A 1 1 IDS SblSDb

NBS

PUBLICATIONS

NB

Relative Propensity of Selected

Commercial Cigarettes to Ignite

Soft Furnishings Mockups

NATL INST OF STANDARDS & TECH R.I.C.

All 102561 206

Krasny, John/Relative propensity of sele QC100 .U56 NO.86-3421 1986 V19 C.1 NBS-P

John F. Krasny

Richard G. Gann

U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

June 1986

QC

inn

.1156

86-3421

1986

c.2

isored by

i. Consumer Product Safety Commission

shington, DC

NBS

RESEARCH

INFORMATION CENTER

NBSIR 86-3421

RELATIVE PROPENSITY OF SELECTED

COMMERCIAL CIGARETTES TO IGNITE

SOFT FURNISHINGS MOCKUPS

John F. Krasny

Richard G. Gann

U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Bureau of Standards

Center for Fire Research

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

June 1986

Sponsored by

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Washington, DC

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS. Ernest Ambler. Director
.

'
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

List of Tables iv

List of Figures v

Abstract 1

1. INTRODUCTION 2

2. EXPERIMENTAL 4

2.1 Test Protocol Development 4

2.2 Substrate Material Selection 6 2.3 Cigarette Packing Selection 10

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 10

3.1 Number of Ignitions 10

3.2 Mass Loss Data Obtained During Tests 15

3.2.1 Mass Loss Data on Igniting Substrates 15

3.2.2 Mass Loss on Self -Extinguishing Substrates 16

3.3 Effect of Ambient Humidity 17

4. CONCLUSIONS 18

5. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 19

6 . REFERENCES 20

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX D

iii
LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1. Number of Ignitions By Substrate and Cigarette

Packing 22

Table 2. Number of Cigarette Ignitions by Substrate Factor (California

and Dobby Fabric Substrates Only) 23

Table 3. Number of Cigarette Ignitions by Substrate Factor (Including

Tulip Fabric) 24

Table 4. Time to 2, 4, and 5 g Mass Loss of Igniting Substrates 25

Table 5. Mass Loss of PU/Fabric Substrates, No Ignitions 26

Table 6. Comparison of Typical Individual Ignition Results at Greatly

Varying Ambient Conditions 27
LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1.

Page

Mass Loss/Time Relationship for an Igniting and a Non- Igniting Substrate 28

RELATIVE PROPENSITY OF SELECTED COMMERCIAL CIGARETTES TO

IGNITE SOFT FURNISHINGS MOCKUPS

John F. Krasny

Richard G . Gann

Abstract

This report covers the first project performed under the

Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, the determination of whether and to

what extent commercial cigarettes have differing propensities to

ignite upholstered furniture substrates. For this purpose, a test

protocol was developed under which 12 types of commercial cigarettes were placed on 18 substrates varying in fabric, padding, and

configuration. It was found that there are statistically significant differences in ignition propensity among the cigarettes (at

the one percent or better confidence level) on three substrates.

No significant differences were found on the other 15 substrates.

No one of the packings consistently showed low ignition propensity

on all three substrates. The mass loss rate of both the cigarette

and substrate during the tests was recorded and did not appear to

be a reliable predictor of ignition propensity.

Key words: Cigarettes; fabrics; furniture; furniture padding;

ignition source; smoldering ignition; upholstered furniture.

1
1 . INTRODUCTION

The Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 (Appendix A) was passed as a rational

approach to reducing the losses due to fires caused by cigarettes inadvertently

dropped on upholstered furniture or mattresses (soft furnishings). The 1983

estimates for smoking- caused fire losses in the United States were [1,2]:

Number % of Residential % of Total

Fires 49,000 8 2 Deaths

Civilian &

1,580 33 27

firefighter

injuries 6,810 32 22

Property loss

$ millions 290 5 4

While the number of cigarette- initiated fires and the property losses

associated with them are only a small percentage of the total numbers, they

account for a quarter of the deaths and injuries. The available statistics do

not include the casualties and losses due to cigarette initiated forest and

grass fires.

Some years ago it was found that several commercial cigarette packings 1

had a lower propensity to ignite soft furnishings than certain other packings

[3,4,5]. Similar results were found in later studies [6,7]. Based in part on

the earlier studies, bills were introduced in the U.S. Congress and several

state legislatures as early as 1979 which required that cigarettes be made less

1 A cigarette packing is defined as a commercial cigarette, described by its

name, sometimes its diameter, its length, whether menthol or non-menthol,

whether filter or non-filter, and by its package type (e.g., soft pack).

2
ignition prone within a certain period. This requirement gave little consideration to technical practicability, cost, or means of defining such lower

propensity to ignite. A revised bill, the Cigarette Safety Act of 1984, became

law in October 1984 (Appendix A) . It requires a study of the technical and

commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other consequences of developing

cigarettes which will have a minimum propensity to ignite soft furnishings.

This work is guided by a Technical Study Group constituted under the this Act.

As the first project, the Technical Study Group asked the Center for Fire

Research (CFR) of the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) to determine

differences in the propensity to ignite soft furnishings of selected, presentday, commercial cigarette packings.

The present report describes experiments to determine to what extent

differences exist in the propensity of 12 commercial cigarette packings to

ignite soft furnishings. More specifically, the work involved the following:

• modification of the test methods previously used for evaluating the

cigarette ignition resistance (CIR) of upholstered furniture and

mattresses for the present purpose;

• specification and procurement of equipment;

• selection, procurement and testing of fabrics and padding materials which

would illustrate any differences in cigarette ignition propensity;

3
• determination of the alkali and alkaline earth metal content of substrate

materials by the Consumer Product Safety Commission's (CPSC) analytical

laboratory and a commercial laboratory;

• choice and procurement of cigarette packings which held large market

shares or, on the basis of earlier work [3, 4, 6, 7] might be expected to

show differences in ignition propensity;

• carrying out of the 864 tests in the testing matrix (four replicates of

twelve cigarette packings on 18 substrates2 each) ; and

• analysis of the combined results.

2 . EXPERIMENTAL

2.1 Test Protocol Development

In order to develop a test method and protocol for the purpose of this

work, the Technical Study Group formed a test planning team of experts. This

team consisted of:

2 The term "substrate" is used to describe one combination of a specific

fabric, padding, in either the flat or crevice arrangement, with or without a cover sheet; e.g., the flat area of a piece of polyurethane foam (PU) covered

with the California Standard fabric, with the cigarette covered by sheeting.

The flat area with the same materials but with the cigarette not covered would,

be a different substrate.

4
H. Cohen, Consumer Product Safety Commission

G. Damant, Chief, Bureau of Home Furnishings, State of California

A. Klancnik, Sealy Inc.

J. Krasny, Center for Fire Research, National Bureau of Standards

A. Spears, Lorillard, A Division of Loews Theatres, Inc.

J. Sharman, Consumer Product Safety Commission

J. Ziolkowski, American Furniture Manufacturers Association

The team's plan was modified slightly and accepted by the Technical Study

Group

.

The test protocol adopted was based on the mini-mockup test arrangement

used by the California Bureau of Home Furnishings [8], the Upholstered Furniture Action Committee (UFAC) [9]

,

and the Business and Institutional Furniture

Manufacturers Association (BIFMA) [10] . This mini-mockup has generally been

used with the cigarette placed only in the crevice and covered with a piece of

sheeting. For this project, cigarettes were also to be placed on the flat

surfaces and both flat and crevice tests were to be performed with and without

the sheeting cover. This arrangement provides for a range of CIR of the

substrates for each fabric/padding combination.

The selected ignition criterion was the direct observation of sustained

substrate smoldering. This differs from one present practice, the measurement

of char length on the fabric surface. Experience in several laboratories

[e.g., 11] had shown that obvious ignition and severe smoldering can occur even

if the char length on the fabric surface is short. The char length in such

cases is thus a misleading measure. In addition, measuring the char length in

the padding, especially cotton batting, which has been extinguished by

5
immersion in water, exposes the operator to fumes and is both messy and

inaccurate

It was also decided to record the combined weight of the cigarette and

substrate versus time during the tests. This permits calculation of the

changes in weight loss rate which accompany smoldering ignition of the substrate. The hypothesis was that the weight loss rate before ignition might be

an indication of the ignition propensity of the cigarette packings. In

addition, flattening of the weight/time curve would be a more reliable indication of self -extinguishment than visual or tactile determination. With the

substrates used here, smoldering ignition appeared to occur at a weight loss of

about 3 g, but all tests in which ignition occurred were continued to 5.5 g

weight loss. The balances have a capacity of 3000 g and a resolution of

0.01 g.

Further modifications were made when initial screening tests showed the

need for certain minor improvements. The protocol used in the 864 tests is

attached as Appendix B.

2.2 Substrate Material Selection

The objective of this work was to determine whether there are statist

cally significant differences in the ignition propensities of selected commer

cial cigarette packings and to identify atypical behaviors. For this purpose,

appropriate substrates capable of showing differences had to be identified ! .

screening of commercial materials. However, a substantial part of the soft

6
furnishings used in the U. S. (an estimated total of 340 million upholstered

furniture items and perhaps three-quarters of the 215 million mattresses [12])

may be expected to resist ignition by all commercial cigarette packings [13].

Another part may be expected to ignite from exposure to all commercial brands

.

The number of soft furnishing substrates which ignite from contact with some

but not other commercial cigarette packings is thought to be relatively small.

This is not surprising since the range of physical parameters in the roughly

200 commercial cigarette packings is reported to be quite small [14]

.

This

similarity made the selection of substrates quite difficult.

The Technical Study Group agreed on the use of the "Standard Fabric" used

in the California regulatory cigarette test [8]. This and the other materials

are described in detail in Appendix B. Another fabric and two paddings, a

polyurethane (PU) foam and a cotton batting, were to be selected by CFR after

preliminary studies.

Small yardages of middle weight, cellulosic fabrics were purchased

locally; however, the fiber contents and weights were unknown, since fabrics in

stores generally do not have labels with such information. In addition, two

other variables which affect the CIR of fabrics, alkali metal content and type

and amount of backcoating, could not be determined in the store.

Samples of several fabrics which were purchased were then tested over a

variety of PU and cotton batting substrates using several cigarette packings

which might be expected to differ in ignition propensity. One "dobby weave"

fabric/PU combination which demonstrated such differences was chosen. However,

7
when the materials were purchased in sufficient quantity to conduct the tests,

the differences between cigarettes were no longer found, indicating possible

inconsistency with the previously sampled materials. (Only one ignition - of a

possible 192 - was found with the chosen dobby weave fabric/PU combination.)

Such inconsistent behavior is not unusual for upholstery materials which are

generally poorly controlled with respect to fabric weight, backcoating and

other finish concentration, and, in some cases, even fiber content of the

yarns. Since the dobby fabric did not show the expected cigarette

differentiation, a third, more ignitable fabric, called the "tulip" fabric

because of its pattern, was also chosen. This fabric performed in the actual

testing as it had in screening.

The 100 percent cotton sheeting with which the cigarettes were to be

covered (as is prescribed in most soft furnishings CIR tests [8-10]) was also

purchased locally, laundered, double rinsed, and tumble dried in home laundering equipment.

Difficulties were also encountered in the selection of cotton batting.

For instance, both flame retardant and non- flame retardant rolls of cotton

batting were found in what was considered one production lot by the local

supplier. Finally, untreated cotton batting was obtained from a manufacturer

who only adds flame retardant on special order. Each of the rolls was visual 1\

inspected on the premises - small particles of flame retardant added by this

manufacturer's process fall out if samples are shaken vigorously. Later,

samples from each roll were tested by a colorimetric method by the CPSC

8
laboratory and found to contain no borate flame retardant. Borate -based flame

retardants are the most common FR agents used for cotton batting.

Similar problems were encountered with the selection of the PU. A foam

which ignited with the sample of the dobby fabric and with some but not all

cigarette packings was identified. However, as stated above, the combination

of the second shipment of this fabric and the selected foam did not ignite.

Another foam was chosen on basis of batch to batch consistency and commercial

availability

.

Smoldering propensity of cellulosic materials is enhanced by the presence

of certain metal ions (15,16). To further characterize substrates, the chosen

cotton fabrics and batting were submitted to the CPSC laboratory for quantitative determination of Na, K, Ca, and Mg ions. The materials were divided into

several parts and samples sent to CPSC from each part, with a duplicate sample

from one of the parts. The CPSC report is included as Appendix C. As can be

seen, the scatter in the data is within + 5 percent. PU samples randomly

chosen from the foam shipment were sent for the same analysis to a commercial

laboratory; the results are shown in Appendix D.

In all, about 70 experiments were needed to complete the materials selection. Those chosen are described in detail in Appendix B, as is the manner in

which they were sampled for the testing work.

9
2.3 Cigarette Packing Selection

For this work, the test cigarettes selected were (a) the one used in most

present CIR testing work [8-10]

,

(b) several cigarettes which on the basis of

previous work might be expected to have different ignition propensities

[3, 4, 6, 7], and (c) a number of popular cigarettes. The final selection

included ten filter and two non- filter packings. The cigarettes, without

identifying marks, were supplied by their manufacturers in coded containers.

New codes were assigned and only these were used in further handling. Sampling

of the cigarettes used in the tests from the 6,000 to 10,000 cigarettes

submitted is described in Appendix B.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Three types of results were used to compare the cigarette packings: total

number of ignitions per packing; the mass loss rate of substrates which

ignited; and the mass loss of substrates which did not ignite.

3.1 Number of Ignitions

Table 1 lists the number of ignitions by packing and substrate. On each

substrate the maximum possible number of ignitions is 48, that is, all four

replicates of 12 packings ignited this substrate. The maximum possible number

of ignitions per packing is 4 replicates of 18 substrates or 72. Tables 7 and

3 summarize these results.

10
The relative CIR of the substrates followed patterns found previously in

a number of laboratories all over the world, as summarized in a recent literature review [13]. Thus, crevices again had somewhat lower CIR than flat areas

and covered flat and crevice substrates had slightly lower CIR than uncovered

substrates. As previously found, cotton batting substrates had much lower CIR

than PU substrates. (In fact, only certain heavy vinyl, wool, or thermoplastic

fiber fabrics would be expected not to ignite over cotton batting when the

usual test cigarette is used in a covered crevice. On the other hand, PU would

only be expected to ignite under medium weight or heavy cellulosic fabrics.

The California Standard Fabric had been chosen by the Bureau of Home Furnishings to eliminate PU with poor CIR from the California market. Apparently,

this effort has been quite successful; in the time allotted for the material

screening, no PU that would ignite with this fabric was found.)

For the sixteen California and dobby fabric substrates, almost all the

variation in number of ignitions among the various cigarette packings occurred

in the flat, cotton batting substrates. All other cotton batting substrates

resulted in at least 47 ignitions out of a possible 48. With the same fabrics,

essentially no ignitions occurred with the PU substrates. There was, however,

some variation among cigarette packings in the two tulip fabric/PU/crevice

substrates. (Experiments with all twelve cigarette packings indicated that the

tulip fabric would always produce ignitions with cotton batting substrates, and

not produce ignitions with flat PU substrates.) The significance of these

variations is discussed next.

11
A chi square test is appropriate for analysis of single columns in Table

1 in which the average number of ignitions per cigarette packing is between 1.0

and 3.0 [17,18]. Using this test on column 1, California Standard

Fabric/cotton batting/flat/uncovered, we determined that the ignition

performance of the 12 cigarette packings is different, at a C. 00013 level of

significance. Analysis of the results in column 18, tulip

fabric/PU/crevice/covered , shows that the performance differences between

cigarettes were not statistically significant, the significance level being

0.30. The remaining columns of Table 1 cannot be tested using the chi square

test because the average number of ignitions is not between 1.0 and 3.0.

The remaining columns can, however, be evaluated for significant differences in the number of ignitions by an exact calculation, analogous to Fisher's

Exact Test for a 2 x 2 contingency table, based on the conditional probability

distribution of the data given the total number of ignitions [19]. Column 2,

CA standard fabric/cotton batting/flat/covered, shows the cigarette packings to

be statistically different from each other at the 0.003 level; for column 5,

dobby fabric/cotton batting/flat/uncovered, the significance level is 0.011.

None of the remaining columns approaches statistical significance.

The results show that there are statistically significant differences in

the ignition propensity of the chosen commercial cigarette packings (which were

not designed by their manufacturers for this purpose) when tested on three of

the 18 substrates. However, no one of the packings consistently showtd low

ignition propensity on all three substrates. Earlier studies found similar

differences in ignition propensity of commercial cigarette packings [3-7],

12
Some of the earlier studies on commercial cigarettes were performed in the late

1970' s; the tar and nicotine delivery of some of the cigarette packings

involved has changed, according to the annual FTC reports issued since then

[20], indicating changes in their characteristics. However, both the

California Bureau of Home Furnishings and the authors believe the differences

in ignition propensity to be smaller than in earlier years [21]

.

There were no differences in the ignition propensities of the cigarettes

when tested on the other 15 substrates. The results also suggest that cigarette rankings may depend somewhat on the substrate; much more work would have

to be done to prove this point. Modest differences in ignition propensity have

also been found with experimental cigarette packings differing systematically

in packing density and diameter on some but not all substrates [22].

It should be noted that the 18 selected substrates were not totally

independent of each other. For four fabric/padding combinations, tests were

conducted in the crevice and in the flat configurations , as well as with and

without a cover over the cigarette. A number of laboratories have shown that

crevices are considerably more likely to ignite than flat surfaces, and covered

cigarettes are somewhat more likely to cause ignition than uncovered ones. (A

review of work on relative CIR of substrates is given in [13].) Thus, it is

not surprising, for example, to find that when column 12 shows no ignitions,

columns 9, 10 and 11 don't either.

The results also indicate that differences in the ignition propensities

of these commercial cigarettes can only be demonstrated on a small range of

13
substrates. What cannot yet be determined is what percentage of the total

population of soft furnishings that might be exposed to burning cigarettes is

represented by the borderline substrates, i.e., what percentage of soft

furnishings would resist ignition by, e.g., cigarette packing 2, but not some

of the others used in this work.

The results furthermore indicate that, to explore differences in cigarette ignition propensity, it is more effective to investigate a number of

fabric/padding combinations than numerous configurations of one fabric/padding

combination. For example, a fabric which ignites with PU can be expected to

ignite with cotton batting, and fabric/padding combinations which do not ignite

in the crevice need not be tried in the flat configuration.

One of the objectives of the commercial cigarette testing was to look for

a commonality of properties of relatively low ignition propensity cigarette

packings. The data are not "hard" in this area but some observations are

presented. The three cigarette packings at the top of Table 1 were of relatively small circumference; however, one other packing with a similar circumference had higher ignition propensity. The two non- filter packings were among

the nine more ignition-prone cigarettes. Without thorough analysis of the

physical and chemical properties of the cigarette packings - a formidable task

not provided for in present plans - no properties could be investigated for

their discrete effects on ignition propensity.

14
3.2 Mass Loss Data Obtained During Tests

Typical mass/time curves, one for a substrate ignition, another for nonignition, are shown in Figure 1. The curves are useful during testing to

assist operator judgement whether an ignition has occurred or not. The

question also arises whether the shape of the mass loss curve obtained on one

or several substrates, or data derived from it, can be used to predict the

general ignition propensity of cigarettes. Two mass loss curves have to be

considered separately: those for igniting substrates (with considerable

inflection of the curve), and those for non-igniting substrates, which indicate

total mass loss before self -extinguishment

.

3.2.1 Mass Loss on Igniting Substrates

In the present substrates, most ignitions occurred at times between the

occurrences of 2 and 3 g mass loss. The slope before ignition could be

characterized by the time to 2 g mass loss. In addition, the times from 4 to 5

g mass loss might characterize the substrate CIR, because at these times, most

of the cigarette has burned out and the mass loss is dominated by substrate

smoldering. However, this was not part of the present study, and the results

are presented here only for the record.

Table 4 shows these results for those cotton batting crevice substrates

which ignited with the cigarettes arranged as in Table 1, i.e., by increasing

ignition propensity. As can be seen, the reproducibility in these results is

poor; the standard deviations (S.D.) varied from 20 to 30 percent, and in some

15
cases, were as large as 60 percent. One could hypothesize that a longer time

to 2 g mass loss on any igniting substrate would be found for those cigarette

packings with lower ignition propensity. On a strictly statistical basis,

using Pearson correlation and Spearman rank correlation methods, there is no

significant correlation between time to 2 g weight loss and number of ignitions

[23]

The time to 4 or 5 g mass loss was also not predictive of cigarette

ignition propensity, and appears to be primarily substrate dependent.

As mentioned before, the dobby fabric had generally lower CIR than the

California standard fabric and covered substrates had lower CIR than uncovered

ones. However, in the present experiments, the mean time to 2 g loss was

longer for the dobby fabric than the California fabric and longer for the

covered than the uncovered substrates. This indicates that some substrates

which are more likely to ignite can have longer ignition times than the less

ignition prone ones. A possible explanation is that a heavier fabric may take

longer to reach the point of smoldering ignition, but is then more likely to

support continuing smoldering.

3.2.2 Mass Loss on Self -Extinguishing Substrates

Table 5 shows the mass loss of the fabric/PU substrates which did not

ignite. The standard errors for the mass losses for the four replicates of

each cigarette packing averaged 11 percent. The averages for each

cigarette/substrate combination were normalized by dividing by the tobacco

column length measured to the overwrap. (The perforated paper in this sleeve

is heavier than the cigarette paper on the tobacco column. The sleeve is used

16
to connect the tobacco column and filter.) This length, rather than that of

the whole tobacco column, was chosen because the tobacco generally continued

smoldering into the overwrap, but did not produce an imprint on the substrate

under the overwrap. In other words, the overwrap paper prevented heat transfer

to the substrate. (This was confirmed by wrapping cigarettes in overwrap

paper. Those cigarettes burned their entire length in air but self -extinguished or made minimum imprints, with no ignition, on a low CIR substrate.)

Again, there was no statistically significant correlation between the

number of ignitions on the California fabric/cotton batting substrate and the

mass loss of the fabric/PU substrates. For example, cigarette packings 2 and 7

(with low number of ignitions) generally produced low mass loss, but cigarette

packing 9, with a higher number of ignitions, also produced relatively low mass

loss

.

3.3 Effect of Ambient Humidity

Laboratories in which tobacco products are investigated generally have

closely controlled temperature and relative humidity (r.h.) presumably because

of the interest in burn rate of cigarettes. No systematic study of r.h.

effects was included in this study. In our laboratory, the ambient conditions

were usually 22 + 3°C (72 + 5°F) and 55 + 10% r.h. However, there were

occasional excursions outside those limits, and r.h. ranges of 25-67% occurred

at 24°C (75°F). Table 6 shows examples of tests in which the r.h. varied

greatly. This variation did not affect occurrence of ignition or non-ignition

in these cases. Little or no r.h. effects on cigarette temperature, and in one

17
case on heat flux from cigarettes, have been reported In the literature, but

burn rate has been reported to be lower at higher r.h. [24-26].

4. CONCLUSIONS

This first project performed under the Cigarette Safety Act of 1984 was

intended to determine differences in the propensity to ignite soft furnishings

of selected, present-day, commercial cigarette packings. Statistically

significant differences among these packings at the 1 percent or higher levels

were found for three of the 18 substrates used in this work; no such

differences were found on the other 15 substrates. No one of the packings

consistently showed low ignition propensity on all three substrates. Other

investigators using different substrates, and in many cases different

cigarettes, have also found differences in ignition propensity on certain

substrates [3-7]. The relationship between the substrates in this study and

the existing furniture population has not been determined. Therefore, the

impact of the measured differences in cigarette ignition propensities on life

safety has not been determined.

The slope of the mass loss curves was helpful in documenting whether

ignition did or did not occur. However, two measures derived from these

curves, the time to 2 g mass loss for the igniting cotton batting substrates,

and the total mass loss for PU substrates which did not ignite, were not

predictive of ignition propensity for all cigarettes tested.

18
5 . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Thanks are due to several colleagues: Miss Joan Rotoloni for conducting

the experimental work, Mr. Richard Peacock for arranging the data analysis

system, Drs . R. and C. Jarvis (Clemson University) and Keith Eberhardt and John

Mandel for statistical analysis of the data, to Dr. Stephen Weber for many

helpful suggestions, and to Ms. Paula Garrett for word processing the numerous

drafts of this report.

19
6 . REFERENCES

[1] Karter, M. J., and Gansarski, J. L. , Fire Loss in the United States

During 1983, Fire Journal, 48, Sept. 1984.

[2] Harwood, B. , Trend in Cigarette -Ignited Fires, Consumer Product Safety

Commission internal memorandum, March 1985.

[3] Damant, G. H. , Bureau of Home Furnishings, North Highland, CA, personal

communication (1979).

[4] Macaluso, C., Cigarette Ignition Studies, in Testimony, Subcommittee on Health and Environment, House Energy and Commerce Committee (March 21,

1983).

[5] Krasny, J. F. , Allen, P. , Maldonado, A., Juarez, N. , Development of a Candidate Test Method for the Measurement of the Propensity of Cigarettes

to Cause Smoldering Ignition of Upholstered Furniture and Mattresses , (NBSIR 81-2363) (U.S.) Nat. Bur. Stand. (1981).

[6] Klancnik, A., Sealy, Inc., presentation to the Technical Study Group,

(March 4, 1985).

[7] Ziolkowski, J., Upholstered Furniture Action Committee, Personal

Communication, (1985).

[8] Flammability Information Package, State of California, Department of

Consumer Affairs, Bureau of Home Furnishings. North Highlands, CA

(1983)

[9] Important Consumer Information from UFAC, Upholstered Furniture Action

Council, High Point, NC (1984).

[10] The Business and Institutional Furniture Manufacturer's Association First

Generation Voluntary Upholstered Furniture Flammability Standard for

Business and Institutional Markets, BIFMA, Grand Rapids (1980).

[11] Shaw, A. and Gill, J. T. , The Smoldering Behavior of Selected 100 Percent

Cotton Fabrics in Combination with Three Different Batting Materials

AATCC International Conference, Chicago, IL (Oct. 1984).

[12] Ray, D. , Consumer Product Safety Commission, Personal Communication,

(1986).

[13] Babrauskas, V. and Krasny, J.F., Fire Behavior of Upholstered Furniture,

Monograph 173, (U.S.) National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD

(November 1985).

20
[14] Spears, A. W. , A Technical Analysis of the Problems Relative to Proposed

Cigarette Legislation Including a Review of Relevant Patents. Testimony,

Subcommittee on Health and the Environment, Committee on Energy and

Commerce, U. S. House of Representatives, (Mar. 21, 1983).

[15] McCarter, R. J., Smoldering Combustion of Cotton and Rayon, J. Consumer

Product Flammability, 2, 346-358 (Dec. 1977).

[16] Shafizadeh, F. , Bradbury, A. G. W. , deGroot, W. F. , and Aanerud, T. W. , Role of Inorganic Additives in the Smoldering Combustion of Cotton

Cellulose, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Product Research and

Development, 21 , 97-101 (1982).

[17] Snedecor, G.W. and Cochran, W.G., Statistical Methods, 6th Edition, The

Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 235 (1967).

[18] Lewontin, R.C. and Felsenstein, J., The Robustness of Homogenity Tests In

2 X N Tables, Biometrics, Vol. 21, 19-33 (1965).

[19] Plackett, R.L., The Analysis of Categorical Data, 2nd edition, New York,

Macmillan, Section 6.3 (1981).

[20] Federal Trade Commission, Tar, Nicotine and Carbon Monoxide of the Smoke

of 207 (number varies with year) Varieties of Domestic Cigarettes,

Federal Trade Commission, Washington, DC (1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985).

[21] Damant, G. H. , and Williams, S., State of California, Department of

Consumer Affairs, Bureau of Home Furnishings, North Highlands, CA,

Personal Communications (1985).

[22] Ihrig, A.M. , Rhyne, A.L. , Norman, V., and Spears, A.W. , Factors Involved

In the Ignition Propensity of Upholstery Fabrics by Cigarettes, Lorrilard

Research Center Report submitted to Technical Study Group (June 1986)

.

[23] Snedecor, G. W. , and Cochran, W.G. , Statistical Methods, - 6th Edition,

The Iowa State University Press, Ames, Iowa, 194 (1967).

[24] North, M. A., The Relative Fire Hazard of Plain and Tipped Cigarettes,

Ministry of Technology and Fire Offices' Committee, Joint Research

Organization, Fire Research Note No. 593 (1965).

[25] DeBardeleben, M. Z. , Claflin, W. E. , and Gannon, W. F. , Role of Cigarette

Physical Characteristics on Smoke Composition, Recent Adv. Tob. Sci. 4,

85-111 (1978).

[26] Behnke , W. , DuPont deNemours and Co. Cigarette Study - Heat Flux and

Ember Temperatures, presented to ASTM Committee D-13 meeting (1969).

21
oH

cn cn r~ in o oo

r*o co tn

> a o

•r4 > ol

i-^ 0) 3 u • 1 E- u CJc

31

>

• O

> Ol

0)u

00 o O

c C

•*-< 3l >

o X

<0 X • 1 o- o >

S a o

04 03 4J ol

•U O 03 •U C*- r-4 0) u_ o

u o c

Pfl Cu 3

OC

•e* u • >

03 0

c o

03 >

0) 0) T3 u

4J Ui u o

03 (0 c

u 03 3

4-1 c

C/5 </) 03 X C U • I 3 0 C/3 >

C/3 •H O

4-1 < 4J ol

>, <0 O 03 X o r-H

• H <4h • V) W-l o c •H c

0 O 3

•>-t 0) 4J Q H C/3 • 1 c >

OC 04 O W X ol

CO >

4-t u 04 c 4J U • 1 V) O o

u X c

04 3 3l X C/3 >

E X

3 •

| z 0 > o O

0( ol c 4J

t—

•

•H 03 4J r-t • 04 4-* VM o

*-H 03 c X X 3

03 H c

o • 1 X >

4J 0 o > ol o 04u

T3 o • 1 u o

03 e

03 3l C

cfl 4J • 05 >

0 < M o a 03 r—

4

IM o

c

3

04 4J

4J 03

04 u

l-i 04

03 X

00 E3

CJ z

—^cNom^cNCNjcNmrNi'^

OOOOOOOOOOCNI

coooooooooo

oooooooooooo

oocooooooooo

oooooooooooo

oooooooooooo

oooooooooooo

oooooooooooo

oooooooooooo t/J X

3

VJ

n4 < rsi m m o' o oo o

22

In

order

of

Increasing

number

of

substrate

ignitions.
Table 2. Number of Cigarette Ignitions by Substrate Factor

(California and dobby fabric substrates only)

No. of Ignitions8 % Ignitions

Crevice 192 50

Flat 171 45

CA Fabric 176 46

Dobby 187 49

Polyurethane Foam 1 0

Cotton Batting 362 94

Covered 189 49

Uncovered 174 45

a The maximum number of ignitions in each case is 384.

23
Table 3. Number of Cigarette Ignition by Substrate Factor

(including tulip fabric*)

No. of Ignitions No. of Tests % Ignitions

Polyurethane foam 27 480 6

Cotton Batting 362 384 94

CA Fabric 176 384 46

Dobby Fabric 187 384 49

Tulip Fabric* 26 96 27

Crevice 215 480 45

Flat 171 384 45

Covered 212 432 49

Uncovered 177 432 41

* Tested over polyurethane/crevice only; probably would have yielded 192 (100%)

ignitions over cotton batting

24
Table 4. Time to 2, 4, and 5 g Mass Loss of

Igniting Substrates

California Fabric/Cotton Batting

Cigarette

crevice covered

time to mass loss, s crevice uncovered

time to mass loss, s 2g 4g 5g 2g 4g 5g

No. Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD

2 1043 564 1193 657 1260 669 875 531 1018 519 1085 574

7 895 168 1068 243 1133 256 1000 210 1163 327 1245 185

1 768 118 903 146 963 176 830 229 970 230 1045 277

4 718 226 873 307 903 197 680 199 800 218 830 224

11 740 179 870 252 925 213 748 128 878 138 948 149

12 958 111 1120 118 1190 163 750 176 885 230 948 89

3 768 125 978 256 1040 158 693 106 853 137 935 146

5 738 102 898 127 953 161 663 120 813 139 850 176

9 745 162 915 243 978 157 688 116 853 149 908 188

10 853 87 1010 124 1065 120 698 105 838 103 883 116

8 993 277 1138 383 1203 114 808 140 1003 167 1068 208

6 673 84 810 150 863 142 685 145 840 199 918 174

Cigarette

No.

If

Dobbv" Fabric/Cotton Battine

crevice covered

time to mass loss, s crevice uncovered

time to mass loss, s

2_g_ 4g 5g 2g 4g 5g

Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD Av. SD

2 1210 211 1510 137 1595 189 1573 331 1830 432 1913 398

7 1610 577 1863 714 1930 739 1448 544 1598 563 1653 507

1 1263 300 1515 379 1608 336 1065 202 1233 233 1298 160

4 1163 378 1333 430 1388 369 1083 249 1288 298 1348 332

11 1043 208 1193 267 1253 96 845 114 1015 215 1070 103

12 1275 323 1563 469 1668 231 1018 168 1195 308 1263 209

3 1013 109 1218 169 1268 196 838 389 1030 469 1100 452

5 963 260 1123 268 1193 299 918 273 1075 325 1148 318

9 943 235 1140 307 1203 263 1083 232 1238 266 1318 315

10 995 217 1230 211 1295 219 933 189 1115 225 1178 248

8 1893 786 2138 798 2035 502 1020 333 1203 340 1275 191

6 1180 205 1385 281 1453 157 770 187 953 255 1020 270

25
Table

5.

Mass

Loss

of

PU/Fabric

Substrates,

No

Ignitions

w

to -poH

coouninoiO'OoooinnN 0'<vO<tooOHtN£j\rvror'

'j^O'OiriNcoooMncoMio

NtOHM/iOHnNO'-jn NQvorvfsoono'ui^Noo

<fvOvo<rvooooor^.vor^vooo

T3

CO m*H(SomcNimr^o\0'roo' HOiNOO'JO'O'NfniONO

cr)(Nimroror^-rJ»-imcN'3- •

>o

o

d)o &

«H»OSH«MSOONOm vOO'NOOO'PlO'O'O'Ni/ICO

HHNHNnNNHPINn

>

0)uo

X CO HioNON-Tnr'OOC'n^o nnNHNNHcn«jNHN

'JH<n^r^N>TO'NOO' co oooc^icsi0'0'or^ooooo'<r vo HHNHHNMNNNHn O'in

ioinNNN«Htn-jHN»j

O'vOior^<<tn>0, N>0iOr-i Hifl^oNC'ootJ'ooHnoooo

H rH H rH rH H H H H 04 H rH

lONNOOOOO'OONinO'ON O H rH O O H O fO H H H 04

'0040.c000<r000j'j0'0jvl 00 O'mmmvoinooJrovor^--1 O' OhhhhNNNhhhoJ O

omooooo'Ooo4<rino<r r-io40HonoNnNHH

oc

co

COo

CO

CO

(0 s

P

CO pH

H(0(*l^<040l/lHrl«(Jl Ni/iiow'OiONMOoom« o4mmco<r<TO'0<ri-'-in*-< 04 NlO<JN>OOOOOonN<fOO O'

rH rH rH rH rH rH ^H rH rH rH rH rH m

'OHOomrumoMOdoo CO CO »H rH rH rH O r-H rH 04 CO rH

ruOrioHncoo'cnoo' ffHjNO'MnmNNrwn

E J r-H r-H E J r-H r*H r-H rH rH *-H rH rH

ooo'nioo.Noono'OEO<? 004rH—I04<TO—H(no40404

004lOfOCMnNMOHNOi 00 0<?04 0''3'<Tr0040'04rHrO 04

rH r-H r-H ( 1 *-H rH rH rH E ) rH rH rH Om

cO

<D •rH

4-> e p p

CD • o

P O <4H

cO Z •H

00 rH

•H cd u O

NOHvfNHnmo'OoO'O >> xi

XIoQ

NOH<rNHnin0'O00'0 10 -H

(0oH

26

(a)

tobacco

column

length

measured

to

overwrap
Table 6. Comparison of Typical Individual Ignition Results at

Greatly Varying Ambient Conditions

Cigarette Fabric Padding Config

.

Cov/Unc Ambient

Cond.

Ignition

Results I/N

2 California cotton crevice cov 24°C 61% I 24°C 33% I

2 California cotton flat unc 24°C 61% N

24°C 33% N

7 California PU crevice unc 24° C 63% N

24°C 38% N

1 California cotton crevice unc 24° C 63% I 24°C 45% I

11 California PU flat unc 24° C 63% N

24° C 35% N

11 Dobby cotton crevice unc 24° C 63% I 24°C 35% I

3 Tulip PU crevice cov 24°C 62% I 24°C 45% N

5 Dobby PU crevice cov 24°C 65% N

24°C 38% N

8 Dobby PU flat cov 24° C 63% N

24° C 52% N

6 Dobby cotton crevice cov 24°C 60% I 24°C 38% I

6 Dobby cotton flat cov 24°C 60% I 24°C 38% I

27
(6) sscn ssvw

(0

28

Figure

1.

Mass

Loss/Tirae

Relationship

for

an

Igniting

and

Non-Igniting

Substrate
APPENDIX A

PUBLIC LAW 98-567—OCT. 30, 1984 98 STAT. 2925

Public Law 98-567

98th Congress

An Act

To establish an interagency committee and a technical study group on cigarette

safety. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may

be cited as the "Cigarette Safety Act of 1984". Sec. 2. (a) There is established the Interagency Committee on

Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (hereinafter in this Act

referred to as the "Interagency Committee") which shall consist of—

(1) the Chairman of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, who shall be the Chairman of the Interagency Committee;

(2) the United States Fire Administrator in the Federal Emergency Management Agency, who shall be the Vice Chairman of

the Interagency Committee; and

(3) the Assistant Secretary of Health in the Department of

Health and Human Services.

(b) The Interagency Committee shall direct, oversee, and review

the work of the Technical Study Group on Cigarette and Little Cigar

Fire Safety (established under section 3) conducted under section 4

and shall make such policy recommendations to the Congress as it deems appropriate. The Interagency Committee may retain and

contract with such consultants as it deems necessary to assist the

Study Group in carrying out its functions under section 4. The

Interagency Committee may request the head of any Federal department or agency to detail any of the personnel of the department or agency to assist the Interagency Committee or the Study Group in

carrying out its responsibilities. The authority of the Interagency

Committee to enter into contracts shall be effective for any fiscal year only to such extent or in such amounts as are provided in

advance by appropriation Acts.

(c) For the purpose of carrying out section 4, the Interagency

Committee or the Study Group, with the advice and consent of the

Interagency Committee, may hold such hearings, sit and act at 6uch

times and places, take such testimony, and receive such evidence, as the Interagency Committee or the Study Group considers

appropriate.

Sec. 3. (a) There is established the Technical Study Group on

Cigarette and Little Cigar Fire Safety (hereinafter in this Act

referred to as the “Study Group") which shall consist of—

(1) one scientific or technical representative each from the

Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Center for Fire Re- search of the National Bureau of Standards, the National

Cancer Institute, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the appointment of

whom 6hall be made by the heads of those agencies;

(2) four scientific or technical representatives appointed by

the Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the

Oct 30, 1984

[H.R. 1880]

Cigarette

Safety Act

of 1984. 15 USC 2054

note. Establishment

15 USC 2054

note.

Contracts with VS.

Establishment.

15 USC 2054

note.

51-139 0-84 ( 621 )

1
98 STAT. 2926 PUBLIC LAW 98-567—OCT. 30, 1984

Study.

15 Uk 2054

note.

Reports. 15 USC 2054

note.

Termination.

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from a list of

individuals submitted by the Tobacco Institute;

(3) two scientific or technical representatives appointed by the

Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, who are

• selected from lists of individuals submitted by the following

organizations: the American Bum Association, the American

Public Health Association, and the American Medical

Association;

(4) two scientific or technical representatives appointed by the

Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, who are

selected from lists of individuals submitted by the following

organizations: the National Fire Protection Association, the

International Association of Fire Chiefs, the International Association of Fire Fighters, the International Society of Fire Service Instructors, and the National Volunteer Fire Council; and

(5) one scientific or technical representative appointed by the

Chairman of the Interagency Committee, by and with the

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from lists of

individuals submitted by the Business and Institutional Furni- ture Manufacturers Association and one scientific or technical

representative appointed by the Chairman, by and with the

advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from lists of individuals submitted by the American Furniture Manufacturers Association.

(b) The persons appointed to serve on the Study Group may

designate, with the advice and consent of the Interagency Committee, from among their number such persons to serve as team

leaders, coordinators, or chairpersons as they deem necessary or appropriate to carry out the Study Group’s functions under

section 4. Sec. 4. The Study Group shall undertake, subject to oversight and

review by the Interagency Committee, such studies and other activi- ties as it considers necessary and appropriate to determine the

technical and commercial feasibility, economic impact, and other

consequences of developing cigarettes and little cigars that will have

a minimum propensity to ignite upholstered furniture or mattresses. Such activities include identification of the different physical characteristics of cigarettes and little cigars which have an

impact on the ignition of upholstered furniture and mattresses, an

analysis of the feasibility of altering any pertinent characteristics to reduce ignition propensity, and an analysis of the possible costs and

benefits, both to the industry and the public, associated with any

such product modification. Sec. 5. The Interagency Committee shall submit one year after the

date of enactment of this Act a status report to the Senate and the

House of Representatives describing the activities undertaken under

section 4 during the preceding year. The Interagency Committee

shall submit a final technical report, prepared by the Study Group,

to the Senate and the House of Representatives not later than thirty

months after the date of enactment of this Act. The Interagency

Committee shall provide to the Congress, within 6ixty days after the

submission of the final technical report, any policy recommendations the Interagency Committee deems appropriate. The Inter- agency Committee and the Study Group shall terminate one month

2
PUBLIC LAW 98-567—OCT. 30, 1984 98

after submission of the policy recommendations prescribed by this

section. Sec. 6. (a) Any information provided to the Interagency Committee or to the Study Group under section 4 which is designated as trade secret or confidential information shall be treated as trade

secret or confidential information subject to section 552(bX4) of title

5, United States Code, and section 1905 of title 18, United States Code, and shall not be revealed, except as provided under subsection

(b). No member of the Study Group or Interagency Committee, and

no person assigned to or consulting with the Study Group, shall

disclose any such information to any person who is not a member of, assigned to, or consulting with, the Study Group or Interagency

Committee unless the person submitting such information specifically and in writing authorizes such disclosure.

(b) Subsection (a) does not authorize the withholding of any infor- mation from any duly authorized subcommittee or committee of the

Congress, except that if a subcommittee or committee of the Conr gTess requests the Interagency Committee to provide such information, the Chairman of the Interagency Committee shall notify the

person who provided the information of such a request in writing.

(c) The Interagency Committee shall, on the vote of a majority of

its members, adopt reasonable procedures to protect the confidentiality of trade secret and confidential information, as defined in

this section. Sec. 7. As used in this Act, the terms "cigarettes” and "little cigars” have the meanings given such terms by section 3 of the

Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act.

Approved October 30, 1984.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H R 1880 (S. 1935): HOUSE REPORT No 98-917 (Comm on Energy and Commerce).

SENATE REPORT No 98-597 accompanying S. 1935 (Comm on Governmental

Affairs). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. Vo) 130 (1984): Aug 6, considered and passed House

Sept 21, considered and passed Senate, amended, in lieu of S 1935. Oct 1 House concurred in Senate amendment with an amendment

Oct 4, Senate concurred in House amendment

o

STAT. 2927

Confidentiality. 15 USC 2054

note.

15 USC 2054

note.

3

APPENDIX B.

PROTOCOL FOR MEASUREMENT OF THE PROPENSITY OF

CIGARETTES TO IGNITE SUBSTRATES

I . General

The Cigarette Safety Act, Public Law 98-567 of October 30, 1984,

establishes an Interagency Committee and a Technical Study Group on

cigarette safety. The latter group's mandate includes undertaking

necessary studies to determine the technical and commercial feasibility

of developing cigarettes that have a minimum propensity to ignite

upholstered furniture and mattresses. One such study is a survey of the

cigarettes currently for sale to determine whether any possess

distinguishing ignition propensity.

A protocol to determine the propensity of commercial and experimental

cigarettes to ignite various upholstered substrates was written by a

task group of the Technical Study Group in July, 1985, i.e., before

actual testing started. It was based on test methods presently used by

the Business and Institutional Furniture Manufacturers Association

(BIFMA) , the California Bureau of Home Furnishings, and the Upholstered

Furniture Action Council (UFAC) . The methods used by these

organizations are very similar and are used to determine the relative

cigarette ignition resistance (CIR) of furniture substrates using a

standard cigarette packing.

1
Basically, the proposed protocol consists of placing cigarettes on a

number of mockups consisting of an upholstery fabric and padding. The

fabric and padding are to be varied to obtain a range of cigarette

ignition resistance. However, there is no reason to include extremely

cigarette ignition resistant or cigarette ignition prone substrates

because they could not be expected to differentiate between present-day

commercial cigarettes. Cigarettes are to be ranked by the number of

substrates they ignite.

The proposed protocol also provides for a major improvement in defining

ignition of substrates by the use of a real-time mass loss -time curves.

This obviates the use of surface char length as a criterion of ignition.

Ignition is indicated if the curve continues to show mass loss;

extinguishment is indicated by a flattening of the curve

When testing was actually carried out, the need for certain modifications became apparent. Below is a description of the test protocol

actually used during the Phase 1 testing of 12 commercial cigarette

packings on 16 substrates.

II. Definitions

Cigarette Packing : A commercial cigarette variety, described by its

name, length, whether menthol or non-menthol, whether with or without

filter, and by its package type.

2
Crevice: The junction of a horizontal and vertical upholstered

furniture surface. For the purpose of this test method, the angle of

these two surfaces in the mockup will be as close to 90° as possible,

considering the natural bowing of certain substrates. Other angles may

be chosen in follow-up work.

Ignition : Continuous, self-sustaining smoldering or flaming combustion

of upholstered substrates which have been exposed to burning cigarettes. Ignition will be determined by operator judgment of "obvious

ignition" . Later experience has shown that with the Phase 1 fabrics

,

padding, and cigarettes, obvious ignition occurred at about 3 g weight

loss; tests were consequently discontinued at 5.5 g or more weight loss.

Substrate : A combination of a cover fabric and a padding material, in

either the flat or the crevice area, e.g., the flat area of a piece of

polyurethane foam covered with a cotton cover fabric. The crevice made

from the same materials was considered another substrate for the purpose

of this method, as was the flat specimen without a cover fabric.

III. Safety

Safety precautions consisted of the use of an effective hood, ready

availability of breathing apparatus, means of extinguishment of

substrates by water spray and immersion in a water bucket, and disposal

of the extinguished specimen (after shredding of the charred padding

where indicated) in a metal can with well-fitting top.

3
IV. General Requirements

Test Apparatus (specimen holder) : The specimen holder consisted of two

wooden panels, each nominally 203 x 203 mm (8x8 in.) and nominally 19

mm (0.75 in.) thick, joined at a right angles at one edge. Use of rough

faced plywood assures that the vertical and horizontal specimens stay in

place during the test and obviates the use of the positioning device

used in the present UFAC and other test arrangements.

Test Enclosure : To minimize disturbance at the cigarette location

during the test, the apparatus was placed into an enclosure, approximately 500 mm (19.5 in.) square, open on top, and 610 mm (24 in.) high.

The enclosure was placed under a canopy hood. Minimum distance between

apparatus and enclosure wall was 76 mm (3 in.). The front of the

enclosure was made from PMMA, to permit observation of the test; the

rest was made from plywood. Air velocity at the cigarette location was

as low as possible consistent with smoke removal (in a vertical plume as

undisturbed as possible) and protection of the operators from fumes

during disposal of smoldering specimens.

Balance : Each test apparatus was placed on a balance, with a 3000 g

capacity, + 0.01 g resolution, capable of taring out test apparatus

weight and providing an analog signal output to a data recorder. Visual

observation of the time-weight loss slope during the test was helpful in

determining ignition. Five balances were used simultaneously.

4
Safety Equipment : Breathing apparatus, water spray bottle, immersion

bucket, tongs, and metal can with tight top for specimen disposal are

required.

V. Test Materials

Fabrics: Two fabrics varying in CIR were used. One was the California

Bureau of Home Furnishings Standard Fabric, a 100% cotton velvet, beige,

340 g/m2 (10.1 oz/yd2

) without backcoating (Pattern 8500, beige, Van

Waters and Rogers, 16300 Shoemaker Avenue, Cerritos, CA 90701). The

second fabric was purchased locally; its commercial name was "Dijon,"

the color "pewter". The dealer did not disclose the manufacturer. It

was a dobby weave, cotton warp and filling, with a decorative filling

stripe approximately 100 mm wide, 5 mm distance between stripes. The

yarn in this stripe was 100% polyester, and was located primarily on the

backside of the fabric except for small patterns which appeared on the

front. The fabric weighed 400 g/m2 (11.8 oz/yd2 ). When samples of this

fabric were obtained for screening, differences in the ignition

propensity of some of the test cigarettes was obtained. However, the

screening samples apparently differed from the fabric bolts obtained for

this work, which showed no such differentiation.

A third fabric, called the "tulip fabric" because of its pattern, was

also acquired locally. It had a rayon background, with a cotton filling

5
stripe similar to the above fabric. The weight was 420 g/m2 (12.4

oz/yd2

)

A commercial 100% cotton sheeting, white, not treated with a flame

retardant, 130 g/m2 (3.8 oz/yd2 ), laundered once, double rinsed, and

tumble dried in standard home laundering equipment, was used to cover

the cigarette during the burn.

The alkali metal content of all fabrics will be determined at various

places in each roll, to determine uniformity.

Padding : For Phase 1, a foam and a cotton batting padding were used.

The foam was a polyether based, polyurethane foam, 34 kg/m3 (2.1

lbs/ft3 ), 51 mm thick (2 in.). (HD 2045, Leggett and Platt, High Point,

NC. Leggett and Platt only sells in truck loads but the foam is

available in small quantities from jobbers, e.g., BCF Supply Co., 2335

W. Franklin Street, Baltimore, MD 21223).

The cotton batting was approximately 40 kg/m3 (2.5 lbs/ft3 ), Quality No.

300 from BCF Supply Co., without flame retardant.

The alkali metal content of the batting and foam are were determined by

outside laboratories, as shown in Appendices C and D.

6
Each of the two fabrics was used with each of the two paddings, with and

without cover sheet, with cigarettes placed on a flat surface and in the

crevice. This resulted in sixteen "substrates".

Cigarettes : In Phase 1, 12 commercial cigarette packings including that

which is presently used for testing upholstery CIR, as well as

cigarettes reported to have lower propensity to ignite were selected.

Cigarettes were assigned code numbers, and packing identities were not

revealed.

VI. Size of Test Materials

Cover Fabric : Fabrics for the vertical foam panel were 356 x 203 mm (14

x 8 in.) and for the horizontal panel, 203 x 203 (8x8 in.). The

longer direction was in the warp direction. For the vertical cotton

panel, dimensions were 305 x 305 mm (12 X 12 in.), for the horizontal

panel, 305 x 254 mm (12 x 10 in.), with the longer dimension in the

filling direction.

Padding : Padding for the vertical panel was 203 x 203 x 51 mm (8 x 8 x

2 in.) and for the horizontal panel, 203 x 127 x 51 mm (8 x 5 x 2 in.).

Sheeting Material : Cotton bedsheeting fabric specimens were 127 x

152 mm (5 x 6 in. )

.

7
VII. Ambient Conditions: The cover fabrics, paddings, cigarettes, and

sheeting were conditioned for at least 24 hours prior to testing as

close to 22 + 3°C (71 + 5°F) and 55 + 10% relative humidity as present

equipment permits. Testing proceeded in the same room. The temperature

and relative humidity at the time of the test are noted on each test

sheet

.

VIII. Specimen Mounting

The cover fabrics were mounted with the warp direction perpendicular to

the crevice. The cover fabric was in uniform contact with the foam so

that no distortion of the foam occurred and the fabric tension was

uniform. The fabric was pinned to the back of the foam.

The cover fabric was in as uniform contact with the cotton batting as

possible, but due to the tension needed to achieve reasonable contact,

some distortion of the cotton batting occurred. The cotton batting was

covered on all four edges, and the fabric stapled to an approximately 6

mm thick (1/4 in.) piece of plywood. For the crevice mockups , the

horizontal plywood/batting/fabric assembly was placed on a wooden

platform, 37 mm (1.5 in.) thick, so that the cigarette would be above

the area of maximum distortion (near the edge) of the vertical assembly.

8
IX. Sampling Procedure

The following plan has been worked out with the collaboration of a NBS

statistical consultant.

1 . Cigarettes

From each of the 6000 to 8000 cigarettes per packing, 100

cigarettes were sampled and put in a tray. The 12 trays were

appropriately labeled for identification with a new code. The

100 cigarettes were obtained by taking approximately equal

numbers from each container in the shipping box. They were

randomized in each tray.

In placing the cigarettes on the substrate, care was taken that

the cigarette paper seam was not in contact with the substrate.

2 . Fabrics

The rolls were divided into 4 swatches, in such a way that the

entire length of the roll was sampled. Each swatch was cut into

a fourth of the total number of specimens required. Then

specimens were randomized by hand within each swatch and kept in

four separate stacks, labeled 1,2,3 and 4.

9
3. Foam

The foam was cut into the appropriate number of specimens on a

band saw, taking the same number of specimens from each sheet.

All specimens were thoroughly randomized.

4 . Cotton batting

Complete randomization of the cotton batting specimens was not

feasible because of the difficulty of storing large numbers of

specimens. However, in each work period the required cotton

batting specimens were taken from the rolls in sequence until

each was half depleted. The remaining parts of rolls were

stored.

5 . Organization of the Experiment

The experiment consisted of four "replicate" tests. Each

replicate encompassed all 16 test configurations, carried out on

all 12 cigarette packings. Replicate #1 used the fabric stack

labeled 1, replicate #2, the fabric stack labeled 2, etc. To

ensure that bias was avoided, the 12 cigarette packings were

tested in random order within each replicate and the random order

changed from replicate to replicate.

10
X. Conducting the Test

A cigarette was lighted and allowed to burn for approximately one minute

to stabilize the burn. The cigarette was placed into the crevice so

that its center was approximately at the center of the crevice. The

cigarette was placed on the flat specimens at an approximately 30° angle

with the warp. The cigarette paper seam was on top of the cigarette.

For the "covered" tests, pieces of sheeting were placed over the

cigarette; for crevice tests, the sheeting was attached by pins to the

vertical panel above the cigarette. A finger run along the length of

the cigarette ensured good contact between sheeting and cigarette. The

tests were continued until either the weight loss/time curve was flat

for several minutes (non- ignition) or at least 5.5 g weight loss was

measured (obvious ignition)

.

XI . Records

Recorded were: cigarette packing code; cover fabric; padding; crevice

or flat area; covered or uncovered cigarette; temperature and humidity

in test room; replicate number, balance number, date, and weight at

about 20 second intervals.

Char length was not measured because the weight loss/time curve could be made

to appear on the screen at any time for any tests and gave a better indication

of ignition or non- ignition than an arbitrary surface char length measurement

as specified in present test procedures (upward char length only in the UFAC

11
tests). Surface char length does not characterize penetration of the smolder

into the padding which can differ considerably. However, measuring this depth

exposes the operator to the fumes from the charred material, even though it may

have been extinguished by wetting.

12
V

appendix c

united •’TATES ©OYERNMENT

Memorandum

U S CONSUMER PRODUCT

SAFETY COMMISSION

TO:

THROUGH:

FROM:

SUBJECT:

Dr. John F. Krasny, Center for Fire Research

National Bureau of Standards _

Margaret Neily, ES'lA r fj

Warren K. Porter, Director, HSHL

Kai lash C. Gupta, D.V.M., Ph.D., HSHL

Analysis for Na, K, Ca , and Mg Content in Fabrics and

Cotton-Batting Specimens Provided by Dr. Krasny

The smoldering property of the cellulosic materials has been

reported to be affected by the presence of inorganic free radical ions.

The factors influencing the smoldering property of cellulosics are of

interest to the Commission because of their impact on the fires

resulting from cigarettes. Samples of four fabrics and one cotton

batting provided by Dr. Krasny, of the National Bureau of Standards,

were analyzed for Na , K, Ca, and Mg content. The results are provided

in Tables 1 to 5. Analysis of this data along with data from other

studies will be conducted by Dr. Krasny.

The analytical procedures used were as follows:

Reference standard solutions (1000 ppm) for Na, K, Ca, and Kg,

and the concentrated nitric acid and sulfuric acid were obtained

from Fisher Scientific Company. All of the glassware used was washed with a 35* nitric acid wash. The samples were shredded into

small pieces and each subsample was analyzed ir, replicate. About a gram of materiel was digested with 10 ml of concentrated nitric

acid and 10 ml of concentrated sulfuric acid by heating for A to i

hours until it was completely digested end the solution was clear.

Upor cooling, the digested solution was diluted with deionized

distilled water to the appropriate dilutions. The standard

solutions for each element and the reagent blanks were treated the same as the samples and run with each batch of samples, no losses were observed. The elements were analyzed with a Perkin Elmer

Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer, Model 503. A standard curve for each element was prepared for each batch of analysis. The

elemental content of the materials was calculated using the

standard curves, dilution factors, and the weight of materiel used.

Reagent blanks (Na- 0.15 ppm,. K- less than detection limit, Ca- 0.2

ppm, and Mg- 0.02 ppm) were used for automatic zero correction for

temple analyte tfetermi nation.

Attachments

l

Appendix C Table 1

California Fabric Sample Number

593-0158

Total elements in PPM

Na K_ Ca Mg

Sub I (a) 565 27 235 118

(b) 572 27 229 119

Average 568 27 232 118

Sub IIA (a) 559 29 228 114

(b) 589 28 216 125

Average 574 28 222 119

Sub III (a) 576 27 230 118

(b) 540 28 216 117

Average 558 27 223 117

Sub IV (a) 578 27 231 120

(b) 575 27 230 118

Average 576 27 230 119

Sub lib (a) 572 29 228 118

(b) 575 29 220 117

Average 573 29 224 117

OVERALL AVERAGE* 570 28 226 118

Standard Deviation* 13 1 6 3

Overall average and standard deviation calculated at NBS
Appendix C Table 2

Gray dobby Sample Number: 593-0157

Total elements in PPM

Na K_ Ca Mg

Sub I (a) 2378 58 5769 2660

(b) 2381 58 5694 2637

Average 2379 58 5731 2648

Sub II (a) 2370 60 5799 2680

(b) 2361 61 5783 2674

Average 2365 60 5791 2677

Sub III (a) 2384 63 5839 2774

(b) 2363 59 5847 2733

Average 2979 61 5843 2753

Sub IVA (a) 2385 65 5713 2732

(b) 2363 67 5713 2721

Average 2374 66 5713 2726

SubNB (a) 2343 67 5738 2726

(b) 2340 66 5778 2744

Average 2341 66 5758 2735

OVERALL AVERAGE 2367 63 5767 2708

Standard deviation 16 4 53 43
Appendix C Table 3

Tulip Fabric Sample Number: 593-1

Total elements in PPM

Na K_ Ca Mg

Sub I (a) 1512 28 26 206

(b) 1505 28 26 220

Average 1508 28 26 213

Sub II (a) 1517 29 23 214

(b) 1504 28 23 208

Average 1510 28 23 211

Sub III (a) 1509 28 23 219

(b) 1516 28 23 213

Average 1512 28 23 216

OVERALL AVERAGE 1510 28 24 213

Standard deviation 5 0 1 6
Appendix C Table 4

Sheeting Material Sample Number593-0160

Total elements in PPM

Na K_ Ca Me

Sub I (a) 364 192 785 2031

(b) 364 192 780 2021

Average 364 192 782 2026

Sub II (a) 371 191 785 2030

(b) 366 187 789 2020

Average 368 189 787 2025

OVERALL AVERAGE 366 190 785 2025

Standard deviation 3 2 4 6
Appendix C Table 5

Cotton batting Sample Number: 593-0161

Total elements in PPM

Na K_ Ca Mg

Sub IA (a) 364 192 785 2031

(b) 364 192 780 2021

Average 364 192 782 2026

Sub II (a) 376 194 787 2020

(b) 359 188 788 2020

Average 367 191 787 2020

Sub III (a) 367 194 785 2030

(b) 366 192 794 2035

Average 366 193 789 2032

Sub IB (a) 371 191 785 2030

(b) 366 187 789 2020

Average 368 189 787 2025

OVERALL AVERAGE 367 191 787 2026

Standard deviation 5 2 4 6

APPENDIX D

HARRY W GALBRAITH. Ph.D

CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD KENNETH S WOODS

PRESIDENT GAIL R. HUTCHENS

EXECUTIVE VICE- PRESIDENT VELMA M. RUSSELLsecretarv/trea surer

P. O. BOX 4187

2323 SYCAMORE DR.

OaHrozatorizi, One.

QUANTITATIVE MICROANALYSES

ORGANIC - INORGANIC

KNOXVILLE. TENNESSEE 37921

PHONE 546-1335

AREA CODE 615

Mr. John Krasny

National Bureau of Standards

Building 224, Room A363

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899

December 11, 1985

Received: November 11th

Dear Mr. Krasny:

Analysis of your compounds gave the following results:

Your #, Our #, ppm Ca,

A M-364 20

26

B M-365 6

12

C M-366 8

11

ppm Mg, ppm Na, ppm K

1 6 9

3 11 11

1 3 6

2 4 11

2 5 10

3 6 12

Sincerely yours,

Gail R. Hutchens

Exec. Vice- President

GRH: sc

LETTER AND SHIPMENTS BY U S MAIL - P O BOX 4187. OTHER CARRIERS - 2323 SYCAMORE DR.. KNOXVILLE. TN. 37921

ESTABLISHED 1950
FORM NBS-1 14A (REV.l 1-84) U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

1. PUBLICATION OR

REPORT NO.

2. Performing Organ. Report No. 3. Publication Date

SHEET (See instructions) NBSIR 86-3421 JULY 1986

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

RELATIVE PROPENSITY OF SELECTED COMMERCIAL CIGARETTES TO IGNITE SOFT

FURNISHINGS MOCKUPS

5. AUTHOR(S) John F. Krasny and Richard G. Gann

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (If joint or other than NBS. see in struction s) 7. Contract/Grant No.

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE *• Type of Report & Period Covered

GAITHERSBURG, MD 20899

9.

SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street. City, State, ZIP)

Consumer Product Safety Commission

Washington, DC

10.

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

j J Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FlPS Software Summary, is attached.

11.

ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here) This report covers the first project performed under the Cigarette Safety Act

of 1984, the determination of whether and to what extent commercial cigarettes

have differing propensities to ignite upholstered furniture substrates. For

this purpose, a test protocol was developed under which 12 types of commercial

cigarettes were placed on 18 substrates varying in fabric, padding, and

configuration. It was found that there are statistically significant

differences in ignition propensity among the cigarettes (at the 1 percent or better confidence level) on three substrates. No significant differences were found on the other 15 substrates. However, no one of the packings consistently

showed low ignition propensity on all three substrates. The mass loss rate of

both the cigarette and substrate during the tests was recorded and did not

appear to be a reliable predictor of ignition propensity.

12.

KEY WORDS (Six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only proper names; and seporate key words by sr^co

I

om. Cigarettes; fabrics; furniture; furniture padding; ignition source; smoldering

ignition; upholstered furniture.

13. AVAILABILITY 14. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

UriXimited For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

Order From Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 20402.

Office, Washington, DC

56

IS. Price

[X] Oi$er From National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, VA 22161 $9.95

UKOMBM » «*