NATL INST. OF STAND & TECH NIST

PUBLICATIONS

AlllOb 100751

NIST Technical Note 1479

High-Rise and Large/Complex Incident

Communications Workshop

Robert Vettori

James R. Lawson

William D. Davis

David Holmberg

Steven Bushby

^ ^„ » National Institute of Standards and Technology • Technology Administration • U.S. Department of Commerce

.U5753

#1479

2007
NIST Technical Note 1479

High-Rise and Large/Complex Incident

Communications Workshop

Robert Vettori

James R. Lawson

William D. Davis

Fire Research Division

Building and Fire Research Laboratory

David Holmberg

Steven Bushby

Building Environment Division

Building and Fire Research Laboratory

February 2007

i& i.v » \

U.S. Department of Commerce

Carlos M. Gutierrez, Secretary

Technology Administration

Robert Cresanti, Under Secretary of Commercefor Technology

National Institute of Standards and Technology

William Jeffrey, Director
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.

It is NIST policy that the SI shall be used in all NIST publications. All the presentations in Appendix 4 of this paper are printed as received from the presenters.

Some presenters did not use the SI since the audience was more accustom to the use of customary units

National Institute of Standards and Technology Technical Note 1479

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Technical Note 1479, 101 pages (February 2007)

CODEN: NSPUE2
Table of Contents

Abstract 2

Introduction 3

Workshop Organization 3

Background 4

Review of Presentations 5

Review of Breakout Discussions 10

High-Rise Building Communications 10

Large and Complex Incidents 12

Workshop Summary 13

Appendix 1 - Workshop Attendees 15

Appendix 2 - Workshop Agenda 17

Appendix 3 - Communication in Buildings 19

Factors contributing to building attenuation of RF signals 19

In-Building wireless systems 20

References22

Appendix 4 - Presentations 23

Presentation by James R. Lawson - National Institute of Standards and Technology 23

Presentation by John Coloe - Fire Department City of New York 30

Presentation by Roy Ferguson and David Kinney - Dallas Fire and Rescue 35

Presentation by Brian Anderson and Raymond Vaughan, - Miami Dade Fire Rescue 38

Presentation by Tom Brennan, - Los Angeles City Fire Department 43

Presentation by Chris Holloway - National Institute of Standards and Technology 46

Presentation by Stu Overby, - National Public Safety Telecommunications Council 75

Presentation by Sharyn Buck - Los Angeles City Police Department 81

Presentation by Charles Dowd - New York City Police Department 87

Presentation by Nelson Bryner - National Institute of Standards and Technology 90

Presentation by Steven Bushby - National Institute of Standards and Technology 98
High-Rise and Large/Complex Incident Communications Workshop

Robert Vettori, James R. Lawson, William D. Davis, David Holmberg, Steven Bushby

Abstract

On June 20 and 21, 2006, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) conducted

a workshop to identify communication issues associated with high rise building incidents and to examine a variety of issues that confront public safety agencies handling large/complex

incidents. The workshop brought together police, fire, and emergency medical personnel from

eight cities along with federal law enforcement personnel, manufacturers, and researchers.

Presentations were given on what is working to enable communications in different areas of the

United States. Breakout sessions allowed for discussion leading to the following conclusions.

(1) Progress is being made in addressing the challenges of radio communications in buildings,

with many solutions presented by workshop attendees. (2) For interagency communications,

interoperability is less about radio patches and more about developing good standard operating

procedures. (3) For large and/or complex incidents, planning, training and the use of the

National Incident Management System (NIMS) are the strongest factors in determining if the

incident will be mitigated successfully. (4) With large incidents, strict radio discipline is important.

Keywords: commercial building; communication equipment; communication network;

emergency responder; fire alarm systems; fire department, high rise building; incident command;

interoperability
Introduction

Historically, high rise buildings have presented challenges to radio communications and over the

years public safety agencies, such as police and fire departments, have been developing ways to overcome these challenges. Although the workshop focus was on high rise communications, the

participants also discussed problems associated with other large buildings such as convention

centers, underground structures such as parking garages, subway stations and tunnels, buildings

designed to be blast proof with heavy concrete walls, buildings with solar reflecting film on windows that block radio signals, and buildings that are deliberately designed and built to block

radio signals.

The concept of a complex incident is probably best defined as one that requires the response of

many agencies. A complex incident does not have to be large in the sense that a large number of

personnel from any one agency are involved. An example of a complex incident could be a call for an unknown chemical left behind in an abandoned apartment. The initial response could

include local foe, police, and hazardous materials response teams. Upon arrival and assessment

of the situation the response may be broadened to include state and federal agencies and possibly

the National Guard Hazardous Materials Civil Support Team. Agencies from all these

jurisdictions along with some private companies to transport and dispose of the material may

work together to bring the incident to a successful conclusion. Although no one agency had a

large number of personnel on the scene, the number of agencies responding makes command and

control more difficult.

While fighting a fire in a high rise building is certainly a complex operation, fire incident

handling may only involve personnel from fire and police departments. Similarly a hostage

situation may require a large response from a police department with personnel from many

different areas of the police department, yet may only have a small response from the fire or emergency medical services in the form of an ambulance to stand by.

Workshop Organization

The workshop provided a forum to discuss the strategies, procedures, best practices, research and

technology that can improve communications during incidents in high rise buildings and

incidents that are large, involving a large number of personnel or complex, involving a large

number of responding agencies. The participants included experts from the emergency

responder, manufacturer, and research communities. A list of participants and the workshop

agenda are provided in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2 respectively. The workshop was divided

into two primary activities: presentations and working group discussions. The purpose of the

presentations was to provide the participants (fire, police, and emergency medical personnel)

with an opportunity to give presentations on how communications work in their respective

departments, and to identify their concerns and issues with communications in high rise

buildings and large/complex incidents. The presentations also provided them with a means to address solutions to communication issues they have either implemented or plan to implement.

The presentations also allowed for indusuy and researchers to present information from research

that is currently in progress to improve communications and interoperability.
After the presentations were completed the participants were organized into two working groups

to further discuss the topics being addressed with the objective of adding, subtracting and

prioritizing the information from the presentations. The two groups worked in parallel and then

assembled again to brainstorm and arrive at a final list of findings and objectives.

Background

This workshop is one component of the Building and Fire Research Laboratory's (BFRL)

Building Networks and Public Safety Communications project sponsored by the Department of

Justice via the NIST Office of Law Enforcement Standards and in support of SAFECOM efforts

to provide a path towards nationwide interoperable public safety radio communications

(http://www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/). The main objective of the Building Networks

and Public Safety Communications project is to investigate the potential use of the building

network infrastructures to facilitate public safety communications. BFRL has conducted basic

research related to building network utilization to supplement radio communications.

Utilizing building network infrastructures could provide many benefits for enabling effective

communications with emergency responders in buildings. Most commercial and institutional

buildings have Information Technology (IT) networks, fire and security networks, and building

automation system networks. These networks may provide an effective means for transmitting

mission-critical voice communications from emergency responders inside the building out to incident command. Existing networks would likely require public safety specific enhancements,

which might be incorporated into an existing IT network, or on the more protected fire or facility

networks.

In addition, there is a wealth of critical information about the conditions within a building that is available through the building automation system that could be used by incident command to help plan effective responses to building incidents. In an earlier OLES-funded project [1, 2, 3]

BFRL worked on identifying building information that is needed by emergency responders, and

determining how to collect, format, transmit, and present that information. Information that was

identified included:

• Status of fire, smoke and security alarms

• Temperature and air quality data

• Presence and location of building occupants

• Status of elevators

• Building video camera views

This workshop has focused on radio communication in buildings. Appendix 3 gives some

background on the sources of radio frequency propagation problems in structures. It also

presents background information on in-building wireless (IBW) systems. IBW solutions were implemented by the departments of some of the workshop presenters to address communication

problems.
Review of Presentations

Presentation by James R. Lawson - National Institute of Standards and Technology

Investigation Findings of The Emergency Response at the WTC

The presentation consisted of an overview of the communication difficulties encountered by the

New York City Police Department, the New York City Fire Department, and the Port Authority

Police Department on September 11, 2001. There were two basic issues with radio

communications. The first was that the radio signals were attenuated in steel and steel reinforced

concrete high rise buildings. This radio signal attenuation blocked communications with

personnel on the upper floors of the World Trade Center buildings which affected command and

control at the incident. This degradation in radio signals also affected the situational awareness

of the emergency responders working inside the buildings. It was stated that those emergency

responders working inside the World Trade Center buildings, who could not see what was

happening outside and had poor radio communications also had poor situational awareness. The

second issue was the volume of radio traffic that morning. After the first aircraft struck the

World Trade Center One building there was an approximate factor of 5 peak increase in radio

traffic level over the normal level of emergency responder radio communications. This was

followed by an approximate factor of 3 increase in communications traffic, above normal level,

and this steadily elevated traffic level continued as the incident unfolded. This surge in

communications traffic volume made it more difficult to handle the flow of communications and

delivery of critical information. Analysis of radio communications records indicated that

roughly 1/3 to 1/2 of the radio messages during surge conditions were not complete or understandable.

Presentation by John Cole - Fire Department City ofNew York

Emergency High-Rise Building Communications

Methods were presented that enhanced radio reception in high rise buildings and other large

structures. Solutions discussed were the use of hard-wired telephones that are installed in office

high rise buildings as part of the fire alarm system, or the use of the "Warden Phones" that are also installed in high rise office buildings. The keystone to their high-rise communications

solution was described as a "Post Radio". This radio allows transmissions from the street level

up into a high rise. The "Post Radio" weighs 10 kg (22 lbs) with its case and battery and

transmits a signal at 45 watts. However, it does not solve the problem of fire fighters with handheld radios communicating down to street level. In this case they must wait for someone who

has another "Post Radio" to position the radio near the emergency to relay the information down

to the lobby or street level. Other recommended uses for the "Post Radio" are large area

buildings, subways, large ships, large malls, airport terminals, stadiums, parks, parades, and

special events. It is a simple solution and it works. The fire department has control over the

radios, so there is less concern as to whether or not they will work when needed.

Another solution is the use of a cross band repeater that is situated in a vehicle near the building.

A repeater is basically a relay station. The puipose of a cross band repeater is the same as any

radio repeater. It allows stations to communicate that ordinarily would not be able to do so because of the low initial output power coupled with distance, terrain or buildings, and other

objects blocking the signal. A cross band repeater is similar in function to a standard repeater in that it contains a receiver and a transmitter that are linked together, but which operate on
different frequencies. Voice signals that the repeater receives on its input frequency are automatically re-transmitted on its output frequency. A cross band repeater incorporates a dual

frequency band radio. For example, a hand held radio would transmit on a VHF band and the cross band repeater would then re-transmit on a UHF band. Thus the name cross band repeater.

A cross band repeater is typically less expensive than a conventional repeater operating on a

single radio band. With a conventional repeater the transmit and receive frequencies are only

separated by a few hundred KHz requiring the radio receiver section to be isolated through the use of narrow band filters that may be large and expensive. The cost of a repeater drops

significantly if its input and output frequencies are separated by several hundred MHz instead of

a few hundred KHz. With a wide spacing between the input and output frequencies, expensive

input filters are no longer required.

Presentation by Roy Ferguson and David Kinney - Dallas Fire and Rescue

Communication Challenges in D.A.R.T. Subway Tunnel

With the construction of a new subway station, Dallas Fire and Rescue found that

communications to the station, which is located under a high rise building, was not adequate.

They found that their duplex repeater channels did not work and that the simplex channels only

worked from radio to radio, if they were on the same subway level. They attempted several

solutions including the use of loaner radios from the subway system, but this required a relay

through the subway command center. Other methods were to use the simplex radios in the

tunnels, emergency telephones in the tunnels to talk to locations outside the subway, and setting

up a relay system with radio to relay information up stairways. With these different systems

communication was described as hit or miss at best. The Dallas Fire and Rescue Department,

along with their Information Technology personnel continued to work with the subway

management to find solutions. The procedure described was to identify the problem, conduct

testing, cooperate with subway management to find an answer, and test out the solution to make

sure that it is satisfactory. No one solution fixed all the communication issues. One method of

successfully dealing with an issue was to re-program some of the hardware that controlled radio

communications while another involved installing additional equipment such as radiating (leaky)

antenna cable in subway tunnels, stairways, and storage areas. They reported that this new

equipment will have to be tested and maintained to guarantee that it will work when needed.

Presentation by Brian Anderson and Raymond Vaughan - Miami Dade Fire Rescue

High Rise Building and Complex Incident Workshop

Some of the significant large incidents that have occurred in the Miami Dade Fire and Rescue

area were Hurricane Andrew, the ValuJet Crash in the Florida Everglades, and the Fine Air

Cargo Crash at the Miami International Aiiport. Some more common large incidents that they

respond to are fires in mid and high rise structures, fires in warehouses and wild land fires. The

difficulties in managing these incidents are the large organizational workload that is placed on

the first arriving units, the assigning of units to specific tasks, and the tracking of units and

individuals.
Other challenges are the time delays in the setting up of command posts for large incidents, the

different communication procedures and style used by different agencies and the issue of unity of

command. The term unity of command refers to the principle that a subordinate should have one

and only one superior to whom he or she is directly responsible. That means, on a hierarchic

tree, there should be only one person in absolute command. Unity of command is an important

principle of an Incident Command System. Some improvements regarding interoperability and

the set up of an adequate command post are the utilization of specialized communication and

incident command vehicles. These vehicles have the communication capabilities that assist with

communication interoperability between agencies at the scene of an incident and also provide an

area where commanders/department heads from different agencies can meet face-to-face to discuss incident issues. A critical aspect of handling a large and or complex incident is training

and the use of the National Incident Management System (NIMS).

The ability of an individual fire fighter to communicate is also affected by his or her personal

protective clothing. It is difficult to manipulate buttons and knobs on a radio with gloved hands.

Personal protective clothing such as protective hoods, helmets, etc., cover the individual's ears and reduce the sound levels. Some solutions attempted have been large frequency selections

knobs installed on the radios, a push button for volume control, and a mask-radio interface

device.

Presentation by Tom Brennan - Los Angles City Fire Department

High Rise Fire and Complex Incident Communication

An overview of the high rise structures in Los Angeles was given. They are categorized into

three different groupings by the date in which they were built; those built pre- 1960, those built

between 1960 and 1974, and those built after 1975. The different eras in which these buildings were built determines the level of built in building and fire protection. However a fire in any of

these high-rise buildings can be an intense incident that presents multiple communication

challenges. The presentation focused on the situational awareness and damage assessments from

the point of view of the 9-1-1 emergency dispatch center. Their belief is that incident

communication does not start when fire or police apparatus are en-route or arrive on the scene; it starts with the first telephone call to the communications center. The communications center is the intelligence collection point. By having the communications center be the intelligence

collection point it is felt that this lessens the overall burden on the Incident Commander. Any

information that the communications center receives, either by telephone, video feeds from news

organizations, radio, etc., is passed onto the Incident Commander. The challenge is how to sort and prioritize varying assessments and not discount information that ultimately may prove

accurate. The information obtained by the communications center can be used for search and

rescue operations, fire suppression, police operations, etc.

Presentation by Chris Holloway -National Institute of Standards and Technology

Propagation and Detection of Signals Before, During, and After a Building Collapse

Work described in this presentation is from a NIST project that investigated communications

problems for first responders (fire fighter and police) in large public buildings and in terrorist

situations, i.e. collapsed buildings. Studies were performed to investigate first responders' radio
frequency propagation associated with large public buildings and various schemes for locating

fire fighters and civilians who may have portable radios or cell phones and are trapped in voids

of collapsed buildings. The work was conducted in buildings scheduled for demolition by

implosion. This method of demolition was chosen because the radio transmitters can be covered

with building debris during the implosion. Before the building implosion, radio transmitters were placed in various areas of the building. Radio propagation characteristics from the

transmitters were measured before, during, and after the building implosions. The three

experiments described were the implosions of an apartment house, a stadium, and a convention

center. The references for the full report for each of these experiments can be found in the

reference section at the end of this report. [4, 5, 6]

Presentation by Stu Overby - National Public Safety Telecommunications Council

Communications for In-Building and the Incident Scene

A description of the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council (NPSTC) In-Building

Working Group which was formed in March of 2006 was given. The In-Building Working

Group's mission is to promote the availability of affordable in-building and in-tunnel

communications in ways that do not interfere with critical operations and to serve as the NPSTC

liaison with other entities addressing in-building or in-tunnel communications. Presently they

are working on developing best practices to minimize interference from in-building

bi-directional amplifiers. An example of what can occur if an in building system is improperly

installed was demonstrated. In this case a bi-directional amplifier was improperly installed. This

caused 200 cell phone base stations to be interrupted causing 250,000 dropped calls of which a

subset were calls to 9-1-1 centers.

Some future technologies were presented that included the ability to wirelessly connect to building security systems, the ability to access building cameras and sensors, and the possibility

to remotely control building functions as part of an emergency response. The use of mesh and

ad-hoc technologies will bring about true mobility to first responders in the field that is not now

possible with wired technologies.

Presentation by Sharyn Buck - Los Angles City Police Department

Los Angeles Police Department Communications

The complexities of managing a large metropolitan police department's communications center were described. Los Angeles covers an area of 467 square miles, has a population of 4 million,

and has 9300 police officers. The city is divided into two geographic areas for the purpose of

police communications, the Metropolitan Communications Dispatch Center and the Valley

Communications Dispatch Center. Each dispatch center is housed in its own building. Both

buildings are designed to withstand an 8.2 magnitude earthquake, and both can operate for 72

hours on back up systems. From these two facilities over 1.7 million 9-1-1 calls were answered

in 2005, with 98.6 % answered in less than 10 seconds. In order to staff these two

communications centers, Los Angeles employs 600 personnel. The communications division is the largest division within the Los Angeles City Police Department.
One of the primary objectives of building these two dispatch centers was to design a pleasant and

stress-reducing work environment for the 9-1-1 emergency operators who are known as Police

Service Representatives (PSRs). To provide a stress-reducing work environment for the PSRs

special consideration was given with regards to noise control, natural lighting sources, spacious

work areas and high vaulted ceilings. Each console (work area) has 4 flat panel computer

screens with a mouse, individual air/heat control, and additional lighting options. The PSR/9-1-1

dispatcher has the ability to work while sitting or standing. The computer panels can be tilted forward or backward to allow full visual range of the screens.

With respect to possible solutions to solve the police agency communications issues within highrise structures, two possible solutions were given. The first is to provide funding for the agency

to build up its infrastructure and the second was to mandate polices that high-rise structures be

built to include the provision on in-building radio coverage. This would require building owners

to provide adequate public safety radio reception in their buildings. One specific example of

how the police department was able to find a solution to a specific communications issue was

during a national political convention. Communications issues within the convention center were solved by placing two bi-directional amplifiers in the ceiling of the convention center.

Presently 700 police vehicles are equipped with mobile data computers, and by 2007 there

should be 1600 in service. This will allow the patrol car to be a mobile office with wireless access for internet, email, and field reporting.

Presentation by Charles Dowd - New York City Police Department

N.Y.P.D. High-Rise Building and Complex Incident Emergency Responder Communications

Another solution is to build an infrastructure that provides adequate coverage within the

jurisdiction. The New York City Police Department has been upgrading and building up their

communications infrastructure. Some examples given were the increase in the number of

transmitters from 85 to 146, and the number of receivers from 515 to 1,264. In a specific

precinct in the city, coverage was expanded by adding an additional 9 receivers. It is believed

that a well engineered network radio system will allow first responders to be independent of any

single in-building system. The New York City Police Department's current radio network

system provides 95 % in-building coverage without the need for in-building repeaters. However

it was pointed out that in-building coverage is affected by the type of construction (i.e. concrete

vs glass) and that larger concrete structures can reduce network coverage to 80 % to 85 %, the

coverage typically being reduced on the lower floors and core areas of the building.

If an in-building system is installed and is properly engineered it has the potential to enhance inbuilding network coverage. It has to meet existing Police Department network requirements.

Among these are a new and appropriate bi-directional amplifier technology that addresses time

delay interference and Federal Communications Commission compliance. Other requirements

include mandatory outage notifications regarding scheduled maintenance, upgrades or system

failures, and that building management be responsible for annual system testing that is to be

conducted by an independent contractor. The findings are forwarded directly from the testing

contractor to the New York Police Department's Communications Division.
Presentation by Nelson Bryner - National Institute of Standards and Technology

Distributed Multi-Nodal Voice/Data Communication Systems

The goal of the Advanced Fire Service Technologies (AFST) Program is to enable a shift to an

information rich environment for safer and more effective fire service operations through new

technology, measurement standards, and training tools. The research currently sponsored by

AFST focuses on fire fighter protective clothing, tactical decision aids, virtual fire fighter

training, thermal imaging camera performance evaluation methods, localization and tracking of

emergency responders, and radio communications. One area of particular interest has been the

thermal environment in which electronic devices, including radios, carried by fire fighters are required to function in, from ambient conditions up to temperatures of 260 °C (500 °F) for some

defined period of time.

Examples of different communication technologies that are being investigated are acoustic/sound

for fire fighter location, infrared for possible use in digitized audio and fire fighter location, and

radio frequency technology. The strength and weaknesses of distributed multi-nodal voice and

data systems, wireless building sensors, radio frequency identification tags, and fire fighter sensor networks were also discussed. It was highlighted that NIST plays a role as a provider of

fundamental science and measurement technology needed by standards organizations for

developing test methods and standards for fire safety and the emergency response community.

Presentation by Steven Bushby - National Institute of Standards and Technology

Emerging Building Automation Technology and its Impact on Emergency Response

Today's modern buildings function with multiple control systems programmed to run different

building systems, such as heating ventilation air-conditioning (HVAC), lighting, access control

(physical security), and life safety (fire). Network communications carry commands from

controllers to actuators and switches, and a host of sensors feed data back to controllers. Yet, for

the most part, all this information is bottled up in the building even while it could provide

tremendous situational awareness to those outside the building, telling them where a fire is, where smoke is, where occupants are, which devices are operating, which lights are on, or which

doors are open.

The challenges are to develop standards for the collecting, moving and displaying of the real

time building information to those who need it. This type of system would not only assist public

safety in the management of the incident but may also provide a conduit for radio

communications into and out of a high rise building with the ability to not only locate, but also

track individual first responders.

Review of Breakout Discussions

High-Rise Building Communications

Techniques were presented and discussed on how to improve communications in high-rise

buildings, other large buildings such as convention centers, and underground sU'uctures such as parking garages, subway stations, and tunnels. Not all the methods presented are applicable to
all buildings since the era in which the building was built may determine if certain built-in fire alarm or fire protection systems are present. Also, a solution that may improve the

communications in one type of building may not yield adequate results in another due to many

reasons, among them the size of the building, height or depth below ground, construction

materials used, and if in fact the building was designed and built with the purpose of blocking

out any communications from the outside. The solutions presented included:

The use of hard-wired telephones that are part of the fire alarm system

The use of warden phones

The use of a "Post Radio"

The use of a "Cross Band Repeater"

Sound powered phones

The use of In-Building systems such as o Repeater systems

o Bi-directional amplifiers

o Leaky antenna cables

o Distributed antenna system of amplifiers, fiber optic cable, coaxial cable, and

radiating cable and/or discrete antennas installed on or inside the property.

• Building up the communication infrastructure within the jurisdiction to the point which

satisfies the need for communications in these structures.

• Training the individual. Simply by having the user move to another location in the

building such as a window, balcony, or elevator shaft may improve radio reception.

• Setting up a relay system of radios all on the same frequency.

For in-building systems maintenance was an issue. Consensus was that in-building systems may

not work when needed since they are not constantly used.

A relatively new concept is the requirement that some municipalities have placed on building owners through legislation. They now require building owners to provide radio reception in

buildings. Over thirty jurisdictions have this requirement and several model laws have been

drafted for use by jurisdictions wanting to pursue this course. It appears that the number of

jurisdictions that will pass some kind of legislation will increase, and should these in-building

systems proliferate there needs to be standard way to test them. There will be a need for

standards and codes to determine the number of times per year the systems need to be tested,

guidelines for specifying the details of what the actual in-building requirements should be,

percentage of area covered, how to measure reception, boundaries for coverage, etc. An example

of such a requirement for radio communications in a building is that 95% of the area will have no more than a 21 dB reduction in signal upon building penetration. One thought was to put

requirements for the installation of these in-building systems in the building code and the actual

minimum requirements for installation, testing, and maintenance into an appropriate national

standard.

11
Large and Complex Incidents

The group consensus was that for a large and or complex incident planning, training and the use of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) are the strongest factors in determining if the incident will be mitigated successfully. There did not appear to be any technical solutions - technology may help, but it is not the solution. Beyond radios, there is a need to be well trained

in interagency issues. Organizations and individuals need to understand where they fit in. It was

felt that interoperability is about developing good standard operating procedures, how to work

together, who needs to be where doing what, and the need to develop interagency protocols.

There was discussion on the differences in an emergency event versus a planned event. For the

emergency event there is not time to work out communication issues, they need to be worked out

in advance. Training and discipline were constantly mentioned as being important for large and

or complex operations. The standard operating procedures will generally determine who is in

charge of an incident.

An example of a planned event was a past presidential inauguration in which the heads or commanders of 127 different agencies met to discuss and formulate plans. Once decisions were made the department heads or commanders of the agencies would then send out instructions to the individual people of each agency. For an event of this size there is a need for someone with

the power to designate the lead agency.

It was felt that for both emergency and planned events that interoperability at the command level

was essential for command and control. Command officers need the ability to communicate with

each other and this is best performed face-to-face. Many jurisdictions are solving this issue by

purchasing large mobile command vehicles that are taken to the scene of an incident. These

vehicles are designed to be used as a multiple-agency mobile incident command vehicle. They

are often equipped with the latest radio, microwave, satellite, telephone and wireless

communications technology, which may include the ability to link all types of emergency radio

systems in use by various public safety agencies. One such mobile command vehicle has the

ability to interconnect 13 different emergency radio systems, phone systems, and data networks

used by the various jurisdictions in which it serves.

However, for an emergency event it takes time to deploy and set up these mobile command

vehicles. An example given was for an airliner crash in Florida in which it took over an hour and

a half for the command center to arrive on scene and set up for operations. One city described

the process taking one hour on a normal day to get their mobile command center vehicle to the

location, setup and operating. Since police and fire are usually first on the scene what is needed

is a good relationship between police, fire, and other agencies that may respond early on to an

incident in order to develop the necessary command structure prior to the arrival of the mobile

command vehicle.

With the ability to patch or interconnect different radio systems from different police, fire,

emergency medical services and other responders comes the difficulty of developing a common

language understood by everyone. It was felt that before patching everyone on the same channel

that there is a need for the jurisdictions involved to have developed and trained on a protocol or

else it will be chaos. Public safety agencies may have very specific jargon or codes that they use

12
which may not be understood by individuals in other agencies. There needs to be protocols in

place using the National Incident Management System. One possible solution given was to use

plain talk without the use of any codes. Another concern when multiple radios from various

agencies are patched or linked together is that there is now the problem of the channel becoming

more crowded. Radio discipline is an important requirement. Everyone needs to be trained to know and understand the protocols.

Still, if command and control is working there are issues with capacity of both the system as well

as of a human to process information. Information overload is when messages are being missed.

The city of Los Angeles is working on addressing a protocol, for handling and processing

information flow at large incidents. An example given is that the Fire Department may have

information that needs to get back to the 9-1-1 call takers so that the information may be given to the public when they call.

For large incidents where there are many responders on the scene, the number of users on a

particular frequency/channel/or talk group is not a good measure for scalability since discipline,

procedures, training, and the nature of the incident are also strong factors. Even if we have 100

channels it will not solve all the communication issues. It was mentioned that the weak link in a communications system may be the person using the radio, someone who is not trained or who

lacks discipline. Training and discipline are important for large scale operations.

Another challenge mentioned for a large incident is the possible loss of the community

infrastructure, including electricity, water, food, lodging, etc., for a long period of time. Many

agencies have a three day self-sufficient requirement when responding to a large incident. This

may also include the community 9-1-1 center. Los Angeles City, for example, has two separate

centers and each can run for three days on self-contained power. After recent storms some

thought that agencies should plan for seven days of self-sufficiency. Some other issues

mentioned were the ability to track individuals, difficulty in keeping a manageable span of

control, logistics, and the ability to size-up the situation.

Workshop Summary

1Solutions exist for in-building communications that work now for most building

communication problems. A list was presented in the previous section, and more details were presented elsewhere earlier in the report. Different solutions are suitable for

different building types and situations.

2. For interagency communications, radio frequency patches can tie radios together, but the

real issues are not technical. Interoperability is about developing good standard operating

procedures, how to work together, who needs to be where doing what and the need to develop interagency protocols.

3. For large and or complex incidents, the group consensus was that planning, training and

the use of the National Incident Management System (NIMS) are the strongest factors in

determining if the incident will be mitigated successfully. There are no technical

solutions - technology may help, but it is not the solution.

13
4. Tools exist for improving incident command, among them: using the NIMS, using a command van, interagency planning, developing standard procedures, and training.

5. Even with excellent plans, large incidents put a strain on any radio network and demand

strict radio discipline to keep channels open for the most important communications.

14
Appendix 1 - Workshop Attendees

Name Affiliation Email address

Brian G. Anderson Miami-Dade Fire and Rescue briana@miamidade.gov

Andrew G. Berezowski Honeywell Fire Systems agb @honeywell .com

Tom Brennan Los Angeles City Fire Department trb0799@lafd.lacity.org

Nelson Bryner National Institute of Standards and

Technology

nelson.bryner@nist.gov

Michael Butkiss Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and

Firearms

michael.butkiss@atf.gov

Steve Bushby National Institute of Standards and

Technology

steven.bushby@nist.gov

John Coloe Fire Department City of New York coloej@fdny.nyc.gov

William Davis National Institute of Standards and

Technology

william.davis @nist.gov

Charles Dowd New York Police Department charles .dowd@nypd.org

Daniel Farley Simplex Grinnell dfarley@tycoint.com

Roy Ferguson Dallas Fire Department roy.ferguson@dallascityhall.com

Ken Fong Boston Police Department fongk.bpd@ci.boston.ma.us

Chris Holloway National Institute of Standards and

Technology

holloway@boulder.nist.gov

David Holmberg National Institute of Standards and

Technology

david.holmberg@nist.gov

Steve Huseth Honeywell Fire Systems steve.huseth@honeywell.com

David Kinney Dallas Fire Department david.kinney@dallascityhall.com

James R. Lawson National Institute of Standards and

Technology

iames.lawson@nsit.gov

Stu Overby Motorola / National Public Safety

Telecommunications Council

stu.overby@motorola.com

Chris Porreca Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and

Firearms

christopher.porreca@ atf.gov

Perry Saxton San Francisco Fire Department

Emergency Communications Dept

wordenergy @rcn .com

15
Peter F. Small National Law Enforcement and

Corrections Technology Center

peter.small@l-3com.com

Cecile Soto San Francisco Emergency

Communications Department

cecile.soto@sfgov.org

Dale Stockton Carlsbad, California Police

Department

dstoc@ci.carlsbad.ca.us

Ray Vaughan Miami-Dade Fire and Rescue vaughan @miamidade .go v

Robert Vettori National Institute of Standards and

Technology

robert.vettori@nist.gov

Tom Walsh Seattle Fire Department walshtm@seattle.gov

16
Appendix 2 - Workshop Agenda

Agenda

High-Rise Building and Complex Incident

Emergency Responder Communications Workshop

June 20, 2006

8:00 a.m. Registration & Coffee

8:15 a.m. Welcome and Introductions - Bill Davis/Jim Hill

8:25 to 8:55 Overview Communications Issues from September 11, 2001 - James R. Lawson

8:55 to 9:20. John Coloe - Fire Department of the City of New York

9:20 to 9:45 Roy Ferguson and David Kinney - Dallas Fire Rescue

9:45 to 10: 10 Brian Anderson and Raymond Vaughan - Miami Dade Fire Rescue

10:10 to 10:25 Break

10:25 to 10:50 Tom Brennan - Los Angeles City Fire Department

10:50 to 1 1:20 Chris Holloway - NIST Boulder - Electro Magnetic Division

1 1:20 to 12:00 Stu Overby - National Public Safety Telecommunications Council

12:15p.m. Lunch

1 :30 p.m. Breakout sessions for High-Rise Issues

3:15 p.m. Break and return to main meeting room

3:30 p.m. Report on Breakout Sessions

4:30 p.m. Adjourn for the day

June 21, 2006

8:15 a.m. Reconvene & Coffee

8:30 a.m. Opening on Large and/or Complex Incidents participant presentations

17
8:30 to 9:00 Sharyn Buck - Los Angeles City Police Department

9:00 to 9:30 Charles Dowd - New York City Police Department

9:30 to 10:00 Nelson Bryner - NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory

10:00 a.m. Break

10:20 a.m. Breakout sessions on Large and/or Complex Incidents issues

12:00 p.m. Lunch

1 : 15 to 1:45 Steve Bushby - NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory

1 :45 to 2:30 Report on Breakout Sessions

2:30 to 3:00 Review solutions, set priorities for issues, develop a road map

3:00 p.m. Adjourn

18
Appendix 3 - Communication in Buildings

Factors contributing to building attenuation of RF signals

Radio interference by buildings can be traced back to the way that different objects and building

materials interact with radio signals. Whereas we know experientially that radio signals are lost

in interior spaces of a building (especially large concrete and metal structures) and underground,

knowing the reasons in more details can help: in finding a signal when inside a building; in

sizing up potential radio communication problems when arriving at a building; and in helping

those involved with developing regulations for in-building radio reception.

There are multiple factors affecting radio reception. Building components will attenuate signals

that pass through them. Walls attenuate, and thicker walls and denser walls generally attenuate more. Whereas a drywall stud wall has an attenuation of 15 dB, a reinforced concrete wall has

attenuation of 30 dB [7]. Moving underground simply multiplies the number of walls and floors a signal must pass. One poured concrete floor or wall in a commercial office building is likely to mean the difference between an acceptable and weak signal. Several walls could mean no

signal.

Metal walls have a stronger signal blocking effect, and also cause stronger reflections.

Reflections result in overlapping signals that can cause dead spots or confuse radios. Just as a metal wall can block and reflect signals, so can metal objects in a room: shelves, partitions, file cabinets [8]. In addition to reflection, diffraction allows waves to bend around corners and

objects in a signal path. These effects together often result in significant variation in signal

strength even within a single room.

There are other interesting effects that can occur in indoor environments. Hallways and elevator

shafts can act as waveguides to move signals further into a building. And there are differences in

construction that are not visible but that can make a big difference in signal strength. Whereas

some concrete floors are pre-cast and pass some signal, other concrete floors may be poured in

place over a metal deck resulting in much worse signal transmission. Whereas we are familiar

with moving toward a window to increase signal strength, if a window has a solar radiation

blocking film, that same film may shield radio signals as well. Another effect is the impact of a

surface near an antenna — signals to and from a handheld radio will be adversely affected by

proximity to objects and walls. For this reason, standing away from walls, near open areas and

hallways, and holding a radio away from one's body can all contribute to improved radio

reception.

Building construction differs generally by building type/use and by age. Residential low-rise

buildings, even large ones, are typically wood frame, plywood, and drywall. Commercial

building stock has concrete floors, and a concrete and steel support structure that attenuates

signals more rapidly. Industrial space may have larger rooms with less concrete but more metal

walls and partitions and thus more reflections and interference on signals. Any high-rise will . likely have issues with point-to-point communications from ground floor to higher floors, due to concrete and steel construction, even if there is good reception on any given floor of a signal

from an outdoor tower coming through the side wall. Tunnels may allow good point-to-point

19
connections along the tunnel, but no reception from one level to another or to the outside due to earth and concrete.

The summary of these varied observations leads one to some useful conclusions: in general, size

and building construction are good indicators of the level of signal attenuation that will occur. However, while size is easily observable, construction details and materials within walls and

floors are not. In addition, the layout of internal space (number and orientation of walls and

open spaces) will affect propagation of signals into interior spaces. Two buildings may appear

roughly equal in size and appearance on the outside but have very different levels of signal

attenuation for any of the reasons mentioned above.

Some more technical details about radio propagation and the effects of obstacles in the path of

radio signals can be found in [9, 10].

In-Building wireless systems

An in-building wireless system provides radio reception in a building that would otherwise lack

radio coverage. Some material concerning in-building repeater solutions for public safety was

discussed during the workshop, and good references for the various signal boosting options are presented in [1 1, 12]. However, in addition to these public safety oriented systems, there is currently a growing movement to install systems to provide cell phone service as well as WiFi

coverage. Evidence of this can be seen in the formation earlier this year of the In-Building

Wireless Alliance (IBWA, http://www.i-bw.org) who's members include leading companies in

the fields of real estate, building controls and wireless communications. Their stated goal is to make the business case for in-building wireless systems in order to build the market for these

systems. From a non-public safety perspective, the IBWA has done market research and

concluded that in-building wireless systems will give a high return on investment to the building

owner due to the willingness of tenants to pay for such features as ubiquitous cell and WiFi

service. But the IBWA also recognizes the side benefits for public safety in that these same

wireless systems might be designed to carry public safety radio communications.

The IBWA defines an in-building wireless system as a "set of solution elements that enables

people and assets to communicate reliably, regardless of where they are inside of the building.

As a result, operational objectives that rely on staying connected are achieved." What do these

systems look like? Generally there is some kind of distributed antenna system (DAS) that

connects to radio receivers. In the case of cell phone use, a "leaky coax" cable antenna could run along hallways and these antenna branches are brought together down to a telecom room where a

cell receiver is located. In the case of WiFi, access points which use the DAS as their antenna

are located several to a floor and connect to the wired Information Technology (IT) network to provide the necessary bandwidth and connection to IT systems.

This is essentially the same as what is done for public safety using a bi-directional amplifier.

Signals from a radio are picked up on a distributed antenna, amplified, and then rebroadcast on

the outside of the building with a directional antenna pointed at the nearest base tower. One

difference with the above examples is that in the case of the cell phone application the building

acts as a cell, while the public safety radio application rebroadcasts the signal to a tower some

20
distance away. If a DAS is being installed in a building anyway, then it might be designed to provide coverage for public safety radio signals.

In-building wireless systems provide the only pathway for excellent in-building public safety

radio reception in many buildings. As we look at what is working today, we see that more and

more municipalities are requiring large building owners to provide indoor radio reception for

public safety. If a municipality is considering requiring building owners to install in-building

wireless systems to support public safety, and building owners are rapidly moving toward

installing in-building wireless systems anyway to support tenant communication needs, then the

public safety community should be working with groups like the EBWA to find ways to enable

public safety communications to share the in-building wireless infrastructure, piggy-backing on

the larger society trend and making the business case for the building owner even better,

allowing the building owner to offer tenants not only cell and WiFi but also increased safety.

And, in fact, the National Public Safety Telecommunications Council has started an In-Building

Wireless group that is working with EBWA to address these issues (as introduced in Stu

Overby's workshop presentation).

21
References

1 Jones, W.W., Holmberg, D.G., Davis, W.D., Evans, D.D., Bushby, ST., Reed, K.A.,

"Workshop to Define Information Needed by Emergency Responders during Building

Emergencies," NISTIR 7193 , January 2005.

2 Davis, W.D., Vettori, R.L., Reneke, P., Brassell, L., Holmberg, D.G., Kostecki, J., Kratchman, J., "Workshop on the Evaluation of a Tactical Decision Aid Display,"

NISTIR 7268, October 2005.

3 Holmberg, D.G., Davis, W.D., Treado, S. J. , Reed, K. A., 2006, "Building Tactical

Information System for Public Safety Officials," NISTIR 7314, January, 2006

4 C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, D.F. Williams, S.A. Schima, S. Canales, D.T. Tamura, "Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and

After the Implosion of a 13-Story Apartment Building," Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Note

1540, May 2005.

5 C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, D.F. Williams, S.A. Schima, S. Canales, D.T. Tamura, "Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and

After the Implosion of a Large Sports Stadium (Veterans' Stadium in Philadelphia),"

Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Note 1541, October 2005.

6 C.L. Holloway, G. Koepke, D. Camell, K.A. Remley, S.A. Schima, M. McKinley, R.T.

Johnk, "Propagation and Detection of Radio Signals Before, During, and After the

Implosion of a Large Convention Center," Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Note 1542, June

2006.

7 Faouzi Derbel, "Reliable Wireless Communication for Fire Detection Systems in

Commercial and Residential Areas", IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking,

WCNC, p.654-659, V.l, 2003

8 "An Introduction to Indoor Radio Propagation", Spread Spectrum Scene Magazine,

http://www.sss-mag.com/indoor.html

9 Rappaport, T.S., "Wireless Communications: Principles and Practice", (2nd Edition),

Prentice Hall PTR; December 31, 2001

10 Morrow, R., "Wireless Network Coexistence", McGraw-Hill Professional, August 1

,

2004

1Public Safety Wireless Network Program, "Public Safety In-Building/In-Tunnel

Ordinances and Their Benefits to Interoperability Report", www.safecomprogram.gov

November 2002.

12 Desourdis, Robert. I., et.al., "Emerging Public Safety Wireless Communication

Systems", Artech House, 2002.

22
5fl =Ocs

CO
a e

en o (0

91co

TS P >. o to a o. c +2 e o OC o

Tt o

-— >. l_ fl c 1 *s. O CD in o Q. hi S E -j

cr o tod 2
Sg

*.°- o

fFDN

mand

terPh

geo

Com epea 5 >.oc ^2 « O O O) O _l c

Vid

WTC1

Showi 5o§

a.1"6O o

(0

£'»

thatt h-rise icate

CD O)

C

evidenc WTChi

commu o^ o

re

isr

FDN eater In CD CD D- In • Z

<o

<N
_<1) 0) o

(0 c '5

CO c

"5>>> T3

CO JC

CO o

'en (0 "5 (0 (A (0c< O o E E

T3

<1) c

CO

*-* c

CA 3

T3

(AC

ro

(0co

CO (A 3 > CO

L.

*-* "^ 3E

cd 5

CO 3O c coco

COo

'E

"J5 •— c "D

O ** 3

(0 "O

CO

**

COco 3

"Oc

CO o

CO

«C«^5oc

COo

•a

co

u

'E3E EEoo

CC

(0 (0 co

JQ

CO >.

CO Eoo o

"5 (0 o <D L. — ^ CO co

(0

"EE £ co CD CO a) CC "E3EEoo

CO

.52 oco

(0

l_

CDQ.

(0

CDCOu o

COuoo

o~

CO oCO

CD

i—>

T3

"coCou

JC

*-« i o

"-3u

COa

jC

+•

CD -Q

CO "O

CO

CD

COu

(/> CO _>"3

J3" 3

(0CO

52

ac

(0

CO

k-CO Dc3

•ac o**-oonac

CO X Eo > o

>> co

(/) >>

JQ

CO ^3

CO

CD

_CD J3

CO CO >o

CO

k-CO

CO

_l

CC

CC

O ^ *— (0 ^3 CD o TJ o (A J= < n ^ E

-Q i_ i_ CO CO 1_ !E o CO o cc .Q (0 c CO CD CD CD H

** J- '•5 a CO (0c

T3

CO

D CD CC CC Q.

aj \- (0 d) (1) CO o 1 1 1 1 1 o ja CO OC cc

1_ cc i- CM CO rr

m z CO CC z

i- >> o o

fact gen

CO CO

e3 E

"O E ©

0) S ° 3C

Q. §

CN
COco

in

O

CO

*-» < 4

0)o m

^5s- <D (O

(0 <tf if) u

CO ^5 £ o>

CO *~ !5

re TJ

CO CM T—

oc -5s

i— CO >bQ

Q.> o

revi_oo

co

r-

~S? <N u>«

J£ f o O

re +»5 r7 i_ / „SS 0)

*-> 5

ID2
oo
o c CD ^ 05 o CDE

"CO x:

CD o

-Q

ZSC c

co a5 ><

CO S x: o

CD

C\J cd CM x: O 5o O1- c § c 5 1 o C o CD £ CD 'c CD c c enQ.

cooo ooc w

Q-

_CC O o

C/l

CD o

CD

CO

CD

Oc

CD x: co H *-* JZ "D

<5 a)

a3

a>

CD- CD o

a> t- ° a > 03 O CD iZ X: CD h. *"* >

a> o & 73 CD Q> c

T3 CD

co <-> o = 5 a m m ° 1

(0 V) o U) S o DC oc 11 >» o CO CO U

1_(0 <

CD «• gen spond nditior

aness. 111 «5u i_ CD O ^ S O Q) TM E£ TO O a

a>E

UJ

(0c

gency r

ilding c

ial

awa « CD 3 .2 1 ® 3 2

C/> •

Em

view 1

situat

w "2 « .oc x> 2 CO 2 CO . ^ c x: co ooo o

too 3ooo .2 to 3 ZJ x:3 s*

(005 EE

COD5 II c o C E E

T> o T3 £ ° o a o o

'5

XI o '5X] o 2 O

O T>

=6 2 o CO i_ > o z> "- o

CD x: T3

CD x: 11

"S 5 o

CO

CO JC

"Dc

CO

C>

CD o g CO CO

cz CD

'co c 15

CO CO t o CO O o) CD 3> c c ~ CD

B!

C i-

>- CD CO S °- 3 S c° — $ 8!

>+- 3 O CO-

§§ « sE S

CO §"

HI

— "O

"I> o

CD cz

8.8: 8 «

>^ !2 o CO ".

<D ^ O) CO ' OfE 5

uj cd : CD I

ON
p*©

4> ZoUcQ

o>u• p* toI

"©UsgBo• PN

-p-> 08

*-»C

0>

Kl

0>

PH

O


COen

3

50S

03

4>

'-

05 Q

fl V03 Q

-os

03EO

«3s

:- fao

e*

-cs* o—

03 —s

COfa

CO

<3 c

1- E -2 < C <0o

"-1 O) 3 E > (A

0)1

^5 w# 2E

.2

to

g c n J5 9- '-3 MM -s o W O C 3

Jit rt rt /^ ka HI w w w

Q. hO

O CO

g

g

Q. =

#JI

X 3 = E

C/J

Jik.' _

Q "5 P 3 Q

CM

W CO 5 ° ^ 0) 0) O |_

a)

© (5

© oc "D1 ^ E C ^ rf c• C .C _C <0 W r» o

1— ^— ^_ .

a*. i* ac

a*. % I i

<D fl)

C 0)

— H. » — .= 3 WO) 3 2 <0 - © c

.fl)

Q tj P s

*- 3 2 E c

*" ? o Z 3 • Q."3 o £ JO O .Q o ? J E 2 n>iS "S £ S

.- ±: .— > = 3 <u U. 2 1L (0 < Q U • • • •

en
3

03 Q

03c

-e

©JD 3

08 ^SOa=So

1/1

s-l <s

.2

PQs# o

03s

09 -

oc
ON

CO
o

CM

/1> c

CO

CDc CO -i£ vU +z O CD CO 03

PTT

bul

nicroph

C CD O p CD r- S- »- q- o s - : i£ _ "D O) -oo

03 CO CD

p CO -i c 42 c CO •;3 X Q_

J5 as-o co =; J _l 2

CO

W

CtS *-

kS co

co J5 .

CD 05

TD1 CD

w

Personal G

JL -'

fl lull 1i
sU

a. &u

"55 o5z>o w rs

<D i * O • OEM

Q.U s mco

rou

*- So

n

a

§2

S-o

a)

V) > om

is>o a in

43IS c vc > —

4J

U <u ecu3 O

S2 3EEO </)

a*

W

^z c

Q. (U

11

so

GO US

WDs

GOos

asc=oH=os

GOu

X

°-S

E-2

CO £ M2 c

a: <B caE

as

go.8

cq c iZ i go O rn w> £ 1Q jj

IvC<

(AO coMBuEEou c

a>uco

(A

<A

II— 4-» o'E

"O 3

'I

o* 2 a> 4S £ C

4-1

V 3 £ o U -to « 5 m v » 8

flee

U)

O 3

Sag 2 « o

4-1 ci c c •i-* u o

4-> u

rden

of

mander E a E o ou u

1-3 uc O 0) £ -M >

7u

sen iden

4-» 4J

w

u

(U c <u c
J*

c

Z>u

LUCO

c

so

o

Q.

CO

x

Lnoo»E

q:

o

Q.

i_ ICO

CT>

U

ro>

LUO

00

E

CO

X

00

u

ro>

LUCO

u

ro>

LU

CO

VD

CO

Ln

ro ro

ro

ro U

rsj

ro U

XJ <0 *_ ? u v U)

acti > -j in rM ro

-j U U

2-ITAC 3-ITAC

IREMAI LEMAR Q. < < <

E i- U) u H H

O 00 —

1

H

Z

hH

I hH hH1 1 O iH

1 1 tH CN rH CM fM CM IN U. V

iH iH 1-4

<A > S

3

U

(A

a:<

CD

Q.

U.

i

ency

Mayday 0)

Li.

Fire/EMS

ate City

(D

o

4-> c

E

D) i O

u4J ley ern MS-

"ft

Z

TJ

<i E °>

i±3.5? z1

rc ±i lu

hO ^t m idi- rs ^6009 H

QJ

Ut

roE

ro "O

TJ

c

ro

(A

V)

<u

OX)

pi- <U IS

2

o

0>

s

DID

ro5 . 5 ro <a m

$ * ai Q (A U

S ° a

Q) O

0>

o E

I 8

(/) re

roo

=

ro 1

gj

c J= <u — u

tA Q.

ro Q.

o; 3

W) <A

ro c H «

O E

(A <A 5 « O (A > W

o

*

I*X ro 4

>

?-

m o

61

c ro .2 3

ro u

E «> =1

8<j

"° E <i .-

o

iV)

c

o

4-rf (QU

c

3

E

E -S

o.a

u a.

<u

(A

(Aroa

(U

4-1 c

u

E^ 1

Sep

<a.S* u

^ ^. *J o 2> c

£ o; u

> +J H

ro O

a: *- J. w

ro ro O *^ "TJ "O

> ro ro O i- E

r 0) r £ M E

.2 c o M W (J

ro U

|E._

J3 (A

^£

O <A £ = ?!1- «4- Sg

« c u c - "S § = .2 43

o; c --5 c c o

hH 3 Q.
Uo

ttcuco

So

Q.Q)

C^O

Q 0-

u 3 «

enE

u. <m a:

enc oc V ro £4-1 V

roen

aou

<u U) u (U 4-» c c c

a) I^B a> en E^ am ^h> L. y

"53 c

4J

CMB

14- h-l D o

enc^ - U) V) > V > w O V) c «u

(A

O ^ a. u_

l. en iro oE£Uou

gj (J

ro

CO* RU

i__ I i aj ro 1o 1c

x: o

Iu o

cr>

35u

J5

TO

Jn - c

CO A

Q

ro

U

U

O

co £

CD

O E

'«= o S

roEo EEo o

un

oo

o>u©

O^ en Cb

•I—I IT) fN

h

U ^tf

inQ.

SL. V coMuc3

LLU

"35 ro o

S2oo > t S

II | O JJ « gn •- ^ .o 5i a>

J; u. j (A

a ^

-*

(ACo

(AV3

coo X5

co CO £ CO CD en

X). c O xs

Q. '5 ^^ co X! o co

CO

-*—1

CD

x

CD o Q.

CO c3 CD ^.^ CD £

D)C

C£ E T3

JO

*^" o C o — '5 O 'ciT X o

CO

"5 "0

aCD

CO o

Q.

to

CD>

CI- TSC

a.

i. c 03 3 — CO GL § &

CD i— sz —

co O) co

'J— c

-Z- CD

+—, ;j

v^ o *.—" CO

co 2 o CD 'co Q.X +J c CO co 'i_

'sz Q.

•—

CO s— c: CD CD

CO

LUz

^-> cIBM

T3

CDOo

CO

CO

CO

coCD=3

coCOCo

^&co £?

Q. .£ O T3 i_a. '5

U_ -Q

CC o

CDX=5D_

O

CD i_ c o

CO co o .2 O T3 — CO -Q

COCD

55 D)

CD> CO

*- CO

CO _Q E "£

a> o x a. W CD CO •£

CO CO =3 X

.2 >, « s > c

CD o c x

co >

CD tO +3 C

CO CO

CD =

CD T31 >

CD -^

CO . . llO (/) O

-^ CD > > I?co

'OT3

T3 CL — CO

XO

C

CO

_co CO m= «>- L_

CO E "2 ^_ t r^

X - § CD

CD .-ti

** a. c

CO E

T3O O) > c

£= ^"C3 7^

Q.

Q. 3

CO

CO

a- 5

co T3C

CO

COco

i;= a.

to

0)

3_ **c

(0oc

CO UJ .0

"00

O

"CD

CO ^ J3 'c Q lk_ co 1_ O

03

03

C

Q.

1— E 5

CO E T3 CO sz 00 '5 ,0

CO c

CO c c X

CD c

_o

CD

CO

"co

COCLE

05

COa. 00 c 00 c

a.E

T3

a.

03

00Q_

'co

"00 '5 3 E ^

XI

SZ

CO

03 sz

_C0 O

00

33

Q.£

CDi_

CO sz

£ZO

00CL

&_

CO

CD

CDE 5

co T3

CD

-I—' O

CD

COCLE

sz

CD '5

X "0 D)

"** c: JD l_ ro c C O)

:*: CO

03Oc

03

VJ> c

CO

CD O) c E

COc O

"E

COCL

Jo I 1 E

CD

sz1

co

-4—

CD> O

CD

COc

-1—' 2

SZ

CL

.2

"co

"5

_Q

CO

03

CDQ.O

'coCL O)

-t—> "00 03>cc

it:CO CD £ c

CO >>

a.E

CO 5

iZ

03>

03

00 .21

D) 0c

COcn

T3

SZ T3

CD

Q.

'—

CO -t—1 c 5

00c

'5

ca

c: T3

CO

ZZ cr

COzz

CO

O CO CO 3 D I ,H T3 0 <D > g 5 •

COO

_l • CDOC

SZO

CO

co

CD

"to r^ OJ O i; NX NX NX

LOCO ^ NX 2

OJ

^1-

c\i CO

LOCO

CO 00 ^~ CNJ CO

O) „ CM ^t

(A •<t

N **

N

a

X

N

X

CO c NX s X

NX

NX 2

'0c

CO

.03

m

CO

CO csi CDO 2

cq

COCM

CO

CD "0 c CO CO cri CM 00

ID c (0 ai

x

CN 'sT

O ^ D" 03 3a- 0)

'^r CM >^- CD „ £ 3 N N

LL 03

NX

X

NXNX

NX

X

"CD LO

LL LL. 2 s 2 2

C0 CO

03CO 03 CO cvi CD

COCO CM

C\i co JZ E cri CO CM ^ O 00 CL c

-* ^

CM * CD •«— j5 =:

03>O 3 03 • • • • • • CL O O
E

a>

*•*

</) cE

a>

i_3

(A

0) C

a> > E

_g

a>— £

CD "5

CD tt O) ?

i_ c O Q.

ig o CD £

(A

"5

CO

l_ £o c

(0 c

CO

O c

_CDCO 1- Q. Q. O _C0 "D O

CO iS

CD> o ^CD o co O A—>

-•—

c -^ d) CD E

-Q CD_

Z3 co

O CO o M— CD -t—

CO CD E p E CO o c CO c: c/> § COooE

to o E

CD CD

(/) TO

CDO)

CDQ_Oi_

"go CO

CD

COo

"£

COc

CD

'_

CO -Q

CDODC 0. c

CD TO -4—> _Or o CDCO *—' 'E ~CD o CO

'c c

"E

CD o

Q. E =5 .Q "CD

_£Z

~CD j 1_ | -4-J -4—

CD CD CD C/) O) CO Q CL a cz b _c OC P5^ " £ 2= 3 CD CO CO
ON
o
J5

CD

o

O)

c

'c

o

E

o

o

o

0.

(/> *•» c

o

E

v.3

(/> CB

jo

Ql

E

2

o+»o

Q.
Q)

>

O

j-

*-» IBE

toc

u

E

£

0)

o

o

0.

(A

c

E

o

i.

3

(A

TO©

CO

o

Q.

£

o

o

o

a.
Pre-Blast Propagation Data

Friday 1-23-04: Rx at manhole

Location

Pre-Data: Stairs

Friday 1-23-04: Rx at manhole

Walking up/down stairs

49.6 MHz

162.0 MHz

- 225.38 MHz

- 448.6 MHz

- 902.6 MHz - 1832.5 MHz

m -50

I

"60

Q-

-70 —

-80 -

-90

-100

Walking up stairs to FL 12

I

'

I

' I'

I

'

I '

I

'

I

'

I 'I

'

I

' I 360 370 380 390 400 410 420 430 440 450 460 470 480 490 500 Location

53
Pre-Data: Windows

Friday 1-23-04: Rx at manhole

Walking up stairs to each window (Tx are outside of window)

I 'I

'

I

'

I

'

I 'I 'I

' I' I' I' I 500 510 520 530 540 550 560 570 580 590 600 610 620 630 640 650 Location Summary of Building Walk-Through

Table 7: Mean and Standard Deviation of the RecCWed Signal Strengths for Transmitters Located in the Building with Windows in LOS

Frequency (MHz) Mean(dB) Standard Deviation

(clB)

49.6 -35.0 10.2

162.0 -21.6 10.4

225.375 -26.9 8.9

44S.6 -32.5 9.3

902.6 -24.6 12.4

1832.5 -28.4 12.5

Table 9: Mean and Standard Deviation of the Received Signal Strengths for Transmitters Carried throughout Building without Window Stops

Frequency (MHz) Meau(dB) Standard Deviation (dB>

49.6 -49.1 8.6

162.0 -38.9 6.8

225.375 -41.4 6.8

44S.6 -45.7 5.9

902.6 -42.3 10.5

1832.5 -43.5 10.8

54
Pre-Data: Data From Walking Cart

Azimuth IromHole |deg)

Blast Data: NIST Van (Tx in Hole)

55
Blast Data: Unmanned Site (Tx in Elevator)

implosion begins 1:43 Transmitters on 3rd Floor Elevator

"i r

Blast Data: Unmanned Site (Tx in Roof)

Implosion at 01:43 Transmitters on Stair to Roof

56
Blast Data: Walk Around with Cart

At !

45

Comparison Chart 900

135 180 225 Compass Bearing from Hole ((leg)315

''-

| -»- Hole-1 3-902.6 After 902.6 MHz |

m

em3 p a

05o -70 1K

-SO-

-110-

Post Blast: Conductive Measurements

57
c^- COCc

0)c

co

COcoo

0)

>- -ao

TJ

cd

0)CLEooco

Q.

CDO

Cl> h—

CD>o *-> r o. CD b E o

•_ (A CD (V Q. X! X 8

LU

l_ o o .*ti 4—* _) m "O

(_

n

O

CO CC

cdCO

<r> 3

CD .a 5

CD c Q O

TO

CO

F

co o o 01 CO o o up c cc Em E

CO

(i) "O c IT) Tt- < CO CJ>r . CO

CO CO m m

CD eno

0. CL

.£ o g 5 ol i — J3

I> E CD

CO

m "O

-o *

CO -aO O co ^7

CDr E E

CD c CD 13

CD x> C CO

O < CN

CO

CO CO

CO CD

CD

CD COo

0. CL 5o

CO

"5

CO

CD

CDQT3

CD JD

COO £ O o *-

Q. 2

<B | D0) O

COoo

co" cc

0)c

CO

O -iz « co

CD o1^

CO

COQ.Eoo

0) .Q

COo

TJ

CO

COcc< oCD

CD T3O

CD3oc

_o

"co3C

0)

CD

in CDCI > **— o

CD

w

TJ E 3 CO o

i2 I

£5 oj §> £

c/> i- I ^ s cgo

0) Q

DC

IT)
COcq

CDOO

0) I

COc

CD

i_

i. i ,\u " ^^

^^ 1 \ \ 1 \

co

O /

t- \ <X

fCO O

X

DC

CD

CDOX

,, \ \ n

II ' 1 11 4 I1 H> *.

ON
o


Stadium perimeter walk

-i |

i | r

100 120 140 Data file location

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 16 Data file location

60 to 70 dB of attenuation

Stadium walk-through

Inside

fmm.

100 120 140 Data file location 160 180 200

Playing field

-10

-20

-30- „ -40

CO5 -50 *-.

-70

-80 - ^0c

49.60 MHz ^

162.09 MHz

225.30 MHz

448.50 MHz

902.45 MHz

1830.0 MHz,

I

' I'

I ' I

' I ' I' I' I

'

I ' I

' I 40 80 120 1(30 200 240 260 320 360 400 440 480 Data file location

50 to 60 dB of attenuation

63
Histograms

Frequency: 448.5 MHz

Mean: -28.7 StdDev: 11.2

jL

Frequency- 1830 MHz

Mean: -43.6 SM Da^ 12.0

Table 8. Mean and standard deviation of the received signal strengths for the upper level measurements for horizontally polarized receiving antennas.

Frequency (MHz) Mean(dB) Standard deviation (dB)

49.60 -30.6 15.0

162.09 -34.4 15.2 225.30 -30.0 13.9 448.50 -33.5 14.4 902.45 -37.2 13.S

1830.00 -43.6 12.0

Receive Site 1 - Lunch Trailer SW. Transmit Site A Signals

i

1 Site A 49.78

Site A 162.20

Site A 226.50

Site A 448.80

Site A 902.45

Site A 1830

64
Site 3 - Crusher NW

-60-

1

V

if

'"

i

,i Urtj III

I

I

1

: i .iVili 1.

, ,.. ;:).).,,

1

if ' 1

'

-100-

1 . v'M • '.'' ',

- Site A

SiteB SiteC

SiteD

- Site A

- Site B

- Site C

- Site D

Site A

SiteB

SiteC SiteD

Site A

SiteB

SiteC

SiteD

Site A

SiteB

Site A

SiteB

• 49.78 -49.66

- 49.72 -49.60

- 162.20

- 163.30 -165.64

-162.09

-226.50

- 225.40

- 226.40

- 225.30

- 448.80

- 448.60 -448.70

- 448.50

- 902.45

- 902.60 -1830

-1831

6:48:58 AM 6:51:50AM 6:54:43AM 6:57:36 AM 7:00:29 AM 7:03:22 AM 7:06:14AM 7:09:07 AM 7:12:00 AM

Time

Comparison of pre- and post-implosion mobile cart perimeter measurements

F

-iynll.<H=$rteDPr.BVM.I— iii4ft6miPo«-H1- SiteD —~4t.6MHzf*« H 2 - Site C>

|

I

1

' .

1

1 -o ..

A

nil

• *js »S

-

ttT

•t •

.

(4MJ fatfM?

«$'

\

•

'- -|w^y> *i#WfcfejMs^

-1W- « 135 160 Z2S

Azimuth from Stadium Onln (d*gl

65


CD

O

C/i

CD

CO

CT3

O

CD

CD

CD

oo

-7

CD

C/D

CD Mi
Cart Measurements

Pre-Measurements Post-Measurements

Walk-Through Measurements

A L[ i J, mi^*iz**usm

1 2£2 •£,: S47 1129 1 E-7 2=25 2B21 3103 3383 3687 3343 4231 4313 4t53 307? 333? 3c41 3523 E2&S Location

1 231 301 731 1031 1231 1301 1731 2001 2231 2301 2731 3001 3231 3301 3731 4001 4231 -tSOl 47T1 3001 3231 3301 Location

1I 1

Ilk k A., till i if!

i

'ill il^awui

i

2E5- 377 BB3 1133 1*11 1729 2017 2303 23K 26M 3169 343T 37*5 4033 4321 iifJ-!i&fi ttU 5473 37C1 B0« 6337 Location

1 309 617 303 1213 1341 1BJ9 21:7 ;4C: 277J 3331 ji59>:97ar.;,: 4J13 ae:i 4929 3237 334.3 3St3 ei£1 6469BT77 Location

69
Pre- and Post-Cart Measurements

Pre: Tx 2 location Post: Tx 2 location

l. -60

—49 MHz 162 MHz

226 MHz 448 MHz —902 MHz —1830 MHz

1 11 21 31 41 61 61 71 81 81 101 111 121 131 141 151 161 171 |6l IQ1 201 211 221 231 Location

—49 MHz 162 MHz

226 MHz 448 MHz —902 MHz —1830 MHz

1 9 17 26 33 41 49 57 66 7} 81 89 V 195 113 121 12* 13? 145 163 161 169 17? 186 193 201 299 Location Summary of Implosion Measurements

Apartment Building

• The mean signal attenuation for a wide range of locations throughout the standing building ranged

from 25 to 50 dB.

The standard deviation ranged from 6 to 14 dB, depending on frequency.

• Some signals experienced large amounts of attenuation, while other signals increased after the

implosion, depending on whether the transmitters ended up on top of the debris pile or buried

beneath building rubble.

• Large amounts of building rubble caused at least 60 to 80 dB of signal attenuation. The true attenuation was not established since we measured only noise.

Sport Stadium

• Maximum signal attenuation on the order of 75 dB was observed by just moving the transmitters

around the outside perimeter of the stadium while monitoring signals at external receive sites. The mean signal attenuation for a wide range of transmitter locations located in the interior of the

standing stadium to an external receive site ranged from 25 to 50 dB.

• The standard deviation for the standing-building propagation measurements ranged from 6 to 14

dB, depending on frequency.

Some signals experienced large amounts of attenuation (some greater than 80 dB, at the noise

floor of our receivers), while other signals increased during the implosion (up to 20 dB), depending on the receiving site and location of the transmitter cache.

Large amounts of building rubble caused at least 30 to 50 dB of signal attenuation. The true attenuation was not established in several cases since we measured only noise.

70
CD

C

CD

hC/)

CD

O

CO

-I—

»

o
us \

*'

01ec

taVE 1 *m j "a! 1 © ^r^ 1 Xos

.© jiitfK. __^^tf —«

"3ESa ^i b

C8 s * <, P agjriK

tfl E6

•<

W)00 TMc

a. [^m o«

_ooU I «H

C4
CO SPGS Antlers Walk IFront Receive Site Lap_2

49.6 MHz 162.09 MHz 225.3 MHz 448.5 MHz 902.45 MHz 1830.0 MHz

600 Sample Number

1200

CO SPGS Antlers Walk 1B Front Receive Site Lap_2

49.6MHz - 162.09MHz 225.3MHz 448.5MHz —902.45MHz 1830.0MHz

500 Sample Number

1000

73
r.SO - ^ j^^^H^He ^B^^^^^^5

t—a^ 'it^^^^^^^H^^KT -5^^- .". ,, "Sss£© ^i U

i-V

-= B?%^Jk fet «4)

jU E l^l^HET^' Jjfl 1 ' ' MM

4>

In ' ^^H^^^B^^^b ' fill 9&&&^ VS

no i * i 5 JHb->|j sSljp.

£>s3O Li* uu 1 ; 2 '1

"s I 'I o

PQ [ M 1 c

0)Ea

LUc3

CQ

+*X

(1) z

CD

Ia>E

a>oco< „

N CO

CO Q_ CD

LU

O

O I O o 00 CNJ Z3 O

oo

00

CD

~3

OO

"O

as o>

"oc

OO

"O CD CD "o

CO

CO E H

CD

Q.

03

CO

c: o CD ~03

CD "o

Q

O E DL CD "c: CDO "O o o

CD

-i

—

<— CD c CD hLU

CD 6 3O

CD

M—

CO >> *—' o _l

'E

13 E

cu

00

a3

CD E CD -Q O E O E

t^ o Q. CD O O CD S
-cs=o

03

'- o5-*-So• pp=

CW

09

Z>u

Ecc a) - « O) > " — *- a) 'ni S fe t<5« co c.2o

(0 o c _ . _ + ^ i- - s 8 2 S| "•- i_ c

iS £ Q.C0 3 m £ ° = O

iil8§

gjLOJ-.E

a.- OO Jr ~ 3 o <n A Sdti to .=

O)c

jo

MH o 3 c

00 o 1 o c C/)

&_ ->» o c

M— 0)

</> c o • oMM ^mm» c

>-» (0 0) o £1 • MM ->-» c3 "D E C

(0 £oo

$3

uCQ 2 o>

Q.

C

+-TJ »"=

ci) 5

CD cQ ?£

'§£ o o

fOJ=

CO CO -co ^> 1- C3 CO

\- CO

co -S T3 C c3

Si

SI

COm * I

CM

K = S O .3

CO § 9 I

CD •

i- c 0) i c c I d £ I C

p"°

i°- o o p0)Q. o C

o.2 c c I s 5a

S3

.CO o!-o**o o 2 5

O) CD c **

>- |5

"5m 5

CO

a- CO < E 0)>O o 5m 3

*-» U 3*-* CO

K-co

O- x:

CDa

CO Z O "55

«s XI L— '<5 oa O kTO

t> Eo

(0

O>z

installed

system

nna

too

close

is

emissions c o2 E CD

<D Q. h- CD ^ a O £ ^ ^'-S S- co 73

CO T3 o

Q_ o cd .52 .E y=

CDQ.3 - Cc E o §> C8 CD "TJO E

1—CD ^—

C

COco

4—* co

+-»

COQQOi—

COI

"43 >. to j= c o DC

JO TOu

"<5

*-• CO

T3

CO

CO

CD

COCO

COooo o

CO c CO o'^ CD w .a o v> 't c ^ -55 co o <6 Q <o

CD

CO

CO O

OQ^WO oCM

m

CN IS iX

I-

(/> z
^IBW Alliance

Stay Connected. Everywhere.

In-Building Wireless Alliance: An Industry Group

Promoting Improved In-Building Communications

Focus is primarily commercial multi-tenant buildings

Led by PRTM Consulting; includes real estate

interests, communications carriers & manufacturers

Participate in IBWA Public Safety requirements

survey: - http://www.pmqbenchmarkinq.com/public/survev/

survevintro.asp?SID=218&bReq=0&bTool=0

IBWA developing several in-building pilot tests incl.

both commercial and public safety communications

June 20, 2006 Ga'rthersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

Preliminary Responses to the

IBWA In-building Survey

Design Consultant 3%

Emergency Planning 3%

State Telecommunications 3%

Emergency medical services 1.4%

Military / defense/ homeland

security 2%

Courtesy, IBWA

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

76
Preliminary IBWA In-Building Public Safety Survey Results

Please Indicate How Important the Following Applications or Services

Are to Your Entity and % having the capability

60%

40%

Rail/bus/public Asset tracking Location-based

transit network services monitoring

Building automation systems (BAS)

20%

Threat Federal/state/local assessment command/control

integration

\ ,' 5 Critical \ / 4 Very Important

•-. y 3 Important Courtesy, IBWA 2 Somewhat

Important

1 Not Important June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

Preliminary IBWA In-Building Public Safety Survey Results

Please Indicate How Important the Following Applications or Services

Are to Your Entity and % having the capability

60%

40%

Real time event

prioritization

20%

Realtime multi- ;Weather integration Incident Biometrics for self database .' management or monitoring on

i management ,' system integration the incident scene

Courtesy, IBWA

Critical Very Important

Important Somewhat

Important

1 Not Important June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

77
Preliminary IBWA In-Building Public Safety Survey Results

Please Indicate How Important the Following Applications or Services

Are to Your Entity and % having the capability

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

Potential Technology Tools Examination by National Sheriff's

Association Crime Prevention & Private Security Committee

Example: Connecting

Incident Management

with Building Security

Secure Wireless

Connection

To In-Building Security

System

via

4.9 GHz Public Safety

Spectrum

• Access Building

Cameras & Sensors

in Hostage or Bomb

Threat Incidents

• Remotely Control

Building Functions as Part of Response

• Leverage 4.9

vehicle equipment

used for access to

other PS hotspots

• Over 700

agencies

have 4.9 GHz

licenses

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

78
4.9 GHz Band: 50 MHz of Broadband

Spectrum Dedicated to Public Safety

ISM

Leverage Technology

U-NII U-NII U-NII

D

S

R

C

PS - Public Safety Licensed \ySpectrum: 50 MHz of dedicated spectrum

UNLI - Unlicensed Broadband Spectrum

DSRC - Digital Short Range Communications Spectrum

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

Mesh Technology

• Integrated Multi-radio access points available

to cover 4.9 GHz and 2.4 GHz bands

• Data and video applications

• 1 MBps data connectivity at fringe of access

points, even at 200mph. Rate is increased as

the user approaches an access point

• Self-Healing, Self Forming & Self Balancing to

match mission critical needs

• Built in location & INDOOR LOCATION with

MESHTRACK

• Supports "Zero Infrastructure" Ad Hoc

Networks

&

J?

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg, MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

79
Mesh Technologies

jTnTsff. I Mesh

June 20, 2006 Gaithersburg MD NIST High-Rise Emergency Communications Workshop

80
c

a;

'-a

Q

"o

On

u

—

OX) c

o3

=

>>

-CC

# C

&C3=

-
c

CD

CO

CO .C

CD . • ^d

°- o 2 > & CD

CD 0> Q. >>

co i- =5

g.

CD o

CO

g

CO CD

co" O) > ° CD co 5 g

CD CO >, CD

CO = -2 CD fe E

Q. ^ E

ro

CD

*"" CD CD p° g s 3 0) CD -C E !g" *- cj o _n O CD 5 ^ O o

com T3 o 0) s* CD oc 5

CD 2 CD CD

CD CO

fc

CD "CD o co C ,_ 73 oz1 siCO CO CM o ° < 3 O) * c

CO CD Sz >*

CD 5 . c o o o

~* "•"

— CJ) CO 1 ° CD E CO = C O

CD < "O c o —

«)i = "too o 5 c\j < o -o J oS

O Sg>TS O

CO

O CD *» CM = a s c-g5 0)c

CO

CDc(CD .co c o o

CO CD — CD o o_ o O

*~ ><

CI) CD > T» o O

en

'*—

r

u

CI)

r i CO CL 3 < r~- _i cn

>.o

CD Jr CO 3 CD o-J2 c

Cl> <D £

-fc 3

CD

C 5? oco C B

CO ° -D E

CO CD O JC o co co CO

"- QCDcc O CD

CD ffl CD _Q CO £ E CD o 13 cz T7 C C CD

CO CD -C 3

CD o « O 33 S ~ ~° 2 o S b

in < .!2 o

CN

oc
oo
a ^—S sa5•«I1•S 5 V 5 ! | S : 2 i s 1 '

!! 1 5 S = I Em E i : i5 5 i i

tti co

a> o 3

13

CD a>

ID ,_ cc

Q.F

<» CD ^ c co .52 .c

<1) co a> o a H LL I 2 _l

COo(oo 'c ! IDocoOoco k o m a> i LU # •o f c

fe CO f i§ ! k

El : f 0)Ec 1 o I

mmm4 >c

LU
oo
00
c-aaQOoIQ—a

jsU

>>ceg

csC

It09-

0)

-I—»

CO

CD

TD

05

DC

05 o X DC

LU LU

-1

D

Q- Z S o o a. o CO CO oz

LU zo m < >- H a oz o <

a.' z

III o > Q o z z -I

03

LU

LU o

LU

CO

H o Z cr LU i Q o O I z

a)o

-i—»

CO

05

-•—» CO

CO

m

=8

c<o->* g ffl ? £ u g o o s o U £ Q u tz> H Q O oo O

en

CO <D

c_

CO CO

ad c

CO

CoN

"o

5-1 4=u

42Uo U

>. *—> J5

co 4—>

i-l i_

03 CD o

Oh T3

CQ Q.

in £ 'o

O

en

>> Si

-*—>

03 CD > u Oh

*—• C • tH>>4—I

S-H •I—1

4=1 H o 00

CD*

a

4—< a CO • • • •

oo

Q11

co

CO

<* CN oCO

co to

CO

CN

O

a.

25 Y— o -

CO

Hi JO T* CO

(0

Q>co

-5?

.c51 <3

(0Et

CO

•co

v.O

CQ 2

ffi c

<s

-c

Q.

(0 iS 21

<fl c 2

.2su£o6

(0

toc

<bEA5

,o- UJo

•65

8*.s * 5 «M C tj c s- O W> fa E u o

LU CC

d)cJoco

•c&o

'5£
<

-J<Q > Z 0) < oHzo

r£ 00oH

CZ3

O

a > u

00<OOHO <<QQ< T

oc

oc
2 = O

oc o E 5 Q ~ DCDOC

ffl CO .Q,

co

COCO

(1)

coc

CDE

CDCD

COc

CO

Itoco

CD

co

.2

O >- 5; >-r en

Q

CL o

Q.E ? 1 co E "5. oCO

CD

CO CO § I O CO O CD

-O CD

CD

g " o

CDCD

CD

C

CD CJ

CD CO CD U

CO PO

Q.

c7T CLID

cr

CD

O ^sL ra O> CD s c

CD CD C en

CD>^ CD

CO O)

en co _

CD>

en c

'5

.0

.E o 2

CO

O) = C =J CD J2 ^> C

CD CD Q. " S|

ON

00
O

OiD

"oaH

*cc«

'-G

C8

*-> COo=

C8S

C8

S-i 0>Su

PQ

s;oi/) "3a©s

i»ce

o>u

0>

<x> x: i !

is ro |E

CO .c <D i 5-I

goS i o

to DC

(0 ooz

T33

0) Q co

(0o

'E3EEoo

«J Q

"33oo>

Sic wJ a k. 1|* i— x «h ® m il ° il < <D S

•5= I I m I I COEE3

(0 .c

oSOI co

+3

C5O

'E3EEoo toi

0)

•— (0 CD p

.a !» «, *

<= a> £ 2

=j -a -2 o

CD S O 8 DC

g

O « « =J S 5 E o » *£ (3 co

CD

g CD CD °- — C —

R- o o <o

c/> <u !r at Q. « — U) <D 2*- <»I" —m

9> £ o i « o ^ .5 (0

Olo

to ,;=

«j <o I I o co a) S CC DC 2 8 ' ' * « I- OT

Ill ? o E §«* _l U- CD

O
o

V)

(0o o 6

<x> co

(Do ) ©Jniejaduiox j|v ooc>I co

"J

(0u

'E3EEoOo

"5

ro (£

CO>» 0)

"O

N

N +•» n> -1- f "I" C «is

CO o *S o

cog

s-f o

>> o *-i O — N N C N I X c Si 5 a O «3- o

CTo

a 2 CM

aj co ' 1 I £,[ u. £ x

a>

x o x S a> = > 3 3 °- «

T3 • CO • • .i 3

DC (/)

Q

-goQ

03CO

en CO

CD

r

ct> <i> o

to£

ra

CD *- Ti

ro3 co c r o3

cT r. CD < COc >•

roc o9

O)

(/) cg

CO<2E

COc

a> 15E

o>c

'c

'ro 8 o o o

ro 2.ro~ l 5 2i

5-S ro E

"2 o .2 |cow< .TO, • • •

CD cg

ro c

On

O

a.C3

TOoo <

a.

ra E a co m i: 3 CD 5 I " ° _

CD IXo

COE S E o OS»E Z

>- l-° i=It§ o CO w — E m "S

0)

O 5 S

Q.

>> • • h-I

>^ o 8 I

CD "D X c E £2 - o

a> o

-9

"~~

w

w 5 E E = o o o o I g |5i. S *f CD

s. (0 ffl

O c » ® « — u> -a "> u r = ro 2 E

0|E2

CD

O

Q.

ro

CD IO 6

CD UJ Q. S 5

CO ^ = 2 c <o o 15 g

»- i

a. o si 2 £

O) Q) CD c <— *~ <-> % |?I O M = z r § e 8 - -2 8

CT>

O

O CD CO Q. • >~ « I n ~ v#^^ ST E E 3 i E 1 CM o o x

*—

A

ro

x 5 =

ti.

c- a> (0co

"5* '5

Maximum

Temperatu (°C)/(°F)

CMegSo OCMmSto oo

en3CD

CM

OomoCD

CMA cou

**

ro JC E .? 5 P£ in in in

T

_

i_

X <D CM t- V

<u ro E

•a Sj= c

z>

u>10

ro O

ro

— -ii— > Eim

0> £1-
o

5kD)OOC

.Cu

(0u

"E3EEoo u

.2

'5> ooc£

CO T3O

H-

*" c3

"S £ c 0)

O o a) 3.

.. CO -77. CT O) ~ 73 J= C (0 « 2 o 2 ^

(0a> "5> oocO

a>

T3C

0) £; -O 03

CO ^ gill ^ 2 CO -Z.

CO ' ' ' a

<D E w £ S

"o

® E is? E " ° i ^wooco

I-co

csu

"E3EEoo E

0)(0>»

(/) •oc3o

CO E 8 S 3o o i < z

(03Oo<

.2 CO •£. -o en « >. S £ g TM i£s si

8?

V E<P S E

ra

O

Q

U cO

'«5 »

a) o g£ </>

</) ts £

CO 6 o c 2 in w ° n i> ° E Q.O) 3 (0 3 JC

<N -

"1

<>>

O)ooc£o

0) 1- £< c CO o (0 X>

«-• 0) c

<0 O) (A

CD o o Oc c o o>

CO 3E c

.co >,

Oo

CD E

0)

*-> T3C oc CO c 3

CO & o o

-3O c

03 o

<u c

en o 0)

COu

<T> CO

H CO

C

O) X) ••—

CO 3 — o ca o o

CD

CO o <

CO

O)

B1 o — CD <.

(D < DC c 3 ^ CO z 2 i 1 1 1 O

CO 1 1 1 1 • •
o

O)

.cuoco

'j

(0o

"E£Eoo s I

i. t c

(0c

<J5 > _ o

0)

(0

re 3 8 5 c Z Co 3 3 S <0 E g-o ? n m o

<D

1-rawc = ©

.2 E 3 = S » E?E

0) "w Q. Dl c ° 5 c

.2 «3

a J* o

(0 ooc

JCuo

h-co

"^

(0o

'E3EEoo wE

0)w

>» COnQ

0)oo>o

CD DOC ?—

CD P

c?~l 3 *

CD

—

O CD

CDOO CO > TJ

(A 5 o o

CO o

uj 2 E E

CO CO c c

CD CD c c

CO CD o o

„_

AC 2 E

>. O)

(0

C E 5 o «

>»n

ON
9

to

i_o

toc

CD CO

O)c

;5

'5

CO

10

fl) 0) I

a>oc

IDEo S « I 0) O..S IW ?§C <u o

is o

>- 2 ^ ^ 5 8.

CO

O

•* TJ O <D

(0

i-o

Cfl c

CD CO 0)

TM o 2

co <

.E

a

T3

C * oE .*

i. o o co

CD TJ

o> (0 2 £ a ao • o aco S g 3 "> o -. C to ~- aj » e

j? E o> c w I §.«!,|

«!!

Q. £D Ll

O)

RJ

u.0)>ou

D)c

O)c

(0

—

u .— c O . E c c » = i i ° o

(0 <"» 3m

a> co Q. W £ > 3 Q.

cr co

0) -o

CC < I I

II

<(%

CD \

U>

<D

CO

COO cou

COO)

(0 Ha

u_a: 2

a> o

CO

CDw

«*- o

O)3

(0

(0

oi

CD 0) > C

<S o a c • •

CO

ON oCO£

CO>

CO

CO *<

(0 QooO>

75oo

-Q

CO b o<

CO

CD

(0

CD ooo

COc

<D COa)c3

ffi

a) i_ a. a>

co -o

•i <B S £

.9- ro *2

Q.

O E £

S3 wc

5.. . E

co cr 8 | o a) £ o 2

0>|

Q

LL CD LL

a> z * a

IsE -<= 2 <

:r I I I I ocoo

CO

1_o

COc

CD CO

k.o

tU

CO

CO

0)

(AO)

CO Hco

COoc

a>

LL

cr

0)C

a> o

>.3

ITc3

U)

TO o

O) <l) .—= SD) oc

(0

1—0) Dn

a> rx

CO CD 5 i.i

.E£^ 2 = _

0)

J «

T3 ^ co

>- CO 5 QlilS _ • • U.

cr

Q.I

CD "O CD

CO > 2 "55

C f0 Q. 'of S

•5 | S

£} g>

O

C *j E — CD co CO >c S Sre =o 2co ** co <D Q LU QC _ • •
o

co

o

V)o

(fl c

o

(f)

i-o+>jC

o

(fl 0)

x:CD

iZ

(A

(0O

.-•••* v.

; «?* , v

*;,+. "--^

"-• tf' i

£*l

in

isi 5 i i

• • 4 » \

=1 l> "V

<%* ""<&* ^> »-•'

o

c

o ^f" |^« o

(fl o JLS1

(fl c

</>

CO CO

CD 1—

CD o

*j CD IZ £ E >

O) CO >.£

Li. oo

•Dc

ors/nodes

ed

on

the

fl

3

locate

nea

il

(0

cE

c

o

C

!So

(0

CO

COo

CO (0 o (0 c

CD < c 2. TM 0)d>

(D O

'E3

E

E

o

•ac

CO

co </) w 2'5i

1- O

(J) cE

D>C0 C Q_ = oCD • uo

o

i.

COc

CDE

lyadd thses ve

pin z o O o

_l — CO »- oo TO

* |sS £ co cd T (fl (J TO Q DC T3< a

O) C C CD O Q. O \il

O) i- „ c

c a> o> t; E o.E = e ' °- -

-C CO CO 05 a. a

(A

O

V)c

9)

(/)i— £

il

T3

0) £

3

-o a

C TO O Q. ° S

X

o *.

a> 1 <fl <
£>

"l

^1

03

.#

+*

(0 Q

"35 E

(0

u >» o>

0)

0) .o

(0 > «

"O i_

a o (0 > z E 3 CO

(1)

a

>.

"5 I "J2 E3 O a,CD 3

</>

— CD

00 o 2 E E w oO IB E^ CD ow

"5oac

CO 3

(0o

(0cV

(ft

r

of

Struct

ercial

sysl

red

for

lim 0) T3Oz

52

CD 5

CD "Oc

as

D>

CD o0)CS O -o O C

TO

CJ

CD

13c

CO

CO

a) "Oco

Q.

en CO

b c ° M

g ** co C o

CD g CC CD

<1)

a.

CJ u.

0) o 0) o 2 S o Q- Q t > _l LL

O 3 i i i k. i 3 . GO ll o ' • • •

£\ 1 t/ >o

Ol 5 2

O) c

CD

—

:£A > g g

O)

g

g o g 5 oc

.cu

0) \-co

+*

03O >o c Ol 3 ** EE

(0c

(0c o o $ co a o (0 e to c ? oo >. OJ ID i jj 3 = K c a elso 01-9 elso • Z n c

On oc

Q_Oo

CDOOX< Oi~o

u.3+-> 3

U.>.o>ooc

.cuo

I-co

"^

(Duc3EEoo

>>aoocCu

0>g

IVc

"o <° o £ c

x; » 3 E r = O Q- co p a> w

0>

n 2 O oI! II „ O H (t 1 12 = a

(0

V

CO £ CO

jj » 2 a> o — " Q. "

"I!e

«>

X2 3

.- <0 o t; ?; o ooS » 2 .£ 5 lT3 O - Q. O) 3 X C -D <B Baa> >

<u .s .=

C II

— CO CO - ?s? O .' CO c c

CD 0) co (a u) T) CD 01 i5 J

<° 3 /J il U

to>

UJ I I I

CO "Dc2

CO

Q. Q.

a> ai rx <z
J

•0 o 11 |

-g lis c

re o 00 o ^^^^ Z 9 .i ,>. I* TO ** O 3 >> ^

1"

.0 7 5

oj c 00 3-C CO CM

:§

g

w <5j

.<2 re < 3c

00

CD

CD

Q re c D «|3 | ^, D- CO 00 CO

<D

re

re u. <LLCO« ' O CO

CD CM ^

LL

CMcO

CO

CD

1^o>|C

CO1 TJc3O

O

_J<

CO3

CO

DO

00c

'w

CD "D

73 c

CO

CDci

Q.D

co

>.

t:

CDQ.O

Q.

"D

CDCO £5 £

Hi

b - ^ 2

CD LL

O

CD oZ3

CD

DO

tz 2

XZ

CD

In

CO LL

CDO

CD O 1 1 1 | C

'^

CO u_ 1 H DO

CO 5

CO h1 1 • • • •
oxO

"oa

-a

o> H

'O8

03 -S

'-ca -oa

08

•*- CO

CmOa

C/3 a

03ao

03I

-a

1/3 aaM

COao

03 *^a

</: u

On

IHqhU^ O

03 (/)

C CL

C

a4=° —E 2QCS m CO

O^ c >*

o5< « 8

LJJ

C g>S>

'5 c E

I- °

.Q

CO CO

CD>

CD

*-* CO

tjSSilfij).o

"©s

.eoH

13S«3 i2

o-E

CD i—»

CO

SCO

03 c

0).2 S EC

"5

CD

coo

CDo

Q- c

O) o I

'§ og

CD>

CDQ_o

CO ±i CD © W

Q_ CD E o) o .E O CO

CO

*—> COooc

COo

CDQ.O

"D

CDO3oCD

00
©S c © 2 © s ? z E .9 ^ © 2 © u -3 u a 5 O ^ ° .2 o ;g o r3

73

>^ ^H

5-1 o o

CI,

<Z>

On

COE

CD *—»

CO „ >^

iBCO

o) .2 £ E

^<c

T3

DO

O) ~ CO

CD E C

M—.^

-I— CD> O— - CO "£ O >>£ < <" CD >1& 8 8.<»

co£

CD CDc .1=CD ccoo oo CD B <o O

.Eos E c

CCc

CD

COo

COc

CD

CO "D

CD

i_

05

SI

CO

COCDc3

.Q

_CD

Q. 3E
+?

5— T3

CO

O

CO £ o

-C o *-J i_ !_

Q.

•*—> >o cO 05 <

DO

C

C)£ c

-1—»

QL o Q. X 03

LU

73o

CDCO

T3

CDO

CO

i—

-Q£

LUI *—• cO<

CD

COco"4—»

COE

COco

Q.

CO o c o P

CO E >

CO c

-C CO

CO "O I 2 o

exi

3:' oo

=5° CD = b O) 0)

.5 8

CO

+~

CD

C

O

OE

-*— o»

CD £ T3

CO

CD £ *—»

CO£
•*—' oCO O)

CO c

CO

CO ;g

CO '5 E

JO

CD CO \CO c

>> JZ

CO +-J c > g CO

05 c E g o CO •*—> 3 g

05 'c C

13E

T3 E i '3

.Q

CD

C

O

CO "o> l . cE

Q.O>

"O COO

_Q

O

CO

*—>

C tT

LU

O

Q_

(f) Q_ < D

CD CO

"D • cg

So

O)

"O

.£ o ecc

<o OQO

coa

a.>z

"^

First

plane

hits

CO

In

<u£ > 1; cc3000000000c

(%) uojssjWsue.il jueojed

CDCc

co x:oEEoo

.co-I-' CDQ.

CO

-I—' CD

CO

CO

.Q

Q. o

COEE

c/)

.E c

.q co

J2 CD o -2

co co

CO .£ I 2

'"co * o c

E.2 I 1 E o

"5

O co A

CO D

COC

CO

co

i_o

_c

T3C

W

CO o o o

COE ~o

"CO >> CO CO CO CO f c c

.2 co

"co

©

co

O CD

CO "D

0)T3

C S coc

COCOco

.Q

•D© CO A o

Q.

COOc

O)i_E