046 - Fire Code Tech crossover with Gus Gagliardi

Hello everybody. And welcome to the Fire Science Show session 46. Today, a little different than usual. We have a crossover episode with Gus Gagliardi of the Fire Code Tech Podcast. Gus, it's his second anniversary of podcasting. So hold the best. Gus. Excellent achievement. And I wish you all the best in your future journeys , in fire podcasting. And, for myself. Well, when I have started this project, I will certainly not the first fire podcaster out there. And I have found Gus. I was very into podcasting anyway, and I found a fire podcast, which was very interesting. And for quite a long time, I comprehended, maybe I could do a thing like that. On my own, actually, Gus was quite nice and invited me to participate in one of his show episodes. A hundred for me, that was like the final chat test. If I can do it, then. It worked out quite well. I think. And I thought, well, fire science show project may actually be a real reality. Within the reach so here we are today. So I definitely owed to Gus for, inviting me and sharing his podcasting passion with me. And that was another reason to pursue. My own goals so thank you very much Gus. Fire Code Tech Podcast is all about engineering, . Fire safety engineering and career development. So there's a lot of interesting things, a little different than we do here in Fire how. But, uh, still very interesting points of view, a very interesting people. Really. great esource for all the professionals in the world. So I would highly recommend it. And in today's episode, we try to merge the best of the two podcasts. So a really nice conversation about. What it is to be a fire safety engineering, how one develops into what they are in the laser of their career, how your perspective changes as your career evolves, going from very broad view in the school to narrow field of engineering and. You know, it's really interesting for me, it's important to not lose sight on the bigger image of the fire. science and fire safety in, because as you probably noticed in many of the episodes of the podcast, The main problem mentioned was that we, we don't think holistically, we don't look at the bigger image. So, so I think it's, it's necessary to understand the implications of the decisions taken while designing fire safety. And, this is what we've tried to discuss in here is especially valuable for the young engineers who are just starting their pathways. But I think also too, All of you dinosaurs in charge. You're the ones creating the spaces for the young peoples. Maybe you should give it a chance as well. I think everyone should give a chance. It's a good episode. So, I hope you enjoy this. crossover Fire Science Code Tech Show. Yeah, lets spin the intro and jump into the episode. Hello, everybody. Welcome to the Fire Science Code Tech Show. I'm here with my friend, co host Gus Gagliardi. Hey Gus!.

Hey, thanks for having me on the podcast Wojciech,. Excited to be speaking with

Thanks for having me on your podcast, Gus. I'm really excited to be in your show as well because that's a crossover episode of Fire Science Show and Fire Code Tech. I really happy to be here. So Gus you're the first one I've actually joined your show sometime ago. That was my first experience speaking and it was, on the radio and. Pretty cool. That was like a year ago. 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 ya?

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 get in to see what you're doing. But for me, it's been, 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 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. You've developed a lot in the last year. I guess it was as, as valuable to learn while sharing, right?

Yeah. I mean, yeah, same for me. I started the podcast because I was early in my career and I had kind of reached a plateau where 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 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, Wojciech

Fantastic. I think, the important part of our job in running our shows is to. the mind of young engineers with, some really solid engineering and we're both a similar age, we were both, have, joined commercial activities, engineering activities. And I must tell you when. Joined, engineering my view over the world of fire engineering and the problems in the world of fire engineering was so different than what I see today after the year of, of doing this show. And you're doing it for more than a year. Uh, and, by the way, you've always asked people to tell their story in your show. What's your story, man? I don't think I've heard that one.

Yeah. So I started in, 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, because 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 went to school for fire protection. Some people are surprised by that. Graduated with my degree and went to work for a fire suppression contracting company. 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 year. I learned a lot. And it's been a big impact to this day on the hydraulics and kind of 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 the systems work, moved back to Oklahoma City, where I got a job in fire protection engineer. 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 hangars and Department of Defense jobs. I probably, you know, as evolved in about six or seven or eight flight simulators for a variety of aircraft's local jobs, national jobs. I did work, across the country everywhere from San Diego, all the way to LaGuardia. 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. And the 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, I started the podcast in 2020, April 20, 20. So almost two years now. So I 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. 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. So that's really my story.

that's a proper engineering career. And they 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 why. Knowledge from the fire safety. And I assume in many places it will be different. in my school we were strongly, experiencing the firefighter, tactics and stuff like that because it was. Firefighters academy and actually almost non smoke control, which kind of ended up hilarious because I became a smoke control experts, but that's that's, that was the twist in the career. But you've mentioned like you go down when you exit this school, when you exit this wide world of learning from every side of the fire, And engineering. suddenly find yourself in the, this whole of doing nuts and bolts of your systems. And, oh man, I've been there as well. I, I started learning about smoke control. Then I started designing them. Then I've started doing CFD for them, three years into my professional career. I knew everything about shopping mall, smoke control that was my bread and butter. But then if I look from. 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 started wondering like, How do we sustain, you know, this connection for young engineers, with the broad context of fire? are we. In the wrong way, building them as silos, where they just go down the rabbit hole of designing one type of a 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 these environment, where people are exposed to wide fire science. Well, obviously don't tell me you start the podcast because I will not take the answer.

Yeah, well, I was going to start off with self congratulating answer of we're doing something here to, to help promote, but, you know, I think. it's interesting to me, when you speak to technicians or people who are more involved of installation, it's, very siloed, but like you're saying, engineering can also be very siloed, 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 liked to, keep knowledgeable about these things is, you know, whatever professional sized societies or technical resources that you can find to, really stay intact with these subjects, pick up a magazine or a blog article about. data centers, if you don't ever work on data centers and you want to learn about, you know, a common protection features and asset protection and life safety for these structures, , how we promote it for the youth, or like, I think about a lot, the idea of how to bring people even into fire protection, uh, which is a struggle as well. Like, in the states. I think that like in maybe globally as well, I'm not as sure. In the states, that's a really hard education piece to like even make students aware that fire protection exists. 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.

recall, um, I've met once a girl who just finished her architectural studies in, Poland and I've 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 pretty much it. And I'm like, wow. That's not a very. Thorough, explanation 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, what the important issues are. And 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 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 this big projects. So what's the collective mind of Fire Code Tech 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 and that project team has a varying level of competency, but how do we make this engineering team is I've heard people describe it before. 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. one issue that. found is that water supply seems to be a big issue , in the states. And maybe this is everywhere, 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. Wojciech in like making the engineering team better.

okay. I usually struggled crossing. Uh, 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 and we need to cut costs. We need to make it. more economically feasible. and then again, you fight for safety. You want to design the safest building. You can, that's feasible to build obviously but this is 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 to save building, but tell me what safety is for you. Or like, how can we define it? What's the goal of the project. And, we were really lacking in this discussion. I think you asked maybe slightly different because in us, the authority having jurisdiction is this strong. party. I assume, I didn't know, maybe it maybe I'm wrong. Am I wrong?

It depends on where, 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, 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. The it's, governed by a very small, city authority. Um, it might not be the case, so it really depends. 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, what 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 and ask for my listeners date. 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. But I want to 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. Huh? Where to start? I hope the elevator ride is longer. That's that's a challenging one. Yeah. I think, I I've made this show to, give, hardcore fire science, no bullshit. Just straight as it is from the people I trust they know what they're saying and. The point is the fire science is so God damn vast. I said that on the show a few times I knew it's gonna be wide. I knew it was going to be crazy jumping from combustion to evacuation, to wildfires, to structural fire engineering. I think I've expected that, but boy, I did not expect how wide it is and how many aspects are there in the science? Yeah. The goal of the show is to give them the same justice, you know, to give them the same in depth, a 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. Learn from it fully like it's, 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, what, 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 the problem like this in your life, you may already have a path in your brain appeal to where to find the knowledge and how to solve it. So, and also, I want to break those silos between disciplines. And then break the silo between science and engineering. That's a tough one to break because like now I'm talking as Wojciech the scientists, 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 the paper for a journal that is. Like engineering report. That's the first thing the reviewer's going to pick on you. All , this reads like an engineering report, not a scientific paper. that's a horrible review, but man, I've received so many of them. so, so there's a reason why this is built in a way of like in an 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 with them and you can talk about this fire science for hours. And it's fun. It's not like it's not the 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 that yeah. And, in future, I probably would. Yeah, I hope they are. And in future, I would also like to get maybe more engineering in the science show, because I think it's important. you have. 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 right.

Yeah, I think it's remarkable. I was talking to somebody recently who worked in like 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 the divide between academia and like engineering and, in my head. 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. More concerned with like fire science and, these kinds of high-minded like ideas about fire behavior and like different things. But and I think that's partially, you know, driven by how these two entities get paid, you know? 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. 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 provides less of those opportunities.

I think that's 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 way. Must be no 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 industry pay for that? And, and you get this a ping pong 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 U S especially the way with like, NFPA a foundation SFPE research foundation. I've heard UL is the gating a lot of money to do 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. I actually, for SFPE I I must give them a shout-out there's the Global Challenges Summit coming soon in like two months. And that's a virtual event in which it will be discussed. What are the Sumits to be ascended? where should we go with, uh, with engineering and, researchers can submit. Grants to do research, to get some money for research. I should actually, I'm afraid that already is closed, but the, there will be next rounds I'm sure. And companies are paying for it for that, so it creates this beautiful link between science and engineering, where both, suddenly do gain from that. And I think that's a beautiful corporation. That's something that I would love to promote.

Yeah, definitely. I think that's cool that I'd 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. And, regulation changes about a triple 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 going to 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 going to be a curveball. There's a code in Fire Code Tech. And, I, I know you often refer to code compliance reading codes and actually I'm amazed how you pop up this 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 that. That's doable because you need to break someone's comfort zone. Hopefully not break law but you can jump from one to another, but now to jump from science to codes while that's a hell of a jump.

Yeah,

Did you, um, you had people who are code makers. You have people who are so active like NFPA and, um,

ICC is the other is the other big institution. but yeah, I think that's a great point. the, 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. The bi-directional amplifiers and buildings are emergency radio, coverage systems. And so we see these changes lagging in, the industry. So I think that, With any change we're going to see it's going to 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. But 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 in-state to, to bridge that gap in policy or in code enforces. 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 want to say against change, but it takes up higher application to get it through. I mean, if you just want to talk about, getting a new technology listed with a listing agency, I mean, there's so many barriers to entry, assume that you have a standard. As soon 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 spent, oh, whatever, you 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.

Listed

It's a barrier to entry. It's a barrier to innovation at times, but we deal with lives and fire safety here. So it's a complicated equation.

I loved it, the barrier to innovation. if I remember correctly in 1925 building codes in us, there was this, that, the goals should be a performance as, as often as they can. so, the technology is not limited or the, the growth is not limited by the technology that is 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 cause maybe I'll pop it in the show notes and I'm horrible in quoting from my head.

Yeah, that's remarkable to even think about, you know, like the codes in the U S haven't even been the same in the last 20 years, 30 years, we used to have a couple of 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 widely in the U S and it's not been that way for very long in my lifetime, it has been. Different on a regional level. So it's pretty wild to think about it's. It's a 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 does it make their work easier or harder? on one hand you can learn the codes and that sets you can design. On the other hand, if you limit yourself to codes itself, you lose the wider picture. uh, like When you were professionally educated in U S was there some focus on, having both

There was a, 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, so they would be more , performance based, more fire science, more fire phenomena. so in school I experienced more technical application sort of training and not. Which is great because you know, like getting to wire a smoke detector in school and, getting to trip a dry valve school is that's all meaningful. But of course you know, there's only so much you can put it in a college degree program, but, Having that experience, I would love to get a, you know, a master's in from like 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 ten-year professional or a 20 year professionals level, because, they have this longstanding knowledge of this 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 because when something new pops up that 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 fire science with the AI where the AI is a new, interesting thing. And it was a theme in my podcast. They had some interviews about that and from it, the emergency view that it's a new, fantastic technology, and it really 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 the amazing discoveries that can be done with them are available to, everyone and base back to your background. Actually, you'd be surprised how many fire scientists would never know how what's the difference between I know optical or ionization smoke detector, or how does a sprinkler valve work and, and what's the machinery behind that? And they think this knowledge is also critical for fire researchers. I will somehow assume my audience is more fire research side though. I know I have a lot of fire engineers listening to this, but I think if I research 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 the lives in the building. If you don't know, and you just assume you make mistakes that may impact, the conclusions of your research. Like they will not change how the smoke flows in your experiments, but they will change the way how you can interpret the outcome of that experiment. And. What really due to the building. And there's a lot of people who would 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, but no, first. You have to validate that second you I have to mass produce that you have to put it in the codes or find a performance-based routes to implement that. I mean, I've done some discoveries and boy discovering is the easy parts. It's so hard to get the, your, new idea of technology through,

I think that's a great point. Like I was talking to somebody the other day and I was like, great ideas are a dime a dozen, and I can tell you a thousand good ideas, but like the ability to push it through and to implement it and to bring it in a lot into life is really the truly remarkable thing. I think about it. 'cause 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 out of your brain and then it's gone. So

Now you have to nose, man. you have to take

now

that, that's the, there's a trick. You take notes, take notes all the time. Take notes.

that's good.

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 serve audiences better? How can we make the world of fire engineering? In the whole better? How to better connect this worlds of fire science and fire engineering. And for me, I, think it would be 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 do you think.

Yeah, I think that a more cross-pollination in general. I mean, where I would go with it I want more people to be talking and more people to be, coming on podcasts and really having these discussions and trying to. Further the total scope and in progress of our industry, by just having more conversations and putting out more content. I mean, I look at an industry like 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 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 can 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, uh, 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 these fields, The mortar 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 didn't go. We can coach you through

The only thing holding you back as you.

That's so cool, man. And I also think, yeah, with Fire Code Tech having this significant flare in, in personal development and career, and, 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 really love to hear stories of scientists, who, went engineering engineers, who, went scientists. And the preferably scientists 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 are building their careers. Building their experiences have really touched both worlds 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 in engineering and then went academic, but I can tell you. career fire protection engineer to academic and. You know, a career academic to fire protection engineer. And I will tell you that the professionals who have experience and both are some of the most impactful and most inspiring that I've ever had a chance to work with. 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, uh, in where Las Vegas is so on these huge high-rise buildings 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. Eye-opener on how neat this field is. And like that really was a big motivating factor for me. 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, that's so I think that cross-pollination of this, academic and a professional or a fire protection engineering rather is a beautiful thing.

Yeah for me, it's also, um, Important aspect is like having this inclusive. I am very happy to have everyone in the show, no matter who you are. If you're a professor, if you're just a student, where the live doesn't matter, who you are, doesn't matter if you, we can together bring the fire science a little closer to engineering. you're very, very welcome. And I would love for everyone to feel like that. And, Yeah, that's also important to me because 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 to get input from others, it's always made my situation better. So that's why that the podcast and just trying , to build. Mentorship and different kind of community relationships is 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 just because I've received a lot from it myself.

Man that's so that's so cool. I'm really happy. We got to do this and I hope there's many members of Fire Science Show, a audience that will jump. And with curiosity to Fire Code Tech and learn about all of these interesting career paths and engineering aspects of, of dealing with fire, 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, I can't get over Wojciech's voice. I mean, it's so silky and smooth. I think he's got a way better podcast voice than me, but let's say 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. Hyper-intelligent individuals about the, oftentimes, like you said, we don't get the science piece of, behind technology 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 Meacham. Like we talked about before the episode started, you know, these people who are just, they love what they do, you know, Guillermo Rein, talk about. a fire that's been burning for thousands of years and just, you know, hear him light up inside. I mean, to me, that passion 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 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,

even been a year. What a crazy year. Well Gus, 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 like this idea of crossing, episodes. So maybe we should do one more, maybe on smoke control. I would love to do the smoke control

I'm down. I'm down. We need to do it. Well, 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 Code 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. They're both good shows. I'm sure there'll be some that you like about both of them and yeah. Thank you guys so much for listening. It's been fun and I hope you enjoyed.

Thank you. that's it. Thank you for listening. I hope you liked it. As you're here in the podcast app. You probably want to try out Fire Code Tech, and see what Gus has to offer. , after two years of podcasting, there's a really great repository of episodes there. And if you look carefully, you can find one with myself as well. I hope that's a good one though. I think it was actually, um, anyway, I think all that has been said has been said, and my further comments on this episode is unnecessary. I would like to just take this freestyle chance to. thank Gus again for what's he's doing for the fire profession. it's a pleasure to watch him and his show grow, develop as an engineer. So Gus great job. You're doing their keep podcasting man. And I hope we'll do this once more. Soon. It was good. It was really fun too, to take over your audience and share my audience with you. So thanks Gus and all your listening. Well, Next Wednesday, next episodes. So make sure you come here and for a Fire Code Tech the episodes are on Monday one week. It's uh, interview format and other week it is. A solo cast format where Gus just discusses some interesting aspects of codes and technology and fire safety engineering. So an interesting twist in podcasting. I like it very much and I hope you do as well. Anyway, that is it. Thank you very much for being here and see around. Cheers.