A dynamics based view of atmosphere - fire interactions

2002 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian E. Potter

Current research on severe fire interactions with the atmosphere focuses largely on examination of correlations between fire growth and various atmospheric properties, and on the development of indices based on these correlations. The author proposes that progress requires understanding the physics and atmospheric dynamics behind the correlations. A conceptual 3-stage model of fire development, based on atmospheric structure, is presented. Using parcel theory and basic atmospheric dynamics equations, the author proposes possible causal explanations for some of the known correlations. The atmospheric dynamics are discussed in terms of the 3-stage model, but can also be viewed more generally. The overall goal is to reframe fire–atmosphere interactions in a way that will allow better understanding and progress in fire science, prediction, and safety.

Fire ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Alistair M.S. Smith ◽  
Eva K. Strand

In August, 2018, an editorial in Fire entitled Recognizing Women Leaders in Fire Science was published. This was intended to ignite a conversation into diversity in fire science by highlighting several women leaders in fire research and development. This editorial was released alongside a new Topical Collection in Fire called Diversity Leaders in Fire Science. The response on social media was fantastic, leading to numerous recommendations of women leaders in fire science that had been inadvertently missed in the first editorial. In this editorial, we acknowledge 145 women leaders in fire science to promote diversity across our disciplines. Fire is continually committed to improving diversity and inclusion in all aspects of the journal and welcomes perspectives, viewpoints, and constructive criticisms to help advance that mission.


2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 533-544 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nils Johansson ◽  
Jonathan Wahlqvist ◽  
Patrick van Hees

Author(s):  
William E. DeWitt

Mathematical Equations That Relate To Fire Phenomena Have Been Around For A Long Time. In 1984, Bukowski Proposed A Series Of Individual Calculations For Conducting A Fire Hazard Analysis. A Broader Series Of Equations, Applicable To Fire Growth Estimates, Was Published In 1985 By Lawson And Quintierez. Nelson Extended This Idea Further In 1986 With Fireform And Fpetool To Give Simple Models Along With Engineering Calculations In A Software Package That Was Widely Used For Fire Safety Engineering Calculations. More Recently, The National Institute For Standards And Technology (Nist) Released Fast And Fastlite. These Software Programs Are A Collection Of Procedures That Builds On The Core Routines Of Fireform And A Simplified Version Of The Computer Model Cfast To Provide Engineering Calculations Of Fire Phenomena. Fast, Which Stands For Fire Growth And Smoke Transport, Is Designed To Provide Quantitative Estimates Of Some Likely Consequences Of Fire, Such As Room Temperatures, Ceiling Layer Height, And Time To Flashover. This Paper Will Describe The Historical Use Of Fire Modeling Software In A Forensic Engineering Context, Review Current Fire Modeling Software Programs Available From Nist, And Present The Results Of An Applied Research Project That Modeled Actual Building Fires Using Fast. Finally, The Paper Will Show The Results Of A Fire Modeling Software Usage Survey Of Nafe Members Who Specialize In Fire And Explosion Investigations.


Author(s):  
Hyeong-Jin Kim ◽  
David G. Lilley

Abstract Flashover is characterized by the rapid transition in fire behavior from localized burning of fuel to the involvement of all combustibles in the enclosure. The objective of the present contribution is to calculate the development of flashover in a typical single room fire, and show the effect of ten key parameters on the time required to reach flashover conditions. It is found that the major parameters affecting flashover are fire growth rate, ventilation opening area, and room area.


Fire ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alistair Smith ◽  
Crystal Kolden ◽  
Susan Prichard ◽  
Robert Gray ◽  
Paul Hessburg ◽  
...  

Across the breadth of fire science disciplines, women are leaders in fire research and development. We want to acknowledge some of these leaders to promote diversity across our disciplines. In Fire, we are also happy to announce a new Special Collection, through which we will continue to acknowledge current and future Diversity Leaders in Fire Science by inviting contributions from the leaders in this editorial, among others.


1999 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary L. Hufford ◽  
Herbert L. Kelley ◽  
Raymond K. Moore ◽  
Jeffrey S. Cotterman

The utility of the new GOES-9 satellite 3.9 µm channel to monitor wildfires and their subsequent changes in growth and intensity in Alaska is examined. The June, 1996 Miller’s Reach forest fire is presented as a case study. Eighteen hours of sequential imagery coincident to the initiation and early stages of the fire are analyzed for hot spots. The dramatic response of the 3.9 µm channel to sub-pixel hot spots and the ability to access the data every 15 minutes makes the channel an effective tool to support forest fire management on wildfires in high latitudes to at least 61°N. In the case of Miller’s Reach, the fire was detected when it was less than 200 hectares in size. Changes in fire growth and intensity were also observed. An automated technique for decision makers which classifies hot spots without requiring image interpretation is proposed.


Author(s):  
Hyeong-Jin Kim ◽  
David G. Lilley

Abstract In structural fires, flashover is characterized by the rapid transition in fire behavior from localized burning of fuel to the involvement of all combustibles in the enclosure. Major parameters affecting flashover are fire growth rate, ventilation opening area, and room area. A comparison of flashover theories is undertaken using the Thomas, Babrauskas and the FASTLite theories, concentrating on the similarities and differences between the theories in their assessment of the major parameters affecting flashover.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-367
Author(s):  
Molly E Hunter ◽  
Melanie M Colavito ◽  
Vita Wright

Abstract Purpose of Review Science plays a critical role in natural resource management, and the use of science in decision-making is mandated by several policy initiatives. Other disciplines have documented the challenges associated with applying science to management and possible solutions to overcoming challenges, but the evaluation of science use in wildland fire management is relatively immature. In this paper, we reviewed the available literature that evaluates science use in wildland fire management and common barriers and facilitators to science use in decision-making. Recent Findings We developed a conceptual model that describes the possible uses of science in fire management (perception, planning, forecasting, implementation, assessment, communication, and policy), common barriers to science use (lack of science, uncertainty, funding/capacity, conflict), common facilitators to fire science use (collaboration, trust, boundary organizations, co-production), and factors that can act as facilitators or barriers to science use depending on their presence or absence (awareness, accessibility, relevance). In the context of our conceptual model, we reviewed 67 papers that examined fire science use between 1986 and 2019. Summary Most studies were conducted in the USA in the last 10 years and demonstrated that science is commonly used in fire management and that the maturation of organizations devoted to science translation and communication in the last 10 years has likely facilitated the application of fire science. The evaluation of fire science use, however, is still relatively immature, with studies needed on the use of fire science in countries outside the USA, the use of science in the management of wildfires, and in the crafting of policy related to wildland fire management.


1997 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
NP Cheney ◽  
JS Gould

The use of the terms "growth" and "acceleration" appears to be inconsistent in the literature and we believe this inconsistency has hindered our understanding of behaviour in the early stages of a fire. The development of a fire from a point ignition to some equilibrium state and the associated increase in fire size and intensity has been referred to variously as the fire growth (Pyne 1984); build-up (Luke and McArthur 1978); or acceleration (Chandler et al. 1983) phase of the fire. More specifically the "acceleration phase" has been used to describe the increase in rate of spread from ignition to a quasi-steady rate of spread (Luke and McArthur 1978, McAlpine and Wakimoto 1991). Characteristic curves showing the increase in rate of spread are illustrated for different fuel and weather conditions (Luke and McArthur 1978). Hypothetical models to describe these curves have been proposed by Cheney and Bary (1969), Van Wagner (unpublished) and McAlpine and Wakimoto (1991). They have been called acceleration curves and acceleration models. The terms growth and acceleration, however, represent different concepts that are not interchangeable. We would like to clarify these concepts and discuss the practical implications for fire managers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document