Comparison of Different Models to Simulate Forest Fire Spread: A Case Study

With the development of computer technology, forest fire spread simulation using computers has gradually developed. According to the existing research on forest fire spread, the models established in various countries have typical regional characteristics. A fire spread model established in a specific region is only suitable for the local area, and there is still a great deal of uncertainty as to whether or not the established model is suitable for fire spread simulation for the same fuel in other regions. Although many fire spread models have been established, the fuel characteristics applicable to each model, such as the fuel loading, fuel moisture content, combustibility, etc., are not similar. It is necessary to evaluate the applicability of different fuel characteristics to different fire spread models. We combined ground investigation, historical data collection, model improvements, and statistical analysis to establish a multi-model forest fire spread simulation method (FIRER) that shows the burning time, perimeter, burning area, overlap area, and spread rate of fire sites. This method is a large-scale, high-resolution fire growth model based on fire spread in eight directions on a regular 30 m grid. This method could use any one of four different physical models (McArthur, Rothermel, FBP, and Wang Zhengfei (China)) for fire behavior. This method has an option to represent fire breaks from roads, rivers, and fire suppression. We can evaluate which model is more suitable in a specific area. This method was tested on a single historical lightning fire in the Daxing’an Mountains. Different scenarios were tested and compared: using each of the four fire behavior models, with fire breaks on or off, and with a single or suspected double fire ignition location of the historical fire. The results show that the Rothermel model is the best model in the simulation of the Hanma lightning fire; the overlap area is 5694.4 hm2. Meanwhile, the real fire area in FIRER is 5800.9 hm2; both the Kappa and Sørensen values exceed 0.8, providing high accuracy in fire spread simulations. FIRER performs well in the automatic identification of fire break zones and multiple ignited points. Compared with FARSITE, FIRER performs well in predicting accuracy. Compared with BehavePlus, FIRER also has advantages in simulating large-scale fire spread. However, the complex data preparation stage of FIRER means that FIRER still has great room for improvement. This research provides a practical basis for the comparison of the practicability and applicability of various fire spread models and provides more effective practical tools and a scientific basis for decision-making and the management of fighting forest fires.