Ooh! I have actually experimented with fire scaling myself. To some extent, a scaled down campfire can work, but at a different burn rate. I once made a tiny hearth and experimented for a while at making tiny fires in it. I found that within the range I was trying, a little scale model of a fire that worked well at full scale worked just as well at mini scale, just on a much faster time scale.
For example, if I had a human scale teepee style fire burning, say 1 to 2 inch diameter sticks at about 12 to 18 inches long, I’d need to toss another stick on it roughly every 1 to 5 minutes to maintain a nice blaze. Scaled down to sticks about 1/8th that size, I needed to feed it a stick every few seconds to maintain it. Much smaller and I wouldn’t have been able to move my tweezers fast enough to keep it fed.
The interaction of different stick sizes also scales that way. If I was to add a couple of eight inch wide split wedges on that same human scale fire, then once those caught, I could slow down feeding the smaller sticks into it to about 1 every 10 minutes, and still keep the same flame size as long as the larger pieces last. Likewise on the same mini fire as above, I could add a few 1 inch wide split wedges, and slow down to feeding it a little stick every 10 seconds.
The size I was playing with could be considered, say, mouse sized. By the time you scaled down to ant sized, the time scale would be so exaggerated as to be meaningless to compare to human sized fires. This isn’t taking into account any additional non-obvious factors that change how it behaves. So no, ant sized campfires are not possible. Mouse sized scale campfires are possible, but only if you tend them constantly and quickly.
Also, I didn’t take any precise measurements, I was just making tiny fires to relax. All numbers above are just rough estimates from memory, so you can’t really calculate how the scaling works from this, only that is sort of does work, within limits.
Thanks! Expert might be too strong a word, but considering how few people have likely done the same experiments, I guess it’s somewhat accurate relative to the normal amount of knowledge on the topic.
It makes sense things would burn faster due to the higher ratio of surface area to overall volume. Since volume increases with the 3rd power and surface area with the 2nd power little logs have proportionally more surface area.
I think, that’s a good idea, in that it would make a good channel. I’d enjoy watching it. However, if I was making content, I wouldn’t be relaxing, so I wouldn’t enjoy being the one filming the channel. I’m sure there’s someone out there who could have fun making it. Plus I got bored with the whole pursuit once I got the hang of it.
Yeah, gah could you imagine having that much executive function. Like doing a thing and then also having the dedication to also film it and get a YouTube channel and every bit of friction along the way. From a thing you started doing because setting things on fire is relaxing
I wonder if a creature the size of something like an ant that also experiences time at a much slower rate would be able to enjoy a tiny ant-sized fire? That would be pretty neat
Ooh! I have actually experimented with fire scaling myself. To some extent, a scaled down campfire can work, but at a different burn rate. I once made a tiny hearth and experimented for a while at making tiny fires in it. I found that within the range I was trying, a little scale model of a fire that worked well at full scale worked just as well at mini scale, just on a much faster time scale.
For example, if I had a human scale teepee style fire burning, say 1 to 2 inch diameter sticks at about 12 to 18 inches long, I’d need to toss another stick on it roughly every 1 to 5 minutes to maintain a nice blaze. Scaled down to sticks about 1/8th that size, I needed to feed it a stick every few seconds to maintain it. Much smaller and I wouldn’t have been able to move my tweezers fast enough to keep it fed.
The interaction of different stick sizes also scales that way. If I was to add a couple of eight inch wide split wedges on that same human scale fire, then once those caught, I could slow down feeding the smaller sticks into it to about 1 every 10 minutes, and still keep the same flame size as long as the larger pieces last. Likewise on the same mini fire as above, I could add a few 1 inch wide split wedges, and slow down to feeding it a little stick every 10 seconds.
The size I was playing with could be considered, say, mouse sized. By the time you scaled down to ant sized, the time scale would be so exaggerated as to be meaningless to compare to human sized fires. This isn’t taking into account any additional non-obvious factors that change how it behaves. So no, ant sized campfires are not possible. Mouse sized scale campfires are possible, but only if you tend them constantly and quickly.
Also, I didn’t take any precise measurements, I was just making tiny fires to relax. All numbers above are just rough estimates from memory, so you can’t really calculate how the scaling works from this, only that is sort of does work, within limits.
Can’t believe I’d see a decently thought provoking question I’d never considered to be met with a subject matter expert in this way. You’re awesome.
Thanks! Expert might be too strong a word, but considering how few people have likely done the same experiments, I guess it’s somewhat accurate relative to the normal amount of knowledge on the topic.
You are the leading expert in the field
Dude, Great response, thank you.
Also, who the fuck are you that you’ve already run this experiment!?
It makes sense things would burn faster due to the higher ratio of surface area to overall volume. Since volume increases with the 3rd power and surface area with the 2nd power little logs have proportionally more surface area.
I wonder if you could make a tiny candle?
This would make a really excellent YouTube channel, just voiceover, same style as perpetual stew. Burn tiny things every day.
I think, that’s a good idea, in that it would make a good channel. I’d enjoy watching it. However, if I was making content, I wouldn’t be relaxing, so I wouldn’t enjoy being the one filming the channel. I’m sure there’s someone out there who could have fun making it. Plus I got bored with the whole pursuit once I got the hang of it.
Yeah, gah could you imagine having that much executive function. Like doing a thing and then also having the dedication to also film it and get a YouTube channel and every bit of friction along the way. From a thing you started doing because setting things on fire is relaxing
Exactly! You know how it is.
This makes total sense due to the square-cube law (and cell sizes I suppose).
Have you considered relatively thicker sticks, like a log on a slower-burning fire? That should mitigate it a bit.
Super interesting, thanks for taking the time to type that out.
I wonder if a creature the size of something like an ant that also experiences time at a much slower rate would be able to enjoy a tiny ant-sized fire? That would be pretty neat
you’re the real mvp