swax Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Hello! A client has asked us to look into using Lazers in a listed building. This is a simple job of course but the main concern I have is the smoke required to make this work. Does anyone have any risk assessments or advice on using smoke for extended periods in a listed building? I'm worried about long term exposure and residue to the delicate paintwork etc..... any advice greatfully received... I've looked at all the relevant manufacturers data sheets about COSHH and chemicals but this doesn't seem to give much away about 'real world' exposure.. Thanks Swax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grum Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I'd be more worried for your client. He appears to be using someone to work on Lasers that may not know too much about them given that they don't even know how to spell LASER correctly. Laser actually means something and most people that understand how to use them correctly and safely will also know what the letters stand for. Lasers can be very dangerous in the wrong hands, even the cheap ribbishy ones, and anything powerful enough to give a decent effect will require careful planning and risk assesment. As for the "smoke" you'd really be better off using a combination of smoke and haze. The have will give you a better chance of getting an even dispersal and this will result in even beams. Then a quick puff of smoke will give a dramatic effect for cones or flat beams as the smoke will be thicker and more animated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swax Posted March 24, 2009 Author Share Posted March 24, 2009 To be honest Grum, I'm more annoyed that someone has taken the time out to point out grammer and spelling rather than making assumptions of my technical understanding of the equipment involved. I happen to suffer from Dyslexia, so thank you for pointing out my mistake. I'd like to spell something out for you to understand in simple letters but I'm sure you get my drift from the above I'm actually quite annoyed. Anyway, back to the topic: Thanks for the advice on using smoke and haze, quick dispersal is also required as the 'show' is a going to be extremely short (repeated many times). Its looking more and more likely that the powers that be will not allow smoke or haze to be used within the building due to the complex fire/smoke systems in place too...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niclights Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The principle ingredient in water-based smoke or haze is triethylene glycol. In my experience it does not leave any detectable residue even at high concentrations and over long periods except in the very near vicinity of the machine. That is based on use in a well ventilated space however. Given that you would be using at relatively low concentrations I think the possibility of any residue is virtually zero. And, since glycol naturally absorbs water, I would imagine that, if there were residue, it may actually benefit the building. As you say, smoke detectors might be the real problem. Ideally you want rate-of-rise-of-heat in any affected zones and listed status could make this difficult. Do avoid mineral oil and glycerine (LeMaitre Neutron and similar) type machines since they will produce residue (oil and sugar respectively). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 The first important question is (of the venue) what may I use and what will the fire detection system do with the effect. The long term effect will be negligable except in the vicinity of the machine BUT the alarm system WILL take account of the listing status. Grade 1 to Grade 3 the conditions will vary. I've been in one grade1 listed venue and each room had smoke detection, AND tubes fed back to a remote monitoring system- some kind of smoke analysis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grum Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 To be honest Grum, I'm more annoyed that someone has taken the time out to point out grammer and spelling rather than making assumptions of my technical understanding of the equipment involved. I happen to suffer from Dyslexia, so thank you for pointing out my mistake. I'd like to spell something out for you to understand in simple letters but I'm sure you get my drift from the above I'm actually quite annoyed. Sorry Swax, but given:1. The limited information in your profile,2. The ammount of people on here that make out they are production companies when they're really just school kids with a couple of knackered disco scans. I am unable to know how much technical experience you have. Fair enough, you have dyslexia, once again I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend. Maybe a quick call to the manufacturer of your haze / smoke fluid will tell you if their product is suitable for your application? You'll probably get much more acurate and trustworthy advice than you will from strangers on an internet forum. P.S. The reason I'm a little touchy on the subject of lasers is because I nearly lost my sight in one eye about 15 years ago thanks to someone messing about with laser equipment they didn't understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardtank Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 Very rare I pull anyone up on spelling, but you've not done so well your self B-)*amount*accurate Is it possible to disable the fire alarms and have a 'fire watch' system where someone has the responsibility of checking areas for signs of fire. I'm not sure of the implications to this plan of action is with the building being listed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grum Posted March 24, 2009 Share Posted March 24, 2009 I'm not claiming to be an english teacher. My point was that anyone who works with lasers is more than likely know that LASER is actually an anagram and that I would be worried if I was dealing with a laser supplier that couldn't spell the product name correctly. As in it would make me ask myslef what else it was that they didn't know about them. Either way I'm clearly the one that looks stupid here. I've said sorry, I can't do much more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jivemaster Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 Speak first to the venue, Without their input this discussion is pointless. Grade 1 listed and Grade 3 listed will have very different implications for your problem and it's solution. Grade1 is typically Royal Palaces and the top few national monuments, and the listing is for the whole building. At the other end Grade3 can be used for just old farmhouses, barns etc and may only apply to parts of the building. If your client has selected and booked a listed venue you could continue to follow the "listed" theme by actually illuminating the list-worthy features, not hiding them in smoke and lasers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swax Posted March 25, 2009 Author Share Posted March 25, 2009 Hello all, Thanks for your replies! I think for all parties concerned we are going to avoid using lasers due to the smoke/haze concerns and other operational issues. I appreciate the time you've spent replying to this thread. CheersSwax Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitlane Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I'm not claiming to be an english teacher. My point was that anyone who works with lasers is more than likely know that LASER is actually an anagram and that I would be worried if I was dealing with a laser supplier that couldn't spell the product name correctly. As in it would make me ask myslef what else it was that they didn't know about them. Either way I'm clearly the one that looks stupid here. I've said sorry, I can't do much more. The only sensible anagram of LASER is EARLS. Or perhaps you meant acronym. (sorry, couldn't resist) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alpha Posted March 25, 2009 Share Posted March 25, 2009 I'm not claiming to be an english teacher. My point was that anyone who works with lasers is more than likely know that LASER is actually an anagram and that I would be worried if I was dealing with a laser supplier that couldn't spell the product name correctly. As in it would make me ask myslef what else it was that they didn't know about them. Either way I'm clearly the one that looks stupid here. I've said sorry, I can't do much more. The only sensible anagram of LASER is EARLS. Or perhaps you meant acronym. (sorry, couldn't resist) What about SERAL? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LXbydesign Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Anyway , to get back to the question - yes you can use lasers but make sure you do a risk assesment of the equipment , its location , required power / cooling etc , where the beams will be projecting , the times and duration of the equipment in use and to ensure you have warning signs up on every entrance to the space clearly defining lasers are in use. The copies of the risk assesment should go to the client , production manager and on-site building management and on-site or contracted security and first aid / medical personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikienorth Posted April 1, 2009 Share Posted April 1, 2009 All this talk of listed buildings, and worries about it's inpact on what you can use. Remember, the great great many listed buildings we all work in on a daily basis. Also, and more commonly known as theatres. Granted not all are, but a great many of them have listed status, or listed features. Commonly the ornate ceilings that are inaccesible to clean. Does it stop us using oil, glycol, glycerine, lasers, lazers, pyro? No, we just risk assess and await Local Authourity approval, where required. Don't panic over a listed building, just think a little.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.