1 / 13

Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation

Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation. Goal: “Maintain critical contacts with the firefighter and first responder community in order to guide, test, and validate our technology development efforts.”. Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation. Strategies: Firefighter forums Joint exercises

ham
Download Presentation

Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation • Goal: “Maintain critical contacts with the firefighter and first responder community in order to guide, test, and validate our technology development efforts.”

  2. Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation • Strategies: • Firefighter forums • Joint exercises • Distinguished speaker lectures • Technology prototyping • Data / Information sharing •  After Action Reviews • Studies / Experiments

  3. Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation Overview • Joint Drills / Technology Testing Exercises - Impact Analysis • Live Burn & CO Sensing Study: OCFA, LA County Fire (23 FEB 09) • HazMat, casualties, First Response drill and SAFIRE Deployment (16 SEP 08) • HazMat drill (with multiple casualties) and SA Study (12 MAY 09) • Tabletop exercise IC Usability Experiment (15 MAY 09)

  4. Firefighter Outreach, Testing, Validation Overview • CERT sponsored Firefighter forums  • Quarterly meetings  • Roundtables, distinguished speakers, FF presentations • One-on-one discussions, meeting, visits • LA County Fire: CO sensing • Joint technology development • Technology Prototyping • Feedback on SAFIRE technologies

  5. Technology Evaluation, Analysis, Validation Assessing effectiveness of developed technologies in improving FF safety is key component of project 5

  6. Technology Evaluation and Analysis • Responsphere Drills • First HazMat drill (17 JUL 08) • Second HazMat drill (12 MAY 09) • Live Burn exercise (23 FEB 09) • Immediate feedback on technology • After-action reviews • Occur after each exercise • Impact Analysis - utilization experiment, tabletop exercise (15 MAY 09) • Reports on testing outcomes • Data sharing • CO Data available for Jeff Burgess (Arizona)

  7. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • SAFIRE / FICB Usability Study – 15 MAY 09 • Goal: “To test the usability of SAFIRE technology for Incident Commanders and receive input on the technology.” • Methodology: Mixed-methods (quantitative and qualitative data) design • SAFIRE evaluated by panel of IC experts at FF forum – Tabletop Exercise • Drill Scenario stopped at 5 “freeze points” to assess 1) Usability, 2) Impact on decision-making

  8. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • SAFIRE / FICB Usability Study – 15 MAY 09 • Freeze points were identified as critical junction / decision points: • IC Setup • Spill location Efforts • Information Traffic Flows • Search and Rescue • Localization of firefighter personnel PRE-FICB INTERVENTION “Given the capabilities of the FICB technology, would you use it at this freeze point?” YES / NO Optional Elaboration: If yes, how? If no, why? POST-FICB INTERVENTION “Would having this capability and information from FICB assist your decision on what to do next?” YES / NO Optional Elaboration: If yes, how? If no, why?

  9. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • SAFIRE / FICB Usability Study – 15 MAY 09 Results: Usability and decision-making impact significantly correlated with SAFIRE technology among ICs. Qualitative feedback overwhelmingly positive. Also, many suggestions for improvement.

  10. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • Situational Awareness (SAFIRE – FICB) – 12 MAY 09 • Goal: “To test the impact of SAFIRE technology on Situational Awareness during the Responsphere HazMat drill.” • Methodology: Traditional Experimental Design • Control Group: Incident Commander without FICB • Experimental Group: Incident Commander with FICB • Drill Scenario stopped at 6 “freeze points” to assess Situational Awareness

  11. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • Situational Awareness (SAFIRE – FICB) – 12 MAY 09 • Freeze points were identified as critical junction / decision points: • Initial Baseline (no FICB) • IC Setup • Spill location Efforts • Information Traffic Flows • Search and Rescue • Localization of firefighter personnel • At each freeze point, ICs were surveyed on their perception, comprehension, and projection (Endsley model of SA).

  12. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • Situational Awareness (SAFIRE – FICB) – 12 MAY 09 Results: Both ICs attained 100% comprehension. FICB reached this point earlier. FICB IC consistently higher in SA scores. SA with FICB: 49% SA without FICB: 32% (was indirectly influenced by FICB by virtue of FF actions)

  13. Technology Validation: SAFIRE Studies • Carboxyhemoglobin and CO Sensors – 23 FEB 09 • Goal: “To test the efficacy and accuracy of commercial SpCO sensors and calibrate SAFIRE-created CO sensors in a live burn, field-deployment scenario.” R Event Timetable: 9:57 -10:21  - Instrumentation/ calibration 10:21- 10:47 – Burn 10:47 – 11:46 – Break 11:46- 12:01 – 2nd Burn Results: FF Movement (e.g., hand, arm motion) caused spikes in SpCO readings and instrumentation read errors by misaligning the sensor strip. Environmental factors (heat, smoke, etc.) caused no malfunctions. 6,929 data points obtained in order to calibrate SAFIRE CO sensors.

More Related