Truss Construction!!!!

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jeff Schwering on January 4, 2009 at 5:56pm

My dept doesn't have a policy on this, although we talk about trusses quite a bit. for me, company officers must be able to identify the truss buildings, residential or commercial, in your city or first due area. On a size-up, if the owner says the fire has been burning 5 mins, double it. Do all of the things we do on a size-up, 360, color of the smoke, life safety issue, etc. Is this a true structure fire? Is the fire eating at the structural integity of the building? If you answer yes, proceed as carefully as we can as firefighters, take a breath officers, think of that double time frame. Risk alot to save alot, motto we all know.

Permalink Reply by Larry Glover on January 4, 2009 at 7:00pm

Neither of my dept's have a policy on truss construction. We talk about more at my vol. dept than we do at work. At my vol. dept we do the things that Jeff mentioned above: size-up, 360, reading smoke, etc. We train frequently on building construction and most of us go out and pre-plan the "3,000+ sq ft. single family dwellings that are popping up all over our district. At work, we don't even mention it. I try to talk "shop" with my captain and engineer but they change the subject. We all need to stay abreast of building construction changes and pre-plan more. I agree with Jeff, "Risk alot to Save alot".

Permalink Reply by Jim Mason on January 4, 2009 at 8:14pm

Then what do you do when you arrive to a truss built fire structure?
What is the plan, how do you decide, why would you go in, where would you enter? Is it important?
Is a plan needed? Should we know before hand? What do you think? We're on the same team, let's come up with something that we can live with, all of us - So Everyone Goes Home, All of Us!!

Permalink Reply by Jim Mason on January 4, 2009 at 8:58pm

But just like several of our other threads on our page, when do we say enough? The civilian report of persons "trapped" inside, does that make us go in? How deep does the investigation need to be in both commercial or resdential before we can effectively work inside? Every see one of these things when the dept goes defensive. There is truely nothing left. Just like in California when the wild fires come through. So my question is this - when do we decide to go in or not? Can we go inside at all? Should we go inside? Is there ever a time or sitiuation to go inside? What are we looking for? How do we decide what to do? Guys are falling into these basements left and right.

Permalink Reply by Jim Mason on January 4, 2009 at 9:11pm

I think we need to talk about how a person presnts him/herself when saying someone is trapped. Could you agree that the way a person presents himself is important? If he/she is in pajama's at 3 am, smoke comming from their clothes, wet from sweat on a 25 degree night, that he/ she has come from inside the fire building? In this case I'd give some more credit to the person that he knows , for sure, that some one is inside.

Permalink Reply by Jeff Schwering on January 4, 2009 at 9:56pm

I agree witness credibility is a big deal, if the person telling me how long the fire has been burning, looks like Jim said, then we need to serious consider getting in and out,if a rescue exsists. Dave is very correct, we make many assumptions while doing our size-up. Just me, but regardless of a truss building or a stick frame building, some of our parameters will have to change. Credible, get in get out. Dave said how far do we push? Again me, if the fire has ahold and is eating away at the structural integity of the building, Do we really have a rescue or is this a recovery, that can be made when this fire is out and we can do safely. This sounds cold, harsh, calleous, but, alot less cold than looking into a wife or girlfriends face, when their loved one, that was trusted to you doesn't come home.

Permalink Reply by Art Zern on January 5, 2009 at 1:20am

Gents,

Can we establish a common understanding of risk? I believe that this is a very difficult question to answer. Risk, is in the eye of the beholder. The ability to adequately assess risk demands a high level of experience and training, a keen eye for detail, a thorough knowledge of building construction and an ability to process and make sense of incomplete information (much of which is of dubious value). The decisions born of this process are always time critical, often life and death and have to be made with very little information.

The reason I ask this question is that there seems to be a trend in the fire service to quickly “write-off” so called vacant, abandon, unoccupied structures or truss built and engineered lumber system buildings. This particular thread is tackling the truss. Well, you show me someone who can identify a “truss built” building every time and I’ll show you someone with x-ray vision. The problem as it relates to this discussion is that we are talking about two different animals. On the one hand, the “traditional “truss. The infamous bow-string and the like. On the other hand, we have the newer truss or as a friend from Chicago calls it the “sixth” type of building construction. This includes engineered and/or light-weight construction including the manufactured or engineered truss. He would call this “Type VI Construction”. Many “traditional” truss buildings are obvious and easily identified. Others are very difficult if not impossible to identify such as remodels and extensive near “tear-downs”. I would consider every strip-mall in America to be light-weight constructed. ETC………

In any case, there is obviously a point where the amount of fire combined with a weakened structure (based on time and construction type) will tip the scale of risk/benefit to the risk side and beg for a defensive attack. However, our job is to protect lives AND property. The best way to accomplish our job is to employ an aggressive, coordinated interior fire attack.

We know that most of the issues that lead to LODDs are repeated, time and again:
• Lack of or incomplete size-up
• Lack of command and control
• Lack of adequate staff
• Failure to wear PPE
• Failure to provide radios for all personnel
• Failure to perform annual physicals
• Failure to be seated and belted
• ETC…………

We need to provide our members with the necessary tools in order to expect a high level of performance. We need to develop what Chief McGrail calls the “firefighter mind-set” so that our members think and believe that it could happen today. If we believe it could happen today, we are compelled to prepare, we are compelled to develop the skills necessary to identify building construction types and we are compelled to develop the knowledge base that allows us to recognize rapidly changing fire conditions. If we believe it could happen today, maybe we will get in shape and stay in shape.

Let us not forget however, the fundamental difference between “us” and the rest of the world. When we take the oath, with our right hands raised, we agree to certain things and these things become our solemn duty, our obligation. These duties include the understanding that a time may and likely will come when we have to be willing to risk everything…..to save the life of a stranger. We also have a duty and obligation to take risk for a stranger’s property. That’s the deal, that is what makes us different from everyone else, with the exception of the military and……..grudgingly…..cops (ok, I said it).

To be sure, we have other obligations as husbands, wives, fathers and mothers. We have still more obligations and duties to our friends and extended families. However, our duty to perform our job and our obligation to the citizens we protect rightly takes precedence when faced with the saving of a life and given a fighting chance. When our citizens, in spite of all of our education and prevention efforts, end up needing to be rescued, we are all they have. No one else will come, they will surely die alone if not for our efforts.

We also have solemn duties and obligations regarding our brothers and sisters in this service. Because we are all we have when, in spite of our best efforts, extensive training and desire, we get lost, separated, disoriented or trapped. Those obligations include; getting and staying fit, seeking continuous improvement, building the skills necessary to assess risk and rapidly changing fire conditions. Our duty also demands that we train and learn and become craftsmen in our profession, because our lives depend on it. Because in the end, no one else will come, and we will surely die alone if not for OUR efforts.

So......as we discuss the truss and other topics in this CSF group, can we agree that our Duty and our Obligation to the citizens and each other requires us to take risk? The question is, how much, who decides and is that person capable of making a sound risk assessment. Do we have the experience, the knowledge? Do we provide our members with the necessary tools to assess risk and make cound dicisions on the fireground? Or..... should we stay outside and write it off?

Permalink Reply by Jeff Schwering on January 5, 2009 at 11:34am

Great post Art, well said!

Many of us that are truely students of the Fire Service have the experience and the knowledge, to make a sound risk assessment, however, we are in school every shift. We must learn and pass that information and knowledge on to those comming up behind us. I'm all for a good interior attack, my dept is an aggressive dept, however, sometimes that aggessiveness will leave the blinders on. We don't train enough on these buildings and RISK ASSESSMENT. We need to provide our officers and members with the skills needed to walk the tightrope we walk everyday. We owe it to our members and we owe it to the citizens we are sworn to protect.

Permalink Reply by Todd Trudeau on January 5, 2009 at 2:47pm

Art,

You had me at "Gents" lol

Nice inspiration

Permalink Reply by Jim Mason on January 5, 2009 at 5:43pm

Ok
So we're going to take on some risk and we're going to manage the risk , if and when we are trained to do so. But even if we are not trained to do so, we'll be taking on some risk and managing it, even though we may not think of it like that without proper training. The question ( and that;'s what I usually do here) is what is the plan? If someone is on the front lawn in the attire and situation described above what should we do? Is there a investigation that we should be doing that we would not do on another type of construction style? Will certain radio transmissions help? Certain levels of fire location and extent we should say no to? A construction style"look" that we will say no to?

And then the question that up's the ante still remains - if someone says my kids are trapped, then what? Double down? All in? Fold the cards? If your dept doesn;t have a plan , what is your company's plan. These are the guys that we respond with , right?
There are entire depts. that will only respond to Lightweight frame housing due to new development in the last 10 years. What do you guys?

Permalink Reply by Jeff Schwering on January 5, 2009 at 9:09pm

Communication is a vital nessessity in all fireground operations, Some of these structures are easily identified, others aren't. If someone is on the front lawn in the attire described, they also probably have an idea of that individual is located. Get a location if possible, a decision will have to be make quickly, but for me and my company, it comes to this. As Art said we are sworn to protect. We all have time to take a long breath. While doing that look at the building, look at the smoke, does the fire have a total grip on the building, if so, this becomes a recovery. We rush in and we risk some or all of us not comming out.If after that breath, a possibility exists, we go all in and do our jobs.

If I know for sure it's a light weight frame home, do I have a confirmed rescue on a human being, if yes, look at the % of the structure is involved. Is this a rescue or recovery, gut makes that call. My rule of thumb on these fires, is double the time the owner says it has been burning. Owner says 5min, make it 10 mins. Conditions like heavy fire from the basement window or roof line make it an easier call. I guess I'm on automatic pilot, on these fires, because I sure don't want myself or my guys or gals to be a statistic.

Permalink Reply by Michael Bricault (ret) on January 5, 2009 at 9:48pm

-Art,
I really enjoyed reading your thoughts and you brought to the light of judgment issue some would want to remain in the dark; namely that some firefighters can be to quick to write off a structure due to the nature of the structure etc.
-One other thing that is a personal pet peeve that dove tails in to your comments, if I may be so bold, is in regard to the abandoned structures. An abandoned structure doesn't set itself on fire. Short of a lightning strike, a human being got into the building and set the fire either through accident or design.
-That clearly means someone may still be inside on arrival of the FD.
-Does this mean we should search everything we respond to? absolutely! However, our actions and tactics need to mach the scene. Aggressive tactics are still reserved for the High Rescue Profile situation.
-Some occupancies and fires should be written off. That being said, I always remind our new members that, "Of all the services that the fire department provides... seeing into the future is not one of them. Therefore we search."-My other favorite ism is, "firefighting is about taking calculated risks and not foolish chances." It will always be a dangerous profession but a true professional is constantly evaluating and sizing up because a professional has situational awareness.
-Stay safe.
BRICK

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page