Maltese Ball Shells

[dagabu]

Splendid!

 

Does anyone have a clue about their compositions?

 

No, sorry. I can't seem to get a single clue as to what and how they make their shells or stars. Mostly just eye candy for us all.

 

-dag

[californiapyro]

I like the color stars that "flash" red, those are neat and i haven't seen those before. I can only guess that they use veline's compositions

[Potassiumchlorate]

I like the color stars that "flash" red, those are neat and i haven't seen those before. I can only guess that they use veline's compositions

 

 

I have heard one thing about the Maltese compositions, and that is that they use chlorates a lot. Don't remember who said it, it might have been on the UKPS board.

[californiapyro]

i have heard the same thing, as well as a lot of the blues are paris green based. I have heard a rumor that some of their star compositions contain benzoates, but cannot verify this.

[Potassiumchlorate]

i have heard the same thing, as well as a lot of the blues are paris green based. I have heard a rumor that some of their star compositions contain benzoates, but cannot verify this.

 

Their blue and aqua stars are just adorable.

[pyroviper]

I am really curious as to the shifting effect they are using. They have to be using multiple delay comps, and setting the stars up in groups. Not to mention the changes in the delay comps have to miniscule.

 

Example. They get an idea of how many stars they can fit into a shell to start with. Then they setup 5 or 6 different delay comps ranging from (0.1s, 0.12s, 0.14s, 0.16s, 0.18s). As they fill up the shell they move left to right with the delay comps.

 

Honestly thats how I would approach something like this.

 

 

[flying fish]

Edit - Just realized I was posting a response to something on the first page that is no longer relevant. Not sure how to delete. Edited May 20, 2012 by flying fish

[FREAKYDUTCHMEN]

I am really curious as to the shifting effect they are using. They have to be using multiple delay comps, and setting the stars up in groups. Not to mention the changes in the delay comps have to miniscule.

 

Example. They get an idea of how many stars they can fit into a shell to start with. Then they setup 5 or 6 different delay comps ranging from (0.1s, 0.12s, 0.14s, 0.16s, 0.18s). As they fill up the shell they move left to right with the delay comps.

 

Honestly thats how I would approach something like this.

 

Interesting point, I think you're right.

As we know, with the beraqs they are masters with delay. I remember they make the delay powder with blackpower, arabic gum and bariumcarbonate. More AG and or BaCO3 makes the blackpowder burn slower. When looking at the ghost shells, it looks like they do this a little bit the same way. Stars with the same diameter, same cores, only the outer relay mix has different amounts delay agents. Maybe not all their ghost shells are made this way, but I think at least some of them.

 

Yes the maltese use chlorates, but not for every occasion. They use perchlorates as well.

[FrankRizzo]

It's amazing that they are able to get such good ignition with the slam they are being exposed during those insane flash breaks. I also have heard that the Maltese use primarily chlorate formulas, and it obviously shows in their success with star ignition.

[FREAKYDUTCHMEN]

Some chlorate stars might catch fire easily, but I've seen plenty really hard breaks with perchlorate color stars, priming is the most important part.

It's quite traditional they use a small layer of charcoal streamer on top of their (multi) color stars, which also makes it a lot easier to ignite.

[Potassiumchlorate]

The performance of compositions with potassium perchlorate is inferior to chlorates, except that potassium perchlorate compositions have a higher burning temperature and maybe that potassium perchlorate flash with catalysts might perform better than chlorate ones.

 

Nice stars. Do they roll by hand or with star rollers?

Edited May 21, 2012 by Potassiumchlorate

[FREAKYDUTCHMEN]

Concrete mixers, but I think they prime their pressed stars by hand.

[warthog]

Excuse me? I'm not into this arguing at all. I was commenting on the shells in dagabu's post.

 

Fredhappy's longer post above which would have been rude of me to quote was what I was referring to but of course, you knew that...

 

My mistake has been corrected. Sorry.

Edited May 24, 2012 by warthog

[burningRNX]

Nice picture Freaky d.

just curious: how big do you estimate those were?

Looks like they use a lot of delay between those different layers.

[FREAKYDUTCHMEN]

The biggest star is about 20 or 22 mm.

[pyroviper]

Warthog, out of your last 5night posts you have done nothing more than instigate and continue a useless argument. This topic is about Maltese shells.

 

Ask yourself a question before posting. Will my post attribute to the collective usefullness of the topic? No? Then don't post.

 

Every post you have made in this topic has been with the intent to fuel/create an argument. I know this forum software has the capability to lock a user from being able to post in selected topics. If warthog is unable to stay on topic, would a moderator please lock him/her from it. This is getting ridiculous. It's been quite a while since I have seen such obvious trolling go un-punished.

[ExplosiveCoek]

Do you have any ideas about the delay comp used between the layers? It seems as if it's al the same.

 

I was wondering, why would you use charcoal streamers on top of colour stars? C streamers burn less hot then pure meal, so I'd guess with meal instead of c streamer the ignition would better right?

 

My charcoal streamers without priming are blowing blind in a shell, with more priming (meal) they work.

[FREAKYDUTCHMEN]

I haven't said there shouldn't be a igniter layer between the charcoal streamer and color composition. But you're taking one important problem away which is the high velocity of the star.

Prime ignites streamer easily, streamer ignites a hotprime easily and the hot prime ignites the color star easy (-when the stars velocity is a bit lower than right after the break).

Yes charcoal streamers can blow blind, so you should always prime your stars, no matter what kind of stars they are (well for at least when you roll them).

[ExplosiveCoek]

Well I've had a lot of issues with charcoal streamers not being able to ignite hot prime, that's why I'm always putting a small layer of meal on my hotprime. Even in willow stars, when the velocity was really low and the stars where dropping instead of flying, the willow couldn't ignite my hotprime.

 

The burn time of meal vs. streamer is roughly the same -in small layers-, so that's why I suggested that it would be easier to just use meal for outer priming only. Meal also is capable of handling really high wind velocity. That is, if you don't want the charcoal tail, otherwise you could use it ofcourse.

 

Also I really like you uploading those pictures, it's nice to see how they make their stars. I didn't expect that much priming in between the different layers actually. Thanks .

[Seymour]

In small layers the burn speed of meal versus charcoal streamers certainly does not become more the same. In these complex stars, rolling on more of a faster mix to simply delay the next effect is a big waste of space. In the context of your hobby, it's a less unsuitable option.

 

Meal does sustain fire at high speeds, but not as well as if there's extra charcoal. Firstly consider blowing on an ember... it flares up, and secondly at high speeds you cannot ignore atmospheric oxygen. The time we are talking about, straight after the shell burst cannot be considered just like stars coasting through the sky, at least not in very hard burst shells.

 

We are talking about a very brief period of time that the streamer section is burning, so the effect of charcoal sparks is not easily noticeable.

 

Willow is at the cooler end of charcoal streamers, and pyrotechnic mixes generally, and so while it not lighting the hot prime is unusual, it's believable.

Edited May 24, 2012 by Seymour

[warthog]

Warthog, out of your last 5night posts you have done nothing more than instigate and continue a useless argument. This topic is about Maltese shells.

 

Ask yourself a question before posting. Will my post attribute to the collective usefullness of the topic? No? Then don't post.

 

Every post you have made in this topic has been with the intent to fuel/create an argument. I know this forum software has the capability to lock a user from being able to post in selected topics. If warthog is unable to stay on topic, would a moderator please lock him/her from it. This is getting ridiculous. It's been quite a while since I have seen such obvious trolling go un-punished.

 

well, shall we continue again or will you allow me to let it go? I have said more than once I was done only to be called out. Being one not to be able to resist a challenge I shall again rise to it;

 

I have tried to inspire debate,not argument, which is supposed to be more civil but alas the current company lacks civility so I shall again ask you, does this need to continue or will I need to return to state my case again?

 

How pray tell will you be punishing me?

 

Your post contributed nothing yet you could not resist could you.

Ask yourself something, is it worth it to continue to screw with this since the point I have tried to make has been made or will you continue to prod until the wound reopens?

 

The topic I had stated was indeed pertinent to the discussion on Malta and their pyrotechnics, if you are too blind to see it, I suggest better glasses.

Edited May 24, 2012 by warthog

[Mumbles]

Seriously Warthog, drop it. I would imagine you're capable of just ignoring something, or letting it slide. Don't feel obligated to constantly reply to every little thing. You've each had the opportunity to say your piece, and I suggest you leave it at that. I, unlike other forums, have no qualms about pruning away bullshit.

 

Back to the topic at hand. A while ago in some of the literature like the Technique in Fire series, as well as things like the AFN newsletter, there was some discussion and references to priming stars for hard breaking shells. In my mind I always want to call them "negative primes", but that is probably just something I made up. I don't have them handy to actually look them up at the moment either. Essentially they are as Seymour described in that they are a prime having an excess of fuel designed to burn more vigorously while flying through the air at high speeds. I will have to partially agree with ExplosiveCoek here. The burning speeds will not differ in thin layers, but the burning time does become comparable. These are not the same, and it does not necessarily mean that using meal will give the same results a tiger tail.

 

To put this into perspective, I like to think about this in the terms of the chrysanthemum system. I'm sure we're all familiar with the formulas from Shimizu Chrysanthemum 6 and Chrysanthemum 8. You've probably heard of tiger tail as well, it's the same as Chrysanthemum 10. The number comes from parts of charcoal relative to 10 parts of potassium nitrate, and includes 1 part sulfur, and 1 part dextrin. Thus a "true" Chrysanthemum 6 is 10 parts KNO3, 6 parts C, 1 part S, and 1 part dextrin. If you go through a do the math against the formulas published in F.A.S.T. you'll see they'll be pretty close, but usually rounded off. There is sometimes tweaking of a few parts here or there, but for the most part it stays relatively close.

 

As a jumping off point, straight black powder with a bit of a stretch is approximately chrysanthemum 2. Most people would agree that black powder is fairly well balanced in terms of oxygen. It has approximately enough to completely burn on it's own. If you've ever burned one of the other stars on the ground, you'll probably see copious sparks flying off or some slag left behind. Black powder can be blown blind out of shells. It will nearly always light, but may not stay lit or have enough heat to light the next layer. Thus it makes sense to go to a higher C number. The excess charcoal will be allow the star to take advantage of the atmospheric oxygen, and potentially remain more a more resilient layer due to the slag produced. I really don't know why I wrote all of this. Long story not so short is that these "negative primes" are basically a spider star mix, which is close to C6. Spider stars are designed to be broken with straight flash breaks, and are very difficult to blow blind. Still throw a dusting of meal on the outside, but according to this literature the higher charcoal prime will stay lit better and ignite the next layer better as well. I've heard more than one accomplished person say that a streamer layer on the exterior of a star is better than just meal.

[warthog]

Right, its all my fault. I say I am done and then someone gives me shit.

 

You are just as double standarded as the Passfire bunch.

 

feel free to prune.

 

It will only make my point.

[bob]

I think what every body is trying to say to warthhog and pyroviper is please stop posting in this topic IMO

I think that you are both really mad at each other but the best thing to do is for the people that are mad to quite posting in this topic

I'm new to this though so this is just a thought and nothing more

bob

[WonderBoy]

I usually do not get into stuff like this, but Warthog, please stop.

 

You do not need to always have the last word.

 

You say it is a debate, but make everything personal. That is not how debates must go, it just stirs the pot and causes trouble.

 

Please stop muddying up other threads, and take it to the Random Discussion and Chat section.

 

 

Thank you,

WB

Edited May 24, 2012 by WonderBoy