Strand SL problem

[kennyb]

It's that wonderful PAT testing time of year again, and on taking our 30 Strand SL profiles apart to clean them, I discovered that 26 of them have cracked reflectors.  They're about 3 1/2 years old, and I'm not particularly impressed by this...anybody else had this problem?  And we won't even go into the difficulty we're having getting the lampbases out of the units.  Also, our Cantata fresnels have an issue with the coating on the outside of the reflector peeling and flaking off something awful - these are a year younger than the SLs.  Any thoughts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

SL - Reflectors:

We have had a few issues over the 6 years that we have produced SLs, which the total amount manufactured is a six figure number. The reflector manufacturers technical experts stated that if the reflector did crack it would start at the rear and propagate along the reflector for about 20 - 30mm. With this type and length of crack the reflector would still perform to specification. If anyone is experiencing different problems than stated above, please do not hesitate to contact your Strand representative to arrange a call. Direct number for Strand Lighting Ltd 01592 652333 and ask for customer services. :D

[gareth]

Hi Ken. Thanks for taking the time to contribute to this topic - it's good to see a representative of the manufacturer posting to a topic concerning problems with that company's equipment.

 

As a follow-on from your comments above, it begs the question - what if the cracks are longer than the 30mm quoted by the reflector manufacturers? Some of the ones I've come across are longer than that, and it's clear from Stu's photos earlier in the topic that some of his cracks are considerably longer! At what length does a crack cross the boundary from acceptable to unacceptable?

 

I'm aware that one venue who have had a lot of trouble with cracked SL reflectors have been issued with FOC replacements for the worst ones as and when they get to the point where a replacement is required. Given that some people have reflectors with cracks larger than 30mm which (according to your statement) takes the reflectors out of their specification, it would be nice to think that this courtesy would be extended to all purchasers of SLs who are experiencing these issues, but what is the 'trigger point' in terms of length of crack?

 

I'm told that in situations where this problem was picked up some time ago and has been monitored, there is a pattern of the size of the cracks increasing over time, so I guess it's safe to assume that people who today have reflectors with cracks in them that are within the boundaries of acceptablility will probably find themselves, in a year or two's time, with badly cracked, or even broken, reflectors as a result of this issue.

[richard_cooper]

http://img293.imageshack.us/img293/5175/935009328330alb8cu.jpg

 

I just thought I'd post a picture of one of our reflectors in case anyone is interested.

 

Edited to make picture actually work...

[road]

words of wisdom you get what you pay for buy source 4 and have no problems or go cheap buy SL and have bad optics and crap design

[gaspipe58]

http://images.ofoto.eu.com/photos139/8/32/9/50/93/0/93500932833_0_ALB.jpg

 

I just thought I'd post a picture of one of our reflectors in case anyone is interested.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Err ...I have no image here. Is it just me? :(

[david.elsbury]

Me too. An error in the posting perhaps?

[peternewman]

Me too. An error in the posting perhaps?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think its to do with the server being setup to not allow external linking of images. Hence you don't see the picture. If however you go direct to http://images.ofoto.eu.com/photos139/8/32/...32833_0_ALB.jpg then you will be able to see the picture, and interestingly once you come back here its now in the cache and shows up here too.

 

HTH

 

PN

[paulears]

I don't have access to url for the image - my version of the post doesn't have the actual link visible? The one peternewman posted isn't complete?

[peternewman]

I don't have access to url for the image - my version of the post doesn't have the actual link visible? The one peternewman posted isn't complete?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I don't quite understand your first comment Paul, but as to my URL being incomplete are you referring to the ... in the middle? If so this is something done by the forum software which shortens all URLs over a certain length. However if you click on it the link should work fine.

 

On second reading are you getting confused by the lack of normal text, would Broken SL Reflector make more sense?

 

PN

[Mush]

Broken SL Reflector make more sense?

 

PN

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Dunno about anyone else but I get a `forbidden` error on the posted image URL, may I suggest:

 

http://www.imageshack.us/

 

for simple, no registration required. image hosting.

 

I know the Selecons use a flat plate cold/hot mirror, what is the disffernce between an Source 4 and an SL that means the S4 dosent have reflector issues?

 

Thanks

[peternewman]

Broken SL Reflector make more sense?

 

PN

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Dunno about anyone else but I get a `forbidden` error on the posted image URL, may I suggest:

 

http://www.imageshack.us/

 

for simple, no registration required. image hosting.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I also do now on a forced refresh, it was working earlier in the day however.

[Bryson]

I see the picture fine, and always have. :(

 

words of wisdom you get what you pay for buy source 4 and have no problems or go cheap buy SL and have bad optics and crap design

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Ummm....don't agree with you there, road. But you're entitled to your opinion. I am a strong believer in SL zooms, and consider their workings to be much superior to the S4 zooms. The optics in an SL are absolutely fine for me. There does seem to be a few problems with them (breaky-off handles, cracking refelectors) but overall, they're a good lantern.

 

My new venue is all Selecon, so I'll be taking the "third way" from here on....I'll let y'all know how that goes.

[JohnG]

words of wisdom you get what you pay for buy source 4 and have no problems

 

My Source 4's have plenty of problems. The reflectors are far perfection. Most throw a nice pitted field. Kind of like looking at the moon. You can see shadowy craters. ETC would not replace the reflectors even after finally admitting the problem. They do not walk on water in my house.

 

We still consider them a valuable part of our inventory just like the SL.

 

JG

[kennyb]

Hi Ken. Thanks for taking the time to contribute to this topic - it's good to see a representative of the manufacturer posting to a topic concerning problems with that company's equipment.

 

As a follow-on from your comments above, it begs the question - what if the cracks are longer than the 30mm quoted by the reflector manufacturers? Some of the ones I've come across are longer than that, and it's clear from Stu's photos earlier in the topic that some of his cracks are considerably longer! At what length does a crack cross the boundary from acceptable to unacceptable?

 

I'm aware that one venue who have had a lot of trouble with cracked SL reflectors have been issued with FOC replacements for the worst ones as and when they get to the point where a replacement is required. Given that some people have reflectors with cracks larger than 30mm which (according to your statement) takes the reflectors out of their specification, it would be nice to think that this courtesy would be extended to all purchasers of SLs who are experiencing these issues, but what is the 'trigger point' in terms of length of crack?

 

I'm told that in situations where this problem was picked up some time ago and has been monitored, there is a pattern of the size of the cracks increasing over time, so I guess it's safe to assume that people who today have reflectors with cracks in them that are within the boundaries of acceptablility will probably find themselves, in a year or two's time, with badly cracked, or even broken, reflectors as a result of this issue.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi Gareth

 

I understand your points regarding the cracks being over 30mm but this does not automatically mean that the problem will get worse and impair the specification of the SL. If you have any concerns just give your Strand representative a shout - We do care at Strand and want to help where possible.

[gareth]

Hi Gareth

 

I understand your points regarding the cracks being over 30mm but this does not automatically mean that the problem will get worse and impair the specification of the SL. If you have any concerns just give your Strand representative a shout - We do care at Strand and want to help where possible.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hi Ken. I wasn't suggesting that Strand don't care! We know that you do! :(

 

It's just that this issue is clearly affecting quite a few people who post to this forum, and seeing as the industry itself is way, way bigger than the Blue Room the actual 'real world' scale of the problem seems likely to be fairly widespread - and in all probability will become more so as increasing numbers of SL users become aware of the growing cracks in their reflectors. I was only asking the questions in the hope that you might be able to give the readership at large some more information regarding the situation they might find themselves in when they discover cracks in their SL glassware that are larger and more troublesome than the 30mm 'limit of acceptability' as specified by the manufacturer (and that those cracks are expanding slowly but surely, as the anecdotal evidence from a venue which has been aware of this problem for some time suggests is likely to be the case - although that information came to me second-hand, I haven't observed that phenomena myself).

 

Given the photographic evidence that we've seen posted to this topic, along with some of the reflectors I've seen myself which bear multiple cracks which are far longer than 30mm, the cracks clearly aren't going to stop at 30mm, so the question remains ..... at what point do they become an issue which affects the lantern in operational terms, and what can SL users expect Strand to do in order to help them overcome this? Clearly it would be unreasonable to expect people who have SLs with cracked reflectors to pay out of their own pockets to rectify an inherent fault in the lantern - the fact that Strand have provided FOC replacements to one venue which is suffering from this problem sets rather a pleasing precedent on this score.

 

Is there any chance, Ken, that you could post something which clarifies Strand's position on this matter, as it's clearly something which is going to affect the SL user community in a fairly large way sooner or later?