Safety factor for rigging

[indyld]

Whenever we have amateurs in the venue who wish to do circus style stuff outside our area of knowledge, we just get a guy from the circus down the road to come in and rig kit. From seeing this guy work over the years, I notice that some things I personally would have gone a little light on, he beefs up, but other things I'd have perhaps doubled up on, they don't. This to me, suggests that circus style rigging is just so different from what I personally do, that I'd rather avoid it.

 

Would be interested to know why this is, as the physics of rigging are pretty universal. Any particular insight or examples here?

[kitlane]

LOLER and PUWER are the UK implementation of EU directives (European Directive (AUWED 95/63/EC) for LOLER and Directive 89/655/EEC for PUWER, plus any subsequent revisions) so there will be an equivalent set of regulations in the OPs country.

[ImagineerTom]

Would be interested to know why this is, as the physics of rigging are pretty universal. Any particular insight or examples here?

Physics is but the application isn't - normal riggers are generally dealing with static loads relating to kit they generally know and understand. Circus rigging involves dynamic loads with spikes and momentary lateral loads that can be several multiples of the initial dead load. Some circus rigging requires an absolutely dead-solid point (so unless you're strapped straight to a structural beam you're going to need a lot of cross-guys) and some are fine with a floating point, furthermore simply known "what" is rigged on it is only half the story; a single trapeze could be used by a 4ft tall russian as little more than an elevated platform for some contortion, or it could be used by 2 6ft tall burly trapeze artists who'll be doing full extension swings, drops and catches. The former would require a point that follows the normal SWL requirements and little else, the latter (though using the exact same trap) would require a dead-solid point (with no guy-ropes in their fly-zone) that was rated at at least 1 ton. It would also need to be not directly connected to anything holding up any lights as there will still be an element of "judder" from some of their catches which will cause movement in anything else directly rigged to the primary support and it would seen an additional adjacent support for their luge/safety line.

Typically circus use also involved a degree of movement/change within a performance (props are winched up seconds before use) so the points you instal have to be practical to use in this context, be placed so as not to interfere with other points and yet still be positioned so that an acts particular requirements can be accommodated. There is also a much much more direct interaction and level of trust between a circus performer and rigger than between a singer and lighting/truss rigger; performers are literally entrusting their lives to their rigger in a fairly unique way so a dialogue, trust and professional relationship has to be quickly established so that everyone is happy. In unusual situations where I've had to rig something that deviates from the "normal" configuration the performer has to trust that I FULLY understand their act and have re-designed the hang taking this in to account; when you're mid-somersault in the first rehearsal is not the time you want to discover that the new positioning of the safety line means your arms are now wrapped in rope and you are about to plummet face first towards the ground.

[paulears]

The quick set up is what impressed me, to be honest. You can start with an empty ring, a pile of bits appear, and cabling is quickly attached, and then within a few seconds, a huge contraption is up, safe and running with people doing crazy things on them, and then again, it can be struck in seconds. All the stuff I'm used to seeing takes ages and uses devices which rarely seem to involve use of the word 'quick'.

[Seano]

Good points all, but none of that is necessarily outwith the experience of a 'normal' rigger these days. Generally dealing with static loads (once the thing is in position anyway) is not the same as exclusively dealing with static loads. Besides Circus type stuff, automation and performer flying are increasingly common in touring music and require all the same considerations.

[mark_s]

Asides from the dynamic nature of the load not being comparable with the majority of what we do as Tom points out, the systems and methods used in circus rigging tend to be well outside the norm of what we do and how we do it, and that alone puts it well outside the comfort zone of most people in our area of the industry I'd say. It's a different beast entirely.

[indyld]

I take the point about application and methods, including differences in kit and convention. However, last time I checked F did still equal MA so I guess the confusion that Paul alludes to over "beefing up" is mainly down to the rigger rightly knowing the requirements and forces of the act in more detail.

[ImagineerTom]

There's no "magic" skill to it, there's nothing that a rigger experienced in one sector couldn't (with some research) manage to do, but in just the same way as on a basic level there's no difference in designing a light-show for a disco as there is designing lighting for an opera or the olympics; but that doesn't mean the job is interchangeable or that the ROH will phone disco-dave's nightclub installations next time they stage the ring cycle. As I mentioned aside from the different expectations and forces applied to points there's also the issue of understanding /what/ it's being used for, different performers on the same trapeze will have dramatically different needs so that breadth of industry knowledge is essential. There are plenty of circus rigging situations whereby you end up with a significant upward load, something that always catches out inexperienced riggers and requires a fundamentally different rig design right from the very start.

 

"Performer flying" and "automation" you see in theatre and concert world have been designed to fit within the parameters of the arena/theatre world rigging practices and formats, again comparing this sort of "unusual" rigging to circus rigging is like comparing Folk Singers to Opera Singers.

 

It's not a mystical power, it's not mind-bending mathematics but it is a specialist skill set that requires some specific industry knowledge and experience in order to be able to make it look quick and effortless. As Paul noted above - go see a circus and you'll see dozens of points and several tonnes of equipment being flown and striked in seconds, in a performance, all perfectly supporting the artistic needs of the performers whilst at the same time complying fully with the same rules and regs as every other rigger has to.

 

It also works the other way - ask a circus rigger to instal some truss for you and you will end up with something that's technically correct but not got the nuances you'd need or expect in a typical theatre/arena setting. In circus if a cable needs checking or a lightbulb changing there's a dozen people fully capable of climbing up to the roof and walking across a tightrope to get to it, whereas in theatre/arena it's all about putting things on motors so that kit can be moved down to ground level for easy access to maintain. Neither one is the "wrong" solution but in each of their respective worlds they are the right solution in the context of that setting.

 

It's different worlds

[Roderick]

Thanks Tom, very well put!

 

Too often we forget how people specialise in a specific area, usually outside our own comfort zone.

Good to be reminded of that every now and then.

[Seano]

"Performer flying" and "automation" you see in theatre and concert world have been designed to fit within the parameters of the arena/theatre world rigging practices and formats, again comparing this sort of "unusual" rigging to circus rigging is like comparing Folk Singers to Opera Singers.

 

I mentioned performer flying and automation only as a counter-example in response to this:

 

Physics is but the application isn't - normal riggers are generally dealing with static loads relating to kit they generally know and understand. Circus rigging involves dynamic loads with spikes and momentary lateral loads that can be several multiples of the initial dead load.

 

Both involve dynamic loads (quite possibly with 'spikes'), and lateral loads which may well exceed the weight of the payload/performer/whatever.

 

There are plenty of circus rigging situations whereby you end up with a significant upward load, something that always catches out inexperienced riggers and requires a fundamentally different rig design right from the very start.

 

One would hope inexperienced riggers aren't the ones designing the rig from the very start. ;)

 

Arena guy-ropes can also go down as well as up on (fairly rare) occasions. Upward loads, I'll grant you, are rather unusual outside of circus type shenanigans, but also not unheard of.

 

Funnily enough I worked on a show a few months ago (This one) that featured indoor skydiving as a flying gag. The (1.5t odd) weight of the aerofoil that hangs around 18m above the fan is not enough to hold it down. (No practical way to guy it down either on account of the rather large area covered by the 3D flying rig so it needed rigid bracing to the roof beams above - more difficult in some venues than others!)

 

It's different worlds

 

Well it depends what you mean by "worlds" I guess, but I've worked with enough circus riggers to know that, give or take the odd bit of jargon, we basically speak the same language.

 

Incidentally, it strikes me as a bit ironic that you're so insistent that this is the case, while simultaneously conflating "theatre" and "arena/concert" genres as if they were exactly the same thing.

[ImagineerTom]

You seem to be determined to pick a fight.

 

My position is simple - circus rigging is a speciality (just like any other branch of rigging or frankly any other industry) for which some significant industry knowledge and experience is needed simply because theres nowhere near the standardisation there appears to be on the surface, see my point above about a single trapeze, and also because there's some quirks which in normal rigging wouldn't make any difference at all but to a performer could literally be a life-or-death issue. Furthermore because you're specifically dealing with hosting performers on equipment it is literally more of a life-or-death situation and different things are a priority when rigging for circus performers than for static kit - a lighting truss 1" out of position is at worst annoying, a trapeze 1" out of position is a serious injury.

 

As I keep saying, there's no "magic" powers but there is a need for a lot of sector-specific experience and knowledge to rig for circus (just as there is for rigging in arenas) if you're going to do it in a real world situation. Just as a nightclub lighting designer /could/ design for an opera (with a bit of hand-holding and a lot of extra time/research) thus any rigger /could/ design and instal rigging for a circus situation - but would need similar hand-holding and research to be able to do it properly. Thus I think we can all agree that if you want the job doing quickly and properly it's best to get an experienced opera lighting designer to design for your opera and an experienced circus rigging person to do your circus rigging.

[mark_s]

Just to potentially play devil's advocate, in my (limited, compared to Tom's) experience of circus, rigging seems to be almost solely undertaken by the performers themselves in traditional traveling circus - occasionally with help from someone such as muggins here. While I don't doubt that the performers are experienced at this, I wonder how many do the formal sums and know, by application of physics, that what they're doing is safe, and how many do it 'by feel', and know it's safe because 'that's the way it's done'?

 

While I've never seen anything obviously dangerous or alarming in my travels, I have came across some truly bizarre methods of doing things, that were being done that way 'just because', and some strange misconceptions when it came to the applicable regulations and to basic rigging practice (from the viewpoint of someone more familiar with 'our sort' of rigging).

 

I'm not entirely sure what my point actually is here, just throwing it out there for discussion.

[ImagineerTom]

There will be "a" person in charge who will have set the process and principles at the start of a tour - because of the speed of turnarounds (as with almost everything else in circus) its usually all hands on deck wherever possible. Also since it's the performers themselves whos life depends on it they tend to have a vested interest in double checking it.

 

If it's old-school performers from Russia / Slavic countries & asia then they will be doing it more on the instinct end of the scale using traditional practices and methods; if they're from any of the circus schools / train schemes in the rest of the world then they will almost certainly have had some formal rigging training and be more versed in modern, more recognised rigging practices.

 

Whilst it may look ramshackle, please remember that the same regulations apply and someone somewhere will have done the sums otherwise the show would be shut down tomorrow. Also since it's their lives / careers on the line they won't be cutting any corners if it's a safety issue.

[Seano]

You seem to be determined to pick a fight.

 

Nope. I've read a lot of your posts on here and I have a good deal of respect for you.

If you take a chill pill you might realise we don't even disagree about anything much other than semantics. Where we do disagree, if you want to interpret that as some kind of pissing contest that strikes me as slightly sad but it's your problem not mine. So peace out, brother. :)

 

While I've never seen anything obviously dangerous or alarming in my travels, I have came across some truly bizarre methods of doing things, that were being done that way 'just because', and some strange misconceptions when it came to the applicable regulations and to basic rigging practice (from the viewpoint of someone more familiar with 'our sort' of rigging).

 

I've seen a fair bit of that over the years within "our" side of the industry too. ;)

[top-cat]

I think above any fighting over whether you need a circus rigger or if an arena rigger or theatre rigger will do, a point has been missed.

 

Whoever you choose, you need to check their individual CV and credentials to ensure that they are suitably qualified (not necessarily paper qualifications, just qualified in terms of competence) to carry out the particulars of the work that you need doing. You could have 10 arena riggers in a bar with all 10 having a particular strength and a particular weakness that would differ from rigger to rigger. It's not a case of "a rigger is a rigger is a rigger" but quite the opposite, you have good riggers and bad riggers, you have experienced riggers and inexperienced riggers... but you also have good experienced riggers who don't know much about winches; and good experienced riggers who don't know much about automation; and good experienced riggers who don't know much about performer flying.

 

Rather than simply saying "you need to get a rigger"... the phrase is more "you need to get a rigger who has experience and credentials in designing and installing performer flying rigs". That's not to say that all riggers shouldn't have a fundamental understanding of static and dynamic load calculations... but ultimately if we're talking about hanging human performers, somebody who's done it before should definitely be in the criteria.