Fire Engineering Training Community

Where firefighters come to talk training

Video Proof of the differences of 1 3/4", 2 1/2" , fog nozzle vs. Smoothbore. This should settle any arguement!

The brothers who made these video's should be given a medal. Its fantastic!. Check out the High-Rise Group discussion by the same name as this posting to get the links.

Views: 435

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Chief,
Hehe, always the "wise guy". Can I meet Francheska before you repost? How'd the training go today, and yes I could use you for flashover on Tues.

Jason, the subjectiveness you refer to is directly related to training. My crew was convinced that the sb would not be near as effective as the fog. When we practiced with a sb for the first couple of times they started to buy in to the versatility of it. Once they made their first couple of fires with a sb I couldn't find the fog nozzle to practice vapor dispersion with anymore. I'm pretty sure it's on the rig somewhere. How many do you typically respond with on your engine?
If you get a grant, let's make sure it's for a few million so we can go to some tropical climate during the winter and do the empirical research over cold frosty beverages. But only after burning stuff up all day long of course.......gotta "keep a fire in your life" as a friend of mine likes to say.
Brian,

We staff three FF's minimum on our units. Once in awhile we get four if the moons align in the solar system. You can probably guess how often that is!

If I do get a grant I'll invite you for the reseach and frosty beverages. Unfortunately we won't be able to burn anything in Florida because we've adopted NFPA 1403. Can we burn where you're at?





Brian Arnold said:
Chief,
Hehe, always the "wise guy". Can I meet Francheska before you repost? How'd the training go today, and yes I could use you for flashover on Tues.

Jason, the subjectiveness you refer to is directly related to training. My crew was convinced that the sb would not be near as effective as the fog. When we practiced with a sb for the first couple of times they started to buy in to the versatility of it. Once they made their first couple of fires with a sb I couldn't find the fog nozzle to practice vapor dispersion with anymore. I'm pretty sure it's on the rig somewhere. How many do you typically respond with on your engine?
If you get a grant, let's make sure it's for a few million so we can go to some tropical climate during the winter and do the empirical research over cold frosty beverages. But only after burning stuff up all day long of course.......gotta "keep a fire in your life" as a friend of mine likes to say.
Jason,

We staff 4 on my engine. This means one at the plug (he becomes the doorman on his return), driver pumps the rig, two on the line (ff and me).

Just finished an acquired structure burn in Collinsville two weeks ago. Come on down......
Definetly a damn convincing argument for using smooth bore nozzles with stand-pipes.
Just curious. I haven't heard anyone talk about boosting the building pressure with FD pumping apparatus to overcome the low pressure problems everyone is talking about.There is alot you can do.There should be at least 50 psi more available in alot of cases by doing this. That is unless there are PRV's at the standpipe outlets that are set low.
Hey Paul

I'm sure many pressure problems could/can be fixed. The problems I have ran into more then once is when I have raised the pressure a failure of some part of the system occured, especially with combonation systems. Each of those times the pressure increases were done slowly and within the supposed limits of the system. It's amazing how much water can come out of a 1/2" pipe, it can flood an entire floor in just minutes. And seeing the basement of a high-rise filling with water is quite demoralizing but I digress.

The debris issue is my major concern and I fear that a raise in pressure could only cause more junk to flake off the pipe. Your thoughts?
Paul Shapiro said:
Just curious. I haven't heard anyone talk about boosting the building pressure with FD pumping apparatus to overcome the low pressure problems everyone is talking about.There is alot you can do.There should be at least 50 psi more available in alot of cases by doing this. That is unless there are PRV's at the standpipe outlets that are set low.
I think one concern with boosting the pressure using a pumper is that you still have the other issues relating to fog nozzles and smaller hose diameter. To attain the GPM of a 2.5" (be it 1 1/8 or 1 1/4" tip) the FL on an 1.75" line would be very high again taking the nozzle pressure back down. Not to mention the fog nozzle clogging. Given some 1.75" hose (Ponn @ 1.96") and a smoothbore this may be less concerning but still not the best weapon in our arsenal. My thought given our poor staffing, is if we're going that far from the engine lets take our best offensive weapon to start, 2.5" and dual SB tips. I'd take the Vindicator if not for the clogging issue.
Point taken Adam. I am not talking about replacing 2-1/2" flows with an 1-3/4". Forgive me if I sounded like that was what I meant. All I am saying is that if a building has pressue restriction problems causing FD's to take up larger and heavier hose for every size fire,big and small, then why not use the FDC which is provided to allow FDs to boost the pressure. to give an extra boost that could help. Earlier the First Meridian fire was mentioned as a low pressure problem fire which was caused by Faulty PRV valves creating residual pressures of 30 psi. Exellent case for the 2-1/2" with the smooth bore even for 1-3/4" flows.Boosting the system pressure with FD support would not and did not help at least to my knowledge.But what if the same 30 psi residual pressure was caused by a low system pressure in a building with no PRVs. The same low flow problem would present but this time a boost from the FD would have a good chance of rectifying it.In my years of working with highrise stuff I have learned to take each property as a unique problem and deal with it accordingly. Can you say preplanning.

Did you know that the First Interstate Building Fire Fought by LA City was handled for the most part if not completely with 2" hose and fog nozzles. They had to pump the system at least initially and had several complete floors going. I believe the system pressure was in the 400 psi range.

Adam Miceli said:
Paul Shapiro said:
Just curious. I haven't heard anyone talk about boosting the building pressure with FD pumping apparatus to overcome the low pressure problems everyone is talking about.There is alot you can do.There should be at least 50 psi more available in alot of cases by doing this. That is unless there are PRV's at the standpipe outlets that are set low.
I think one concern with boosting the pressure using a pumper is that you still have the other issues relating to fog nozzles and smaller hose diameter. To attain the GPM of a 2.5" (be it 1 1/8 or 1 1/4" tip) the FL on an 1.75" line would be very high again taking the nozzle pressure back down. Not to mention the fog nozzle clogging. Given some 1.75" hose (Ponn @ 1.96") and a smoothbore this may be less concerning but still not the best weapon in our arsenal. My thought given our poor staffing, is if we're going that far from the engine lets take our best offensive weapon to start, 2.5" and dual SB tips. I'd take the Vindicator if not for the clogging issue.
Mike. It sounds like your area buildings are in not to good of shape and more pressure might not be better. I live out west where structutres are somewhat newer and have only had one leak out of at least 40 sucessful highrise pump operations. One was done at 600 psi and many others in the 300 to 400 range. Please understand that out of all that only 4 or 5 were actual fires all others were drills. We are fortunate to have a good relationship with the locals and have been able to convince them that training is critical to there safety.Know your buildings.

Mike Walker said:
Hey Paul

I'm sure many pressure problems could/can be fixed. The problems I have ran into more then once is when I have raised the pressure a failure of some part of the system occured, especially with combonation systems. Each of those times the pressure increases were done slowly and within the supposed limits of the system. It's amazing how much water can come out of a 1/2" pipe, it can flood an entire floor in just minutes. And seeing the basement of a high-rise filling with water is quite demoralizing but I digress.

The debris issue is my major concern and I fear that a raise in pressure could only cause more junk to flake off the pipe. Your thoughts?
Paul Shapiro said:
Point taken Adam. I am not talking about replacing 2-1/2" flows with an 1-3/4". Forgive me if I sounded like that was what I meant. All I am saying is that if a building has pressue restriction problems causing FD's to take up larger and heavier hose for every size fire,big and small, then why not use the FDC which is provided to allow FDs to boost the pressure. to give an extra boost that could help. Earlier the First Meridian fire was mentioned as a low pressure problem fire which was caused by Faulty PRV valves creating residual pressures of 30 psi. Exellent case for the 2-1/2" with the smooth bore even for 1-3/4" flows.Boosting the system pressure with FD support would not and did not help at least to my knowledge.But what if the same 30 psi residual pressure was caused by a low system pressure in a building with no PRVs. The same low flow problem would present but this time a boost from the FD would have a good chance of rectifying it.In my years of working with highrise stuff I have learned to take each property as a unique problem and deal with it accordingly. Can you say preplanning.
I must admit we do not have many standpipes to deal with and none with PRV's so pumping them is clearly an option. Only a few of the systems are new enough to require the 100 psi standard, but none are so tall that a full stretch from the hose bed is out of the question either, though staffing is pretty slim. As you note the First Interstate fire and I'm sure hundreds of others have been fought with smaller lines and fog nozzles, but again in my mind, with any fireground operation, the fewer potential pitfalls the better. Preplanning is certainly key for a FD such as ours where this type of operation is nearly theoretical due to small percentage of systems. But proper planning, equipping and training is our best chance at success.
Perhaps you are right about the age of the buildings, I've been a strong advocate for the procedures you teach about standpipe buildings and use your work as a reference often.
Mike, if you like I can send you the latest info

Mike Walker said:
Perhaps you are right about the age of the buildings, I've been a strong advocate for the procedures you teach about standpipe buildings and use your work as a reference often.

Reply to Discussion

RSS

Policy Page

CONTRIBUTORS NOTE

Our contributors' posts are not vetted by the Fire Engineering technical board, and reflect the views and opinions of the individual authors. Anyone is welcome to participate.

For vetted content, please go to www.fireengineering.com/archive/.

Fire Engineering Editor in Chief Bobby Halton
We are excited to have you participate in our discussions and interactive forums. Before you begin posting, please take a moment to read our policy page. -- Bobby Halton

Be Alert for Spam
We actively monitor the community for spam, however some does slip through. Please use common sense and caution when clicking links. If you suspect you've been hit by spam, e-mail peter.prochilo@clarionevents.com.

FE Podcasts


Check out the most recent episode and schedule of
UPCOMING PODCASTS

© 2019   Created by fireeng.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service