The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Small Attack Lines for High-Rise Fires
OK here we go. This debate is as passionate as the smooth bore Vs fog nozzle debate. I am going to take a stab at it. I believe that there are situations that allow for a low friction loss 1-3/4" or 2" handline to be used in a highrise fire. And you say?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by SAFE Firefighter on
-
Maybe the question is too broad. Are we talking residential (compartmented) or commercial (open) layouts? How tall are we considering a building to be a high rise? Are there PRV? What is the construction? Are we talking about a blanket answer for ALL high rise fires?
In many catastrophic high rise incidents, unknown circumstances caused major problems. For example, low water supply (Philly), Advance fire on arrival (LA), doors left-open to common hallways, wind-driven (NY, Chicago, NIST studies). Some of these were commercial HR and some were residential.
While 2 1/2" w/ smooth bores is ideal, some departments simply do NOT have the manpower to mount a sustainable attack with that setup. If they attempt it, they'll have to rob Peter to pay Paul (i.e. add manpower to a handline using a crew that could ventilate.)
Some departments can only DO WHAT THEY CAN DO. A big part of keeping us safe is knowing when the problem has outgrown our ability to mitigate. If you have the manpower, the 2 1/2" is the safest and best bet for extinguishment, but you still may encounter a fire that you can't put out.
The wind-driven studies found that conditions deteriorated so quickly that outcomes may not have been changed in particular incidents/ LODD. It DID RECOMMEND controlling the conditions with aggressive ventilation and the use of WIND CURTAINS. Obviously in both cases, manpower is still the main determining factor.
I have always maintained that some tactics can be standardized under common circumstances. However, it's almost impossible to find a black and white answer for a profession spends most of its time in the gray area.
Thanks again.
-
-
Hey Chief,
I thought I wrote (or meant to write) house FIRE line (i.e. 1 3/4"). I agree with you that the use of "house lines" in inappropriate... but may do in a pinch.
As I expanded on in my second thread... in both of our FD's cases, we're strong through the First Alarm and may be able to make a push on a decent high rise fire with additional resources called for (early) to make up a 2nd Alarm. However, if we can't get it, the resources needed to adequately fight a rocking HR fire are sparse and not quickly available.
Take Care.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Got it. I'm not sure that the use of the term "house fire line" is specific enough for what we're talking about here, though.
One example - my department recently fought a house fire on which we flowed multiple 1.75 inch lines, a 2.5 inch line, and during the transitional phase, a portable monitor. All of those are techically included in the term "house fire line".
I'm wasn't trying to nitpick - I was just trying to be specific.
As for our limited resources - you're absolutely correct. The good news is that we don't have many true high-rise occupancies, and that most of the mid-rise stuff is sprinklered. Those things are no guarantee, but they do help.
An aside on something else that's been discussed by others in this thread is "wind-driven fires." I agree that this part of the discussion is important, too, but the wind has been around since before there were organized fire departments, so wind should be no surprise.
That especially goes for your department and mine - the southeastern home of "variable" wind direction and intensity.
-
Permalink Reply by David Earl Gregory on
-
There ya go SAFE Firefighter. Well said here as well as in your other comments. I've not signed here for a few weeks but I have been reading the posts periodically. Ideal and/or textbook situations are seldom encountered in the real world. These days, departments have to worry about manpower shortages more so than in the past. This goes for both volunteer and full-time paid. With the ever increasing costs of doing business, whether that business is a commercial enterprise or firefighting, cuts ARE going to be made. Lives are going to be endangered and lost as well as property losses.
If your job is firefighting, you have to use what you're given to work with. 2 man engine companies are absolutely NOT going to be able to do the same jobs as efficiently and as well as 3 and 4 man companies. Shutting down stations, reducing staffing, all adds to the equation. While it may be an ideal approach to stretch 1, 2, or even 3 large bore lines and nozzles to a fire, in reality in most cases, that ain't gonna happen. So, what are we/YOU as a firefighter to do? You go with what you have and make the best of it. As has been said already, you can put out a hell of a lot of fire with the 1.5 and 1.75 lines, "IF" you know how.
My question is, are we training properly on application of the wet stuff to the red stuff or...are we training on "quantity" of wet stuff to red stuff?? I am fully aware of my handicap here since I stretched my last line in 1985 and am not up to speed on all the modern tools and hazards. The concept is still the same however, ya gotta put it out sooner or later, better sooner than later. We can all insure "our" safety by hanging out in the street waiting for the fire to come to us or, we can grab the lines and manpower we have been given to work with and go kick ash. As for all the detractors on the smaller lines as initial attack lines, an old saying comes to mind. "Beware the man with only one gun, for he likely knows how to use it." Make damn sure you know how to use the gun you're pulling in the firefight. Whether bullets or water, you put it where it'll count and half the battle is over.
Remember, not all departments are as well endowed with manpower and equipment as others. The focus here should be on "HOW" to work with and go with what you've got, as opposed to beating up someone for pulling an inch and a half as an initial attack line. I wanna see how you explain you let it burn because you didn't have Bill and Joe with you to pull the big hose so you just stood there sucking wind. Maybe I didn't word my comments here exactly right for some of you, but I hope you got the drift of what I was saying.
-
-
Good point about the vertical hike. That is going to take time, which usually equals a more developed and hotter fire. That translates to the need for more lines unless you're SURE that a single, larger line can control the fire despite the hike delay.
-
Permalink Reply by Rescue1 on
-
Great response everyone! Just off shift and not much sleep again so spare with me.
We all seem to be on the same page. FYI, my scenario on a horizontal blow torch was 100% true and was a 30 MPH wind driven residential high-rise fire which started in the master bedroom. Once the window gave it only took a few minutes before the 200' hallways was a horizontal blow torch. The melting of the face piece was being a bit dramatic but a very real possibility. Face pieces start to break down at about 300 degrees and can start "liquefy" at a steady temperature of 500 degrees.
All the calculations, pressures and GPM's are right one. Man power? Even larger departments, like ours, would prefer the mobility of a smaller line but even with t a larger department, everyone is carring equipment and supplies needed for this type of incident. It's more practical to carry 200' of 2 1/2" hose when you find that the 1 3/4" you brought won't do the job. It's too late. In the real world this situation is extremely difficult to contain let alone extinguish with hand lines from the stairwell. Those aren't our procedures when a fire of this type was on the 5th or 6th floor as in Brooklyn, NY last week. Basically, we protect in place with the largest size diameter hose which has the lowest friction loss and highest GPM to protect us and the hundreds of civilians above the fire floor. Studies have shown that it takes approximately 3 to 4 hours for the fire load on just that floor to reduce enough to initiate an attack from the interior stairwells. Normal procedures to knock the fire down from the exterior are not an option! Yet! But will be very soon. That's why since our Cook County Building and LaSalle Bank fire I've have been trying to develope a way to safely and easily give of that option of an exterior attack when we face these situations.
Take a peak at remote nozzle tests if you like.
Years of testing, formulas and experience have determined that a 2 1/2" is the line of choice. There are tests being conducted with lighter, more flexible hose which would help.
Be safe brothes and sisters! Off to the firefighters bowling fund raiser. Over 600 bowlers this morning on 125 lanes each day over 4 days. Great bonding.
-
Permalink Reply by Paul Shapiro on
-
OK hear is my other 2 cents. Rescue 1 it sounds like your fire was a hot one and warranted the big line. Most 2-1/2" fans are stuck on the 265 gpm flow with the 1-1/8" tip. Why stop there. Let's use a post 93 building for an example. We get 500 gpm at a 100 psi standpipe residual pressure. If the flow is under 500 gpm the 100 psi figure will be higher. Using a 150' x 2-1/2" handline with a 1-3/8" nozzle a flow of 400 gpm can be obtained with ba good stream. At 400 gpm the standpipe residual pressure should be higher than 100 but even if it wasn't 400 gpm could be delivered.
-
-
Paul. Very true. This is one example of many tens of thousands of highirse fires annually. Maybe I should say that most times we can handle the situation with a smaller line but even in our large city we are limited to what we can carry up so we just prepare for the worse senerio everytime. We are not only limted to GPM's of the NFPA standards regulating GPM's out of standpipe systems and it makes sense because we don't have the capabilities of a master stream in a highrise fire. Those standards are regulated to protect us. We are also limited to the amount of lines that we can attack with due to standpipe limitations.
Your are correct Paul. We have to face that fact of what is available.
How about we introduce class "A: foam increasing that extinguishing effectiveness by up to 5 X? 265 GPM has the effectivenes of 1325 GPM! 2 lines equal 2650 GPM. In those extreme circumstances we still couln't get the water on the fire no matter what size line we are using but let's keep that for another blog.
-
Permalink Reply by Russ on
-
thanks and i believe in lots of manpower like Shareef said. i would feel better with duce and an half but, 1-3/4 is a better choice and (personally) 2" is better as long as i have a straight tip nozzle for the fire killing power
-
-
If you don't have lots of manpower and can't get it quickly, then what?
Some of us are not blessed with the manpower resources it takes to throw human wave after human wave at the fire.
-
Permalink Reply by Tyler Lyons on
-
FECT, I agree that manpower and occupancy has a lot of factor, we don't use 2" here so hard to say, I haven't worked with it. that being said... IF the fire is compartmentalized, IF the fire has not extended to multiple offices, IF the sprinklers are working and can control the fire load, IF, IF, IF... bring the 2.5" and branch it to 1.75" when needed. Fog or smooth bore, a whole different argument... both have their ups and downs. It is a lot more difficult with a 3 person crew. On a high rise here, first engine and truck in, go to fire floor. Thats a minimum of 7 people and sometimes 9 for the hand lines. Every call is different, 99% of the time you won't need the big water, but prepare for the 1%er... just sayin
-
Permalink Reply by Jeff Cole on
-
You can put out alot of fire with 1.5" and 1.75" "IF" you know how? I am puzzled. Aggressive advancement and years of heavy firefighting experience is not going to be the deciding factor in any fire in which the heat, fuel, flame spread, and all that other stuff equates to fire that eats up the smaller lines and prevents advancement and containment.
You can be an expert marksman and shot BB's at a charging Gorilla all day, but your just gonna piss him off, and you aint gonna stop him. The only excuse for failure to be capable of stretching a bigger line is lack of continous training, or motivation. Notice I said "stretch". Advancement IS another issue, and can very well be staffing dependent.
2.5" in conjunction with 2" CAN be a workable solution. But this buisness changes very slowly. I remember the change from 1.5" to 1.75" and soon it was widely embraced, yet few actually used it to their advantage, and actually did enough actual testing. It was just accepted. And very little, if any flows were increased.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
