2009
DOI: 10.1016/j.firesaf.2008.03.004
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Physical modelling of fire spread in Grasslands

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
129
0
2

Year Published

2013
2013
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 97 publications
(132 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
129
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…For more details concerning the model (physical formulation and numerical methods) and also the confrontation between numerical results obtained using this model and experimental data collected on the field for shrubland and grassland fires, the reader is invited to consult previous published papers [8,11].…”
Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For more details concerning the model (physical formulation and numerical methods) and also the confrontation between numerical results obtained using this model and experimental data collected on the field for shrubland and grassland fires, the reader is invited to consult previous published papers [8,11].…”
Section: Mathematical Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We can notice that the order of magnitude for the ROS produced using these different approaches, are quite similar, as far the wind conditions remained Temperature field and velocity vectors calculated during the propagation of a surface fire through a tall grass [19]. relatively moderate (U 10 < 8 m/s).…”
Section: Numerical Results Obtained Using the Firestar Modelmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…To illustrate what kind of information, we can extract from wildfire physical modelling, we have reproduced in this part, some numerical results obtained from numerical simulations carried in two ecosystems: a grassland [19] and a Mediterranean shrubland [20]. To assure a sufficient level of accuracy during all the calculation, the computational domain was discretized using an adaptive mesh refinement (AMR), on both side of the pyrolysis front, maintaining a mesh size equal to 0.5 x δ R and 1.0 x δ R along the vertical and the horizontal direction, respectively.…”
Section: Numerical Results Obtained Using the Firestar Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The available models for wildfire behaviour prediction can be classified in two main classes: empirical/semi-empirical models [22,23] and full physical models [24,25]. Models belonging to the first class are typically 1D models that are then extended to 2D landscape propagation through proper approaches.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%