The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator

Fuel treatment effectiveness is often evaluated with fire behavior modeling systems that use fuel models to generate fire behavior outputs. How surface fuels are assigned, either using one of the 53 stylized fuel models or developing custom fuel models, can affect predicted fire behavior. We collect...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Forest science 2014-04, Vol.60 (2), p.231-240
Hauptverfasser: Noonan-Wright, Erin K, Vaillant, Nicole M, Reiner, Alicia L
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 240
container_issue 2
container_start_page 231
container_title Forest science
container_volume 60
creator Noonan-Wright, Erin K
Vaillant, Nicole M
Reiner, Alicia L
description Fuel treatment effectiveness is often evaluated with fire behavior modeling systems that use fuel models to generate fire behavior outputs. How surface fuels are assigned, either using one of the 53 stylized fuel models or developing custom fuel models, can affect predicted fire behavior. We collected surface and canopy fuels data before and 1, 2, 5, and 8 years after prescribed fire treatments across 10 national forests in California. Two new methods of assigning fuel models within the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator were evaluated. Field-based values for dead and downed fuel loading were used to create custom fuel models or to assign stylized fuel models. Fire was simulated with two wind scenarios (maximum 1-minute speed and maximum momentary gust speed) to assess the effect of the fuel model method on potential fire behavior. Surface flame lengths and fire type produced from custom fuel models followed the fluctuations and variability of fine fuel loading more closely than stylized fuel models. However, results of 7 out of 10 statistical tests comparing surface flame length between custom and stylized fuel models were not significant (P < 0.05), suggesting that both methods used to assign surface fuel loads will predict fairly similar trends in fire behavior.
doi_str_mv 10.5849/forsci.12-062
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1540221261</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1540221261</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-f702457a8c6b3d81eb9adee285f775de1397ceefa5c1a5bde927f369b081e7dc3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkb1PwzAQxS0EEqUwsltiYUnxRxInI6paQCpioEVskeOci6s0LraDyn-PQ5hY7ob7vaenewhdUzLLirS809Z5ZWaUJSRnJ2hCS14kXPDiFE0IoVki0vL9HF14vyOEFJywCTquPwAvtAYVzBd04D2WXYNXZm-CDMZ2HluNlz20-Nk20Jpuizd-mCEKl8bBLz8AHi-OATofRTjY8W4d-IDfYAujG341-76VwbpLdKZl6-Hqb0_RZrlYzx-T1cvD0_x-lSjORUi0ICzNhCxUXvOmoFCXsgFgRaaFyBqgvBQKQMtMUZnVDZRMaJ6XNYmsaBSfotvR9-DsZx_TVHvjFbSt7MD2vqJZShijLKcRvfmH7mzvupguUsMfKRNFpJKRUs5670BXB2f20n1XlFRDD9XYQ0VZFXvgP_RlfiY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1537381278</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Noonan-Wright, Erin K ; Vaillant, Nicole M ; Reiner, Alicia L</creator><creatorcontrib>Noonan-Wright, Erin K ; Vaillant, Nicole M ; Reiner, Alicia L</creatorcontrib><description>Fuel treatment effectiveness is often evaluated with fire behavior modeling systems that use fuel models to generate fire behavior outputs. How surface fuels are assigned, either using one of the 53 stylized fuel models or developing custom fuel models, can affect predicted fire behavior. We collected surface and canopy fuels data before and 1, 2, 5, and 8 years after prescribed fire treatments across 10 national forests in California. Two new methods of assigning fuel models within the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator were evaluated. Field-based values for dead and downed fuel loading were used to create custom fuel models or to assign stylized fuel models. Fire was simulated with two wind scenarios (maximum 1-minute speed and maximum momentary gust speed) to assess the effect of the fuel model method on potential fire behavior. Surface flame lengths and fire type produced from custom fuel models followed the fluctuations and variability of fine fuel loading more closely than stylized fuel models. However, results of 7 out of 10 statistical tests comparing surface flame length between custom and stylized fuel models were not significant (P &lt; 0.05), suggesting that both methods used to assign surface fuel loads will predict fairly similar trends in fire behavior.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-749X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-3738</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5849/forsci.12-062</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bethesda: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Forest &amp; brush fires ; Grasses ; Heat ; Moisture content ; Prescribed fire</subject><ispartof>Forest science, 2014-04, Vol.60 (2), p.231-240</ispartof><rights>Copyright Society of American Foresters Apr 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-f702457a8c6b3d81eb9adee285f775de1397ceefa5c1a5bde927f369b081e7dc3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Noonan-Wright, Erin K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaillant, Nicole M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reiner, Alicia L</creatorcontrib><title>The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator</title><title>Forest science</title><description>Fuel treatment effectiveness is often evaluated with fire behavior modeling systems that use fuel models to generate fire behavior outputs. How surface fuels are assigned, either using one of the 53 stylized fuel models or developing custom fuel models, can affect predicted fire behavior. We collected surface and canopy fuels data before and 1, 2, 5, and 8 years after prescribed fire treatments across 10 national forests in California. Two new methods of assigning fuel models within the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator were evaluated. Field-based values for dead and downed fuel loading were used to create custom fuel models or to assign stylized fuel models. Fire was simulated with two wind scenarios (maximum 1-minute speed and maximum momentary gust speed) to assess the effect of the fuel model method on potential fire behavior. Surface flame lengths and fire type produced from custom fuel models followed the fluctuations and variability of fine fuel loading more closely than stylized fuel models. However, results of 7 out of 10 statistical tests comparing surface flame length between custom and stylized fuel models were not significant (P &lt; 0.05), suggesting that both methods used to assign surface fuel loads will predict fairly similar trends in fire behavior.</description><subject>Forest &amp; brush fires</subject><subject>Grasses</subject><subject>Heat</subject><subject>Moisture content</subject><subject>Prescribed fire</subject><issn>0015-749X</issn><issn>1938-3738</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkb1PwzAQxS0EEqUwsltiYUnxRxInI6paQCpioEVskeOci6s0LraDyn-PQ5hY7ob7vaenewhdUzLLirS809Z5ZWaUJSRnJ2hCS14kXPDiFE0IoVki0vL9HF14vyOEFJywCTquPwAvtAYVzBd04D2WXYNXZm-CDMZ2HluNlz20-Nk20Jpuizd-mCEKl8bBLz8AHi-OATofRTjY8W4d-IDfYAujG341-76VwbpLdKZl6-Hqb0_RZrlYzx-T1cvD0_x-lSjORUi0ICzNhCxUXvOmoFCXsgFgRaaFyBqgvBQKQMtMUZnVDZRMaJ6XNYmsaBSfotvR9-DsZx_TVHvjFbSt7MD2vqJZShijLKcRvfmH7mzvupguUsMfKRNFpJKRUs5670BXB2f20n1XlFRDD9XYQ0VZFXvgP_RlfiY</recordid><startdate>20140401</startdate><enddate>20140401</enddate><creator>Noonan-Wright, Erin K</creator><creator>Vaillant, Nicole M</creator><creator>Reiner, Alicia L</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88I</scope><scope>8AF</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>BKSAR</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PCBAR</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7U6</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140401</creationdate><title>The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator</title><author>Noonan-Wright, Erin K ; Vaillant, Nicole M ; Reiner, Alicia L</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c337t-f702457a8c6b3d81eb9adee285f775de1397ceefa5c1a5bde927f369b081e7dc3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Forest &amp; brush fires</topic><topic>Grasses</topic><topic>Heat</topic><topic>Moisture content</topic><topic>Prescribed fire</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Noonan-Wright, Erin K</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vaillant, Nicole M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Reiner, Alicia L</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>STEM Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Materials Science &amp; Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Agricultural &amp; Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>eLibrary</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Earth, Atmospheric &amp; Aquatic Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Noonan-Wright, Erin K</au><au>Vaillant, Nicole M</au><au>Reiner, Alicia L</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator</atitle><jtitle>Forest science</jtitle><date>2014-04-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>240</epage><pages>231-240</pages><issn>0015-749X</issn><eissn>1938-3738</eissn><abstract>Fuel treatment effectiveness is often evaluated with fire behavior modeling systems that use fuel models to generate fire behavior outputs. How surface fuels are assigned, either using one of the 53 stylized fuel models or developing custom fuel models, can affect predicted fire behavior. We collected surface and canopy fuels data before and 1, 2, 5, and 8 years after prescribed fire treatments across 10 national forests in California. Two new methods of assigning fuel models within the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator were evaluated. Field-based values for dead and downed fuel loading were used to create custom fuel models or to assign stylized fuel models. Fire was simulated with two wind scenarios (maximum 1-minute speed and maximum momentary gust speed) to assess the effect of the fuel model method on potential fire behavior. Surface flame lengths and fire type produced from custom fuel models followed the fluctuations and variability of fine fuel loading more closely than stylized fuel models. However, results of 7 out of 10 statistical tests comparing surface flame length between custom and stylized fuel models were not significant (P &lt; 0.05), suggesting that both methods used to assign surface fuel loads will predict fairly similar trends in fire behavior.</abstract><cop>Bethesda</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><doi>10.5849/forsci.12-062</doi><tpages>10</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0015-749X
ispartof Forest science, 2014-04, Vol.60 (2), p.231-240
issn 0015-749X
1938-3738
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1540221261
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Forest & brush fires
Grasses
Heat
Moisture content
Prescribed fire
title The Effectiveness and Limitations of Fuel Modeling Using the Fire and Fuels Extension to the Forest Vegetation Simulator
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-25T14%3A48%3A21IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Effectiveness%20and%20Limitations%20of%20Fuel%20Modeling%20Using%20the%20Fire%20and%20Fuels%20Extension%20to%20the%20Forest%20Vegetation%20Simulator&rft.jtitle=Forest%20science&rft.au=Noonan-Wright,%20Erin%20K&rft.date=2014-04-01&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=240&rft.pages=231-240&rft.issn=0015-749X&rft.eissn=1938-3738&rft_id=info:doi/10.5849/forsci.12-062&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1540221261%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1537381278&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true