Citation

Greear LC, Hudson WZ, Jupe R, Pinion DO, Wanna JT. J. Fire Sci. 1996; 14(6): 413-425.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1996, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Fifty cellulosic upholstered furniture fabrics were purchased in the Richmond, Virginia area and tested to determine their ignition responses to eleven commercial cigarette brands. Six of the commercial brands (A-F) had been identified by the National institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), using their cotton duck substrate test method, as having reduced ignition propensity. The six cigarettes had ''unconventional''(4) characteristics deemed by NIST as likely to lower cigarette ignition propensity: smaller circumference, lower permeability paper, and/or reduced paper citrate. On the cotton duck fabrics, these cigarettes were extinguished frequently. On the fifty upholstery fabrics, the cigarettes rarely were extinguished. NIST also tested fourteen ''conventional,''(5) best-selling brands that their cotton duck test method classified as ''strong'' igniters. Five brands (1-5) tested here on upholstery fabrics were also major commercial brands of ''conventional'' design. Testing of the fifty upholstery fabrics and eleven cigarettes followed the protocol developed by NIST with exceptions that upholstery fabrics replaced cotton ducks and polyethylene film was not used between fabrics and foam. Standard ANOVA analysis of ignition responses of the fifty upholstery fabrics showed that the two cigarette types, A-F and 1-5, were statistically similar: the differences in ignitions reported by NIST using cotton duck as the test fabric were not found with this broad range of actual upholstery fabrics. Differences in ignition responses among the fabrics did range from igniting in all tests to not igniting in any test, and from igniting more frequently with the six ''lower ignition propensity'' cigarette brands to more frequently with the five ''conventional'' ones.