昆明西山林场5种可燃物的火行为研究

doi:10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202003004

国家林草科技领军期刊
中国精品科技期刊
中国高校百佳科技期刊
江苏省新闻出版政府奖期刊奖
RCCSE林学权威期刊（A+）
CSCD核心期刊
Scopus数据库收录期刊
中文核心期刊
SCD核心期刊

作者加群：102861116

微信公众号：南京林业大学学报

高级检索

南京林业大学学报（自然科学版） ›› 2021, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (1): 197-204.doi: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202003004

昆明西山林场5种可燃物的火行为研究

闫想想¹(), 王秋华¹^,^*(), 缪秀丽², 韩永涛³, 龙腾腾¹

1.西南林业大学土木工程学院,云南省森林灾害预警与控制重点实验室,云南昆明 650224
2.昆明市西山林场,云南昆明 650100
3.开封市通许县自然资源局,河南开封 475400

收稿日期:2020-03-02 接受日期:2020-10-09 出版日期:2021-01-30 发布日期:2021-02-01
通讯作者: 王秋华
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金项目(31660210,31960318);云南省农业联合面上项目(2018FG001-055);云南省教育厅科学研究基金项目(2019Y0145)

Fire behavior of five kinds of fuels in Xishan Forest Farm, Kunming City

YAN Xiangxiang¹(), WANG Qiuhua¹^,^*(), MIAO Xiuli², HAN Yongtao³, LONG Tengteng¹

1. Southwest Forestry University, Faculty of Civil Engineering, Yunnan Key Laboratory of Forest Disaster Warning and Control, Kunming 650224, China
2. Xishan Forest Farm of Kunming City, Kunming 650100, China
3. Natural Resources Bureau of Tongxu County, Kaifeng 475400,China

Received:2020-03-02 Accepted:2020-10-09 Online:2021-01-30 Published:2021-02-01
Contact: WANG Qiuhua

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

【目的】通过估测西山林场内主要可燃物特征,预测潜在的火行为大小,为西山林场的防火管理提供科学参考。【方法】通过外业调查,对柏木(Cupressus funebris)、旱冬瓜(Alnus nepalensis)、云南松(Pinus yunnanensis)、华山松(P. armandii)和麻栎(Quercus acutissima)5种可燃物采样,估算西山林场内主要可燃物载量大小,并在实验室内进行燃烧模拟试验,量化火行为特征,包括引燃时间、火焰维持时间、无焰燃烧维持时间、蔓延时间、火焰高度、火焰温度、无焰燃烧温度、火焰热辐射、无焰燃烧热辐射等。【结果】云南松林内的载量达到2.35 kg/m²、燃烧火焰最高温度628 ℃、燃烧火焰最大高度70 cm、最大热辐射为6.92 kW/m²、燃烧后无焰燃烧的最高温度266 ℃,均与每年进行计划烧除时云南松纯林内的载量1.15 kg/m²、火焰最高温度697.6 ℃、火焰最大高度44.5 cm、最大热辐射8.02 kW/m²,无焰燃烧的最高温度194.3 ℃有差异。不同林种可燃物的火强度大小依次为:云南松(786.07 kW/m) >麻栎(564.39 kW/m)>华山松(275.30 kW/m) >柏木(6.26 kW/m),其中云南松的火强度(786.07 kW/m,中强度火)与云南松纯林计划烧除时的火强度403.60 kW/m(低强度火)有差异。【结论】森林可燃物的载量对火强度影响较大,麻栎和华山松属于低强度火,柏木的火强度几乎可以忽略不计。森林抚育更新等人为干预措施,可对林内可燃物进行有效调控,减少和预防森林火灾的发生。

关键词: 有焰燃烧, 无焰燃烧, 火强度, 阻滞时间, 地表可燃物, 昆明市西山林场

Abstract:

【Objective】 This study aimed to improve fire prevention management for Xishan Forest Farm by estimating the main fuels characteristics and predicting potential fire behavior. 【Method】 Based on a field survey and sampling, the status of fuel was analyzed in the Xishan Afforestation Community. There were five main types of combustibles: Cupressus funebris, Alnus nepalensis, Pinus yunnanensis, P. armandii, and Quercus acutissima. Their combustion was measured in the laboratory, and the fire behavior was calculated, including ignition time, flame maintenance time, flameless combustion maintenance time, spread time, flame height, flame temperature, flameless combustion temperature, flame heat radiation and flameless combustion heat radiation. 【Result】 In the P. yunnanensis forest, the fuel load was 2.35 kg / m², the maximum flame temperature was 628 ℃, the maximum flame height was 70 cm, the maximum flame heat radiation was 6.92 kW / m², and the maximum temperature for flameless combustion was 266 ℃. During the prescribed burning every year in P. yunnanensis, the load was 1.15 kg / m², the highest temperature of the flame was 697.6 ℃, the maximum flame height was 44.5 cm, the maximum heat radiation of the flame was 8.02 kW/m², and the maximum temperature for flameless combustion was 194.3 ℃. There was a difference between the prescribed burning and Xishan forest farm of P. yunnanensis. The fire intensity order was P. yunnanensis > Q. acutissima > P. armandii > C. funebris, and the intensity values were 786.07, 564.39, 275.30 and 6.26 kW/m, respectively. Among these, the fire intensity of P. yunnanensis of 786.07 kW/m (medium-intensity fire) was different from the fire intensity of 403.60 kW / m (low-intensity fire) when P. yunnanensis of pure forest is planned to be burned. 【Conclusion】 The fuel load had the greatest impact on the fire intensity of combustibles. Q. acutissima and P. armandii were low-intensity fires, and the fire intensity of C. funebris was almost negligible. It is recommended that the Xishan Afforestation Community adopt human intervention to effectively treat forest combustibles and to prevent forest fires.

Key words: flaming combustion, flameless combustion, fire intensity, residence time, surface fuel, Xishan Forest Farm of Kunming City

中图分类号:

S762

闫想想,王秋华,缪秀丽,等. 昆明西山林场5种可燃物的火行为研究[J]. 南京林业大学学报（自然科学版）, 2021, 45(1): 197-204.

YAN Xiangxiang, WANG Qiuhua, MIAO Xiuli, HAN Yongtao, LONG Tengteng. Fire behavior of five kinds of fuels in Xishan Forest Farm, Kunming City[J].Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 2021, 45(1): 197-204.DOI: 10.12302/j.issn.1000-2006.202003004.

图/表 5

表1

图1

表2

图2

图3

参考文献 32

[1]	孙武, 牛树奎. 北京地区主要针叶林型林火行为[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2012,40(2):54-60.
	SUN W, NIU S K. Forest fire behavior in main coniferous forests in Beijing[J]. J Northeast For Univ, 2012,40(2):54-60. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2012.02.015.
[2]	胡海清, 罗斯生, 罗碧珍, 等. 林火干扰对广东马尾松林土壤有机碳密度及其活性有机碳的影响[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版): 2020,44(5):132-140.
	HU H Q, LUO S S, LUO B Z, et al. Effect of forest fire disturbance on soil organic carbon density and labileorganic carbon of Pinus massoniana forests in Guangdong Province, China[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2020,44(5):132-140.DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201904024.
[3]	罗碧珍, 罗斯生, 魏书精, 等. 生物质燃烧排放物研究进展[J]. 南京林业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018,42(6):191-196.
	LUO B Z, LUO S S, WEI S J, et al. Review on emission from biomass combustion[J]. J Nanjing For Univ (Nat Sci Ed), 2018,42(6):191-196. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2006.201803042.
[4]	田晓瑞, 王明玉, 殷丽, 等. 大兴安岭南部春季火行为特征及可燃物消耗[J]. 林业科学, 2009,45(3):90-95.
	TIAN X R, WANG M Y, YIN L, et al. Fire behavior and consumption of fuel loadings in spring season in southern Daxing’an mountains[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2009,45(3):90-95. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2009.03.016.
[5]	潘登, 张合平, 潘高, 等. 桂西南松栎林火行为研究及碳排放计量[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2017,26(5):51-61.
	PAN D, ZHANG H P, PAN G, et al. fire behavior and carbon emission of pine oak forests in southwest Guangxi of China[J]. J Nat Disasters, 2017,26(5):51-61. DOI: 10.13577/j.jnd.2017.0507.
[6]	张家来, 曾祥福, 胡仁华, 等. 湖北主要森林可燃物类型及潜在火行为研究[J]. 华中农业大学学报, 2002,21(6):550-554.
	ZHANG J L, ZENG X F, HU R H, et al. Study on the type of forest fuel and the latent five behavior in Hubei Province[J]. J Huazhong Agric Univ, 2002,21(6):550-554. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1000-2421.2002.06.013.
[7]	陈帅, 陶骏骏, 王振师, 等. 火行为对森林地表可燃物燃烧碳转化的影响[J]. 燃烧科学与技术, 2018,24(2):177-185.
	CHEN S, TAO J J, WANG Z S, et al. Effects of fire behavior on carbon conversion rates of surface fire in wildland[J]. J Combust Sci Technol, 2018,24(2):177-185. DOI: 10.11715/rskxjs.R201703031.
[8]	潘登, 张合平, 潘高, 等. 基于Rothermel的南亚热带马尾松人工林潜在火行为研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2017,37(6):14-23.
	PAN D, ZHANG H P, PAN G, et al. Research on Masson pine potential fire behavior in southern subtropical based on Behave Plus[J]. J Central South Univ For Technol, 2017,37(6):14-23. DOI: 10.14067/j.cnki.1673-923x.2017.06.003.
[9]	陈启良, 刘清江, 王秋华, 等. 昆明地区冲天柏林地表可燃物特征及火行为研究[J]. 林业调查规划, 2018,43(5):64-69.
	CHEN Q L, LIU Q J, WANG Q H, et al. Characteristics of ground fuel and potential fire behavior of Cupressus duclouxiana forest in Kunming[J]. For Invent Plan, 2018,43(5):64-69. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1671-3168.2018.05.013.
[10]	张景群, 康永祥, 吴宽让, 等. 秦岭森林潜在火行为数量分类及划分指标研究[J]. 林业科学, 2001,37(1):101-106.
	ZHANG J Q, KANG Y X, WU K R, et al. Studies on the quantitative classification and dividing indices of potential fire behavior of forest in Qinling[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2001,37(1):101-106. DOI: 10.3321/j.issn:1001-7488.2001.01.015.
[11]	张敏, 刘东明. 长白山林区落叶松林可燃物模型及火行为状况[J]. 自然灾害学报, 2007,16(2):127-132.
	ZHANG M, LIU D M. Fire behavior model and situation of Larix olgensis combustibles in forest zone of Changbai Mountain[J]. J Nat Disasters, 2007,16(2):127-132. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1004-4574.2007.02.023.
[12]	张吉利, 刘礴霏, 邸雪颖, 等. 平地无风条件下蒙古栎阔叶床层的火行为Ⅲ.火线强度、可燃物消耗和燃烧效率分析及预测模型[J]. 应用生态学报, 2013,24(12):3381-3390.
	ZHANG J L, LIU B F, DI X Y, et al. Fire behavior of Quercus mongolica leaf litter fuelbed under zero-slope and no-wind conditions.Ⅲ.Analysis and modelling of fireline intensity,fuel consumption,and combustion efficiency[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2013,24(12):3381-3390.
[13]	王秋华, 仝艳民, 李世友, 等. 滇中地区入侵紫茎泽兰的潜在火行为[J]. 福建林业科技, 2015,42(2):29-33.
	WANG Q H, TONG Y M, LI S Y, et al. Potential fire behaviors of invasive Eupatorium adenophorum in middle-Yunnan Province[J]. J Fujian For Sci Technol, 2015,42(2):29-33. DOI: 10.13428/j.cnki.fjlk.2015.02.007.
[14]	蔡卫红, 王晓红, 于宏洲, 等. 基于Rothermel模型的可燃物参数对林火行为影响的计算机仿真[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2013,33(11):34-41.
	CAI W H, WANG X H, YU H Z, et al. Effects of fuel load and height on accuracy of fire simulation:a case study of 4.30 Nnuohanhe conflagration in Great Khingan region,Heilongjiang Province[J]. J Central South Univ For Technol, 2013,33(11):34-41. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-923X.2013.11.007.
[15]	金森, 周勇. 昆明典型地表死可燃物含水率预测模型的研究[J]. 中南林业科技大学学报, 2014,34(12):7-15.
	JIN S, ZHOU Y. Study on moisture content prediction model of dead surface fuels in typical stands,Kunming[J]. J Central South Univ For Technol, 2014,34(12):7-15. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-923X.2014.12.003.
[16]	吴志伟, 贺红士, 梁宇, 等. 丰林自然保护区森林可燃物模型的建立[J]. 应用生态学报, 2012,23(6):1503-1510.
	WU Z W, HE H S, LIANG Y, et al. Establishment of standard forest fuel models for Fenglin Natural Reserve,Heilongjiang Province,China[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2012,23(6):1503-1510.
[17]	胡海清, 陆昕, 孙龙, 等. 大兴安岭典型林分地表死可燃物含水率动态变化及预测模型[J]. 应用生态学报, 2016,27(7):2212-2224.
	HU H Q, LU X, SUN L, et al. Dynamics and prediction models of ground surface dead fuel moisture content for typical stands in Great Xing’an Mountains,Northeast China[J]. Chin J Appl Ecol, 2016,27(7):2212-2224. DOI: 10.13287/j.1001-9332.201607.007.
[18]	刘方策, 张运林, 满子源, 等. 照片分类法与图像识别技术相结合的森林可燃物分类[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2018,46(11):51-57.
	LIU F C, ZHANG Y L, MAN Z Y, et al. Classifying forest fuel types by photo classification and image recognition[J]. J Northeast For Univ, 2018,46(11):51-57. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2018.11.010.
[19]	于宏洲, 金森, 邸雪颖. 以时为步长的塔河林业局白桦林地表死可燃物含水率预测方法[J]. 林业科学, 2013,49(12):108-113.
	YU H Z, JIN S, DI X Y. Models for predicting the hourly fuel moisture content on the forest floor of birch stands in Tahe forestry bureau[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2013,49(12):108-113.
[20]	孙龙, 鲁佳宇, 魏书精, 等. 森林可燃物载量估测方法研究进展[J]. 森林工程, 2013,29(2):26-31,37.
	SUN L, LU J Y, WEI S J, et al. Research progress of forest fuel load estimation methods[J]. For Eng, 2013,29(2):26-31,37. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-005X.2013.02.005.
[21]	杨博文, 陈鹏宇, 金森. 帽儿山两林分气温与地表可燃物温度差异及对可燃物含水率预测的影响[J]. 林业科学, 2015,51(7):91-98.
	YANG B W, CHEN P Y, JIN S. Differences of air temperature and fuel surface temperature in two stands in Maoershan forest farm and their effects on fuel moisture modelling[J]. Sci Silvae Sin, 2015,51(7):91-98. DOI: 10.11707/j.1001-7488.20150710.
[22]	吴志伟, 贺红士, 刘晓梅, 等. 丰林保护区地表森林死可燃物载量与环境因子的关系[J]. 东北林业大学学报, 2011,39(3):52-55.
	WU Z W, HE H S, LIU X M, et al. Relationship between loading of dead forest fuels in surface soil and environmental factors in Fenglin Nature Reserve[J]. J Northeast For Univ, 2011,39(3):52-55. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-5382.2011.03.017.
[23]	陈宏伟, 常禹, 胡远满, 等. 大兴安岭呼中林区森林死可燃物载量及其影响因子[J]. 生态学杂志, 2008,27(1):50-55.
	CHEN H W, CHANG Y, HU Y M, et al. Load of forest surface dead fuel in Huzhong area of Daxing’anling Mountains and relevant affecting factors[J]. Chin J Ecol, 2008,27(1):50-55.
[24]	DIMITRAKOPOULOS A, PAPAIOANNOU K. Flammability assessment of Mediterranean forest fuels[J]. Fire Technol, 2001,37(2):143-152. DOI: 10.1023/A:1011641601076.
[25]	FONS W L. Analysis of fire spread in light forest fuels[J]. Journal of Agricultural Research, 1946,72(3):92-12
[26]	MILLER C, URBAN D L. Connectivity of forest fuels and surface fire regimes[J]. Landsc Ecol, 2000,15(2):145-154. DOI: 10.1023/A:1008181313360.
[27]	VIEGAS D X, VIEGAS T S P, FERREIRA D. Moisture content of fine forest fuels and fire occurrence in central Portugal[J]. International Journal of Wildland Fire, 1992,2(2):69-86.
[28]	MUTLU M, POPESCU S C, STRIPLING C, et al. Mapping surface fuel models using lidar and multispectral data fusion for fire behavior[J]. Remote Sens Environ, 2008,112(1):274-285. DOI: 10.1016/j.rse.2007.05.005.
[29]	JENKINS M J, PAGE W G, HEBERTSON E G, et al. Fuels and fire behavior dynamics in bark beetle-attacked forests in Western North America and implications for fire management[J]. For Ecol Manag, 2012,275:23-34. DOI: 10.1016/j.foreco.2012.02.036.
[30]	骆介禹. 森林燃烧能量学[M]. 哈尔滨: 东北林业大学出版社, 1992.
[31]	王秋华, 单保君, 龚家平, 等. 滇中地区云南松纯林计划烧除研究[J]. 江西农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2018,40(2):235-240.
	WANG Q H, SHAN B J, GONG J P, et al. A study on prescribed burning in pure forest of Pinus yunnanensis franch in central Yunnan Province[J]. Acta Agric Univ Jiangxiensis (Nat Sci Ed), 2018,40(2):235-240. DOI: 10.13836/j.jjau.2018031.
[32]	王秋华, 刘文国, 李世友, 等. 昆明西山国家森林公园粗死木质残体的燃烧性研究[J]. 江西农业大学学报(自然科学版), 2013,35(1):138-143.
	WANG Q H, LIU W G, LI S Y, et al. A study on the combustibility of coarse woody debris in Xishan national forest park of Kunming[J]. Acta Agric Univ Jiangxiensis (Nat Sci Ed), 2013,35(1):138-143. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1000-2286.2013.01.025.

可燃物 fuel	林龄/a age of forest	龄组 age of group	立地类型 type of stand	坡度/(°) grope degre	郁闭度 canopy density	平均树高/m mean tree height	平均胸径/ cm mean DBH	载量/ (kg·m^-2) load	热值/ (kJ·kg^-1) heat value	含水率/ % moisture content
柏木 C. funebris	15	幼龄林	阴坡中厚层红壤	23	40	8.2	8.5	1.47	20 330	14.91
旱冬瓜 A. nepalensis	15	中龄林	阴坡中厚层红壤	23	50	7.1	8.3	3.37	18 560	10.31
云南松 P. yunnanensis	8	幼龄林	阳坡中厚层红壤	28	70	5.2	7.0	2.35	21 414	9.73
华山松 P. armandii	25	近熟林	阳坡中厚层红壤	22	55	9.1	14.9	3.37	19 110	16.99
麻栎 Q. acutissima	35	中龄林	阳坡中厚层黄红壤	12	70	11.5	16.0	2.24	20 700	10.64

可燃物 fuel	t_I/s	t_F/ min	h_max·F/ cm	T_max·F/ ℃	R/ (m·min^-1)	Φ_max·F/ (kW·m^-2)	t_uF/ min	T_max·uF/ ℃	Φ_max·uF/ (kW·m^-2)
柏木 C. funebris	3	2.28	20	416	0.44	3.18	4.48	263	0.75
旱冬瓜 A. nepalensis	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
云南松 P. yunnanensis	1	3.45	70	628	0.76	6.92	9.90	266	3.40
华山松 P. armandii	1	6.34	50	608	0.42	6.7	3.59	406	4.47
麻栎 Q. acutissima	3	3.89	90	643	0.41	7.3	9.02	476	6.77

昆明西山林场5种可燃物的火行为研究

Fire behavior of five kinds of fuels in Xishan Forest Farm, Kunming City

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 5

参考文献 32

相关文章 1

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

作者

读者

审稿