A Study of Firefighting in the Coming Age of Ubiquitous Computing, 2002
-
Upload
jason-hong -
Category
Technology
-
view
70 -
download
0
Transcript of A Study of Firefighting in the Coming Age of Ubiquitous Computing, 2002
A Study of Firefighting in the Coming Age of Ubiquitous Computing
Xiaodong JiangLeila A. TakayamaJason I. HongJames A. Landay
G r o u p f o rUser Interface Research
University of CaliforniaBerkeley
Nov 20 2002 2
Research Motivation
• Emergencies are a fact of life– 1,755,000 fires in the United States in 1998– 4000 deaths, 22000 injuries, 100 firefighter deaths / year– $9 billion+ in property losses / year
• Difficult to make coordinated decisions under stress– Assessment, tracking, communication, and planning– "Fire fig hting is m aking a lo t o f d e c is io ns o n little
info rm a tio n"• Improvements can save lives and minimize damage
– Every second counts
Nov 20 2002 3
Research Motivation
• Relatively unexplored domain in HCI– Very far away from desktop computing– High-stress and chaotic
• Sensor nets– Small cheap sensors for location,
identity, temperature, humidity• Significantly pushes scalability and usability
issues for ubicomp apps
Nov 20 2002 4
Overall Approach (1 of 2)
• Field studies of Firefighters– Understand existing tools, processes, language,
structure of emergency responders– Understand the problems and constraints they have
• What we learned– Incident Command System for managing and
coordinating resources– Accountability– Assessment– Communication– Inside the Fire
Nov 20 2002 5
Overall Approach (2 of 2)
• Iterative development of lo-fi prototypes– Understand what kinds of sensor information useful,
who needs to know it, and how to present it– Prototype an electronic board for relaying sensor
info to a specific role, the Incident Commander– Prioritize for "bang for buck" deployment
• What we learned– Location is the most important info– Also wanted support for managing resources– Difficult to scale for large incidents
Nov 20 2002 7
Field Studies
• Field studies– Observed and interviewed
participants in "normal" work environment
– Four months, three depts– One field exercise– Two emergency calls
• Participants– 1 Assistant Chief– 5 Battalion Chiefs– 2 Captains, 2 Engineers– Many Firefighters
Nov 20 2002 8
Firefighter Organization
• Basic unit of organization is the Company– "Any piece of equipment having a full complement of
personnel"– Engine, Truck (Ladder), Brush, HazMat– 1 Captain, 1 Engineer or Driver, 1+ Firefighters
• Battalions are a collection of companies
Nov 20 2002 10
Organization in Larger Incidents
• Companies are organized hierarchically– Divisions are for geographic regions
• Ex. North or Third Floor– Groups are for specific functions
• Ex. Ventilation, Rescue, Rapid Intervention Team
• Command Post– Officers and staff managing overall response– Planning, Operations, Logistics– Person in overall command is the Incident
Commander (IC)
Nov 20 2002 13
Incident Command System (ICS)
• Used by many local, state, and federal agencies
• "[U]nified command, common terminology, comprehensive resource management, and manageable span of control"
• Five roles– Command -> Strategic plan– Operations -> Tactical operations– Planning -> Maps, weather reports– Logistics -> Getting supplies– Administration -> Finances
Nov 20 2002 14
Example ICS Forms
• ICS supported by many forms– ICS form 201
• Help visualize and keep track of situation, communicate with others
Nov 20 2002 17
Scenario – Single Story House Fire
• 911 Dispatcher notifies nearest Fire Station• Firefighters in first engine size up the situation
– Ex. Layout of building, scope of fire, nearest hydrants
• Engineer sets up hose lines• Highest ranking officer assumes role of IC
Nov 20 2002 18
Scenario – Single Story House Fire
• Battalion Chief arrives– Assumes role of IC– Might also assume
Operations and Logistics• Delegates in larger
incidents– Gets 30-sec assessment
from previous IC• What resources do you
have?• Who is here, where are
they?• Status of fire?• What resources are
needed?
Nov 20 2002 21
Scenario – Single Story House Fire
• Figures out a plan– Offensive / Defensive
• Call for more resources– Second alarm, Third alarm, etc
• Once the fire is extinguished, releases resources
Nov 20 2002 22
Key FindingsAccountability
• Accurate count of resources & personnel
• Rapid notification of immediate dangers
• Some approaches– Two-in two-out– Roll calls– Passports– PASS
• Problems– Chaotic, difficult to get good info– Situations change quickly
Nov 20 2002 23
Key FindingsAssessment
• Sizing up the situation correctly– Scope of fire, hidden fires, floorplans, dangers
• Some approaches– Prevention (annual inspections, drills)– Collection of info beforehand
• Material Safety Data Sheets• Floorplans
– Firefighters on scene radioing back info• Problems
– Data out of date– Difficult to find right info– Difficult to get right info
Nov 20 2002 24
Key FindingsCommunication
• Coordinating responders• Some approaches
– Face-to-face– Radio communication
• Problems– Noise intensity– Congestion– Radio dead zones
• Missed orders• Missed abandons
Nov 20 2002 25
Key FindingsInside the Fire
• Carrying 40+ lbs of equipment– Jacket, SCBA, Axe, etc
• Often can't see due to smoke– Crawling on ground– Stay near hose lines, guide
ropes, or right-hand searches• PASS system
– Panic button, motion sensor– Most are audio only
Nov 20 2002 26
Key FindingsInside the Fire
• Flashovers – Simultaneous and sudden
ignition– New dangers due to equipment
• Backdrafts– Oxygen starved fire gets oxygen
• Hidden fires• Structural Collapse• Personal Hazards
– Getting lost, running out of oxygen, disorientation
Nov 20 2002 28
Low-fidelity Prototypes
• Initially focus on the IC– Three low-fi prototypes of
electronic board• Understand what kinds of
sensor info are useful, how to present it
Nov 20 2002 30
Prototype 1
• Pros– Floor plans very useful– Tracking individual firefighters
useful– Good for small incidents
• Cons– Unsure if could get sensor
info– Some info useful but too
detailed for large incidents– Need better support for
managing resources– History not very useful
Nov 20 2002 32
Prototype 2
• Pros– Liked the ICS greaseboard metaphor– Liked having overview map and local map– Sensor data about companies kept on the edge
• Cons– ICS hierarchy not often used, wastes a lot of
space– Hard to see important info when needed
Nov 20 2002 34
Prototype 3
• Pros– "Resource-task-location" very well received– Tracking of how long on duty also well received– Notification of critical situations better– Scales better for larger incidents
• Cons– Mixes Command, Planning, Ops– Concerns about cost, implementation
and reliability
Nov 20 2002 35
Summary
• Incident Command System• Accountability, Assessment, Communication,
Inside the Fire• Three low-fidelity prototypes
– Location very useful– Originally wanted sensor-based apps, but basic
resource management very useful– Scale is still a very difficult problem– Also questions of implementation (reliability)