The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
NIST Releases Report on Effects of Firefighting Crew Sizes
EVELYN BROWN
NIST
WASHINGTON D.C. - A landmark study issued today by the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) shows that the size of firefighting crews has a substantial effect on the fire service's ability to protect lives and property in residential fires.
The report is the first to quantify the effects of crew sizes and arrival times on the fire service's lifesaving and firefighting operations for residential fires. Until now, little scientific data have been available.
"The results from this rigorous scientific study on the most common and deadly fires in the country—those in single-family residences—provide quantitative data to fire chiefs and public officials responsible for determining safe staffing levels, station locations and appropriate funding for community and firefighter safety," said NIST's Jason Averill, one of the study's principal investigators.
The four-person crews were able to deliver water to a similar-sized fire 15 percent faster than the two-person crews and 6 percent faster than three-person crews, steps that help to reduce property damage and lower danger to the firefighters.
"Fire risks grow exponentially. Each minute of delay is critical to the safety of the occupants and firefighters, and is directly related to property damage," said Averill, who leads NIST's Engineered Fire Safety Group within its Building and Fire Research Laboratory.
"Our experiments directly address two primary objectives of the fire service: extinguishing the fire and rescuing occupants," said Lori Moore-Merrell of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and a principal investigator on the study.
The four-person crews were able to complete search and rescue 30 percent faster than two-person crews and 5 percent faster than three-person crews, Moore-Merrell explained. Five-person crews were faster than four-person crews in several key tasks. The benefits of five-person crews have also been documented by other researchers for fires in medium- and high-hazard structures, such as high-rise buildings, commercial properties, factories and warehouses.
This study explored fires in a residential structure, where the vast majority of fatal fires occur. The researchers built a "low-hazard" structure as described in National Fire Protection Association Standard 1710 (NFPA 1710), a consensus standard that provides guidance on the deployment of career firefighters. The two-story, 2000-square-foot test facility was constructed at the Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville, Md.Fire crews from Montgomery County, Md., and Fairfax County, Va., responded to live fires within this facility.
NIST researchers and their collaborators conducted more than 60 controlled fire experiments to determine the relative effects of crew size, the arrival time of the first fire crews, and the "stagger," or spacing, between the arrivals of successive waves of fire-fighting apparatus (vehicles and equipment). The stagger time simulates the typically later arrival of crews from more distant stations as compared to crews from more nearby stations.
Crews of two, three, four and five firefighters were timed as they performed 22 standard firefighting and rescue tasks to extinguish a live fire in the test facility. Those standard tasks included occupant search and rescue, time to put water on fire, and laddering and ventilation. Apparatus arrival time, the stagger between apparatus, and crew sizes were varied.
The United States Fire Administration reported that 403,000 residential structure fires killed close to 3,000 people in 2008—accounting for approximately 84 percent of all fire deaths—and injured about 13,500. Direct costs from these fires were about $8.5 billion. Annually, firefighter deaths have remained steady at around 100, while tens of thousands more are injured.
Researchers also performed simulations using NIST's Fire Dynamic Simulator to examine how the interior conditions change for trapped occupants and the firefighters if the fire develops more slowly or more rapidly than observed in the actual experiments. The fire modeling simulations demonstrated that two-person, late-arriving crews can face a fire that is twice the intensity of the fire faced by five-person, early arriving crews. Additionally, the modeling demonstrated that trapped occupants receive less exposure to toxic combustion products—such as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide—if the firefighters arrive earlier and involve three or more persons per crew.
"The results of the field experiments apply only to fires in low-hazard residential structures as described in the NFPA Standard 1710, but it provides a strong starting point," said Moore-Merrell. Future research could extend the findings of the report to quantify the effects of crew size and apparatus arrival times in medium- and high-hazard structures, she said.
The next step for this research team is to develop a training package for firefighters and public officials that would enable them to have both quantitative and qualitative understanding of the research, a project also funded by FEMA's Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program.
The study's principal investigators were Averill, Moore-Merrell and Kathy Notarianni of Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Other organizations participating in this research include the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the Commission on Fire Accreditation International-RISK and the Urban Institute.
The report was funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and released today in Washington, D.C., before the start of the annual Congressional Fire Services Institute meeting that draws top fire safety officials from across the nation.
The Report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments, NIST Technical Note 1661, can be downloaded here.
Founded in 1901, NIST is a nonregulatory agency of the Commerce Department that promotes U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life.
NIST
WASHINGTON D.C. - A landmark study issued today by the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) shows that the size of firefighting crews has a substantial effect on the fire service's ability to protect lives and property in residential fires.
Read the Report:
Report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments
Related
Performed by a broad coalition in the scientific, firefighting and public-safety communities, the study found that four-person firefighting crews were able to complete 22 essential firefighting and rescue tasks in a typical residential structure 30 percent faster than two-person crews and 25 percent faster than three-person crews.Report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments
Related
- Command Safety: NIST Study to be Issued
- Command Safety: NIST Report, Field Experiments
- FireRescue Magazine: The Good of the Whole
The report is the first to quantify the effects of crew sizes and arrival times on the fire service's lifesaving and firefighting operations for residential fires. Until now, little scientific data have been available.
"The results from this rigorous scientific study on the most common and deadly fires in the country—those in single-family residences—provide quantitative data to fire chiefs and public officials responsible for determining safe staffing levels, station locations and appropriate funding for community and firefighter safety," said NIST's Jason Averill, one of the study's principal investigators.
The four-person crews were able to deliver water to a similar-sized fire 15 percent faster than the two-person crews and 6 percent faster than three-person crews, steps that help to reduce property damage and lower danger to the firefighters.
"Fire risks grow exponentially. Each minute of delay is critical to the safety of the occupants and firefighters, and is directly related to property damage," said Averill, who leads NIST's Engineered Fire Safety Group within its Building and Fire Research Laboratory.
"Our experiments directly address two primary objectives of the fire service: extinguishing the fire and rescuing occupants," said Lori Moore-Merrell of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) and a principal investigator on the study.
The four-person crews were able to complete search and rescue 30 percent faster than two-person crews and 5 percent faster than three-person crews, Moore-Merrell explained. Five-person crews were faster than four-person crews in several key tasks. The benefits of five-person crews have also been documented by other researchers for fires in medium- and high-hazard structures, such as high-rise buildings, commercial properties, factories and warehouses.
This study explored fires in a residential structure, where the vast majority of fatal fires occur. The researchers built a "low-hazard" structure as described in National Fire Protection Association Standard 1710 (NFPA 1710), a consensus standard that provides guidance on the deployment of career firefighters. The two-story, 2000-square-foot test facility was constructed at the Montgomery County Public Safety Training Academy in Rockville, Md.Fire crews from Montgomery County, Md., and Fairfax County, Va., responded to live fires within this facility.
NIST researchers and their collaborators conducted more than 60 controlled fire experiments to determine the relative effects of crew size, the arrival time of the first fire crews, and the "stagger," or spacing, between the arrivals of successive waves of fire-fighting apparatus (vehicles and equipment). The stagger time simulates the typically later arrival of crews from more distant stations as compared to crews from more nearby stations.
Crews of two, three, four and five firefighters were timed as they performed 22 standard firefighting and rescue tasks to extinguish a live fire in the test facility. Those standard tasks included occupant search and rescue, time to put water on fire, and laddering and ventilation. Apparatus arrival time, the stagger between apparatus, and crew sizes were varied.
The United States Fire Administration reported that 403,000 residential structure fires killed close to 3,000 people in 2008—accounting for approximately 84 percent of all fire deaths—and injured about 13,500. Direct costs from these fires were about $8.5 billion. Annually, firefighter deaths have remained steady at around 100, while tens of thousands more are injured.
Researchers also performed simulations using NIST's Fire Dynamic Simulator to examine how the interior conditions change for trapped occupants and the firefighters if the fire develops more slowly or more rapidly than observed in the actual experiments. The fire modeling simulations demonstrated that two-person, late-arriving crews can face a fire that is twice the intensity of the fire faced by five-person, early arriving crews. Additionally, the modeling demonstrated that trapped occupants receive less exposure to toxic combustion products—such as carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide—if the firefighters arrive earlier and involve three or more persons per crew.
"The results of the field experiments apply only to fires in low-hazard residential structures as described in the NFPA Standard 1710, but it provides a strong starting point," said Moore-Merrell. Future research could extend the findings of the report to quantify the effects of crew size and apparatus arrival times in medium- and high-hazard structures, she said.
The next step for this research team is to develop a training package for firefighters and public officials that would enable them to have both quantitative and qualitative understanding of the research, a project also funded by FEMA's Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program.
The study's principal investigators were Averill, Moore-Merrell and Kathy Notarianni of Worcester Polytechnic Institute. Other organizations participating in this research include the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the Commission on Fire Accreditation International-RISK and the Urban Institute.
The report was funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and released today in Washington, D.C., before the start of the annual Congressional Fire Services Institute meeting that draws top fire safety officials from across the nation.
The Report on Residential Fireground Field Experiments, NIST Technical Note 1661, can be downloaded here.
Founded in 1901, NIST is a nonregulatory agency of the Commerce Department that promotes U.S. innovation and industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our quality of life.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
I glanced through it. It "seems" that once a staffing level of 4 is achieved, from there on out it becomes a case of diminishing returns. Four seems to be the optimum. But then, many hands make light work.
-
Permalink Reply by Daniel Luechtefeld on
-
@strcopr: When it was just the fire service making this claim, it was easier to dismiss on the grounds that fire service leadership was engaging in rhetoric aimed at creating or preserving manpower billets.
That NIST is a neutral third-party - not concerned with the manpower of any single department - is highly important. It greatly increases the credibility of what the fire service has been advocating.
Moreover, it's likely the insurance industry will incorporate this knowledge into their actuarial tables. Consequently, the extent to which departments comply with NIST recommendations will drive their insurance rates; not following NIST recommendations will carry a financial penalty. THAT will get the attention of civilian leadership.
-
-
Daniel,
Not to put too fine a point on it, but there is one glaring mistake in your argument: You are attempting to use reason and logic in dealing with politicians and tax payers. Shame on you.
-
-
Jack/dt: the bottom line is this: with NIST confirming what the fire service has long advocated, the case can now be made that maintaining crew sizes will SAVE taxpayer money by lowering insurance premiums.
Shoveling money to the insurance industry is not popular...even among the hard-headed.
-
Permalink Reply by Mike Schlags (Captain Busy) Retd on
-
but... just maybe, this report might be used to save jobs that are being cut to balance budgets? I for one celebrate this type of report that as Daniel pointed out is an independent third party. Common sense sure as hell doesn't work so using a rolled up newspaper to smack the nose of politicians using firefighter and law enforcement jobs to protect other non-vital services that have bloated to unbelievable bureaucracies. Or maybe it's just California?
-
-
That's a victory. I've encountered citizens who think that 2-3 is optimal. This in a high call-volume city: Seattle.
-
-
Daniel,
Firstly (I hope you realize) that my comment was tongue-in-cheek, secondly it would depend on the actual dollar increase to individual home owners insurance policies versus increases in individual property taxes.
A change in ISO ratings/Public Protection Classification is dependent on a number of variables yet changes to any of those variables may not have as dramatic (or apparent) monetary affect on either town ratings or individual insurance as cutting staff. At least in the eyes of the public. Not that I'm against appropriate staffing by any means, I'm just saying.
-
-
strtcopr,
Like I said I only glanced through the report but there does appear to be a significant advantage to having a minimum of 3 staffing, enough so to warrant maintaining 3 as a true minimum and there is likewise a significant advantage to going to 4 staffing. My point was that from 4 to 5 the advantage seemed to not be significant (I seem to remember a 6% increase in efficiency from 4 to 5).
Also, staggered response, the time between additional units arriving also contributed to an increase in efficiency. It might even make a stronger argument for more stations as opposed to increased staffing at existing ones. Bottom line is more people on scene and as quickly as possible.
I think the best example is NASCAR pit crews; Clearly the more people doing assigned tasks complete the overall pit stop more quickly and efficiently. Seems to me that that same model obviously applies to the fire service. Unless of course putting a car back on the track is more important than putting out a fire. If that's the case then my whole argument falls to shit.
Additionally, (again if I'm remembering correctly) there was about a 25% increase in efficiency from 3 to 4 staffing. That could be translated to the public as increasing their chance of being rescued (or their house saved) by 25%. Not an insignificant increase in odds.
-
Permalink Reply by Luke on
-
No different in Bellevue either in terms of citizens & politicians beliefs...
-
Permalink Reply by Jack Jansen on
-
I know we'd all like to have 6 person crews but, for many departments, just keeping 3 on board is constantly a major problem. I was lucky enough to have the opportunity to "rebuild" a fire service which had little change in more than several decades. This allowed me to place 4 person crews at ISO intervals to guarantee that those levels would stay in place. At least, that's what I thought. Last year, our council temporarily closed two engine crews where "quint" apparatus were present in the same station. In itself that might not have been a great problems but, in addition to closing the two companies in question, we were still 5 companies (3 Ladder and 2 Engine) short in the overall master plan from the 1990s. The Council had never provided the funds to build the stations, buy the apparatus and man the companies which were needed due to years of annexation. It never seems to get any better in our business.
-
-
The fire service needs to take a page from the National Education Association's (NEA) handbook.
When you look at the starting pay, the step increases, 180 day work year (on average, plus weekends off, christmas, winter and spring vacations plus other holidays, in service days and summers off) tenure and contractual classroom sizes, they're doing something right for their members.
But then, I guess people see teaching children in a classroom as more important than saving them in their bedroom.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
