Table 7 – Evaporation correction factor Figure 7 – Relationship between Evaporation Moisture Factor (EMF) and as a function of fuel surface fuel surface temperature. temperature. Figure 8 – Flow diagram of the table-based fine dead fuel moisture calculations. Table 8 – Example Moisture Correction Factor (MCF) table for fuels that are absorbing water. Relative Humidity (%) 9 7% <5 14 19 24 29 24 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 79 84 89 94 95+ to 5 to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 <30 -4 -2 0 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 18 30-49 -3 -2 -1 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 11 13 50-69 -3 -2 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 8 70-89 -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 90-99 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 100-104 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 105-110 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 110-115 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 > 115 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Figure 9 – Comparison of Nelson-calculated fine dead fuel moistures (blue) to SimpleFMMC (red) calculated values calculated from hourly weather data at the Sanborn RAWS . Despite the huge simplifications in model logic, correlations between the complex and simple models are 0.94.
Table 7 – Evaporation correction factor as a function of fuel surface temperature. Figure 7 – Relationship between Evaporation Moisture Factor (EMF) and fuel surface temperature. Figure 8 – Flow diagram of the table-based fine dead fuel moisture calculations. Table 8 – Example Moisture Correction Factor (MCF) table for fuels that are absorbing water. Relative Humidity (%) 7% <5 5 to 9 10 to 14 15 to 19 20 to 24 25 to 29 30 to 24 35 to 39 40 to 44 45 to 49 50 to 54 55 to 59 60 to 64 65 to 69 70 to 74 75 to 79 80 to 84 85 to 89 90 to 94 95+ <30 -4 -2 0 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 15 18 30-49 -3 -2 -1 0 0 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 8 9 11 13 50-69 -3 -2 -1 -1 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 8 70-89 -2 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 4 90-99 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 100-104 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 105-110 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 110-115 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 > 115 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Figure 9 – Comparison of Nelson-calculated fine dead fuel moistures (blue) to SimpleFMMC (red) calculated values calculated from hourly weather data at the Sanborn RAWS . Despite the huge simplifications in model logic, correlations between the complex and simple models are 0.94.
FFS_final_report_Rev2.docx