Citation

Sutherland D, Sharples JJ, Mell W, Moinuddin KAM, Sutherland D, Sharples JJ, Mell W, Moinuddin KAM. Int. J. Wildland Fire 2021; 30(3): 221-223.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2021, International Association of Wildland Fire, Fire Research Institute, Publisher CSIRO Publishing)

DOI

10.1071/WF20091

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

In response to Cruz et al. (2020b) (hereafter: CSG20), we would like to clarify that we are committed to further research into the mechanisms that drive fire spread in grassland fuels, and are open to making the most of synergies that exist between various programs of research. As demonstrated by Filippi et al. (2013), Kochanski et al. (2013), Clements et al. (2019), etc., there is much to be gained by combining detailed experimental data with rigorous computational modelling.

CSG20 raise several concerns about the results of Moinuddin et al. (2018) (hereafter: MSM18), which indicate that a change in fire propagation regime (wind- v. plume-driven) can alter the way rate of spread (RoS) responds to changes in fuel characteristics. Here, ‘plume-driven’ refers to the dominance of buoyancy forces on flame behaviour, in comparison with the shear forcing of the ambient wind conditions – there is no link to pyrocumulus development. Specifically, CSG20 question the existence of two different modes of fire propagation and the finding that the RoS can decrease as grass height increases. They also question some of the stated implications of the findings for strategic decision-making. While our results show that the RoS of a plume-driven fire decreases with increasing grass height (proportional to fuel load), they also show that the intensity increases (fig. 11a, MSM18) with increasing grass height. Therefore, we are in no way suggesting that increased fuel load implies less of a hazard.

Central to the critique offered by CSG20 is the observation that practically all of their fires are characterised ...

Language: en