Perhaps the most iconic part of the firefighter ensemble is the helmet. This item of PPE has provided ready recognition of firefighters for generations. Despite the fact that firefighter helmets can be traced back to the turn of the 20th century, many fire service traditionalists still champion the original design — the unique ribbed dome shape with a drooping large back brim, shorter front brim, and leather shield held by a metal eagle depicting the local fire department. In fact, this look is still so engrained in fire service tradition that even though the early shape was necessary for creating the seams between the leather segments of the dome, the style is replicated in the current product models that use modern material technology.
Helmet design, then and now
Of course, fire service helmets have evolved over the last four decades. In 1977, the National Bureau of Standards (NBS, now the National Institute for Standards and Technology, NIST) rolled out tests to demonstrate the efficacy of these products in protecting a firefighter’s head during structural fires and other emergencies. Other designs offered a more smooth-domed shape with usually smaller brims and, further to what some in the fire service would consider blasphemous, the motorcycle-like designs more commonly seen in Europe.
Helmet design and performance was also impacted by NFPA standards. The first draft of NFPA 1972 was introduced in 1987, mimicking the NBS recommendations as new requirements for these products. While NBS suggested the use of ear covers to help protect the neck, NFPA 1972 added criteria for either flame- and heat-resistant face shields or goggles to be part of the helmet.
From this point on, eye and face protection along with ear covers became constant for the expected helmet configurations. Consequently, a variety of helmet styles persist today, driving an ongoing debate about the “acceptable” types and need for both ear covers and eye/face protection. More recently, the question has been raised whether these components should remain mandatory.
Component offerings for helmets
All firefighter helmets are required to consist of base components, which include:
- The helmet shell, which is the primary hard component protecting the firefighter’s head;
- An energy absorption system, essentially the helmet’s suspension system, which allows the helmet to be seated on the head and consists of a series of internal straps and a headband that further permits adjustment for the helmet fit;
- The retention system, usually a chinstrap that may or may not be supplemented by a nape device at the back of the firefighter’s head and upper neck;
- Fluorescent and retro-reflective trim for visibility;
- Ear covers that thermally protect the back and sides of the firefighter’s head and neck; and
- An eye and face protective device, which is either a face shield or set of goggles.
Ear covers have become defined as a layered textile fabric-based panel that extends from the left to the right front sides of the helmet around the back of the wearer’s head. This component was originally proposed to provide thermal protection to the firefighter’s neck and, consequently, shares some properties with garments such as flame resistance, heat resistance and thermal insulation. With the increased mandatory use of firefighter protective hoods, which is considered an interface component rather than a separate element of the ensemble, the required thermal insulation is much less for the ear covers than the garments. In fact, it has the same minimum TPP rating of 20 W/m2, as does the protective hood. (Garment composites must have a TPP rating that is 35 W/m2 or greater.)
Eye and face protective devices are much more varied. Historically, face shields were a principal item of most helmets that were certified to NFPA standards. The broad shield would sit above the brim and pivot down in front of the firefighter’s face when needed, usually for calls like victim extrication and post-fire activities. While the height of the shield would vary, most fields extend several inches below the front brim and to the sides. For some helmets, flip down or eye shields have been mounted on the underside of the front brim. These hinged components would angle down and be held in place by a spring-tensioned mechanism. Over the past two decades, some helmet designs incorporate base shields that can retract to the interior portion of the helmet and be released by a mechanism that brings shields in front of the face. Typically, both flip-down eye shields and retractable lenses are smaller than the counterpart full face shields.
Goggles have also been provided with helmets — sometimes directly mounted, sometimes loose. Unlike face shields that are not primary eye protection, goggles have the attribute of fitting directly against the wearer’s face over their eyes, but they sacrifice protection to other portions of the face.
Over the years, NFPA standards have defined the minimum design and performance of both face shields and goggles, introducing eye and face-area coverage as well as unique flame- and heat-resistance requirements. There have been numerous debates regarding whether face shields or goggles should be mandated and how they should be provided with the helmet. Currently, any structural firefighting protective helmet must be supplied with either a face shield that is mounted directly to a helmet or goggles, which are permitted to be provided loose (not attached to the helmet).
Ear covers and eye/face protection utility
Many firefighters question the use of both ear covers and eye/face protection as mandatory components for firefighter helmets. Some believe that with the mandatory use of protective hoods, adequate thermal protection is provided to their neck and head areas that are not covered by the garment collar, SCBA facepiece or helmet shell. Part of this thinking is that the hood TPP rating can be increased well beyond the minimum 20 W/m2 value.
There are also some beliefs that having a slightly less protected area of the firefighter ensemble allows a firefighter to have a better sensory perception that the fireground environment is becoming thermally overwhelming sooner rather than later, which would allow them to exit earlier before conditions worsen and exceed the protective capabilities of their ensembles. Others may point to the lack of ear or other facial burn injuries at their department, showing that their tactical approaches work without the ear covers being used.
Ear covers easily become contaminated, leading to secondary exposures of firefighters with residual fireground chemical products. There have been complaints that the removal and cleaning of ear covers can be difficult, though the most recent editions of NFPA 1971 helmet design requirements have promoted the easier removal and reinstallation of these components. Still, ear covers can provide a greater level of heat retention in the head/neck face area that makes firefighters feel hotter than they might otherwise perceive under non-fire conditions.
There are broader criticisms for mandatory face shields or goggles. The fire service has increasingly transitioned to the appropriate use of SCBA during all fireground operations, including overhaul. In the past, eye and face protection was particularly useful for overhaul operations involving teardown of ceilings and other actions that create significant debris on the fireground. Because SCBA facepieces already provide primary eye and face protection, the argument has focused on eye and face protection on the helmet being redundant and a possible unnecessary expense.
As already noted, face shields don’t fully cover the firefighter’s eyes. Debris and particulates can contact the face or enter the eyes through the sides of the shields. Moreover, face shield plastics, though heat resistant, melt or distort easier than other parts of the helmet during heavy fireground exposures, requiring frequent replacement and may be difficult to clean. When mounted to the top of the helmet, goggles that become contaminated put that contamination next to the firefighter’s eyes when worn for other reasons after the fire. Consequently, many departments would prefer that goggles be a separate device that they can use when needed that does not have to be supplied with the helmet as currently dictated by the NFPA standard.
What is the right configuration of helmets?
Obviously, there are a lot of factors to consider when selecting a protective helmet for firefighters’ overall structural firefighting protective ensemble. It is understood that minimum requirements for helmets have evolved over decades, often in response to specific fire service needs that have been identified, then turned into specific design or performance criteria. However, it is further recognized that not every fire department uses the same tactics when working structural fires. Also, given the large variety of other ensemble components, including garments, hoods, gloves and footwear, it is likely that there is not a “one solution fits all” product configuration.
We believe that as much as appropriate helmet configurations have been debated over the last several decades, there is a need to better understand how current helmet products are used and the utility of the specific mandatory components. Collecting information on ear covers and eye/face protection can reveal important trends and perspectives on how firefighters may choose to deploy their helmets as part of an overall ensemble. In fact, the results from a simple survey conducted at the F.I.E.R.O. PPE Conference in March of this year were telling. Therefore, we invite you to take this simple 12-question survey here, which remains open.
Our intent is to promote this information to the NFPA Technical Committee that addresses structural firefighting protective helmet requirements. It is hoped that by being informed of actual data and findings, the committee can now make responsible choices for how specific helmet configuration requirements are set.
Note: The views of the author do not necessarily reflect those of the sponsor.
