The meaning of "flammable"

[Stan Ames]

The term “flammable” is widely used both within the fire safety community and by the general population but, like a lot of things about fire, it may not be as straight forward as it seems.

What do we understand by the word flammable when applied to a product or material? I need to know how the word is generally interpreted by the fire community and by the general population.  

Any opinions would be most welcome.
 
Regards

Stan

[John Webb]

Stan,
Flammable=capable of being ignited and sustaining burning.

(I presume you are my former colleague at FRS?)

[Chris Houston]

My employers (an insurance company) don't like us using the word flammable when we talk about liquids and gases, but prefer us to refer to liquids with a flashpoint of.......

But I think the people who read our reports understand the word flammable better than "a liquid with a flashpoint below....."

To me, the word flammable tends to apply to liquids and gasses (but can of course apply to solids and dust) and in my mind it means the ones that can be easily ignited at reasonably normal temperatures.

[Fishy]

BS 4422 (Fire — Vocabulary) is the place that has these definitions, and is spectacularly unhelpful...

"flammable: capable of flaming under specified conditions"

How is it interpreted by the Man On the Clapham Omnibus?  Can be lit with a match or lighter.

[CivvyFSO]

Don't forget good old fashioned dictionaries!

flam·ma·ble – adjective easily set on fire; combustible; inflammable.

I suppose there's an argument again of where do the limits lie?

Loose Paper = Flammable
Very tightly wound roll of paper = ?

[wee brian]

We try not to use flammable

Theres some confusion when you get to inflammable and non flammable.

[Martin Burford]

Civvy
The term " application of a naked flame" springs to mind.
Conqueror

[John Webb]

Quoting wee brian "There's some confusion when you get to inflammable and non-flammable."
I thought that was why the BS 4422 was bought in to 'put down' inflammable and get everyone to refer to 'flammable' and 'non-flammable' as the preferred terms. See also the IFE 1979 3rd edition of 'Dictionary of Fire Technology'.

[Jim Creak]

Where does combustible come in, what is the difference between combustible and flammable? I always thought a temperature range or low flash point has to be involved with flammable ? The debate then must continue with highly flammable?

I quite like the meaning for combustible in my dictionary...easily annoyed.

[Fishy]

Anything that's not non-combustible is combustible!!!

Seriously - as regards Combustible I'd use the definition in the relevant building standards - the Approved Document B in England and Wales for example.  Basically, anything with more than a few percent organic content is combustible.

[AnthonyB]

To muddy the waters further the packaging labelling regs have three categories - flammable, highly flammable & extremely flammable!! (IIRC use is based on flashpoint)

I alway understood that the reason highly inflammable persisted on signage for so long was a throwback to the wording of the Petroleum Regs which dated back to the 1920's, pre 90's statutory signage in car parks and petrol stations always seemed to use this term

[Jim Creak]

Im a sucker for research.. The debate goes on...inflammableness? (noun)  inflammably?(adverb)

[Stan Ames]

Sincerest thanks to all that have replied to this question. It has certainly exposed some of the difficulties we have defining even the most fundamental fire phenomena.  

In the 1970s I was involved in developing a test method that is still being used to define what HSE calls "highly flammable solids", many cellular foams fall into this category. But combustible liquids with a flashpoint over 37.5°C are widely described as NOT "flammable". If we in the fire safety community find this confusing, what chance does the general public have when assessing the fire risks of products and materials.

Many thanks

Stan