This smoke detector is particularly interesting because it doesn't use the normal dedicated control chip, but instead uses what appears to be a very cheap and common microcontroller.
I was reminded about this unit when Mike of the channel mikeselectricstuff mentioned he'd found a Chinese component supplier selling microcontrollers for 3 cents each (minimum of just 10). Better still, they do actually have an English manual and downloadable development environment. Sadly there doesn't appear to be a programming algorithm for the common universal programmers.
Here's a link to Dave's video:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYhAGnsnO7w
And a link to Mike's excellent channel:-
https://www.youtube.com/user/mikeselectricstuff
(It's really worth subscribing to.)
The microcontrollers are OTP devices (One Time Programmable) so you would wreck one with every version of the software you tested. But hey, they're 3 cents each. And for the final production run they would just be a common cheap component on the PCB.
If you enjoy these videos you can help support the channel with a dollar for coffee, cookies and random gadgets for disassembly at:-
http://www.bigclive.com/coffee.htm
This also keeps the channel independent of YouTube's advertising algorithms allowing it to be a bit more dangerous and naughty.
I was reminded about this unit when Mike of the channel mikeselectricstuff mentioned he'd found a Chinese component supplier selling microcontrollers for 3 cents each (minimum of just 10). Better still, they do actually have an English manual and downloadable development environment. Sadly there doesn't appear to be a programming algorithm for the common universal programmers.
Here's a link to Dave's video:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYhAGnsnO7w
And a link to Mike's excellent channel:-
https://www.youtube.com/user/mikeselectricstuff
(It's really worth subscribing to.)
The microcontrollers are OTP devices (One Time Programmable) so you would wreck one with every version of the software you tested. But hey, they're 3 cents each. And for the final production run they would just be a common cheap component on the PCB.
If you enjoy these videos you can help support the channel with a dollar for coffee, cookies and random gadgets for disassembly at:-
http://www.bigclive.com/coffee.htm
This also keeps the channel independent of YouTube's advertising algorithms allowing it to be a bit more dangerous and naughty.
Probably the coolest reverse engineered project I’ve seen.
They cost less in a LOCAL store and it will be at least somewhat safe. Not that it matters because as soon as they start to warn the battery is empty they get pulled out and not replaced
whoever buys this cheap deserves whatever happens. Darwinism.
Amtel ATtiny?
I don't need to watch the video. The title made my day!
Classic Clives never age. They are as interesting now as they were when first aired. I enjoy watching them. 👍
There are a horrible number of failure modes in optical smoke detectors. If either the Tx or RX stop working the alarm does not work, but does not generate an alarm to indicate the fault. The detector will only work with the right type of smoke, not sufficiently dense to block the detection path or fog either the Tx or RX. The smoke particles must be the right colour and size to ensure the scatter of the light, for it to be detected.
Long term dust build up desensitises the detector, even with level compensation. It does not fail safe, and by that I mean, generate an alarm or warning under fault conditions similar to the low battery indicator. These are horribly insensitive, even when well designed. I suspect it would be too expensive to correct all the inherent flaws. One improvement might be to add a second detector in the direct beam path, so as to ensure the transmitter is working and not blocked by smoke, or dust. The ionisation type seem inherently more reliable.
Clive mentioned strain on the LED…
Logic would suggest that there would be roughly the same strain on the LED as the switch itself (more strain on the switch as it actually fully takes the pressure of the switch). Is this a fair assumption? Obviously you could say that because the LED is taller that the strain would necessarily be higher, but that assumes a torque force on the LED, and as the spring would compensate for any, very, minor torque forces, it would be safe to negate those I believe.
I am not saying he is incorrect, or that I am. Just that my logic brought me down a different path, and although I 'feel' that I am correct, I prefer to ask others in such instances. Best to prevent from getting confident in one's own assumptions of correctness.
I think…
Maybe I am incorrect about that as well… 😳🤫😬
**
Past this, it's not related anything to.
Yeah, in retrospect, don't question yourself…
You're always 'right'… Gotta foster the arrogance and travesty of the future, these lazy millennials are too 'patient', and 'understanding'… Who will destroy nations and be THE dictator of the future if we do not foster such nonsense now!?!? Take a stand, stop correcting your children! Foster the attitude that they are always 'right'! Oh, you think they should be grounded for breaking the 'rules'? Well they are rules YOU made up, and the chitlins did not agree to, so obviously, as with the US refusing to sign agreements against war crimes, it's not a war crime if the US does it, because we never agreed to such things/definitions…
Teach your children how to be the US!! The greatest country full of 'right' white people running shit. 🤣🤣🤣🇷🇺 RED, WHITE AND BLUE, BABY!!!
Edit: Oopsies… Wrong flayg… But the pride I've learned from reading my own words has trained me, SO IT REMAINS! I am 'right'! Suckit!
😁😬
Thought I clicked on a nurdrage video!
what about the Americum 241 nuclear technology ones?
Haha – during my first mind-numbing job for 3 years after graduating university for a large global German engineering/technology company I worked with fire detection/protection systems. One time while testing the system in large London office building the testing actually set off the alarm and caused a full evacuation off the building. During winter. When it was snowing. It. Was. Hilarious. The only up-side to throwing away 3 years of my life and career at a company I still wish would go bankrupt even now, 8 years after escaping from them.
Torch my home for 4 bucks? Thats way to expensive! Give me a dollar and I'll do it in no time! Lighters can't cost that much… lol
Love this channel Clive. Only just found it a few days ago. Very interesting, and it keeps me from doing what I should be doing at midnight; sleeping.
We can’t wire consumer smoke detectors into alarm systems in the states anymore. To problematic. I only buy the lithium 10 year radioactive detectors now.
BTW that electric smoke you inhale i think you should step over back to the oldschool smokes Dont hear good news on it and even my little sister refuses to use it knowing shes all in the modern tech.
LMFAO I ripped my smoke detector off the wall after I burned a grilled cheese and the little bastard wouldn't turn off.
I'll never put it back.