BY JOHN “SKIP” COLEMAN
Things were simpler a long time ago. Only wood and other common combustibles burned. Buildings were generally built with real “dimension” lumber. Today, buildings are built differently. Some are so large and the air-handling systems so complicated that they are run by computer and have engineers on duty 24 hours a day to tend to them. Windows in most modern high-rise buildings cannot be opened so they do not overrun or contradict what the computer wants to do with the air. (Please indulge me on this very simplistic description.)
I thank the respondents for their honesty. Eight of the 15 respondents said they did not feel they had adequate training in these systems. Only two [one from the Fire Department of New York (FDNY) and one from Oregon] said they believed they were adequately trained in these systems. Four didn’t really answer the question but provided information about these systems. One respondent said there were no high-rises in his jurisdiction. Some comments follow.
Question: Do you feel you are adequately trained in the use of smoke-control systems in new buildings?
Thomas Dunne, deputy chief, FDNY: New York City is loaded with high-rises and large commercial buildings with sophisticated smoke-control and fire-extinguishing systems. The presence of these occupancies has allowed us to develop a good body of experience in working with these systems and at the same time has created a need for us to train on how they function. Our high-rise firefighting procedures in particular provide detailed methods for using a HVAC system to manage smoke conditions at a fire. All of our chief and company officers have studied the elements of these smoke-control systems.
Our personnel are well trained in the basics of modern smoke-control systems. However, the complex nature of these systems, along with their potential for creating severe hazards for firefighters if they are misused, mandate a heavy reliance on the expertise of engineers and other building personnel to safely and effectively operate them. An important aspect of any training is knowing the safe limits of what you can individually accomplish.
Bobby Shelton, firefighter, Cincinnati (OH) Fire Department: I do not feel that we are adequately trained in the use of smoke-control or alarm systems in today’s buildings. When we see new construction in our jurisdiction, we are going to have to do inspections, ask questions, find out when these systems are going to be installed, and talk to the responsible parties about the operation of these systems. There is no other way to become familiar with the capabilities of these systems. If we wait for someone to approach us, we will be waiting a mighty long time. Our education is in our hands.
Jeffrey Schwering, captain, Crestwood (MO) Department of Fire Services:We are not adequately trained in the smoke-control systems in newer buildings. We have some background in these systems, but, all too often, the engineers design this new type of fire suppression system and then move on.
Gary Seidel, chief, Hillsboro (OR) Fire Department: Within Hillsboro, we have found a wide variety of smoke-control systems and panels. We have also found that several of these systems are in place only for the protection of the building’s assets (smoke evacuation) and are not required as if they were for egress protection. Our fire prevention staff works diligently in identifying these systems, diagramming and labeling them during the construction process to assist personnel in their use. As it relates to smoke-control systems, our fire suppression crews understand the concept of ventilation for the protection of assets. When it comes to a known tactic that truly works for smoke removal, our fire suppression personnel usually opt for positive-pressure ventilation or positive-pressure attack. In addition, we also take control of HVAC systems to prevent the unwanted spread of smoke or hazardous materials throughout the building. We can always use additional training on new fire protection systems, as well as better tactics in ventilating a building or removing smoke.
Leigh T. Hollins, battalion chief, Cedar Hammock (FL) Fire Rescue:I do not, and I don’t feel that an average company officer would be either. Additionally, from what I know of these systems, each will be vastly different, depending on the building and the manufacturer of the various components and the main panel. In buildings with such systems, the maintenance chief and the crew should be trained in the use of these systems and be on hand to assist our crews in the beneficial use of these complex systems.
Christopher J. Weir, division chief, Port Orange (FL) Department of Fire & Rescue: Our city does not have high-rise buildings with smoke-control systems in place. I have extensive training in smoke-control systems and feel comfortable in training our firefighters in their use if and when we begin construction of high-rise buildings in our Riverwalk Project.
Jason Hoevelmann, deputy chief, Sullivan (MO) Fire Protection District: Probably not. New engineering and technology have made these systems very complex. Without some fairly detailed training, it could be very difficult for a firefighter to navigate through one of these systems.
Richard Wilson, lieutenant, Bartlett (IL) Fire Department:I do not feel my company and I have received enough proper training in the newest technology of suppression systems.
Daniel Wall, lieutenant, Bryan (TX) Fire Department:No way are we prepared for this.
Read more comments at emberly.fireengineering.com.
John “Skip” Coleman retired as assistant chief from the Toledo (OH) Department of Fire and Rescue. He is a technical editor of Fire Engineering; a member of the FDIC Educational Advisory Board; and author of Incident Management for the Street-Smart Fire Officer (Fire Engineering, 1997), Managing Major Fires (Fire Engineering, 2000), and Incident Management for the Street-Smart Fire Officer, Second Edition (Fire Engineering, 2008).
