Stupid question about fire.

DanielaTorre said:

Can wooden floorboards catch fire if said fire is applied directly?

For example, my MC takes a seat on the stage of an old theatre and inadvertently sets down the torch he was holding. He's a kid and is distracted, so he doesn't immediately realize what he's done until the floorboards catch fire.

I say yes because you know, physics, common sense, chemistry and what not. But something's nagging me about it. Perhaps there's a wax that has been applied to the wood, a sheen.....

Although the story takes place in a modern setting, said scene takes place in a portal-world where everything is kind of stuck in the late 19th century, therefore the theatre is mid-19th.

Is the scene pertinent to plot progression you say? It is at present though I'm always open to reconsider if something this trivial might be a problem.

Thanks!

Click to expand...

I imagine we are talking about a 'flame' torch, that is fuelled by oil. If the oil was to spill over the flooring, yes it would and very quickly!

Not sure if the Victorians treat their wooden floors, you would have to ask an expert [i.e Victorian historian.]

If there is fuel, like kerosene or parrafin as you mentioned, I think it probably would burn.

Just wood, I'm not too sure. I think I had wooden table in science classes at school, thick wood and varnished, which didn't burn but were scorched slightly.

The material has to reach the proper temperature first before reacting to open flame. In the case of wood, an open flame alone is not enough because the heat it generates would be spread across the boards. An accelerant would help. And also if the entire theater is ablaze, the environmental temperature makes it possible for other materials to also be at the proper temperature to catch fire.


What is the temperature at which a book catches fire?

Hint: It's the title of a novel.

Answer: Farenheit 451


-cb

Also have to consider how the torch was laid down.

Maybe he could lay it down somewhere where it rolls off and into a laundry basket or something. Scene shifters behind the curtain move something and... - anything rather than it just 'burning down' until it reaches the boards if that's what you meant. These torches maybe didn't 'burn down' because the ends were wrapped in stuff dipped in whatever - - maybe the end portion just burned out.

One last point, maybe they're heavy at one end like juggling equipment and can't be laid down on the edge of something except one-way. Not sure which way!

Sorry, I'm maybe muddling the issue more than helping.

Good luck.

Heat rises, so it is hard to get anything up to combustable temperatures by trying to light the top of them. The bigger the chunk of wood, the less likely as well that you would get enough of it up to temperature before your flame died (I think someone mentioned it above). I doubt it would burn, but would probably scorch. That's why, why you're character builds a campfire, he builds layers of small branches, and lights the dry grass he stuck in the bottom. But, your city slicker character would just pile everything with no thought to oxygen starvation or skinny sticks catching fire easier, and then would drop their matches on top of the pile. Subsequent to that, they will start wondering why they have to eat cold beans out of can.

Now, if he happened to set it down and it rolled up against a canvas backdrop, that would likely be another story...(Lol, Bufty beat me by 3 minutes!)

Scrap.

Laying the torch down in order to pick up cards means the single-point light source will be behind the cards, so he still won't be able to see well enough to read what's on them.

Also, because there's no light source behind him. Whatever it is that casts the shadow has to come between him and a light source.

Also, because laying the torch down on an old wood-plank floor is a boneheaded move. It's a lot harder to get readers interested in stupid characters than in smart ones.

I hang out with fire eaters, and while you are supposed to be really careful, I know a friend who has an act that involves tossing a lit torch into the (old, dry, wooden, outdoor) stage by "accident" to scare the audience. She leaves it for several seconds before jumping up to put it out, and while it does scorch the boards, it doesn't catch fire. However if your MC were to spill some gas on the stage prior to setting his torch down, there would be a whole different situation. It still might not catch the stage on FIRE, exactly (unless there was a LOT), but the gas would burn and look exciting for a moment, and your MC would probably want to stomp it out quickly.

You've still got the problem with the dark environment and the single light source being behind the cards he wants to read.

I had an interesting time reading this topic - I've always wondered how "technical" books should be depending on the reading level. I can understand the "light source" part of the argument, but I'm wondering if it really matters in terms of the stage lightning on fire.

Would a middle grade reader question the scientific nature of the fire as to whether or not the stage is actually able to burn. Or would they just take it as part of the story and not give it a second thought. Of course, we can't tell what the reader is thinking, and some readers think differently than others.

One of my beta readers brought up a similar question about the description of my battle bots. I had mentioned that on bot had an exhaust pipe attached to its rear end and it was puffing out huge plumes of smoke. But then my beta reader was asking so does that mean your bot runs on part diesel fuel and part electric? Like a car?

I thought about it and was like..is that necessary information to divulge?

That's why I found this topic interesting..since every little tidbit in story can be broken down and analyzed, but in the end, does it matter? I say it matters only if its plot breaking, or creates loose ends.

BUT regarding this topic - once you figure out the light source issue, I wouldnt worry about the fire burning.

DanielaTorre said:

Hmmm. Now you're getting reeeeaally technical. LOL.

Click to expand...

No, I'm not. It would genuinely bother me if I were reading your manuscript. Not every reader is going to have that reaction, but some will. Others will have a niggling sense that something is wrong. Others won't notice it. That puts it on par with getting the caliber of a gun wrong, or not keeping track of which way your character turns at the foot of the stairs in order to go to the kitchen.

GuruLord said:

I had an interesting time reading this topic - I've always wondered how "technical" books should be depending on the reading level. I can understand the "light source" part of the argument, but I'm wondering if it really matters in terms of the stage lightning on fire.

Click to expand...

Cultivate the habit of getting things right. Even readers who don't know why specific details are wrong will get an uneasy sense that this reality isn't as solid underfoot as it might be.

At what age does that kick in? I can only speak to my own experience: some of my earliest reading memories are of figuring out that this book feels realer, and stuff in it somehow matters more, than that other book that's supposedly just like it.

Would a middle grade reader question the scientific nature of the fire as to whether or not the stage is actually able to burn. Or would they just take it as part of the story and not give it a second thought.

Click to expand...

It depends on how riveting the story is, how fast it's moving, and whether you're working at an appropriate level of detail. Neither Robert E. Howard's Conan stories nor Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes stories would work if they didn't get those right.

One of my beta readers brought up a similar question about the description of my battle bots. I had mentioned that on bot had an exhaust pipe attached to its rear end and it was puffing out huge plumes of smoke. But then my beta reader was asking so does that mean your bot runs on part diesel fuel and part electric? Like a car?

I thought about it and was like..is that necessary information to divulge?

Click to expand...

That depends on the story and genre, and what that character is doing. If you're writing rivet-y SF at longer lengths, and that particular bot is going to be a recurring character, it might matter. If it's a momentary cool detail, probably not. Whatever you do, don't make the mistake of trying to explain it. Nine times out of ten that'll only get you into trouble.

That's why I found this topic interesting..since every little tidbit in story can be broken down and analyzed, but in the end, does it matter? I say it matters only if its plot breaking, or creates loose ends.

Click to expand...

I say everything matters. The question is (1.) how much it matters; (2.) whether the reader is likely to be paying attention to it at that moment; and (3.) what it would take to fix it. If you have a zippy little fast-moving short story, and the amount of new text it would take to fix a technical objection would be an unmanageable burden, don't bother.

BUT regarding this topic - once you figure out the light source issue, I wouldn't worry about the fire burning.

Click to expand...

A good scary monster turning up behind your character beats a technical quibble any day.

HapiSofi -

Everything you've said makes perfect sense -

I'm at the point with my novel where am I explaining things (technical things) only if I know they serve an importance throughout my book(series).

Other times I'll let things slide, but since my book follows a bit of a technical side with kids making inventions, I'm lucky enough to have a Cornell engineering graduate assisting me to make sure my terminology and my descriptions make sense. Sense enough that I dont have to go into so much crazy detail that I jus tend up boring a middle grade reader.

But I agree with you the most with the last part - the good scary monster - As long as you have that moment that grabs the reader and pulls him or her into the story more, you can disregard a bit of tech.

Creating a real / convincing world for the reader is difficult. But yes, even the little things do matter. So i'll avoid screwing up the little things as much as I can (or just do a bit of research.....)

The joys of writing

I'll just add too - that I have a "mind control machine" as a plot device. Of course I can't go into any real detail as to the functionality of the device in a middle grade book...since after all there is no such thing as a mind control device, I had to take certain liberties and just let "things work out themselves".

Make the floor in your story more susceptible to fire. Not all floors were perfect. Write a plausible "defect." The floors were thick. Very thick for floors, according to my research. They were pine. I also read this, but did not read the entire article:


http://preserveala.org/pdfs/ESSAYS/HISTORIC FLOORS.pdf

"The most common wood flooring in Alabama for the entire 19th
century was dense heart-pine. Some use was made of poplar, ash, cypress and other woods. At least one circa 1830 floor of oak has been observed, a unique example thus far. Oak flooring was not popular until the 20th century.

Pine is biologically classified as a “softwood”. However, if one hefts a plant of dense, hard, heavy early
19th century pine the classification seems a misnomer. It is heavier per board foot than modern oak. It
is very hard. The growth rings are generally from 15 to 25 per inch, whereas modern “dense pine” is
classified as six growth rings per inch. It is permeated with pitch and glistens when split."

If they mean pitch is in the old wood, you could research flammability, or at least make it plausible in the story.

The part about the point of light and not being able to read the card is something I probably wouldn't even think of while reading, but ymmv. If something really needs to catch fire, I'd go with the idea of having it clatter a few feet away and hit a curtain. Before this was all pointed out, I would've totally bought the stage going up if I was fed the line that it was old, dry wood. It's one of those things that happens in movies sometimes and people point out on websites or in geek discussions, but wouldn't really break the flow of the thing.

As opposed to, for example, the notorious "propane gas doesn't rise, it sinks" scene from Panic Room, where the characters' actions would've gotten them killed in the real world.

Wow, lots of replies. I admit that I haven't read them all, so forgive me if it has been said, but--

In an abandoned place, the floors wouldn't be clean. Maybe you could catch some sawdust/lint/spiderweb type stuff on fire. Let it spread quickly to something fabric.

Unless of course, you need the floorboards to give way first.

OH! Creosote. Old buildings were treated with creosote to stop termites. Essentially something like tar and highly flammable. However, just the joists would be treated, not the floorboards.

Finally, you could have them roughed up a little, maybe a bit weak here and there - splinters catch fire easily.

ETA: Pitch smells like pinesol, while creosote stinks like fresh tar in the summer, if I recall correctly.

ETA: Creosote would have been a major need for anything to withstand time in Alabama, btw. The termites are godawful here in Georgia if you don't spray for them frequently. [Although this old farmhouse is creosote treated, I still lost a bit of siding.]