THERMAL IMAGING TECHNOLOGY: WHAT`S RIGHT FOR YOUR DEPARTMENT?
KEN DOZIER
You`ve wanted thermal imaging technology for your department for some time and finally have the funds to make the purchase. How do you ensure that you are ordering the type of unit and added options that are most suited to your department`s needs? The Abilene (TX) Fire Department was faced with these and other important questions after the money for purchasing the thermal imaging technology was raised through a communitywide fundraising effort. KTAB-TV, a local station, and a few area merchants had approached the fire department with an offer to raise the funds to purchase the thermal imaging equipment. A tremendous amount of time and numerous resources were committed, and more than $93,000 was raised within 14 months. Halfway through the campaign, it became obvious that the fund-raising efforts would be successful. At that time, our department undertook a research/evaluation program to determine which thermal imaging product would best suit our needs.
The objectives of the program were as follows: (1) to ensure that the public would be served well through our diligent research of the available units, (2) the unit would meet the needs of our department, (3) our firefighters would have input with regard to the use and type of thermal imager selected, and (4) we would obtain the best unit for the best price.
THE EVALUATION PROCESS
The evaluation process consisted of several components.
Research
We learned as much as we could about thermal imaging technology in general. This involved reviewing numerous magazine articles and publications pertaining to the development and use of thermal imagers in the fire service. We contacted potential vendors by letter, explaining that we wanted to evaluate various thermal imaging products. We asked for literature and statistics on their particular units and a list of questions that we should ask all vendors when we met with them. In addition, we conducted a peer review of other departments that are using thermal imaging, asking specifically about the type of units they use and for which applications.
Department Evaluation
We established a committee of 10 Abilene Fire Department employees to evaluate the units available at that time. The committee represented a cross-section of the department; members` ranks ranged from beginning firefighter to chief officer.
Classroom. The two-day evaluation process began with a two-hour class in which I explained the basics of thermal imaging technology (we called it “Thermal Imaging 101”). I covered issues such as heat sensitivity, the evolution of thermal imaging technology in the fire service, whiteout, saturation, how the technology works in general, and some of the options available from various vendors.
Each panel member received a comparison chart listing the various options, features, and statistics as provided in the vendors` literature. Committee members were instructed in the evaluation process protocol. During each vendor`s presentation, the panel was asked to verify all items listed under that vendor in the comparison chart.
After this class, each vendor was allowed one hour to demonstrate its particular unit to the committee in a classroom setting. The remainder of the first day was devoted to reviewing the presentations. (Note: Six vendors were invited to participate in the evaluation; five actually participated.)
Field Testing. The second day was devoted to evaluating the equipment under live fire conditions. All 10 committee members donned protective clothing and proceeded to evaluate the various units in the Abilene Fire Department burn building. Numerous fire situations were simulated throughout the structure so that each participant could evaluate each unit under different fire conditions. Some rooms were filled with smoke; others had live fires. This part of the evaluation process took approximately three hours.
After we completed the live-fire evaluation, all the vendors gathered to answer any additional questions that surfaced during the evaluation. The vendors were then thanked and dismissed.
Selection Phase
Two primary considerations had to be addressed during the selection phase: which of the available units would best suit our needs and which options to purchase. Numerous options are available (i.e., a pyrometer, color mode, video overlay, remote transmitter capabilities, and so on).
Which unit and vendor the Abilene Fire Department chose is not important. What is important is that the evaluation process be supported and withstand the public scrutiny given a community purchase. Every department`s needs are different. It is imperative that the citizens` interests be well served through the evaluation pro-cess.
The Abilene Fire Department now has five thermal imaging units. We are confident that they will meet our expectations as we seek to provide more efficient service to our citizens and a safer working environment for our Abilene firefighters.
 |
 |
 |
 |
Fire department members evaluate the thermal imaging units under live-fire conditions. (Photos courtesy of KTAB-TV.)
Ken Dozier is a member of the Abilene (TX) Fire Department, assigned as chief of the Training/Safety Division. He is a Texas Commission on Fire Protection-certified master firefighter and master instructor and has a bachelor`s degree from Abilene Christian University.
