6afraidof7 Posted August 10, 2023 Posted August 10, 2023 3" mess, jumble filled shell with 1/4" Yellow stars(2/3) and some 1/4" Emerald Green Mag(1/3) stars mixed in, 2 1/2 FA ERC no boost. Layered stars and burst into baggie then tightened baggie up closing shell around it. I use this process on occasion (with better results) and knew it wouldn't be nice when I finished the shell, to me, this is an example of a loosely filled shell. Quite a bit more burst and stars to baggie to get it to fit tighter in shell would be first fix. You could feel the baggie of goodies wabbling around in the shell when you shook it. For me I have no doubt it is the loose fill job and the single pole wrapping causing the egg.
6afraidof7 Posted August 10, 2023 Posted August 10, 2023 Not trying to hijack the thread, just wanted to show what some of us go through trying to get good breaks. Takes quite a bit of work, testing and then onc you get it consistency from your pre build and after show notes. Lot's of reading and trials, plus supportive comments always help.
Richtee Posted August 11, 2023 Posted August 11, 2023 Keep it up. Yer past my best break-wise. But you'll never top my bacon
cmjlab Posted August 11, 2023 Posted August 11, 2023 Out of curiosity, why are you using unprimed stars? Which comp / instructions did you follow to make the Tremalon stars? Theoretically, depending on which formula and method you followed, Tremalon stars could easily lit if made one way, but could be more difficult, if made the 2nd way. Tiger tail stars should light relatively easily primed or not,but Snowball stars have more metal in it correct (making them harder to ignite than tiger tail anyways)? If so, they would also need prime to light reliably. Priming is a bigger factor for unlit / blind stars (in my opinion anyways).
cmjlab Posted August 11, 2023 Posted August 11, 2023 Either Way, it's nice seeing some pyro testing going on! Nice work, keep it up!
6afraidof7 Posted August 11, 2023 Posted August 11, 2023 Thank you! I enjoy the testing and experiments. The unprimed stars are part of some tests as well, just cuz I hear and read some folks that don't prime. With priming still a little bit of a mystery to me I thought I would try some tests and experiments. So far, I am in the camp that should prime regardless, I certainly share your opinion. Priming is a pretty big factor and is still science to me. The Tremalon is Mike Swisher's BP based, which is an experiment as well. Instead of using a hardwood/commercial airfloat in the BP, I thought I would see if there is a difference using a SYP based BP. I made up some granulated 20 mesh BP with a 50/50 mix of SYP float and 80-mesh. I don't think it is near hot enough and may not be a gain over a raw mix. Wrapping some this weekend after dusting them and the N1 with some prime. Snowball does have some metal in them, and this really was kind of a mistake (no prime). They dried up and lit out of the star gun so they quickly went into a shell. Was trying to get the shell in the mix of shells to shoot so I didn't really take the extra time like I should have. The remainder are in the box with prime on them now and will hopefully get them wrapped up this weekend also and see what we get. I have never used that star and it seems like a pretty decent one, at least when they all light. Another mystery, these stars all light out of the make shift star gun I have. Maybe I am not hitting them hard enough out of the gun to notice. Snowball, Improved - Oglesby Potassium Nitrate 0.35 Barium Nitrate 0.16 Antimony Trisulfide, Chinese needle or dark pyro 0.13 Aluminum, atomized or spheroidal, 325-mesh 0.1 Sulfur 0.09 Charcoal, airfloat 0.09 Dextrin 0.08
cmjlab Posted August 11, 2023 Posted August 11, 2023 (edited) Nice, you answered my next question for me too (using granulated B.P. base vs. raw chems). I'm surprised the Tremalon didn't light without prime since you are making it with the B.P. base, and pumping them I assume (unless you are cutting them, then maybe that would represent another variable in your research - as to whether water breaks down the b.p. granules enough to lose the benefit of easy ignition). The stargun does seem to have inconsistencies between hammering them out so fast that they don't light, and if that truly mimics the break. Well I for one shall follow your experience with interest! Good luck. Edited August 11, 2023 by cmjlab
Mumbles Posted August 17, 2023 Posted August 17, 2023 I'd suggest trying some pole swapping when pasting shells. That said, I've seen some darn near egg shaped shells break fairly round though. With enough flash to make a 3" look like a 6" anything is possible. I'd need to try to find some pictures, but I'm fond of a method that Jim Widmann demonstrated in a PGI bulletin a number of years ago. I think it's described in Shimizu's Fireworks, Art, Science, and Technique as well. Essentially a poles are left bare during pasting. I think a final smaller patch of paper was applied afterwards. The poles are rotated after every layer (or double layer if you paste that way). He went through the trouble of applying poles in 7 directions, but I've never really found that necessary. I stick with 3 personally. Top/bottom, front/back, left/right if you looking at a shell in a single orientation. Paper strips are about 2/3 of the length to go fully pole to pole. There's a lot of different patterns and methods to try to prevent build up and get even coverage. Use whatever works for you, and isn't so overly complicated that you forget where you're at or mess up.
Recommended Posts