KaBoom Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 I suppose RJ45 would be a little more accommodating as you can get XLR-type connectors that are rj45. I think they're called ethercon. The rj12's are such a pain as the only cable you can get into them reliable is the cheap PVC 6core flat telephone/modem -type stuff. Try coiling 100ft of that after it's sat in a cold venue! I've found it so much easier to do a jump at the controller end onto 6pin XLR and then either have a breakout box with spring terminals or alternitively a jump back to rj12 if im using airbursts on harnesses. One of the things in life that are set to try our patience methinks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ike Posted November 10, 2003 Author Share Posted November 10, 2003 Update The company is sticking by its decisions to fire pyros from the control room and would like to emphasize the fact that it is NOT a theatre but instead a 'multi purpose performance venue' with no wings as such and hardly ever any scenery in use. Also does anyone know if the ABTT pyrotechnics courses will accept under 18s, its not that I particularly want to setup and detonate pyros its just I feel I would like to know a bit more about the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Posted November 10, 2003 Share Posted November 10, 2003 Send Lincoln (who moderates this forum) a PM as he does a lot of pyro training and is a nice bloke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaBoom Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 If it's le maitre stuff you're firing then the documentation states it shouldnt be fired by someone under the age of 18. Might be a bit of an issue with your risk assessment thats all. of course, if you're interested then there's nothing to stop you going along I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 The company is sticking by its decisions to fire pyros from the control room...That is their decision but they shouldn't be suprised if operators don't want to do it that way....NOT a theatre...which is completely irrelevant. What matters is that they are using pyros. What risk assessment have they done? They have done one haven't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterT Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 One advantage of tails is that it moves connectors away from the pyros which puts out some pretty corrosive muck. Which is another reason to use plastic connectors.I remember another reason for tails. if you unplug the tails when loading the pod to make really sure it's safe. When you plug it back in you're not stood over an explosive charge that could do some damage but instead you'll probably get the biggest shock of your life... :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ike Posted November 11, 2003 Author Share Posted November 11, 2003 ...NOT a theatre...which is completely irrelevant. What matters is that they are using pyros. There point was not that its name was important but that it does not have big bits of set, legs etc and a different layout to a prosc theatre. Well I think that was there point. What risk assessment have they done? They have done one haven't they? There risk assessment was not brilliant, it was basically a generic pyros one with bits missing and bits that were in no way applicable to our venue. Oh and there was NO mention of why the firing was done from the control room rather than the stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 11, 2003 Share Posted November 11, 2003 There risk assessment was not brilliantTo quote the Pythons...'Run Away, Run Away'... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Funny how your name is "Brian" too! Sorry... couldn't resist it! Lincoln (watching with interest!) :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Funny how your name is "Brian" too!Hmmm, I missed that connection when I posted. Shouldn't have done tho' as I was working with a load of Python fans when the film 'LOB' came out. It was funny for the first few weeks and then got decidedly less so. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Lincoln (watching with interest!) Do you have a view on this one Lincoln? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Yes Tom, thank you I have deliberately watched this thread with interest without joining in with the debate to see how it developed and to see what the reaction of others would be. I consider it wise not to jump in with every issue posted in order to see where it goes. I would, of course jump quickly and heavily on anything that smacked illegal, stupid or just downright dangerous. I must also declare my interest in the ABTT Code of Practice. I am in the process, with others, of revising this code. The ABTT asked me to get involved with it over a year ago and I have been holding them back in order to syncronize with the new HSE "Manufacture and Storage of Explosives Regulations" (MSER) which have just recently completed and kick in next April 2004. Seemed silly to me to revise the code only to do it again by next April. And watch out... storage of pyro in theatres is going to be changing! Now then... connectors... Yes, in an ideal world we would like to have a "dedicated" pyro connector but I do recall the drama when the debate and introduction of the low voltage "birdie" connector came into being! (remember? 16a style, and bigger than the birdies themselves). So, my view is that the Bulgin (yes! mains!) connector is..., until the various industry standards groups around the world decree otherwise, ...unique enough to be considered appropriate for the job we are requiring it to do. The advantages of the connecter are that they are "over rated" electrically and that, to my knowledge, I know of only one other piece of theatrical/technical equipment that uses them, the CCT Helious Range - usually as architectural fittings... and Yes! I did used to work for CCT building, selling and hiring Silhouettes and Minuettes etc... A disadvantage/advantage of using Bulgins are that they "were" not always readily available unless you had accounts with people like RS and Farnells. These days, Maplins on the high street seem to have them (as well as Fireworks!!!)Yes, the plugs are "fiddly" to wire... Yes, there is no "in-line" socket in the range but that can easily be overcome with back to back socket boxes. My main concern about this whole subject is that SO many people, venues, hire companies choose to convert everything they can to utilise XLR-3 connectors. It is perfectly understandable in an environment where we all need to keep costs to a minimum and make use of existing mic and speaker cables. Everybody seems to be doing it... even the DMX boys that don't need pin 4 and 5. Now, whilst mic tie-lines, even with phantom power applied to them would not be enough to fire a pyro device the same lines could have been used and left patched up to run COMMS... they do have a current rating being more than enough to ignite any pyro devices on the circuit. So in response to the original thread question... If you are going to run tie lines from the stage to the control room, which, I am NOT recommending, in preference to being closer to the device(see below). I would suggest that you replicate the Bulgin sockets in the control room and on the side of the stage and make up appropriate cables to connect from the cartridge holder (flashpod) to the side of the stage and the same for the controllers... CLEARLY mark/label them as "PYRO tie-lines ONLY" and with the benefit of them being an "odd" unique connector you will have demonstrated a duty of care to provide a safety feature to your installation. Now then!... I do not recommend this course of action in any way and you could find that you are in breach of your insurance policy/manufacturers recommendations if you start making modifications to equipment. As part of the Pyro course we provide we discuss, demonstrate and explore the "confidence" factor of operating pyrotechnics. By this I mean, If you are the closest (person) technician to the device when it is ignited you will instill confidence in the surrounding actors, musicians etc... ok.. ok.. not always practical but be assured that if you put yourself up for be the closest person to the device(s) when the devices are ignited you will be providing far more confidence to the people that are closest to the devices than being perhaps over 100' away, two storeys up buried in a cozy control room (perhaps with the TV on too!). The operator being closest to the device also provides perfect cover as the first on the scene should there be any problem with the device firing... including being able to clearly see if one of those lovely actor/dancer types has kicked the cartridge holder (flashpod) over... and yes, you should have screwed it down (without the pyro in it, if using an electric screwdriver!). A further solution (or risk assessment "control measure") would be to have a secondary technician close to the device with a push to make "dead mans handle type of thing" switch to confirm safe to fire stuff. The flying lead part of this thread is also being discussed again with the ABTT code of practice revision. The requirement for this was originally included by the original C.O.P. author(s) and supported by the Home Office/Fire Service and it was very much relevant to the days of fuse-wire and free-flowing, loose flash powder. Non the less... In the course of a multiple "run" (i.e. pantomime season) I feel, the ability to locally isolate the device is extremely valid and worthy... yes! It will need a bit more work when rigging the show and it will mean a bit more "hardware" (socket - socket box and 2 Metre tail)... but hey... something positive to put on the risk assessment as a "control measure" at last!! and additional safety to the technician changing devices between shows. I am told that the manufacturers (1970's) were approached at the time of writing the C.O.P about this matter but opted to have a panel mounted Bulgin socket rather than a flying lead. Well! I hope that all that helps and perhaps promotes some more debate and thought... Lincoln (Phew!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 Thanks Lincoln, very comprehensive. Good to have you around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lincoln Posted November 12, 2003 Share Posted November 12, 2003 RJ12 ConnectorsThese connectors are widely in use in North America for three channel operation and we (Just FX) have and use them for some of our LunaTech- PyroPak equipment, especially for speed!. It is very nice to make a cable up for three circuits that takes less than a minute to make. The same safety problems apply mind... with the advent of Ethernet RJ45 sockets appearing in new installations around the stage area the use of this system I foresee us having problems in the future. XLR-3Le Maitre (USA/Canada) control systems and cartridge holders (flashpods) use XLR-3 ! Yep! I've talked to them about the safety implications about this... and the response was that they can not source Bulgin type plugs and sockets over there ! XLR-4Used extensively by LunaTech/PyroPak and chucks 110V down them to transformers to convert to typically 6Volt Pin 1,2,3 = three channels Pin 4 common return and sleeve/earth as earth! Also Skyhigh use XLR-4 for their twin pod systems and (I think! need to check) pins 1 and 2 run circuit one and pins 3 and 4 run circuit 2 XLR-6Might be wise to avoid these as Clearcom and Tecpro use these for their 2 circuit and 4 circuit comms connectors. There ya go Lincoln Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaBoom Posted November 13, 2003 Share Posted November 13, 2003 Brainwave......... think I'll go invent me a unique 6pole connector! Seems to be the only way out of this duplicate connector protocol issue! Now where's me scale ruler and Cad software cd's! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.