PATTON REPORT NO.

49
0 1976 Patton, Inc.

THE SMOKE DETECTOR FRAUD

HOW THE SMOKE MEN CONNED AMERICA
One of the cleverest and most lucrative cons ever pulled off
in America has been executed by some of the smoke detector
promoters. The smoke detector is a useful device. It has
advantages. But, 15 years ago it was not a big seller. It had its
disadvantages as well. It'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.
I ItelOPOIO Iftetal —.Wee itteeluet• tot teem
hot* etee. •I# .Ale tetette s Remo e.
I. PlAhO STOOl — tweet Ate eh.. .......App..
■ tt. O .
wet.. hoe yet Foe..
$OCILDIONO 111101— totelhottea
hoe. o fleet* le aseeetetable
hoet 6. we. r.
MVO* MAthee
100001AO IMI•e0
PC M•ZOO
THE "ULTRA FAST" SMOKE
DETECTOR 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 Indiana, and are prepared for the ignition of one of
the 40 live fire tests planned. Thermocouples and instruments
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, 11 more detectors are
installed.
The house has a third bedroom, located downstairs off the
corridor, approximately 8 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. It is impossible to see across the bedroom. The
ho woe, Me loth" . etteest
researchers consider the bedroom environment "untenable".
h-
a ste, MVO ...... milord how onti tot.■
..... One hit now templet. the tleetteteett
Only four of the 21 smoke detectors in the home have
cetehteettee
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 judged untenable.
Eight downstairs detectors have operated, but three have not.
None 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 all ten upstairs detectors have failed to
operate.
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 11TR1 Project J6340, Contract
4-36092
 What happened? Was this test a freak? All the world knows
thit with the first whiff of smoke — in fact even before the
human eye can see the smoke — the ionic detectors operate.
Everybody 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 to
detect 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 of
fire safety was the diagram depicting fire in four stages (see
illustration.)
Note how carefully the graph is drawn to imply 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 another
extensive time period (whei-e 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 knows how much!)
Finally fire moves into stage 3, but the note on the curve
claims, appreciable heat is still not present. Somebody must be
kidding! Look at all the flame and smoke coming off that
curve in stage 3. Still no heat?
Finally, at last, 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. (It's too late now buddy, you're already
dead, is the message.)
Is this really a true picture of fire, and an honest evaluation
of the smoke detector performance? Of course not, it's a fairy
tale that comes to you direct from Roger the Dodger, with
technical 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 will
see through little lies, and won't believe them, he said. If you
2
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 instantly
recognize it as a fraud. It was just too unreal to be believed. So
everybody 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.
In 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. If, when properly alerted, people were able to
put the fire out — fine. But too often the alai m sounded with
no one around to hear it, or those who did hear it were urfable
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 to
a 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 to
90% 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. In 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 --
deaths.
4. Convince the public that the people too often are
already dead when the sprinkler finally opens.
 THE BAG OF TRICKS
In carrying through on this extensive and fantastically
profitable scheme the smoke detector people shuffled facts
around like a magician shuffles cards. Here are some of the
tricks.
THE MYSTERIOUS MOVEMENT
OF 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't
it? Smoke rises to the ceiling coming off a hot (flaming) fire
because the gases are super heated and therefore bouyant and
dynamic. But if there's no flame and no heat — why would the
combustion products rise up off the fire, and travel acro5s the
ceiling to the detector? What is the driving force? It doesn't
seem to make sense, technically. But they had an answer to
that one.
The invisible combustion products move about in air like
molecules move in water solution. Drop a lump of sugar in a
bowl of water and soon the sugar is dispersed uniformly
throughout the solution. Gases disperse similarly as prescribed
by the gas diffusion laws. It sounded great. It was good to
know atomic science was being marshaled to combat fire.
The only problem was they forgot to tell us that not all
.:ombustion products behave this way and those that do might
take forever to reach the detector; and that the chance that
this early combustion products phenomenon would play a
significant role in a real smoldering fire in a real building might
be real sli m.
THE "PULLING THE IONS
OUT 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 to believe it. So they had a test to
demonstrate.
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 shawn
to possibly not one grasped a key point, the ability to detect
the 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 burst of heat to drive the ions
`o the detector. (There's no sense relying on that mysterious
gas movement phenomenon, is there?)
Did you ever see a smoke detector salesman demonstrate
his product in a real building by throwing a bunch of oily rags
in the corner?
3
THE SMOKE SHUFFLE
It is true that a smoldering fire can produce smoke before it
produces a significant amount of heat. It is also true that
combustion products (toxic gases) kill more people in fire than
the flames. However, in those fires where there has been
multiple loss of life clue to toxic gases — it has been the big fire
(a tremendous heat producing fire) that has generated the
gases that killed over a large area. The amount of combustion
products being given off by fire is almost a direct function of
fire size. The smoke detector people shuffled smoke from the
little fire (that is too small to operate the sprinkler) with
smoke from the big fire (that killed a lot of people).
In effect they first established the fact that people who die
in big fires usually die from the gases — not the direct
flames.Then having established that the gases kill, they promo-
ted the concept that smoldering fires produce smoke without
heat. The conclusion, watch out for the little fire that doesn't
operate the sprinkler — its the big killer.
THE "SINGLE FATALITY FIRE" PROOF
Don't depend on sprinklers to save life, was the tone behind
much of the sales pitch. To prove the point, the single fatality
fire was trotted out.
Now, it is known that people can die from building fires,
but they can also die from "human torch" fires within
buildings. An elderly nursing home patient can spill lighter
fluid 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 fireworks
show. Intimate 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 dazzle
promotions glossed over these matters.
THE "EARLY WARNING" DETECTOR
IS NOT A FAST SMOKE DETECTOR
Yes, the smoke detector can sometimes detect fire in 10 to
60 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 fast 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 for
detecting a so called Stage 1 fire — prior to smoke developing.
And this is simply not true. The "early warning" detector does
not detect a stage 1 (or even a stage 2) fire early. In fact, under
real life conditions (not laboratory testing) it often will not
detect the stage 1 or 2 fire at all.
THE FAST FIRE IS THE KILLER
Smoke detector salesmen make like all fires just sit around
for a half hour or so blowing off smoke, but no heat or flame.
That is certainly the message of the so called four stage fire
curve. In truth, a high percentage of the fires are instantane-
ously flaming fires (so called stage 4). They produce flames,
heat and smoke from time zero forward. Many of these fires
can proceed to the room flashover stage in as little as three to
five minutes, and begin killing over a wide area, killing many
people. Once the entire room bursts into flashover, carbon
monoxide and other combustible gases can be pumped out of
the fire room into the hallway and a ceiling high flame front
can roll downthe hallway. It is the big flaming and heat
producing fire that has been the cause of the multiple loss of
life fires. The sprinkler system will operate promptly for this
most dangerous fire type, and control it before it becomes
large.
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 not
proficient in manually controlling the fast fire. Even
when they discover the fire before the detector itself
operates, they are quite likely to be unable to control it.
2. The fast fire can kill over a wide area in less time than it
takes for a fire department to respond, hook up hose
lines, and gain control. The people are dying as the
engines 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 their
products, 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, engineer, building owner, or
whoever 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. It's U.L. listed, it detects the stage 1 fire even
before smoke appears, it'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 it
won'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
4
top of the Wrigley Building in Chicago and shout out, "Hey,
America, these smoke detectors have some limitations, you
better not believe everything you hear?" Did they do this?
You bet your baby they didn't.
FIRE ISLAND
The NFPA—UL control system which was established
before the turn of the century could be likened to ferry
operation 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 UL
checking the goods being transported and sold (all goods must
be 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. If you don't support
the ferrymasters, you don't take the ride.
Now, traders who trade on Fire Island also ask cooperation
from the ferrymasters for their support. It is a "Iwo way
strait", and each needs the other.
THE PROBLEM WITH SPRINKLERS
From the viewpoint of protecting and expanding the tot:.
fire safety market place the fire detection system is greatls,
preferred to the sprinkler system. The detection system is but
one component of a -total system—. Detecting a fire is only
step one in bringing fire under control. There also is a need for
fire extinguishers, fire hose, fireproof corridor walls, flame
spread ratings for the interior trim and furnishings, self closing
fire 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 with
the "Fire Island Market Place".
The sprinkler system on the other hand, is a complete
system of itself. It detects the fire — and then puts it out.
Those thousand and one other products that form (along with
a detection system) a "building system for fire safety" are not
necessarily essential to the performance of the sprinkler
system. 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 Island.
NFPA and UL also have a direct financial interest in
maintaining a very broad spectrum of products that must be
regulated, tested, and approved. This is why the NFF'A has
been most careful to always structure the NFPA-13 Sprinkler
Committee so that a majority of the committee members have
a direct conflict of interest with easy to design and install low
cost sprinkler systems. This desire for vast arrays of fire safety
products, all being components of an extremely broad base
"solution" to fire; rather than a more simple and direc,
solution using already available water, has got to be the
underlying motivation for the NFPA-UL cooperation in the
smoke detector scheme.
 FIRE PROTECTION IN PERSPECTIVE
The smoke detector salesmen realized that the smoke
detection system could not compete successfully with the
sprinkler system when scientifically evaluated in relation to a
"aming, heat producing fire. While the smoke detector usually
perated more rapidly, the sprinkler controlled the fire, and
this was the difference of life or death. Therefore, the fire
curve 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 fire type, it was
then necessary to conceal two important facts. One was that
the very slow fire will produce deadly conditions very slowly;
and in an occupancy such as an hospital it is rather unlikely
that the staff would remain unaware of a smoldering fire for
an extended period of time. Secondly, it was necessary to
conceal the fact that the smoke detector could be extremely
slow to react to this fire type. The NFPA and U.L. cooperated
in allowing much less than a full disclosure of all the facts, and
NFPA then cooperated in the forced selling (via mandatory
requirements in their codes) of the equipment.
Simultaneously, they wrote code restrictions that greatly
increased sprinkler system costs making this system far less
competitive.
If all the facts are told, where is the true value of the smoke
detector? I personally view the need for detectors as follows:
1. I support smoke detectors in a dwelling or apartment
because 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 buildings) first need
sprinklers. Generally, imposing smoke detectors on top of the
sprinkler system is not justified. There may be exceptions
where people sleep and the area is not well supervised.
3. Smoke detectors in air handling systems are quite likely
to not operate, especially if the system is large. This situation
needs further testing and evaluation. I believe it is improper
for the NFPA codes to mandate detectors in air handling
equipment until all facts are laid on the table and evaluated.
4. As for smoke detectors in the corridors of hospitals and
nursing homes as prescribed by NFPA-101, I consider that a
waste of money if the building is sprinklered, and very
questionable protection even if it isn't.
5. Smoke detectors arranged to automatically remove
elevators from service is one of the most controversial
"protection" regulations today. I consider it a condition that
may well precipitate panic and major loss of life — even under
the condition of a non fire.
I also believe that the Federal Government should initiate
an extensive investigation into the practices, regulatory powers
and market controls of the National Fire Protection
Association and Underwriters Laboratories, and the influences
of the lobbyists associated with these organizations.
There are more that 12,000 lives and 100,000 fire maimings
t
fer year at stake, and my claim that there are direct conflicts
of interest involved in fire safety — with desires to preserve
and enlarge markets for fire safety products frequently being
in direct conflict with efforts to reduce the fire rate —
5
warrants thorough study. After all, the U.S. does lead the
entire world in the categoryof fire disaster. It is my firm
conviction that it is no accident that we got where we are.
THE HOSPITAL AND NURSING HOME — The fast fire is
the spectacular fire that wipes out many lives and causes
retroactive fire ordinances to be written. The smoke detector
which has been sold profusely to medical facilities, via the
codes, represents little or no protection against the fast fire,
because detection doesn't stop the fire.
As for detecting the very slow fire (stage 1 or 2 fire) sure it
will 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 bells
will 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
not 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 of
suffering the big deadly fire.
The smoke detector salesman and the NFPA has conned the
Hospital and Nursing Homes away from the good and econom-
ical protection, which could have reduced fire deaths, reduced
construction costs, and reduced insurance premiums.
By far the most serious consequence of the smoke detector
distortions of the fire problem is that the needed solutions —
the really practical and reliable solutions to fire — have been
put on the shelf. During a period when the United States
suffers more fire deaths on a per capita basis than any other
nation on earth, profiteers have manuvered the codes to
virtually guarantee that the best safety systems will not be
installed.
THE SOLUTIONS?
Is 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 of
law? When they can control the products being sold, and can
also investigate the fires that occur and give their own
interpretations 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 the
equipment? Why can't the relatives of those who die from fires
 ft

in buildings, that have been designed in confol mance with the
NFPA Life Safety Code take legal action against NFPA? Why
can't a businessman who is forced to expend huge sums of
money to revise his property to conk), m th an NFPA Code
(due to a local, state or Federal Agency adopting that code
and enforcing it) take legal action against that government,
and recover that expenditure on the basis that the government
or agency is acting improperly in allowing organizations such
as NFPA to control commerce, and prevent the use of lower
cost and safer systems? If the NFPA continues in the present
destructive directions, it would only seem a matter of time
until businessmen and the fire victims will have to explo.
such defensive measures.

SUBSCRIPTION FORM
Name
Title
Company

Address

bscripti Rate I per year.

Pr, Bimo thly (6 issues per year)

PATTON, INC.
6075 Cleveland Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43229