Reaction intensity partitioning: a new perspective of the National Fire Danger Rating System Energy Release Component
Francis M. Fujioka A B , David R. Weise
B , Shyh-Chin Chen B , Seung Hee Kim A C and Menas C. Kafatos A
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Center of Excellence in Earth Systems Modeling and Observations at Chapman University, Orange, CA 92866, USA.
B US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Riverside, CA 92507, USA.
C Corresponding author. Email: sekim@chapman.edu
International Journal of Wildland Fire 30(5) 351-364 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF20025
Submitted: 21 February 2020 Accepted: 24 February 2021 Published: 14 April 2021
Journal Compilation © IAWF 2021 Open Access CC BY
Abstract
The Rothermel fire spread model provides the scientific basis for the US National Fire Danger Rating System (NFDRS) and several other important fire management applications. This study proposes a new perspective of the model that partitions the reaction intensity function and Energy Release Component (ERC) equations as an alternative that simplifies calculations while providing more insight into the temporal variability of the energy release component of fire danger. We compare the theoretical maximum reaction intensities and corresponding ERCs across 1978, 1988 and 2016 NFDRS fuel models as they are currently computed and as they would be computed under the proposed scheme. The advantages and disadvantages of the new approach are discussed. More study is required to determine its operational implications.
Keywords: energy release, fire behaviour, fire modelling, fuel model, fuel moisture, mixed fuel bed, NFDRS 2016, Rothermel model.
References
Albini FA (1976) Estimating wildfire behavior and effects. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-30. (Ogden, UT) Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_int/int_gtr030.pdf [Verified 19 March 2021]Albini FA, Reinhardt ED (1995) Modeling ignition and burning rate of large woody natural fuels. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5, 81–91.
| Modeling ignition and burning rate of large woody natural fuels.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Albini FA, Brown JK, Reinhardt ED, Ottmar RD (1995) Calibration of a large fuel burnout model. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5, 173–192.
| Calibration of a large fuel burnout model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Alexander ME, Cruz MG (2012) Interdependencies between flame length and fireline intensity in predicting crown fire initiation and crown scorch height. International Journal of Wildland Fire 21, 95–113.
| Interdependencies between flame length and fireline intensity in predicting crown fire initiation and crown scorch height.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Anderson HE (1990) Relationship of fuel size and spacing to combustion characteristics of laboratory fuel cribs. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Research Paper INT-424. (Ogden, UT). Available at https://www.fs.fed.us/rm/pubs_int/int_rp424.pdf [Verified 19 March 2021]
Andrews PL (1986) BEHAVE: Fire behavior prediction and fuel modeling system – BURN subsystem, part 1. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-194. (Ogden, UT).
Andrews PL (2008) BehavePlus fire modeling system, version 4.0: Variables. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-213WWW. (Fort Collins, CO)
Andrews PL (2018) The Rothermel surface fire spread model and associated developments: A comprehensive explanation. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-371. (Fort Collins, CO)
Bradshaw L, Deeming JE, Burgan RE, Cohen JD (1984) The 1978 National Fire-Danger Rating System: technical documentation. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-169. (Ogden, UT)
Burgan RE (1988) 1988 revisions to the 1978 National Fire Danger Rating System. USDA Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Research Paper SE-273. (Asheville, NC)
Byram GM (1959) Combustion of forest fuels. In ‘Forest fire: control and use’. (Ed. KP Davis) pp. 61–89. (McGraw-Hill: New York)
Byram GM, Nelson RM, Jr (2015) An analysis of the drying process in forest fuel material. USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, e-General Technical Report SRS-200. (Asheville, NC) Available at https://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/47925 [Verified 19 March 2021]
Coen JL, Cameron M, Michalakes J, Patton EG, Riggan PJ, Yedinak KM (2013) WRF-Fire: coupled weather–wildland fire modeling with the Weather Research and Forecasting Model. Journal of Applied Meteorology and Climatology 52, 16–38.
| WRF-Fire: coupled weather–wildland fire modeling with the Weather Research and Forecasting Model.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cohen JD (1986) Estimating fire behavior with FIRECAST: user’s manual. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report PSW-90. (Berkeley, CA) Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_gtr090/psw_gtr090.pdf [Verified 19 March 2021]
Cohen JD, Deeming JE (1985) The National Fire Danger Rating System: Basic equations. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report PSW-82. (Berkeley, CA)
Deeming JE, Lancaster JW, Fosberg MA, Furman RW, Schroeder MJ (1972) The National Fire-Danger Rating System. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Paper RM-84. (Fort Collins, CO)
Deeming JE, Burgan RE, Cohen JD (1977) The National Fire Danger Rating System – 1978. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, General Technical Report INT-39. (Ogden, UT)
Finney MA (1998) FARSITE: Fire Area Simulator – Model development and evaluation. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Research Paper RMRS-RP-4. (Ogden, UT)
Frandsen WH (1971) Fire spread through porous fuels from the conservation of energy. Combustion and Flame 16, 9–16.
| Fire spread through porous fuels from the conservation of energy.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Furman JH, Linn R (2018) What is FIRETEC (and why should I care)? Fire Management Today 76, 33–36.
Jolly WM, Hadlow AM, Huguet K (2014) De-coupling seasonal changes in water content and dry matter to predict live conifer foliar moisture content. International Journal of Wildland Fire 23, 480–489.
| De-coupling seasonal changes in water content and dry matter to predict live conifer foliar moisture content.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Linn R, Reisner J, Colman JJ, Winterkamp J (2002) Studying wildfire behavior using FIRETEC. International Journal of Wildland Fire 11, 233–246.
| Studying wildfire behavior using FIRETEC.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Linn RR, Goodrick SL, Brambilla S, Brown MJ, Middleton RS, O’Brien JJ, Hiers JK (2020) QUIC-fire: A fast-running simulation tool for prescribed fire planning. Environmental Modelling & Software 125, 104616
| QUIC-fire: A fast-running simulation tool for prescribed fire planning.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mandel J, Beezley JD, Kochanski AK (2011) Coupled atmosphere–wildland fire modeling with WRF 3.3 and SFIRE 2011. Geoscientific Model Development 4, 591–610.
| Coupled atmosphere–wildland fire modeling with WRF 3.3 and SFIRE 2011.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Mandel J, Amram S, Beezley JD, Kelman G, Kochanski AK, Kondratenko VY, Lynn BH, Regev B, Vejmelka M (2014) Recent advances and applications of WRF-SFIRE. Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences 14, 2829–2845.
| Recent advances and applications of WRF-SFIRE.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
National Wildfire Coordinating Group (2002) Gaining an understanding of the National Fire Danger Rating System. PMS 932. Available at https://www.nwcg.gov/sites/default/files/products/pms932.pdf [Verified 19 March 2021]
Peterson SH, Morais ME, Carlson JM, Dennison PE, Roberts DA, Moritz MA, Weise DR (2009) Using HFire for spatial modeling of fire spread in shrublands. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Research Paper PSW-RP-259. (Albany, CA). Available at http://www.fs.fed.us/psw/publications/documents/psw_rp259/psw_rp259.pdf [Verified 19 March 2021]
Rothermel RC (1972) A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Paper INT-115. (Ogden, Utah)
Scott JH, Burgan RE (2005) Standard fire behavior fuel models: A comprehensive set for use with Rothermel’s surface fire spread model. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, General Technical Report RMRS-GTR-153. (Fort Collins, Colorado).
Weise DR, Fletcher TH, Cole W, Mahalingam S, Zhou X, Sun L, Li J (2018) Fire behavior in chaparral: evaluating flame models with laboratory data. Combustion and Flame 191, 500–512.
| Fire behavior in chaparral: evaluating flame models with laboratory data.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Wilson RA, Jr (1980) Reformulation of forest fire spread equations in SI units. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station, Research Note INT-292. (Ogden, UT).
