The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
interior firefighting ?
any specific way yall do interior attacks or any usefull tips or tactics.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Craig on
-
To vague of a question. The tactics and strategy vary enough between a high rise, 5 story ordinary, wood frame or concrete tilt up that it would take pages to explain. Perhaps you could define the question better with an example building type and whether it is light weight construction or not. Thanks
Pierre-Louis Lamballais, I agree that a lot of fires are ventilation limited,however I would argue that flashover cannot occur without firefighter venting. Many structures have windows and vent openings that fail allowing adequate air access to flash without firefighter intervention. Venting is key to allowing the interior firefighters to quickly find the seat of a fire by reducing heat and increasing visiblity. It also has the benefit of limiting horizontal fire spread by creating the low pressure path up and out of the structure as well as providing occupants the opportunity to self rescue or survive until we can reach them. All ventilation must be coordintated and communicated to coincide with fire attack. Your water calculations seem off to me. The nist studies consistently show that larger gpms are needed to fight the construction materials of today. Especially a foam rubber sofa or chair.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDNPhq5ggoE
The tragedy in Charleston can be explained by poor tactics more than improper venting.
You raise many good points, however venting in coordination with fire attack has proven valuable and safe with proper training.
Thanks Stay Safe!
-
Permalink Reply by Pierre-Louis Lamballais on
-
Hi Craig,
" Your water calculations seem off to me. The nist studies consistently show that larger gpms are needed to fight the construction materials of today. Especially a foam rubber sofa or chair."
I know "a little" the NIST (I'm beta tester of their FDS software). The main problem is that they are in the USA, and compute the flow rate with solide bore. But, in order to cool, you need to have time and surface of contact with heat. With a soide bore, only 20 to 25%of water extinsguish the fire. With a fog nozzle, we rise up to 80 to 90%.
In order to understand that, just take a glass of water and pour it in a small part of the barbecue. You will see the fire, at this location, is out. Now, take 2 glasses of water and pour them at the same location. You will see they do nothing more as you flow water on the same location. The key is NOT the flow rate. The key is the correct use of flow rate with a good transformation ratio on a large surface.
What is funny is that, if you calculate the amount of water really used at a flow rate of 135GPM with a fog nozzle (so with a 80% ratio) and compare to the amount of water really used with a ratiop of 20% with a "big big big nozzle", you will see no difference.
Concerning "venting in coordination with fire attack has proven valuable and safe with proper training." I agree. But I instruct FF for many years and I know that this is the "ideal way" but not the real one. We can dream of pretty nice tactics, nice venting operation with pretty nice coordination. But today unfortunaly budget are going down, time for training decrease and the "coordination and proper training" if not well done let the fire scene turn more ofter in nightware than paradise.
Our method is different but have a great advantage: even if you are not well trained and have no good coordination, it works fine.
In fact, with a high level, you get the same result than we have with a medium one.
Also, if you read carefully the article, and re-watch the video you post you will see the flashover occurs at 3.23 min. Not after the call to FF but after ignition. Do you think that 3.23 is enought to take the phone, call the fireservice, let the fire service take the truck and being on the scene? Seriously no. So, if you are on this scene after 3.23min the flashover has occured.If it happened after, this can be only because of an increase of ventilation. And this is not possible with window breakage as window breakage happened sooner.
I know it's very hard to change and to admit we're doing wrong.In 2007 I was in Belgium giving flahsover course. One day, during the meeting at the end of the one day course, a professionel FF told us "No need to be very intelligent to understand that, for years, we were on the wrong way".
I know it's hard. Because for years, I was also on the wrong way. :)
Hope I'll have the opportunity to show you (and have a beer after!)
Best regards
Pierre-Louis
-
-
Permalink Reply by Norm Tindell on
-
Every region and every department does things, tactics included, differently. Consult with your officers and with the instructors at your area school. If you have not done so yet attend a live fire training exercise at your local fire school or academy. If you can't find one ask the guys at a larger neighboring department if you can come to theirs. Then you will get some good ideas. Practice, practice, practice.
-
Permalink Reply by Travis Skinner on
-
we always go inside the structure to check it we may or may not have a hose line we usually do but we dont charge it unless we need it.
-
-
thanks norm ill look into it
-
-
Just for information, this way of doing is illegal in France. In order to enter a house where we supposed to have a fire, you must have a charge hoseline, able to flow a minimum of 135GPM.
Read the article about vent induced flashover. In fact,just entering "to see" provide air to the fire and change its evolution. Never forget we call structural fire "Rapid fire progress" due to the fact they spread in gas not on solid fuel. This means if you see you need a nozzle and don't have it, it's too late.
As I say to my students, only James Bond run faster that flames. :)
Regards
Pierre-Louis
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Pierre-Louis,
I've attached a PDF by John D. Wiseman that explains Thornton's Rule.
If I understand it, and you, correctly, it isn't the composition of the burning material but the available oxygen that limits combustion or increases the HRR (hence your discussion about ventilation).
Based on Thornton's Rule, the following conclusion is made by the author (Wiseman, J.):
In oxygen-limited fires, the type of organic material burning is irrelevant since the amount of heat released is constant for a given amount of oxygen consumed. Therefore, the widespread use of plastics does not indicate a need for greater fire flows than in years
past. In oxygen-limited fires, cellulose-based materials release just as much heat as hydrocarbon-based materials per unit of oxygen consumed.
Candidly I don't fully understand the math involved but the conclusions are clear. Despite the fact that modern furnishings produce higher heat, they are limited by their oxygen consumption and so in essence, create no greater heat than the legacy furnishings of 50 or 60 years ago. It is only when the fire is adequately ventilated (more than enough oxygen) that the greater heat will be produced.
The above mentioned is in regard to a fire still contained to the room of origin. I would suggest reading the attached PDF to get a fuller understanding of what Pierre-Louis is saying. I would also suggest reading the link that he provided - http://www.tantad.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&si...
Who'd of thought we'd end up with a silk purse from a sow's ear? - Attachments:
-
-
Thornton%27s%20Rule.pdf, 54 KB
-
-
-
No Tyler :)
When you write "Remember... all fires go out........... eventually." you add a wrong word. You must write "Remember... all fires go out.".
And this is the main problem: you arrive on scene because there is a fire. And we go back to the fire-station when the fire is out. But if we do nothing, and just wait, we will see the fire will be out by itself.
If, by doing nothing or doing bad thinks, the fire would spread and stay alive for centuries, if would be good because in this case, we would see we're wrong. But as even with bad actions, the fire will be out, it's hard to explain we have to learn.
Best regards
Pierre-Louis
-
Permalink Reply by Shareef Abdu Nur on
-
I'm sorry, but I disagree with many of your statements. There are times when the only way to enter a structure is from the burned side and sometimes you may have to attack the fire head on.
Also, from a Truck point of view, we enter the structure without a hoseline almost each and every fire. that's our job! We go in before the hose line and search for victims and fire for the Eng Co. When we VES, one member is entering the bedroom and searching by him/herself on the floor above the fire.
Fast, aggressive interior attack is how we conduct business. This is what saves lives and property and conducted properly with a coordinated effort, good things can happen.
I do however agree with you as far as training. Training is critical and is key to successful operations.
-
-
Hi,
Nice to see everybody saying what to do. But I've made a new message here:
http://www.firefighternation.com/forum/topics/on-the-scene-of-a-str...
Strange... no one answer. ;-)
Best regards
Pierre-Louis
-
-
Pierre-Louis Lamballais
I understand and agree that most fires now days are ventilation limited (oxygen starved). You can see this on the Cherry road NIST study as well as the Station night club fire. The nist studies and tests clearly show dropping o2 levels. I also agree that a fog nozzle is the best tool to cool the environment. In my service we use a low pressure high gpm fog on all inch and three quarter lines and smooth bore on the 2.5 lines. This being said I have been in fires where ventilation has not occurred and witnessed roll over and penciling in the smoke. This proves that there is enough o2 in the smoke to have a rollover leading to flashover. Also, on reponse times, my last fire was a call to scene time of less that 3 minutes (reponse time was 50 seconds), though this is hardly the typical response time frame. I still believe that not ventilating anything larger than a single family residence will greatly hinder the fire attack progress and occupant egress. On the other hand exhausting smoke (fuel) up and out a vent will naturally draw in fresh air therby increasing the likelyhood of fire growth, this growth can still be contained and controlled with the use of a fog nozzle or attack on the seat of the fire. I believe venting or not venting is a very situation dependent strategy. An attack that you do not choose to vent on is a gamble that the fire is not impeding or spreading to impeade egress as well as a risking that you can find the seat of the fire before conditions change ie windows or structural components failing. If something does change realize that you are essentially surrounded by fuel. Have you noted many steam burns using this technique?
The NIST studies essentially show that modern fuels produce much large BTU's at a more compressed time frame.
Great discussion and thanks for the info and links. It would be a pleasure to have a beer with you.
Stay Safe !
Craig
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
