The FireFlux II experiment: a model-guided field experiment to improve understanding of fire–atmosphere interactions and fire spread
Craig B. Clements A L , Adam K. Kochanski B , Daisuke Seto A , Braniff Davis A , Christopher Camacho A , Neil P. Lareau A , Jonathan Contezac A , Joseph Restaino C , Warren E. Heilman D , Steven K. Krueger B , Bret Butler E , Roger D. Ottmar F , Robert Vihnanek F , James Flynn G , Jean-Baptiste Filippi H , Toussaint Barboni H , Dianne E. Hall A , Jan Mandel I , Mary Ann Jenkins B , Joseph O'Brien J , Ben Hornsby J and Casey Teske K
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Fire Weather Research Laboratory, Department of Meteorology and Climate Science, San José State University, San José, CA 95192, USA.
B Department of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA.
C School of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA.
D USDA Forest Service Northern Research Station, Lansing, MI 48910, USA.
E USDA Forest Service, Fire Sciences Laboratory, Missoula, MT 59808, USA.
F USDA Forest Service Pacific Northwest Research Station, Seattle, WA 98103, USA.
G Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Houston, TX 77204, USA.
H University of Corsica, 20250 Corte, France.
I Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO 80204, USA.
J USDA Forest Service, Southern Research Station, Athens, GA 30602, USA.
K University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59812, USA.
L Corresponding author. Email: craig.clements@sjsu.edu
International Journal of Wildland Fire 28(4) 308-326 https://doi.org/10.1071/WF18089
Submitted: 26 January 2018 Accepted: 4 January 2019 Published: 23 April 2019
Abstract
The FireFlux II experiment was conducted in a tall grass prairie located in south-east Texas on 30 January 2013 under a regional burn ban and high fire danger conditions. The goal of the experiment was to better understand micrometeorological aspects of fire spread. The experimental design was guided by the use of a coupled fire–atmosphere model that predicted the fire spread in advance. Preliminary results show that after ignition, a surface pressure perturbation formed and strengthened as the fire front and plume developed, causing an increase in wind velocity at the fire front. The fire-induced winds advected hot combustion gases forward and downwind of the fire front that resulted in acceleration of air through the flame front. Overall, the experiment collected a large set of micrometeorological, air chemistry and fire behaviour data that may provide a comprehensive dataset for evaluating and testing coupled fire–atmosphere model systems.
References
Achtemeier GL (2013) Field validation of a free-agent cellular automata model of fire spread with fire–atmosphere coupling. International Journal of Wildland Fire 22, 148–156.| Field validation of a free-agent cellular automata model of fire spread with fire–atmosphere coupling.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Achtemeier GL, Goodrick SA, Liu Y, Garcia-Menendez F, Hu Y, Odman MT (2011) Modeling smoke plume-rise and dispersion from southern United States prescribed burns with Daysmoke. Atmosphere 2, 358–388.
| Modeling smoke plume-rise and dispersion from southern United States prescribed burns with Daysmoke.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Adams JS, Williams DW, Tregellas-Williams J (1973) Air velocity, temperature, and radiant-heat measurements within and around a large free-burning fire. In ‘14th International Symposium on Combustion’, 20–25 August 1972. Vol. 14(1) pp. 1045–1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0082-0784(73)80094-3 (The Combustion Institute: Pittsburgh, PA, USA)
Andrews PL (2014) Current status and future needs of the BehavePlus fire modeling system. International Journal of Wildland Fire 23, 21–23.
| Current status and future needs of the BehavePlus fire modeling system.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bradski G, Kaehler A (2008) ‘Learning OpenCV: computer vision with the OpenCV Library.’ (O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA)
Butler B, Teskey C, Jimenez D, O’Brien J, Sopko P, Wold C, Vosburgh M, Hornsby B, Loudermilk E (2016) Observations of energy transport and spread rates from low-intensity fires in longleaf pine habitat – RxCADRE 2012. International Journal of Wildland Fire 25, 76–89.
| Observations of energy transport and spread rates from low-intensity fires in longleaf pine habitat – RxCADRE 2012.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cheney NP, Gould JS (1995) Fire growth in grassland fuels. International Journal of Wildland Fire 5, 237–247.
| Fire growth in grassland fuels.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cheney NP, Gould JS, Catchpole WR (1993) The influence of fuel, weather and fire shape variables on fire spread in grasslands. International Journal of Wildland Fire 3, 31–44.
| The influence of fuel, weather and fire shape variables on fire spread in grasslands.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Cheney NP, Gould JS, McCaw WL, Anderson WR (2012) Predicting fire behaviour in dry eucalypt forest in southern Australia. Forest Ecology and Management 280, 120–131.
| Predicting fire behaviour in dry eucalypt forest in southern Australia.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clements CB, Oliphant A (2014) The California State University Mobile Atmospheric Profiling System: a facility for research and education in boundary-layer meteorology. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 95, 1713–1724.
| The California State University Mobile Atmospheric Profiling System: a facility for research and education in boundary-layer meteorology.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clements CB, Seto D (2015) Observations of fire–atmosphere interactions and near-surface heat transport on a slope. Boundary-Layer Meteorology 154, 409–426.
| Observations of fire–atmosphere interactions and near-surface heat transport on a slope.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clements CB, Zhong S, Goodrick S, Li J, Bian X, Potter BE, Heilman WE, Charney JJ, Perna R, Jang M, Lee D, Patel M, Street S, Aumann G (2007) Observing the dynamics of wildland grass fires: FireFlux – a field validation experiment. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society 88, 1369–1382.
| Observing the dynamics of wildland grass fires: FireFlux – a field validation experiment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Clements CB, Lareau N, Seto D, Contezac J, Davis B, Teske C, Zajkowski TJ, Hudak A, Bright B, Dickenson MB, Butler B, Jimenez D, Heirs JK (2016) Fire weather conditions and fire–atmosphere interactions observed during low-intensity prescribed fires – RxCADRE 2012. International Journal of Wildland Fire 25, 90–101.
| Fire weather conditions and fire–atmosphere interactions observed during low-intensity prescribed fires – RxCADRE 2012.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Countryman CM (1969) Project Flambeau. An investigation of mass fire (1964–1967). Final report – Vol. I. USDA Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Forest and Range Experiment Station, pp. 1–68. (Berkeley, CA, USA)
Dupuy J-L, Pimont F, Linn RR, Clements CB (2014) FIRETEC evaluation against the FireFlux experiment: preliminary results. In ‘VII International conference on forest fire research proceedings’, 17–20 November 2014, Coimbra, Portugal. (Ed. Viegas DX) pp. 261–274. https://doi.org/ 10.14195/978-989-26-0884-6_28 (Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra: Coimbra, Portugal)
Filippi J-B, Pialat X, Clements CB (2013) Assessment of ForeFire/Meso-NH for wildland fire/atmosphere coupled simulation of the FireFlux experiment. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute 34, 2633–2640.
| Assessment of ForeFire/Meso-NH for wildland fire/atmosphere coupled simulation of the FireFlux experiment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Finney MA (1998) FARSITE: Fire Area Simulator – model development and evaluation. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Research Paper RMRS-RP-4, p. 47. (Ogden, UT, USA)
Finney MA, Cohen J, Forthofer J, McAllister S, Gollner MJ, Gorham D, Saito K, Adam B, English J (2015) The influence of buoyant dynamics on wildfire spread. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 112, 9833–9838.
| The influence of buoyant dynamics on wildfire spread.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26183227PubMed |
FIRESCAN Science Team (1996) Fire in ecosystems of boreal Eurasia: the Boreal Forest Island Fire Experiment, Fire Research Campaign Asia–North (FIRESCAN). In ‘Biomass burning and global change. Vol. 2. Biomass burning in South America, south-east Asia, and temperate and boreal ecosystems, and the oil fires of Kuwait’. (Ed. JS Levine) pp. 848–873. (MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA)
Gould JS, McCaw WL, Cheney NP, Ellis PF, Knight IK, Sullivan AL (2007) ‘Project Vesta – Fire in dry eucalypt forest: fuel structure, fuel dynamics and fire behaviour.’ (Ensis–CSIRO: Canberra, ACT, Australia; and Department of Environment and Conservation: Perth, WA, Australia)
Hinzman L, Fukuda M, Sandberg DV, Chapin FS, Dash D (2003) FROSTFIRE: an experimental approach to predicting the climate feedbacks from the changing boreal fire regime. Journal of Geophysical Research 108, 8153
| FROSTFIRE: an experimental approach to predicting the climate feedbacks from the changing boreal fire regime.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kochanski AK, Jenkins M, Mandel J, Beezley J, Clements CB, Krueger S (2013) Evaluation of WRF-Sfire performance with field observations from the FireFlux experiment. Geoscientific Model Development 6, 1109–1126.
| Evaluation of WRF-Sfire performance with field observations from the FireFlux experiment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Linn RR, Anderson K, Winterkamp J, Brooks A, Wotton M, Dupuy J-L, Pimont F, Edminster C (2012) Incorporating field wind data into FIRETEC simulations of the International Crown Fire Modeling Experiment (ICFME): preliminary lessons learned. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 42, 879–898.
| Incorporating field wind data into FIRETEC simulations of the International Crown Fire Modeling Experiment (ICFME): preliminary lessons learned.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 |
McRae DJ (1996) Prescribed fire aerial ignition strategies. Natural Resources Canada, Canadian Forest Service, Great Lakes Forestry Centre, NODA/NFP Technical Report TR-33. (Sault Sainte Marie, ON, Canada)
Mell W, Jenkins M, Gould J, Cheney P (2007) A physics-based approach to modelling grassland fires. International Journal of Wildland Fire 16, 1–22.
| A physics-based approach to modelling grassland fires.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Ottmar RD, Hiers JK, Clements CB, Butler B, Dickinson MB, Potter B, O’Brien JJ, Hudak AT, Rowell EM, Zajkowski TJ (2016) Measurements, datasets and preliminary results from the RxCADRE project. International Journal of Wildland Fire 25, 1–9.
| Measurements, datasets and preliminary results from the RxCADRE project.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Palmer TY (1981) Large fire winds, gases and smoke. Atmospheric Environment 15, 2079–2090.
| Large fire winds, gases and smoke.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Quintiere JG (1993) Canadian mass fire experiment. Journal of Fire Protection Engineering 5, 67–78.
| Canadian mass fire experiment.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
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-RP-115. (Ogden, UT, USA).
Schroeder MJ, Countryman CM (1960) Exploratory fire climate surveys on prescribed burns. Monthly Weather Review 88, 123–129.
| Exploratory fire climate surveys on prescribed burns.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Simard AJ, Eenigenburg JE, Adams KB, Nissen RL, Deacon AG (1984) A general procedure for sampling and analyzing wildland fire spread. Forest Science 30, 51–64.
Stocks BJ, McRae DJ (1991) The Canada/United States cooperative mass fire behaviour and atmospheric environmental impact study. In ‘Proceedings of the 11th conference on fire and forest meteorology’, 16–19 April 1991, Missoula, MT. (Eds PL Andrews, DF Potts) pp. 478–487. (Society of American Foresters: Bethesda, MD, USA)
Stocks BJ, van Wilgen BW, Trollope WSW, McRae DJ, Mason JA, Weirich F, Potgieter AIF (1996) Fuels and fire behaviour dynamics on large-scale savanna fires in Kruger National Park, South Africa. Journal of Geophysical Research 101, 23541–23550.
| Fuels and fire behaviour dynamics on large-scale savanna fires in Kruger National Park, South Africa.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Stocks BJ, Alexander ME, Wotton BM, Stefner CN, Flannigan MD, Taylor SW, Lavoie N, Mason JA, Hartley GR, Maffey ME, Dalrymple GN, Blake TW, Cruz MG, Lanoville RA (2004) Crown fire behaviour in a northern jack pine–black spruce forest. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34, 1548–1560.
| Crown fire behaviour in a northern jack pine–black spruce forest.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Sullivan AL (2009) Wildland surface fire spread modelling, 1990–2007. 3: Simulation and mathematical analogue models. International Journal of Wildland Fire 18, 387–403.
| Wildland surface fire spread modelling, 1990–2007. 3: Simulation and mathematical analogue models.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Taylor RJ, Evans ST, King NK, Stephens ET, Packham DR, Vines RG (1973) Convective activity above a large-scale bushfire. Journal of Applied Meteorology 12, 1144–1150.
| Convective activity above a large-scale bushfire.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
