Exploring three-dimensional coupled fire–atmosphere interactions downwind of wind-driven surface fires and their influence on backfires using the HIGRAD-FIRETEC model

The obstruction of ambient winds and the possible existence of indrafts downwind of a wildfire are aspects of coupled fire–atmosphere interaction influencing the effectiveness of a backfiring operation. The fire-influenced winds behind a headfire as well as their influences on backfire spread are explored using the three-dimensional HIGRAD-FIRETEC model. Fires are simulated under weak to strong wind speeds and in shrubland and grassland fuel types. The importance of three-dimensionality in the simulation of such phenomena is demonstrated. Results suggest that when fire–atmosphere interaction is constrained to two-dimensions, the limitations of air moving through the head fire could lead to overestimation of downwind indrafts and effectiveness of backfiring. Three-dimensional simulations in surface fuels suggest that backfires benefit from the obstruction of ambient winds and potentially the existence of an indraft flow in only a limited range of environmental conditions. Simulations show that flows are most favourable when the wildfire is driven downslope by a weak wind and the backfire is ignited at bottom of the slope. Model simulations are compared with backfiring experiments conducted in a dense shrubland. Although this exercise encountered significant difficulties linked to the ambient winds data and their incorporation into the simulation, predictions and observations are in reasonable agreement.

[1]  Michael M. Clark,et al.  A sub-grid, mixture–fraction-based thermodynamic equilibrium model for gas phase combustion in FIRETEC: development and results , 2010 .

[2]  François Pimont,et al.  Validation of FIRETEC wind-flows over a canopy and a fuel-break , 2009 .

[3]  Dominique Morvan Numerical simulation of the interaction between two fire fronts in the context of suppression fire operations , 2009 .

[4]  Study of wildfire in-draft flows for counter fire operations , 2008 .

[5]  Esko Mikkola,et al.  Comparison of Two and Three Dimensional Simulations of Fires at Wildland Urban Interface , 2008 .

[6]  Philip Cunningham,et al.  Numerical simulations of grass fires using a coupled atmosphere–fire model: Basic fire behavior and dependence on wind speed , 2005 .

[7]  R. Shaw,et al.  Turbulent Statistics of Neutrally Stratified Flow Within and Above a Sparse Forest from Large-Eddy Simulation and Field Observations , 1998 .

[8]  F. H. Harlow,et al.  FIRETEC: A transport description of wildfire behavior , 1997 .

[9]  Michael R. Raupach,et al.  Simplified expressions for vegetation roughness length and zero-plane displacement as functions of canopy height and area index , 1994 .

[10]  N. Cheney,et al.  The Influence of Fuel, Weather and Fire Shape Variables on Fire-Spread in Grasslands , 1993 .

[11]  Craig C. Chandler Forest fire management and organization , 1991 .

[12]  G. B. D. Coignac Le contre-feu est-ce la seule technique efficace d'extinction des grands incendies ? , 1986 .