NIST Special Publication 1123

Emergency First Responder Respirator 

Thermal Characteristics:

Workshop Proceedings

Amy Mensch

Nelson Bryner

U.S. Department of Commerce

Engineering Laboratory

National Institute of Standards and 

Technology

Gaithersburg, MD 20899

 
NIST Special Publication 1123

Emergency First Responder Respirator 

Thermal Characteristics:

Workshop Proceedings 

Amy Mensch

Nelson Bryner

U.S. Department of Commerce

Engineering Laboratory

National Institute of Standards and Technology

Gaithersburg, MD 20899 

June 2011

The Fire Protection Research Foundation

Kathleen H. Almand, Executive Director

Department of Homeland Security

Janet Napolitano, Secretary

Federal Emergency Management 

Association

W. Craig Fugate, Administrator

United States Fire Administration

Glenn A. Gaines, Acting Administrator

National Institute of Occupational Safety and 

Health

John Howard, Director

National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory

Les Boord, Director

U.S. Department of Commerce 

Gary Locke, Secretary 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

Patrick D. Gallagher, Director
ii

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in this

document in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately.

Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the

National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that the

entities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose. 

National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1123

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1123, 52 pages (June 2011) 

CODEN: NSPUE2
iii

ABSTRACT

The purpose of this workshop was to identify performance needs and establish research priorities 

to address the thermal characteristics of respiratory equipment used by emergency first 

responders. The workshop provided a forum for representatives from the first responder 

community, self contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and component manufacturers, and 

research and testing experts to discuss issues, technologies, and research associated with SCBA

high temperature performance. The goals of the workshop were defined in two parts: 1) Clarify 

baseline information, including the current state-of-the-art, applicable fire service events, and 

current related research, and 2) Research planning, including identification of performance needs 

and short and long term research priorities.

Presentations were given to explain the current SCBA certification process, understand 

experience from actual fire service incidents, and review the current state of respirator research. 

After the presentations, the workshop divided into three working group sessions to discuss 

performance needs and research priorities in smaller groups. Suggested topics for discussion

included: a) Current Equipment, b) Current Practice and Usage, c) Future Trends, d) Short Term 

Research Needs, e) Long Term Research Needs, and f) other issues.

The results of the three smaller groups’ deliberations were discussed when the full workshop 

reconvened. The responses from each group were merged into a combination of issues that 

related to the use and performance of the lens of the SCBA. The primary concerns and research 

priorities were the characterization of the fire fighter environment, performance of current and 

new technology, development of representative and realistic testing, and improvements to fire 

fighter training on the limitations of protective equipment. A significant amount of discussion 

concentrated on the testing for NFPA certification, which currently contains limited thermal 

testing.

Keywords: fire fighting; first responder; heat flux; lens; performance metrics; respirator; selfcontained breathing apparatus; SCBA; temperature; viewing section
iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The success of any workshop is dependent on the hard work of the individual speakers, 

facilitators, and participants. These proceedings are an assimilation of the contributions from 

everyone involved in the workshop; copies of the presentations are included in Appendix 3. 

Thanks to all who made presentations and to those who participated in the workshop.

Thanks go to Nelson Bryner from NIST, Casey Grant from FPRF, and Bill Haskell from NIOSH, 

who served as chairs of the breakout sessions and helped bring focus to the discussions. In 

addition, we wish to acknowledge the assistance of Les Boord, NPPTL director, who provided 

location and equipment for the workshop. The authors also appreciate Susan Buller from 

NIOSH and Wanda Duffin-Ricks from NIST for providing logistical support.
v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv

INTRODUCTION 1

WORKSHOP ORGANIZATION AND OBJECTIVES 5

BREAKOUT GROUP RESULTS 8

CONCLUSIONS 12

REFERENCES 13

APPENDIX 1 – WORKSHOP AGENDA 15

APPENDIX 2 - WORKSHOP ATTENDEES 17

APPENDIX 3 – WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS 19

APPENDIX 3.A – Workshop Purpose and Goals 19

APPENDIX 3.B – NIOSH/NPPTL Overview 22

APPENDIX 3.C – NFPA Certification of Fire and Emergency Services PPE 25

APPENDIX 3.D – Safety Equipment Institute Testing Laboratory 28

APPENDIX 3.E – NIOSH/FFFIPP Activities 30

APPENDIX 3.F – Massachusetts Fire Training Academy 37

APPENDIX 3.G – NIST Respirator Research 41

APPENDIX 4 – WORKING GROUP QUESTIONS 45

APPENDIX 5 – WORKING GROUP RAW RESULTS 47

APPENDIX 5.A – Working Group A Raw Results 47

APPENDIX 5.B – Working Group B Raw Results 49

APPENDIX 5.C – Working Group C Raw Results 51
1

EMERGENCY RESPONDER RESPIRATOR THERMAL CHARACTERISTICS

INTRODUCTION

First responders use a self–contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) in order to provide breathable 

air to the user in atmospheres that present immediate danger to life and health (IDLH). In the 

case of fire fighting, the environment often lacks oxygen and contains smoke, carbon monoxide 

and other toxic products of pyrolysis and combustion. The SCBA provides a clean supply of air 

and respiratory protection from these contaminants. In addition the SCBA provides some 

protection from heat. Since the personal protective ensemble covers the entire body, part of the 

SCBA is relied on to protect the face and respiratory tract from thermal injuries. A certain 

amount of thermal protection is provided by the thermal resistance of the materials themselves 

and by cooling from the air flow inside the SCBA. 

The current SCBA is primarily comprised of three components: a high pressure tank, a pressure 

regulator system, and an inhalation connection. The inhalation connection in the typical design 

is a facepiece or mask, which seals around the entire face and chin. Straps are used to keep the 

facepiece secured on the face and maintain the seal. The low pressure regulator and hose 

assembly connects to the front of the facepiece, and when opened, supplies air to maintain a 

positive pressure (a pressure greater than ambient) inside the facepiece. A nosecup incorporated 

inside the facepiece directs the user’s exhalation out of the facepiece through one way valves. 

This design helps reduce fogging of the lens, which would impair visibility. Polycarbonate is 

typically used for the lens material due to its superior impact resistance and clarity, and relatively 

good thermal properties. Often an abrasion resistance coating, such as silicon oxide, is applied to 

the polycarbonate to reduce scratching of the lens. 

There are three main standards that exist for SCBA: 42 CFR Part 84, EN 136, and NFPA 1981. 

The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is the authority responsible 

for testing and certifying respiratory equipment in the United States as documented in the Code 

of Federal Regulations, 42 CFR Part 84 – Approval of Respiratory Protective Devices.[1] SCBA

is only one type of respirator that is covered in 42 CFR Part 84. The document specifies 

components and minimum requirements to certify respirators based on the effectiveness of 

respiratory protection provided in hazardous atmospheres. Testing involves evaluation of

quantities such as device weight, impact resistance, service time, breathing resistance, gas flow, 

and inhalation and exhalation valve performance.

In Europe, the European Committee for Standardization (CEN) publishes the European standard 

for respiratory protective devices – full face masks, EN 136. This document specifies the 

requirements for approval of full face masks as part of respiratory protection devices. A full face 

mask is defined as “... a facepiece which covers the eyes, nose, mouth and chin and provides 

adequate sealing on the face of the wearer of a respiratory protective device against the ambient 

atmosphere, when the skin is dry or moist, and even when the head is moved or when the wearer 

is speaking.”[2] Testing involves evaluation of temperature resistance, flammability, thermal 

radiation resistance, harness strength, speech diaphragm, visibility, inhalation and exhalation 

valve performance, leaktightness, breathing resistance, and inward leakage.
2

The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) began publishing voluntary standards for 

respiratory equipment in May 1971, with NFPA 19B – Standard on Respiratory Protective 

Equipment for Fire Fighters. The 19B document prohibited filter-type canisters and only 

allowed SCBA. In May 1981, NFPA 19B was withdrawn, and NFPA 1981 – Standard on 

Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus for Fire Fighters was adopted, which required a positive 

pressure design and a minimum service time of 30 min. The NFPA standard required NIOSH 

certification, but additional requirements were necessary to capture the conditions specific to fire 

fighting. Performance requirements and appropriate testing protocols, which simulated 

environments experienced in fire fighting and storage were added in 1987. The first heat and 

flame exposure test was implemented in the 1992 edition. In 2002, a universal air connection 

was specified, so that any air source could replace an empty cylinder in an emergency situation. 

The most recent edition of NFPA 1981, adopted in 2007, was changed to Standard on 

Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency Services. Another 

significant change to the standard was the requirement for protection from chemical, biological, 

radiological and nuclear terrorism agents, or CBRN certification from NIOSH.[3] The NFPA 

1981 document specifies minimum requirements for the NFPA certification for use by fire and 

emergency responders in atmospheres that are immediately dangerous to life and health (IDLH). 

The thermal environments that fire fighters are exposed to in structural fires are highly variable, 

and depend on many factors including fuel type and load, interior finish, and structure layout and 

construction. Studies on fire fighter protective clothing [4-6] have described pre-flashover fire 

fighting environments with temperatures between 100 °C and 300 °C and maximum heat fluxes 

between 5 kW/m2and 12 kW/m2. More dangerous fire fighting environments where protective 

clothing has been studied, involve temperatures up to 700 °C and heat fluxes of 20 kW/m2to 

40 kW/m2.[5-7] However, conditions of flashover and post-flashover can reach 1000 °C and 

170 kW/m2.[8] Donnelly et al. [9] combined various reports and articles from the literature, 

which classified fire fighting environments into categories and specified the maximum time, 

temperature and heat flux associated with each type of exposure. The result was a 

recommendation of four thermal classes of fire fighter exposure, which are displayed graphically 

in Figure 1. The maximum time for each class is listed within the shaded area showing the range 

of air temperatures and heat flux values at each thermal class. Thermal classes such as these can 

be used to establish performance requirements of protective equipment standards.
3

Figure 1 – Graphical representation of the recommendations for thermal classes of fire fighter 

environments, from Donnelly et al., 2006, [9] showing range of air temperature, heat flux and 

duration.

Currently in the US, the certification test that involves the most severe thermal exposure for an 

SCBA is the Heat and Flame Test, Section 8.11 of NFPA Standard 1981 – Open Circuit 

Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) For Emergency Services.[10] In this test, the 

SCBA is mounted on a test headform breathing at 40 L/min and placed in a convection oven at 

95 °C for 15 min. This exposure would be classified as Class I in Figure 1. No more than 20 s 

later, the breathing rate is increased to 103 L/min, and the SCBA is exposed to direct flame 

contact for 10 s. The contact peak temperature is specified to be between 815 °C and 1150 °C. 

Therefore the second portion of the test fits into Class IV from Figure 1. Following the heat 

exposures, the headform is dropped from a height of 15.2 cm (6 in). The SCBA is tested for 

airflow performance and for visual acuity. Although this test involves elevated temperatures, it 

does not capture the conditions of temperature and heat flux that a fire fighter may experience in 

Classes II and III. 

This workshop was designed to discuss the research needs in order to reduce the problem of heat 

related respirator failures during fire fighting. The need for improved SCBA and facepiece 

design to withstand a variety of extreme conditions including high heat loads, was documented 

in a U.S. Fire Administration special report in 2001.[11] In the decade since, several additional 

reports on fire fighter fatalities have indicated that inadequate thermal performance of the SCBA 

lenses contributed to one or more fire fighter fatalities.[12-18] The SCBA masks in most of 

these cases were found still on the victims, and all displayed extensive damage to the point 

where the SCBA could no longer provide respiratory protection from the IDLH environment. In 

addition, there have been numerous anecdotal accounts of crazing, bubbling, and softening of 

Class I

25 min

Class II

15 min

Class III

5 min

Class IV

<1 min

10

100

1000

0.1 1 10 100

Air Temperature (°C)

Heat Flux (kW/m2)

260

160

2
4

lenses, some of which have been reported as near misses.[19-22] These incidents have caught 

the attention of the first responder community and SCBA manufacturing industry. Because the 

SCBA plays such a critical role in the survival of fire fighters, especially those that find 

themselves trapped or lost, the SCBA user and manufacturing community has decided that the 

issue of respirator thermal performance needs to be addressed. This workshop was organized to 

identify the current state-of-the-art of existing SCBA technology, identify performance needs, 

and prioritize the research needs to reduce heat related respirator failures for fire fighters.
5

WORKSHOP ORGANIZATION AND OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of the workshop was to identify performance needs and establish research 

priorities to address the thermal characteristics of respiratory equipment used by emergency first 

responders. The workshop assembled participants from the first responder community, SCBA 

and component manufacturers, and research and testing experts to facilitate discussion from a 

variety of perspectives. 

The issues, technologies, strategies, and research associated with the performance of respirators 

in high heat environments was presented and discussed. The workshop agenda and a list of 

attendees are provided in Appendices 1 and 2, respectively. The objectives of the workshop 

were defined in two parts: 

Clarify baseline information: including the current state-of-the-art, applicable fire service 

events, and current related research, and 

Research planning: including identification of performance needs and short and long term 

research priorities.

Presentations were given to clarify baseline information. The complete list of presentations and 

presenters can be found in the agenda in Appendix 1. The slides that were presented are 

provided in Appendix 3. Workshop participants were divided into smaller breakout groups,

which identified performance needs and started the prioritization process. The breakout group 

results were presented to the workshop for review and discussion of research planning.

To describe the current self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) and certification process, 

representatives from the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)/National 

Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL), the National Fire Protection Association 

(NFPA), and Safety Equipment Institute (SEI) each gave presentations. The presenters described 

the role of each of their organizations in the regulation, standards writing, and certification 

processes. It was explained that the NFPA 1981 committee on the open circuit SCBA was in the 

process of examining and accepting proposals for changes to the standard until the summer of 

2011, to be implemented in 2013. The current standard [3] has a heat and flame test which was 

designed to eliminate melting and after-flaming of plastic components of the facepiece such as 

straps, hoses, and the speaking diaphragm, and to maintain visual acuity of the facepiece lens 

after a thermal impact in Class I and a short duration in Class IV from Figure 1. The committee 

has been considering adding another more severe thermal impact test, which would test the 

mechanical survivability of the facepiece lens.

To understand selected fire service events, representatives from the NIOSH Fire Fighter Fatality 

Investigation and Prevention Program (FFFIPP) described five incidents in recent years related 

to thermal degradation of respirators. There were seven fatalities associated with these events, in 

which the fire fighter’s SCBA may have been thermally degraded while the user was still “on 

air.” This was indicated by thermal injuries to the victims’ respiratory systems, as well as the 

fact that the victims were found with their SCBA masks damaged, but still in place. It is 

assumed that if a fire fighter’s SCBA tank runs out of air, the user’s reaction would be to remove 

the mask; this was not observed in these cases. Although mask degradation may have 
6

contributed to these fatalities, there were also many other factors. A common aspect discussed 

was the occurrence of a rapid increase in thermal energy, and the attempt, but failure to escape. 

It is expected that conditions encountered exceeded the performance capabilities, and 

subsequently the NFPA requirements, of the SCBA. Three fire service organizations spoke 

about some of these events as well as their organization’s overall experience related to the 

thermal issues with respirators. They expressed concern over the performance of the SCBA, as 

well as issues related to training and the loss of ability to sense the danger of the environment 

with the current use of highly insulating turnout gear and hoods. The users indicated two distinct 

needs regarding the SCBA and its relationship to the rest of the components of the personal 

protective ensemble: 

Further research to improve the thermal resistive performance and test methods. 

Increased awareness for the fire service community about the thermal protection levels 

provided.

To provide a review of the current state of respirator research, representatives from the Fire 

Protection Research Foundation (FPRF), NIOSH/NPPTL, and the National Institute of Standards 

and Technology (NIST) outlined related research developments and future plans. The FPRF and 

NPPTL reported that there were several recently completed and in-progress studies related to the 

fire service. The studies, which are related to respirator use and fit, other personal protective 

equipment, or fire fighting tactics, could reveal information applicable to the issue of damaged 

SCBA. Several potential research topics were proposed that related to the thermal characteristics 

of the SCBA or other equipment used by fire fighters, as well as re-evaluation of the fire 

environment for protective equipment design. NIST updated the participants on several ongoing 

projects related to respiratory issues or respirators. These included real-time particulate 

monitoring during overhaul, contaminant sensor location in respirators, respirator fit 

characterization, methods for thermal exposures, and respirator high temperature performance 

metrics. NIST has begun to characterize the thermal performance of respirators in lab scale 

radiant panel tests and oven tests, and in full scale fire experiments. Specific input from the 

workshop participants to help direct future research efforts was requested as experiments and 

processing of data continue.

At the conclusion of the presentations, which provided valuable background information, the 

workshop was divided into three working groups to discuss performance needs and research 

priorities. The groups were arranged to include a relatively balanced mix of users, manufacturers 

and researchers. The different participants brought unique and valuable perspectives to the 

discussion. The workshop organizers suggested several topics for discussion including: 

Current Equipment 

Current Practice and Usage

Future Trends

Short Term Research Needs

Long Term Research Needs

Other Issues
7

The detailed list of working group questions is located in Appendix 4. The groups were 

reminded to consider factors related to the changing fire service landscape. This included the 

effects of technological changes to the SCBA on the horizon (e.g. flat-pack design), 

enhancements to other protective equipment, the modern style of building construction and 

furnishings, and current tactics and training practices.

The first working group session focused on the performance needs and the second on research 

priorities. After each working group session, the workshop participants reconvened, and each 

working group reported a summary of their discussion, followed by an entire group discussion. 

The results of the sessions of the working groups were combined and are presented in the next 

section.
8

BREAKOUT GROUP RESULTS

The raw results of the breakout group discussions are located in Appendix 5. These results 

reflect items that were discussed during the sessions for Identification of Performance Needs and 

Development of Research Priorities. The items are a mixture of direct answers to working group 

questions, important related points or even questions and concerns raised through discussion 

within the breakout groups. The working groups typically discussed issues in both general and 

specific terms, which are reflected in the results. Although there was a wide variety of ideas and 

topics discussed, it was evident there were certain common themes. The same response was not 

always listed in exactly the same manner from all groups, but there was significant overlap. 

Conversely, identically listed responses may have had different meanings when taken within the 

context of the working group discussion. 

As part of the discussion on performance needs, the working groups identified issues with the 

current equipment and practice as well as possible solutions. Thirteen items were mentioned by 

all three groups in the discussion of performance needs and are presented in Table 1, with seven 

items that identify issues, and six items that identify possible solutions. The items are listed as a 

general topic, and then more detail from each group’s perspective is listed under “scope.”

There were many items that were identified by only one or two of the groups, but this did not 

mean that these ideas do not have merit or that other groups didn’t agree. The working group 

format certainly allows recognition of common themes, but it also relies on individuals to think 

of issues and ideas that may not be obvious to everyone else. These items can all be found in 

Appendix 5, but a few of the innovative items include reflective coatings, a rub/impact/wipe test, 

supplemental lenses, repeated exposures, temperature extremes, soot effects, active cooling, flat 

pack effects, and PASS issues.

As the discussion on research priorities followed, the groups began to focus their discussion on 

the most important issues, and how to address them. It became clear that many items were 

repeated from performance needs, but with more clarity. Table 2 lists four items that were 

mentioned by all three groups in the discussion of research priorities, in no particular order. The 

scope of each item is separated into aspects that relate to either short term or long term tasks. 

The research items that were listed by one or two groups include: thermal warning indicator, 

including other organizations in the research effort, establishment of a research clearinghouse, 

development of training media for the new generation of fire fighters, consistent ensemble 

testing, information overload for fire fighters, funding issues, repeated exposures, 

communications issues, and conducting a mask damage incident survey.
9

Table 1 – Common items for performance needs identified by all three groups.

Item Scope Type of Item

Facepiece is 

weakest link

Lens, mask, face piece, SCBA are weakest components. Issue

Identified

Variable 

environment

What is a representative exposure? Define the environment, 

but it’s highly variable. That’s why there is no such thing as 

routine fire fighting. All situations are important.

Issue 

Identified

Optimization

Trade-offs

Optimize existing materials, performance, and cost, etc. Could 

be a trade-off for visibility and better thermal performance. 

ANSI-Z87.1 transparency test may not be passed by new 

materials.

Issue 

Identified

Training 

issues

Training concerns, insufficient live fire training, enforcement of 

training. Must train for personal responsibility. Create a 

multi-agency partnership on a training video.

Issue 

identified

Behavioral 

issues

Must address behavior and usage issues. Change the fire 

service culture.

Issue 

Identified

Care and 

maintenance

Look into the standard and Selection, Care and Maintenance 

(SCaM) documents. Need to better understand gear care and 

maintenance. Enforce visual inspection of equipment.

Issue 

Identified

PPE prevents 

sense of 

environment

The protection of the other PPE prevents a sense of hazard. 

Should we go backwards and reduce or limit protection of other 

PPE? Fire fighters had a better sense of the danger of the 

environment before the high levels of PPE were worn. Must 

improve mask performance, not lower other PPE, however, 

could mandate an upper limit for TPP (for hoods or gloves).

Issue 

Identified

Ensemble 

testing

Uniform testing of entire ensemble, for both severity and 

frequency. All elements should be equal in performance.

Possible 

Solution

Design for 

catastrophic 

event

Design so a mask failure is not fatal, to prevent catastrophic 

failure. Extend survivability time in emergency conditions. 

Design for a catastrophic event. Should survive one flashover.

Possible 

Solution

Alternative 

materials

Glass, composites, layering, new materials, polyethersulfone. Possible 

Solution

Different 

uses

Different ratings for masks used in fire-fighting, overhaul, 

confined space, flashover training? Should use same masks for 

training and fire fighting.

Possible 

Solution

Warning 

Device/ 

indicator

Thermal warning device, imminent hazard indicator, pre-failure 

indicator, early warning method, built in warning system. 

Could be based on temperature, flux, or rate of temperature 

rise. Could use a worst case algorithm. Could have an audible 

alarm, straight forward signal, or a radiant heat or temperature 

indicator/ display, such as a bimetallic strip. Can use HUD.

Possible 

Solution

Reassess test 

methods

Reassess test methods, more realistic radiant exposure lens test. 

Radiant vs. convective exposure. Must be a repeatable sequence 

– might simulate rapid fire growth. Test parameters could go 

higher/lower depending on the need.

Possible 

Solution
10

Table 2 - Common items for research priorities identified by all three groups.

Item Scope Type of Item

Improve Mask 

Design

Identify mechanical/engineering solutions. Develop new 

materials, designs, approaches. Research new material 

properties – visual acuity, thermal, impact/abrasion 

resistance.

Short Term

Implementation of an improved/enhanced mask material, 

design. 

Long Term

Representative 

and realistic 

testing

Evaluate existing test methods. Test protocols should 

replicate “real world” conditions in reproducible test, and 

represent appropriate scenarios, such as a lost fire fighter or 

routine fire fighting. 

Short Term

Revise/develop new test methods. A new test method for 

heat exposure and/or heat and flame.

Long Term

Best Practices, 

Behavior/ 

Training

Adhere to best practices – involves training and behavior. 

Identify needs for changes to training. Identify solutions for 

changing behavior (human solutions). Address limitations 

for PPE in training. Educate approach for improvement.

Short Term

Address training and enforcement needs and implement 

changes. 

Long Term

Define Fire 

Environment

Identify thermal stresses (radiant/convective). Collect 

quantitative data on actual usage (flux, temperature, and 

time). Define heat flux/temperature levels for survivability. 

Define conditions during and after an extreme event.

Short Term

Hold a “Project FIRES” part II, with national involvement. 

Measure real time data temperature on the respirator.

Long Term

A desire to have an improved facepiece design was an action item shared by all the groups. New 

materials, technologies and approaches were suggested. While polycarbonate has traditionally 

been used as the lens material in SCBA, a material with better thermal properties, such as 

polyether sulfone was suggested. Polyether sulfone has a heat deflection temperature at

0.46 MPa of about 210 °C as opposed to polycarbonate (about 140 °C).[23] The potential 

benefits and drawbacks of a hybrid glass and plastic lens were also discussed. Glass has superior 

thermal properties, and plastics have better impact resistance; however, differences in thermal 

expansion would be an issue for layered lenses, with the curved geometry that exists currently. 

The integration of a warning system, possibly with the heads-up-display (HUD), was suggested 

to indicate either facepiece temperatures at the limit of performance, or dangerous conditions 

(heat flux or temperatures) likely to damage a facepiece. Because of the improvements in the

protection of the rest of the gear, it is a concern that fire fighters cannot sense how hot their 

environment actually is. Bubbling of the lens material often occurs when the lens softens and 

loses mechanical properties, but this usually cannot be seen because of dark, smoky conditions. 

Further, when the bubbling occurs, the danger already exists because the lens is in a softened 

state, susceptible to damage. More research and development is needed on new materials and 

designs before any or all of these changes could be implemented. 
11

The second item calls for improvements to tests and standards. The latest NFPA 1981 Standard 

for Open Circuit SCBA For Emergency Services contains a Heat and Flame Test, 

Section 8.11.[3] In this test, the SCBA is mounted on a test headform, breathing at 40L/min, and 

placed in a convection oven at 95 °C for 15 min. No more than 20 s later, the breathing rate is 

increased to 103 L/min, and the SCBA is exposed to direct flame contact for 10 s, followed by a 

drop from a height of 15.2 cm (6 in). The SCBA is tested for airflow performance, but also for 

visual acuity. The participants of the workshop agreed that this does not capture the conditions 

of temperature and heat flux that a fire fighter may be exposed to in emergency situations. Also, 

considering that the rest of the fire fighter’s personal protective equipment is tested in an oven at 

260 °C, the SCBA has the lowest requirement in terms of thermal performance. Additional tests

have been proposed by the NFPA committee that would test for “survivability” of the SCBA. 

The proposed tests would be similar to the Heat and Flame test, but certain parameters would be 

different, such as a higher oven temperature or a gas fired radiant heat panel exposure. The 

breathing rate would stay at 40 L/min for the entire test. The only pass criteria would be for the 

SCBA to maintain positive pressure for the duration of test. The NFPA committee is open to 

feedback regarding this test or other ideas. In general, there were several concerns raised with 

regard to testing. It was agreed that the tests should replicate realistic conditions as much as 

possible, while being repeatable and manageable in cost. Laboratory ovens and small flames are 

repeatable, but may not be representative of real conditions. The current test also may be 

missing the component of radiative heat transfer, which can be dominant over convective heat 

transfer under certain fire fighting conditions. Many participants believed that the entire 

personal protective equipment ensemble should be tested together. This has not been done in the 

past, because of the logistical issues of bringing together equipment from various manufacturers. 

However, ensemble testing would ensure that all components were tested at the same level.

Changes to the next edition of the NFPA 1981 standard will not go in effect until the next 

revision, tentatively set for 2013. In addition, a new standard only applies to new equipment. 

Departments typically replace equipment at regular intervals, but considering these lag times, it 

would take up to 15 years to change out all of the equipment. This is one reason why many 

participants stressed that changes to training would have a more immediate impact than changes 

to equipment. A combined effort among multiple agencies was suggested to develop a video

demonstrating the limitations of SCBA equipment and the dangers associated with certain 

behaviors. It was expressed that effective training is important, no matter what improvements are 

made to the gear. There will always be some limitations to the gear, and fire fighters need to be 

aware of the limitations. 

Understanding the thermal stresses (temperatures, heat fluxes, and duration) associated with the 

fire fighting environment is critical to understanding the performance needed for SCBA. Studies 

with this kind of data are published regularly, but information has not been organized. In order 

to be useful and accessible, the specific data should be combined into general categories of 

exposures and reported in a single document. Additionally, studies measuring temperatures and 

heat fluxes on the SCBA and lens during actual use were suggested. Another idea for gathering 

“real world” information was to develop a survey for fire fighters on the prevalence of SCBA 

thermal damage and the conditions experienced by the mask.
12

CONCLUSIONS

A diverse group of experts in SCBA manufacturing, certification testing, use, and research was 

assembled to discuss and identify needs and research priorities related to emergency responder 

respirators. The first goal of the workshop was to review the current state-of-the-art of SCBA 

technology and identify critical performance needs. A summary of the performance needs 

defined by the workshop includes:

Thermal resistance of the facepiece equal to or better than the rest of the fire fighter 

ensemble

Understanding of and ability to sense the variable fire environment

Responsible fire fighting culture, behavior and usage of SCBA.

After the performance needs were discussed, four areas were identified as priorities for further 

research and effort. The group presented both short and long term thrusts for each research area, 

including to:

Improve SCBA facepiece design

Characterize the fire environment

Develop more representative and realistic testing

Define best practices for use and behavior, and implement into training.
13

REFERENCES

[1] CFR, "Approval of Respiratory Protective Devices", Code of Federal Regulations Title 42 

Part 84, 498-557, 2009.

[2] EN 136 Respiratory protective devices - Full Face masks - Requirements, testing, marking, 

1998 Edition. European Committee for Standardization (CEN), rue de Stassart 36, B-1050 

Brussels, Belgium.

[3] NFPA 1981 Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for 

Emergency Services, 2007 Edition. National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), Quincy, 

MA.

[4] Krasny, J. F., J. A. Rockett, and D. Huang, "Protecting Fire Fighters Exposed in Room 

Fires: Comparison of Results of Bench Scale Test for Thermal Protection and Conditions 

During Room Flashover", Fire Technology 24 (1), 1988, pp 5-19.

[5] Lawson, J. R., "Fire Fighter's Protective Clothing and Thermal Environments of Structural 

Fire Fighting," NISTIR 5804, 1996, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 

Gaithersburg, MD.

[6] Rossi, R., "Fire Fighting and its Influence on the Body", Ergonomics 46 (10), 2003, pp 

1017-1033.

[7] Schoppee, M. M., J. M. Welsford, and N. J. Abbott, "Protection Offered by Lightweight 

Clothing Materials to the Heat of a Fire," ASTM STP 900, 1986, American Society for 

Testing and Materials, Philadelphia, PA.

[8] Fang, J. B and J. N. Breese, "Fire Development in Residential Basement Rooms," NBSIR 

80-2120, 1980, National Bureau of Standards (currently NIST), Gaithersburg, MD.

[9] Donnelly, M. K., W. D. Davis, J. R. Lawson, and M. J. Selepak, "Thermal Environment for 

Electronic Equipment Used by First Responders," NIST TN 1474, 2006, National Institute 

of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.

[10] NFPA 1981 Standard on Open-Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for 

Emergency Services, 2007 Edition. NFPA, Quincy, MA.

[11] Thiel, A. K., "Special Report: Prevention of Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus 

Failures," USFA-TR-088, 2001, U.S. Fire Administration, Emmitsburg, MD.

[12] Madrzykowski, D., "Fatal Training Fires: Fire Analysis for the Fire Service, Interflam 

2007," International Interflam Conference, 11th Proceedings, September 3, 2007, London, 

England, pp 1169-1180.

[13] NIOSH, "Career officer injured during a live fire evolution at a training academy dies two 

days later - Pennsylvania," Report F2005-31, 9-19-2007, National Institute of Occupational 
14

Health and Safety, Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program, 

Morgantown, WV, Available: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200531.html .

[14] NIOSH, "Career Lieutenant and Fire Fighter Die in a Flashover During a Live-Fire 

Training Evolution - Florida," Report F2002-34, 6-16-2003, National Institute of 

Occupational Health and Safety, Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention 

Program, Morgantown, WV, Available: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/pdfs/face200234.pdf.

[15] NIOSH, "Career Fire Fighter Dies in Wind Driven Residential Structure Fire - Virginia," 

Report F2007-12, 6-10-2008, National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety, Fire 

Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program, Morgantown, WV, Available: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/reports/face200712.html .

[16] NIOSH, "A Volunteer Mutual Aid Captain and Fire Fighter Die in a Remodeled 

Residential Structure Fire - Texas," Report F2007-29, 11-3-2008, National Institute of 

Occupational Health and Safety, Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention 

Program, Morgantown, WV, Available: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/pdfs/face200729.pdf.

[17] NIOSH, "Career Probationary Fire Fighter and Captain Die as a Result of Rapid Fire 

Progression in a Wind-Driven Residential Structure Fire - Texas," Report F2009-11, 4-8-

2010, National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety, Fire Fighter Fatality 

Investigation and Prevention Program, Morgantown, WV, Available: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/pdfs/face200911.pdf.

[18] NIOSH, "Volunteer Fire Fighter Dies While Lost in Residential Structure Fire - Alabama," 

Report F2008-34, 6-11-2009, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Fire 

Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program, Morgantown, WV, Available: 

http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/fire/pdfs/face200834.pdf.

[19] National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System, "Firefighter experiences near miss in 

flashover trailer training.," Report 06-441, 8-23-2006, Available: 

http://www.firefighternearmiss.com.

[20] National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System, "Engine crew surprised by sofa flare 

up.," Report 06-428, 8-18-2006, Available: http://www.firefighternearmiss.com.

[21] National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System, "Facepiece damaged during live burn 

training.," Report 07-903, 5-7-2007, Available: http://www.firefighternearmiss.com.

[22] National Fire Fighter Near Miss Reporting System, "Problem with CAFS unit identified at 

live burn.," Report 08-044, 1-25-2008, Available: http://www.firefighternearmiss.com.

[23] MatWeb Material Property Data. 2010 [cited 8-11-2010]; Available from: 

URL:http://www.matweb.com
15

APPENDIX 1 – WORKSHOP AGENDA

Agenda: Workshop on Emergency First Responder Respirator Thermal Characteristics

Time Description Who

Day One - Tuesday, 27 July 2010

9:00 Welcome, Preliminaries, and Introductions Casey Grant, Fire Protection Research 

Foundation

9:20 Workshop Purpose and Goals and FPRF 

Research Update

Casey Grant, Fire Protection Research 

Foundation

9:30 Status Review of Current State-of-the-Art 

NIOSH/NPPTL Overview

NFPA Certification of Fire and Emergency 

Services PPE

NFPA Technical Committee on 

Respiratory Protection 

Safety Equipment Institute Testing 

Laboratory

Les Boord, National Personal Protective

Technology Laboratory

Bruce Teele, National Fire Protection 

Association

Dan Rossos, Portland Fire and Rescue

Pat Gleason and Steve Sanders, Safety 

Equipment Institute

10:00 Break

10:10 Review & Discussion of Applicable Fire 

Service Events 

NIOSH/FFFIPP Activities

Houston Fire Department

Pennsylvania Fire Training Academy

Massachusetts Fire Training Academy

Stephen Miles and Tim Merinar, Fire 

Fighter Fatality Investigation and 

Prevention Program

Carl Matjeka, Houston Fire Department

Edward Mann and Pat Pauly, PA State 

Fire Commissioner

Fred LeBlanc, Massachusetts Fire 

Training Academy

11:00 Review & Discussion of Current Related 

Research Initiatives 

NIST Respirator Research

NIOSH/NPPTL Research

Nelson Bryner, National Institute of 

Standards and Technology

Heinz Ahlers, National Personal 

Protective Technology Laboratory

12:00 Lunch
16

Time Description Who

1:00 Identification of Performance Needs

Discuss Working Group Questions, side 1) Three breakout groups, A, B, C

3:15 Break

3:30 Presentation of Performance Needs from 

Breakout Groups

Three breakout groups, A, B, C

4:00 Group Discussion of Performance Needs

5:00 Adjourn for the day

Day Two - Wednesday, 28 July 2010

8:00 Development of Research Priorities 

Discuss Working Group Questions, side 2) Three breakout groups, A, B, C

9:30 Break

9:45 Presentation of Research Priorities from 

Break-out Groups

Three breakout groups, A, B, C

10:15 Group Discussion of Research Priorities

11:00 Break

11:15 Summary

12:00 Adjournment
17

APPENDIX 2 - WORKSHOP ATTENDEES

SCBA Thermal Characteristics Workshop 27-28 July 2010 Pittsburgh, PA

First Name Last Name Organization Email Address

1 Heinz Ahlers NIOSH-NPPTL hahlers@cdc.gov

3 Chris Anaya Sacramento Metro FD anaya@prodigy.net

4 Eric Beck MSA Company eric.beck@msanet.com

5 David Bernzweig Columbus Div of Fire vpbernzweig@local67.com

6 Mark Black Naval Surface Weapons Ctr. marshall.black@navy.mil

7 Les Boord NIOSH-NPPTL zfx2@cdc.gov

9 Nelson Bryner NIST nelson.bryner@nist.gov

11 Rich Duffy IAFF rduffy@iaff.org

12 William Flint DC Fire & EMS Dept. william.flint@dc.gov

13 Pat Gleason Safety Equip Institute pgleason@seinet.org

14 Casey Grant FPRF cgrant@nfpa.org

15 Ira Harkness Naval Surface Weapons Ctr. a.harkness@navy.mil

16 Bill Haskell NIOSH-NPPTL czi8@cdc.gov

17 John Kuhn MSA Company john.kuhn@msanet.com

18 Fred LeBlanc MA Fire Academy Redknight44@verizon.net

19 Jim LeBlanc Fosta Tek Optics jleblanc@fosta-tek.com

20 Nick Luzie Sperian Resp Protection nluzie@sperian.com

21 Edward Mann PA State Fire Commissioner emann@state.pa.us

22 Craig Martin Avon-ISI craig.martin@avon-rubber.com

23 Carl Matjeka Houston Fire Dept. Carl.Matejka@houstontx.gov

24 Amy Mensch NIST amy.mensch@nist.gov

25 Tim Merinar NIOSH-FFFIPP tmerinar@cdc.gov

26 Stephen Miles NIOSH-FFFIPP smiles@cdc.gov

27 Paul Moore NIOSH-FFFIPP phm0@cdc.gov

28 Pat Pauly PA State Fire Commissioner ppauly@state.pa.us

29 Jeff Peterson NIOSH-NPPTL jpeterson1@cdc.gov

30 Jerry Phifer Tyco/Scott jphifer@tycoint.com

31 Amy Quiring Tyco/Scott astaubs@tycoint.com

32 Stephen Raynis FDNY rayniss@fdny.nyc.gov

33 Daniel Rossos Portland Fire & Rescue dan.rossos@portlandoregon.gov

34 Steve Sanders Safety Equipment Institute ssanders@seinet.org

35 Robert Sell Dräger Safety, Inc robert.sell@draeger.com

36 Angie Shepherd NIOSH-NPPTL dlq0@cdc.gov

37 Michael Shrum Houston Fire Dept. michael.shrum@houstontx.gov

38 Denise Smith Skidmore College dsmith@skidmore.edu

39 Jon Szalajda NIOSH-NPPTL zfx1@cdc.gov

40 Bruce Teele NFPA bteele@nfpa.org

41 Bob Timko NVFC (PA Rep) btimko@msn.com
18

42 Bill Troup FEMA bill.troup@dhs.gov

43 Bruce Varner Santa Rosa FD bvarner@santarosafd.com

44 Steve Weinstein Sperian Resp Protection sweinstein@sperian.com

45 John Williams NIOSH-NPPTL wjwilliams@cdc.gov
19

APPENDIX 3 – WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS

APPENDIX 3.A – Workshop Purpose and Goals

Casey Grant, Fire Protection Research Foundation
20
21
22

APPENDIX 3.B – NIOSH/NPPTL Overview

Les Boord, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory
23
24
25

APPENDIX 3.C – NFPA Certification of Fire and Emergency Services PPE

Bruce Teele, National Fire Protection Association
26
27
28

APPENDIX 3.D – Safety Equipment Institute Testing Laboratory

Pat Gleason and Steve Sanders, Safety Equipment Institute
29
30

APPENDIX 3.E – NIOSH/FFFIPP Activities

Stephen Miles and Tim Merinar, Fire Fighter Fatality Investigation and Prevention Program
31
32
33
34
35
36
37

APPENDIX 3.F – Massachusetts Fire Training Academy

Fred LeBlanc, Massachusetts Fire Training Academy
38
39
40
41

APPENDIX 3.G – NIST Respirator Research

Nelson Bryner, National Institute of Standards and Technology
42
43
44
45

APPENDIX 4 – WORKING GROUP QUESTIONS

NIOSH, NIST, NFPA/FPRF 

Workshop on Emergency First Responder Respirator Thermal 

Characteristics

Location: NIOSH NPPTL, Building 140, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA

Date: 27-28 July 2010

WORKING GROUP QUESTIONS

Last Updated: 12 July 2010

Each of the working groups should individually address the following set of specific 

topics/questions, and report back to the whole group:

1) Identification of Performance Needs (Day 1)

a. Current Equipment

1. What components of the overall SCBA package require attention, and in 

what priority order (e.g. face piece, straps, connectors, PASS, etc)?

2. Are there certain repeatable sequences of operation that magnify or 

promote equipment failure (e.g. repeated training exposure with minimal 

cool-down, long shelf life, winter usage, etc)? 

3. What parameters should be used to define the realistic limits of operability 

(e.g. temperature exposure, visibility thru face piece, etc)

b. Current Practice and Usage

1. What are the prioritized conditions of use that are of most concern (e.g. 

certain structural fires, training, seasonal conditions, etc)?

2. What specific operational concerns, if any, need to be addressed (repeated 

high temperature exposure, pre-failure indicators, replacement protocols, 

etc)?

3. What specific training concerns, if any, need to be addressed (recognition of 

failure markers, maintenance practices, etc)?

c. Future Trends

1. How are SCBA expected to change based on current technological trends 

(e.g. equipment, operation, training, etc)?

2. What perceived problems might be anticipated with future SCBA (e.g. 

adaptation of support infrastructure, physiological complications, etc)?

d. Other Issues

1. What are known or potential topics of technical debate (e.g. method to 

evaluate face piece integrity, etc)?

2. What specifically needs to be addressed from a regulatory or standardization 

standpoint? 

3. What single message should the fire service express on this topic in terms of 

performance needs?
46

2) Development of Research Priorities (Day 2)

a. Short Term Research Needs

1. What are short term research priorities for equipment (e.g. improved face 

piece materials, defining PASS signals operation, etc)

2. What are short term research priorities for usage and practice (e.g. survey of 

field usage, establishing evaluation protocols, etc) 

b. Long Term Research Needs

1. What are long term research priorities for equipment (e.g. development of 

evaluation test methods, identifying real-time measurement techniques, etc)

2. What are long term research priorities for usage and practice (e.g. defining 

culture of use, establishment of realistic physiological benchmarks, etc)

c. Other Issues

1. What constituent groups and/or organizations need to be involved (e.g. 

clinical/physiological, materials science, etc)?

2. What single message should the fire service express on this topic in terms of 

research priorities?
47

APPENDIX 5 – WORKING GROUP RAW RESULTS

APPENDIX 5.A – Working Group A Raw Results

Table 3 - Group A Identification of Performance Needs Summary

Current Equipment

• Face piece is weakest component

• Straps fraying

• Parameters to define limits of operability of 

lens

• Optically clear

• Impact

• Abrasion resistant

• Distortion requirement

• Thermal performance

• PASS performance – multiple tones/failure 

to recognize

• Thermal warning device

• Temperature display

• Ensemble Testing

Current Practice and Usage

Conditions of Use

• Imminent hazard indicator – temperature, 

heat flux or rate of rise of temperature 

indicator

• Duration and intensity of exposure

• How long can a fire fighter survive?

• Representative fire exposure

• 300 °F to 400 °F minimum in hallway

• 500 °F

• >1200 °F to1500 °F during 

flashover/in a room with fire

• Survivable fire exposure

• 80kW/m2TPP test

• Radiant/Convective

Operational Concerns

• Temperature range extremes: hot to cold, 

cold to hot 

• Nose cup deflecting cool air to exhaust

• Soot layer on the lens

• Simultaneous exposure to heat, impact and 

rub tests

Training Concerns

• Insufficient quantity of live fire training

• Inexperienced fire fighters -losing a 

generation

• Loss of generational experience

• Fewer fires today 

• Promoted from EMS to fire captains

Future Trends

• Glass lens

• Composite lens

• Flat lens geometry (watch glass – quartz)

• Adequate thermal props

• Two part Acme goggles

• NASA space shuttle windows

• Peel away sacrificial layer

• Provide additional cues to hazard

• PPE prevents sense of hazard

• Bimetallic strip alarm

• Temp indicator

• Radiant heat/temperature indicator

• Worse case algorithm

• Audible alarm (FF + IC)

• Reflective Coating

• Loss of Experience

• Flat Pack

• Wear into confined space

• Decreased physiological burden

• Less flexible when charged

• Less effort - FF can spend more time 

in fire

• Different ratings for masks

• Confined space

• Fire

• Non-fire

Other Issues

• Uniform testing of entire ensemble

• Consistent with environment FF will 

encounter 500 °F

• More Realistic radiant exposure test

• Trade off visibility/better performance

• Standard and SCaM documents
48

Table 4 - Group A Development of Research Priorities Summary

Short Term Research Needs

• Lens – improve material

• Communications

• Interface with SCBA

• Representative scenarios where lens are not 

performing

• trapped / lost FF

• daily or routine use

• ID thermal stresses - use to improve 

testing methods

• Adhere to best practices

• Behavior

• Training program

• Quantify usage areas

• Peer review – best practices

• kW/m2, temp, time

• Temp Indicators / displays

• TIC or HUD

• Unified performance requirements between 

SCBA and PPE

• Define fire environment

• Radiant / convective - develop 

appropriate test protocols

Long Term Research Needs

• Lens system - improve materials -

implementation 15 years

• Communications - crew / IC

• Technology integration

• Information overload

• Enhanced standard uniformity

• Uniform performance levels

Other Issues

• Funding for lens replacement

• Fire Grants vs. SCBA main. budgets

• Department involvement -

• Knowledge gap

• Information dissemination

• Engage service organizations IAFC, IAFF 

NVFC, NIOSH etc.

• Fire service media

• Regulation-

• NIOSH advisory to replace?

• Address adherence to best practices 

• Behavior

• National and local

Single Message Expressed

• Unified equipment performance criteria

• representative & realistic

• Failure point should not result in death

• weak link should not be respiratory

• Funding Resources

• Information dissemination

• Training

• Equipment
49

APPENDIX 5.B – Working Group B Raw Results

Table 5 - Group B Identification of Performance Needs Summary

Current Equipment

• Need to have approach that considers entire 

ensemble (For both severity and frequency)

• Need inherent built-in methods for 

“warning”

• Need to define environment

• Normal vs. ordinary vs. emergency 

(where we want “survival”)

• What levels of protection do we want

• Need to clarify product life cycle

• Need to identify factors that cannot be 

compromised (e.g. transparency, impact 

resistance) in addition to thermal 

characteristics

• Need to consider not only equipment 

enhancement, but also technology for other 

purposes (e.g. early and reliable warning 

system)

• Feedback from the field is that the mask is 

the current weak link

• Consider alternative materials (e.g. layering 

of materials)

• Not practical to lower current protection of 

other gear. Improving mask protection is 

the practical option

• Exception: Mandating an upper limit 

for TPP (possibly for certain 

components like hoods or gloves)

• Consider impact of added face piece 

accessories used with current materials

• Design to prevent “catastrophic failure”

• Repeatable sequence is “rapid fire growth”

• Data is lacking and needed on repeatable 

exposure and the long term effect

• Establish priority of performance 

characteristics

• Impact (catastrophic consequences)

• Thermal Resistance (catastrophic)

• Abrasion Resistance

• Transparency

• Cost

• Life cycle/durability

• Some are more convenience by still can 

lead to injuries and fatalities indirectly.

Current Practice and Usage

• This is a behavioral and training issue

• Need straight-forward signal that users can 

easily relate to (e.g. measuring rate of 

temp. change)

• Current fire service environment is highly 

variable

• Design for protection needed in room next 

to room that flashed

• Need better understanding (training) of 

gear care and maintenance

Future Trends

• Consider special equipment specifically 

designated for flashover training

• Consider additional flip-down lens or other 

supplemental lens

• Consider active cooling system

• Provide built-in warning methods

• Measurement of inhaled air temperature

• Might have to look at minimizing weight

Single Message Expressed

• All ensemble elements should be 

equivalent in performance

• Extend survivability time in emergency 

conditions.

• Optimize best use of existing materials 

through reevaluation using existing and 

new test methods

• Must address behavior, usage, training, and 

education.
50

Table 6 - Group B Development of Research Priorities Summary

Short Term Research Needs

• Identify Training Needs

• Identify flux level for lens failure

• Mechanical (can have engineered 

solution)

• Human (e.g. Training)

• Combination of both

• Identify mechanical solutions for lens 

failure

• Identify human-based solutions for lens 

failure

• Evaluate existing test methods (e.g. flux, 

temp, time, etc.)

• Collection of credible data on actual field 

usage (not only LODD events)

• Clarify impact of repeated exposure (i.e. 

Training vs. field ops)

• Establish pro-active approach to use 

current info and best practices for training 

programs (thru NAFTD-North American 

Fire Training, USFA-NFA, etc.)

Long Term Research Needs

• Address training needs

• Hold “Project Fires” part II with a 

comprehensive overview of issue to 

establish target usage (w/ meta-analysis) 

(e.g. national/international involvement)

• Revise or develop new test methods

• Establish framework and protocol for long 

term data collection needs (e.g. PASS 

device, autopsy, etc)

• Holistic ensemble testing (e.g. develop 

ensemble TPP thresholds, min/max)

• Development of active warning system

• Development of new materials, designs, 

and approaches (e.g. active cooling)

• Establish research clearinghouse

Other Issues

• Groups/organizations needed (and not 

currently involved

• Academia, DOD, NASA, USFS, etc.

• International

• Other technical committees (e.g. NFPA 

1500, 1403, 1971, 1981, 472, and 1800, 

ASTM, ISO)

Single Message Expressed

• Determining flux, temperature and time is 

critical

• Address training needs

• Evaluate current state of the art, educate 

approach for improvement, enhance 

design, materials, equipment to improve 

survivability
51

APPENDIX 5.C – Working Group C Raw Results

Table 7 - Group C Identification of Performance Needs Summary

Current Equipment

• Lens is number 1 priority, followed by the 

face piece, and the rest of the SCBA

• Complete ensemble testing

• Pressure boundaries should be maintained

• Training and behavioral issues contribute 

to equipment failure

• Surviving a catastrophic event is critical

• Should survive 1 flashover

• Mask temperature does not equal 

environment temperature

Current Practice and Usage

• All situations are important to design for

• There is no such thing as routine fire 

fighting

• High temperature exposure is operational 

concern

• SCBA should be tested as an ensemble

• Use the HUD to monitor the temperature of 

the lens for pre-failure indicator

• The same mask should be used for training 

and fire fighting

• Training can help change the fire service 

culture, which values dangerous “macho” 

behavior

• Enforcement of training is difficult

• Several points to emphasize in training

involving personal responsibility

• Visual inspection of equipment

• Don’t walk into the fire

• Follow best practices

• Multiple agencies partner on a video, 

similar to Houston’s demonstration, 

showing the limits of the equipment to 

distribute and use in training

• Videos would have high impact

Future Trends

• Should we go backwards and reduce/limit

the level of protection in the rest of the 

equipment?

• Fire fighter could better sense the 

danger of the environment and acted 

cautiously

• Use new materials

• Polyethersulfone has a heat deflection 

temperature about 100 °F higher than

polycarbonate, and is almost as 

transparent

• Gold coating to reflect heat

• Changes to the standards are the effective 

way to push technology to advance

• Test parameters higher/lower

• Will another component just become the 

weakest link?

• Would a new SCBA still fail in a 

catastrophic event?

Other Issues

• Face piece/lens test

• A wipe/impact test that occurs after 

conditioning

• Complete ensemble testing

• ANSI-Z87.1 transparency test may not be 

passable by new materials

• Single message would be to address the 

training/culture of the fire service in an “in 

your face” manner with a video created by 

a joint effort with NIOSH, NFPA, IAFF, 

IAFC, IFSTA, DELMAR, NVFC, NIST
52

Table 8 - Group C Development of Research Priorities Summary

Short Term Research Needs

• Research new material (polyethersulfone)

• Other 3rd party evaluation (NIOSH, 

NIST, other)

• Test visual acuity

• Test thermal properties

• Test impact/abrasion resistance

• Define heat flux/temp levels for 

survivability

• Replicate “real world” conditions in 

reproducible lab tests

• What are the fire conditions?

• What are conditions immediately after 

event?

• Produce and evaluate a 

survey/questionnaire after incidents where 

masks are damaged, for gathering 

information

• Need to determine what information 

needs to be gathered

• Should be short, 4-5 questions, and 

have pictures to show examples of 

damage

Long Term Research Needs

• Create a temperature tag on the respirator 

to gather real time data

• New test method 

• heat exposure

• heat/flame

• Long term: use/practice

• Training tools tailored to the “new 

generation” of fire fighters

• You-tube, video games, etc.

Other Issues

• Groups to be involved

• Technology/Training warehouse

• Responder.gov clearinghouse

• Survivability training for fire fighters, 

simulators, similar to what the military uses

Single Message Expressed

• There are limitations of the PPE, and this 

must be stressed in training

• Discipline is a related issue