hawaiiwerks Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 I am planning on making some 3"-6" shell aerial fireworks by the end of this month and I have no experience what so ever, so I was wondering if I could get some input on what would be the most informational book out there available that I could buy. Thanks in advance.
pyrochris732 Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) just go on various pyro websites and you'll find good ones there. Skylighter has a bunch but im sure some members here have the good ones. Also, you'll get all the shell building information you need right here. if you are lucky you will also stumble upon some people here's youtube channel on how to build a shell. Just do some searching here and you'll get pointed in the right direction. To start off, you'll want to not only get some good star formulas but also a tutorial on how to make black powder coated rice hulls. I think pyroguide is another useful site for this info. You will also want to learn how to make lift (or buy commercial gunpowder if you dont want to make it). Then you will want to learn how to paste your shell (very important). Search the "3 strip method." Also, skylighter has EXCELLENT articles on all the above things mentioned. Plus they have data on lift amounts per shell size, shell breaking heights, etc. One thing I suggest to you is to get or make yourself a decent ball mill if you plan on making lift for more than just a few shells. Its not as expensive or difficult as it may initially seem. Edited January 7, 2011 by pyrochris732
pyrokid Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 Pyrochris had some good information in his post. I think I should add that 3 to 6 inch shells may be setting your sights a little high if you "have no experience whatsoever." It takes alot of components to put a shell together, and it is important for the safety of you and your spectators, as well as the quality of your finished product, that you have a good base of expierence before you start on projects like this. There are all types of things that you may not have predicted that can pop up when you are in the middle of making your shells. I would suggest making some comets, mines, and lift powder to start out with. I think there is no substitute for "getting your hands dirty" a little bit. Watching a video can only teach you so much. Good luck on your projects!
pyrochris732 Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 right, you may want to start smaller just to understand the dynamics behind how shells work and what it takes to build them. Smaller plastic canister shells (2 inch) are loads of fun and can still give you great breaks. However if you want to go the traditonal round shell route, why not try a 1.75 - 2.5 inch to start? Once you fire some small ones, work your way up. Just to add to that, the amount of material required for shells over 3 inches seems to really skyrocket (no pun intended). I was amazed at how much star comp and burst charge I needed for a 4 and 5 inch shell compared to a 3 inch. thats when the need for a ball mill comes in.
hawaiiwerks Posted January 7, 2011 Author Posted January 7, 2011 I was on skylighter.com and I noticed theres a dvd "6" ball shell construction" by Dave Stoddard what do you guys think of that dvd if anyone of you seen it?
Mumbles Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 I've never seen the video, but I've heard it's good. He uses a bit exotic break charge IIRC, in that he just fills the whole shell with 2FA. This can get heavy and expensive. When building shells, at least with the goal of the bigger types, I don't see much reason to go any smaller than 3". They normally don't break any bigger than commercial 2" shells, and don't consume THAT much materials. The methodologies used for 6" or 8" shells are a lot more similar to those in a 3" vs. 2" shell. You can get a symmetric break from a 3" shell using pretty typical methods, where as a 2" shell takes a little more effort. Materials do really go up in larger shells, but it makes sense when you think that volume goes up by a factor of 8 for every time you double the diameter. For books I'd recommend the following:Ball Shells - Fireworks: the Art Science, and Technique (commonly called FAST in our circles)Canister Shells - Pyrotechnica IX and XI (commonly called The Fulcanelli Papers or Fulcanelli Articles) Honestly, the best resource you can probably pay for is Passfire.com It has pretty much an illustrated version of Pyrotechnica IX and XI, as well as the relevant articles on making lift, burst, stars, and building ball shells. In addition there is the forum who's memberlist practically reads as a who's who in amateur pyro. I would take anything from PyroGuide with a grain of salt. There is plenty of good information, but it also is notorious for having incorrect or questionable information too.
dagabu Posted January 7, 2011 Posted January 7, 2011 (edited) I would take anything from PyroGuide with a grain of salt. There is plenty of good information, but it also is notorious for having incorrect or questionable information too. Especially the formulas, there is a lot left out and no mention is made of the poisons and health risks. I second Passfire, the best money I have spent to date (except for some donations to APC ) on pyro! Edited January 7, 2011 by dagabu
Mumbles Posted January 8, 2011 Posted January 8, 2011 I can't completely fault them for leaving out such precautions on poisons. Some responsibility has to be had on the part of the person using them. If mainstream media has taught us nothing, it should be that chemicals are not as safe as they may seem. I can fault them on the fact that some of the formulas are flat out wrong. There is a green attributed to Hardt that comes to mind that may have been fixed. The error makes it mildly unsafe as well. There are also questionable passages, such as suggesting 10-20% dextrin in blackmatch for instance at one point in time. There are other less drastic errors as well. I like the concept, but the execution could have been done better.
dagabu Posted January 8, 2011 Posted January 8, 2011 I can't completely fault them for leaving out such precautions on poisons. Some responsibility has to be had on the part of the person using them. If mainstream media has taught us nothing, it should be that chemicals are not as safe as they may seem. I can fault them on the fact that some of the formulas are flat out wrong. There is a green attributed to Hardt that comes to mind that may have been fixed. The error makes it mildly unsafe as well. There are also questionable passages, such as suggesting 10-20% dextrin in blackmatch for instance at one point in time. There are other less drastic errors as well. I like the concept, but the execution could have been done better. Man, I hate to argue with someone that is a LOT smarter then me but what the heel; we expect everyone here to be responsible and you have chastised many about posting things that are dangerous but an open book with no process, no warnings, just a mishmash of chems gets your OK? Sorry but I cant agree with that.
pyrojunkie Posted January 8, 2011 Posted January 8, 2011 I have to say I agree with Mumbles on this one. People in this hobby should really be responsible enough to know what they are working with. Also, not every formula on Passfire even list the dangers associated with certain nasty chems. In fact most do not. Granted they are discussed in the forum, but you would still have to look for the info there just as anywhere else. I am a newbie, and I do take responsibility to learn what I am using, as should everyone else. Honestly, if you can't take the time to learn the hazards associated with the chems you are using, maybe you aren't ready for this hobby.
dagabu Posted January 8, 2011 Posted January 8, 2011 Honestly, if you can't take the time to learn the hazards associated with the chems you are using, maybe you aren't ready for this hobby. Okey-Dokey, lets see how well that works in practice.
Mumbles Posted January 11, 2011 Posted January 11, 2011 There are some things that are intrinsically harmful such as soluble barium salts, dichromates, and the like. Those are the kind of things that I think should be on the shoulders of the practitioner. I think one should have some grasp on the chemicals we're using and their properties as a prerequisite to using them. It is the more specialized things like nitrate/aluminum reactions, chlorates with sulfur, dichromated magnesium with AP and soluble barium/strontium salts that I tend to feel should be taught. They're not as straight foward, and probably are not mentioned in most of the common places. We use these things in specialized applications, which bring about specialized problems. Any MSDS will tell you barium is poisonous, and probably shouldn't be ingested.
Recommended Posts