THE PATTON REPORT

No. 3 A Loss Control Publication Feb. 1969

WHAT IS DESIGNED FIRE PROTECTION

Want A Man Who's Flexible?

Want a man who's flexible, Want a man who's flexible.

Who does just what he's told; And sways with every breeze?
Who never questions policy, Who has alternating policies
And stays within the fold? As numerous as trees.

A man who hears no honor call,
To stand up for what's right.
A man who'll never rock that boat
And never, , never fight.
4
Then get a man with no back bone,
Without a spine, you see.
And you will really be amazed
At how flexible he'll be.

Who shakes the hand of every man

And roots for either team; Written By:
Who'd rather float where current flows, Richard M. Patton
Than swim against the stream.

In order to understand "DESIGNED FIRE PROTECTION" it is first necessary to

examine existing fire protection practices, design methods, and concepts.
It is necessary to do this because DESIGNED FIRE PROTECTION as defined in
this newsletter represents a departure from the traditional ways. To under-
stand the new we must begin with the old.

If we begin with the old, perhaps we should start with the start. Fire pre-
vention and fire protection are, of course, as old as the history of man.
However, if we think in terms of current fire protection practices we need
go back only as far as the development of the fire lnsu ranee business during
the latter part of the 19th century.

Insurance is a financial plan based on several ver:,! simple concepts.

They are:

A - The law of averages.

B Homogeneous units (properties of similar size and characteristics).
C - Spread of risk.
D - Loss experience.
E - Rate making and underwriting.

Here's the way it works. If there is a large number of homogeneous units

that are not all subject to one single loss or catastrophe (there is spread
of risk) the number of units that will be destroyed each year will be pre-
dictable (the law of averages). Once the number of losses is determined
- ( experience) it is a simple financial matter to levy a charge against all
units that will pay for the losses, and in addition cover the insurers over-
head and profits. This is an amazingly straightforward and remarkably suc-
cessful financial plan. It has been especially successful over the years
because there is an additional plus factor; the payment of the loss occurs
at a time interval after the collection of the premium, and in the interim
the money held is put to work.
No. 2

There are hazards to insurance as there are to every business venture. For
example, care must be taken to protect the insurer against unplanned for
catastrophic losses due, for instance, to hurr'.cane, flood, earthquake, etc.
That's where underwriting and the selection of risk comes in.

The goal of underwriting is to acquire homogeneous risks (similar properties)

and obtain a spread of risk (no more than one or a few subject to a single
loss). When these conditions are met the law of averages comes into play and
profits are assured if rates are correct.

It should be noted that excellence of risk is not a. prerequisite for profit-

able insuring. A class of poor risks (poor protection - severe hazards) can
be very attractive to the insurance industry provided the frequency of loss
can be accurately determined and a rating structure established based on
experience.

Poor risks, llowever, are very disruptive when mixed with good risks. If
rates are predicated on the good risks the overall result will be unfavorable
loss experience. When rates are adjusted the good risks will pay excessive
premiums and may seek other markets.

The matter of dissimilar risks has not been too serious a problem with some
classes of fire insurance such as homes, churches, office buildings, insti-
tutional buildings, hotels, motels, etc. But it has been with industrial
and many commercial properties. Because of the dissimilar nature of these
properties, the variations in size and values, and the differences in the
severity of the fire hazards; straight forward underwriting of the properties
has been impossible.

This is a problem that faced the early fire insurers. And, thru this day the
problem has become more complex as the industrial evolution continues. How-
ever, from the beginning the industrial and commercial fire insurance markets
represented too many potential insurance dollars to be abandoned. A solution
was needed to bring those properties that were not homogeneous into the frame-
work of insurance based on the law of averages.

The solution was two fold; and involved:

A The development of complex insurance rating systems that

graded construction features, protective features, and
the severity of the fire hazard.

B - The development of protective facilities and the simultaneous

classifying, grading and standardizing of these facilities.

NOW HEAR THIS!

FIRE PROTECTION AS IT WAS CONCEIVED AND AS IT HAS DEVELOPED IS A SYSTEM

DESIGNED TO EQUALIZE DISSIMILAR PROPERTIES THAT WOULD OTHERWISE BE UN-
INSURABLE SO THAT THEY MAY BE BROUGHT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF THE LAW OF
AVERAGES. THE DEVELOPMENT OF FIRE PROTECTION HAS BEEN STUNTED g ECAUSE OF
THE LIMITED SCOPE OF THIS OBJECTIVE.
No. 3

Fire protection as we know it today is a by-product of the insurance industry.

It is based on the extension of the law of averages. It is predicated on
"average conditions", "standard protection", "classes of construction", " ex-
perience", and, whether we like it or not, "acceptable loss ratios".

FIRE PROTECTION IS NOT NOW, AND NEVER HAS BEEN, DESIGNED TO SCIENTIFICALLY
FIT PROTECTION TO A SPECIFIC PROPERTY OR OPERATION.

That fire protection is currently geared toward bringing a broad class of

properties back within the framework of the law of averages and make them
insurable is fairly easy to substantiate. One need only examine a few of
the hundreds of fire standards and codes to see that this is the pattern.
The sprinkler standard puts all of the diverse properties in America into
three classes - "light", "ordinary", and "extra hazard", and thru the magic
of the law of averages it proceeds to design a sprinkler layout for each
and every one of those properties, right down to the head, the fittings,
,
the hangers and the piping.

For years we have been dividing properties of vastly different fire loading
( BTU's per sq. ft.) with a standard fire wall and standard fire doors.

If there still is a question as to the objective of fire protection, lets ask

someone who should know. In his article "The Development of Sprinkler Stand-
ards" which appeared in the July 1968 NFPA Fire Journal, Mr. E. W. Fowler,
Manager of the Engineering and Safety Department of the American Insurance
Association informs us, "The sprinkler standard, as it was originally written
and as it has continued to the present day, is basically designed for use by
an insurance inspection organization as a guide for determining the acceptabi-
lity of an installation of automatic sprinklers for some insurance purpose".

The point made that the sprinkler standard is geared toward the needs of the
insurer (who can average his losses) also holds true with other fire stand-
ards. Engineering by the rules is engineering by averages.

I will leave it to the reader to pursue these observations at his leisure

to satisfy himself in his own way, if he will, that fire protection engi-
neering is presently an extension of the law of averages. Meanwhile,
will proceed to examine in greater detail the field of "fire protection
engineering" as it has evolved under the impetus of insurance needs. Here
are its characteristics.

1 -ITS ROOTS ARE IN STATISTICS

Statistics is the science of the underwriter. Past experience is the key

to future profits. There is a strong tendency to stick with known methods,
standardize, and resist change. Progress is extremely slow.

2.-SOLUTIONS ARE DEVELOPED THRU THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS

Change, when it does occur, is usually the result of adverse loss experience.
Committees meet, discuss the problem, propose solutions,compromise, and pass
new rules. Over the years the impetus has been for more requirements and
stricter requirements. The result is more and more of that which has tailed
in the past, with little innovation and negligible progress.
No. 4

3.-OFTEN, RESEARCH IS NOT RESEARCH

A high percentage of the "fire research" is not true research at all.

Rather, it is a routine testing of the new products of industry to see
if they fall within the framework of old fire protection standards.
Rarely are old fire protection standards examined to see if they meet
the needs of modern industry.

Even where there is "true research", the research methods are often systematic
(by the numbers) and unimaginative. Frequently, after the data is organized
and compiled conclusions are written that are inserted in the report that
are based on past fire experience (or someone's interpretation of experience);
these conclusions having no relation to the basic test data developed.

4.-NEGLECT OF THE HOMOGENEOUS RISK

Many properties including homes, churches, motels, nursing homes, colleges,

etc. are fully insurable within the framewOrk of the law of averages with-
out automatic fire protection. Therefore there has been little impetus to
develop protection systems for these properties. For instance, it can be
easily shown that sprinkler pipe sizing can be substantially reduced for
compartmented occupancies such as motels (small number of heads subject to
a single fire), and water supplies can be Correspondingly reduced; but it has
not been done.

5.-INSTANT ENGINEERING, EASY DESIGN REVIEW

The use of standards make the training of inspectors (often called engineers)
an easy matter. Design review and inspections are facilitated. Unfortunately,
rule book engineering does not always make plants safe, and almost invariably
it results in overpriced protection.

6.-WHAT IS "LOSS EXPERIENCE" FOR THE INSURER IS OFTEN DISASTER FOR THE INSURED

Solving fire problems with standards, averages, and generalizations may rep-
resent a satisfactory solution for the insurer or other regulatory agency
that deals with the over all loss experience, but it does not produce a good
solution for the individual property owner. In order to cover a broad class
of properties with a standard solution that solution must be keyed to adequate
protection for all but a few of the properties. MATHEMATICALLY, THIS MEANS
THAT MUCH MORE THAN HALF WILL BE OVERPROTECTED. THOSE FEW THAT WILL BE
UNDERPROTECTED ARE SUBJECT TO DISASTER. While insurers soften the blow by
paying businessmen back some of their own money when loss occurs, often it
falls far short of that which is needed to fully offset the loss.

7.-LIFE SAFETY, OFTEN NEGLECTED

Since the driving force behind protection is a financial one, safety to the
individual often receives inadequate attention.

These then, are the characteristics of protection based on the law of averages.
Now it is time to ask the question - "WHAT IS DESIGNED FIRE PROTECTION?"
Just as an analysis of "LAW OF AVERAGES PROTECTION" is complex, a des-
cription of DESIGNED PROTECTION is complex'. Here are its characteristics.

DESIGNED PROTECTION is protection specifically fitted to the property.

It is protection geared to the needs of the owner, or the corporation.
This is protection employing closer tolerances, more study, more engi -
neering, and more innovation.

There is no corporation that has an inexhaustible supply of money for

safety purposes. IT IS ESSENTIAL THAT MONEY WHICH IS EARMARKED FOR PROTEC-
TION WILL RESULT IN THE MAXIMUM PROTECTION PRACTICAL FOR THE PRICE. To
accomplish this requires more time and study than the insurance company
engineers ars? able to devote to the problem.

The difference between a structure and a pile of bricks is the mortar that
joins them. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SEVERAL HUNDRED ODD FIRE STANDARDS AND
CODES AND TRUE FIRE PROTECTION IS GOOD ENGINEERING RASED ON ECONOMICS.

Writing fire codes is an endless process. The only way to separate the good
from the trivia is to price it and evaluate it, and see how much protection
you get for the dollar. It is just recently that this principle is getting
recognition. For instance, there are studies being made now to evaluate
fire resistance vs sprinkler systems or water spray. Obviously, you can keep
steel strong under fire conditions by insulating it or by wetting it. Which
is better? The traditional approach is to write a fire resistance standard,
and a sprinkler standard, and urge the use of both.

DESIGNED PROTteilON results from a very careful and comprehensive study of

the specific n o,- j s of the property and the operation. It is based in engi-
neering fundamentals and a knowledge of fire protection techniques, equip-
ment, and standards; but it rejects blind use of the standards.

DESIGNED PROTECTION is founded on a healthy skepticism with regard to policies

such as the one which permits a water pump on a public water supply system
feeding a great many sprinkler systems to be automatically controlled by an
excellent controller costing $700.00, but requires a $2,700.00 "approved" con-
troller for the pump on the private supply that feeds sprinkler systems in
a single building.

DESIGNED PROTECTION IS THE ALLOCATION OF TECHNICAL KNOW HOW, IMAGINATION,

AND AMBITION TO A FIRE PROBLEM.

DESIGNED PROTECTION provides excellent protection for the insurer as well

as the insured. There is nothing about DESIGNED PROTECTION that would de-
stroy the need for insurance.
•
How much of DESIGNED PROTECTION will the authorities "buy"? Quite a bit!
In the past I have been very successful at gaining approval for carefully
drawn up plans of protection that resulted in substantial economies and/or
protection improvements. Needless to say, I didn't win them all.
No. 6

Also, there is an advanced phase of DESIGNED PROTECTION, a PHASE TWO if you

will, that offers even greater economy and improvement of protection. Here
I can not offer too much right now because there is a need for some major
reshifting of some rather adamant positions before what I propose can be
marketed. However, I have prepared a report entitled "PATTON CONCEPT OF
SPRINKLER PROTECTION" which defines protection in terms of engineering fun-
damentals rather than rules, and the moment this is done areas where change
is desirable become obvious. This is available to anyone interested, but
the supply is limited, and the price if $5.00 to discourage all but the
serious. Corporations with major protection problems such as rolled paper
storage, high piled stock, rubber storage, etc. may want to help push some
of these new concepts and innovations thru to completion as they will take
the burden of excessively priced protection off their backs. Essentially.
these companies are now paying for extremely high priced standard protec-
tion for properties that should not be protected with standard protection.

In future issues of THE PATTON REPORT I will cover many of the areas where
immediate . savings or protection improvements are possible and I will also
discuss many PHASE TWO matter's,' improvements that will take major revision
in thinking on the part of many people who now are in control of the rules
and regulations.

As stated before, there is nothing in DESIGNED PROTECTION that runs counter

to insurance principles except that it may require a more sophisticated
review of what has been done. In fact, when one considers the fantastic
advances that industry has made in recent years, and the static nature of
protection, and when one considers the losses the insurers have suffered
in recent years as their engineers stick with their past experiences and
outdated systems; one might expect the insurance industry to welcome the
suggested changes with open arms, to view them as a possible way out of
their dilemma. Something tells me though that this will not be the reac-
tion to those philosophies that I propose that are well removed from the
present norm.

When the system of slavery existed in the United States the outright owner-
ship of labor essentially eliminated the need for the white labor force.
The result was vast numbers of unemployed white men who became known as
"white trash". When the Civil War came along, though, those men fought
tenaciously and courageously to preserve a way of life that was condemning
them to abject poverty.

Similarly, I expect a great number of graduate engineers employed by the

fire protection establishment to fight with all the strength they possess to
preserve a system of fire protection that puts them on a par with an inspec-
tor armed with a rule book.

R. M. Patton
Loss Control Consultant
647 Colts Neck Road
Freehold, New Jersey 07728
(201) 431-2752