Physically motivated empirical models for the spread and intensity of grass fires
Steven I. Higgins A E , William J. Bond B , Winston S. W. Trollope C and Richard J. Williams DA Institut für Physische Geographie, Goethe-Universität Frankfurt am Main, Altenhoeferallee 1, D-60438 Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
B Department of Botany, University of Cape Town, Private Bag, Rondebosch, ZA-7701, South Africa.
C Department of Livestock and Pasture Science, University of Fort Hare, Alice, ZA-5700, South Africa.
D CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems, PMB 44, Winnellie, NT 0821, Australia.
E Corresponding author. Email: higgins@em.uni-frankfurt.de
International Journal of Wildland Fire 17(5) 595-601 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF06037
Submitted: 21 March 2006 Accepted: 18 December 2007 Published: 3 October 2008
Abstract
We develop empirical models for the rate of spread and intensity of fires in grass fuels. The models are based on a well-known physical analogy for the rate of spread of a fire through a continuous fuelbed. Unlike other models based on this analogy, we do not attempt to directly estimate the model parameters. Rather, we use data on the rate of spread to indirectly estimate parameters that describe aggregate properties of the fire behaviour. The resulting models require information on the moisture content of the fuel and wind speed to predict the rate of spread of fires. To predict fire intensity, the models additionally use information on the heat yield of the fuel and the amount of fuel consumed. We evaluate the models by using them to predict the intensity of independent fires and by comparing them with linear and additive regression models. The additive model provides the best description of the training data but predicts independent data poorly and with high bias. Overall, the empirical models describe the data better than the linear model, and predict independent data with lower bias. Hence our physically motivated empirical models perform better than statistical models and are easier to parameterise than parameter-rich physical models. We conclude that our physically motivated empirical models provide an alternative to statistical models and parameter-rich physical models of fire behaviour.
Additional keywords: fire behaviour, fire intensity, grassland, rate of spread, savanna.
Acknowledgements
We thank the reviewers and handling editor for very constructive comments on the manuscript. Steven Higgins acknowledges the financial support of the Robert Bosch Foundation.
Arora V (2002) Modelling vegetation as a dynamic component in soil–vegetation–atmosphere transfer schemes and hydrological models. Reviews of Geophysics 40, 1006.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bond WJ, Woodward FI , Midgley GF (2005) The global distribution of ecosystems in a world without fire. The New Phytologist 165, 525–537.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS | PubMed |
Cary G, Keane R, Gardner R, Lavorel S, Flannigan M, Davies I, Li C, Lenihan J, Rupp T , Mouillot F (2006) Comparison of the sensitivity of landscape–fire–succession models to variation in terrain, fuel pattern, climate and weather. Landscape Ecology 21, 121–137.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cheney N, Gould J , Catchpole W (1993) The influence of fuel, weather and fire shape variables on fire-spread in grasslands. International Journal of Wildland Fire 3, 31–44.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Fons WL (1946) Analysis of fire spread in light forest fuels. Journal of Agricultural Research 72, 93–121.
Higgins SI, Bond WJ , Trollope WSW (2000) Fire, resprouting and variability: a recipe for grass-tree coexistence in savanna. Journal of Ecology 88, 213–229.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Keane R, Cary G, Davies I, Flannigan M, Gardner R, Lavorel S, Lenihan J, Li C , Rupp T (2004) A classification of landscape fire succession models: spatial simulations of fire and vegetation dynamics. Ecological Modelling 179, 3–27.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Nelson RM (2002) An effective wind speed for models of fire spread. International Journal of Wildland Fire 11, 153–161.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Shea RW, Shea BW, Kauffman JB, Ward DE, Haskins CI , Scholes MC (1996) Fuel biomass and combustion factors associated with fires in savanna ecosystems of South Africa and Zambia. Journal of Geophysical Research 101, 23 551–23 568.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Trollope WSW , Potgieter ALF (1985) Fire behaviour in the Kruger National Park. Proceedings of the Grassland Society of Southern Africa 22, 17–22.
Weber RO (1991) Modelling fire spread through fuel beds. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 17, 67–82.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Williams FA (1982) Urban and wildland fire phenomenology. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science 8, 317–354.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS |
Williams RJ, Gill AM , Moore PHR (1998) Seasonal changes in fire behaviour in a tropical savanna in northern Australia. International Journal of Wildland Fire 8, 227–239.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wilson RA (1985) Observations of extinction and marginal burning states in free-burning porous fuel beds. Combustion Science and Technology 44, 179–193.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Woodward FI, Smith TM , Emanuel WR (1995) A global land primary productivity and phytogeography model. Global Biogeochemical Cycles 9, 471–490.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | CAS |