Application of the Nelson model to four timelag fuel classes using Oklahoma field observations: model evaluation and comparison with National Fire Danger Rating System algorithms
J. D. Carlson A F , Larry S. Bradshaw B , Ralph M. NelsonA Biosystems and Agricultural Engineering, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK 74078, USA.
B USDA Forest Service, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT 59807, USA.
C USDA Forest Service (retired), Leland, NC 28451, USA.
D Agricultural producer, Slapout, OK 73848, USA.
E Oklahoma Climatological Survey, Norman, OK 73019, USA.
F Corresponding author. Email: jdc@okstate.edu
International Journal of Wildland Fire 16(2) 204-216 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF06073
Published: 30 April 2007
Abstract
The application of a next-generation dead-fuel moisture model, the ‘Nelson model’, to four timelag fuel classes using an extensive 21-month dataset of dead-fuel moisture observations is described. Developed by Ralph Nelson in the 1990s, the Nelson model is a dead-fuel moisture model designed to take advantage of frequent automated weather observations. Originally developed for 10-h fuels, the model is adaptable to other fuel size classes through modification of the model’s fuel stick parameters. The algorithms for dead-fuel moisture in the National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS), on the other hand, were originally developed in the 1970s, utilise once-a-day weather information, and were designed to estimate dead-fuel moisture for mid-afternoon conditions. Including all field observations over the 21-month period, the Nelson model showed improvement over NFDRS for each size fuel size class, with r2 values ranging from 0.51 (1000-h fuels) to 0.79 (10-h fuels). However, for observed fuel moisture at or below 30%, the NFDRS performed better than the Nelson model for 1-h fuels and was about the same accuracy as the Nelson for 10-h fuels. The Nelson model is targeted for inclusion in the next-generation NFDRS.
Additional keywords: dead-fuel moisture, modelling.
Acknowledgements
Funding for this research was provided by the USDA Forest Service (Fire Sciences Laboratory, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Missoula, MT) by a Research Joint Venture Agreement (03-JV-1122046-077). We also acknowledge Collin Bevins, Systems for Environmental Management (SEM), who developed the numerical version of the Nelson model used in this study. We also thank Hendrijanto Nurtjaho and Suyadi Supratman who helped compile and analyse the dead fuel moisture data.
Brock FV, Crawford KC, Elliott RL, Cuperus GW, Stadler SJ, Johnson HL , Eilts MD (1995) The Oklahoma Mesonet: a technical overview. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology 12, 5–19.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Carlson JD , Burgan RE (2003) Review of users’ needs in operational fire danger estimation: the Oklahoma example. International Journal of Remote Sensing 24, 1601–1620.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Elliott RL, Brock FV, Stone ML , Harp SL (1994) Configuration decisions for an automated weather station network. Applied Engineering in Agriculture 10, 45–51.
McPherson RA, Fiebrich C, Crawford KC, Elliott RE , Kilby JR (2007) Statewide monitoring of the mesoscale environment: a technical update on the Oklahoma Mesonet. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology 24, 301–321.
| Crossref |
Nelson RM (2000) Prediction of diurnal change in 10-h fuel stick moisture content. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 30, 1071–1087.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |