Fire Protection

What?

Firstly, a vent is by definition an exhaust, not an intake.

Second... what?

So to the answer: No.

Actually, yes air does get drawn into the soffit vents and exhausts out the gable vent.

Fires mostly spread to houses by heat and falling embers....once the temperature gets high enough the wood begins off-gassing flammable compounds, the falling embers then ignite this gas and the fire then spreads....

Will that be the same or different to

Spontaneous Ignition!

When materials just burst into flames once they reach a certain temperature..

No: spontaneous combustion, spontaneous ignition, auto ignition... there is no need for ignition source, an ember is an ignition source.

Embers alone may not result into a wide conflagration like a forest fire!

A forest fire is an unusual thing, sometimes seemingly with a mind and a will of its own.

Some days, in the woods, it is difficult to get a campfire going on a sunny day using half a box of kitchen matches. Other days, a guy tosses a soggy cigar butt out the window of his car into the rain drenched vegetation alongside the road and your conflagration is sparked.

There is some nonsense being spread about here in the USA regarding some wildfires we are experiencing. Directed Energy Weapons used by some dark entity to selectively burn out the dissidents? No, these people are the victims of the whimsy of the fire god and his minion, the wind god.

I'd like to see an example of a guy tossing a soggy cigar butt out of his window and it starting a fire ( conflagration ) in rain soaked vegetation.

A soggy cigar butt would impune that it was soggy from being wet with saliva and isn't it the whole idea of fire fighters to put water on vegetation to get it soaked to prevent fire from starting or spreading ?

Well, I can’t find any reputable documentation for the wet grass part, but I do find this:

https://www.fws.gov/refuge/McNary/Alert/Fire_Prevention_Order.html

With that, out gassing of hot wood, the use of water curtains and cooling the exposures makes even more sense.

It's not rocket science...

..."An average surface fire on the forest floor might have flames reaching 1 meter in height and can reach temperatures of 800°C (1,472° F) or more."...

...." The temperature in the upper layer of hot gases rises to 400 degrees F—hot enough to kill people. ... The fire can now spread by two paths: direct flame contact or by auto-ignition, the temperature at which objects will spontaneously burst into flames without being touched by flames."...

Anybody who has actually witnessed a large fire up close can attest to the heat generated....You can't get within a 100 feet without being burned....

https://nhmu.utah.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/Wildfire%20FAQs.pdf

https://www.thisoldhouse.com/ideas/what-really-happens-house-fire

Potentially as the soffit vents are designed to draw air in, but if the fire is that close to a house it doesn't really matter as the house is likely to catch fire due to the nearby heat and flames.

Also, if the fire is that close to the house then you won't be there (unless you are a very heavy sleeper).

One of the main reasons for spread of fire, is proximity of flammable material. For fighting forest fires, usually, a barrier is created by felling some width of trees, and isolate the fire thus.

In central air conditioning, the duct that carries cool air, itself would be a path for the fire, and since the mesh that covers the inlet is usually flammable plastic,, it catches fire first and then the curtains etc.

Fire does contain some embers, especially, if fierce, and these embers are potential ignoters.

Yes, they do cause fires in the cellars too.

Is there sofit vents and attics in forests?

Anything flammable on a house can ignite if exposed to radiant heat and ingition source.

if amber gets into the attic if will ignite whatever is there to ignite. If there is suction and an open pathway through the vent, yes burning ember can get into the attic.

The concern should not be the roof vents but anything around the house that can get up in flames.

Houses in forests tend to accumulate flammable material from the surroundings to name in particular leaves or pine needles in gutters or roof crevices.

The amber has a home run when it hits a gutter filled with dry leaves and would be more concerning than the roof vent.

The fire in the attic will still develop.

Be safe!

Ten years ago I worked as a design engineer for Shindaiwa. At the time we were approached by an individual who was promoting a patent on a dry foam fire suppression system and he was interested in our backpack blower as an air supply for the product. The system used a tank of chemical, a water source and the blower. The chemical and water went into the backpack blower exhaust tube and turned into a foam that could be stacked up. It would stick to and stay on walls, roofs, bushes and such. He had some demo videos that were applicable. In one video, the system was used to turn a stand of dry undergrowth into a wall of fire suppression foam that was an effective firebreak. Another demo involved covering an entire house in a cocoon of foam that blocked the flame and embers, but also the radiant heat of a brush fire. In another demo they took a car on fire and filled it with foam in about 5 seconds, extinguishing the fire. In a final demo they used the system to put out a football sized basin filled with JP4 jet fuel.

I've always thought that putting one of those systems in each neighborhood in California would be relatively cheap insurance and go a long ways towards mitigating the local wild fire risk.

I've been looking for a link to the video demos, but haven't found them yet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firefighting_foam

Worst...painters...ever.

Same idea, only foam was left on about a foot thick or more and didn't run at all. It was also a one man operation with a lot more volume throughput, about 70 to 100 cubic feet of foam per second.

I wonder if hanging a radiant barrier 12' high curtain around the house would slow it down....?

A louvered wall system that could be closed when fire approached....

Ember carryover in the wind would breach most of those in short order. In my area we've had wildfires jump 2 miles over water and have whole, smoldering oak and maple leaves drop out of the sky.

Maybe tenting the whole house in a radiant barrier...?

Why not just build or clad the buildings in more fire resistant materials in certain areas to reduce the risk if it is such an issue.

A giant fire blanket for a building is only really helpful if the fire is very fast moving and is exposed to high temperatures for a short duration isn't it?

This stuff looks up to the task....

Fireproof building materials...

http://www.bwf-group.de/en/bwf-protec/applications/seating.html

http://www.jeccomposites.com/knowledge/international-composites-news/ntt-carbon-fiber-group-announces-koreox-preoxidized-pan-new

The fancy materials that would likely provide a good level of serious protection are still cost prohibitive though for a whole house?

Maybe California could set up their own manufacturing facility and the insurance companies could offer steep discounts sort of subsidize the cost...I mean the costs of firefighting alone in Calif must be exorbitant...Probably a lot cheaper to just cover any building in the path of the fire....

...."California's $442 Million Fire Budget Is Exhausted—and Needs $234 Million More to Keep Fighting. California wildfires have scorched the state this summer, and the costs continue to mount.Sep 6, 2018"...

http://fortune.com/2018/09/06/california-fire-2018-cost-insurance-claims/

...."California Wildfire Insured Losses at Billions of Dollars and Climbing. An analysis by catastrophe modeler RMS shows 15 wildfires are burning more than 280,000 acres in California have collectively destroyed nearly 7,000 homes and businesses and killed 31 people.1 day ago"...

https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2018/11/12/507286.htm

It takes on average about 2 hours to tent a house.... and 2 hours to remove it...

California spends almost 23 billion a year subsidizing undocumented aliens ,,, and you say they only need 234 million to fight a little forest fire ( ? )

"... California spends almost 23 billion a year subsidizing undocumented aliens ..."

That seems worthy of linking to a source

TX - 11 B, NY - 7.5 B, FL - 6.2 B, NJ - 4.

4 B, IL - 3.2 B, .

Off topic.

That's not a link to a source....Ooops,,here's one...

....."There were approximately 11.3 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. in 2016, roughly unchanged from the prior year but well below the 12.2 million peak in 2007. There were an estimated 8 million unauthorized immigrants in the U.S. civilian workforce in 2016, roughly 5%.^[7] The Congressional Budget Office reported in 2007 that "the tax revenues that unauthorized immigrants generate for state and local governments do not offset the total cost of services provided to them" but "in aggregate and over the long term, tax revenues of all types generated by immigrants—both legal and unauthorized—exceed the cost of the services they use."^[8] "...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_impact_of_illegal_immigrants_in_the_United_States

Yeah the whole picture looks a little different....

Oh and a bonus find, the explanation...

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/cost-of-illegal-immigrants/

Wikipedia, the first paragraph pretty much sums up the following text. In this, wikipedia remains neutral. " is challenging to measure and politically contentious. Since it is a challenging field to quantify, it leaves room for varying methodologies of study, and so the definitive results of the economic impact can change ". In other words, the following text could have an unknown number of interpretations and quantities, dependent on the study (s). More of a factoid than anything. A few notes:

a. Can lower wages and increase overall costs of production. Wages are part of production costs. Lower wages increase production profits, not costs.

b. Illegal immigration increases the welfare of domestic workers. So if the pool of workers goes up and the overall wages go down,,,

c. 11.3 is not, " well " below 12. 2 . , more like slightly below.

d. If paid under the table,. Employers that pay this way don't pay welfare contributions or other costs.

Thanks for the morning chuckle.

Too much guesswork here and little substance.

This seems pretty definitive...

https://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/cost-of-illegal-immigrants/

OK here we are in the middle of one of these fires with a guy that had to evacuate....I think the whole house cover would work...It would need to be deployable within like 30-60 min ....

Like a giant folding awning...

Why not aluminized Mylar, or whatever they make personal fire shelters out of?

Don't know if this would hold up to the heat in all cases, but would make a great experiment...maybe a double layer or beefed up version for purpose...

https://www.auburnmfg.com/product-category/safety-clothing/aluminized-fabrics/

Ha! check this out, just saw this....

A similar product already exists.....although it doesn't look like it's instantly deployable...they say it's deployable in minutes...OK this might be the barrier wall thing more than whole house cover...

http://www.firezat.com/contact.html

..." The Forest Service used Firezat’s 5 foot by 150 foot reusable HD structure wrap. Once the fire has passed the wrap can be rolled up and used for future fire events. Firezat cabin wrap is used to help protect historical monuments, national treasures, cabins and homes, as the last best effort to save these irreplaceable structures. Firezat Fire Shields are preferred because of their larger size, reduced labor to deploy, reduced damaged to the structure, and finally, because they are constructed with a heavier aluminum laminate and Kevlar thread, they are reusable for many fire deployments."...

Ok this one is more like it, 3 hours and three people to cover a 2600 sqft house, and it required several different size rolls...in this case they had water sprayers under the tarp to mitigate the high heat, so there must indeed be a problem with the high heat encountered...

http://www.firezat.com/Firezat%20Press%20Release%20Oct-2007-PR.pdf

These firezat wraps are proven to work well in most conditions, but in the case of the recent fires in California , there didn't seem to be enough time or manpower. The massive amount of money ca. Is finally going to spend on forest management and proper power line management, will save many homes in the future, not to mention the amount of people who will be able to work in the forest.

If you're going in the forest, watch out for the ticks....the'll get ya'....

You could have something like half a tent on either side that were mounted in "C" shaped recessed vaults that opened when needed and closed like a clamshell covering the entire house...

....and little ones for your cars...

In thinking it over, one of the more effective things to do would be to cover your house with aluminum foil. The tinfoil hat for your whole house.

Something I tried one time when playing with various perversions of the big backpack blowers was to run a garden hose into the blower tube. The result was a plume of fine mist that went a long ways (80 to 100'+) and thoroughly wet down everything in it's path. The tube air velocity was about 250 mph and the water got everywhere.

All these possibilities, but not One word about good forest management (which will not stop fires but it sure we'll lessen them). California is a prime example of mismanagement. The 'fuel' that has been allowed to build up (especially around subdivisions) is shamefull. They knew the drought was coming but they still stuck their heads in the sand. It actually costs allot less to 'manage' a forest, and a well managed forest 'plan's for fires. Communities can also plan for fires by changing their building codes. The building in the video showed some very vulnerable places. But the fuel on the forest floor (if it was cleaned up) is the key issue as that lessens the embers.

We need goats. Lots of goats.

I agree. Cleaning up the debris on the forest floor makes for less stuff to burn. Cleaning can even be by intentional controlled burning.

Yes, and yes. California has just finally come to that same conclusion. 1 billion dollars for forest management. We'll see. The gov. May divert it to California's tunnel to nowhere.

California seems to be really good at spending money uselessly....Just enable the logging industry to do what they do, that won't cost a dime, and if a few treehuggers get in the way, then lock them up, the'll no doubt be proud of their effort....California's quest to stifle any industry other than silicon valley enterprises, in the name of saving every little creature, other than human of course,, is usually at the heart of all their problems...

I hope California can use Colorado (and others) timber industry as a model. They "work", instead of "hug". New leases and new regulations are bringing back this industry.

They should start again to upgrade/replace the antiquated power lines and make sure the overhanging trees are cut back 15' or so and the brush munched up. There are some schools of thought that these older power lines and equipment have caused many fires. Every time the winds blow, the lines spark together. then the equipment powers up again with pulses of high voltage to recheck the open circuits, more sparks, which is crazy. Billions and billions in damage, but hardly any insurance. The power company will have a hard time recovering. But the train to nowhere travels on.

In areas dominated by 'fire ecology' species (trees being mostly conifers that create detritus that does not hold water well, dries out quickly, and burns hot) removing fuel from the forrest floor can be a profitable venture as pinestraw is in demand...though as landscaping it would better to ship it to more humid areas less likely to be under threat of wildfire.

A big plus is the fact that getting a paycheck and being in the forest all day is a no brainer. It helps build "spirit".

Does it matter?

Shouldn't you be Brexiting?

Some excellent footage here....