The Patton Plan for Fire Safety
Increased concern for life
safety from fire is not
enough. Adding new struc-
tural fire regulations is
useless. Strengthening
present protection pro-
grams won't help. The
thing to do is to put out the
fire. Doesn't sound revolu-
tionary, but it is. And it
doesn't have to cost all
that much
By RICHARD M. PATTON
President
Patton Fire Protection
and Research. Inc.
100 E. Alameda St., Suite 406
Tucson, Arizona 85701 (602) 622-7423
60/January, 1973
Improved fire safety will occur building has never been a good
on a national basis only after
dramatic changes are made in
our existing fire technology.
Changes proposed in this article
will profoundly affect building
construction, and also building
codes, up to 60% of which are
directly related to fire problems.
False solutions
We have tried to solve the fire
problem by regulating the basic
structure. For 100 years we
have been adding new structural
regulations and producing higher
cost "fireproof" buildings. But it
hasn't worked and it never will
work. It is now time to move in
a new direction that offers more
promise — toward a positive pro-
gram to correct fire causing con-
ditions.
Our present fire safety pro-
gram for human life in structures
is based on the "fireproof build-
ing" theory of fire protection.
Presumably, human life is safe
in a steel and concrete building
resistant to the ravages of fire.
This is basically and patently
false. The very high cost of fire-
proofing of steel can be justified
only if there is a real possibility
that a long duration interior fire
will occur within the structure.
Why do they die?
If the building has been
"proofed" against fire, where
does this leave the occupants who
are inside the building with the
fire? The design characteristics
of a fireproof building and a
furnace are identical. Both are
designed to withstand interior
fires. And from the earliest days
of the fireproof building it has
acted as both a heat trap and a
crematorium.
Even though the fireproof
way to protect human life, every
time human life is lost, regula-
tions governing fireproof con-
struction have been increased.
The fireproof building has
evolved into a maze of fireproof
cubicles as part of a scheme to
"trap" and enclose the fire no
matter where it originates. This
has accomplished three things:
1. Greatly adds to construction
and maintenance costs.
2. Interferes with operations and
reduces efficiency.
3. Provides a low level of fire
safety.
We never learn
Yet the cult of the fireproof
building is very much alive. New
regulations which the experts are
presently promoting are:
1. Require more doors to be self-
closing.
2. Install special smoke removal
systems.
3. Install special systems to pres-
surize stairway and elevator
shafts to prevent smoke spread.
4. Prohibit carpeting on the
floors and use of many plastic
materials in construction.
5. Require separate air handling
systems for every floor.
6. Install computers to keep
track of fire spread and pre-
programmed messages to in-
struct occupants where to go
and what to do to escape the
fire.
Contents count
Basic safety plans associated
with fireproof construction and
ways in which they fail under
real fire conditions are detailed
in Table 1.
A tremendous number of re-
strictive and very costly building
code regulations have come into
existence as a result of the as-
sumption that it is the structure
itself that establishes the fire
characteristics of a facility. The
Patton Plan challenges this as-
sumption on the basis that it is
interior furnishings and combust-
ible contents — not the structure
that counts. Interior furnishings
are most easily ignited, burn
most furiously, and produce the
most toxic gases.
Further, when interior furnish-
ings become ignited, it is prob-
able that any deaths that occur
will precede serious structural in-
volvement. It must follow that
structural regulations, which are
so costly and restrictive, are
largely irrelevant to the human
problem of fire safety.
Why not put it out?
If we assume the fire usually
starts in the contents, and be-
comes a deadly fire before the
structure itself is tested, then by
solving the human life problem
we also solve the structural prob-
lem. There are three ways to
solve the content fire problem:
1.Eliminate the combustible en-
vironment. A very high per-
centage of the materials man
requires for human comfort are
combustible. When we realize
that a single overstuffed chair,
and single sofa or bed contains
enough fuel to initiate room
flashover, then we must con-
clude that we can't solve the
problem by restricting combus-
tibles.
2. Eliminate ignition sources.
While fire prevention makes a
great deal of sense, there are
far too many ignition poten-
tials to ever achieve absolute
control. Despite our best fire
prevention efforts, some fires
will occur.
Continued on next page
TABLE 1. WHY PRESENT FIRE PLANS FAIL
ASSUMPTION: A non-burnable building is inherently fire safe.
REFUTATION: It is the interior combustible furnishings that are most likely
to ignite, burn most rapidly and produce the greatest quant-
ity of toxic gases. People inside the "furnace" with the fuel
will usually be killed before the structure itself is significant-
ly involved.
ASSUMPTION: Fire can be rendered safe by closing a door and trapping
it in the fireproof room where it originates.
REFUTATION: 1) What about the people in the room where fire origi-
nates?
2) Fire often originates in corridors or other areas where it
is not possible to trap it.
3) Even if fire originates in an unoccupied room with the
door closed, usually a person investigating smoke odor will
open the door to see what is happening. Normal human
reaction is to open the door and let the fire escape, and
no amount of training is going to change this.
ASSUMPTION: If fire escapes, there will be time for emergency proce-
dures and escape from the fire zone.
REFUTATION: Fire tests and research prove that fire can sometimes build
up so rapidly that even mobile occupants can be trapped
and killed before they have a chance to escape.
ASSUMPTION: As a last resort, room occupants can close the door and
"ride out" a fire.
REFUTATION: 1) Fire can suddenly fill a corridor with heat and smoke
and cause chaos before all doors can be closed. Some
people will not have the ability or knowledge to close
doors.
2) Fire will invariably panic some people. Many will try to
leave rooms to flee and will be overcome. Others may
panic and leap out of windows.
3) Even if the door is closed and the occupants are calm,
they can be overcome by gases forced into the room. (Fire
generates its own pressure by converting solids to gases,
with tremendous increase in volume.)
ASSUMPTION: Fireproof barriers will limit fire spread so most of the
occupants will be safe.
REFUTATION: It is a known fact that smoke and toxic gases which claim
most victims, can spread beyond physical fire barriers —
the air handling system is only one of the ways smoke
spreads. The "experts" are currently planning complex
systems to control smoke spread in buildings. The cost will
be enormous and probability of success small.
BUILDINGS/61
 PA'TTON PLAN FOR FIRE SAFETY

National code authorities and the National Bureau of Standards

are now moving toward recognition of an inexpensive and highly
reliable fire suppression system called the Life Safety System,
which picks up where the industrial sprinkler left off 70 years ago.

3. Put the fire out. This is the one Suppression System uses small The 2 1/2 gallon fire extinguish-
facet of fire technology that tubing; is economical; generally er, presently provided, is not
holds the greatest promise. operates off domestic water sup- well understood and fire often
Once a fire starts, there is no ply; has reliability in excess of gains headway as the amateur
satisfactory solution short of 99.9%; is capable of inconspicu- tries to figure out how to use it.
complete extinguishment. Fire ous installation in existing build- Research shows that only 20 gal-
suppression is the ultimate fire ings; has a long trouble-free life; lons can control a one-room fire
protection. greater resistance to earthquake when applied in the form of a
and explosion; and represents spray, but the 2% gallon fire
Sprinklers can be better the first major advance in sprink- extinguisher applies water at an
The Patton fire control plan ler system design in this century. inadequate rate in the form of a
consists of three parts. First, straight stream, and is exhausted
there should be a low cost, but Equipping amateurs in about 60 seconds. The 1%-in.
highly reliable built-in automatic Second facet of the plan is to hose, often provided, discharges
greatly improve tools available 50 GPM or more, can have a
suppression system throughout to an employee or occupant who severe nozzle reaction, and is ex-
the facility which will respond
discovers the fire. Research tremely stiff and most difficult to
to products of combustion. The demonstrates that a small garden
present sprinkler system, subject move and operate when under
type hose with spray nozzle cap- pressure. (The City of Rochester
to industrial type sprinkler regu- able of discharging 6 to 10 gal-
lations, employs large, ugly pip- has already included new criteria
lons per minute can readily
ing, requires huge water supplies, handle a one-room size fire even in fire code amendments for high
and according to National Fire after the room is totally involved. rise buildings which include use
Protection Association statistics, A small hose of this type is of %-in. garden hose on hose
fails approximately 4% of the economical, easy to provide, and reels instead of 1%-in, hose in
time it is called upon to operate. readily used by amateur fire hose cabinets for occupants to
The proposed Life Safety Fire fighters. use in fighting fire.)
The third facet of a sensible
fire control plan is prompt noti-
fication of public fire services.
TABLE 2. REWARDS OF A NEW FIRE TECHNOLOGY The built-in fire suppression sys-
tem will be arranged to auto-
A plan of absolute fire suppression will do all these things: matically and directly notify the
1. Permit a great reduction in building construction costs. (For example, fire department in event of Ire,
winged, sprawling buildings will no longer be necessary.) transmitting the signal if a
2. Permit greater freedom of interior design which will result in im- sprinkler opens or a small hose
proved efficiency and reduced operating costs, (Opening up in- is put into use.
teriors will create a more light, airy and humane facility.)
3. Reduce maintenance costs. (The fireproof building has many hidden Give Technology a chance
maintenance costs in addition to an initial excessive capital outlay.) If we first recognize the fact
4. Provide occupants with "in-place" protection. (The fire will be that we can never solve the in-
promptly detected and suppressed; people will not have to run for terior fire problem by regulating
stairways to escape.) the structure, we will then pro-
5. Permit use of economical and useful materials in construction. (Mis- ceed to create and further de-
guided experts are already trying to regulate many useful ma- velop technological solutions
terials out of existence.) based on the fire suppression
6. Initiate a new renaissance in architecture. (More than 60% of our concept. This solution should
building regulations deal with fire safety, greatly confining the de- also have application to all types
signer. Totally new concepts of structures and solutions needed by of buildings, including hospitals,
tomorrow's society will be possible.) nursing homes, and dwellings,
where most fire deaths occur.

62/January, 1973