This page documents two distinct FFRS validation sequences shown in the same official video. Part 1 is a Class A fire suppression test in which the FFRS extinguished a prepared solid-fuel test cube from a fixed 10 m stand-off distance in 4 minutes 30 seconds using one onboard water tank. Part 2 is a separate 30-minute heat-radiation test in which the FFRS was progressively moved toward a radiant heat source while thermocouples monitored temperatures and the water shield was evaluated. Results from the two tests are presented separately below.
Watch the complete two-part FFRS test video
The video combines both controlled tests in one sequence, but they evaluate different capabilities. The first section demonstrates remote fire suppression against a Class A fuel load. The second section evaluates thermal exposure, monitored temperature response and the effect of the FFRS water-shield system under intense radiant heat.
Part 1 – Class A fire suppression test
The first test evaluates the FFRS as a complete remotely operated firefighting system against a prepared Class A solid-fuel fire. The objective was not simply to demonstrate water flow, but to complete the full operational chain: maintain a defined stand-off position, remotely aim the fire monitor, sustain water application and bring the burning test cube to full extinguishment.
Class A fires involve ordinary solid combustible materials such as wood, paper, textiles and similar fuels. These materials can continue to smoulder after visible flames are reduced, so suppression requires accurate water placement and continued cooling of the fuel load.
Test setup and stand-off distance
The FFRS was positioned at a fixed 10 m distance from the prepared Class A test cube. It remained at this distance throughout the suppression sequence; the machine was not moved progressively closer to make extinguishment easier. The operator controlled the platform and fire monitor remotely, remaining separated from the immediate fire area.
Suppression sequence
From the 10 m position, the operator remotely aimed the onboard fire monitor at the burning fuel load. Water application was maintained and adjusted to attack the visible flame and cool the material as the fire was progressively brought under control. The machine remained in the same stand-off position for the complete suppression sequence.
The Class A fire was fully extinguished after 4 minutes 30 seconds. The FFRS completed this test using one onboard water tank, with no refill required before extinguishment.
FFRS extinguished the prepared Class A fire in 4 minutes 30 seconds from a fixed 10 m stand-off distance using one onboard water tank. This result applies specifically to the controlled test configuration shown in the video and photographs.
Part 2 – Heat radiation test
The second section of the video is a separate heat-radiation test. It was designed to evaluate how the FFRS behaves when exposed to increasing radiant heat and to observe the effect of the integrated water shield on measured surface temperatures. This indoor test is separate from the Class A extinguishing test above; the 4 minute 30 second extinguishing result does not apply to this section.
For temperature monitoring, ZAG installed thermocouples on the FFRS according to the defined thermocouple test plan. The machine was then exposed to a controlled radiant heat source and moved progressively closer as the test continued. Temperatures were observed at each stage before the next change in distance.
Heat-radiation test timeline
The test began at a greater stand-off distance and the FFRS was moved closer in controlled steps. The timeline below records the distance, measured temperatures and operator actions during the test.
| Elapsed time | Distance from heat source | Measurement / action |
|---|---|---|
| Start | 7 m | The heat-radiation test began with the FFRS positioned 7 m from the fire source and thermocouple monitoring active. |
| 6 min | 6 m | The FFRS was moved to 6 m. Thermocouples showed approximately 40 °C, with the temperature remaining stable and not continuing to rise. |
| 9 min | 5 m | The FFRS was moved closer to 5 m to increase thermal exposure. |
| 14 min | 5 m | Measured temperature reached approximately 90 °C. The water shield was activated, after which the measured temperature dropped by approximately 15 °C. |
| 21 min | 4.5 m | The FFRS was moved another 0.5 m closer to the fire source to increase the thermal load and again approach the 90 °C target. |
| 22 min | 4.5 m → 6 m | Approximately 90 °C was reached on the lower part of the shield. The vehicle was moved back to 6 m. |
| 23 min | 6 m → 7 m | Thermocouple temperature remained at approximately 91 °C, so the FFRS was moved back again to 7 m. |
| 30 min | 7 m | The test was concluded after 30 minutes when the combustible heat-source cube had burned out. |
Water-shield response
The most important transition occurred at the 14-minute point. At 5 m from the heat source, thermocouple readings reached approximately 90 °C and the FFRS water shield was activated. Following activation, the measured temperature decreased by approximately 15 °C, demonstrating the immediate cooling effect recorded during this test.
The platform was then intentionally moved closer again at minute 21 to increase the radiant heat load. One minute later, approximately 90 °C was measured on the lower part of the shield, after which the FFRS was moved back first to 6 m and then, because the thermocouples still showed approximately 91 °C at minute 23, to the original 7 m distance.
Water use during the heat-radiation test
The water shield was used for approximately 16 minutes during the 30-minute test. After this period of water-shield operation, the onboard water tank level was still approximately 95%. After the test, the tank was manually topped back up to full. The 95% value is the observed tank level after the test sequence and should not be interpreted as a laboratory-calibrated flow-consumption measurement.
The FFRS completed the 30-minute heat-radiation sequence with thermocouple monitoring and controlled changes in stand-off distance. At 5 m, temperatures reached approximately 90 °C; activating the water shield produced an observed temperature reduction of approximately 15 °C. After approximately 16 minutes of water-shield use, the onboard tank level was about 95%.
What the two tests demonstrate together
The two test sequences address different parts of robotic firefighting. The Class A test focuses on the ability to remotely position the FFRS and complete an extinguishing task from a defined stand-off distance. The heat-radiation test focuses on controlled exposure to increasing radiant heat, temperature monitoring and the response of the water-shield system.
The Class A test demonstrates remote suppression while the operator remains separated from the immediate fire area.
The system was used through final extinguishment rather than only demonstrating water flow or monitor movement.
The heat-radiation test used ZAG-installed thermocouples to monitor the FFRS as the distance to the heat source was changed.
At approximately 90 °C, water-shield activation was followed by an observed temperature reduction of approximately 15 °C.
Relevant FFRS firefighting specifications
The following published specifications provide context for the FFRS platform used during testing. They are general platform specifications and should not be interpreted as measurements recorded during these individual tests unless explicitly stated in the test results above.
| System area | Published FFRS specification |
|---|---|
| Onboard water | 1,500 L water tank |
| Foam | 170 L separate foam tank |
| Water flow | Up to 340 L/min |
| Operating pressure | Up to 16 bar |
| Throw distance | Up to 30 m |
| Remote control | Up to 1,000 m line-of-sight |
| Thermal imaging | 640 × 480 LWIR |
Test scope and limitations
How the results should be interpreted
- The 4 minute 30 second result applies only to the controlled Class A fire suppression test shown in Part 1.
- The temperature readings, distance changes and water-shield observations apply only to the separate heat-radiation test shown in Part 2.
- The tests do not represent every possible fire size, fuel load, geometry, ventilation condition or environmental condition.
- The footage is from controlled technical testing, not an uncontrolled real-world emergency deployment.
- The results should not be interpreted as certification to a specific fire-testing standard unless such certification is separately stated.
- Published FFRS platform specifications are general system specifications, not measured values from these individual tests unless explicitly identified as test data.
Controlled testing is one part of the wider validation process. Real incidents can introduce additional variables such as wind, smoke density, toxic substances, structural instability, communication restrictions and rapidly changing heat loads.
Part of wider FFRS validation
Together, the Class A suppression test and the heat-radiation test provide two different forms of evidence about the FFRS platform: one focused on completing a remote extinguishing task, and the other on monitored thermal exposure and water-shield response. Keeping the two results separate makes the operating conditions and measured outcomes easier to understand and verify.
For a broader overview of the platform, see the FFRS Fire Fighting Robotic System page. For more information about remote operation and autonomous functionality, see Remote vs Autonomous Fire Fighting Robots.
Explore the FFRS Fire Fighting Robotic System
See the complete FFRS platform, onboard suppression system, mobility, remote operation, thermal imaging and intended applications for civil protection and hazardous-response operations.
Explore the FFRS Fire Fighting Robotic System