Download Technical, Practical and Manufacturing Feasibility of Technologies

•
AHAM test reports covering work conducted as part of the 1986 Food Fire Test
Program.
In addition, we reviewed videos illustrating grease fires and safe cooking techniques that
AHAM made available to us.
To deepen our understanding of industry issues and concerns, we met with appliance
manufacturers to discuss their product lines, product development process, technology
needs, technology evaluations, relevant tests, concepts, related product development
programs, product trends, industry concerns, and safety requirements. The specific
elements of the discussions at these meetings are confidential, (as per our agreement with
AHAM and CPSC) but we have incorporated the general information into our
evaluations.
In addition to the literature reviews and meetings, we conducted some tests in our lab to
obtain additional data on system performance and characteristics. We obtained the CPSC
range prototypes and conducted limited testing on both the gas and electric units. We
reviewed the Good Housekeeping report covering their tests of these units. We obtained
a Rinnai Gas Table with a temperature controller and conducted numerous tests to
understand its operation and performance. To supplement these tests, we reviewed the
Rinnai User Manual, translated from Japanese by AHAM.
Finally, we utilized our understanding of the appliance industry, the standards process,
the science of cooking products, and the product development process to support our
analyses and evaluation work.
3.4 Develop Evaluation Criteria
Specific evaluation criteria and metrics were developed in the categories of cooking
performance, operability, reliability/durability, manufacturability/installation/service,
safety, and effectiveness in addressing surface cooking fires. These criteria and metrics
were reviewed with representatives from CPSC and AHAM. It was agreed that as a
starting point for the screening work, each criteria would have equal weighting relative to
each other. These criteria were further grouped into two categories: 1) criteria that
reflected the effectiveness of the technology to mitigate surface cooking fires and 2)
criteria that reflected the potentially negative impact of the technology on the
performance, operation reliability safety of the cooking system.
3.5 Screen Technology Classes by Evaluation Criteria
As an initial screen, we evaluated each technology class with respect to the agreed upon
evaluation criteria and metrics. The evaluation scores for each technology class were
tallied. A scatter plot of fire mitigation effectiveness versus impact on product value was
generated for the set of technologies. Two additional ‘technology classes’ were
evaluated as a process check: ‘do nothing’ (i.e. make no change to range/add no fire
suppression technology), and ‘add smoke alarm only’.
3-2