This experimental study is a contribution to the understanding of the phenomena of the wildfire. This work was realized on the dead twigs of Cistus monspeliensis exposed to the heat flux at 50 kW m2 using a cone calorimeter. The experiments were realized on the shrub particles with different thicknesses (range of leaves and twigs: 1–20 mm) in function of the stage of combustion (pre-ignition, flaming, and glowing phases). For this, heat release rate, smoke production rate, smoke extinction area, the aerosol yield (Ya) via the light extinction measurements, and modified combustion efficiency were measured. The results show that there is a size limit for which the heat release rate had a different combustion behavior. The smoke production rate was also measured, and it showed that smoke was mainly emitted during the pre-heating phase. Aerosol yield (Ya) was calculated depending on these combustion phases (pre-ignition and flaming stage) and for the range of thickness of the samples.
MellWEJenkinsMAGouldJ. A physics based approach to modeling grassland fires. Int J Wildland Fire2007; 16: 1–22.
2.
LinnRReisnerJColmanJJ. Studying wildfire behavior using FIRETEC. Int J Wildland Fire2002; 11: 233–246.
3.
SantoniPAFilippiJBBalbiJH. Wildland fire behaviour case studies and fuel models for landscape-scale fire modeling. J Combust2011; 2011; 613424-1–613424-12.
4.
MirandaAI.An integrated numerical system to estimate air quality effects of forest fires. Int J Wildland Fire2004; 13: 217–226.
5.
RothermelRC. A mathematical model for predicting fire spread in wildland fuels. Research paper, INT-115, January 1972. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
6.
DeemingJEBurganRECohenJD.Manually calculating fire-danger rating: 1978 national fire-danger rating system. Technical Report INT-39, 1977. Ogden, UT: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.
7.
McArthurAG. Fire behaviour in eucalypt forests. Commonwealth of Australia, Forestry and Timber Bureau, Leaflet No. 107, 1967. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Forestry and Timber Bureau.
8.
PeetGB.A fire danger rating and controlled burning guide for the Northern Jarrah (Euc. Marginata sm) forest of Western Australia. Perth, WA, Australia: Forest Department, 1965.
9.
SneeuwjagtRJPeetGB.Forest fire behaviour tables for Western Australia. 3rd ed.Perth, WA, Australia: Department of Conservation and Land Management, 1985.
10.
CheneyNP.Fire behaviour. In: GillAMGrovesRHNobleIR (eds) Fire and the Australian biota. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian Academy of Science, 1981, pp. 151–175.
11.
BurrowsND.Flame residence times and rates of weight loss of eucalypt forest fuel particles. Int J Wildland Fire2001; 10: 137–143.
12.
TihayVSantoniP-ABarboniT. Autoignition of dead shrub twigs: influence of diameter on ignition. Fire Technol2016; 52: 897–929.
13.
GaughanDMCox-GanserJMEnrightPL. Acute respiratory effects of smoke exposure in wildland firefighters. In: Annual meeting of the American thoracic society, San Diego, CA, 20–25 May 2005. Washington, DC: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).
14.
BarboniTCannacMPasqualiniV. Volatile and semi-volatile organic compounds in smoke exposure of firefighters during prescribed burning in the Mediterranean region. Int J of Wildland Fire2010; 19: 606–612.
15.
BarboniTPellizzaroGArcaB. Analysis and origins of volatile organic compounds smoke from ligno-cellulosic fuels. J Anal Appl Pyrol2010; 89(1): 60–65.
16.
MirandaAIFerreiraJValenteJ. Smoke measurements during Gestosa-2002 experimental field fires. Int J Wildland Fire2005; 14: 107–116.
17.
ReisenFBrownSK.Australian firefighters’ exposure to air toxics during bushfire burns of autumn 2005 and 2006. Environ Int2009; 35(2): 342–352.
18.
SantoniP-ARomagnoliEChiaramontiN. Scale effects on the heat release rate, smoke production rate, and species yields for a vegetation bed. J Fire Sci2015; 33(4): 290–319.
19.
RehCMLettsDDeitchmanS.Health hazard evaluation report. HETA-91-152-2140, April1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service, Yosemite National Park, National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH).
20.
ChoiMYHaminsAMulhollandGW. Simultaneous optical measurement of soot volume fraction and temperature in premixed flames. Combust Flame1994; 99: 174–186.
21.
KellyFFussellJ.Size, sources and chemical composition as determinants of toxicity attributable to ambient particulate matter. Atmos Environ2012; 60: 504–526.
22.
MetzgerKBTolbertPEKleinM. Ambient air pollution and cardiovascular emergency department visits. Epidemiology2004; 15: 46–56.
23.
YamasoeaMAArtaxoaPMiguelAH. Chemical composition of aerosol particles from direct emissions of vegetation fires in the Amazon Basin: water-soluble species and trace elements. Atmos Environ2000; 10: 1641–1653.
24.
SaarikoskiSSillanpääMSofievM. Chemical composition of aerosols during a major biomass burning episode over northern Europe in spring 2006: experimental and modelling assessments. Atmos Environ2007; 41: 3577–3589.
25.
VicenteAAlvesCCalvoAI. Emission factors and detailed chemical composition of smoke particles from the 2010 wildfire season. Atmos Environ2013; 71: 295–303.
26.
MyllymäkiJBaroudiD. Prediction of smoke production and heat release by convolution model. NORDTEST Technical report 1297–96, 1999. Espoo: VTT Technical Research Centre of Finland.
27.
ISO 5660–1:1993. Fire tests—reaction to fire—part 1: rate of heat release from building products (Cone Calorimeter Method).
28.
TihayVSantoniP-ABarboniT. Experimental and theoretical study of diameter effect on the ignition of cistus twigs. In: Proceedings of the VII international conference on forest fire research (ed ViegasDX), Coimbra, Portugal, 2014. Coimbra, Portugal: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra.
29.
CruzGButlerBWViegasDX. Characterization of flame radiosity in shrubland fires. Combust Flame2011; 158: 1970–1976.
30.
ChiaramontiNRomagnoliESantoniPA. Comparison of the combustion of pine species with two sizes of calorimeter: 10 g vs 100 g. Fire Technol2017; 53: 741–770.
31.
ÖstmanBALTsantaridisLD. Smoke production in the cone calorimeter and the room fire test. Fire Safety J1991; 17: 27–43.
32.
DietenbergerMAGrexaO. Correlation of smoke development in room tests with cone calorimeter data for wood products. In: Proceedings of the 4th international scientific conference of wood & fire safety, Zvolen, 14–19 May 2000, pp. 45–55. Zvolen: Technical University of Zvolen.
33.
MulhollandGWChoiMY. Measurement of the mass specific extinction coefficient for acetylene and ethane smoke using the large agglomerate optics facility. In: Proceedings of the 27th international symposium on combustion, Pittsburg, 2–7 August 1998, pp. 1515–1522. Boulder, CO: The Combustion Institute.
34.
YokelsonRJ.Safari 2000 gas emissions from biofuel use and production. Data set, Oak Ridge National Laboratory Distributed Active Archive Center, Oak Ridge, TN, September2000, http://daac.ornl.gov/
35.
ReidJSKoppmannREckTF. A review of biomass burning emissions part II: intensive physical properties of biomass burning particles. Atmos Chem Phys2005; 5: 799–825.
36.
ChenLWAMoosmüllerHArnottWP. Emissions from laboratory combustion of wildland fuels: emission factors and source profiles. Environ Sci Technol2007; 41: 4317–4325.
37.
WilkieCAMorganAB.Fire retardancy of polymeric materials. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2009, p. 398.
38.
BenkoussasBConsalviJLPorterieB. Modelling thermal degradation of woody fuel particles. Int J Therm Sci2007; 46: 319–327.
39.
BrydenKMRaglandKWRutlandCJ.Modelling thermally thick pyrolysis of wood. Biomass Bioenerg2002; 22: 41–53.
40.
MorvanSMéradjiSAccaryG.Physical modeling of fire spread in Grasslands. Fire Safety J2009; 44: 50–61.
41.
UrbanskiSPHaoWMBakerS.Chemical composition of wildland fire emissions. Dev Environm Sci2009; 8: 79–107.
42.
Tihay-FelicelliVSantoniP-AGerandiG. Smoke emissions due to burning of green waste in the Mediterranean area: influence of fuel moisture content and fuel mass. Atmos Environ2017; 159: 92–106.
43.
ChewMYL. HRR, smoke and toxicity of ceiling and wall linings and finishes. Int J Eng Perform-Based Fire Codes1999; 1(3): 204–212.
44.
YokelsonRJChristianTJKarlTG. The tropical forest and fire emissions experiment: laboratory fire measurements and synthesis of campaign data. Atmos Chem Phys2008; 8: 4221–4266.
45.
AlvesCVicenteANunesT. Summer 2009 wildfires in Portugal: emission of trace gases and aerosol composition. Atmos Environ2001; 45: 641–649.
46.
AndreaeMOMerletP.Emission of trace gases and aerosols from biomass burning. Glob Biogeochem Cycles2001; 15: 955–966.
47.
Garcia-HurtadoEPeyJBorrásE. Atmospheric PM and volatile organic compounds released from Mediterranean shrubland wildfires. Atmos Environ2014; 89: 85–92.
48.
ParkSSYuJ.Chemical and light absorption properties of humic-like substances from biomass burning emissions under controlled combustion experiments. Atmos Environ2016; 156: 114–122.
49.
WardDEHardyCC.Smoke emissions from wildland fires. Environ Int1991; 17: 117–134.
50.
JanhällSAndreaeMOPöschlU.Biomass burning aerosol emissions from vegetation fires: particle number and mass emission factors and size distributions. Atmos Chem Phys2010; 10: 1427–1439.
