FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

Feb. 26, 2004

CONTACT: John Blair
(301) 975-4261

A report from the Commerce Department’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) today
stated that both types of commercially available home smoke alarms (also called smoke “detectors”)
consistently provide people enough time to escape most residential fires. It stressed the need for
immediate response to an activated alarm and showed that individuals caught in a flaming fire (as
opposed to a smoldering fire) have an average of three minutes from an alarm’s first warning to escape.
“The three-minute escape window for flaming fires differs from the 17 minutes NIST recorded in its
seminal smoke alarm tests in the 1970s,” said Richard Bukowski, the NIST researcher who conducted
both studies. “It confirms what fire scientists have recognized for some time: fires today seem to burn
faster and kill quicker because the contents of modern homes (such as furnishings) can burn faster and
more intensely.”

“Our new research, however, proves that even with a three-minute warning, smoke alarms still
offer enough time to save your life,” Bukowski stressed. “When the alarm sounds, it is important that
everyone just get out of the house.”

Smoke alarms are of two types—ionization and photoelectric.* Some combination models are sold.
According to the two-year NIST home smoke alarm performance study, ionization smoke alarms respond
faster to flaming fires, while photoelectric smoke alarms respond quicker to smoldering fires. The report
concluded that, despite these differences, the placement of either alarm type on every level of the
house provided the necessary escape time for the different types of fires examined. The
researchers determined the necessary escape times by considering the time that the alarms sounded in
various locations and the development of untenable (unsurvivable) conditions.

The tests also showed how closed bedroom doors and proper placement of smoke alarms affect one’s
chances of survival. In both cases, the time to escape untenable conditions was increased, providing that
the individual was not in the room where the fire originated.

* Ionization alarms work on the principle that as smoke particles enter the alarm’s sensing chamber, the
particles reduce the electric current flow in the alarm. Photoelectric alarms use light to detect the
presence of smoke particles, with the particles scattering the light toward a sensor.

The new smoke alarm data are expected to be useful in considering programs and legislation to install
interconnected smoke alarm systems (where one alarm sets off all other alarms connected to it within a
building) in older homes. Major U.S. housing codes have required interconnected smoke alarms,
including alarms in bedrooms, since 1993. However, most homes built before that date are not so
equipped.

The NIST report also looked at the interaction of smoke alarms and residential sprinklers of the type
increasingly being required in new homes. The tests reaffirmed earlier findings that smoke alarms of
either type will activate faster than sprinklers, although sprinklers, once activated, can stop a major home
fire quickly. The NIST report also noted that sprinklers activated well after smoke alarms and after heat
alarms. The report concluded that “while these sprinklers have an outstanding record of saving lives and
property, the later activation times imply that residential sprinkler installations should always include
smoke alarms (as currently required in National Fire Protection Association Standards 13D and 13R) to
provide greater escape time for those capable of escaping.”

To further investigate the results of an earlier study by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
(CPSC), NIST also looked into “nuisance” or false alarms, usually activated by cooking fumes. Such false
alarms are of concern because inconvenienced individuals sometimes disconnect the smoke detectors,
leaving the area without devices capable of detecting authentic fires. The NIST tests showed that
normal cooking activities cause nuisance alarms in both photoelectric and ionization type alarms.
Neither type of detector was demonstrably better in reducing nuisance alarms. The test data,
however, are expected to be useful in the design of next-generation “smart” units that will use computer-
chip evaluation of multiple fire conditions to accurately distinguish unwanted fire conditions from nuisance
conditions.

The recent NIST tests were similar in many respects to the 1975-1976 NIST tests that produced the first
data on record to clearly demonstrate the potential of smoke alarms to save lives. The NIST fire
engineers tested the ionization and photoelectric alarms in fire tests conducted within a controlled
laboratory setting as well as in two homes—a manufactured home and a three-bedroom, two-story brick
house. The layout of the manufactured home also was considered representative of apartments and
condominiums of about 100 square meters (or about 1,000 square feet). Groups of alarms were located
in the room of fire origin, in at least one bedroom and in a central location on each floor. The researchers
used actual furnishings and household items for fire sources and tested smoke alarms bought in retail
stores.
Sponsors of the study include the CPSC; the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; the U.S. Fire
Administration; the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (the Healthy Homes Initiative);
and Underwriters Laboratories. The National Fire Protection Association and the National Research
Council Canada made in-kind contributions to the project.
The NIST report, “Performance of Home Smoke Alarms: Analysis of the Response of Several Available
Technologies in Residential Fire Settings,” may be downloaded as a PDF file at
http://smokealarm.nist.gov.
As a non-regulatory agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Technology Administration, NIST
develops and promotes measurement, standards and technology to enhance productivity, facilitate trade
and improve the quality of life.