Review of the Sound Effectiveness of Residential Smoke Alarms
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A REVIEW OF THE SOUND EFFECTIVENESS OF RESIDENTIAL SMOKE ALARMS December 2004 (Revised) CPSC-ES-0502 U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20207-0001 U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) was created in 1972 by Congress under the Consumer Product Safety Act and began operating in 1973. In the Consumer Product Safety Act, Congress directed CPSC to protect the public "against unreasonable risks of injuries associated with consumer products." CPSC is charged with protecting the public from unreasonable risks of serious injury or death from more than 15,000 types of consumer products under the agency's jurisdiction. Deaths, injuries and property damage from consumer product incidents cost the nation more than $700 billion annually. The CPSC is committed to protecting consumers and families from products that pose a fire, electrical, chemical, or mechanical hazard or can injure children. The CPSC's work to ensure the safety of consumer products - such as toys, cribs, power tools, cigarette lighters, and household chemicals - contributed significantly to the 30 percent decline in the rate of deaths and injuries associated with consumer products over the past 30 years. U.S. CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION DIRECTORATE FOR ENGINEERING SCIENCES A REVIEW OF THE SOUND EFFECTIVENESS OF RESIDENTIAL SMOKE ALARMS CPSC-ES-0502 December 2004 (Revised) Arthur Lee Electrical Engineer Division of Electrical Engineering Directorate for Engineering Sciences Jonathan Midgett, Ph.D. Engineering Psychologist Division of Human Factors Directorate for Engineering Sciences Sharon White Engineering Psychologist Division of Human Factors Directorate for Engineering Sciences Acknowledgements Sandy Inkster, Ph.D. Linda Smith Physiologist Health Statistician Directorate for Health Sciences Directorate for Epidemiology The views expressed in this report are those of the CPSC staff and have not been reviewed or approved by, and may not necessarily reflect the views of, the Commission. No Text on This Page ii CPSC-ES-0502 December 2004 (Revised) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In 2003, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) initiated a project to review the audibility effectiveness of residential smoke alarms for the older population. The scope of the project was broadened to address recent concerns that children may not wake to the sound of a smoke alarm. The CPSC staff estimates that in 1999 there were 337,300 unintentional residential structure fires resulting in 2,390 civilian deaths, 14,550 civilian injuries, and $4.24 billion in property losses. The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) reports that, during the 24-year period from 1977 to 2001, home fires and home fire deaths dropped 49% and 47%, respectively, excluding events from September 11, 2001. In 2001, four of every five fire deaths occurred in home structure fires, excluding 9/11, according to NFPA. An estimated 35 million people in the United States were 65 years old or older in 2000, or almost 13% of the population. In 2010, the “baby boom” generation will begin to turn 65. As more of the baby boomers become 65 and older, the number of people over the age of 65 is expected to double by the year 2030, growing to 70 million. The number of people over the age of 65 will have increased to 20% of the population, or one in five people in the United States, by 2030. The NFPA reports for 1999 that the fire death rate for people over 65 is 25.3 fire deaths per million, or more than twice the national average. The fire death rate increases for older age groups. For example, for those over the age of 75, the fire death rate (32.9 fire deaths per million) is about three times the national average. The NFPA also reports for 1999 that preschool children (under age 5) accounted for a disproportionate number of fire deaths in homes. Preschool children had a fire death rate of 19.9 fire deaths per million, or roughly twice the national average (10.5). The number of fire deaths involving preschool children has been on the decline. NFPA attributes the declining number of fire deaths to the CPSC regulation requiring child-resistant cigarette lighters, which became effective in 1994. NFPA reported that, if this trend continues, preschool children may no longer be a high-risk age group. For 1999, the NFPA report also states that children ages 5 to 9 had a fire death rate (10.1 fire deaths per million) similar to the national average. Older children, ages 10 to 19, experienced the lowest death rate – approximately 4.4 fire deaths per million. This report presents a literature review of the sound effectiveness of residential smoke alarms in waking sleeping children and in producing audible signals suitable for older adults. The staff also reviewed possible alternatives to current smoke alarms, such as changes in smoke alarm horn frequency, cues, or other methods that may improve alarm sound effectiveness. The CPSC staff believes that improvements in smoke alarm sound effectiveness could lead to increased escape time for occupants in a residential fire. It should be noted that any recommendations for change to increase sound effectiveness for waking children and alerting older adults must also be evaluated to determine that there is not a reduction in the current level of effectiveness for other age groups. December 2004 (Revised) CPSC-ES-0502 iii The following conclusions are based on the information presented in this report. · Children under the age of 16 have longer periods of deep sleep compared to adults. · Current smoke alarms do not reliably wake children under the age of 16. · There is no evidence that children have a higher fire death rate because of the inability to wake to a smoke alarm. · Current smoke alarms are effective in waking most adults not under the influence of drugs, alcohol, and sleep deprivation. However, current smoke alarms may not reliably notify or alert seniors who are hearing impaired. · The fire death rate for older adults is higher than the national average. This may be attributed to many factors – mobility, awareness, loss of hearing, etc. · Various home configurations and locations of smoke alarms can limit the transmission of sound throughout the house. · Interconnected smoke alarms can provide earlier warning of smoke and fire. · The addition of interconnected smoke alarms inside bedrooms may provide improved warning of smoke and fire where bedroom doors are closed. · Alternative warning systems and sounds warrant further exploration to account for as many home configurations and occupant needs as possible. Additional research is needed to better understand potential deficiencies in the audibility of smoke alarms. CPSC staff believes the following areas of research need to be explored to gather additional data to help determine possible technical solutions and/or public education campaigns: Training Approach vs. Sleep-Induced Incapacity. Determine whether children can be awakened by an alarm through training. Exploration of Alternative Cues. Investigate whether alternative cues can reliably wake children (e.g. strobe light, alternative sounds and sound characteristics, human voice, etc.). Smoke Alarm Sound Uniqueness. Determine whether current smoke alarm patterns/tones are identifiable and unique when compared to other alerting sounds. iv CPSC-ES-0502 December 2004 (Revised) Alternative Sound Frequency of Smoke Alarm Signal. Explore feasibility and effectiveness of lowering the sound frequency of the smoke alarm signal, and/or use of alternative signals such as a high-low frequency combination. Improving the Detection Capability of Smoke Alarms. Examine possible technical solutions to improve smoke alarm detection capabilities, such as alternative or combination sensors. Interaction of Multiple Smoke Alarm Cues. For different alarm cues sounding simultaneously, determine if alarm sounds are still recognizable. December 2004 (Revised) CPSC-ES-0502 v No Text on This Page vi CPSC-ES-0502 December 2004 (Revised) Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY................................................................................................................iii 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................1 1.1 Fire Hazard ...............................................................................................................................1 1.1.1 Children at Risk............................................................................................................................................................. 2 1.1.2 Older Adults at Risk ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Project Objectives......................................................................................................................2 1.3 Technical Approach...................................................................................................................3 2.0 LITERATURE SEARCH..............................................................................................................3 2.1 Residential Smoke Alarms..........................................................................................................3 2.1.1 Human Response to Sound Intensity and Pitch....................................................................................................... 4 2.1.2 Sound Level