Apr 11, 2022
Welcome to episode 50 of Fire Code Tech! This podcast is a cross over episode with the host of the Fire Science Show Wojciech Węgrzyński. The conversation covers background stories for both podcast hosts, problems with the industry and how to bridge the gap between problems in industry.
1925 Building Code Link: Check page 19
Fire Science Show
https://www.firescienceshow.com/
Transcription
Hello, all welcome to the show. I'm Gus Gagliardi, and this is fire code tech on fire code tech. We interview fire protection professionals from all different careers and backgrounds in order to provide insight and a resource for those in the field. My goal is to help you become a more informed fire protection.
Professional fire code tech has interviews with engineers and researchers, fire marshals, and insurance professionals, and highlights topics like codes and standards, engineering systems, professional development, and trending topics in the industry. So if you're someone who wants to know more about fire protection or the fascinating stories of those who are in the field, you're in the right place, uh, welcome to episode 50 fire code.
In this episode, we got a special theme for you. It's a crossover episode with wojak Gudinski of the fire science show. Yes, we're doing a crossover episode today and it was a lot of fun. Wanna celebrate our two year anniversary on the fire code text show, and just say that so excited to keep producing content and releasing, um, new and original ideas.
Just content for people in fire and life safety. So thank you guys for listening. I really do appreciate it. I say that all the time, but it is sincere. Yep. So hope you enjoyed this episode with ack. We're going to get into professional development. My background, his background, a little bit of conversation about how the industry is trending and where we can develop content.
And so much more really enjoyed this episode with Woj. Think it is a phenomenal all star podcast. Hope you enjoy. Don't forget to subscribe to the fire science show and fire code tech. And if you want any of the links or topics that we talk about in the episode, you can check the, uh, show notes, notes.
Hello, everybody. Welcome to the fire science code tech show. I'm here with, uh, my friend and cohos Gadi. Hi guys. Hey, thanks for having me on the podcast, Jack, excited to be speaking with you. Thanks for having me on your podcast, cuz I'm really excited to be in your show as well because that's a crossover episode of fireside show and Farco tech I'm really happy to that's right.
Be here. So guys, you are the first one I've actually joined your show sometime ago. That was my first experience speaking and that was on the radio. And. Pretty cool. That was like a year ago and a lot has changed for me, but how's the time going for you? How was the experience building a podcast oriented around fire engineering for you?
Man? It's been so fun and yeah, it's been really fun for me to watch you get some, you know, success and just like people viewing and getting to see what you're doing. But for me, it's. I've been having so much fun professionally and with fire code tech, uh, the last year has been a lot of career building.
Just started a new role for a new fire protection engineering firm. And yeah, so working on building the podcast and still trying to get great guests and. Dream big about what kind of content and different pieces of media that I can produce for the field. For me, I'm always excited. I think I'm easily excitable, but yeah, it's been fun.
Been building. Yeah. I, I think for myself, when I make this, I, I make it as much for my audience as for myself and try to learn as, as much as I can go. That was the thing that made me start the show in the first thing to learn as much from the best people I can find around. And for you, the twist in your career, uh, you've developed a lot in last year, I guess it was as, as valuable to learn while sharing.
Yeah. I mean, yeah, same for me. I. Started the podcast because I was early in my career and I'd kind of reached a plateau where yeah. I wanted to learn more and there was like kind of a set track of how I could develop and that wasn't fast enough for me. And mm-hmm . So I wanted to reach out to people selfishly and pick their brain on different technical topics and professional development topics, and really kind of grow as a professional.
and for me, it was just like, when it worked it 10 times better than I thought it would, honestly, for the social part of it and for the professional and technical part of it. So, yeah, similar, similar thing, which I fantastic. I think the important part of our job in running our shows is to infect the mind of young engineers with some really solid.
Engineering. And we are both a similar age. We, we both have joined commercial activities, engineering activities, and I must tell you when I join engineering, my view over the world of fire engineering and the. Problems in the world of fire engineering was, uh, so different than what I see today after the year of, of doing this show.
And you are doing it for more than a year. And by, by the way, you've always asked people to tell their story in your show. What's your story, man? I, I, I don't think I've heard that one. yeah, so I started. And, uh, got my degree at Oklahoma state university grew up in Edmond, Oklahoma. That's in the center of the country just right above Texas.
I always tell people when I'm out of the country, cuz Oklahoma's a much less known, grew up in Edmond, went to school at Oklahoma state, got a degree in fire protection and safety technology. So it went to school for fire protection. Some people are surprised by. Graduated with my degree and went to work for a fire suppression contracting company, fire suppression.
So I got to see, yeah, I got to see the nuts and bolts of how sprinkler systems are put together and do hydraulic calculations and design just north of Oklahoma in Nebraska. So was in Omaha for about a. I learned a lot and it's been a big impact to this day on the hydraulics and, and kind of the, the fine tune.
Some engineers, they always stay high level systems and they never get down into the nuts and bolts. So for me, that's a valuable piece of my puzzle and figuring out how those systems work, move back to Oklahoma city, where I got a job in fire protection engineering. And yeah, I worked for a firm FSB for about four and a half years.
And yeah, really saw a wide variety of projects, aviation projects. I worked on a lot of aircraft hangers and department of defense jobs. I probably, you know, I was involved in about six or seven or eight flight simulators for a variety of Aircrafts local jobs, national jobs. I did work across the country everywhere from San Diego, all the way to LA guard.
So I got to see a wide variety of fire protection across the nation in that role, and really everything from like high expansion foam systems to hazardous materials and their storage and high industrial use cases. So that was where I really cut my teeth as an engineer mm-hmm and learned what does it mean to problem solve and to really be code compliant and to.
Solve problems on a national level and with a variety of authorities having jurisdiction. And so, yeah, started the podcast in 2020, April, 2020. So almost two years now. So was at kind of a two, three year step into my career and really just gained enough competency to realize how much, I didn't know. And then got this new role with just working with a couple other fire protection engineers that are really small firm.
There's only three of us and we're in Edmond again, close to where I grew up. So now working on hangers, still working on a variety of DOD and commercial projects and getting to learn a lot more about the business side of things and project management and a wider variety of fire protection engineering.
That's really my story. That's a proper engineering career. And I think a lot of the people can relate to that in both of our audiences. That that's what you do. You finish your course where you probably have received quite wide knowledge from the fire safety. And I assume. In many places, it will, uh, be different in my school.
We were strongly experiencing the firefighter tactics and stuff like that because it was firefighter's academy. And, uh, actually almost nons smoke control, which kind of ended up hilarious because I became a smoke control expert, but that that's, that was twisting the career. But you've mentioned like you go down on, when you exit this school, when you exit this wide world of, of learning from every side of fire and engineering, you suddenly find yourself in the, this hole of doing nuts and bolts of your systems.
And. Oh man, I've been there as well. I, I I've started learning about smoke control. Then I've started designing them. Then I've started doing CD for them. And three years into my professional career, I knew everything about shopping, more smoke control. That was my bread and butter. But, but then if I look from, to that experience from my today's eyes, from my today's knowledge, Even just taking my academic career aside, even just from the podcast view where again, I am exploring the broad ocean of fire.
I, I start wondering like, how do we sustain, you know, this connection for young engineers, with the broad context of fire, are we in a wrong way, building them a silos where they just go down the rabbit hole of designing one type of system. They become super expert like in hydraulic calculations, but maybe they don't know that much about evacuation.
And then in 10 years they will forget everything they've learned at the school, like how we preserve this environ. Where people are exposed to white fire science. Well, obviously don't tell me you start podcast because I will not take that answer. yeah. Well, I was gonna start off with the self congratulating answer of, uh, we're doing something here to help promote, but, you know, I think it's interesting to me when you speak to technicians or just people who are more involved of installation, it's, it's very siloed, but like you're saying, engineering can also be very siloed.
Mm. You know? Constricted to the whatever occupancies that you commonly deal with or whatever system types that you commonly deal with. I think for one of the ways that I always like to keep knowledgeable about these things is. You know, whatever professional sized societies or technical resources mm-hmm that you can find to really stay intact with these subjects, pick up a S F P E magazine or a, a blog article about data centers.
If you don't ever work on data centers and you wanna learn about, you know, common protection features and asset protection and life safety for these structures, how we promote it. The youth, or like, I think about a lot, the idea of how to bring people even into fire protection. Okay. That's good. Which is a struggle as well, like in the states.
I think that like, and maybe globally as well, I'm not as sure, but. in the states. It's a really hard education piece to like even make students aware that fire protection exists. Mm-hmm they might know that being a mechanical engineer or a civil engineer or a structural engineer is a thing, but they might not never understand that fire protection is a thing.
So I think it's a struggle on a lot of levels. Don't know if that answers your questions. I recall, um, I've met once a girl who just finished her architectural studies in Poland. And I asked her. So what did you learn about fire safety as a newly trained architect? And she was like, yeah, if I put sprinters in my building, I can do one hour walls instead of two hour walls.
And that's, that's pretty much it. And I'm like, wow, that's not a very, uh, thorough explanation of on what the profession of fire protection engineering is. And I think a lot of that comes also from us, the engineers of the community, because we also sometimes lose the grasp on what the important topics are or what the important issues are in, in my podcast.
I very rarely had. People who tell me that the roughness of the pipe is critical for fire safety or that some specific nuance of designing smoke control makes all the difference. They were rather that we are not talking with each other. We are designing in silos. We are not looking at the bigger picture.
We do not have defined goals of our analysis. Doesn't such a similar image. Come from your show, you have more engineers like people working on these big projects. So what's the collective mind of fire go tech, say about the big issues in fire and are we really addressing them? Yeah, I think that this new firm that I've been working at rated engineering, they are really concerned with this idea, this idea that the contractor is not speaking with the engineer and the engineer has a varying level of competency.
Project team has a varying level of competency, but how do we make this engineering team, as I've heard people describe it bef mm-hmm, had a whole episode about that, but how do we make this engineering team function better? And, you know, I've talked to people recently at conferences and really. Trying to needle this idea, you know, what kind of things can we do as a team better what's lacking in our documents?
The one issue that I've found is that water supply seems to be a big issue in the states. And maybe this is everywhere. Mm-hmm . But in documents, ensuring that you have data about the water supply and correct data and calibrated data and data that is acquired using the right methods. So that seems to be a really big issue in my local community.
And I can also speak a little bit on a national scale as well, but that's something I see for sure at Roja and like making the engineering team. Okay. I usually struggle crossing lines between different groups of interest on the project, you know, jumping on architects because I need a new shaft and it's impossible jumping on electricians because I will need more power.
It's impossible. I need the fan in this location. It's very hard. Uh, we need to cut costs. We need to make it more economically feasible. Uh, and then. You fight for safety. You want to design the safest building. You can, that's feasible to build obviously, but there's a really safe one. I don't want to design unsafe systems and unsafe buildings, and that's probably the goal of us all.
And then you meet the expectations on the other side that are not very well defined, like, okay, you want a safe building, but tell me what safety is for you, or like how we define it. What's the goal of the project. And we really lacking in this discussion. I, I think us may be slightly different because in us, the authority having jurisdiction is this strong party, I assume, I don't know.
Maybe, maybe I'm wrong. Am I wrong? and. It depends on where yeah. It depends on the population size, honestly. And how much money that, that enforcing entity has in order to fund these professionals that review these drawings. So if you're talking about LA, then yes, it's a very strong authority and probably rivals many globally, you know, , mm-hmm, so as far as restrictiveness and you know, how much they care and, and the, the letter of the law being followed to a T then yeah.
LA, but. if you're talking about rural Oklahoma, maybe, I don't know some far corner of Oklahoma where it's governed by a very small city authority. Um, it might not be the case, so it really depends. Mm-hmm but you touched on great points. I wanted to just say like that coordination thing is so difficult and also like having a discussion with the project stakeholders and trying to determine.
Is the risk tolerance of the owner. I think that's a conversation that I've been really thinking about a lot lately, but one thing before we go on, I just wanted to turn the table on you. Yeah. And ask for my listeners that you give a little bit of discourse on the fire science show. What, you know, people can go check it out and we'll drop some links for people to go click on it and check it out.
I wanna flip the table on you. Cause I know your listeners would like hearing it too from you about give me just your elevator pitch on the fire science show. Oh man. Uh, where to start? Uh, I hope the elevator ride is long that's that's a challenging one. Yeah. I, I think I I've made this show to give hardcore fire science.
No bullshit. Just straight as it is from the people I, I trust they know what they're saying. and the point is the fire science is so golden, vast. I, I said it on the show a few times. I, I knew it's gonna be wide. I knew it's gonna be crazy jumping from combustion to evacuation, to wildfires, to structural fire engineering.
I I've I've expected that, but boy, I did not expect how wide it is and how many aspects are there in the science. And the goal of the, the show is to. Give them the same justice, you know, to give them the same in depth, uh, look to investigate. What's important for them. What is interesting in them? So people are actually exposed to it.
Like I don't expect people will. Learn from it fully like it's if, if your expectation is to learn from one hour podcast episode, that's probably unrealistic because it takes time to learn, but just being exposed to something, you know, that something exists while problems are in there. What it means to do something really on a very high level.
You suddenly start to realize the connections, the problems, the issues. And if you ever find a problem like this in your life, you may already have a path in your brain, uh, build to where to find the knowledge and how to solve it. So, and I also, I want to break those silos between disciplines and, and break the silo between science and engineering.
That's a tough one to break. Like now I'm talking as voting S. We communicate through peer reviewed papers, which are probably horrible to read and even worse when you are an engineer. And there's a reason for that, because if you write a paper for a journal that is very like engineering, grouper, that's the first thing the reviewer is gonna pick on you up.
This reads like an engineering report, not a scientific paper, that that's a horrible review. Man I've received so many of them. So, so there's a reason why this is built in a way of like INAC accessible way. And I really felt bad about this. And then you go to a conference, you meet all these fantastic people.
You go for a beer of, with them, and you can talk about this fire science for hours. and it's fun. It's not like it's not a trip to hell. It's fun. And I thought, man, maybe we can recreate this somewhere online. And people could actually enjoy some of that. And I really hope they are. And in the future, I probably, you think they are.
Yeah. I, I hope they are. And in the future, I would also like to get maybe more engineering in the science show. I, I think it's important. You have a lot of fantastic engineers and they very good at defining the missing links. What do we really need? And I think this discourse between science and engineering is something we really need in our communities.
Like there is no point to do fire science, if it doesn't end up in fire engineering and there is no way you can do fire engineering, neglecting the fire science. Yeah, I think it's remarkable. I was talking to somebody recently who worked in like the, the tech transfer department at a university. So helping research get integrated into more physical aspect of things.
But yeah, I think that's a, definitely a struggle that, that divide between academia and like engineering and in my. I think about a lot like technology and you know, like how we could problem solve better and different ways to protect and keep people safe and how that really gets me excited. But then if you talk to the engineering community, at least in the states, it seems like they are not as concerned with that are.
More concerned with like fire science and these kind of highminded like ideas about fire behavior and like different things. But when I think that's partially, you know, driven by how these two entities get paid, you know, mm-hmm but I think that, yeah, it's something that we need to look at as a community, which is.
How to close this feedback loop between engineering and fire scientists. And, you know, I think that the states are experiencing a slow shift towards performance based design. And I think performance based design presents a lot more opportunities for. Scientists and engineers to work together.
Unfortunately, if you keep it purely prescriptive, it's a bit more bureaucratic and it, it provides less of those opportunities. I, I think that also goes back to the way how science is funded. With research grants, you get money for research and research by assumption must be innovative. They must be know this new best idea.
It's, it's difficult to get grant funded to improve an existing technology, because if the improvement is so evident, why don't the, the industry pay for that? And, and you get this. Paying punk back from a wall with grant ideas like that. So there's definitely this boundaries artificially placed there through funding, but then I appreciate efforts in, in the us, especially the, with like N FPA, uh, foundation, SFP research foundation.
I've heard UL is dedicating a lot of money to, to research in their institutes, which is also amazing. So I hope with more entities like that and more funding bodies that. Align engineering with science. There's a bright future actually for SFP. I, I must give them a shout out. There's the global challenges summit coming, uh, soon in, in like two months.
And that's a virtual. Even in which it will be discussed, what are the sums to be ascended? What, where should we go with, uh, with engineering and researchers can submit their grants, uh, to, to research, to get some money for research. Actually, actually I'm afraid that already is closed, but there will be next rounds.
I'm sure. And companies are paying for, for that. So it creates this beautiful link between science and engineering. Both suddenly do gain from that. And I think that's a beautiful cooperation. That's something I would love to promote. yeah, definitely. I think that's cool that I would be interested in that just to hear to me, I think, as a professional being aware of trends and being aware of.
Where the industry is heading is crucial. I mean, I can speak in the us. There has been a huge kind of upset with foam fire suppression recently. Mm-hmm and regulation changes about a F and the kind of incident record around hanger fires. Has led the industry to reevaluate some of these fire suppression systems.
And I've been aware of these grumblings in the community for a year or two. And then all of a sudden this legislation is popping up fast. And so having a knowledge about these trends in these. Large macro features of our industry and where it's going is very important because the more knowledgeable you are, the quicker you're gonna be able to react to as a professional, to where this is going.
I also had a question I really wanted to ask you, and that's gonna be a curve ball. There's a code in fire code tech. And I, I know you. And refer to cold compliance reading codes. And actually I'm amazed how you pop up these section numbers from your mind. For me, that's crazy. in, in codes, but in some aspects, you know, this fire science and fire engineering has there has been a third branch.
Which is probably as old as, as the other ones, the fire codes and how this environment is built. And as crossing, you know, the boundary between science and engineering, it seems, yeah, that's, that's, that's doable because you need to break someone's comfort zone. Hopefully not break low , but you can jump from one to another, but now to jump from science to code, well, that's a hell of a jump.
Yeah. Did you, um, You have people who are code makers, you have people who are so active in like an FPA and then yeah. ICC is the other institution. But yeah, I think that's a great point. I mean, the wheels of code grind slow. I always like to think about, as we think about September 11th and. What that did for the fire codes.
I mean, some of those impacts and effects we didn't see until maybe 10, 15 years later in the code. And so we have new pieces of fire and life safety equipment, like the bidirectional, amplifiers and buildings or emergency radio coverage systems. And so we see these change. Lagging in the industry. So I think that with any change we're gonna see, it's gonna have anywhere from a five to a 15 year lag, especially code in the states works from the coasts in.
So in a lot of ways, or think of it more of. From very large and progressive mm-hmm , uh, cities, and then into the more rural and remote. So it kind of filters in, and I think about it in that way. So whatever change you would like to instate to, to bridge that gap in policy or in code enforcement, diffusion of these ideas of these policies.
That takes time to permeate the, the different communities and cities and states and authorities. So there is this momentum. Momentum, I don't wanna say against change, but it takes a higher application to get it through. I mean, if you just want to talk about getting a new technology listed with a, uh, listing agency, I mean, there's so many barriers to entry.
Assume that you have a standard. Hm assume that there's even a standard to test your technology through. You know, there may not be, you may have to create a new standard with the UL and get that tested and put it finally, once it gets into the codes, you know, you've spent, oh, whatever, anywhere from a couple 10,000, you know, 10, 20, $30,000 to hundreds of thousands of dollars to get your technology into the code.
So, yes. Okay. It's a barrier to entry. It's a barrier to innovation at times, but we deal with lives and, and fire safety here. It's a complicated equation. I love the barrier to innovation. If I remember correctly in 1925 building, uh, code in us, there was this, that the goal should be, um, performance as, as often as they can.
So the technology is not limited or the, the, the growth is not limited by, uh, the technology that's prescribed. And that was like already a hundred years ago in the, in the code. And I don't think it went. That way, I'll find that quote. Maybe I'll pop in the show. That's uh, yeah, I'm horrible in quoting for my head.
yeah. That's remarkable to even think about, you know, like the codes in the us haven't even been the same in the last 20 years, 30 years, we used to have a couple different regional building codes in the us. And only in the last three decades, have we consolidated into like a uniform set of codes through the ICC and regionally, there are some states even that don't even follow those kind of same code enforcement procedures.
So it really varies wildly in the us, and it's not been that way for very long in my lifetime. It, it has been different on a regional level. It's pretty wild to think about. It's it's, we're a very, very young industry, honestly, to jump back to the mindset of a young engineer who's entering the profession.
This beast of codes doesn't make their work easier or harder. On one hand, you can learn the codes and that's it. You can design on other hand, if you limit yourself to codes itself, you lose the wider picture. Yeah. Like when you were professionally educated in us, was there some focus on having. There was, uh, like you said earlier, your education is really just like a broad base of everything.
And so in my mind there we're like the program I graduated was is like technology focused. It's a technology program. So it's really more on application. If you were to go to a program like the Maryland program or the Worcester Polytech program. They are more fire science oriented mm-hmm so they would be more performance based, more fire science, more fire phenomena.
Mm-hmm . So in school I experienced more technical applications, sort of mm-hmm training and knowledge, which is great because you know, like getting to wire a smoke detector in school and getting to trip a dry valve in school is that's all meaningful. But of course, you know, there's only so much you can put in a college degree program.
Having that experience, I would love to get a, you know, a master's in from like, uh, Maryland or one of these programs where they really harp on the fire science, because I think that's like how you get a well rounded kind of background for professionals. I see this code base is a huge hindrance on your ability to like perform at a 10 year professional or a 20 year professional's level because they have this long standing knowledge of.
Basis of how to solve problems. So what I think about is competitive edges for young people is I think that when there's something new or trending, you have to be knowledgeable. Cuz when something new pops up the 30 year professional has no more background than you do. So you can become the SME on it, and that's how you can give yourself a leg up.
Something like that happens now in, in fire science with the AI where the AI is a new, interesting thing. And it was a theme in my podcast. I had some interviews about that and from it emerges a view that it's a new, fantastic technology. And, uh, it really, you know, shrinks the distance between you and the ones who have 30 years of experience because.
Both you and them have to learn the new tool and amazing discoveries that can be done with them are available to, to everyone and base back to your background. Actually, you would be surprised how many fire scientists would never know how what's the difference between I know optical organization smoke detector, or, or how does a, a sprinkler valve work and, and what's the machinery behind it.
And I think this knowledge is also critical. Fire researchers. I would somehow assume my audience is more fire research side. I know I have a lot of fire engineers listening to, to this, but I think the fire researchers need to be exposed more to how truly buildings work, how safety is delivered, what are the elements of the puzzle that go into protecting their lives in the building?
Because yeah, if you don't. And you just assume you make mistakes that, uh, may impact the conclusions of your research. Like they will not change how the smoke flows in your experiment, but they will change, uh, the way how you can interpret the outcome of that experiment and what will it do to the building.
And there's a lot of people who who'd overestimate the potential impact. Like people figuring out a new, clever way to do something and they would say, okay, this is groundbreaking. This will change the world. No first, you have to validate that second. You have to mass produce that you have to put it in the codes or find a performance based route to implement that.
I mean, I've done some discoveries and boy discovering is the easy part. , it's so hard to get your new idea technology through. I think that's a great point. Like I was talking to somebody the other day and I was like, great IDs are a dime, a dozen. I could tell you a thousand good ideas, but like the ability to push it through and to implement it and to bring it in into life is really the, the truly remarkable thing.
I think about it a lot, because how many ideas have you had in the shower thinking about, you know, something that you found remarkable and it comes to you like a Eureka moment and you're like, oh my gosh, here's a million dollar idea I just thought of, and then what is that worth? It floats outta your brain.
And then it's gone. Yeah, you have to do notes, man. you have to take notes, notes that that's that's the tricky take notes. Take notes all the time. Take notes. That's that's good. Yeah. That's really good. Now for the last part of the show, I wanted to take this chance of us being here together to brainstorm something like how can we yeah.
Serve audiences better? How can we make the world of fire engineering? In a whole better how to better connect this worlds of fire science and fire engineering. And for me, I think it. Great to have more fire engineers in my show to understand where their pain points are located and maybe try to find scientific answers for them.
I think this could be a nice pathway. What, what do you think? Yeah, I. Think that, uh, more cross pollination in general. I mean, where I would go with it. I want more people to, to be talking and more people to be coming on podcasts and really having these discussions and trying to further the total scope and, and progress of our industry by just having more conversations and putting out more content.
I mean, I look at an industry like, uh, software develop. And I see an organization like a free code camp, and they put out dozens of hours of content on different programming methods and, and means, and it's all for free. And they have leaders in the industry come and speak about how to learn and how to develop and issues in the industry and dive into specific topics for hours on end and make it so easy that somebody who is in.
High school or middle school could pick it up and learn from it. And that's something that I really aspire for our industry to try to bring to the table. I think that we just need to make it more accessible, make it more detailed, make more of it. You know, I don't think that, you know, there's dozens of podcasts in fire and life safety.
And I still just think that we've only just begun. So. I've absolutely. That's my thoughts on it. I just hope to keep furthering that discussion and building a community of not only people who are ingesting the content, but creating the content. Yeah. There's so, so many good resources in the field of podcasting.
And I think with this field, uh, the murder is the better because there is no point of saturation. So if there's anyone listening in to us who would like to join the club, well, there's free spots here. We can, we can coach you through that's. That's the only thing holding you back is you that's. That's a cool man.
And also think. With, uh, Farcote having this mm-hmm, significant flare in, in personal development and career. And I, I feel this is a theme in, in your show where you really go through how someone got to the point where they are. I would truly love to hear stories of scientists who went engineering, engineers, who went engineering, and then came back to science.
That would be a stories I would love. I would love the most because I think these people, um, building. Careers building their experiences have really touched both worlds and, and in an experiment they've experienced what it means to lack scientific background for engineering and lack engineering goal for science, right?
Oh yeah. Well, I can tell you, I can't. Say any with the triple jump where they started, uh, academic, and then they went engineering and then went academic. But I can tell you career fire protection engineer to academic and, you know, uh, career academic to fire protection engineer. And I will tell you that the professionals who have experience in both are some of the most impactful and, and most inspiring that I've ever had a chance to work.
And the reason why I'm a fire protection engineer today is because I had a fire protection engineer who is a teacher at the school that I went to. And there were a couple, but one in particular, she worked in Clark county, which is in where Las Vegas is. So on these. Huge Highrise buildings. Mm-hmm and the blend of competency for research and like the progression of the field, as well as the functional knowledge of how codes and standards work and the science of how to implement these systems really gave me a big like eye opener on how neat this field is.
And like that really was a big motivating factor. And then on the other side at FSB, I worked with several PhDs who came from academia. And when I would go to them with questions about how a system would work and they would structural engineers, who would diagram out in hand, beautiful handwritten sketches.
You know, obviously you could tell that they had taught a class before Z would just go through. No, I don't know if you understand this point specifically and would draw it out. The actual connection detail for something we were looking at. Like how special those moments were in my life and how it's changed, you know, what I do now, um, it's, can't be understated, but so I think that cross pollination of this academic and, uh, professional or, uh, fire protection engineering rather is a beautiful thing.
Yeah, for, for me, it's also, um, important aspect, this like having this inclusive, I'm very happy to have everyone in the show, no matter who you are. If you're professor, if you are just a student, where do you live? Doesn't matter who you are. Doesn't matter. If you can together, bring the fire science a little closer to engineering.
You're very, very welcome. And I would love everyone to, to feel like that. And yeah, that's also important to me cuz there's enough barriers between us to build even more. Yeah. Yeah. I think that. For me, honestly, it's just like any time where I've tried to be like to bring people to the table and to really hear people's voice and, and to get input from others, it's always made my situation better.
So that's why. The the podcast and just trying to build mentorship and different kind of community relationships has been such a theme for me because it's been so rewarding. I think that I'm geared for it by my personal nature. But I also think that at every step of the way, I've just had dividends paid into my life from speaking with people and trying to learn and trying to grow.
So that's why you see it as a theme in the, in the podcast is it's just because I've, uh, received a lot from it myself, man. That's so, that's so cool. I'm really happy. We, we got to do this and I hope there's many members of fire central show, uh, audience that will jump. With curiosity to Farco tech and learn about all of these interesting career paths and engineering aspects of, of dealing with fire highly recommended
Yeah. Yeah. And I'd say for my listeners, if you want to, if you want to hear somebody speak. First of all. I mean, we, I can't get over Wil Jack's voice. I mean, it's so silky and smooth. I think you've got a way better podcast voice than me, but so if that's not enough of a factor just to drive you over to the fire science show, I'll give you one more, which is.
You get to talk to some really passionate and really hyper intelligent individuals about the, oftentimes like you said, we don't get the science piece of behind technology or, or behind the progression of fields. But it's really interesting for me to hear, like you talk with Guillermo. Or you speak with Brian MechE.
Like we talked about before the episode started, you know, these people who are just, they love what they do, you know? Yeah, absolutely gear. Modera talk about a fire that's been burning for thousands of years and just, you know, hear 'em light up inside. I mean, to me, that passion and, and speaking with people about giving you a broader perspective for fire and life safety is it's so cool.
And I find huge value in that, and I'm a fan of yours and, you know, we talked. We talked for the first time on the podcast, you know, hasn't even been a year ago now has not even been a year. What a crazy year. Well, All the best for your developments in fire code tech. And I have a feeling we'll meet somewhere in here.
Not that far away from now. I, I, I like this idea of crossing episodes, so maybe we should do one more maybe on smoke control. I would love to do smoke control one, come down, come down. We need to do it. That's we'll we'll meet again. This is not goodbye for sure. thanks so much for now and yeah, to everyone listening to this special episode of fire science, go tech show.
Thank you. . Hey. Hey, thank you guys. And don't forget to go subscribe if you liked what you're listening to subscribe to both hit the bell on both. Yeah. They're both good shows. I'm sure there'll be some that you like of both of 'em and, uh, yeah. Thank you guys so much for listening. It's been fun and I hope you enjoyed.
Thank you. Thanks for listening, everybody. Be sure to share the episode with a friend, if you enjoyed it, don't forget that fire protection and life safety is serious business. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are by no means a professional consultation or a codes and standards.
Interpretation. Be sure to contact a licensed professional. If you are getting involved with fire protection and or life safety. Thanks again. And we'll see you next time.