Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

TB 133 tests only the seat surface of furniture, therefore, should a manufacturer only protect the inside surfaces of the furniture, or should he be concerned with the outside furniture surfaces also?

0
Posted

TB 133 tests only the seat surface of furniture, therefore, should a manufacturer only protect the inside surfaces of the furniture, or should he be concerned with the outside furniture surfaces also?

0

A. The bureau’s intent in developing TB 133 is that furniture complying with the test be safer furniture. It is not the bureau’s wish that manufacturers seek to compromise the intent of the standard or attempt to “beat the test.” In designing a fire test such as TB 133, it is clearly not possible to use multiple ignition sources and multiple ignition locations on products. The intent of TB 133 is that furniture be manufactured to perform in a fire-safe manner irrespective of the point of ignition of the furniture. Therefore, manufacturers should produce furniture with the intent of making it safer furniture.

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123