PATTON REPORT NO.49

O 1976 Patton, lnc.

to measure smoke density. carbon monoxide, and other

components of the combustion gases are in place.*

Ten smoke detectors of various manufacture are on the

ceiling of the upstairs hall. Doors to the upstairs bedrooms are

closed. On the upper walls and ceiling of the downstairs hall.

at the base of the open stairway, 1 1 more detectors are

installed.The house has a third bedroom, located downstairs off the

corridor, approximately B feet down the hall from the open

stairway. The door from this bedroom to the downstairs hall is

closed- The bedroom window is closed. An electrical charcoal

lighter rod is placed on a mattress in the downstairs bedroom-

Three minutes later it is removed and a lazy haze of smoke

hovers over the char.

One full hour later the char on the mattress is 20" in

diameter. lt is impossible to see across the bedroom. The

researchers consider the bedroom environment "untenable"-

Only four of the 21 smoke detectors in the home have

operated.A full 21 more minutes pass. Carbon monoxide in the

bedroom exceeds 0.3 percent, more than 7 times the

concentration the researchers consider to be tolerable. The

first floor hallway has less than 40% light transmission. The

escape path for the upstairs bedroom is now iudged untenable.

Eight downstairs detectors have operated, but three have notNone of the upstairs detectors have operated- (usually, a home

has a detector at the top of the stairway only' if any-)

At one hour and 34 minutes into the test, the test is

terminated. Smoke in the upstairs bedrooms is stratified at the

3' level (about bed height.) Two downstairs detectors have

failed to operate - and att fen upstairs detectors have failed taoperate.

*For further information and data on this test program evaluating the

smoke detector performance contact the National Bureau of Standards,

Washington, D. C., and refer to ilTRl Pro.lect J634O, Contract

+36092

Potton RePottA PUBLICATION DEDICATED TO HUMAN FIRE SAFETY

Published Bimonthly, 6 lssues Per Year By Patton

6075 Cleveland Avenue, Columbus, Ahio 43229

THE SMOKE DETECTOR FRAUD

HOW THE SMOKE MEN CONNED AMERICA

One of the cleverest and most Iucrative cons ever pulled offin America has been executed by some of the smoke detector

promoters. The smoke detector is a useful device. lt has

advantages. But, 15 years ago it was not a big seller. lt had its

disadvantages as well. lt's behavior was erratic as fire is itself

erratic, detecting some fire types quickly, other types not so

well at all. A detector that offered good protection some of

the time was not nearly so saleable as a detector that offered

good protection all of the time.Unfortunately, however, as hard as the engineers tried they

could not produce that super detector that could do all things

with all fires. So, the promotors put their heads together, and

did the next best thing. They designed the fire to fit the

detector.

THE "ULTRA FAST'' SMOKEDETECTOR TESTED

A group of fire researchers have completed the hook up of

21 smoke detectors in a typical two story plus basement brick

home in lndiana, and are prepared for the ignition of one of

the 40 live fire tests planned. Thermocouples and instruments

What happened? Was this test a freak? All the world knows

that with the first whiff of smoke - in fact even before the

human eye can se the smoke - the ionic detectors operate'

Everybodlr knows this! Did the researchers goof? Did someone

forget to plug in the circuits? Did somebody sabotage the

mechanisms?None of these things happened- The detectors operated just

as expected (not very well at all). They operated just as they

always have worked - or failed to work. The fact is that the

smoke detector that has been promoted for its capability todetect fire fast {before the flames and the heat appear) is a

very slow detector of smoke before the flames and the heat

appear.

THE FOUR IMAGINARY STAGES OF FIRE

Probably the cleverest con job ever pulled off in the field offire safety was the diagram depicting fire in four stages (see

illustration.)Note how carefully the graph is drawn to lmply an

extended period of time for fire to exist. First comes stage 1

(where it is claimed only the smoke detectors will give

warning, of course.) The Stage 1 fire precedes the development

of smoke. Then, after a while, fire moves on to anotherextensive time period (wheie presumably visable smoke is now

being produced). Note these first two stages are labeled

minutes or hours which conveys much time is passing. Also

note that stage 2 description indicates that, "flame or apprec-

iable heat still not present". The curve next moves on to a

"broken time" interval. A lot more time is passing is the

message {Who knowshow much!)Finally fire moves into stage 3, but the note on the curve

claims, appreciable heat is still not present. Somebody must be

kiddingl Look at all the flame and smoke coming off thatcurve in stage 3. Still no heat?

Finatly, ar tast, the 4th stage comes. Now time is being

measured not in hours and minutes - but in minutes and

seconds. Note the curve is already moving way up fast in the

major hazard zone. {lt's too late now buddy, you're already

dead, is the message.)

ls this really a true picture of fire, and an honest evaluation

of the smoke detector performance? Of course not, it's atairvtale that comes to you direct from Roger the Dodger, withtechnical assistance by Mother Goose.

NEVER TELL A LITTLE LIE

Hitler was a mad man. Of that, there can be no doubt. But

what many people are reluctant to admit today is that a genius

lurked behind the madness.

One of Hitler's gems was to never tell a little lie. People willsee through little lies, and won't believe them, he said. lf you

tell a lie, be sure its a big lie. Then people will say. this must be

the truth, no one would make up a lie like this.Much of the success of the smoke detector operation was

due to the picture of the fire that was drawn' The fire curve as

depicted, with its four stages, and with an elongated first stage,

was so unlike a typical real fire that everyone could instantl-v'

recognize it as a fraud. lt was.iust too unreal to be believed. So

everybodv believed it.

THE BASIC PLAN

To understand the reasons for the creation of the imaginary

four stage fire curve, one must understand what the basic

motivations were.ln fire protection, the automatic sprinkler system and the

fire detection system were competing systems. The fire de-

tection system detected fire. sounded an alarm, and did

nothing more, lf, when properly alerted, people were able toput the fire out - fine. But too often the alarm sounded withno one around to hear it, or those who did hear it were unable

to control the fire (and this was not unusual). Fire often

spread so rapidly that life was lost before an effective attack

could be mounted.

The sprinkler system not only detected fire, but automatic-

ally controlled it, and wetted all immediately surrounding '-combustibles so that even if some fire remained. it was held toa minor stage until the fire department arrived.

The sprinkler system had other advantages as well. The

sprinkler system could reduce fire insurance rates by up to90% and sometimes paid itself off with premiums savings in as

little as 3 years. Rate credits for detection systems were slim,

if available at all. Sprinklers had a proven capability to reduce

fire potential by 99.9% (when properly designed). The reliabil-

ity of the detection systems was spotty at best. The detection

system had a reputation of being false alarm prone, requiring

very specialized technical knowledge for servicing (which often

was not available), and frequently being out of service when

fire occured. ln short, detection system salesmen had market-

ing and credability Problems.The smoke detector people knew that something drastic

had to be done to move the detectors. The American public,

and especially the Fire Services, and the Architects had to be

convinced that the smoke detector was the ultimate solution

to fire, and the sprinkler system a danger to life'The sprinkler system was operated by heat. The smoke

detector was operated by smoke. Usually the smoke detector

operated faster than the sprinkler head. The plan then was to:

1. Exaggerate the speed of operation of the smoke

detector.2. Exaggerate the time frame of fire'3. Exaggerate the role of smoke {from the small fire} in fire

death s.

4. Convince the public that the people too often are

already dead when the sprinkler finally opens-

THE BAG OF TRICKS

ln carrying through on this extensive and fantasticallyprofitable scheme the smoke detector people shuffled facts

-. around like a magician shuffles cards. Here are some of the

tricks.

THE MYSTERIOUS MOVEMENTOF COMBUSTION PRODUCTS

How can a detector at the ceiling be operated by the so

called Stage 1 fire when there is no heat being given off (and

not even any visible smoke either?) Seems impossible, doesn'tit? Smoke rises to the ceiling coming off a hot (flaming) firebecause the gases are super heated and therefore bouyant anddynamic. But if there's no flame and no heat - why would thecombustion products rise up off the fire. and travel across theceiling to the detector? What is the driving force? lt doesn'tseem to make sense, technically. But they had an answer tothat one.

The invisible combustion products move about in air likemolecules move in water solution. Drop a lump of sugar in a

bowl of water and soon the sugar is dispersed uniformlythroughout the solution. Gases disperse similarly as prescribed

by the gas diffusion laws. lt sounded great. lt was good toknow atomic science was being marshaled to combat fire,

The only problem was theV forgot to tell us that not all

:ombustion products behave this way and those that do mighttake forever to reach the detector; and that the chance thatthis early combustion products phenomenon would play a

significant role in a real smaldering fire in a real building mightbe real slim.

THE "PULLING THE IONSOUT OF THE FIRE" TRICK

The smoke detector can detect fire in the earliest stage

-even before visible smoke appears they told the world.It sounded great. But some people wanted to see this

remarkable performance t'g,believe it. So they had a test todemonstrate.

Crumble up several sheets of carbon paper in a waste paper

basket, light it off below the detector and count the seconds

--- 12, 13, 14, 15 Bingo. The detector sounds. Beautiful!I suspect that out of every 100 people this test was shown

to possibly not one grasped a key point, the ability to detectthe so called stage 1 fire was being sold, but the fire being used

in the demonstration test was a so called stage 4 fire-The carbon paper fire produces a generous burst of partic-

--ulate matter and also a generous burs't of heat to drive the ions

J the detector. (There's no sense relying on that mysteriousgas movement phenomenon, is there?)

Did you ever see a smoke detector salesman demonstratehis product in a real building by throwing a bunch of oily rags

in the corner?

THE SMOKE SHUFFLE

It is true that a smoldering fire can produce smoke before itproduces a significant amount of heat. lt is also true thatcombustion products (toxic gases) kill more people in fire thanthe flames. However, in those fires where there has been

multiple loss of life due to toxic gases - it has been the big tire(a tremendous heat producing fire) that has generated thegases that killed over a large area. The amount of combustionproducts being given off by fire is almost a direct function offire size. The smoke detector people shuffled smoke from thelittle fire (that is too small to operate the sprinkler) withsmoke from the big fire (that killed a lot of people).

ln effect they first established the fact that people who die

in brg fires usually die from the gases - not the directflames.Then having established that the gases kill, they promo-

ted the concept that smoldering fires produce smoke withoutheat. The conclusion, watch out for the little fire that doesn'toperate the sprinkler - its the big killer.

THE "SINGLE FATALITY FIRE" PROOF

Don't depend on sprinklers to save life, was the tone behindmuch of the sales pitch. To prove the point, the single fatalityfire was trotted out.

Now, it is known that people can die lrom building fires,but they can also die from "human torch" fires withinbuildings. An elderly nursing home patient can spill lighterfluid on his pajamas while filling his lighter and not even

realize it, and then go up in flames as he tries to light his

cigarette. A man can use gasoline to clean parts with, and die

regretting it.A cigarette in an oxygen tent is like a fireworksshow. lntimate involvement with flames can maim or kill in

less than a minute.The sprinkler can't protect against this fire type. But

neither can the smoke detector. The detector may operate

within the first minute, but the response time and fire control

capability of those who will hear the alarm may greatly exceed

the operating time of the sprinkler. But their razzle dazzlepromotions glossed over these matters.

THE "EARLY WARNING'' DETECTORIS NOT A FAST SMOKE DETECTOR

Yes, the smoke detector can sometimes detect fire in 10 to60 seconds if the fire initiates as a flaming and heat producing

fire. This early warning for the flaming fire.But the "early warning" detector has not been sold to the

American public as a fasf detector for the so called Stage 4(heat producing) fire. This detector is being sold to the

American public on the basis that it is a fast detector fordetecting a so called Stage 1 fire - prior to smoke developing.

And this is simply not tue. The "early warning" detector does

not detect a stage 1 {or even a stage 2l fire early. I n fact, u nder

real life conditions {not laboratorydetect the stage 1 or 2fire at all.

testing) it often will not

THE FAST FIRE IS THE KILLER

Smoke detector salesmen make like all fires just sit aroundfor a half hour or so blowing off smoke, but no heat or flame.

That is certainly the message of the so called four stage firecurve. ln truth, a high percentage of the fires are instantane-

ously flaming fires (so called stage 4). They produce tlames,heat and smoke from time zero forward. Many of these firescan proceed to the room flashover stage in as little as three tofive minutes, and begin killing over a wide area, killing manypeople. Once the entire room bursts into flashover, carbonmonoxide and other combustible gases can be pumped out ofthe fire room into the hallway and a ceiling high flame frontcan roll downthe hallway. lt is the big flaming and heatproducing fire that has been the cause of the multiple loss oflife fires. The sprinkler system will operate promptly for thismost dangerous fire type, and control it before it becomes

I arge.The smoke detector is not. and never will be a solution to

this fast fire problem because:

1. Most "on site" amateur fire fighters are simply nofproficient in manually controlling the fast fire. Even

when they discover the fire before the detector itselfoperates, they are quite likely to be unable to control it.

2. The fast fire can kill over a wide area in less time than ittakes for a fire department to respond, hook up hose

lines, and gain control. The people are dying as theengines pull up to the building in these fires.

THE PROS ENTER THE PICTURE

Fire safety is a regulated field. Fire protection equipment

normally is tested and listed by Underwriters Laboratory, and

installed in accordance with a National Fire Protection Assoc-

iation standard. The justification for these regulatory organiz-

ations is that they protect the public's interest.

U.L. tested and listed the smoke detectors being marketed.

When the manufacturers reps went around and talked to the

customers about the fantastic performance capabilities of theirproducts, the U.L. seal was always at the forefront of the

brochure, test reports, and promotional claims, Articles and

advertising from the NFPA Fire Journal were part of the

promotion. When the architect, enqineer, building owner, orwhoever else, saw that U.L. seal and had it explained to him,

by and large they assumed the seal was certifying the promo-

tional claims. lt's U.L. listed, it detects the stage 1 fire even

before smoke appears, ir.'s super fast All these "facts" came

out of the same brochure, were spoken by the same salesman.

People believed it. Nobody said, "the stage 1 fire might take

an hour and a half to ring the bell." Nobody said, "maybe itwon't ring at all."

Was U.L. and NFPA aware of the claims being made? Of

course they were. Did the U.L, Chief Engineer get up on the

top of the Wrigley Building in Chicago and shout out, "Hey,America, these smoke detectors have some limitations, youbetter not believe everything you hear?" Did they do thisTYou bet vour babv they didn't.

FIRE ISLAND

The NFPA-UL control system which was established

before the turn of the century could be likened to ferryoperation across a strait to a large island that represents a

tremendous market for goods and service. NFPA-UL operate

the ferry system, with NFPA writing the regulations and ULchecking the goods being transported and sold (all goods mustbe labeled or approved). Nobody can cross from the mainland

to trade in the captive market without paying a certification"tax" on all goods to the ferrymasters. lf you don't supportthe ferrymasters, you don't take the ride.

Now, traders who trade on Fire lsland also ask cooperationfrom the ferrymasters for their support. lt is a "two waystrait", and each needs the other.

THE PROBLEM WITH SPRINKLERS

From the viewpoint of protecting and expanding the totfire safety market place the fire detection system is greatlrpreferred to the sprinkler system. The detection system is butone component ol a "total system". Detecting a fire is onlystep one in bringing fire under control. There also is a need forfire extinguishers, fire hose, fireproof corridor walls, flamespread ratings for the interior trim and furnishings, self closingfire doors, special fire dampers in the air handling system, and

such a variety of other "approved" and "labeled" products as

to amaze and astound those who have not been familiar withthe "Fire lsland Market Place".

The sprinkler system on the other hand. is a completesystem of itself. lt detects the fire - and then puts it out.Those thousand and one other products that form (along witha detection system) a "building system for fire safety" are notnecessarily essential to the performance of the sprinklersystem. As a consequence, the smoke detector rather than the

sprinkler system is greatly preferred by the vast bulk of those

organizations that ride the ferry to Fire lsland.

NFPA and UL also have a direct financial interest inmaintaining a very broad spectrum of products that must be

regulated, tested, and approved. This is why the NFPA has

been most careful to always structure the NFPA-1 3 SprinklerCommittee so that a majority of the committee members have

a direct conflict of interest with easy to design and install lowcost sprinkler systems. This desire for vast arrays of fire safetr^products, all being components of an extremely broad bas'

"solution" to fire; rather than a more simple and direc.solution using already available water. has got to be theunderlying motivation for the NFPA-UL cooperation in thesmoke detector scheme.

FIRE PROTECTION IN PERSPECTIVE

The smoke detector salesmen realized that the smokedetection system could not compete successfully with the

-^,sprinkler system when scientifically evaluated in relation to a-'aming,

heat producing fire. While the smoke detector usuallyperated more rapidly, the sprinkler controlled the fire, and

this was the difference of life or death. Therefore, the firecurve was developed so as to concentrate on a very slow,

smoldering fire, which would not break out into flame for a

long time period. Having concentrated on this f ire type, it was

then necessary to conceal two important facts. One was thatthe very slow fire will produce deadly conditions very stowly;

and in an occupancy such as an hospital it is rather unlikelythat the staff would remain unaware of a smoldering fire foran extended period of time. Secondly, it was necessary toconceal the fact that the smoke detector could be extremelyslow to react to this fire type. The NFPA and U.L. cooperatedin allowing much less than a full disclosure of all the facts, and

NFPA then cooperated in the forced selling (via mandatoryrequirements in their codes) of the equipment.Simultaneously, they wrote code restrictions that greatly

increased sprinkler system costs making this system far less

competitive.lf all the facts are told. where is the frue value of the smoke

detector? I personally view the need for detectors as follows:

1. I support smoke detectors in a dwelling or apartmentbecause a fire (slow or fast) can wipe out a family when asleep.But, for a minimum level of protection a detector on at least

_every level is necessary, and the public is entitled to a true'icture of the response time for various fires,

2. Large buildings that could suffer a major "fast" fire{including hospitals. nursing homes. hotels, motels, institu-tional buildings, schools and high rise buildingsl tirst needsprinklers. Generally, imposing smoke detectors on top of thesprinkler system is not justified. There may be exceptionswhere people sleep and the area is not well supervised.

3. Smoke detectors in air handling systems are quite likelyto not operate, especially if the system is large. This situationneeds further testing and evaluation. I believe it is improperfor the NFPA codes to mandate detectors in air handlingequipment until all facts are laid on the table and evaluated.

4. As for smoke detectors in the corridors of hospitals andnursing homes as prescribed by NFPA-101 , I consider that a

waste of money if the building is sprinklered. and veryquestionable protection even if it isn't.

5. Smoke detectors arranged to automatically removeelevators from service is one of the most controversial"protection" regulations today. I consider it a condition thatmay well precipitate panic and major loss of life - even underthe condition of a non fire.

I also believe that the Federal Government should initiatean extensive investigation into the practices, regulatory powers

and market controls of the National Fire ProtectionAssociation and Underwriters Laboratories, and the influences

.----of the lobbyists associated with these organizations.

There are more that 1 2,000 lives and 1 00,000 f ire maimingsper year at stake, and my claim that there are direct conflictsof interest involved in fire safety - with desires to preserve

and enlarge markets for fire safery products frequently beingin direct conflict with efforts to reduce the fire rate -

warrants thorough study. After all, the U.S. does lead theentire world in the categoryof fire disaster. lt is my firmconviction that it is no accident that we got where we are.

THE HOSPITAL AND NURSING HOME -Thefastfire is

the spectacular fire that wipes out many lives and causes

retroactive fire ordinances to be written. The smoke detectorwhich has been sold profusely to medical facilities, via the

codes, represents little or no protection against the fast fire,because detection doesn't sfop the fire.

As for detecting the very slowfire (stage 1 or 2 fire) sure itwill do that in 30 minutes, 45 minutes, an hour or two hours,

depending. But, what is the staff doing during this time when

smoke is slowing building to that future time when the bellswill ring? The human nose is many times more sensitive than

the detector. and usually you can see the smoke long before

the detectors sound.The detectors are detecting that fire type {so called stage 1

or 2) that the staff itself is capable of defending against, and

nof providing good protection against the fire type that the

staff is not capable of guarding against (the instantaneous stage

4 fire).The hospitals and nursing homes have spent huge sums of

money on smoke detectors, they have purchased a nightmare

to maintain, they have been lulled into a sense of false

security, and they still have about the same chance as ever ofsuffering the big deadly fire.

The smoke detector salesman and the NFPA has conned theHospital and Nursing Homes away from the good and econom'r'cal protection, which could have reduced fire deaths, reduced

construction costs, and reduced insurance premiums.

By far the most serious consequence of the smoke detectordistortions of the fire problem is that the needed solutions -the really practical and reliable solutions to fire - have beenput on the shelf. During a period when the United States

suffers more fire deaths on a per capita basis than any othernation on earth, profiteers have manuvered the codes tovirtually guarantee that the besf safety systems will not be

installed-

THE SOLUTIONS?

ls there any solution to the problem when non elected,

outside the government, quasi legal organizations write codes,

regulations, and standards that in effect have the weight oflaw? When they can control the products being sold, and can

also investigate the fires that occur and give their owninterpretations as to the cause, how can they be stopped?

The enclosed pages from the Congressional Record indicate

one possible solution through the Federal Government.

There is another possible solution. Why can't the bussiness-

man who has improperly forced via a code to purchase

equipment that has been misrepresented to him, take legal

action against those who profit through the forced sale of theequipment? Why can't the relatives of those who die from fires

in buildings, that have been designed in conformance with the or agency is acting improperly in allowing organizations suchNFPA Life Safety Code take legal action against NFPA? Why as NFPA to control commerce, and prevent the use of lowercan't a businessman who is forced to expend huge sums of cost and safer systems? lf the NFPA continues in the presentmoney to revise his property to conform th an NFPA Code destructive directions, it would only seem a matter of time *{due to a local, state or Federal Agency adopting that code until businessmen and the fire victims will have to explo.-and enforcing it) take legal action against that government, such defensive measures.

and recover that expenditure on the basis that the government

PRESENT ADDRESS AND INFORMATION

EVIL WINS W}IEN GOOD PEOPLE DO NOTF{ING,

www.TheWorldFireSafetyFou ndation.ors, wtvw.Firecrusade.comwww.Am ericasHoloca ust.orq

RICHARD M. PATTON, FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERAUTHOR, THE AMERICAN HOME TS A FTRE TRAP

President of: THE CRUS$E AGAINST FIRE DEATHSPOST OFFICE BOX 1133 o CITRUS HEIGHTS, CA 95611

rmoatton @surewest. net