Cited by 93Fire dynamics and safety researchFire effects on ecosystemsThermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 36 of the 36 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Computational study of critical moisture and depth of burn in peat fires

Open access
Huang, Xinyan, Rein, Guillermo·2015·International Journal of Wildland Fire

Abstract

Smouldering combustion is the slow, low-temperature, flameless burning of porous fuels and the most important phenomenon of wildfires in peatlands. Smouldering fires propagate both horizontally and vertically through organic layers of the ground and can reach deep into the soil. In this work, we develop a one-dimensional computational model of reactive porous media in the open-source code Gpyro. We investigate the vertical in-depth spread of smouldering fires into peat columns 20 cm deep with heterogeneous profiles of moisture content (MC), inert content (IC) and density. The model solves the species, momentum and energy conservation equations with five-step heterogeneous chemistry, to predict the transient profiles of temperature, species concentration, reaction rates and depth of burn from ignition to spread and to extinction. Modelling results reveal that smouldering combustion can spread over peat layers with very high MC (>250%) if the layer is thin and located below a thick, drier layer. It is shown that the critical moisture for extinction can be much higher than the previously reported critical MC for ignition (e.g. extinction MC up to 256% for low-IC peat, with critical ignition MC of 117%). The predicted critical MC values and depths of burn are compared with experimental measurements for field samples in the literature, showing good agreement. This study provides the physical understanding of the role of moisture in the ignition and extinction of smouldering peat fires, and explains for the first time the phenomenon of smouldering in very wet peat layers.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/wf14178

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 36 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 93

Metadata

Authors
Huang, X., & Rein, G.
Affiliations
Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Rein, Guillermo
Venue
International Journal of Wildland Fire
Published
2015-07-30
Volume
24
Issue
6
Pages
798-808
ISSN
  • 1049-8001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1448-5516
OpenAlex
W1873860114
Cited by
88
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 1
FWCI
17.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
International Journal of Wildland Fire (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Funders
  • Ohio State University
  • Florida Atlantic University
  • Universidad del Atlántico
  • University College Dublin
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Safety, Risk, Reliability and Quality › Fire dynamics and safety research
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Energy › Fuel Technology › Thermochemical Biomass Conversion Processes
Keywords
smoldering combustion, peatland fires, peatlands, critical moisture content, fire extinction, ignition, reactive porous media, heterogeneous chemistry, moisture content

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review