Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DSPA: Dry Sprinkler Powder Aerosol, FIT: Fire Intervention Tool

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RFDACM02
    replied
    My question is if comparing apples to apples, what do you do if you're unsure of victims and you'e armed with a hoseline? Steam to the lungs likely will kill as fast as dry chemical.

    Interesting thread Fyred, nice to hear from a firefighter with no stake in the company.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by ChiefKN View Post
    If the deployment is from a Chief, then more than likely it will be an exterior deployment through a window. Unless you have a Chief officer that cheats interior on his own.

    Just a couple of thoughts/questions using that scenario:

    • Maintaining the compartment would be guesswork(without knowing interior layout or if doors are closed, etc)? In addition, this also restricts this to "closed" rooms, like bedrooms, bathrooms, utilities and small basements. Kitchens are usually part of an open floor plan.

      Maintaining the compartment in an interior is always guesswork anyways. You may encounter a bedroom and assume since the windows are still in and you still have the door that the compact is "intact" when in fact there is an interconnecting bathroom that both doors are open on.

      The point I made was that despite the doorway being open because there was no door, the fire was knocked down. It wasn't out, but then again I did remove the plywood covering the window to ventilate before the fire began to grow again. I can only speculate as to what would have happened IF venting had not occurred.

      If the exteriror openings are minimal I think it would still at the very least slow the fire if not knock it down even in a large open space like a kitchen area.


    • What do you do if unsure of victims?

      If I am unsure of the location of the victims I very well may not deploy it. However, if I have a room that is fully involved there would be no survivable victims in that room anyways. I may deploy it then to hope to keep the fire in check to allow time for a quick search or to buy time for the engine to arrive.
    • The "contents" were pallets and hay, I wonder how this would change with actual room contents?

      Remember this was a mobile home with wall paper, that funky "whatever the heck" it is ceiling material, a bi-fold door closet with the doors open, so the doors were added fuel load. Was it like a room with regular furniture and belongings in it? Nope, but the fire was substantial.

      I spoke to several people at this fire school who have deployed these for real in room fires and basement fires and the most water used to overhaul after deployment was claimed to be 50 gallons.

    • Any sense of the intensity of reignition?

      Again, the circumstances were the hallway door was not there so the agent was not contained, the fire was knocked down and when I ventilated it grew back in intensity. How intense? It was hot in the room but the hoseline was worked from a standing position and the fire was killed with a few seconds of water application. We did do massive hydraulic overhaul of the hay because it was the last burn of the day and we were not supposed to burn the trailers to the ground.
    All this is my OPINION based on MY OBSERVATION of this device in action. I do not claim to be an expert of any sort regarding this device. I guess I just see its potential in the right circumstances to save property and perhaps lives.
    Last edited by FyredUp; 08-16-2010, 07:02 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chenzo
    replied
    Originally posted by ChiefKN View Post
    If the deployment is from a Chief, then more than likely it will be an exterior deployment through a window. Unless you have a Chief officer that cheats interior on his own.

    Just a couple of thoughts/questions using that scenario:

    • Maintaining the compartment would be guesswork(without knowing interior layout or if doors are closed, etc)? In addition, this also restricts this to "closed" rooms, like bedrooms, bathrooms, utilities and small basements. Kitchens are usually part of an open floor plan.
    • What do you do if unsure of victims?
    • The "contents" were pallets and hay, I wonder how this would change with actual room contents?
    • Any sense of the intensity of reignition?
    Maintaining the compartment would most definitely be guesswork. And as stated, we had a full door open, and it still managed to suppress the fire. BUT, if you don't have another one, or an engine VERY shortly behind, as soon as the powder settles and air is reintroduced, it flares back up, and you're back to square one.

    Victims-depending on the circumstances of the fire, my guess is any victims are probably already deceased. If you happen to come along a fire that hasn't developed very far yet, then IMO, it's a game of chance. If you toss that in a room where there are potentially still victims that are alive, I feel you have put the nail in their coffin. It pushes the heat down, and I can't imagine the powder is good for the respiratory system.

    I would be curious to see how it would handle a typical bedroom, or living room, with furniture/clothing/dresser/cabinets etc as well. If we get the oppurtunity to use it again, I hope we can set up a more realistic bedroom.

    We tossed it in the room when the fire was fairly close to flashover. It knocked it down, but when air was reintroduced, it took off fairly intense again. It was back up the wall, almost working it's way across the ceiling.

    Hope this helped answer your questions. Maybe Fyred can offer some more insight if I didn't cover enough.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by fire49 View Post
    Did you video it???

    If so can you post it somewhere????
    P
    Sorry, no video. I guarantee if I get another chance at a demo I will try to get some video on it.

    Leave a comment:


  • ChiefKN
    replied
    If the deployment is from a Chief, then more than likely it will be an exterior deployment through a window. Unless you have a Chief officer that cheats interior on his own.

    Just a couple of thoughts/questions using that scenario:

    • Maintaining the compartment would be guesswork(without knowing interior layout or if doors are closed, etc)? In addition, this also restricts this to "closed" rooms, like bedrooms, bathrooms, utilities and small basements. Kitchens are usually part of an open floor plan.
    • What do you do if unsure of victims?
    • The "contents" were pallets and hay, I wonder how this would change with actual room contents?
    • Any sense of the intensity of reignition?
    Last edited by ChiefKN; 08-16-2010, 05:59 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • fire49
    replied
    Did you video it???

    If so can you post it somewhere????
    P

    Leave a comment:


  • L-Webb
    replied
    I'm glad you got to see one in action. I would like to hear if y'all do any more testing.

    Like chenzo said I really want to see the difference in the FIT and a 20 pound dry chem.

    Thanks for the info.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by tree68 View Post
    It's important to note that dry chemical extinguishers don't cool the fire - they interrupt the combustion. IMHO, the only reason the temperature would be reduced by the FIT would be because the fire was (theoretically) no longer burning. Any residual heat would remain.

    I've heard of fires doused with a dry chem extinguisher re-igniting when more air was introduced.

    That said - it's still a potential tool for situations where water isn't available yet, as was discussed at length in a previous thread as well.
    Any honest firefighter will tell you they also have had a fire that was doused with water reignite when more air was introduced.

    Like I have stated previously the salesman said they would be happy to come up and demonstrate the device for us if we had a practice controlled burn in a house. If we have a house burn I fully intend to take them up on that offer.

    To me the biggest obstacles to its success are the ability to control openings in the fire area AND the cost. Even if insurance companies will reimburse the cost I know of some smaller volly FD's that $995 would severely deplete their equipment budget for the year.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    When one of these "extinguisher grenades" gets a UL listing, I'll consider giving it a second look. When the price gets more reasonable, maybe even a third.
    And that's fine. I was neither endorsing or condemn the product.

    We had so much hearsay about the product in the last topic on it that here was my chance to see it work and report on the results. My OPINION is that in certain circumstances it could be a valuable tool to buy time for an engine company to arrive and stretch lines.

    I was on the UL band wagon in the previous topic myself. To be honest at this point I view throwing that down as a reason to avoid looking at a product that may save homes and potentially lives.

    I don't recall anyone throwing down the UL label on the multi-page cheater connection for the SCBA mask. Anyone want to tell me that it was UL approved?

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by Acklan View Post
    FyredUp how many square feet does this device effectively cover?
    I am not a salesman, or a factory rep, and I have no iron in the fire on this product, so all I can do is tell you that their sales brochure says it will "completely suppress a fire in a 3500 cubic foot room and slow the spread of fire in larger spaces."

    I will tell you this, in my humble opinion it is necessary for the room to be fairly tight for it to completely extinguish the fire. The room we had was probaby 10 x 12 x 8 feet with no door on the entry point to the room and the window boarded over. It filled the room with the extinguishing agent and pushed enough into the hall that my helmet was turned gray by the dust. The fire was knocked down but not completely extinguished.

    Leave a comment:


  • FyredUp
    replied
    Originally posted by MarcusKspn View Post
    Thanks for the replies. If I remember right you have always been very critical of this thing, so I knew I would get some honest answers from you.
    I admit freely that before I saw it work I thought it was a high priced gizmo that couldn't work. Now I believe in specific circumstances it has potential to buy time for the arrival of an engine company. I want to be involved in further testing to see more chances of it operating.

    Like I said, still skeptical, but not nearly as much having seen it work.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chenzo
    replied
    Tree-I agree with your first paragraph. If I made it sound like I thought dry chem would cool the air, my mistake.

    I think that's exactly what happened. Air was reintroduced into the equation, and the fire just took off again.

    And I agree, it has potential, but I also think that if I walk up to the window with a 20 or 30 pound drychem extinguisher, and just unload the whole thing in the window, it would have the same or very similar results, at a fraction of the price.(and that is something I would like to see tested. A 20 pound drychem extinguisher vs. the FIT in comparably sized and set up rooms.)

    Slackjawed- Before we tossed in the FIT, the fire was fairly devoloped, rolling across the ceiling, and I think an officer with a PW wouldn't be able to do what this did. But, on the other hand, as I said above, I think if the officer rolled up with a drychem and dumped the whole thing in the window, (after shutting doors/windows etc if possible) I think it would have comparable results at a fraction of the price.
    Last edited by Chenzo; 08-16-2010, 02:19 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • slackjawedyokel
    replied
    In your opinion how did if differ in results from other techniques such as the first arriving officer(in a command vehicle) could do, such as a well aimed PW - and shutting doors?

    Leave a comment:


  • tree68
    replied
    Originally posted by Chenzo View Post
    The demo guy we had with us said that shortly after deployment of the FIT, the temp should be greatly reduced. That is the one point where I call shennaigans. The salesman deployed it, it went off and filled the room like Fyred said, but as far as temp goes, all I feel it did was push the heat from the ceiling to about where your head would be crouching.
    It's important to note that dry chemical extinguishers don't cool the fire - they interrupt the combustion. IMHO, the only reason the temperature would be reduced by the FIT would be because the fire was (theoretically) no longer burning. Any residual heat would remain.

    I've heard of fires doused with a dry chem extinguisher re-igniting when more air was introduced.

    That said - it's still a potential tool for situations where water isn't available yet, as was discussed at length in a previous thread as well.

    Leave a comment:


  • Chenzo
    replied
    I was in there behind Fyred with the TIC, we were going to look at the tempurtature drop, because according to the salesman, it was supposed to greatly lower the temp in the room. Unfortunately, just as we lit the fire, the battery on the TIC died, so we based it off of feeling.

    The demo guy we had with us said that shortly after deployment of the FIT, the temp should be greatly reduced. That is the one point where I call shennaigans. The salesman deployed it, it went off and filled the room like Fyred said, but as far as temp goes, all I feel it did was push the heat from the ceiling to about where your head would be crouching.

    I was crouched down, about 5 feet outside the room that the FIT was deployed in, and after it went off, it got noticeably hotter, to the point where if you didn't duck down even farther from a crouch, it was almost unbearable.

    I was fairly impressed. It did more than I thought it would, but I'm no believer yet.

    1. It still costs almost a $1000. Granted, the salesman said alot of insurance companies are covering these now, and if you get one that fails, DSPA will replace it at no charge, so that makes it a bit more justifiable if you can afford the initial cost.

    2. The demo guy said that it works much better if the room is as sealed up as possible. I don't foresee the ideal conditions for this device being met all too often. Perhaps in a basement fire, but in a bedroom, I think there is too many variables for it to work to its full effectiveness. If the door to the bedroom is open, as soon as the powder settles, and oxygen gets reintroduced, the fire will flare back up. (as Fyred said, he kicked open the window to vent, and the fire flared back up)

    I think it has potential. I really do, but I also think that it needs to be tweaked a little. Based on what I saw, the firing system needs to be reworked (which has supposedly been taken care of already), And I honestly think it would be a more effective tool if it was made just a little bigger/was made to go off a little longer. I think it would buy more time, even in those conditions that aren't so ideal. If it were designed to go off a little longer, I think it would buy more time for an engine company to show up, because it would keep the powder going in the room longer, leaving less of an oppurtunity for oxygen to be reintroduced.

    Far less skeptical, but not sold on buying any yet.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X