Flammability Updates & News

This quarter’s column is a look at the present, and how it may relate to the future. As an industry, we have already begun this journey. We can see, in the distance, two mountains we have to climb. One of the mountains has been mapped (California’s new standard, AB 603, in effect as of January 2004), but the other is known only in outline (the developmental federal standard). We can get a good idea of what we’re facing, by looking at where we are now, and measuring the distance to at least the “known mountain,” AB 603.

Since the majority of futon makers in the US are currently manufacturing and testing in accordance with 16 CFR 1632 and Cal TB117—a cigarette smolder standard and a small-flame component standard—materials and testing facilities changes of a similar (but not identical) nature may be required for Cal AB 603 and the new federal standard (when it is finalized).

Because AB 603 and the new federal standard are both large-open-flame composite tests, advice gleaned from this quarter’s column is only a “loose fit” for them, and is more directly applicable to the current laws (including AB 603).

The staff of the California Bureau of Home Furnishings (BHFTI), long a leader in US compliance legislation, was gracious enough to answer some questions on all the above, that I posed to them recently.

TJ: There are a number of companies in the futon industry who are currently testing for California Technical Bulletin 106 (US CFR 1632), and California Technical Bulletin 117. Has there been notable differentiation of success between companies that test their own futons, and companies that submit their futons to professional labs for testing?

BHFTI: The Bureau has no data to use in answering this question since we are not advised on a comprehensive basis of manufacturer’s or private laboratory test reports. However, the important issue is that ongoing testing should become a part of every manufacturer’s quality control regime, whether performed in-house or by a third-party laboratory.

Also, remember that the federal mattress/futon smoldering standard (16 CFR 1632/Technical Bulletin 106) requires mandatory testing. Every new prototype mattress must be tested and qualified prior to being sold in the United States. In addition, the standard requires that records of the test be kept for a specific time period and if changes are made to the ticking, tape edge or welt cord, component-substitution tests must be done to ensure these changes do not result in a greater tendency to smolder.

In-house testing to either Technical Bulletin TB 117 or TB 106 can involve significant capital investment and personnel training, so each manufacturer must decide what system is best, based on their own cost-benefit analysis. As a general rule, the private laboratories offer accurate, consistent results since they are in the business of doing these tests on a continuous basis and should have the expertise and equipment to perform them correctly.

In either case, test results are subject to a thorough technical review by the Bureau.

TJ: In general, what component materials have had the most success in the various compliance scenarios—what works best in TB 106? What works best in TB 117?

BHFTI: Technical Bulletin 106 (TB 106), identical to the federal cigarette resistance standard for mattresses, 16 CFR 1632, is a smoldering test on a finished product (mattress, futon or mattress pad), while Technical Bulletin 117 (TB 117) is a series of small, open-flame and smoldering tests on the individual components used to construct upholstered furniture.

Component materials used to construct futons and mattresses should be as smolder resistant as possible, especially those components used as cover fabrics or tickings and fillings located just below or near the cover fabric. This is because a typical test failure begins when the burning cigarette causes sustained smoldering ignition of the cover fabric, which then may interact with the first layer of filling to propagate the fire. Once the smolder zone exceeds two inches in any direction from any cigarette, the product fails Technical Bulletin 106.

There are two approaches, from a materials standpoint, to meeting TB 106. One is to intentionally use smolder-resistant fabrics and tickings and the second is to use smolder resistant filling materials. A smolder-resistant fabric alone may be insufficient and one may also need to use both smolder-resistant fabrics and fills for certain futon designs just to meet TB 106. The strategy for making a component smolder-resistant or for selecting smolder-resistant components, must be approached differently for each type of component. Generally speaking, synthetic fabrics and fibers as well as polyurethane foams, are very cigarette-resistant but will melt and burn easily with an open flame unless a flame-retardant is added.

Fabrics may be rendered more smolder-retardant by application of a fire retardant in the resin backcoating applied to the finished fabric, or other topical means. Polyurethane foams, even those not containing a flame retardant as would be used to meet TB 117, are generally fairly smolder resistant. Cotton battings, the traditional filling of choice in futons, are quite smolder-resistant and flame-resistant if an adequate level of boric acid, distributed evenly throughout the batt, is added. The Bureau cautions futon, mattress and furniture manufacturers to only buy cotton battings from reputable garnetters who have fire retardant (FR) quality control programs in place. The National Cotton Batting Institute requires its members who produce FR cotton batting to submit to a quality control program for testing and certification of their filling supplies.

TJ: AB 603 calls for a situation in which a barrier fabric wrap would be useful. What sort of barrier might work best? And, if a company chooses to forego a barrier wrap, what sort of materials might they use?

BHFTI: Although no regulatory standard has yet been written to satisfy the statutory requirements of AB 603 pertaining to mattresses and box springs, the directive of the standard is to provide mattresses sold in California the ability to resist large, open flames, of the type that would be presented by burning bedclothes ignited by a candle, lighter or match.

If the use of a fire-blocking barrier is selected as the strategy, the choice of barrier must be made after consideration of information such as the size and design (innerspring, foam core, cotton batting core, pillowtop, etc.) of the mattress, the type of ticking used and the level of flame resistance of the ticking, and the amounts and order of layering of the filling materials.

A variety of barrier materials are now available for use which offer varying levels of protection from open-flame ignition sources and do not necessarily sacrifice aesthetic and physical qualities, as was the case with the earlier generation of barrier materials. Barrier types include fabrics with specific FR materials built into the fiber or inherently FR fibers (fiberglass, Neoprene, vinyl and other proprietary FR additives), fabrics or tickings with a flame-retardant backcoating applied, and cushioning materials available in thin configurations, such as boric-acid treated cotton pads. Certain combinations of the above may also work to reduce costs and increase FR performance, while still not sacrificing comfort, resiliency and support.

If the decision is made to employ improved flame-resistant filling materials, a variety of cellular foams (melamine-loaded polyurethane, Combustion Modified High Resiliency, Neoprene, etc.) and new FR fiber battings formulated to resist flaming and melting are available.

Since protection for mattress/foundations sets from a large flame ignition source is one goal of AB 603, the Bureau’s and the mattress industry’s experience with development of Technical Bulletin 129, an institutional large-open flame mattress standard, can be helpful in planning how to comply. In many cases, intentionally choosing a combination of a less-expensive fire-blocking barrier and somewhat improved fillings can serve to meet a stricter flame standard and still minimize cost. But there is no hard and fast rule that works in every case.

Assistance with supplies and a list of vendors for fire barriers and filling materials with improved open-flame resistance can be obtained from the Sleep Products Safety Council (SPSC), the American Furniture Manufacturer’s Association (AFMA), the Business and Institutional Furniture Manufacturer’s Association (BIFMA), the National Cotton Batting Institute (NCBI) and the (California) Association of Woodworking and Furnishings Suppliers (AWFS) as well as other organizations.

TJ: In your understanding of AB 603, do you foresee specific “trouble spots” in futons being tested for the standard? For instance, do crevices, tufting indentations or seams present any additional opportunity for ignition?

BHFTI: As with any standard involving testing of a finished furniture or bedding product (or a large-scale mockup of the product) to large open flame, the structural integrity of the outer fabric or ticking as well as any fire-blocking barrier materials used below the outer fabric, is a critical consideration. One may use the best fire barrier material available, but if seams are employed that use non-flame retardant threads or fasteners, fire can breach the barrier at this point and penetrate into the core filling, resulting in a fire scenario leading to flashover. Use of flame-retardant tufting threads is also important in preventing flame penetration.

As far as crevices are concerned, for a futon in the seat/back configuration, they represent a worst-case location for either a smoldering or flaming fire to occur. This is because crevices do not allow heat from the ignition source to dissipate as rapidly as on smooth, flat surfaces and there is more fuel in the zone of the ignition source to become involved in burning. Bureau research has shown that the crevice areas of furniture are one of the most probable areas where a sustained fire may occur, especially for a smoldering fire caused by cigarettes, which may easily roll into a crevice and go unnoticed.

Generally speaking, a traditional futon, constructed with boric acid-treated cotton batting fill, and only a small percentage of more combustible elements, should do quite well in a small flame test or a large flame test. Futons constructed with these materials have demonstrated this capability in testing for TB 133 and TB 129.

TJ: What impact would the AB 603 standard, and/or the new national standard, have on Cal TB 106, the cigarette smolder standard?

BHFTI: Since the exact test procedure for mattresses that will result from the AB 603 legislation has not been written, it is difficult to answer this question definitively at this time. There is always a possibility that changes in the design, use of materials and construction methods for a futon or other product to meet an open-flame standard may change the smoldering properties of the product. Thus, after selection of an open flame test, research will also have to be done on mattresses and futons to determine if smolder resistance would be compromised, resulting in a higher failure rate for Technical Bulletin 106 (16 CFR 1632), by construction changes made to impart more flame resistance. However, for futons, this may not be a major issue for the following reasons.

Prior work by the Bureau, CPSC and the cotton industry has shown that for a traditionally constructed futon containing a ticking without excessive smolder tendencies and a filling consisting of an adequate and homogenous application of boric-acid treated cotton batting, both a large open-flame standard like Technical Bulletin 129 and a finished product smoldering standard like Technical Bulletin 106, can be met.

The strategy employing flame-retardant barrier fabrics and materials will in many cases allow a finished furnishings product to comply with more severe large open-flame standards like TB 129. However it may not prevent a smoldering fire spreading across the surface of the futon or mattress. But even if a smoldering fire does occur, this type of fire, especially for a futon using a cotton or cotton/polyester blend fabric over an FR interliner or barrier, is not very likely to lead to a major flashover situation, which is always one major goal of any flammability standard for a consumer product.

TJ: Any advice you’d like to give futon makers in light of the upcoming new standards?

BHFTI: Given all the regulatory, research and industry-sponsored initiatives underway leading to improved flammability standards for residential furniture and bedding products and the increasing ability of the supplier industry to provide better-performing component materials and designs, it is not a matter of if the standards will change but a matter of when. In the case of mattress/box spring sets sold in California, there is already a date of implementation (January 2004) for AB 603.

To help ensure that a company can produce products consistently meeting these improved standards at minimal cost, the Bureau recommends that planning begin now to understand changes in the law, what technical changes may be required, and what design and material options are available.

Also, consumers are increasingly aware of fire safety-issues with respect to purchase of home furnishings and other consumer products and will continue to demand safer products.

For more information, visit the Bureau’s Web site at www.dca.ca.gov/bhfti. FL