Why register? ...To Enhance Your Experience
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    MembersZone Subscriber SamsonFCDES's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,708

    Default The can Vs. 1" Booster line Vs. 1.75" attack line Vs. 2.5" Smootherbore, Vs. CAFS, VS

    A wide open topic to discuss what seems to be a highly contradicted topic on the forum...

    How much water does it take to knock down fire!?!?!?

    We have the full spectrum of opinions it seems.

    - Can advocats claim you can knock down a room and contents fire with a 2.5 gallon water can. Truckies especialy love to claim victory before the nozzle men can even stretch to the fire.

    - We have the Europeans using 1" booster lines to knock down the majority of their stucture fires. They have old wold brick and mortar construction, but so do many places in the US. Most US firefighters claim you are doomed if you use 1" booster line.

    - We have the 1.75" attack line, standard fare in the US and mostl likely the number 1 fire killer in the US.

    - We have the 2.5" high flow low pressure lines, lots and lots of water, drown that sucker.

    And intermixed in between all of those various flows/methods, we have the steam cooker argument...

    "If you use fog you are going to cook youself and everybody else."

    And the smootherbore vs. combination argument...

    and on and on.

    Lets go over it all.

    Some questions to start the topic.

    How can Can Men claim to be able to control/knock down a fire when there are others that claim you are screwed unless you are using 2.5" hoselines.

    Just how much water does it take to knock down a room and contents fire. Of course this has a huge amount of variables...

    But I submit this, you can knock down a room and contents fire with anywhere between 1-1000 gallons of water depending on the situation, BUT you must apply it correctly and with skill if you are using the low flow attack.
    -Brotherhood: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of you life is to serve as a warning to others.

    -Adversity: That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.

    -Despair: Its always darkest before it goes Pitch Black.


  2. #2
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    North Wisconsin
    Posts
    165

    Lightbulb Don't hurt when you squirt..

    Having been a career fireman in the UK, and a POC here in Yankdom, I can at least give some different perspectives...

    Cans: Occasionally we would have first in crews take a can in with them when looking for fire location, but that would only be a no smoke or very light smoke showing situation. Cans can extinguish a suprising amount of fire, but offer no protection. Great for the occasional armchair etc fire.

    Hosereels (or booster lines as you spams like to call 'em) can be great for bricks and mortar structures with room and contents fires. Most of our appliances in our brigade were fitted with two stage impellers and high pressure reels. These hosereels got the job done 90% of the time. Some people will tell you that correct application (pulse technique) can prevent flashover and provide you with adequate protection, but for me, I have to say I'm a convert and fan of larger lines and straightips (even better with CAFS).

    Remember, Big Fire Big Water, all fires go out eventually, choose the line that actually makes a difference.

    Cheers

  3. #3
    Forum Member Dave1983's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Gator Country
    Posts
    4,157

    Default

    Just how much water does it take to knock down a room and contents fire. Of course this has a huge amount of variables...
    Depends on the size of the fire.

    Can advocats claim you can knock down a room and contents fire with a 2.5 gallon water can. Truckies especialy love to claim victory before the nozzle men can even stretch to the fire.
    Still find that hard to belive. I guess there are many definitions of "room & contents". In my area, room and contents requires at least an 1 3/4".

    We have the Europeans using 1" booster lines to knock down the majority of their stucture fires. They have old wold brick and mortar construction, but so do many places in the US. Most US firefighters claim you are doomed if you use 1" booster line.
    If it works for them, great. No one around here has had booster lines since the mid 80's.

    We have the 1.75" attack line, standard fare in the US and mostl likely the number 1 fire killer in the US.
    Same here, but I expect to see a change over to 2" in the next 5-10 years. My department is already talking about it.

    We have the 2.5" high flow low pressure lines, lots and lots of water, drown that sucker
    Here as well. Three 1 3/4" and one 2 1/2" on each rig. Nice for BIG fires. Cant recall last time we used one

    If you use fog you are going to cook youself and everybody else."
    I tend to belive that with proper tactics, PPE and training, you can limit any FF lobsters. Any unprotected civilians in the room, thats another story...

    And the smootherbore vs. combination argument...
    Along with quints vs. straight ladders, red vs. whatever other color you can think of and a host of others. Dont want to waste my time with this one...

    How can Can Men claim to be able to control/knock down a fire when there are others that claim you are screwed unless you are using 2.5" hoselines.
    Like I said before, must be many ideas as far as what is "room and contents". In my world, a can isnt enough and a 2 1/2" is overkill.

    But I submit this, you can knock down a room and contents fire with anywhere between 1-1000 gallons of water depending on the situation, BUT you must apply it correctly and with skill if you are using the low flow attack.
    WOW, what a concept

    Dave

  4. #4
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,744

    Default

    I don't its a fair comparison between our booster lines and the high pressure lines carried in the UK and Europe. Different animal altogether as far as I know.

    I have witnessed a can "knock down" a 10 x 10 bedroom that was heavily involved. One key with the can in door control (ie closing it) and in this case that the room was not vented to the outside. 1700 to 1 ratio for steam right?

    All tools in the toolbox. Experience and training will dictate what you need to get the job done. There will be days you make the wrong choice no matter what. One argument against the old US booster reel was that if there was more fire than you could put out, you were doomed. At least the 1 /34 will give you some protection while you shag ***** back to the truck for the bigger hose.

    An interesting article I found while looking for the steam expansion ratio (OK I am a dumbass, I couldn't remember it):

    The Iowa-Grimwood formula: rate of flow formula for confined fires - Firefighting Technology


    The most impressive fact about the research on fog nozzles that has been done during the past 50 years in more than 10 countries is the convergence of all this research upon the same conclusions. These conclusions, the author concludes, establish without any doubt that fog nozzles can be used safely and effectively to fight confined structure fires, as well as other types of fires

    A very interesting result of the research on fog nozzles is the proof that two rate of-flow formulas created in two different countries 36 years apart are actually the same formula. One formula uses the English system of measurement while the other formula uses the metric system. So, it is not immediately obvious that the two formulas are actually the same.

    The switch from using smooth bore nozzles to the use of fog nozzles began in the US after a speech delivered by Chief Lloyd Layman of the Parkersburg W V Fire Department to the Fire Department Instructor's Conference (FDIC) in Memphis, TN, USA, in 1950. chief Layman had conducted the first research on the use of fog nozzles at the US Coast Guard Fire School, Ft. McHenry, Baltimore, MD, USA, during World War II.

    The first formula was created in 1954 by two men, Keith Royer (Director) and Bill Nelson (Chief Instructor), at the Fire Service Institute of Iowa State University at Ames, Iowa, USA. At that time very little was known about fire behaviour or water behaviour in structure tires. Most of the information avail able was from combustion engineering. So they began their own research, systematically analysing actual structure fires.

    Then they turned their attention to a second basic question: how much water is needed to control a tire with fog nozzles? They answered this question by creating the following formula.

    Gal = Vol 200

    In this equation, Gal = the number of gallons of water, Vol = the volume of a confined space in cubic feet, and 200 = a constant determined by two scientific facts

    The first fact is that one gallon of liquid water converts to a gas (steam) at 212[degrees]F at a ratio of 1:1.700. That is, one cubic foot of liquid water expands to 1,700 cubic feet of steam. Since one cubic foot of water contains 7,48 gal, one gallon of water produces

    1.700/7,48 = 227,

    Or 227 cubic feet of steam. Thus one gallon of water converts to enough steam to fill a 227 [ft.sup.3] confined space. This number is rounded down to 200 to allow for 90 per cent rate of conversion to steam in actual firefighting.

    The second fact is that one cubic foot of pure oxygen combined with ordinary fuels produces 538 btus of heat. Since air contains 21 per cent of oxygen by volume, and flame production stops when the oxygen level reaches 15 per cent, therefore

    21% - 14% = 7%.

    Thus only this amount of oxygen, seven per cent of air, is available for flaming com bustion. Multiplying seven per cent by the number of British thermal units produced by one cubic foot of oxygen gives

    x 0.07 = 37 btu

    This is the number of British thermal units produced by one cubic foot of air. The number of Btus produced by 200 cubic feet of air is

    37 X 200 = 7.400 btu

    To raise the temperature of one gallon of water from 62[degrees]F to 212[degrees]F requires 1.250btu (1 gal weighs 8.34 lb x 150 = 1.250). To vaporise one gallon of water at 212[degrees]F requires 8.090 btu (8.34 X 970.3 = 8.090) If one gallon of water is applied to a fire at 62[degrees]F, then this gallon absorbs 9.340 btu. Since 7,400 < 9.340, the conclusion is that one gallon of water can absorb all the heat produced by 200 cubic feet of air Notice the margin of safety, almost 2,000 btus.

    It is quite remarkable that both scientific facts converge on the same constant, 200. This provides a solid foundation for the validity for the Iowa gallonage formula.

    To convert the gallonage formula to a metric formula, we must start with the litre. The litre, like the gallon, is a measure of volume with one gallon equalling 3,785L Since the volume of structures is usually expressed in cubic meters, we must transform litres to cubic meters This is easy to do in the metric system.

    One litre equals one cubic decimetre, or one one-thousandth of a cubic metre.

    1.000L = 1[m.sup.3]

    The expansion ratio of liquid water to steam is 1:1.700 no matter what unit of measure is used. Therefore one litre of water expands to 1.700 litres of steam.

    L = V/1.700

    In this equation, both L and V are in litres. To change the number V to cubic meters, it is necessary to divide the numerator and denominator of the fraction by 1,000.

    L = V/1.000

    1.700/1.000

    'V/1.000' may be rewritten as 'Vol' in cubic meters Since the Iowa formula assumes a 90 per cent conversion rate of water to steam, we must do the same for the metric formula.

    L = Vol

    1,5

    This is the Iowa gallonage formula in metric units.

    Paul Grimwood has done extensive research on the flow rates used by various European fire departments. In his book, Fog Attack, he summarised his work by stating that the flow rate of 0,5Lpm/[m.sup.3] is close to the average used by firefighters in fighting actual structure fires. In a recent article he presented a formula that he characterised as a minimum rate of flow formula

    Lpm = A X 2

    In this equation Lpm is the rate-of-flow, and 'A' is the floor area of the confined space in [m.sup.2].

    This equation differs from the Iowa gallonage formula in two respects First, it is a rate-of-flow formula, not a gallonage formula. Second, ii involves area of the confined space, not the volume.

    What we must do is change the Iowa gallonage formula to a rate-of-flow formula. Any rate-of-flow formula must have time as a factor.

    RoF X t = Gal (or L)

    A rate-of-flow formula without time as a factor is valid for a time of one minute only.

    RoF X 1 = Gal (or L)

    For example, a RoF of 100 Lpm equals 100L only for a time of one minute. For all other times the equation is false (not equal) So making this change for the Iowa gallon age formula gives:

    Lpm X t = Vol

    1,5

    Doing the same for Grimwood's formula gives the following equation

    Lpm X t =A X 2

    There is one final change. The Grimwood formula must be changed to volume. This is done by multiplying the area (A) by ceiling height. Let us do this for 2.5m and 3.0m (8ft and 10ft). Of course if we multiply the numerator of a fraction by a number, we must do the same to the denominator.

    Lpm X t = 3 X A X 2

    Lpm X t = 2,5 X A X 2

    2,5

    Since 3 X A (of 2,5 X A) equals volume, we may change notation to get the following equations

    Lpm X t = Vol. X 2

    Lpm X t = Vol. X 2

    2,5

    Our final change is to simplify the numerator of each fraction by multiplying the numerator and denominator by 0,5.

    Lpm X t = Vol.

    Lpm X t = Vol.

    1,5

    1,25

    In this formula, L pm = litres per minute and Vol = volume of a confined space in cubic meters. Note that the 3m (10ft) ceiling height gives a formula identical to the Iowa rate-of-flow formula. The 2,5m (8 ft) ceiling height is almost within 90 per cent of the Iowa formula.

    What is the significance of this finding? First, these two formulas were created ,36 years apart and in different countries. This is a perfect ex ample of the convergence of scientific research upon the same set of facts and principles. It is sale to say that the Iowa-Grimwood formula will be the only valid formula that fire services will have to determine the right amount of water to use in a fog attack when the tire fully in volves a confined space.

  5. #5
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 1999
    Location
    MA
    Posts
    1,744

    Default

    I hate when you spend 20 minutes writing something that disappears into never-never land........

    Is it a fair comparison between the US booster line and the UK high pressure reels? My understanding is that they are different animals.

    As for the can. I can't imagine taking the can as the only tool, but if you are inside on an investigation....or protecting the rescue effort, it is a great tool. I have seen it "knock down" or control a 10 x 10 bedroom fire, but the door was controlled (ie closed) and the room hadn't vented to the outside. Think about it. 1700:1 expansion ratio, all that steam has to go somewhere. Did the fire still need to be mopped up? Yup!

    As for the rest, different tools in the toolbox. Experience and training will dictate what size line you should pull. There will be times that you are wrong. The problem with the good ole booster line, was that its flows were so low, that if the fire was more than it appeared...you were lucky if you could get out. By flowing as much as 200GPM from an 1 3/4 line, at least you can protect your retreat for a bigger line.

    My feelings are that there is some merit to using a smoothbore where rescue is likely. Less steam, better reach, more likely to produce a viable victim. That being said. Fires still go out with both, and you'll never get a concensus opinion one way or the other.

    Dave

  6. #6
    Forum Member VinnieB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    On the couch in my skivvies
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    We use the can in a search team...the can goes in first...finds, locates and confines...we use 6 lengths of 1.75" and 12 lengths of 2.5"...with smooth bore nozzles...our goal is 180gpm @ 50psi and 225gpm @ 50psi, repectivley....Because of our area this works really well for us.
    Last edited by VinnieB; 10-18-2004 at 01:36 PM.
    IACOJ Member

  7. #7
    MembersZone Subscriber E229Lt's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Posts
    2,987

    Default

    How much water does it take to knock down fire!?!?!?
    180 gpm.

    JMHO

  8. #8
    MembersZone Subscriber SamsonFCDES's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    1,708

    Default

    Originally posted by E229Lt


    180 gpm.

    JMHO
    Or is it...

    810 gpm.
    018 gpm.
    108 gpm.
    180 gpm.
    801 gpm.

    FSAD
    -Brotherhood: I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
    -Mistakes: It could be that the purpose of you life is to serve as a warning to others.

    -Adversity: That which does not kill me postpones the inevitable.

    -Despair: Its always darkest before it goes Pitch Black.

  9. #9
    MembersZone Subscriber
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    326

    Default

    Originally posted by VinnieB
    We use the can in a search team...the can goes in first...finds, locates and confines...we use 6 lengths of 1.75" and 12 lengths of 2.5"...with smooth bore nozzles...our goal is 180gpm @ 50psi and 225gpm @ 50psi, repectivley....Because of our area this works really well for us.
    I believe you meant 265 gpm at 50 psi, not 225 gpm. What department are you a firefighter for?

  10. #10
    Forum Member Bones42's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    Pt. Beach, NJ
    Posts
    10,671

    Default

    They are all tools and all have their uses. My "engine company" does not use a can, they are pulling a 1 3/4 or 2 1/2. My "truck company" will take the can. Alarm investigations we all function as "truck companies". We have foam capable lines but no CAFS. Our 2 1/2's are 1 1/8 smoothbores and my 1 3/4's are breakapart adjustables with 15/16 smoothbore. We flow 150gpm and 266gpm.
    "This thread is being closed as it is off-topic and not related to the fire industry." - Isn't that what the Off Duty forum was for?

  11. #11
    Forum Member VinnieB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    On the couch in my skivvies
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    Originally posted by erics99


    I believe you meant 265 gpm at 50 psi, not 225 gpm. What department are you a firefighter for?

    No....I actually I ment 255....sorry about that....I didn't proof read...my booger finger spazed out.....and I am a firefighter in lower tier of "upstate" NY.....most apley know as the Hudson Valley.
    Last edited by VinnieB; 10-19-2004 at 12:20 AM.
    IACOJ Member

  12. #12
    Forum Member FyredUp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Rural Wisconsin, Retired from the burbs of Milwaukee
    Posts
    9,893

    Default

    Let me preface my comments by saying...This works for us, it may not work for you, everyone must evaluate their particular situation and determine what may be best for them in their circunstances.

    We use 2 inch hose exclsively for handline fire attack. We switched from a 1 3/4 and 2 1/2 inch hose fire attack abvout 5 or 6 years ago. Currently our nozzle selection is an Elkhart 200 gpm at 75 psi break apart combo backed by a 1 1/4 inch slug. We are evaluating the new nozzle tips being tested by FDNY and we are seriously looking at changing our 2 inch handlines to all smoothbore nozzles.

    FyredUp

  13. #13
    MembersZone Subscriber Firefighter430's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Virgilina, VA USA
    Posts
    323

    Default

    - Can advocats claim you can knock down a room and contents fire with a 2.5 gallon water can. Truckies especialy love to claim victory before the nozzle men can even stretch to the fire.



    We don't use a can but I could see that they would have advantages in some situations.

    ****************************** ****************************** ****

    - We have the Europeans using 1" booster lines to knock down the majority of their stucture fires. They have old wold brick and mortar construction, but so do many places in the US. Most US firefighters claim you are doomed if you use 1" booster line.



    Booster lines are nice to clean tools and put out trash can fires but thats about all they are really good for in my playbook if you are going to pull a line pull bigger than you need and work from there. You just can't flow the water you need and most departments don't calc. the friction loss in 1" BL (1 PSI per Ft) to even flow near the GPM the nozzle is rated for.

    ****************************** ****************************** ****

    - We have the 1.75" attack line, standard fare in the US and mostl likely the number 1 fire killer in the US.



    In our county that is true but I have seen fires that laughed at a 1 3/4" line flowing 125-150 GPM

    ****************************** ****************************** ****

    - We have the 2.5" high flow low pressure lines, lots and lots of water, drown that sucker.

    Great for some fires and have seen times when I wished we had pulled a 2 1/2" line. We had a storage shed fire last spring that only a 2 1/2" smooth bore would dent. Lots of fuel and lots of fire means lots of water.

    ****************************** ****************************** ****

    "If you use fog you are going to cook youself and everybody else."

    And the smootherbore vs. combination argument...

    This is a never ending argument and no one will ever win this one. You use what works for you and I have what works for me. The steam issue deals with the fact that a fog nozzle already breaks the water and makes the conversion to steam easier whereas a solid bore takes longer therefor making rescue safer for firefighters and victims. Lots of FD in our county laugh when you talk about smooth bore attack lines because the county has always taught fog nozzle protection of the attack crew. I would chance to say that there is not a single smooth bore 1 3/4" attack line (SBAL) in the county even given the advantages of SBAL in some situations.
    "Illegitimis non carborundum."

    - Gen. Joseph Stilwell
    (Lat., "Don't let the *~#%&S grind you down.")

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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