New experimental diagnostics in combustion of forest fuels:  microscale appreciation for a macroscale approach

Cancellieri, Dominique; Leroy-Cancellieri, Valérie; Silvani, Xavier; Morandini, Frédéric

doi:https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-1957-2018

Articles | Volume 18, issue 7

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-1957-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-1957-2018

© Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Articles | Volume 18, issue 7

Research article

|

16 Jul 2018

Research article |

| 16 Jul 2018

New experimental diagnostics in combustion of forest fuels: microscale appreciation for a macroscale approach

Dominique Cancellieri, Valérie Leroy-Cancellieri, Xavier Silvani, and Frédéric Morandini

Download

Final revised paper (published on 16 Jul 2018)
Preprint (discussion started on 30 Jan 2018)

Interactive discussion

Status: closed

AC: Author comment | RC: Referee comment | SC: Short comment | EC: Editor comment

- Printer-friendly version

- Supplement

RC1: 'Balanced study but novel elements are requiered', Anonymous Referee #1, 02 Mar 2018
- AC1: 'Answer to reviewer n°1', Valerie Leroy-Cancellieri, 04 Apr 2018
RC2: 'Microscale appreciation for a Macroscale approach', Anonymous Referee #2, 04 Mar 2018
- AC2: 'Answer to the reviewer n°2', Valerie Leroy-Cancellieri, 04 Apr 2018

Peer-review completion

AR: Author's response | RR: Referee report | ED: Editor decision

ED: Reconsider after major revisions (further review by editor and referees) (14 Apr 2018) by Mario Parise

AR by Valerie Leroy-Cancellieri on behalf of the Authors (15 Apr 2018) Manuscript

ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (08 May 2018) by Mario Parise

RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (11 May 2018)

RR by Anonymous Referee #2 (30 May 2018)

Suggestions for revision or reasons for rejection

The authors made a big effort to improve the paper.

I agree with another Reviewer, that edge effect could influence on the fire behaviour next to mass-loss prototype. I think discussion on this subject should be included in the paper.

I believe the authors chose an incorrect way to present the influence of selected parameters on the mass loss rate in Figure 11. They are analysing the effect of the parameters on the mass loss rate and the mass loss rate is depicted on the diagram as a parameter. I would recommend that the authors change this Figure.

Minor comments:
1. Figure 2. It requires a note that the dimension of all the quantities is in cm or adding “cm” to each number.
2. Page 6, line 29. “”, these previous works…”. Which works? There is only one reference above (line 27).
3. Page 6, line 31. A reference needs to be added.
4. Page 7, line 9. There is a misprint. It should be “1 m” instead of “1”.
5. Page 7, line 13. “15 W/cm2” needs to be deleted.
6. Page 7, line 31. Figure 4 confuses the reader, as you said “The mass-loss prototype was placed near the end of the bed to ensure the steady state of the fire propagation.” Please add the picture with the prototype at the end of the plot.
7. Authors used the different ways to express dimensions, e.g. m.s-1 or m/s. One way of writing should be used.
8. Figure 6. Was it an average temperature for each species? If yes, a note should be added.
9. Figures 7 and 8 duplicate each other. I would recommend using only one Figure in the paper.
10. Figure 9. Was it an average heat flux? If yes, a note should be added.
11. Table 4. A relative error (or other) between the experiment and simulation needs to be added.

Hide

ED: Publish subject to minor revisions (review by editor) (03 Jun 2018) by Mario Parise

AR by Valerie Leroy-Cancellieri on behalf of the Authors (12 Jun 2018) Author's response Manuscript

ED: Publish as is (22 Jun 2018) by Mario Parise

AR by Valerie Leroy-Cancellieri on behalf of the Authors (25 Jun 2018) Manuscript

Short summary

The technology presented in this paper is based on a completely new approach wherein the development of a new field mass loss device combined with recent progress in the understanding of its behaviour achieves never before recorded data. It is the first time that the kinetics of decomposition of biomass have been validated under real wildland fire conditions, thus ensuring reliable characterisation of source terms.