Laboratory Scale Experimental Study of Foam Suppression on Smouldering Combustion of a Tropical Peat

Ratnasari, Nadhira Gilang; Dianti, Afiri; Palamba, Pither; Ramadhan, Mohamad Lutfi; Prayogo, Gatot; Pamitran, Agus Sunjarianto; Nugroho, Yulianto Sulistyo

doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1107/5/052003

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In addition to its smothering effect, the foam layer also cools the surface of the fuel owing to the water content of the foam solution. Ratnasari et al (2018) and Subekti et al (2020) investigated the suppression time of peat fires using Class A fluorine-based foam and palm oil fatty acid-based foaming agent (FAP) foam respectively. Suppression time decreased with foam layer height while FAP foam performed more poorly than fluorine-based foam.…”

Section: Suppressant Agents To Fight Wildfiresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory study on the suppression of smouldering peat wildfires: effects of flow rate and wetting agent

Santoso

Cui

Amin

et al. 2021

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The application of water, or water mixed with suppressants, to combat wildfires is one of the most common firefighting methods but is rarely studied for smouldering peat wildfire, which is the largest type of fire worldwide in term of fuel consumption. We performed experiments by spraying suppressant to the top of a burning peat sample inside a reactor. A plant-based wetting agent suppressant was mixed with water at three concentrations: 0% (pure water), 1% (low concentration), and 5% (high concentration), and delivered with varying flowrates. The results showed that suppression time decreased non-linearly with flow rate. The average suppression time for the low-concentration solution was 39% lower than with just water, while the high-concentration solution reduced suppression time by 26%. The volume of fluid that contributes to the suppression of peat in our experiments is fairly constant at 5.7 AE 2.1 L kg À1 peat despite changes in flow rate and suppressant concentration. This constant volume suggests that suppression time is the duration needed to flood the peat layer and that the suppressant acts thermally and not chemically. The results provide a better understanding of the suppression mechanism of peat fires and can improve firefighting and mitigation strategies.

show abstract

Section: Suppressant Agents To Fight Wildfiresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Laboratory study on the suppression of smouldering peat wildfires: effects of flow rate and wetting agent

Santoso

Cui

Amin

et al. 2021

Int. J. Wildland Fire

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Owing to its low temperature, propensity to travel belowground, and flameless characteristics, smouldering of organic soils is difficult to detect (Page et al, 2002;Rein et al, 2008;. Additionally, when detected, smouldering is notoriously difficult to extinguish, requiring vastly greater quantities of water (Hadden and Rein, 2011;Ramadhan et al, 2017;Ratnasari et al, 2018). In Southeast Asia, this flaming-to-smouldering transition is common, as it is frequently used in agricultural practices to clean the land and return nutrients for use in plantations-this practice is typically referred to as slash and burn (Figure 1).…”

Section: Characteristics Smouldering Flamingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of the Transition From Smouldering to Flaming Combustion in Wildfires

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Wildfires are uncontrolled combustion events occurring in the natural environment (forest, grassland, or peatland). The frequency and size of these fires are expected to increase globally due to changes in climate, land use, and population movements, posing a significant threat to people, property, resources, and the environment. Wildfires can be broadly divided into two types: smouldering (heterogeneous combustion) and flaming (homogeneous combustion). Both are important in wildfires, and despite being fundamentally different, one can lead to the other. The smouldering-to-flaming (StF) transition is a quick initiation of homogeneous gas-phase ignition preceded by smouldering combustion, and is considered a threat because the following sudden increase in spread rate, power, and hazard. StF transition needs sufficient oxygen supply, heat generation, and pyrolysis gases. The unpredictable nature of the StF transition, both temporally and spatially, poses a challenge in wildfire prevention and mitigation. For example, a flaming fire may rekindle through the StF transition of an undetected smouldering fire or glowing embers. The current understanding of the mechanisms leading to the transition is poor and mostly limited to experiments with samples smaller than 1.2 m. Broadly, the literature has identified the two variables that govern this transition, i.e., oxygen supply and heat flux. Wind has competing effects by increasing the oxygen supply, but simultaneously increasing cooling. The permeability of a fuel and its ability to remain consolidated during burning has also been found to influence the transition. Permeability controls oxygen penetration into the fuel, and consolidation allows the formation of internal pores where StF can take place. Considering the high complexity of the StF transition problem, more studies are needed on different types of fuel, especially on wildland fuels because most studied materials are synthetic polymers. This paper synthesises the research, presents the various StF transition characteristics already in the literature, and identifies specific topics in need of further research.

show abstract

“…Compared to flaming wildfire, smoldering wildland fire require at least 50% more water to extinguish the same amount of burning fuel (Rein, 2013). Some chemical foaming agents can easily penetrate into peat soil and shield the burning peat particles from the oxygen supply (Ratnasari et al, 2018), but the required quantity to suppress any real peat fire is enormous. In fact, limited trials in the literature have demonstrated the ineffectiveness of all man-made suppression methods in controlling or extinguishing any massive peat fire (Dianti et al, 2018;Mikalsen et al, 2018;Ramadhan et al, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%