline, guideline in helping you write your own paper, not to be used for academic credit. All users must abide by our "Student Honor Code" or you will be restricted access to our website.
History of Building Construction and Changes Related to Fire Safety & Prevention History of Building Construction and Changes Related to Fire Safety and Prevention Major Cases in the United States That Have Led to Changes in Fire Safety and Prevention in Building Construction Though numerous tragic fires have contributed to our current Fire Safety and Prevention measures, a few cases dominate our country's collective memory in the establishment and refinement of the "Life
Fire Safety Management The purpose of this paper is to explore several key concepts related to Fire Safety Management. Specifically this paper aims to explore the following concepts in greater detail: Fire protection/suppression systems, Building Construction and Exit Drill in the Home (EDITH) and other Home Safety Programs. Fire technology has expanded in recent years, providing for important fire safety management components. This includes construction of more fire retardant buildings and implementation
fire safety management. The writer explores several areas of fire safety and proposes several ways to manage its implementation. There were six sources used to complete this paper. Throughout history fires have destroyed property and killed people. Because a fire can happen anywhere at anytime the world has experienced fires in almost every setting and capacity. Fires in major hotels, high rise buildings and single dwelling homes are all things
Fire Department Reviewing and changing standard fire fighting procedures for high rise buildings incidents The main aim of this research paper is to not only review the current standards for fighting fire in high rise buildings but to also recommend various ways to improve those standards. Furthermore, the paper also reviews how these standards may affect the current fire fighting methods. The needs of the local Chief Fire Officers, the current fire
Safety Managers Program There was the new act of Occupational Safety and Health Administration, called OSHA in short introduced in 1970. This new act gave rise to a lot of growth in the development of Safety officers. At the same time it also led to an increase in the cost of Worker's Compensation for injury and illness and this has also increased the importance of the Safety and Health Manager. While
Current Events Medical-Marijuana On July 12, 2011 the Seattle city council took the first steps toward the regulation of medical-marijuana dispensaries within city limits. The city would require that "medical-marijuana operations get a city business license and comply with city land-use, fire safety, and other rules." (Martin) The state of Washington has had legalized medical-marijuana for 13 years, but the voter-approved law is scheduled to change on July 22, due to the