Texas A&M University Study
The World Fire Safety Foundation

- - - - - - - - - -  More Evidence  - - - - - - - - - -

- See:  Fathers For Fire Safety  --  Fire Chiefs Presentation

- See:  The UL Letters

- See: 
Indiana’s, WTHR TV series -- ‘Deadly Delay’

- See:  Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro  -- ‘Class Action Law Suit’

- See:  ‘Closing the Deadly Loophole in Australia’s Flawed Smoke Alarm Standard

- See:  ‘Recommending, Selling or Installing Ionization Smoke Alarms, A Criminal Act of Negligence?

Texas A&M University

‘Risk Analysis of Residential Fire Detector Performance’
August 1995

Texas A&M University

Risk Analysis - 1995

     Researchers at Texas A&M University, along with support from the University of Colorado and Iowa, completed a three year smoke alarm study in the August 1995.  They were concerned that  Underwriters Laboratories testing of smoke alarms, by putting a smoke detector in a wooden box and then by blowing hot smoke into it, was did not representative of real-world fire conditions.

     Texas A&M’s testing was a fault-tree-analysis model designed by Bell Laboratories for the United
States military.  After three years research they concluded:
- In the smoldering stage of fire the ionization alarm had a 55.8% failure rate to the
  photoelectric alarms 4.06% failure rate.
(Note: ‘failure rate’ is calculated from statistics showing one or more people died in a house fire.
- In the flaming stage of fire compared , where the ionization alarm is claimed to have a few
   seconds advantage, it had a 19.8% failure rate, to the photoelectric alarms 3.99% failure rate.


Here > > >