Flammability issues moving to forefront
Consultant group provides background, commentary
By Furniture Today Staff -- Furniture Today, April 1, 2003
Over the past 30 years, industry associations, state and federal governments and other interested parties have spent thousands of hours working to prevent injuries and deaths from residential fires. No one wants unsafe conditions created by the furnishings in our homes but, historically, industry and government have been in opposition about a resolution of the problems.
Government's wish list typically has covered changes in product performance that would eliminate burn deaths, allow the home to be safer from fire (in other words, allow exit time and keep a fire from totally consuming a room), be cost effective and affordable to the consumer, and be "drop-in" or require few, if any, changes to be made by the manufacturer in producing the new products.
Industry said, "We agree with all of the above, plus you need to understand our emphasis on fashion. The flame-resistant features must be invisible. In other words, comfort and beauty must be there as in the past and we definitely do not wish to change our manufacturing process. And, by the way, cost is a major concern to us because we find it very difficult to pass on added costs to the furniture retailer and ultimately the consumer."
Critical mass
Another extremely important consideration to both is the question of critical mass. Can the products needed for improved FR performance be commercially produced in quantities that will satisfy the demands and needs of the market?
Open-flame ignition of mattress/boxspring, top-of-the-bed (pillow, mattress cover and comforters) and upholstered furniture has been a hotly discussed topic for many years. Recently in the United States, a significant amount of industry trade association and governmental agency activity has centered on open-flame research, test method development and potential state and federal regulation. Parallel to these activities, open-flame resistant product development has been under way to provide "real world" solutions for industry and consumers.
Hot topic
Why is flammability such a hot topic?
Some statistical trends have emerged. Since 1989, the number of mattress and bedding fires and fire injuries caused by open-flame ignition has been greater than the number caused by cigarettes. This has put a great deal of focus on reducing the open-flame hazard associated with mattresses and bedding.
For upholstered furniture the number of cigarette-caused fires is still greater than those attributed to open-flame ignition. However, the percentage of fires attributed to open flames is increasing.
The problem is that most of the materials currently utilized in mattresses, bedding and upholstered furniture can be easily ignited by open-flame sources.
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has reported progress in the implementation of standards for one open-flame source, the cigarette lighter. A child-resistant butane lighter standard took effect in 1994, and a multipurpose lighter standard was implemented in December 2000. But statistics have shown that increased use of another open-flame source, candles, has led to a dramatic increase in fire deaths. Fire deaths attributed to candles have increased 750% from 20 in 1980 to 170 in 1998. Almost half of these fires started in the bedroom.
New material components
Ultimately, the best way to address open-flame safety is to investigate new materials that can significantly reduce the hazard.
All residential mattresses sold in California after Jan. 1, 2004, will be required to be resistant to open-flame ignition. A standard will be in place as of that date, unless the CPSC issues a federal open-flame standard that supersedes the California requirement.
In October 2001, the CPSC initiated the process toward a mandatory federal standard for open-flame safety of residential bed sets. The CPSC plans to issue its proposed test method. After a 60-day public comment period, the final test method, pass/fail criteria and compliance date could be issued.
Although the CPSC is not required to have its standard in place by January 2004, the California Bureau of Home Furnishings is operating under a legislative mandate to have its state standard in place by then.
Upholstery vs. bedding
In some respects the open-flammability issues related to upholstered furniture are similar to those with mattresses and top-of-the-bed. But there is a significant difference in the nature of the fires involving these three product types. The difference is related to the fact that in actual fires the typical flame to which upholstered furniture may be exposed is significantly less than that typically seen by a mattress or top-of-the-bed.
Since upholstered furniture is not usually covered with products such as comforters, the typical fuel source is better represented by a small open flame, like a butane lighter. The furniture industry and its suppliers, under the leadership of the Upholstered Furniture Action Council, the Alliance for the Polyurethane Industry, the CPSC and the California bureau have all independently conducted fire research and developed test methods to simulate small open-flame ignition of upholstered furniture.
These research and test method development activities continue. It is not clear what test methods and criteria will prevail. Almost all of the composite test methods under development and discussion involve the use of a small open-flame source (representing a butane lighter) applied to the sample mounted in a test rig similar to that used in the British Standard 5852 test for a period of 20 seconds.
The California bureau is revising its 27-year-old mandatory standard (Test Bulletin 117) for smoldering and open-flame ignition of component materials used in the manufacture of upholstered furniture. The major changes, which were made available in a draft proposal in early 2002, revolve around the inclusion of a composite "mock-up" small open-flame test and a small open-flame horizontal test for fiberfill materials.
The CBHF has indicated that current CAL117-compliant and even BS5852-compliant polyester fiberfill materials do not pass their proposed test. However, numerous new, commercially available products do.
Mattress and boxspring sets, top-of-the-bed and upholstered furniture are composite articles, usually made of many components. Designing or developing an open-flame resistant product would be easier if one could simply purchase open-flame resistant components, designed to pass a specific standard, and then be fully assured that the final composite product meets a specific open-flame standard. Unfortunately, this is difficult in practice, especially for products as complex as mattresses, boxsprings, top-of-the-bed and upholstered furniture.
One reason for this problem is that each component of a final composite article delivers specific or even multiple features including comfort, aesthetics, durability, economy, etc. Many of these components have "commercially equivalent" open-flame resistant replacements which can and do provide the same features as their more flammable cousins.
Another reason a component-only qualification approach is difficult is related to the dynamics of a fire. Even if "commercially equivalent" open-flame resistant replacements were available, when they are assembled into final composite form they may still fail a composite open-flame test due to unexpected synergistic interactions.
In response to the regulatory action and activities of the California Bureau of Home Furnishings and CPSC, the industry has created and commercialized flame-resistant products.
One of the fears of mattress, top-of-the-bed and upholstery manufacturers has been that existing ticking and dress fabrics would no longer be compliant. For the most part this question has been answered with the development of new knitted, woven and nonwoven interliner barrier products. Not only are these products affordable, but they do not compromise comfort or aesthetics. Further, they are invisible to consumers.
It is clear that the wheels of industry are in motion and the challenge to meet the new market need for flame-resistant products is well under way.
Market need has created opportunity for industry throughout the manufacturing value chain. Government and industry are working hand-in-hand to establish legislation and develop test methods that ultimately will create a safer environment in homes.
History has proven that change creates conflict. Industry will endure the growing pains related to the transition from existing product groups in the market to the new upgraded flame resistant products. When all of these issues are sorted out, we will all be better off from the experience.
