0:00:03 > 0:00:05Take a look around your home.
0:00:07 > 0:00:10Can you be sure that every appliance is safe?
0:00:12 > 0:00:17Is everything a company tells you about a product true?
0:00:17 > 0:00:20And are you getting the best value for your money?
0:00:21 > 0:00:24With the help of the country's top experts, we're going to see
0:00:24 > 0:00:29what it takes to test the household products we use every day.
0:00:31 > 0:00:34We'll discover how they're pushed to their limits.
0:00:37 > 0:00:39We'll put the makers' claims on trial.
0:00:41 > 0:00:44And show you how to make your money go further.
0:00:44 > 0:00:47You'll find these products in any ordinary house.
0:00:47 > 0:00:50But this is no ordinary house.
0:00:50 > 0:00:52And no ordinary street.
0:00:52 > 0:00:55This is the Watchdog Test House.
0:01:01 > 0:01:02Hello. We're deep inside
0:01:02 > 0:01:05one of Britain's leading science centres.
0:01:05 > 0:01:08Here at the Building Research Establishment
0:01:08 > 0:01:10some of the products and materials
0:01:10 > 0:01:14that we use every day are put to the test.
0:01:14 > 0:01:17To make sure that they're safe, environmentally friendly
0:01:17 > 0:01:19and that they don't fall apart.
0:01:19 > 0:01:22Coming up on today's programme...
0:01:22 > 0:01:25It was thick, black smoke
0:01:25 > 0:01:29and there was flames coming out of the back of the machine.
0:01:29 > 0:01:33It's the appliance most likely to cause a fire when faulty.
0:01:33 > 0:01:36So how does the latest testing ensure washing machines are safe?
0:01:36 > 0:01:40Confused by all those kitchen roll claims?
0:01:40 > 0:01:43You see it's wettable, wringable, strong as bull!
0:01:43 > 0:01:46We put three big brands through their paces.
0:01:48 > 0:01:51And more cars, but fewer deaths.
0:01:51 > 0:01:54All thanks to this superhuman device - the crash-test dummy.
0:02:01 > 0:02:05Washing machines. Arguably the most essential item in the home.
0:02:05 > 0:02:08But also the most likely to cause a fire.
0:02:08 > 0:02:10There were more than 3,500 fires
0:02:10 > 0:02:15triggered by faulty domestic appliances last year
0:02:15 > 0:02:18and one in seven of them was caused by a washing machine.
0:02:18 > 0:02:22And if it does go up in flames, the consequences can be pretty scary.
0:02:26 > 0:02:31It was black smoke throughout the kitchen...and there was flames.
0:02:34 > 0:02:37I didn't even think there was that much that could go wrong with
0:02:37 > 0:02:38a washing machine.
0:02:39 > 0:02:43One Saturday morning, Debbie McFadden was doing the family's
0:02:43 > 0:02:46weekly wash when her machine developed a problem.
0:02:46 > 0:02:48I put the washing on.
0:02:48 > 0:02:51As I come down the stairs, I could smell burning.
0:02:51 > 0:02:52Like a rubber smell.
0:02:52 > 0:02:57Then I went into the kitchen, and the kitchen was full of smoke.
0:02:57 > 0:03:00So I've gone to the washing machine, unplugged it from the socket...
0:03:00 > 0:03:04Debbie then went out into the garden to hang out the wet washing.
0:03:04 > 0:03:07By unplugging the machine she thought she'd made it safe.
0:03:07 > 0:03:09But she was wrong.
0:03:09 > 0:03:13As I come back in, it was thick, black smoke
0:03:13 > 0:03:17and there was flames that was coming out of the back of the machine.
0:03:17 > 0:03:20And my first thought was just get it out the house.
0:03:20 > 0:03:23And as I pulled it out it was absolutely boiling.
0:03:23 > 0:03:27I burnt my fingertips and part of my hand.
0:03:27 > 0:03:30Debbie had no option but to get out of the house.
0:03:30 > 0:03:33By the time the fire brigade put out the flames,
0:03:33 > 0:03:35the damage had already been done.
0:03:35 > 0:03:38The kitchen floor was burnt.
0:03:38 > 0:03:41Obviously the washing machine was melted.
0:03:41 > 0:03:45The whole bottom part of the washing machine was totally welded.
0:03:45 > 0:03:48Debbie and her daughter Rachel, who was also in the house at the time,
0:03:48 > 0:03:49were unharmed.
0:03:49 > 0:03:52But it could have been so much worse.
0:03:52 > 0:03:55We were lucky because normally I would have put it on at night
0:03:55 > 0:03:57and gone to bed.
0:03:57 > 0:03:59Or I put it on and go shopping.
0:03:59 > 0:04:03Now, I don't have any of them on at all unless I'm downstairs.
0:04:03 > 0:04:05I wouldn't even go up and have a bath
0:04:05 > 0:04:07and leave the washing machine on.
0:04:07 > 0:04:09Debbie contacted the manufacturer,
0:04:09 > 0:04:12who immediately replaced the machine.
0:04:12 > 0:04:15They've since told us that the fire was a result of a fault with
0:04:15 > 0:04:19the heating element inside the machine which caused it to overheat.
0:04:19 > 0:04:22So what is it about a washing machine that makes it
0:04:22 > 0:04:26the appliance most likely to catch fire when faulty?
0:04:26 > 0:04:28Washing machines, like all mechanical items, can be
0:04:28 > 0:04:30a dangerous product.
0:04:30 > 0:04:32In washing machines we have a combination of mechanical
0:04:32 > 0:04:36action, electricity and water.
0:04:36 > 0:04:37And those three factors,
0:04:37 > 0:04:40if not controlled correctly, can possibly lead to a fire.
0:04:40 > 0:04:43Especially when some of the machines are very, very, low cost,
0:04:43 > 0:04:47which often means components may not be up to the standard
0:04:47 > 0:04:49we would particularly like.
0:04:49 > 0:04:53But, of course, it's also one of the most common appliances.
0:04:53 > 0:04:56And with millions of machines in homes across the UK,
0:04:56 > 0:05:00and fewer than 600 reported fires last year caused by faults,
0:05:00 > 0:05:04the chances of this happening to you are actually pretty rare.
0:05:04 > 0:05:08That's not to say a washing machine can't develop other problems.
0:05:08 > 0:05:12They can flood. Or even explode. So the challenge for manufacturers
0:05:12 > 0:05:17is to reduce these risks whilst keeping machines affordable.
0:05:17 > 0:05:20And how do they do that? With thorough testing.
0:05:20 > 0:05:23Later we'll be heading to the UK National Standards Body to
0:05:23 > 0:05:25witness just how rigorously washing machines are put
0:05:25 > 0:05:28through their paces before they come on to the market.
0:05:34 > 0:05:37Now, any idea what "duralock" is?
0:05:37 > 0:05:40How about "unique pocket technology"? No?
0:05:40 > 0:05:45Well, it's all to do with this, the humble kitchen roll.
0:05:45 > 0:05:48They're just some of the confusing words companies use to
0:05:48 > 0:05:50encourage you to buy their brand.
0:05:50 > 0:05:53But is there any difference between their product
0:05:53 > 0:05:57and the cheapest one on the market which makes no such claims?
0:05:57 > 0:05:59Time to put them to the test.
0:05:59 > 0:06:01Yes, Sophie, the trusty kitchen towel.
0:06:01 > 0:06:04From spillages and food prep, to cleaning windows
0:06:04 > 0:06:08and scrubbing carpets, it's long been a household essential.
0:06:08 > 0:06:09'Thirst Pockets are super-absorbent.
0:06:09 > 0:06:12'They have exceptional pocket technology
0:06:12 > 0:06:15'and each sheet rapidly absorbs spills and locks in moisture.'
0:06:15 > 0:06:19Exceptional pocket technology? Sounds impressive!
0:06:19 > 0:06:21But I'm not sure I quite understand it.
0:06:21 > 0:06:24Any more than I understand this.
0:06:24 > 0:06:28'You see it's wettable, wringable, strong as bull!'
0:06:29 > 0:06:33So, with so many manufacturers now making bold claims, how do you
0:06:33 > 0:06:34decide which one to buy?
0:06:34 > 0:06:37Value for money would be the first priority.
0:06:37 > 0:06:40Quality. I suppose. Durability and price.
0:06:40 > 0:06:41Absorbency?
0:06:41 > 0:06:44One that doesn't fall apart when I use it.
0:06:44 > 0:06:45Not a lot to ask, is it?
0:06:45 > 0:06:48Time to cut through the advertising jargon to find out exactly
0:06:48 > 0:06:51what it is you're getting for your money.
0:06:51 > 0:06:54We've chosen the three kitchen rolls we could
0:06:54 > 0:06:56find in the supermarket that make the strongest claims.
0:06:56 > 0:06:58Those are...
0:06:58 > 0:07:02The Thirst Pockets Super Absorbent, which claims to have
0:07:02 > 0:07:04"unique pocket technology" and the power of an elephant
0:07:04 > 0:07:08in just one sheet, and costs 1½ pence per towel.
0:07:10 > 0:07:12Plenty Original.
0:07:12 > 0:07:15At 1.9 pence per sheet, this claims to come with "duralock",
0:07:15 > 0:07:19which they say enables you to "rinse and re-use".
0:07:19 > 0:07:22And ASDA's own brand, Shades Power Towels.
0:07:22 > 0:07:25This costs 1.6 pence per sheet and boasts that they are even
0:07:25 > 0:07:29stronger than the leading brand, which is Plenty.
0:07:29 > 0:07:31Our fourth roll is the cheapest we could find.
0:07:31 > 0:07:33At just half a penny per sheet,
0:07:33 > 0:07:37this one makes absolutely no claims whatsoever.
0:07:37 > 0:07:40Got all that? Good. Let's start testing.
0:07:40 > 0:07:43We've come to Surrey Quays shopping centre in east London.
0:07:43 > 0:07:46Which kitchen towel do the public prefer?
0:07:46 > 0:07:48Starting with the touch test.
0:07:48 > 0:07:51- It's definitely this one. - This one's quite rough.
0:07:51 > 0:07:52That feels OK.
0:07:52 > 0:07:56We asked 20 people to rate each roll on how they thought it felt.
0:07:56 > 0:07:59One rated the basic product as the best.
0:07:59 > 0:08:02Four voted Thirst Pockets as their favourite.
0:08:02 > 0:08:03Five voted for Plenty.
0:08:03 > 0:08:07But top of the touch test with 10 out of 20 votes was ASDA Shades.
0:08:07 > 0:08:09I didn't see that coming.
0:08:09 > 0:08:13On to our next challenge - absorbency and durability.
0:08:13 > 0:08:16For this test, we set up a table with four different lanes.
0:08:16 > 0:08:19In each lane we pour an equal amount of blue water.
0:08:19 > 0:08:23Our 20 testers then use one sheet of each roll to wipe up each spill
0:08:23 > 0:08:27and vote on which product they felt did the best job.
0:08:27 > 0:08:28And to make sure the test is fair,
0:08:28 > 0:08:31they each have ten seconds to wipe up the water spill.
0:08:31 > 0:08:34Come on, put some elbow grease into it.
0:08:34 > 0:08:36Definitely not that one.
0:08:36 > 0:08:38That's not bad.
0:08:38 > 0:08:39- A?- It's B.
0:08:39 > 0:08:40Surprisingly, A.
0:08:40 > 0:08:42I'd buy the D.
0:08:42 > 0:08:44- It's A.- D was the best.
0:08:44 > 0:08:48Good news for ASDA fans - their brand has come top again.
0:08:48 > 0:08:49Really?
0:08:49 > 0:08:52Really? Wow.
0:08:52 > 0:08:56In second place was Plenty, in third was Thirst Pockets,
0:08:56 > 0:08:59and in last place was the cheapest roll that made no claims.
0:08:59 > 0:09:02So the people have spoken. And if you haven't got it by now,
0:09:02 > 0:09:05across all our tests the kitchen towel they felt performed
0:09:05 > 0:09:07the best overall - drum roll please -
0:09:07 > 0:09:11ASDA Shades Power Towels!
0:09:11 > 0:09:14Out of the 20 people we asked, ASDA Shades got 11 votes.
0:09:14 > 0:09:16Plenty Original got five votes,
0:09:16 > 0:09:18and Thirst Pockets got four votes.
0:09:18 > 0:09:21As for the cheapest brand - the one with no claims - it scored
0:09:21 > 0:09:23a big fat zero.
0:09:23 > 0:09:28But that's just public opinion - what about a more scientific one?
0:09:28 > 0:09:31We're heading to the lab, where Kate Leach, an expert in paper science,
0:09:31 > 0:09:33will be putting the four towels through their paces.
0:09:33 > 0:09:37It'll be interesting to see what the results of this are,
0:09:37 > 0:09:39because to be honest,
0:09:39 > 0:09:42even I don't know how they're going to fare against each other.
0:09:42 > 0:09:45She's excited, I'm excited, I hope you are.
0:09:45 > 0:09:47Join us later to find out the results.
0:09:51 > 0:09:55Most products that we use every day are constantly being improved
0:09:55 > 0:09:58and made safer as a result of testing.
0:09:58 > 0:10:01And the motor industry has made great strides.
0:10:01 > 0:10:05In fact there's one figure who's done more for human safety
0:10:05 > 0:10:07than even Lynn Faulds Wood.
0:10:07 > 0:10:09The crash-test dummy.
0:10:11 > 0:10:14- LYNN FAULDS WOOD ON TV:- 'Welcome to Watchdog. In tonight's programme,
0:10:14 > 0:10:16'all these people have written to us...'
0:10:19 > 0:10:23MUSIC: "Blue Danube Waltz" Johann Strauss
0:10:25 > 0:10:27The crash-test dummy.
0:10:27 > 0:10:30A superhuman feat of engineering that's been saving lives
0:10:30 > 0:10:33for 65 years.
0:10:33 > 0:10:37It's helped researchers predict how much force can hit the human body
0:10:37 > 0:10:39in an accident.
0:10:39 > 0:10:43It's helped car manufacturers to do exhaustive testing
0:10:43 > 0:10:48and it's helped us to be much, much safer in our cars today.
0:10:48 > 0:10:50Just take a look at this footage.
0:10:51 > 0:10:54A head-on collision between a classic American car
0:10:54 > 0:10:58from the '50s and a modern vehicle.
0:10:58 > 0:11:00If these had been people without seat belts
0:11:00 > 0:11:05and airbags, the driver of the classic car would have died.
0:11:05 > 0:11:08But with the benefit of decades of crash-test research,
0:11:08 > 0:11:12the driver of the modern car could have walked away.
0:11:13 > 0:11:14'Over now to New Mexico.'
0:11:14 > 0:11:16In the early days of research,
0:11:16 > 0:11:19manufacturers thought there was little they could do
0:11:19 > 0:11:21to protect people in a crash.
0:11:21 > 0:11:23Research was mainly done by the military
0:11:23 > 0:11:27and volunteers, like US Air Force Colonel John Stapp.
0:11:27 > 0:11:31Here he is, test running a rocket-powered sled designed
0:11:31 > 0:11:35to simulate the forces hitting the body in a crash.
0:11:35 > 0:11:38'At 421mph, the sled speeds along the track.
0:11:38 > 0:11:41'The jolt of starting off is equal to driving into a brick wall
0:11:41 > 0:11:43'at 120mph.'
0:11:43 > 0:11:47Despite his extreme bravery, there is of course only so far you can
0:11:47 > 0:11:51take testing when experimenting with real human volunteers.
0:11:51 > 0:11:55ROCK 'N' ROLL MUSIC
0:11:55 > 0:11:59But then there was a breakthrough in the form of Sierra Sam.
0:11:59 > 0:12:03Made of rubber and steel and modelled on an average pilot,
0:12:03 > 0:12:07Sam was built for the US Air Force to test ejection seats,
0:12:07 > 0:12:09helmets and harnesses.
0:12:09 > 0:12:15But the car industry soon adopted him as the first crash-test dummy.
0:12:15 > 0:12:17His role was to show where a body would travel
0:12:17 > 0:12:20and what it might hit in a crash.
0:12:22 > 0:12:26Your chance of survival, if you're ejected from a moving vehicle
0:12:26 > 0:12:29during the accident, is very slight.
0:12:29 > 0:12:32At this stage, they weren't necessarily
0:12:32 > 0:12:35looking at the likelihood or level of injuries or level of injuries...
0:12:35 > 0:12:38It was all about the space around drivers -
0:12:38 > 0:12:43whether they'd stay in it and how it would collapse around them.
0:12:43 > 0:12:46So it was thanks to Sam that cars began to be designed with
0:12:46 > 0:12:48reinforced areas around occupants
0:12:48 > 0:12:52and crumple zones designed to absorb the force of the crash.
0:12:52 > 0:12:53But there was only so much
0:12:53 > 0:12:57they could learn from what was essentially a lump of rubber.
0:12:57 > 0:13:01As cars became more affordable and road deaths increased,
0:13:01 > 0:13:06it was clear a new solution was needed to improve survival chances.
0:13:06 > 0:13:09MUSIC: "Be My Baby" The Ronettes
0:13:09 > 0:13:12That came in the form of dummies with articulated joints
0:13:12 > 0:13:15that could sit behind the wheel like a human.
0:13:15 > 0:13:19For the first time, they were wired with scientific instruments.
0:13:19 > 0:13:23This allowed manufacturers to study the impact of a crash
0:13:23 > 0:13:26on the body itself and led to perhaps the greatest
0:13:26 > 0:13:30advance in car safety, the three-point seat belt.
0:13:31 > 0:13:35Although it wasn't made compulsory here until 1981,
0:13:35 > 0:13:41it's estimated this single invention may have saved 60,000 lives.
0:13:41 > 0:13:45But if more progress was going to be made, car makers had to
0:13:45 > 0:13:48agree on one dummy that could be used across the industry.
0:13:50 > 0:13:54So wherever the test will be carried out, you know
0:13:54 > 0:13:57the dummy is going to perform in exactly the same way,
0:13:57 > 0:14:00so that we're all testing to the same level.
0:14:00 > 0:14:04MUSIC: "Heart Of Glass" Blondie
0:14:04 > 0:14:08It wasn't until 1971, that car makers agreed the Hybrid model
0:14:08 > 0:14:11would become the standard dummy.
0:14:11 > 0:14:17It was tweaked and improved until 1977, the year it became Hybrid III.
0:14:17 > 0:14:19Reliable crash after crash,
0:14:19 > 0:14:24it remains the dummy of choice around the world to this day.
0:14:24 > 0:14:26We can remove the back of the head off...
0:14:29 > 0:14:32Although the Hybrid III is not actually human -
0:14:32 > 0:14:35the advanced scientific devices in its head...
0:14:35 > 0:14:37..that is where we have our accelerometers...
0:14:37 > 0:14:41to assess the injury level for head impacts.
0:14:41 > 0:14:44..chest and even its thighs can provide manufacturers with
0:14:44 > 0:14:48detailed information as to what would happen to your organs
0:14:48 > 0:14:51and bones on impact, so they were able to come up with ever
0:14:51 > 0:14:55more sophisticated ways of protecting them in a crash.
0:14:55 > 0:14:59MUSIC: "Blue Monday" New Order
0:14:59 > 0:15:03The work of Hybrid III led to the development of airbags
0:15:03 > 0:15:05in the '80s and '90s.
0:15:05 > 0:15:09And by now, he had a family - a smaller wife and children.
0:15:09 > 0:15:13Other dummies came along to test specific types of collision.
0:15:13 > 0:15:17The side-impact dummy led to side impact air bags.
0:15:17 > 0:15:20And researchers studying whiplash
0:15:20 > 0:15:23use the biofidelic, rear-impact dummy.
0:15:23 > 0:15:26Dummies have even been used to test safety on trains.
0:15:26 > 0:15:28But they don't come cheap,
0:15:28 > 0:15:33with today's standard dummy costing £100,000.
0:15:33 > 0:15:36It's fair to say the crash-test dummy has been the most
0:15:36 > 0:15:38extraordinary success story.
0:15:38 > 0:15:41In 1960, over 50 years ago,
0:15:41 > 0:15:45nearly 7,000 people died on our roads.
0:15:45 > 0:15:49By 2012, although we've got ten times the number of cars out
0:15:49 > 0:15:53there, deaths were down by almost three-quarters.
0:15:53 > 0:15:55That's not at all bad for a dummy.
0:16:06 > 0:16:10Portable radios, remote controls, torches - they all need batteries.
0:16:10 > 0:16:14But which type should you buy? Lithium or alkaline?
0:16:14 > 0:16:16Rechargeable or disposable?
0:16:16 > 0:16:20Brand or non-branded? It's hard to know.
0:16:20 > 0:16:23So what do the tests show to be good value for money?
0:16:23 > 0:16:25Richard Headland from Which is here.
0:16:25 > 0:16:28We've got some battery-powered items in front of us.
0:16:28 > 0:16:32When you look at the array of batteries on offer now, it can be
0:16:32 > 0:16:35quite baffling, and the price difference can be quite big.
0:16:35 > 0:16:36Absolutely.
0:16:36 > 0:16:39There's a massive difference between cheap and expensive batteries,
0:16:39 > 0:16:41between disposable and rechargeable batteries.
0:16:41 > 0:16:44But even if you're just looking at disposables,
0:16:44 > 0:16:47there's two main types to choose from. Alkaline,
0:16:47 > 0:16:50which tend to be cheaper, and lithium batteries which are more
0:16:50 > 0:16:53expensive that have come out in recent years.
0:16:53 > 0:16:56What is the difference between lithium and alkaline batteries?
0:16:56 > 0:16:58Lithium batteries are ideal
0:16:58 > 0:17:03if you have a flash in your digital camera that uses a lot of power.
0:17:03 > 0:17:06A lithium battery will last longer in that scenario.
0:17:06 > 0:17:09But for these kind of items, which are relatively low or medium
0:17:09 > 0:17:13drain, you'll be fine using alkaline batteries.
0:17:13 > 0:17:15There are some very well known brands out there.
0:17:15 > 0:17:19Compared to the non-brands, how do they stand up?
0:17:19 > 0:17:21We tend to find that the big brands perform
0:17:21 > 0:17:25best in our tests for absolute longevity of life.
0:17:25 > 0:17:28But the non-brand batteries are very good value
0:17:28 > 0:17:32when you look at them in terms of how much you pay per hour.
0:17:32 > 0:17:35You may have to change them more frequently than you do with the big
0:17:35 > 0:17:38brands, but they're still pretty good in terms of overall battery life.
0:17:38 > 0:17:42What about rechargeable batteries? Is that worth it?
0:17:42 > 0:17:43Rechargeables are worth it
0:17:43 > 0:17:46if you have lots of battery-powered things in your home.
0:17:46 > 0:17:49Kids' toys use a lot of batteries.
0:17:49 > 0:17:51So in our tests we found that
0:17:51 > 0:17:55if you bought four rechargeable AA batteries, plus a charger,
0:17:55 > 0:17:59and you charge them 100 times, that would cost about £90,
0:17:59 > 0:18:03whereas if you bought 400 AA batteries, disposable ones,
0:18:03 > 0:18:05that's going to cost you at least £170.
0:18:05 > 0:18:07So quite a big difference.
0:18:07 > 0:18:09Richard, thank you.
0:18:14 > 0:18:18Back now to our kitchen rolls and those confusing claims.
0:18:18 > 0:18:22Earlier we saw 10 out of 20 members of the public rate this
0:18:22 > 0:18:27product, ASDA Shades, the best when it came to strength and absorbency.
0:18:27 > 0:18:28But were they right?
0:18:28 > 0:18:32To find out we're taking our paper towels to the lab.
0:18:32 > 0:18:35First a quick reminder of our four contenders.
0:18:35 > 0:18:40The Thirst Pocket Super Absorbent at 1½ pence per towel.
0:18:40 > 0:18:43Plenty Original. They cost 1.9p per sheet.
0:18:43 > 0:18:46And of course that ASDA Shades Power Towels.
0:18:46 > 0:18:48They cost 1.6 pence per sheet.
0:18:48 > 0:18:51We're also comparing those to a very basic towel - the cheapest
0:18:51 > 0:18:54we could find - at just half a penny a sheet.
0:18:54 > 0:18:57This one makes absolutely NO claims.
0:18:57 > 0:18:59ASDA Shades might have won over the public.
0:18:59 > 0:19:01But how will they all perform in the lab?
0:19:04 > 0:19:05The two main things they tend to brag about
0:19:05 > 0:19:09in their advertising is the strength and absorbency.
0:19:09 > 0:19:11So it makes sense that we should test them for ourselves.
0:19:11 > 0:19:14Good idea. Let's get to it.
0:19:14 > 0:19:17Kate starts by cutting each sheet into strips of equal width
0:19:17 > 0:19:18and equal length.
0:19:18 > 0:19:21First up, it's the strength test.
0:19:21 > 0:19:25It'll be interesting to see what the results of this test are because, to
0:19:25 > 0:19:29be honest, even I don't know how they'll fare against each other.
0:19:29 > 0:19:34Kate doesn't want to make it too easy, so she wets the strips first.
0:19:34 > 0:19:37She then hangs them from this bar with crocodile clips and attaches
0:19:37 > 0:19:41plastic cups which she will load up with an equal number marbles.
0:19:41 > 0:19:43The last one to break is the winner.
0:19:44 > 0:19:47It does emulate quite nicely the tensile tests
0:19:47 > 0:19:51they would actually do in industry to check how strong these
0:19:51 > 0:19:54products were from a quality control perspective.
0:19:55 > 0:19:57So here come the marbles!
0:19:57 > 0:19:58OK, I'll count the marbles out
0:19:58 > 0:20:02and I'm going to start by putting five in each one to start off with.
0:20:07 > 0:20:10Because these things can be quite strong.
0:20:10 > 0:20:12The first to go is our cheapest product,
0:20:12 > 0:20:14the one which makes no claims.
0:20:14 > 0:20:17- It breaks after just five marbles. - Oh!
0:20:17 > 0:20:20Next, it's Thirst Pockets.
0:20:20 > 0:20:26It survives 20 marbles. But ASDA Shades Power isn't far behind.
0:20:26 > 0:20:29Despite claiming to be stronger than the leading brand -
0:20:29 > 0:20:31Plenty - it falls after 23 marbles.
0:20:31 > 0:20:35And in fact Plenty Original is our strength test winner,
0:20:35 > 0:20:39holding on in there with an impressive 32 marbles.
0:20:39 > 0:20:43So the best one we found was the Plenty Original,
0:20:43 > 0:20:47the next one was the ASDA one, not the Thirst Pockets.
0:20:47 > 0:20:49The Thirst Pockets was closely behind,
0:20:49 > 0:20:51and bottom of the pack was the basic range,
0:20:51 > 0:20:54which is what we'd kind of expect, I'd have thought.
0:20:56 > 0:20:58Time now for the absorbency test.
0:20:58 > 0:21:01How much cranberry juice can each of the kitchen rolls soak up.
0:21:01 > 0:21:03And how quickly?
0:21:03 > 0:21:06We're going to look a rate and capacity of absorbency.
0:21:06 > 0:21:09These are terms that we use in the trade, and all they mean
0:21:09 > 0:21:12is the speed at which we can suck up the liquid that we're trying
0:21:12 > 0:21:17to mop up, and the total quantity that can be sucked up altogether.
0:21:17 > 0:21:19In other words - which towel sucks up the most
0:21:19 > 0:21:21liquid at the fastest speed?
0:21:22 > 0:21:27- And they're off.- They're all very evenly matched in terms of rate.
0:21:27 > 0:21:32And capacity, we're looking at the Plenty
0:21:32 > 0:21:35and the ASDA premium being pretty much neck and neck.
0:21:35 > 0:21:38Followed by the basic brand.
0:21:38 > 0:21:42And then Thirst Pockets is just marginally behind.
0:21:42 > 0:21:44So the winner?
0:21:44 > 0:21:47The market leader again - the Plenty Original which sucked up
0:21:47 > 0:21:51the MOST liquid, closely followed by the ASDA Shades Power Towels -
0:21:51 > 0:21:55the people's favourite - or at least the 20 we asked.
0:21:55 > 0:21:58But the surprising result here is that the cheapest paper towel -
0:21:58 > 0:22:02the one which makes no claims - didn't come last in our test.
0:22:02 > 0:22:04That honour went to Thirst Pockets who,
0:22:04 > 0:22:06despite boasting of the power of an elephant in one sheet,
0:22:06 > 0:22:11sucked up the least liquid. You could call that the elephant in the room.
0:22:11 > 0:22:13So the one we found that was the least,
0:22:13 > 0:22:16had the least capacity and the slowest rate of absorbency,
0:22:16 > 0:22:19was actually the Thirst Pockets -
0:22:19 > 0:22:24which is the product which brands itself on being able to shlurp up
0:22:24 > 0:22:28all the spills we have at home, which is quite surprising really.
0:22:28 > 0:22:31The makers of Thirst Pockets told us they aim to provide
0:22:31 > 0:22:35performance AND value for money, and that in their own extensive
0:22:35 > 0:22:39testing, their product performed above other economy ranges.
0:22:39 > 0:22:41They add the brand has recently been taken over by a new
0:22:41 > 0:22:45manufacturer, who will be investing to improve the product further.
0:22:45 > 0:22:48So come on, Kate, don't keep us in suspense.
0:22:48 > 0:22:51Across all our tests, how did each of the rolls do?
0:22:51 > 0:22:55We sawn that the Plenty was slightly better than the others.
0:22:55 > 0:22:59Closely followed, really, by the ASDA premium brand,
0:22:59 > 0:23:02there really wasn't much in it in most of the tests we did.
0:23:02 > 0:23:04The Thirst Pockets were definitely third
0:23:04 > 0:23:06and in some cases actually fourth.
0:23:06 > 0:23:09The basic range was by far the weakest
0:23:09 > 0:23:12but had quite good absorbency rate and capacity
0:23:12 > 0:23:15which as consumers we tend to care about quite a lot.
0:23:15 > 0:23:18But then if we factor in the price of these things,
0:23:18 > 0:23:21the basics is so much cheaper than the rest
0:23:21 > 0:23:25that really it doesn't really justify the difference
0:23:25 > 0:23:27in strength and capacity there is
0:23:27 > 0:23:31between that one and the premium brands or the branded brands.
0:23:36 > 0:23:37Back now to washing machines -
0:23:37 > 0:23:42The appliance most likely to cause a fire when faulty.
0:23:42 > 0:23:45It makes the testing a washing machine goes through
0:23:45 > 0:23:48before it comes onto the market all the more important.
0:23:48 > 0:23:51So how high are the standards?
0:23:51 > 0:23:53And how strict are the safety tests?
0:23:53 > 0:23:56Well, this is the place to find out.
0:23:56 > 0:23:58The British Standards Institution.
0:23:58 > 0:24:01It's not just one of the country's leading independent testing
0:24:01 > 0:24:05facilities, it's also responsible for the national safety standards.
0:24:05 > 0:24:08Although the manufacturers of washings machines
0:24:08 > 0:24:12don't HAVE to meet the standards, nearly all do, as a way of ensuring
0:24:12 > 0:24:14their products comply with safety laws.
0:24:14 > 0:24:17Now it's fair to say testing a washing machine
0:24:17 > 0:24:20to British Standards takes some time.
0:24:20 > 0:24:24Testing a washing machine comprises some 31 different series of tests.
0:24:24 > 0:24:27Typically a full set of tests would take us two to three weeks.
0:24:27 > 0:24:31So today we've asked Graham to take us through the highlights
0:24:31 > 0:24:35on a typical mid-range product currently on the market.
0:24:37 > 0:24:39First we're going to need some laundry -
0:24:39 > 0:24:42and if we're talking British Standards,
0:24:42 > 0:24:43you can't just use any old washing.
0:24:44 > 0:24:48What we have here is the standard test cloth.
0:24:48 > 0:24:51So it's a very specific dry textile material.
0:24:51 > 0:24:53What we have here is 8kg of it,
0:24:53 > 0:24:57which is the maximum load for the machine we're looking at today.
0:24:57 > 0:24:59Graham's team then rig the machine up
0:24:59 > 0:25:01with a whole host of electronic sensors,
0:25:01 > 0:25:05they turn on the machine on and wait to see what happens.
0:25:05 > 0:25:08We monitor lots and lots of different temperatures -
0:25:08 > 0:25:11of motors, of insulation, of switches, of safety components.
0:25:11 > 0:25:13And we check that none of those components
0:25:13 > 0:25:16exceed their permitted maximum temperature.
0:25:16 > 0:25:19They monitor the machine over three wash cycles
0:25:19 > 0:25:23whilst checking for any signs that the parts are overheating.
0:25:23 > 0:25:26So far, so good, but time to take it up a notch.
0:25:26 > 0:25:29It's the electrics next, and the machine is about to be
0:25:29 > 0:25:32subjected to a short, sharp shock.
0:25:33 > 0:25:37For 60 seconds, 1,000 volts is pumped through the machine -
0:25:37 > 0:25:39four times the normal mains supply.
0:25:39 > 0:25:44Will it survive without any of the wires or insulation failing?
0:25:44 > 0:25:45Of course it does.
0:25:45 > 0:25:47Next up, that all-important test -
0:25:47 > 0:25:50whether the machine can withstand fire.
0:25:50 > 0:25:52This is what we call a glow-wire test.
0:25:52 > 0:25:55It's a test we apply to non-metallic materials
0:25:55 > 0:25:58which are likely to be exposed to abnormal heat or flame.
0:25:58 > 0:26:02Graham and his team take a square piece of plastic
0:26:02 > 0:26:04from the washing machine and attach it to the glow rig.
0:26:04 > 0:26:07The whole point of it is if you have a bad connection
0:26:07 > 0:26:11or electrical fault, the plastic doesn't deteriorate or spread fire
0:26:11 > 0:26:15that which actually generate into a bigger fire in your kitchen.
0:26:15 > 0:26:18If the material burns, it's only allowed to burn for 30 seconds.
0:26:18 > 0:26:20It has to self-extinguish.
0:26:20 > 0:26:22If it doesn't burn at all, that's a pass.
0:26:23 > 0:26:26Again, this typical mid-range machine passes the test.
0:26:26 > 0:26:29So far, we've seen a snapshot of the electrical
0:26:29 > 0:26:31and heat tests carried out.
0:26:31 > 0:26:32But what about the mechanics?
0:26:32 > 0:26:34Graham's turning his attention to the door.
0:26:35 > 0:26:38In the past when these types of machines were first invented
0:26:38 > 0:26:40they didn't have door locks and interlocks
0:26:40 > 0:26:43and there were instances where children climbed inside
0:26:43 > 0:26:46tumble dryers and washing machines and harmed themselves.
0:26:46 > 0:26:48So in response, the industry's improved standards.
0:26:48 > 0:26:50So the test here is to see whether you could accidentally open
0:26:50 > 0:26:54the door using reasonable force when it's supposed to be locked.
0:26:55 > 0:26:58The team first measure the force to open the door normally.
0:26:58 > 0:27:02Then they multiply that by ten, to a maximum of 50 newtons,
0:27:02 > 0:27:05to make absolutely certain the door can't be opened
0:27:05 > 0:27:07when the lock is engaged.
0:27:07 > 0:27:10It's really quite important that when the machine's
0:27:10 > 0:27:13full of hot water and spinning, it shouldn't be opened accidentally.
0:27:14 > 0:27:17Despite all this testing, just like any appliance,
0:27:17 > 0:27:22things can still go wrong. So the testers need to plan for this too.
0:27:22 > 0:27:24It's something they call "abnormal operation".
0:27:24 > 0:27:27So for this test, they flood the machine.
0:27:28 > 0:27:31The test we're doing here is an overflow test.
0:27:31 > 0:27:34We've actually broken the valve which normally controls
0:27:34 > 0:27:37the water coming into the machine - we've physically broken it.
0:27:37 > 0:27:39That means when we try to fill the machine up, it will carry on,
0:27:39 > 0:27:42it won't ever stop. And we suspect it will overflow.
0:27:42 > 0:27:43We don't know what will happen yet.
0:27:43 > 0:27:46But what we're checking is that the water doesn't overflow
0:27:46 > 0:27:49to a point where it gets onto any electrical parts,
0:27:49 > 0:27:51and could present an electrical hazard.
0:27:51 > 0:27:55In other words, if the machine fails, it must fail safely.
0:27:55 > 0:27:57So how will ours perform?
0:27:57 > 0:27:59It starts to fill up as expected.
0:27:59 > 0:28:02Only after a couple of minutes, it stops.
0:28:02 > 0:28:05It turns out this is a very clever machine.
0:28:05 > 0:28:08So it's trying to avoid flooding your house by draining itself.
0:28:08 > 0:28:09This is going very well.
0:28:09 > 0:28:13It's an excellent result. This is fine. It's a good pass.
0:28:13 > 0:28:16Our machine has survived high voltages, extreme heat
0:28:16 > 0:28:18and even flooding.
0:28:18 > 0:28:22It's passed with flying colours. That's not always the case, though.
0:28:22 > 0:28:24The majority of the products submitted to us
0:28:24 > 0:28:25don't pass first time.
0:28:25 > 0:28:27So we test products, we find the faults,
0:28:27 > 0:28:29the manufacturers fix them, we test them again,
0:28:29 > 0:28:32until the end they reach a conclusion where the product
0:28:32 > 0:28:34actually passes the entire standard.
0:28:37 > 0:28:39If you want more information on the safety
0:28:39 > 0:28:42of products in your home, you can go to our website.
0:28:47 > 0:28:50That's all for today. Thanks for watching.