Archives for ess-engineered-systems

See all posts in the network tagged with ess-engineered-systems

Predictability and Performance Of Buildings and Today’s Fireground

Understanding the distinctiveness of your first-due, mutual aid or greater-alarm response area requires constant vigilance and continuous observations. Building knowledge equals firefighter safety. Photo By CJ Naum

When we look at various buildings and occupancies, past operations (good and bad) give us experience that defines and determines how we assess, react and expect similar structures and occupancies to perform at a given alarm. The “art and science of firefighting” is predicated on a fundamental understanding of how fire affects a building and its occupants and the manner in which the fire service engages when called on to combat a structure fire.

We have certain expectations that fire will travel in a defined, predictable manner:

That the building will react and perform under assumptions of past performance and outcomes
That fire will hold within a room and compartment for a predictable duration
That the fire load and related fire flows required will be appropriate for an expected size and severity of fire encountered within a given building, occupancy or structural system
That we can safely and effectively mitigate a fire in any given building type and occupancy
That we will have the time to conduct the required tasks identified to be of importance based on identified or assumed indicators
That the building will conform to the rules of firefighting engagement

Times have changed

Today’s incident demands on the fireground are unlike those of even the recent past. This means incident commanders, commanding and company officers and firefighters alike must have increased technical knowledge of building construction with a heightened sensitivity of fire behavior and fire dynamics, a focus on operational structural stability of the compartment and building envelope and considerations related to occupancy risk versus the occupancy type. Understanding the building – its complexities in terms of anatomy, structural systems, materials, configuration, design, layout, systems, methods of construction, engineering and inherent features, limitations, challenges and risks – is fundamental for operational excellence on the fireground and firefighter safety.

There is an immediate need for emerging and operating command and company officers to increase their knowledge and insights of modern building occupancy, building construction and fire protection engineering and to modify traditional and conventional strategic operating profiles in order to safeguard companies, personnel and team compositions. Strategies and tactics must have the combined adequacy of sufficient staffing, fire flow and tactical patience orchestrated in a manner that identifies with the fire profiling, predictability of the occupancy and the building that accounts for presumptive fire behavior.

We used to discern with a measured degree of predictability how buildings would perform and fail under most fire conditions. Implementing fundamentals of firefighting operations built on decades of time-tested and experience-proven strategies and tactics continues to be the model of suppression operations. These same fundamental strategies continue to drive methodologies and curriculums in current training programs and academy instruction.

We must maintain a balance with learning about old and new building construction. A renewed focus on Type III, Ordinary /Protected construction and Type IV Heavy Timber must be incorporated within initial, in-service and periodic training and drills. Recent firefighter LODD events in these building types reinforces this need and gap. Photo By CJ Naum

Increasing company and command officer competencies in Building Anatomy, structural systems and how buildings are built and affected by fire behavior is fundamental to effective fireground operations. Interdependent structural components are evident for wall, floor and support assemblies in this Type IV occupancy. Do you know the inherent collapse potential of these buildings? Photo by CJ Naum

We have assumed that the routiness or successes of past operations and incident responses equates with predictability and diminished risk to our firefighting personnel. Photo By CJ Naum

Our current generation of buildings, construction and occupancies are not as predictable as past conventional construction, therefore risk assessment, strategies and tactics must change to address these new rules of combat structural fire engagement. Photo by CJ Naum

Executing tactical plans based on faulty or inaccurate strategic insights and indicators has proven to be a common apparent cause in numerous case studies, after-action accounts and firefighter line-of-duty-death reports. Our years of predictable fireground experience have ultimately embedded and clouded our ability to predict, assess, plan and implement Incident Action Plans (IAPs).

The demands of modern firefighting will continue to require the placement of personnel in situations and buildings that carry risk, uncertainty and inherent danger. As a result, risk management must become fluid and integrated with intelligent tactical deployments and operations.

Managing Risk

“If you don’t fully understand how a building truly performs or reacts under fire conditions and the variables that can influence its stability and degradation, movement of fire and products of combustion and the resource requirements for smart aggressive fire suppression in terms of staffing, apparatus and required fire flows, then you will be functioning and operating in a reactionary manner that is no longer acceptable within many of our modern building types, occupancies and structures. This places higher risk to your personnel and lessens the likelihood for effective, efficient and safe operations. You’re just not doing your job effectively and you’re at risk. These risks can equate into insurmountable operational challenges and could lead to adverse incident outcomes. Someone could get hurt, someone could die; it’s that simple, it’s that obvious.”

Those are the words of Chief Anthony Aiellos (ret.) of the Hackensack, NJ, Fire Department on the 20th anniversary of the Hackensack Ford dealership fire that killed five firefighters in 1988. Without understanding building-occupancy relationships and integrating fire dynamics and fire behavior, risk, analysis, the art and science of firefighting, safety-conscious work environment concepts and effective and well-informed incident management, company-level supervision and task-level competencies, you are derelict and negligent and everyone may not be going home. Empirical insights and test data must be integrated in emerging fire suppression models and improved firefighting theory.

It’s Occupancy Risk versus Occupancy Type; Changes in building size and floor area, compartment volume and interconnectivity, fire load packages, methods and materials in construction and structural support systems create specific risk profiles and demands in what used to be common Occupancy types. A report of a fire in a residential occupancy will have different risks and operational requirements if the house is a 1500 SF Bungalow, a 2500 SF old Decker/Flat or a 4000 SF Engineered system house. Photo By CJ Naum

Conclusion

Our world has evolved. Technological and sociological demands create a continuing element of change in the built environment and our infrastructure. With these changes and demands come the need to assess these vulnerabilities, hazards and threats with effective and dynamic risk management and competent command and control.

These changes influence the way we do business in the street, the interface-up close and personal with the buildings in your community and equate to the risks and hazards you and your personnel will be confronted with and the level of safety afforded them during incident operations.

Fire suppression tactics must be adjusted for the rapidly changing methods and materials impacting all forms of building construction, occupancies and structures. The need to redefine the art and science of firefighting is nearly upon us. Some things do stand the test of time, others need to adjust, evolve and change. Not for the sake of change only, but for the emerging and evolving buildings, structures and occupancies being built, developed or renovated in our communities.

If the fire service can significantly increase proficiencies in building knowledge and equate that to other fundamental operational aspects in structural fire operations, then there would be a direct enhancement to firefighter safety, through injury and LODD reduction, operational efficiency and operational excellence. If we understand buildings, occupancies and construction, and balance this with our understanding of fire dynamics and orchestrate it with appropriate strategies, tactics and command management, then we made the new safety equation work; Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety (Bk=F2S). It’s all about the Anatomy of Buildings on fire.

The Probability of Adverse Consequences (PAC) must be recognized in all buildings with continuous and focused risk assessment during all phases and task assignments. This single building and occupancy exemplifies an Integrated Hybrid Building (IHB) type that incorporates Type III Ordinary construction with an engineered wood I-beam roof assembly on the lower street level and Type II non-combustible construction on the upper floors. This would require different IAP’s and tactical deployment in the event of a fire. Photo by CJ Naum

Get out on to your streets and into the field and look at how the buildings are being constructed in your jurisdiction. Understanding how they are built and what the inherent dangers are, coupled with accurate pre-fire planning data will provide mission critical information when engaged in combat fire suppression operations. The anatomy of the building is fundamental to corresponding firefighting operations. Photo by CJ Naum

Understanding Buildings, Performance & Fire Operations

There is an acute corollary of technical knowledge and inter reliance on occupancies, construction, strategy, tactics, risk, safety, physics, engineering and fire suppression theory…FACT!
There are Fundamental Domains that can be applied
There is a direct empirical correlation that provides quantitative & qualitative performance indicators and command gauges that can be utilized for risk assessment and strategic & tactical operational decision-making.

Think about the following;

Read, comprehend and implement the new IAFC The Rules of Engagement for Firefighter Survival and The Incident Commanders Rules of Engagement for Firefighter Safety
Take a tour of your response area, district or community. Take a good look around and begin to recognize the apparent or subtle changes that will affect and influence your future incident operations; Take note and think about what needs to be adjusted, modified or changed in your operations.
Read up on the latest research and technical literature on wind driven fires, extreme fire behavior, structural ability of engineered lumber systems, fire loading and suppression theory, vent path studies and fire suppression theory.
Take the time to personally read a series of the latest NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program LODD reports and relate them to your organizations operations and jurisdictional risks.
Start thinking in terms of Occupancy Risks versus Occupancy Type and align your operations and deployments to match those risks. It’s much more than just the Five Fundamental Building Types of the past.
Increase your situational awareness of today’s fireground and refine your strategic and tactical modeling.
Implement both Strategic and Tactical Patience; Slow down and allow the building to react and stabilize, for fire behavior to stop behaving badly and for your companies to increase survivability ratios while meeting the demands of conducting time sensitive tactical fire service operations
Think about Adaptive Fireground Management and Command Resiliency
Reprogram your assumptions and presumptions and options on building construction and firefighting operations; the buildings have changed, our firefighting has not; what are you going to about that gap?
Understanding the building-occupancy relationships and the art and science of firefighting, equating to Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety.
Start knowing your buildings-intimately; it’s the key to effective firefighting

Understand the buildings and occupancies not only in your jurisdiction, first or second-due areas, but also in those areas that you may be called upon to respond to for greater alarms or mutual aid. Remember Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety.

Understand and improve upon your skill set levels and those of your company, battalion, division, department or region.

Keep apprised of different types of building materials and construction used in your community.
The operative question is this: “What do you “really” know about the buildings in your district?”
As you drive about your response district, coming back from an alarm, heading to the firehouse tonight or running errands around your community, take a good look around. Ask yourself a simple question; “How well do you know the buildings, structures and occupancies in your response jurisdiction?”
Be honest, do you really understand how those “older residential” structures were built and understand how fire travels and impacts your fireground operations?
Are your aware of the newest features of engineered structural support systems being constructed within that new set of homes going up in your second-due area?
Are you aware, that vacant office building is being converted into a light manufacturing and assembly business?
How about those unoccupied store fronts and businesses that have recently closed up due to the tough economic times…. any special hazards or operational concerns to your company should you get a dispatch to respond?
Have the senior members of your station or department shared their stories of operations and incidents at various buildings around your district or community?
Did you listen to them, or were you quick to dismiss those “old war stories”. There’s a wealth of “pre-planning’ nuggets hidden in those stories. Take the time to listen, remember or postulate
Take a good look around….think about any given building, the one across the street that you’re looking at while you waited for the traffic light to change; Think about a fire in that same building.
Do you really understand how it will truly perform under combat structural fire conditions?
What’s the building’s collapse profile?
How much operational time will you have? Will you need?
What’s the fire load package size?
What are your concerns for rapid fire extension, extreme fire behavior and vent path issues that may affect firefighter safety?
What dynamic risk assessment factors will you have to deal with?
How safe is it for you to engage in interior operations upon your arrival?
How can this building, its occupancy and structural system hurt, my team, my company, my firefighters, my department, me?

Never assume the same rules of structural fire engagement can be applied to all buildings without constant risk assessment, recon and situational awareness. Strategies and tactics must remain fluid. This single story commercial occupancy looked like a basic renovated Type III building from the street. An exposed (minimal design) interior accompanied by a non-conventional bow string truss support system and a raftered roof deck are ingredients for catastrophe for the unsuspecting Engine or Truck Companies. Photo by CJ Naum

Keep an eye in the rear view mirror; learning from the wisdom and knowledge from where you’ve been, what you’ve done and all your past experiences and practice; but at the same time focusing on the road before you with keen attentiveness on situational awareness, anticipating error-likely conditions and balanced risk assessment and operational management in both your strategic and tactical deployments.

Ensure you’re glancing occasionally in your rear view mirror to monitor where you’ve been, while driving your initiatives, programs, processes and actions forward. Above all, maintain the courage to be safe and know and understand your buildings, occupancies and your company’s capabilities.

Posted by Christopher Naum on September 9, 2012 • Filed under: building construction, Building Construction for the Fire Service, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, Combat Fire Engagement, construction, dynamics, Engineered Structural Systems, ESS, fire behavior, Fire Protection Engineering, firefighter, firefighting-operations, fires, History Repeating Event, LODD, occupancies, pre-planning, risk-based assessment, size-up, strategies, structure fires • Tagged: "pre-fire planning", Adaptive Fire Ground Management for Command and Company Officers, Adaptive Fireground Management, Adaptive Strategies and Tactical Patience, Building Anatomy, Building Construction for Fire Officers, Building Construction for the Fire Service, building construction principles, Building Knowledge=Firefighter Safety, Buildings on fire, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, CJ Naum, commandsafety.com, engineered structural system, Fire Fighting Strategy and Tactics, firefighting, First-Due Commanding Fire Officer, Heavy Timber Mill Construction, Occupancy Risk, Occupancy risk versus occupancy type, Operational Safety Considerations at Ordinary and Heavy Timber Constructed Occupancies, Predictive Occupancy Profiling, Predictive Strategic Process, Reading the Building: Predictive Occupancy Profiling, Rules of Engagement of Structural Firefighting, Structural Anatomy of Buildings, Type III and Type IV construction characteristics, Type III Collapse Safety, Type III Ordinary Construction, Understanding Buildings

Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Survival Week 2011: Day Five: Near-Misses, Maydays and Floor Collapses

1 comment

Do you know what's underneath you as you're making entry?

During the last quarter of 2010 and leading well into the second quarter of 2011 there has been a significant emerging trend developing in basement fires, compromised floor systems and assemblies leading to collapse and numerous near-miss events, close calls and unfortunatly, line of duty deaths during fire operations.

If you’ve been paying attention to the various news and on the job reports these past number of months, you may have noticed the increasing numbers of emerging trend evident in near miss, close-calls resulting in maydays, RIT deployments and self-rescue resulting from floor compromise and floor collapse. The double line of duty deaths of two San Francisco (CA) Fire fighers while operating in a Terraced (Hillside construction) residential occupancy while operating below the base level diaphragm (upper street level access). (HERE)

In December 2010, I was doing some research and posting links related to the first one or two events on Buildingsonfire on Facebook, HERE, it became evident at the time that there was an immediate opportunity to get some learning’s and insights out. If you have a chance head over to Facebook and link into Buildingsonfire and check out the incident links posted as well as some immediate report links. (Demember 2010 time frame)

In a coincidential posting on July 28, 2010, I posted on CommandSafety.com an interesting incident that I came across while preparing for a new post related to a near-miss event that occured in which a Camp Taylor (KY) firefighter survived a floor collapse that momentarily trapped him proximal to the seat of a working basement fire. Camp Taylor (FD) Captain Michael Long sustained second and third degree leg burns after falling through the floor of the burning home and subsequently being rescue by other fire department personnel after calling a mayday.

Operational Safety at Basement Fires: Close Call; Originally Posted on CommandSafety.com on July 28, 2010

This event has all the ingrediants the the 2011 Safety Week focus on Surviving the Fire Ground and managing the Mayday. Little did I know that later, in February 2011, while participating in the National FireFighter Near-Miss Reporting System Stakeholders meeting in California, would I have the chance to hear Captain Long’s story first hand, and then also have the opportunity to have him as a guest, sharing his story live on the Taking it to the Streets Radio program in February. (HERE)

Camp Taylor (FD) Captain Michael Long’s near-miss and story of survival resonates with this year’s theme of Surviving the Fire Ground- Firefighter, Fire Officer and Command Preparedness and Managing the Mayday and provides an opportunity to focus on the event in this, Day Five of the 2011 Fire/EMS Safety, Health and Surival Week activities. The details of Captain Long’s story can be found on the National FireFighter Near Miss Reporting System web site (HERE) as well as in the June 2011 issue of Fire Engineering Magazine titled, Floor Collapse: A Survivors Story. Let me state upfront also the Captain Michael Long will be presenting the accounts of his near miss event and the lessons-learned at IAFC Fire-Rescue International Conference in Atlanta in August (HERE).

On July 25, 2010, Captain Michael Long of the Camp Taylor (Ky.) Fire Protection District fell through the floor of a house during a four-alarm fire and suffered severe burn injuries. On Aug. 30, 2010, Capt. Long submitted a near-miss report based on this event. The National Fire Fighter Near-Miss Reporting System is an anonymous and confidential reporting system; however, Capt. Long wanted to have his name associated with this report so that others would understand the value of sharing near-miss events. What follows is an excerpt from his report and excerpts from a recent phone interview. To read his full report, including an extensive lessons learned section, search by report number for report #10-1072 on the Search Reports page of www.firefighternearmiss.com.

Near Miss Report Event #2010-1072

“I made sure my crew was ready to enter, sounded the floor for stability and then crossedover the threshold, entering the structure. When I was approximately 5 feet inside the structure, I felt the floor start to give way. I turned toward the front door to try to bail out, and at the same time yelled at others to get out, when the floor system collapsed. This was no ordinary collapse. More than two-thirds of the first floor collapsed simultaneously. The living room, dining room, kitchen, bathroom and foyer all fell at once. “When the collapse happened, I was the only one who fell into the basement, right into the heart of the fire. All I could see around me were flames.

I could not see the hole that I had fallen through. I could not see my fellow firefighters above me. All I could see was fire. I began to try to find something to use to climb back up with. Since I did not know what type of collapse had occurred, I just started clawing away at anything as I was trying to climb. During this time, my legs were burning.

Fire was burning up between my boots and my bunker pants. The pain was intense. My deputy chief was trying to put a line on me for protection, but the fire was extremely intense. He was lying on the porch with fire shooting out over his head. He stated he could occasionally see the top of my helmet and the reflective stripes on my coat sleeves.

By a bit of luck, a roof ladder was laying in the front yard that had just been taken off the roof after the completion of a ventilation operation.

My deputy chief directed the crew to put the ladder into the hole for my escape. “By this time, I was burned on my legs and struggling with exhaustion and the intense heat. I was screaming both from pain and due to fear. I could hear screaming coming from above, butwas unable to make out the majority of it. I finally heard the word “ladder” and then felt something across my back. Once they got the ladder into the basement, I had to get around to it. I still could not see anything but fire, so this was all by feel. As I started up the ladder, I got two rungs up, reached for the third rung, and lost my grip and fell back into the basement landing on my back. I was so exhausted that I started making my peace with God that this was where I was going to die.

For the full excerpt from Captain Long’s near miss report go to the NFF Near Miss Reporting Site and Resource Link, HERE

Captain Long

Incident Lessons Learned from Captain Long:

Train as if it is real. Train, train, train, and then train some more. Take advantage of every opportunity to train. The better we are trained, the less our chance of injury. The training must be physically and mentally. Crews must focus on more hands-on scenario-based training that allows for problem solving. If crews are taught that the outcome to every scenario is static, they are not being encouraged to think. Every run is different; no single solution applies to every situation. Adaptations or decisions that are not in step with changing conditions can actually be disadvantageous. We must make the right decisions based on the correct interpretation of the environment and blend those observations with our knowledge, skills, and abilities to map a course of action that will lead us to a successful outcome. Read reality and come up with the best possible plan. In my situation, quick thinking and adapting to the problem that presented itself saved my life.
Mutual-aid training is a must. We must train more with our neighboring departments to improve operations. It is occasionally difficult to work in situations where you do not really know with whom you will be working or where the command structure and tactics differ from those of your department. We all learn from the same book; however, the interpretations and tactics differ from person to person and department to department. I am not saying anyone is right or wrong in the way they do things—we all just need to do a better job of understanding that there is more than one way to get the job done.
We cannot know exactly how everyone on an emergency scene will perform because each person has a different interpretation of his surroundings and role in the system. Standard operating guidelines (SOGs) can assist in this area, but SOGs rely on perceptions and interpretations by individuals to be implemented as intended. Accidents often happen because everyone has a unique perspective on the environment, and each makes different decisions based on their perception.
We must perceive the environment correctly to ensure we make the right move. If these actions are not communicated and coordinated in the intricate system that is the fireground, accidents will be the inevitable and regrettable results. Training and frequent reviewing of SOGs are vital to our safety.
Risk assessment. Sounding the floor prior to entry is not always a good indicator of the floor’s stability. Less than two minutes before I made entry, there were three other firefighters, at least the same weight as I, in the same area where the collapse occurred. Everything changed in a very short time. There was no warning. Adkins told me at the hospital that all he heard was a “whoosh” sound when the floor collapsed. Then I disappeared. Within two minutes, the floor assembly went from being able to sustain a live load of at least 900 pounds in that area (accounting for gear, equipment, SCBA, and so on) to collapsing with about a 300-pound load, and I was close to a load-bearing wall. A good way to evaluate risk vs. gain is to get the most accurate report on burn time as possible to help determine structural integrity.
Rapid intervention. RIT is a critical fireground benchmark and is very important for safety, but it would have been ineffective in this situation. Had my crew not reacted the way they did immediately, I would not have been able to last long enough to wait for the RIT. In the time it would have taken for the RIT to gear up, come up with a plan, and enter, I would have died. The stars aligned in my favor that night. The person calling the Mayday or a nearby crew often mitigates personnel emergencies. My crew was able to act decisively at the correct time, and I am alive because of it. It is important to remember that a large percentage of Maydays are mitigated by the crew to which the lost firefighter is assigned or a nearby crew. RIT deployments account for a small number of rescues; we must always be alert and ready for the “incident within the incident.”
Manage your emotional response. From a personal standpoint, you must rely on your training and try not to panic. Know your equipment and procedures well. I did panic, but I was still able to keep myself together enough to know not to leave the area since I had been told that the stairs had burned away. Keeping my SCBA on, resisting the emotional reaction to remove my mask because of claustrophobia, was a huge factor in my survival. If I had tried to find another way out, my crew could not have gotten to me with the ladder. Had I removed my mask, the story would have ended quite differently. When I teach, I try to train as if it is the real thing. Never take a run for granted. Always expect the worst; you will be better prepared to deal with the unexpected.
If we continually study accident reports and learn from them, the likelihood of being surprised will be diminished. Peter Leschak writes in Ghosts of the Fireground: ”In fire and other emergency operations, you must not only tolerate uncertainty; you must savor it, or you won’t last long. The most efficient preparation is a general mental, physical, and professional readiness nurtured over years of training and experience. You live to live. Preparing is itself an activity, and action is preparation.”
Talk about it. Critical incident stress debriefing (CISD) is important for ensuring that personnel from all departments on scene are taken care of emotionally. CISD needs to extend beyond just one or two briefings. Personnel involved in a highly emotional event must be given the opportunity to speak to a trained CISD team member early and be given as much time as is needed to work through their issue. Some firefighters have a macho attitude and try to deal with their emotions on their own, or maybe they don’t deal with them at all. Others self-medicate with alcohol or, worse, these difficult emotional events are allowed to fester with no relief. People should be accepting of those who deal with issues up front and tell their stories. Telling these stories makes us better and helps to keep us safe. This reduces the possibility of “snapping” because you have too much pent-up emotion.
My fellow firefighters are still affected by this event, even those who were not there. Department personnel must be open-minded and receptive to the fact that emotional events will affect your performance and your personal life and that it is acceptable to be open and deal with them. When difficult emotional situations present themselves, members should attempt to deal with them as soon as possible.
Know what is possible and what is not. Know the experience level of your crew. Going into a bad situation with a crew that may not have exposure to a lot of different situations or that you aren’t that familiar with could make operations more difficult. I had everything from a 30-year veteran to a one-year recruit, so the experience level was all across the board. I knew that the situation we were going into was getting worse and required quick action, so I took the lead to ensure that the operation would be completed as quickly as possible. I knew my deputy chief would be watching us to ensure things were proceeding safely. I knew my crew could get the job done; however, this was an operation that is not often practiced and I wanted to make sure it was done correctly. I will not send my crew into an area that I am not comfortable going into. The more you train and the more people you can train with, the better you will understand your capabilities.

Listen or download the special interview I had with Captain Mike Long as well as

Taking it to the Streets Radio Program and Interview with Capt. Long

Taking it to the Streets^TM is a monthly radio show featured on BlogTalk Radio and is hosted by nationally renowned fire service leader Christopher Naum, a 36-year fire service veteran and highly regarded national instructor, author, lecturer and fire officer and the distinguished leading national authority on building construction and fire ground operations. Taking it to the Streets^TMis a Buildingsonfire.com Series and FireFighternetcast.com Production, © 2011 All Rights Reserved

Taking it to the Streets: Near Miss Reporting and One Captain’s Close Call

Filed under Live Netcasts, News, Our Show Archives, Taking It To The Streets

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

The progam was taped from the Live Broadcast on March 16th at 9pm EST

Taking it to the Streets: Near Miss Reporting and One Captain’s Close Call

On Your Street, In Your City, Across the Country, Around the World^TM

The direct show link is here

The line-up of Program guests included, Lt. Steve Mormino, FDNY (ret), Captain CJ Haberkorn Denver (CO) Fire Department and Special Guest Captain Michael Long, Camp Taylor (KY) Fire Protection District.

Grab a cup of coffee and sit down for a special two part, two hour program with Taking it to the Streets on Firefighernetcast.com where we’ll be discussing the National Near-Miss Reporting System and the untapped resources that the program and system provides with Christopher Naum and this outstanding group of fire service leaders. The second part of the program will dedicated to the personal account of Captain Long’s Close Call event from July 25, 2010 (NMR #10-1072) when a catastrophic floor collapse at a residential occupancy plunged him into a fire involved basement.

Check out the latest downloads of recent programs in the archives by visiting Taking it to the Street’s webpage on Firefighternetcast.com or for program insights at CommandSafety.com.

Firefighternetcast.com HERE
Taking it to the Streets Radio Programs, HERE and HERE
Buildingsonfire.com, HERE

Taking it to the Streets^TM, radio program hosted by highly regarded national instructor, author, lecturer and fire officer Christopher Naum, continues to provide provocative insights and dynamic discussions with leading national fire service leaders and guests on important issues affecting the American Fire Service with applications internationally within the tradition and brotherhood of the Fire Service.

Taking it to the Streets^TM, is a Buildingsonfire.com Series and Firefighter Netcast.com Production, in affiliation with the Command Institute

National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System’s Support for the 2011 Safety Week

Don’t forget to go to the National Firefighter Near Miss Reporting System for number of exceptional training aids, resources, PPT and more. NFFNMRS, HERE

Here are some of the National Firefighter Near Miss Reporting System Produced 2011 Safety Week Products


File Title	File Size	File Description
Presentation: Preventing The Mayday	176 KB	A powerpoint presentation about situational awareness, planning, size-up, and defensive operations
Presentation: Being Ready for the Mayday	176 KB	A powerpoint presentation about personal safety equipment, communications, and accountability systems
Presentation: Fire Fighter Expectations of Command	176 KB	A powerpoint presentation about fire fighter expectations of command.
Presentation: Self-Survival Skills	176 KB	A powerpoint presentation about self survival skills at a mayday.
Presentation: Self-Survival Procedures	176 KB	A powerpoint presentation about self survival procedures.
Grouped Report: Preventing The Mayday	176 KB	A grouped report about situational awareness, planning, size-up, and defensive operations
Grouped Report: Self Survival Procedures	176 KB	A grouped report about self survival procedures
Grouped Report: Being Ready for the Mayday	176 KB	A grouped report about personal safety equipment, communications, and accountability systems

In the meantime here are some links I pulled together that you should take the time to read and share with your companies, personnel and staff…..

This seems like a good time to have a ten minute drill on these events as Operating Experience (OE) on floor systems and operational safety, calling or commanding the mayday.

Or take some time to visit the The IAFF Fire Ground Survival Program (FGS)site which has the most comprehensive survival-skills and mayday-prevention program currently available and is open to all members of the fire service. Incorporating federal regulations, proven incident-management best practices and survival techniques from leaders in the field, and real case studies from experienced fire fighters, FGS aims to educate all fire fighters to be prepared if the unfortunate happens. (Day One: Are you ready, HERE)

For links to the IAFF Fire Ground Survival Program, HERE and HERE

Self-Survival Procedures

FGS Online Program Chapter 3
To improve survivability in a Mayday situation, a fire fighter must know how to alert rescuers to his or her location and perform self-survival techniques. Through the study of fire fighter fatalities, NIOSH has identified specific actions fire fighters can take to help save themselves. Variations of this same NIOSH recommendation have appeared in numerous fire fighter fatality reports. These recommendations were used to create a self survival procedure that is easy to remember using a mnemonic (GRAB LIVES). Following these steps increases the likelihood of the rescuers finding and assisting the fire fighter to safety.
When a fire captain died when trapped by partial roof collapse in a vacant house fire in Texas, NIOSH recommended in report number F2005-09 that trapped fire fighters should:

First, transmit a distress signal while they still have the capability and sufficient air.
Next, manually activate their PASS device. To conserve air while waiting to be rescued, try to stay calm and avoid unnecessary physical activity.
If not in immediate danger, remain in one place to help rescuers locate them.
Survey their surroundings to get their bearings and determine potential escape routes.
Stay in radio contact with the IC and other rescuers.
Attract attention by maximizing the sound of their PASS device (e.g., by pointing it in an open direction); pointing their flashlight toward the ceiling or moving it around; and using a tool to make tapping noises on the floor or wall.

Self-Survival Skills

FGS Online Program Chapter 4

Disentanglement Maneuvers

Fires inside an enclosed structure create a mess for fire fighters operating on the floor. Fire fighters often encounter debris that has fallen off shelves, and ceiling and wall fixtures that have burned and are left hanging to the floor. These hazards, coupled with the mess a fire fighter creates when searching for victims in smoky environments, can create egress problems for a fire fighter.

As fire burns draperies, blinds, lighting fixtures, computer wiring, and HVAC ducting, the possibility of encountering an entanglement hazard increases. The overhead ducting of the HVAC system contains wires that give the ducting its stability.

If a fire breaches the ceiling and burns the ducting, the wires within the ducting fall to the floor. These wires can cause a dangerous entanglement hazard to fire fighters operating on the floor. Fire fighters must anticipate these hazards and have a plan to follow when egress is cut off.

NIOSH Alert: Preventing Injuries and Deaths of Fire Fighters

Fire Fighter Expectations of Command

FGS Online Program Chapter 5
A discussion of what command must communicate to the distressed fire fighter, dispatch, the RIT group supervisor and all others assigned to the incident to assure a successful rescue.

Here are Some Mission Critical Reference Links for Operational Insights and Operating Experience (OE) to support Your Training and Operational Needs not only this week, but through the entire year.

Here are some Safety Considerations related to Residential Occupancies (non-inclusive) for Operations at Basement Fires that will support fireground operational safety:

Conduct a thorough fire size-up and communicate the findings to all personnel on-scene before entering the building.
Conduct an assessment of the Building Profile ( building construction type, structural assembly systems and features and age) and assesss fire behavior and intensity levels.
Ensure an adequte Risk Assessement is conducted and that Risk versus Gain is determined
Maintain situational awareness throughout the tactical deployment of crews within the interior of the structure
Conduct a 360 degree perimeter assesement when feasible to determine access and egress points, fire location and travel and other mission critical operational perameters.
Incident commanders and company officers should be trained and experienced in structure fire size up to avoid putting fire fighters at unneeded risk of working above fire-damaged floors.
Do not enter a structure, room, or area when fire is suspected to be directly beneath the floor or area where fire fighters would be operating, or if the location of the fire is unknown.
Never assume structural safety of any floor (regardless of the construction) having a significant fire under it.
Conduct pre-incident planning inspections during the construction phase to identify the type of floor construction.
If pre-planning is not conducted, assume residential construction and small commercial buildings built since the early 1990s may contain engineered wood I-joists.
Report construction deficiencies noted during preplanning to local building code officials. For example, engineered wood floor joists should only be modified per manufacturer specifications—usually limited to cutting to length and removing pre–cut knockouts for utility access. Report damaged or cut chords or webs to building officials.
Develop, enforce, and follow standard operating procedures (SOPs) on how to size up and combat fires safely in buildings of all construction types. Rapid intervention teams (RIT) should include a portable ladder with their RIT equipment when deployed at basement fires.
Ensure Time Compression is considered: Ensure Command has the ability to monitor progress or elapsed incident time and adjusts strategic and tactical plans accordingly and in a time effective manner.
Provide training on identifying signs of weakened floor systems (soft or spongy feel, heat transmitted through floor, downward bowing, etc.).
Make fire fighters aware that all floor types can fail with little or no warning.
Use a thermal imaging camera to help locate fires burning below or within floor systems, but recognize that the camera cannot be relied upon to assess the strength or safety of the floor. (Refer to the recent UL Test Data and Operational Safety Considerations ”Structural Stability of Engineered Lumber in Fire Conditions” available at http://www.uluniversity.us/ )
Fire fighters should be trained on the use of thermal imaging cameras, including limitations and difficulties in detecting fire burning below floor systems. (See reference to UL above)
Immediately evacuate and, if possible, use alternate exit routes when floor systems directly beneath the floor where fire fighters would be operating are weakened by fire.
Use defensive overhaul procedures after fire extinguishment in structures containing fire-damaged floor systems of all types.
Consider becoming active in the building code process and influence requirements for fire resistance of floor and ceiling systems to further fire fighter safety and health.
Ensure RIT personnel area staged and have complete a site assessment of the building and occupany upon thier arrival and set-up
Ensure that a rapid intervention team (RIT) is on the scene as part of the first alarm and in position to provide immediate assistance prior to crews entering a hazardous environment

Here’s some screen shots from Buildingsonfire on Facebook. Go HERE or follow the link at the left column. Join the growing list of over 3900 fans with Buildingsonfire on Facebook and Buildingsonfire.com

Posted by Christopher Naum on June 22, 2011 • Filed under: "firefighter safety", "health and safety", "pre-fire planning", "Safety Week", "Situational Awareness" assessment, assemblies, building construction, Building Construction for the Fire Service, buildings, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, close-call, command presence, construction, courage to be safe, Engineered Structural Systems, ESS, failures, fire behavior, firefighter-safety-health, firefighting-operations, fires, floors, IAFC, IAFF, LODD, Mayday, Naum, NFFF, NFPA, NIOSH • Tagged: 16 Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives, 2011 Fire/EMS Safety Week Training Resources, 2011 Focus: Surviving the Fire Ground – Fire Fighter, 2011 Planning and Resource Aid for Training Deliveries, 2011 Safety Health and Survival Week, 2011 Surviving the Fire Ground- Firefighter Fire Officer and Command Preparedness, Basement Fire Near Miss events, Basement fire operations safety, basement fires, Building, building construction, Building Construction for the Fire Service, Buildingsonfire, buildingsonfire.com, Buildingsonfre.com, Camp Taylor (FD) Captain Michael Long, Chicago Fire Department Courage to Be Safety, Chris Naum, Christopher Naum, combat fire suppression, commandsafety.com, compromised floor systems and assemblies leading to collapse, Diamond Heights section, Everyone Goes Home Program, FDNY Courage to BE Safet, fire behavior, fire dynamics, Fire Fighter Safety Week, Fire Fighting, Fire Officer & Command Preparedness, Fire Service LODD from Basement fires, fire suppression, Fire/EMS Safety, Fire/EMS Safety Health & Surival Week 2011, Fire/EMS Safety Health & Surival Week 2011: Day One- Are You Ready, Firefighter Close-call, Fireground Operations, Flashover, flashover lodd, Health and Survival Week 2011: Day Five: Near-Misses Maydays and Floor Collapses, Hillside construction firefighting safety, IAFC, IAFF, Incident Command, Initial Fire Attack, LODD, Lt Vincent Perez, Mayday, Mayday Training, mayday-prevention program, Nation Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting Systems, National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System 2011 Safety Week Resources, National FireFighter Near Miss Reporting System, National Near Miss Reporting System, Near Miss Reporting System, near-miss, NFFF, NIOSH, NIOSH Alerts, NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigative Reports, NIOSH Reports, NMR, operations, Preventing the Mayday, residential occupancy, RIT, RIT Training, Safety Considerations and Operations at Basement Fires, Safety Considerations related to Residential Occupancies (non-inclusive) for Operations at Basement Fires, Safety Health and Survival Section, San Francisco FD, San Francisco FD LODD June 2011, SFFD, SFFD Diamond Heights Fire, Sixteen Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives, Surviving the Fire Ground – Fire Fighter Fire Officer and Command Preparedness, tactics, Terraced (Hillside construction) residential occupancy, Terraced Occupancy Firefighting, Wind Driven Fire

Fire Behavior 101; Taking it to the Streets

2 comments

Fire Dynamics

Fire Dynamics is the study of how chemistry, fire science, material science and the mechanical engineering disciplines of fluid mechanics and heat transfer interact to influence fire behavior.

In other words, Fire Dynamics is the study of how fires start, spread and develop. But what exactly is a fire?

Defining Fire

Fire can be described in many ways – here are a few:

NFPA 921: ”A rapid oxidation process, which is a chemical reaction resulting in the evolution of light and heat in varying intensities.”
Webster’s Dictionary: “A fire is an exothermic chemical reaction that emits heat and light”

Fire can also be explained in terms of the Fire Tetrahedron – a geometric representation of what is required for fire to exist, namely, fuel, an oxidizing agent, heat, and an uninhibited chemical reaction.

Measuring Fire

Heat Energy is a form of energy characterized by vibration of molecules and capable of initiating and supporting chemical changes and changes of state (NFPA 921).

In other words, it is the energy needed to change the temperature of an object – add heat, temperature increases; remove heat, temperature decreases.

Heat energy is measured in units of Joules (J), however it can also be measured in Calories (1 Calorie = 4.184 J) and BTU’s (1 BTU = 1055 J).

Temperature is a measure of the degree of molecular activity of a material compared to a reference point.

Temperature is measured in degrees Farenheit (melting point of ice = 32 º F, boiling point of water = 212 º F) or degrees Celsius (melting point of ice = 0 º C, boiling point of water = 100 º C).

º C	º F	Response
37	98.6	Normal human oral/body temperature
44	111	Human skin begins to feel pain
48	118	Human skin receives a first degree burn injury
55	131	Human skin receives a second degree burn injury
62	140	A phase where burned human tissue becomes numb
72	162	Human skin is instantly destroyed
100	212	Water boils and produces steam
140	284	Glass transition temperature of polycarbonate
230	446	Melting temperature of polycarbonate
250	482	Charring of natural cotton begins
>300	>572	Charring of modern protective clothing fabrics begins
>600	>1112	Temperatures inside a post-flashover room fire

Heat Release Rate (HRR) is the rate at which fire releases energy – this is also known as power. HRR is measured in units of Watts (W), which is an International System unit equal to one Joule per second.

Depending on the size of the fire, HRR is also measured in Kilowatts (equal to 1,000 Watts) or Megawatts (equal 1,000,000 Watts).

Heat Flux is the rate of heat energy transferred per surface unit area – kW/m².

Heat Flux (kW/m²)	Example
1	Sunny day
2.5	Typical firefighter exposure
3-5	Pain to skin within seconds
20	Threshold flux to floor at flashover
84	Thermal Protective Performance Test (NFPA 1971)
60 – 200	Flames over surface

Temperature vs. Heat Release Rate

One candle vs. ten candles – same flame temperature but 10 times the heat release rate!

HRR: ~ 80 W Temperature:
500 C - 1400 C
(930 F - 2500 F)

HRR: ~ 800 W

Heat Transfer

Heat transfer is a major factor in the ignition, growth, spread, decay and extinction of a fire.

It is important to note that heat is always transferred from the hotter object to the cooler object - heat energy transferred to and object increases the object’s temperature, and heat energy transferred from and object decreases the object’s temperature.

CONDUCTION

Conduction is heat transfer within solids or between contacting solids.

The governing equation for heat transfer by conduction is:

Where T is temperature (in Kelvin), A is the exposure area (meters squared), L is the depth of the solid (meters), and k is a constant that unique for different materials know as the thermal conductivity and has units of (Watts/meters*Kelvin).

Thermal Conductivity of Common Materials

Copper = 387	Gypsum = 0.48
Steel = 45.8	Oak = 0.17
Glass = 0.76	Pine = 0.14
Brick = 0.69	PPE = 0.034 – 0.136
Water = 0.58	Air = 0.026

CONVECTION

Convection is heat transfer by the movement of liquids or gasses.

The governing equation for heat transfer by convection is:

Where T is temperature (in Kelvin), A is the area of exposure (in meters squared), and h is a constant that is unique for different materials known as the convective heat transfer coefficient, with units of W/m²*K.

These values are found empirically, or, by experiment.

For free convection, values usually range between 5 and 25. But for forced convection, values can range anywhere from 10 to 500.

RADIATION

Radiation is heat transfer by electromagnetic waves.

The governing equation for heat transfer by radiation is:

Where T is temperature (in Kelvin), A is the area of exposure (in meters squared), α is the thermal diffusivity (a measure of how quickly a material will adjust it’s temperature to the surroundings, in meters squared per second) and ε is the emissivity (a measure of the ability of a materials surface to emit energy by radiation).

Fire Phenomena

Fire Development is a function of many factors including: fuel properties, fuel quantity, ventilation (natural or mechanical), compartment geometry (volume and ceiling height), location of fire, and ambient conditions (temperature, wind, etc).

Traditional Fire Development
The Traditional Fire Development curve shows the time history of a fuel limited fire. In other words, the fire growth is not limited by a lack of oxygen. As more fuel becomes involved in the fire, the energy level continues to increase until all of the fuel available is burning (fully developed).

Then as the fuel is burned away, the energy level begins to decay.

The key is that oxygen is available to mix with the heated gases (fuel) to enable the completion of the fire triangle and the generation of energy.

Watch

Windows: Traditional Fire Development in a Compartment Fire

Mac: Traditional Fire Development in a Compartment Fire

Fire Behavior in a Structure
The Fire Behavior in a Structure curve demonstrates the time history of a ventilation limited fire. In this case the fire starts in a structure which has the doors and windows closed.Early in the fire growth stage there is adequate oxygen to mix with the heated gases, which results in flaming combustion. As the oxygen level within the structure is depleted, the fire decays, the heat release from the fire decreases and as a result the temperature decreases.

When a vent is opened, such as when the fire department enters a door, oxygen is introduced.

The oxygen mixes with the heated gases in the structure and the energy level begins to increase.

This change in ventilation can result in a rapid increase in fire growth potentially leading to a flashover (fully developed compartment fire) condition.

Watch

Windows: Fire Behavior in a Structure (Ventilation limited)
Mac: Fire Behavior in a Structure (Ventilation limited)

Flashover is the transition phase in the development of a contained fire in which surfaces exposed to the thermal radiation, from fire gases in excess of 600° C,

reach ignition temperature more or less simultaneously and fire spreads rapidly through the space.

This is the most dangerous stage of fire development.

Videos:

Reports:

Informational Source: The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is an agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. (HERE)

Predictability of Performance: Its Occupancy Risk NOT Occupancy Type

Tactical Patience and the New Considerations of Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and Contemporary Residential Construction

UL Ventilation and Fire Behavior Full Scale Testing

Impact of Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and Contemporary Residential Construction

For many of you that have been following my writings and perspectives on building construction, firefighting, command risk management and operational excellence for firefighter safety have long recognized that I have been promoting and advocating the fact the fireground is changining, our stratgies and tactics demand change adn does the demand for increased knowledge within the areas of building construction, fire dynamics, while integrating the art and science of firefighting. The most recent release of the testing report from Underwriters Laboratories; Impact of Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and Contemporary Residential Construction and the accompaning emphirical data further validates assumptions and presmises that many of us shared based upon field obervations and first hand incident operations related to the dramatic changes being witnessed as a result of operational challenges in a wide varity of occupanies and building types.

This material is a must read for all emerging and practicing company and command officers ( for starters) to being grasping the magnitude and extent of quantifiable data that supports the premise that combat fire engagement and suppression operations and the rules of engagement are going to change and that change is fast approaching.

Considerations for Tactical Patience and Adaptive Fireground Management are continued themes I will expand upon in future postings….

Here’s the executive summary of the report and findings from UL. For an download of the entire UL Report, go HERE.

Under the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistance to Firefighter Grant Program, Underwriters Laboratories examined fire service ventilation practices as well as the impact of changes in modern house geometries. There has been a steady change in the residential fire environment over the past several decades. These changes include larger homes, more open floor plans and volumes and increased synthetic fuel loads. This series of experiments examine this change in fire behavior and the impact on firefighter ventilation tactics. This fire research project developed the empirical data that is needed to quantify the fire behavior associated with these scenarios and result in immediately developing the necessary firefighting ventilation practices to reduce firefighter death and injury.

Two houses were constructed in the large fire facility of Underwriters Laboratories in Northbrook, IL. The first of two houses constructed was a one-story, 1200 ft², 3 bedroom, 1 bathroom house with 8 total rooms. The second house was a two-story 3200 ft², 4 bedroom, 2.5 bathroom house with 12 total rooms. The second house featured a modern open floor plan, two-story great room and open foyer. Fifteen experiments were conducted varying the ventilation locations and the number of ventilation openings. Ventilation scenarios included ventilating the front door only, opening the front door and a window near and remote from the seat of the fire, opening a window only and ventilating a higher opening in the two-story house. One scenario in each house was conducted in triplicate to examine repeatability.

The results of these experiments provide knowledge for the fire service for them to examine their thought processes, standard operating procedures and training content. Several tactical considerations were developed utilizing the data from the experiments to provide specific examples of changes that can be adopted based on a departments current strategies and tactics.

There has been a steady change in the residential fire environment over the past several decades. These changes include larger homes, more open floor plans and volumes and increased synthetic fuel loads. This series of experiments examine this change in fire behavior and the impact on firefighter ventilation tactics.

This fire research project developed the empirical data that is needed to quantify the fire behavior associated with these scenarios and result in immediately developing the necessary firefighting ventilation practices to reduce firefighter death and injury.

Two houses were constructed in the large fire facility of Underwriters Laboratories in Northbrook, IL.
The first of two houses constructed was a one-story, 1200 ft2, 3 bedroom, 1 bathroom house with 8 total rooms.
The second house was a two-story 3200 ft2, 4 bedroom, and 2.5 bathroom house with 12 total rooms.
The second house featured a modern open floor plan, two story great room and open foyer.

Fifteen experiments were conducted varying the ventilation locations and the number of ventilation openings. Ventilation scenarios included ventilating the front door only, opening the front door and a window near and remote from the seat of the fire, opening a window only and ventilating a higher opening in the two-story house.

One scenario in each house was conducted in triplicate to examine repeatability. The results of these experiments provide knowledge for the fire service for them to examine their thought processes, standard operating procedures and training content. Several tactical considerations were developed utilizing the data from the experiments to provide specific examples of changes that can be adopted based on a departments current strategies and tactics.

The tactical considerations addressed include:

Stages of fire development:The stages of fire development change when a fire becomes ventilation limited.
- It is common with today’s fire environment to have a decay period prior to flashover which emphasizes the importance of ventilatio
Forcing the front door is ventilation: Forcing entry has to be thought of as ventilation as well.
- While forcing entry is necessary to fight the fire it must also trigger the thought that air is being fed to the fire and the clock is ticking before either the fire gets extinguished or it grows until an untenable condition exists jeopardizing the safety of everyone in the structure.
No smoke showing:A common event during the experiments was that once the fire became ventilation limited the smoke being forced out of the gaps of the houses greatly diminished or stopped all together.
- No some showing during size-up should increase awareness of the potential conditions inside.
Coordination:If you add air to the fire and don’t apply water in the appropriate time frame the fire gets larger and safety decreases.
- Examining the times to untenability gives the best case scenario of how coordinated the attack needs to be.
- Taking the average time for every experiment from the time of ventilation to the time of the onset of firefighter untenability conditions yields 100 seconds for the one-story house and 200 seconds for the two-story house
- In many of the experiments from the onset of firefighter untenability until flashover was less than 10 seconds.
- These times should be treated as being very conservative. If a vent location already exists because the homeowner left a window or door open then the fire is going to respond faster to additional ventilation opening because the temperatures in the house are going to be higher.
- Coordination of fire attack crew is essential for a positive outcome in today’s fire environment.
Smoke tunneling and rapid air movement through the front door:Once the front door is opened attention should be given to the flow through the front door.
- A rapid in rush of air or a tunneling effect could indicate a ventilation limited fire.
Vent Enter Search (VES):During a VES operation, primary importance should be given to closing the door to the room.
- This eliminates the impact of the open vent and increases tenability for potential occupants and firefighters while the smoke ventilates from the now isolated room.
Flow paths: Every new ventilation opening provides a new flow path to the fire and vice versa.
- This could create very dangerous conditions when there is a ventilation limited fire.
Can you vent enough?:In the experiments where multiple ventilation locations were made it was not possible to create fuel limited fires.
- The fire responded to all the additional air provided.
- That means that even with a ventilation location open the fire is still ventilation limited and will respond just as fast or faster to any additional air.
- It is more likely that the fire will respond faster because the already open ventilation location is allowing the fire to maintain a higher temperature than if everything was closed. In these cases rapid fire progression if highly probable and coordination of fire attack with ventilation is paramount.
Impact of shut door on occupant tenability and firefighter tenability:Conditions in every experiment for the closed bedroom remained tenable for temperature and oxygen concentration thresholds.
- This means that the act of closing a door between the occupant and the fire or a firefighter and the fire can increase the chance of survivability.
- During firefighter operations if a firefighter is searching ahead of a hoseline or becomes separated from his crew and conditions deteriorate then a good choice of actions would be to get in a room with a closed door until the fire is knocked down or escape out of the room’s window with more time provided by the closed door
Potential impact of open vent already on flashover time:All of these experiments were designed to examine the first ventilation actions by an arriving crew when there are no ventilation openings.
- It is possible that the fire will fail a window prior to fire department arrival or that a door or window was left open by the occupant while exiting.
- It is important to understand that an already open ventilation location is providing air to the fire, allowing it to sustain or grow.
Pushing fire:There were no temperature spikes in any of the rooms, especially the rooms adjacent to the fire room when water was applied from the outside. It appears that in most cases the fire was slowed down by the water application and that external water application had no negative impacts to occupant survivability.
- While the fog stream “pushed” steam along the flow path there was no fire “pushed”.
No damage to surrounding rooms:Just as the fire triangle depicts, fire needs oxygen to burn.
- A condition that existed in every experiment was that the fire (living room or family room) grew until oxygen was reduced below levels to sustain it.
- This means that it decreased the oxygen in the entire house by lowering the oxygen in surrounding rooms and the more remote bedrooms until combustion was not possible.
- In most cases surrounding rooms such as the dining room and kitchen had no fire in them even when the fire room was fully involved in flames and was ventilating out of the structure.

Online Training Program

In order to make the results of this study more user friendly for the fire service to examine, UL developed an online interactive training module that can be viewed by clicking here. The program includes a professionally narrated description of all of the experiments, their results and the tactical considerations. Experimental video is used and graphical data is explained in a way that brings science to the street level firefighter.

UL University On-Line CBT

Comparison of Modern and Legacy Home Furnishings

An experiment was conducted with two side by side living room fires. The purpose was to gain knowledge on the difference between modern and legacy furnishings. The rooms measured 12 ft by 12 ft, with an 8 ft ceiling and had an 8 ft wide by 7 ft tall opening on the front wall. Both rooms contained similar amounts of like furnishings.

The modern room was lined with a layer of ½ inch painted gypsum board and the floor was covered with carpet and padding.

The furnishings included a microfiber covered polyurethane foam filled sectional sofa, engineered wood coffee table, end table, television stand and book case.
The sofa had a polyester throw placed on its right side. The end table had a lamp with polyester shade on top of it and a wicker basket inside it.
The coffee table had six color magazines, a television remote and a synthetic plant on it.
The television stand had a color magazine and a 37 inch flat panel television.
The book case had two small plastic bins, two picture frames and two glass vases on it.
The right rear corner of the room had a plastic toy bin, a plastic toy tub and four stuffed toys.
The rear wall had polyester curtains hanging from a metal rod and the side walls had wood framed pictures hung on them.

The legacy room was lined with a layer of ½ inch painted cement board and the floor was covered with unfinished hardwood flooring.

The furnishings included a cotton covered, cotton batting filled sectional sofa, solid wood coffee table, two end tables, and television stand.
The sofa had a cotton throw placed on its right side.
Both end tables had a lamp with polyester shade on top of them.
The one on the left side of the sofa had two paperback books on it.
A wicker basket was located on the floor in front of the right side of the sofa at the floor level.
The coffee table had three hard-covered books, a television remote and a synthetic plant on it.
The television stand had a 27 inch tube television.
The right front corner of the room had a wood toy bin, and multiple wood toys.
The rear wall had cotton curtains hanging from a metal rod and the side walls had wood framed pictures hung on them.

Both rooms were ignited by placing a lit stick candle on the right side of the sofa. The fires were allowed to grow until flashover. The modern room transitioned to flashover in 3 minutes and 30 seconds and the legacy room at 29 minutes and 30 seconds.

View the entire video, or you may also download the video:

- Download high-resolution (718MB).
  High download time expected – 90 minutes (speed: DSL)
- Download low-resolution (34MB).

Posted by Christopher Naum on May 29, 2011 • Filed under: "pre-fire planning", Architectural Design, assemblies, behaviors, Building Construction for the Fire Service, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, Combat Fire Engagement, construction, Engineered Structural Systems, ESS, failures, fire behavior, Fire Protection Engineering, fire suppression, firefighting-operations • Tagged: Adaptive Fireground Management, building construction, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, commandsafety.com, Conventional Construction, FD strategies and tactics, fire behavior, fire dynamics, fire dynamics and fire behavior, Fire Load Package, fire loading, fire service ventilation practices, Flashover, Full scale fire testing, Heat Release Rate, Heat Transfer, HHR, Impact of Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and Contemporary Residential Construction, Legacy construction, NIST, NIST Investigative Program, rate of heat release, residential fire environment, Stages of fire development:, standard operating procedures, Strategy and tactics, Tactical Patience, thecompanyofficer.com, Type V wood Frame, Underwriters Laboratories, Ventilation on Fire Behavior in Legacy and Contemporary Residential Construction, Ventilation scenarios, VES

Engineered Floor I-Joists and Firefigher Safety: Basic Insights

1 comment

The following videos provide some Basic insights on Engineered Floor I-Joists and Firefighter Safety. The first two video reports are a few years old, but provide some good visual and narrative insights into the current building construction trends, operational limitations and fireground tactical safety considerations.

Take the time to review these video clips and gain some new insights or refresh and reinforce your past knowledge of engineered floor systems, assemblies and tactical safety considerations. References and links to mission critical reports, studies and incidents is provided for your to expand your knowledge and skill base; for every rank and level of operations from firefighter, company or command officer.

Some insights on Engineered I-Joist construction and uses from a manufacture’s perspective….

Some insights on a newer type of I-Joist Hanger System interated into an Insulated concrete formwork system (ICF)

Cut-outs in I Joists for HVAC runs

If you’ve been paying attention to the latest news and on the job reports the past two month, you should have noticed there’s been an adverse emerging trend evident in near miss, close-calls resulting in maydays, RIT deployments and self-rescue resulting from floor compromise and floor collapse.I previously posted some research and links related to the first one or two events on Buildingsonfire on Facebook HERE, It became evident that there was an immediate opportunity to get some learning’s and insights out.

If you have a chance head over to Facebook and link into Buildingsonfire and check out the incident links posted as well as some immediate report links from the December/January time frameIn the meantime here are some links I pulled together that you should take the time to read and share with your companies, personnel and staff…..Take the time to have a ten minute drill on these events as Operating Expeeince (OE) on floor systems and operational safety with your company, station or department.Take a look at your current SOP and SOG’s and determine if you have the right “stuff” in place to provide operational guidance and direction based upon your organization’s operational profile and capabilites.Is your training up to speed on size-up, risk profiling and command and compay level operations for conducting work at buildings and occupancies with actual or suspected engineered floor systems?Reference Links for Operational Insights and Operating Experience (OE)

Here’s some screen shots from Buildingsonfire on Facebook. Go HERE or follow the link at the left column. Join the growing list of 3700 fans with Buildingsonfire on Facebook and Buildingsonfire.com

UL Testing

UL Fire Academy CBT

UL Structural Stability of Engineered Lumber in Fire Conditions
This two-hour presentation summarizes a research study on the hazards posed to firefighters by the use of lightweight construction and engineered lumber in floor and roof designs. This free on-line computer based presentation will allow fire professionals to better interpret fire hazards and assess risk for life safety of building occupants and firefighters.
This online firefighter training course is the result of a research partnership among UL, the Chicago Fire Department, IAFC, and Michigan State University, funded in part by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. This self-guided course, which focuses on the structural stability of engineered lumber under fire conditions, is targeted toward the 1.1 million fire service personnel in the United States and Canada. The knowledge developed and shared in this course is critically important to firefighter and civilian safety.
This two-hour presentation summarizes a research study on the hazards posed to firefighters by the use of lightweight construction and engineered lumber in floor and roof designs. This free on-line computer based presentation will allow fire professionals to better interpret fire hazards and assess risk for life safety of building occupants and firefighters.
Program Objectives:
Provide brief history of events leading up to DHS Grant tests
Identify the fire test hypothesis, parameters, and steps completed in the testing process
Compare tests results (legacy vs. modern construction)
Communicate learnings from our partners representing the fire service
Discuss code recommendations
UL University on-line Program HERE

Here’s a link to a past informative posting related to engineered systems and their relationship to firefighter safety and operations, HERE. There’s some great contributed information and manufacturer “insights” on the subject engineered wood I-joists and beams and firefighter safety. There are some interesting statistical extrapolations, correlations and conveniences’ that attempt to make the case. But then again, You be the judge. Take at look at the presentation developed by the American Forest and Paper Association, HERE and HERE.

If you haven’t done so yet, don’t forget to check out the free online training program on Structural Stability of Engineered Lumber in Fire Conditions at the UL University developed and provided by Underwriter’s Laboratories (UL), HERE

Here’s an additional series of other important Reference Links that provide some insights on operational safety, incident conditions and factors ;

NIOSH Publication No. 2009-114: Preventing Deaths and Injuries of Fire Fighters Working Above Fire-Damaged Floors HERE
NIOSH Publication No. 2005-132: Preventing Injuries and Deaths of Fire Fighters Due to Truss System Failures HERE
NFPA Report on Light Weight Construction, HERE
Informative USFA Coffee Break series postings related to Building Types & Fire Resistance: HERE. HERE, HERE, HERE, and HERE
Remember, Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety (Bk-F2S)

Buildingsonfire.com and the Command Institute

Coming Spring 2011

We’re finishing up with the content development and working on the supportive case studies and interactive group activities for an exciting new one day seminar program on that will address the leading issues, studies and reports specific to engineered floor and roof systems, incorporating the lastest UL and NIST test data and insights with cutting edge methodolgies and practices for firefighting operations.

Engineered Structural Systems & Fireground Operations will be available for training bookings commencing in May 2011. Contact us for a new brochure and program details.

In addition, look for a new updated 2011 Training Seminar brochure to download with a series of revised training seminars incorporating the newest operational insights

Building Construction for the Command & Company Officer
Building Construction and Tactical Operations
Tactical Operations and the New Rules of Combat Fire Engagement
Dynamic Risk Assessment of Occupancies for Operational Safety
Reading the Building: Predictive Profiling Predictive Occupancy Profiling

Posted by Christopher Naum on February 26, 2011 • Filed under: "firefighter safety", "pre-fire planning", Architectural Design, building construction, Building Construction for the Fire Service, buildings, buildingsonfire.com, Christopher Naum, construction, Engineered Structural Systems, engineered systems, ESS, firefighting-operations, floors • Tagged: "firefighter safety", Building Knowledge=Firefighter Safety, buildingsonfire.com, Chris Naum, Christopher Naum, commandsafety.com, Dynamic Risk Assessment, Engineered Floor I-Joists, engineered floor joist systems, engineered structural system, engineered systems, floor, Floor assemblies, floor Collapse, I Joists, lightweight construction, NFPA, NIOSH, NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality Investigative Reports, NIOSH LODD Reports, NIST, prefire planning, thecompanyofficer.com, UL, UL Structural Stability of Engineered Lumber in Fire Conditions, Underwriters Laboratories

Engineered Structural Systems- Hazards

3 comments

CNN recently presented an informative piece on the continuing trends in the design and use of engineered structural systems (ESS) . CNN correspondant Gerri Willis provides an informative and insightful look at something the fire service knows all too well. Here’s some additional information for you; According to the Wood Truss Council of America (WTCA), wooden trusses are used in roof systems in more than 60% of all buildings in the United States [SBCMAG 2004]. Truss and related engineered wooden floor systems are also becoming more common. Today, more engineered structures use lighter weight materials, producing …larger spans and clear openings. Trusses can be designed to carry expected loads, be produced economically, be safely handled, and reduce construction costs.

Engineered building components may provide adequate strength under normal loading; but under fire conditions, these truss systems can become weakened and fail, leading to the collapse of roofs, floors, and possibly the entire structure. Truss systems are usually hidden, and fires within truss systems may go unnoticed for long periods of time, resulting in loss of integrity.

Structural design codes often do not factor in this decreased system integrity, as fire degrades the structural members. Fire fighters typically rely on warning signs to indicate imminent truss failure such as roofs and floors that feel spongy or are visibly sagging. Quite often, these warning signs are not good predictors of truss system failures. The United States Fire Administration (USFA) reports that during 1990-2000, structural fires and explosions accounted for 46.1% of all reported fire fighter fatalities (500 of 1,085) [USFA 2002]. Statistics compiled by the WTCA suggest that 4.7% of the total fatalities (108 of 2,286) during 1980-2001 were due to structural collapse [Grundahl 2003b]. Fifteen separate incidents investigated by NIOSH identified at least 20 fatalities and 12 injuries that have occurred from 1998-2003 during fire-fighting operations in buildings containing truss systems.

http://us.cnn.com/video/?/video/living/2009/12/18/willis.new.housing.fire.danger.cnn CNN Reports on ESS Dangers

At least three scenarios can occur in which fire fighters suffer fatalities and injuries while operating at fires involving truss roof and floor systems:
1. While fire fighters are operating above a burning roof or floor truss , they may fall into a fire as the sheathing or the truss system collapses below them.
2. While fire fighters are operating below the roof or floor inside a building with burning truss floor or roof structures , the trusses may collapse onto them.
3. While fire fighters are operating outside a building with burning trusses , the floor or roof trusses may collapse and cause a secondary wall collapse.

Posted by Christopher Naum on December 28, 2009 • Filed under: "pre-fire planning", building construction, buildings, Christopher Naum, Collapse, Engineered, Engineered Structural Systems, engineered systems, ESS, failures, fire behavior, fire suppression, firefighting, floors, hazards, LODD, Lumber, Uncategorized • Tagged: buildings, CNN, CNN Reports, Collapse, construction, engineered structural system, engineered systems, ESS, fire behavior, fire resistance, firefighting, floor, floor systems, Green Bay FD, loading, LODD, new construction, residential, structural anatomy, Truss, UL, Willis

Without understanding the building-occupancy relationships and integrating; construction, occupancies, fire dynamics and fire behavior, risk, analysis, the art and science of firefighting, safety conscious work environment concepts and effective and well-informed incident command management, company level supervision and task level competencies…You are derelict and negligent and "not "everyone may be going home". Our current generation of buildings, construction and occupancies are not as predictable as past conventional construction; risk assessment, strategies and tactics must change to address these new rules of structural fire engagement. There is a need to gain the building construction knowledge and insights and to change and adjust operating profiles in order to safe guard companies, personnel and team compositions. It's all about understanding the building-occupancy relationships and the art and science of firefighting, Building Knowledge = Firefighter Safety (Bk=F2S)

Archives for ess-engineered-systems

Taking it to the Streets: Near Miss Reporting and One Captain’s Close Call

Self-Survival Procedures

Self-Survival Skills

Disentanglement Maneuvers

Fire Fighter Expectations of Command

Fire Behavior

Fire Dynamics

Defining Fire

Measuring Fire

º C

º F

Response

37

98.6

Normal human oral/body temperature

44

111

Human skin begins to feel pain

48

118

Human skin receives a first degree burn injury

55

131

Human skin receives a second degree burn injury

62

140

A phase where burned human tissue becomes numb

72

162

Human skin is instantly destroyed

100

212

Water boils and produces steam

140

284

Glass transition temperature of polycarbonate

230

446

Melting temperature of polycarbonate

250

482

Charring of natural cotton begins

>300

>572

Charring of modern protective clothing fabrics begins

>600

>1112

Temperatures inside a post-flashover room fire

Heat Flux (kW/m2)

Example

1

Sunny day

2.5

Typical firefighter exposure

3-5

Pain to skin within seconds

20

Threshold flux to floor at flashover

84

Thermal Protective Performance Test (NFPA 1971)

60 – 200

Flames over surface

Temperature vs. Heat Release Rate

HRR: ~ 80 W Temperature: 500 C - 1400 C (930 F - 2500 F)

HRR: ~ 800 W

Heat Transfer

Copper = 387

Gypsum = 0.48

Steel = 45.8

Oak = 0.17

Glass = 0.76

Pine = 0.14

Brick = 0.69

PPE = 0.034 – 0.136

Water = 0.58

Air = 0.026

Fire Phenomena

Watch

Watch

Heat Flux (kW/m²)

HRR: ~ 80 W Temperature:
500 C - 1400 C
(930 F - 2500 F)