Pyromaster2
Registered User
Most mortar racks are designed out of wood, it's easy to built, but not the safest way to built your racks, if a mortarburst occur your rack will blown away in pieces, the rack builded out of wood will fragment when shooting huge kalibers, when shooting small kalibers like 75mm (3'') the damage it's not that great especially when shooting colourshells, if you shoot salute's the rack will be more damaged if a mortarburst occur.
Pyro-art in Germany has introduced new designed mortar racks out of steel, they are lighter, compacter then wooden racks, and safer but more expensive.
On this site you will find more information about these mortar racks.
Pyro-art in Germany has introduced new designed mortar racks out of steel, they are lighter, compacter then wooden racks, and safer but more expensive.
On this site you will find more information about these mortar racks.
Pyromaster2
Registered User
These steel racks from pyro-art has been tested on mortarbursts i think, i'm not sure but in this case if i see the structure of these steel racks the chance that the neighbouring racks will fall over is 10 - 20%, the chance that the neighbouring tube's in the same rack will be damaged is larger (>70%) then the other racks will fall down because the tube's stand beside each other, especially with larger calibers it can be a catastrofe for the pyrotechnican when a shell goes in the tube.
In this case it's not possible to positioning the racks in different calibers, such as 75mm-100mm-125mm, etc.
It's only possible to positioning them in groups of the same caliber.
Such things is only possible if you make the racks out of wood unfortunately.
I didn't manage to make the meeting, but I know that several people who did attend view this area, so they may be able to enlighten us. I have heard much about what was said, but I am not going to say too much as these are serious matters and accuracy of what was discussed there is important.
I think that the general upshot of it all is that the onus is on the companies to ensure that the equipment they use is fit for purpose.
Many of the companies I work for are now investing in metal racks. As pyromaster 2 rightly says the larger the calibre (or more powerful shells) the more damage its going to occur.
Steve
I think that the general upshot of it all is that the onus is on the companies to ensure that the equipment they use is fit for purpose.
Many of the companies I work for are now investing in metal racks. As pyromaster 2 rightly says the larger the calibre (or more powerful shells) the more damage its going to occur.
Steve
Did a bit of digging and looks like us boys in the USA have already thought long and hard about racking solutions. Home
Metal racks, new design timber racks and plastic pods that even float in water.
It is time that display companies paid more attention to the quality of their racking systems especially where they use delay chain fusing. Hardly any delay fusing is used in the US because of the requirement to double the safety distance if you cannot guarantee that the racking system will not reallign mortars in event of in mortar burst.
Metal racks, new design timber racks and plastic pods that even float in water.
It is time that display companies paid more attention to the quality of their racking systems especially where they use delay chain fusing. Hardly any delay fusing is used in the US because of the requirement to double the safety distance if you cannot guarantee that the racking system will not reallign mortars in event of in mortar burst.
Laatst bewerkt door een moderator:
Bonbridge just as an observation, but might it be that the collaring/holding of the tubes may just be at the very point of a potential failure? Most designs I have seen, are like that posted by Pyromaster bracings are top and bottom, or at least leave the first third to two thirds of the tube free, have these been tested to destruction?
Propyro (got your link working - if you see the edit)
Interesting what you say, I recently saw a programme on Discovery that was US TV prog about the 'Worlds most Dangerous Jobs' and whilst being a firer was obviously made to look more dangerous than it is, I was puzzled by the manner in which the shells were fired, basically sleeved visco (i.e. straight from the factory) one at a time from different racks, with a quick fired QM finale. I wasn't at all impressed by the practice, looked terribly dangerous - rushing around between very tightly arranged racks with 4 - 5" shells being launched within a few feet of people heads. I guess the TV makers wanted it to look a little more exciting. Also had film of a 3" (75mm) candle failing standing in a mortar, also too close to the firers :sad: . Have you seen it?
Propyro (got your link working - if you see the edit)
Interesting what you say, I recently saw a programme on Discovery that was US TV prog about the 'Worlds most Dangerous Jobs' and whilst being a firer was obviously made to look more dangerous than it is, I was puzzled by the manner in which the shells were fired, basically sleeved visco (i.e. straight from the factory) one at a time from different racks, with a quick fired QM finale. I wasn't at all impressed by the practice, looked terribly dangerous - rushing around between very tightly arranged racks with 4 - 5" shells being launched within a few feet of people heads. I guess the TV makers wanted it to look a little more exciting. Also had film of a 3" (75mm) candle failing standing in a mortar, also too close to the firers :sad: . Have you seen it?
I don't know who the manufacturer is and whether they are tested or not .
pyromasterllc.com is the web address
Even has a video showing in rack explosion but quality is a bit sketchy.
UK guys should buy these designs if possible rather than re inventing the wheel like everybody tries to do.
Tried inserting pictures here but wanted url etc ...too hard. If somebody else can manage it would be worthwhile for others.
I managed to find a "risk assessment - shells" by Tom Smith of BPA and this was his CONCLUSION
The risks from firing shells range from “broadly
acceptable� upwards – they DO NOT pose
unacceptable risks
Larger displays merit greater “in depth� analysis
than smaller shows and can justify additional
expenditure on risk reduction matters
Many potential controls are not justified on
Cost/Benefit analysis – BUT SOME ARE
Beware the “gotcha�
I wonder what this means in practical terms.
Even has a video showing in rack explosion but quality is a bit sketchy.
UK guys should buy these designs if possible rather than re inventing the wheel like everybody tries to do.
Tried inserting pictures here but wanted url etc ...too hard. If somebody else can manage it would be worthwhile for others.
I managed to find a "risk assessment - shells" by Tom Smith of BPA and this was his CONCLUSION
The risks from firing shells range from “broadly
acceptable� upwards – they DO NOT pose
unacceptable risks
Larger displays merit greater “in depth� analysis
than smaller shows and can justify additional
expenditure on risk reduction matters
Many potential controls are not justified on
Cost/Benefit analysis – BUT SOME ARE
Beware the “gotcha�
I wonder what this means in practical terms.
Meggsy,
I just uploaded a photo of my racks. I thought long and hard before I built this new batch of racks. All same length. Side boards almost to mouth of mortar to allow easy Pyro clock fixing and easy foiling - even though I never foil because foiling is one of the biggest con jobs in pyro.
Well built racks but God help me if a salute or large calibre blows in the tube and the delay chain is still intact and burning etc.
I just uploaded a photo of my racks. I thought long and hard before I built this new batch of racks. All same length. Side boards almost to mouth of mortar to allow easy Pyro clock fixing and easy foiling - even though I never foil because foiling is one of the biggest con jobs in pyro.
Well built racks but God help me if a salute or large calibre blows in the tube and the delay chain is still intact and burning etc.
Pyromaster2
Registered User
This is indeed a thing the most pyro's worry about.
But the most dangerous situation that you can have is if a shell goes in the left or right flank tube (the first (left flank) or last tube (right flank) in your rack).
It gives the most damage to your rack and if the tube's stand beside each other with no space between them the chance is high that the other tube's will fall down on one side or will trown away.
In my opinion it's safer to positioning the tube's in racks with space between them, but much company's positioning their tube's without any space between them or space between the racks.
Or you make your racks out of wood with space between the tube's or you make your racks out of steel without any space and that only the tube's will be damaged by a mortarburst, i think this is the two safest options because it's hard to set space's between tube's if you make your racks out of steel in the way that Pyro-art made them.
The chance that a mortarburst occur is small but you can't avoid it because it's one of the most dangerous things that can happen in pyrotechnic.
Laatst bewerkt:
Here's a link to the programme I think Meggsy meant:
http://www.freakpyromaniacs.com/forum/film-materiaal/12987-hazard-pay-pyrotechnician.html
By the way, Meggsy, I agree with your remark on the potential failure. I'd also prefer a top and bottom bracing.
Looks like I have to redesign my 5 and 6 inch racks.
The picture of the mangled leg is really scary. Does anybody know what safety distance was in place.
http://www.bpa-fmg.org.uk/bpa2007/wp-content/uploads/local-authorities-and-fireworks-displays.pdf
http://www.bpa-fmg.org.uk/bpa2007/wp-content/uploads/kf-racks.pdf
The picture of the mangled leg is really scary. Does anybody know what safety distance was in place.
http://www.bpa-fmg.org.uk/bpa2007/wp-content/uploads/local-authorities-and-fireworks-displays.pdf
http://www.bpa-fmg.org.uk/bpa2007/wp-content/uploads/kf-racks.pdf
I think that it is unfortunate that these pictures have been published, more for the kids concerned who may/or may not have seen them. This isn't having a pop at you propyro (as they are in the public domain), the images are shocking, and a salutory reminder of the power of large shells for anyone who has any involvment in professional fireworks.
As for safety distances, I don't think there was ever an issue with regard this.
I will discuss with Tony if the link should remain.
Steve
As for safety distances, I don't think there was ever an issue with regard this.
I will discuss with Tony if the link should remain.
Steve
Laatst bewerkt:
@Strsky, i think is good that also the public like the Fireworks "Freaks" on this forum can read them. Because alot of people CAN buy shells and the need to know what the danger is. Pictures like these are sad but also confronting,.
And the most of us need to be confronted with the extreem dangers before they start thinking. I think we need to show more of the other side of Fireworks. Fireworks is beautifull but has also a other side...Thats why always keep in mind "RESPECT" for fireworks also the small consumer items.
And the most of us need to be confronted with the extreem dangers before they start thinking. I think we need to show more of the other side of Fireworks. Fireworks is beautifull but has also a other side...Thats why always keep in mind "RESPECT" for fireworks also the small consumer items.
More reports like this need to be made public. Not made public in the sense of issuing press releases to the media but more in terms of making them known to people in and around the trade. I have a feeling many accidents are hushed up in the trade. The consequence is that many shooters carry on with no real appreciation of what can and does happen when things go wrong. We have all heard of accidents but when you see photos of injuries it really hits home. Pyros often ignore real and present risks all in the name of ensuring a good show.
I was at San Seb one year and I asked why all the tonnes and tonnes of sandbags being placed all around the racks (I have only seen this consistently practicised in Spain) and it was said by the super that they had a spectator fatality a few years ago when a shell exploded in a metal mortar. Credit to them in that they were laying down tonnes of sandbags but they were still using metal mortars and half the length of the tubes was uncovered.
I have started a few threads related to safety and delay chain fusing on this site and have said quite a bit about my view that the world wide pyro industry could be doing much more to improve safety. Lets hope those with a full time involvement in pyro get down to business and do the testing and research to address safety issues and then share the results around the world.
I was at San Seb one year and I asked why all the tonnes and tonnes of sandbags being placed all around the racks (I have only seen this consistently practicised in Spain) and it was said by the super that they had a spectator fatality a few years ago when a shell exploded in a metal mortar. Credit to them in that they were laying down tonnes of sandbags but they were still using metal mortars and half the length of the tubes was uncovered.
I have started a few threads related to safety and delay chain fusing on this site and have said quite a bit about my view that the world wide pyro industry could be doing much more to improve safety. Lets hope those with a full time involvement in pyro get down to business and do the testing and research to address safety issues and then share the results around the world.