LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
The debate continues on wood truss construction
I’m writing as regards to “Are Wood Trusses Good for Your Health?” and “Amend the Building Code?” written by Francis L. Brannigan in your June issue.
A number of statements and inferences made by the author are simply not true. For example:
“Wood truss floors are not classified as fire-resistive.” Regardless of material, no floor or roof is code-rated as fire-resistive unless successfully tested to the requirements of ASTM Standard El 19. There are at least nine rated design assemblies for wood truss floors in Underwriters Laboratories, Factory Mutual, and building code evaluation reports
“Fire resistance” is primarily resistance to fire-caused collapse On the contrary’, in FI 19 there are three modes of defined failure, of which one is structural collapse. The other two are excessive heat transmission through the assembly or the passage of hot gases or flame through the assembly. The first of these occurrences determines the time rating. The author further infers that buildings should be built to withstand any fire of any intensity for unlimited time. This is impossible, a ridiculous statement by the author.
And finally, contrary to what the article states, all model building codes require fire resistance-rated construction for separations between different types of occupancies and tenants, with additional requirements for size of buildings, set-backs, and fire and draft stopping. My experience with code officials and the model code staffs is that the major objective is life safety, which includes fire safety You would believe from the article that the codes and the construction industry are indifferent to this concern, which is absolutely not true.
There are other gross misrepresentations, but this letter is overly long now.
Articles of this type, written either from ignorance or intentional bias, should not be published. They truly misinform your readers as to the actual facts.
GEORGE F. EBERLF.
President Lumbermate Company
Francis Brannigan responds:
Mr. F.berle alleges that I said “Wood truss floors are not classified as fire-resistive.” The accurate quote is ‘‘Structures with wood truss floors are not classified as fire-resistive. ” This of course is true, or else we might see wooden high rises. In fact, a wooden top floor was erected on a Florida high rise.
Rather than implying that structures should resist fire indefinitely. I stated that non-fire-resistive structures are entitled to collapse. I urge firefighters to he aware of the hazards. The only inference to he drawn is that tactics should be adjusted accordingly. I didn ‘t make this point in the June article because I have been heating this drum for the last 21 years of my 46-year career.
My article was intended to contradict Mr. Schaffer’s misguided attempt to reassure firefighters as to the safety of wood busses. I presented a series of arguments developing the point that ASTM FI 19 is not a realistic test, particularly to reassure firefighters. I don ‘t see that Mr. Eberle spoke to any of the arguments presented. Apparently. ASTM FI 19 is to be equated with the Ten Commandments.
All codes and standards are political documents. They represent a consensus of conflicting views. I am not aware that the safety of firefighters is uvl l-represented in the development of codes and standards. As a matter of fact, fire officers who have attempted to incorporate firefighter safet)’ have been told that this is not a concern of the code, but solely of the fire sen ice.
The RMS Titanic met all applicable codes. So did Chicago’s McCormack Place, tlye General Motors’ transmission plant at Li- vonia, Mich., and the MGM Grand.
Code “improvements” come about as a result of disastrous experience. Ben Franklin told us, “Experience keeps a dear school, but fools will learn in no other. ” My sole endeavor (at the age of 70) is to keep firefighters from providing that expensive and heartwrenching experience. I admit to a bias, FIREFIGHTER SURVIVAL.
For ten years I investigated combustible multiple-dwelling fires for the National Bureau of Standards. My advice to those who live in combustible multiple dwellings has been:
Have your persona! property insured up to full value-.
Keep any uniquely valuable property in a bank vault;
Evacuate immediately at the first indication of fire, and
Call the fire department from a safe location.
I closed my article “Built Like a Brick Outhouse. Or Is It?” (Fire Engineering, February 1986) with the question, “Did you ever see a builder at a fire department funeral?”
It is up to us in the fire service to take care of ourselves and not be misled by reliance on codes, standards, and technical information provided by others whose agenda does not necessarily coincide with ours.
The pump operator’s no babysitter
Someone once said, “If everyone in the world agreed, what a boring place it would be.” In order to keep the world an interesting place and our firefighters safe. I would disagree strongly with part of Paul McFadden’s article in the August issue of your magazine.
In that issue, he wrote, “Don’t forget the pump operator. Once his water supply is assured, his supply pressure adequate, and his hoselines charged, he can help. Feeding hoselines, butting ladders, and moving tools and other equipment will still keep him close to his primary responsibility—the pumping engine…. We need more hands than we have, not a baby-sitter.”
The engineer’s job is at his pump. He is the beginning of the attack team’s lifeline. He should be the first one to observe a potential water problem, whether with the pump or the system. His job is indispensable, and it is irresponsible to say otherwise. How long would a firefighter have to be beaten by a loose hose before Mr. McFadden’s unnecessary baby-sitter gets back to his pump? Or is there a specific distance which is acceptable or a risk value that can be determined? I don’t believe so.
Mr. McFadden’s article on horizontal venting was possibly arguable, yet educational. However, the reference to pump operators was, in my opinion, inexcusable. Until it’s determined that water will not be needed, the engineer/operator must stay by his apparatus.
JIM MCMATTHIES Assistant Chief Hazelwood (MO) Fire Department
Sexually oriented advertising insults female firefighters’ professionalism
I want to thank Mike Oltersdorf for his letter in the August issue complaining about the sexually oriented advertising of fire service products. I was pleased to find that there are men associated with the fire service who find pin-up calendars and semi-nude female models (whether real firefighters or not) to be an inappropriate and unprofessional image for fire departments today.
Those who generate this material will tell you that they are trying to promote a “positive image” of fire service women. I ask your readers to consider what could be positive about encouraging people to judge female firefighters on the basis of physical attractiveness instead of the legitimate standards of physical and mental ability.
Most female firefighters have worked hard to become skilled at their jobs and to cam the respect of their male co-workers. The majority of us find such sexually oriented material —whether it’s generated by men or by women— to be an insult to our professionalism. It also harms us by very much confusing the issue of sexual harassment, as Mr. Oltersdorf correctly pointed out.
I hope that other men and women of the fire service will speak up on the subject and, in particular, will express their views to the companies that continue to promote this type of material.
TERESE M. FIOREN Coordinator Women in Fire Suppression
There’ll be no room for sleazy advertising at training conference
Congratulations on printing Mike Oltersdorf s letter to the editor on lewd advertising at conferences.
I was so appalled at what was taking place—as were 50 to 60 attendees and other exhibitors—that I served notice then and there regarding FD1C.
Formal action by our board has created an inspection team which will operate before the opening and during the exhibition hours to prevent lewd advertising or scantily clad personnel as the draw to one’s exhibit.
A letter to 1989 FD1C exhibitors states the following:
“The Society strongly supports the concept of women in the fire service, be it in the business, education, administration, or political aspect. We applaud women such as Connie Gross. Betty McMillan, Chiefs Anne Murphy Springer and Lynn Oliver, and the thousands of other women who have challenged the professional development standards and achieved certification. Conversely, we see no room for sales by sex appeal at FD1C.
The Board of Directors has appointed an ethics inspection team to handle such matters at the 1989 FDIC exhibits. Enough said — 1 hope.”
I hope you will make our board’s action widely known.
EDWARD H. MCCORMACK, JR. Executive Director International Society of Fire Service Instructors
Applause for Chapman
Chief Elmer Chapman’s article on the First Interstate Fire (“High-Rise: An Analysis,” August 1988) is outstanding, though it’s no less than I would expect from the man whom I consider to be the best-informed fire officer on high-rises in the country.
FRANCIS L. BRANMGAN, SPFE
Let’s get political
It was a pleasure visiting with you while at the International Association of Fire Chiefs’ conference in Washington, D.C. I thought the seminars and exhibits were conducted in a professional manner.
Senator Dan Quayle came off very- well. It was good to see the International is getting the recognition we need to help the future needs of our profession so that we may better serve our communities throughout this great country . But it surprised me when it was announced that he was the first vicepresidential candidate ever to address the IAFC in over 115 years of its existence.
We all know the federal government is cutting programs, and the fire service in this country cannot afford these cuts. We must get political and have the support of our legislators if we hope to save such programs as the National Fire Academy and the Public Safety Officer’s Benefit Act.
JOHN G. WOOD, JR.
Chief of Department Hartford (Vt.) Fire Department
Magazine is a reliable resource
On September 24 — 25, the Asheville —Buncombe Technical Community College sponsored a bus rescue class for western North Carolina firefighters. Ronald Moore, an instructor from the New York Fire Academy, conducted the class, and we used (with your permission) two Fire Engineering articles: “School Bus Emergencies,” August 1984 and “School Bus Emergencies Part Two,” March 1985.
Firefighting classes are on the increase. It’s great to know that we have your magazine as a resource to rely on.
CURTIS LANE
Coordinator, Continuing Education Asheville—Buncombe Technical Community College
We enjoy hearing from our readers. In addition to sending comments, you’re welcome to send questions that come up as you read articles here; we’ll be happy to forward them to our authors. Whether you have questions or comments, write to Fire Engineering, 250 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10001.
