Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 94
  1. #21
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RFDACM02 View Post
    As I said, I'm a skeptic of PPV in many cases, and this seems like a an extrapolation of a only somewhat proven tactic. I know it works when it works, but so do water curtains. Both fail miserably, when they fail too.
    FWIW, PPV used properly is a very effective tactic. The problem is, I've seen a lot of totally botched attempts at PPV. "Water curtains," OTOH, don't work at all.
    Last edited by DeputyMarshal; 12-27-2010 at 09:48 PM. Reason: typo
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.


  2. #22
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FireFuss View Post
    That building is standing today because of 40 or so sprinkler heads outside on the adjoining wall. They were pressurized by an engine, and acted as a sort of wall mounted water curtain.
    Direct cooling by wetting an exposure works just fine; a traditional "water curtain" between the fire and the exposure does not.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  3. #23
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    Our water curtain appliance is designed to tilt so it can flow across the surface.
    ?

  4. #24
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    1,894

    Default

    And back to the original question - it worked well in our situation , the only thing I would have done differently ,would to be have someone stationed at the fan to kill it if there was a wind shift or an inversion of some sort. This was an extermely smokey fire and took a long time to self vent. (multiple roofs /ceilings ) we also had gone completely defensive when we initated the ppv on the exposure and had two lines and a portion of the drop ceiling down to monitor the entire wall. (no vents in the flat roof)The fan was in the C/D corner of the exposure building (one story)and the vent was the front door on the A side of the exposure.
    ?

  5. #25
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    I think a lot of FF's lose track of two things about PPV. One: It's a TOOL. Two: That TOOL should have an OPERATOR with it and it DOES have a THROTTLE which DOES NOT necessarily have to be set at full throttle. I LIKE PPV's, have used them on various building constructions. Used with DISCRETION they can speed up your work and make your life EASIER, Used IMPROPERLY: Hello PARKINGLOT! T.C.

  6. #26
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rescue101 View Post
    I LIKE PPV's
    Minor nit-pick: PPV is a tactic, not a tool. This tactic is usually implemented using a fan (tool) -- either gasoline powered or electric -- but can occasionally even be accomplished by taking advantage of a convenient wind.

    I do agree with your overall assessment.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  7. #27
    Forum Member Rescue101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    Bridgton,Me USA
    Posts
    8,162

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Minor nit-pick: PPV is a tactic, not a tool. This tactic is usually implemented using a fan (tool) -- either gasoline powered or electric -- but can occasionally even be accomplished by taking advantage of a convenient wind.

    I do agree with your overall assessment.
    I agree with your assessment. For the purposes of the THREAD however,I DON'T think the OP was thinking Mother Nature PPV. T.C.

  8. #28
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Haughton, LA
    Posts
    214

    Default

    Sounds like it helped slack
    Last edited by 6Duron1; 12-29-2010 at 02:46 PM.

  9. #29
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Pressurizing an exposure is VERY effective.

    I have used it and had success on the following exposures; strip malls, a dwelling w/ attached garage and adjacent high rise floors.

    The higher the interior pressure, the more effective it will keep fire out!

  10. #30
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    Pressurizing an exposure is VERY effective.
    You might want to reread the initial post. The OP appears to be talking about detached exposures.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  11. #31
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    You might want to reread the initial post. The OP appears to be talking about detached exposures.
    I probably did misunderstand the OP, although, the point remains the same - pressurizing an exposure, attached or not, is VERY effective.

  12. #32
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    I probably did misunderstand the OP, although, the point remains the same - pressurizing an exposure, attached or not, is VERY effective.
    For a detached exposure, effective at doing what?
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  13. #33
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    For a detached exposure, effective at doing what?
    Eliminating fire spread to the given exposure.

  14. #34
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    Eliminating fire spread to the given exposure.
    How do you propose that pressurizing a detached exposure will prevent fire spread given that fires typically spread to detached exposures either by radiant heat or direct flame contact; neither of which is effected by pressurization?
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  15. #35
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    How do you propose that pressurizing a detached exposure will prevent fire spread given that fires typically spread to detached exposures either by radiant heat or direct flame contact; neither of which is effected by pressurization?
    Pressurization has everything to do with keeping out direct flame contact and radiant heat.

    As fire spreads it seeks to go to a neutral or negative pressure (outside air, non-pressurized buildings, etc). Fire will not spread where there is a positive pressure, thus the reason for pressurizing exposures.

  16. #36
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    Pressurization has everything to do with keeping out direct flame contact and radiant heat.
    Pressurization has zero effect on both of those modes.

    As fire spreads it seeks to go to a neutral or negative pressure (outside air, non-pressurized buildings, etc). Fire will not spread where there is a positive pressure, thus the reason for pressurizing exposures.
    Pressurizng a detached exposure does nothing to prevent either radiant heat or direct flame contact from igniting its exterior. If you want to keep a detached exposure from igniting, keeping heat/fire off of its exposed surfaces is typically going to be a far superior strategy to pressurizing it.
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  17. #37
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Pressurization has zero effect on both of those modes.
    Pressurizng a detached exposure does nothing to prevent either radiant heat or direct flame contact from igniting its exterior. If you want to keep a detached exposure from igniting, keeping heat/fire off of its exposed surfaces is typically going to be a far superior strategy to pressurizing it.
    Of course traditional exposure protection via. charged handlines must by utilized for proper exterior exposure protection. But, to protect the entire(interior/exterior) structure, pressurization must also be utlized.

  18. #38
    Forum Member DeputyMarshal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,638

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    Of course traditional exposure protection via. charged handlines must by utilized for proper exterior exposure protection. But, to protect the entire(interior/exterior) structure, pressurization must also be utlized.
    If you protect the exterior the interior isn't a primary exposure.

    Of course, if you have the luxury of excess manpower standing around with nothing better to do, go for it...
    "Nemo Plus Voluptatis Quam Nos Habant"

    The Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules.

  19. #39
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Northeast Coast
    Posts
    3,777

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by J.Beck View Post
    Fire will not spread where there is a positive pressure, thus the reason for pressurizing exposures.
    Good lord, do you understand basic fire behavior or heat transfer? How does PP affect radiant heat transfer or conductive transfer?

    It's amazing that more of us haven't burned down blocks ignoring the use of positive pressure on exposures. Where I live, if the positive pressure can protect a house, they probably would rather have it burn then pay the heating bill.

  20. #40
    Forum Member J.Beck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    93

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    If you protect the exterior the interior isn't a primary exposure.

    Of course, if you have the luxury of excess manpower standing around with nothing better to do, go for it...
    Capiche.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 08-01-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-02-2005, 07:38 AM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 07-03-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-07-2005, 10:37 PM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 04-03-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-04-2004, 12:58 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 12-20-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-21-2003, 10:17 AM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 11-15-03
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-16-2003, 06:35 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts