Smart Hazard Detector Feedback for False Alarm Easing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional smoke or carbon monoxide alarms provide no indication of a hazardous condition until a loud alarm sounds, leading to user confusion and unnecessary actions, as they often trigger falsely due to minor incidents like cooking smoke.
Innovation Solution
A hazard detector system that monitors hazardous conditions and provides auditory and visual indications not only when the condition is present but also when it is easing, using multiple states and adjustable threshold durations based on factors like humidity and other sensor data.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If a conventional alarm triggers immediately when a threshold hazardous condition level is detected, then the alarm responds quickly to hazards, but it causes false alarms and user annoyance due to minor incidents like cooking smoke
Solution Approach 1:
The system performs preliminary monitoring and evaluation before triggering the alarm. It detects hazardous conditions and waits for a threshold duration to confirm persistence before activating the alarm signal, preventing premature responses to transient conditions like cooking smoke
Solution Approach 2:
The alarm system dynamically adjusts its response based on the duration and persistence of detected hazardous conditions. It transitions between different states (monitoring, alarm, easing) based on real-time condition assessment, allowing flexible response to varying hazard scenarios
2Loss of information
If a conventional alarm provides only a loud alarm signal, then the system remains simple, but it provides insufficient information to users about whether remediation actions are effective
Solution Approach 1:
The system provides continuous feedback to users about hazard status through distinct signals. When hazardous conditions ease below the threshold for a specified duration, the system generates an easing signal to inform users that remediation actions are effective, creating a closed-loop information system
Solution Approach 2:
The system uses different signal parameters (alarm signal vs. easing signal) to convey different hazard status information. This allows rich information communication using the existing alarm infrastructure without adding substantial hardware complexity
3Reliability
If the alarm waits for a time period before indicating hazard easing, then false easing indications are reduced, but the response time to inform users of safe conditions is delayed
Solution Approach 1:
The system applies a partial waiting period (threshold duration) before indicating easing, which is sufficient to filter false positives but not excessively long to cause unacceptable delays. This optimized duration balances reliability and responsiveness
Data Source
AI summary
Ambient amount of a hazardous condition may be monitored. A mode may be set to a state indicative of the hazardous condition being present in the ambient environment. It may then be determined that the amount of the hazard in the ambient environment has dropped below an alarm criterion. A time period may then be tracked during which the amount of the hazardous condition present in the ambient environment of the hazard detector has remained below the alarm criterion. It may be determined that the time period has reached at least a threshold duration, during such time period the amount of the hazardous condition present in the ambient environment of the hazard detector having remained below the alarm criterion. An indication of the hazardous condition easing may be output in response to the time period being at least the threshold duration.