Physiological Demands And "Air Management" For Firefighters Breathing From An Scba During Simulated High Rise Firefighting Tasks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Firefighters rely on the limited amount of air in their self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) air cylinder to enter a fire scene, to perform necessary tasks and to safely exit the fire. The risk of suffocation or smoke inhalation is great if the air supply is not properly managed. However, measurement of the physiological demands and air requirements during simulated firefighting tasks while wearing full Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and positive pressure SCBA has been a difficult process based on undeveloped technology. PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were to integrate a breath-by-breath data collection system with the SCBA and to examine the physiological demands during 5 simulated firefighting tasks on the 5th floor of a high rise structure while breathing through the SCBA. METHODS: Subjects consisted of 33 male and 3 female incumbent firefighters with a peak treadmill oxygen uptake of 51 ± 7 ml/kg/min. Subjects climbed 5 flights of stairs carrying an additional 18 kg high rise pack, removed the high rise pack and completed a combination of hose drags and room searches, followed by a forcible entry simulator, victim rescue drag, and 5 flight descent to exit the fire scene. All participants wore full PPE and a SCBA integrated with the Cosmed K4b2 breath by breath gas exchange system. RESULTS: Average completion time for this scenario was 5 min 37 s ± 57 s, with an average VO2 of 33 ± 5 ml/kg/min (65 ± 10% VO2peak). In spite of this relatively low VO2, respiratory exchange ratio reached 1.2 suggesting a large anaerobic component and ventilatory demand. Even with a relatively brief task, 34 to 68% of the '30 min' cylinder was consumed. The most physically demanding task was the victim rescue drag requiring 70 ± 10% of VO2peak. CONCLUSION: These data provide basic information necessary to establish principles for "air management" for firefighters during emergencies in a high rise structure. Supported: Technical Support Working Group, Canadian Police Research Centre.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".