ivars21 Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 (edited) Hi, I am in process of finishing pyro composition database, and I have loads of vicious flash compositions, which I would prefer restrict from kewls with some quiz, which they have to successfully complete in order to see them. So if anyone has an idea for safety related/general pyro question - post below (preferably with 1 correct anwer and 3-4 wrong answers).Thank you guys. Edited March 23, 2014 by ivars21
spitfire Posted March 23, 2014 Posted March 23, 2014 (edited) Ask some questions that are related to safety and knowledge of materials. Do's and don't's... like sulfur/chlorate, what is visco, where is parlon used for, what does Strontium carbonate do.... questions to filter out kids only looking for a big bang. They don't know what the heck parlon is or what it does... EDIT: on a second thought... every serious pyro knows plenty of flash compositions why list them at all..? Everyone who needs to look up KClO4/AL flash clearly isn't ready to make it anyway Edited March 23, 2014 by spitfire 2
nater Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 EDIT: on a second thought... every serious pyro knows plenty of flash compositions why list them at all..? Everyone who needs to look up KClO4/AL flash clearly isn't ready to make it anyway I have to agree with this. If a standard formula will not work for a certain reason, a serious pyro will know where to turn from there.
ivars21 Posted March 24, 2014 Author Posted March 24, 2014 Yes, but not everyone is serious pyro when they begin the hobby. Anyway, thank you for your suggestions.
MrB Posted March 24, 2014 Posted March 24, 2014 Somewhat of circle reasoning... "I want to lock out kewl bombers, since they just hurt them self, others, and property - i want to provide the means to teach people how to blow up them self, others, and property." I actually agree. Kewl bombers WILL find a way in to the database, hell, most of them will do so faster then i would. And flash needs to be in the database, for the simple reason that it belongs there. I know only 1 kind of flash by heart, KClO4 / Mg (or MgAl) and KClO4 / Al. (first one equal parts, second one 72/28, and all the way to 2/1)If i ever get around to doing something that wont allow me binary mixing my flash, i might want something else, and a database with the info in, could prove useful. Just saying. It's pretty much the same reasoning as stands behind why i answer pretty much any question on pyro, whoever asks it. I'd much rather be the "go to guy" that people ask, so that i can try and influence them to do it safely, then the guy who knows it all, but just shoots the question down, and have the asking person go find it on some kewl bombing site... Not that i'm any kind of authority on any subject of pyro...B! 1
nater Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 My opinion is that flash has its uses, however someone new to the hobby probably does not need to know all of the different flash formulas from the get go. Once they have the experience and know that they need a different flash formula, they will have discovered the proper resources to turn to. I can't think of an reason that someone new to the hobby would have a legitimate use for anything except a slow flash booster or a standard flash for a burst enhancer or flashbag.
pyrokid Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 (edited) I don't think there's any reason to arbitrarily withhold information about flash. No one would argue that a rounded and complete theoretical understanding of fireworks is detrimental in any way. Knowledge of flash gives a fuller view of the spectrum of fireworks and gives perspective on the relative sensitivities and strengths of different compositions. If every site decided to leave instruction about flash to some other site, the information wouldn't be available anywhere on the internet. At that point, one would be left only with the option of learning about flash in person, which is stupid. Safety is safety. You can have 50 years' experience and still make one mistake and be dead. Isn't it cool to compare a bunch of different formulas anyway? Edited March 25, 2014 by pyrokid
ollie1016 Posted March 25, 2014 Posted March 25, 2014 Maybe have 4/5 questions about flash powders, to highlight their dangers etc 1
hindsight Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 This reminds me of a certain commander who wanted to determine which of his subordinates had the intellect, judgment, and disposition to handle some remarkably destructive ordnance. There wasn't an opportunity to administer psychological screening and intelligence testing, nor was it possible to first place these people in real life simulations to evaluate their responses. He presented them four questions which, he claimed, demonstrated their temperament and capacity for rational thought. The questions varied, but, generally, seemed to require a general fund of knowledge. Surprisingly, the questions had nothing to do with the subject of weaponry. The General stated that he was never disappointed in the choices made by that commander. Sorry, the following question is the only one I seem to remember. There was no consulting internet databases. Which of the following names does not fit with the rest:1) Nikolai Rimsky Korsakov2) Alexander Borodin3) Boris Tchaikovsky4) Sergei Rachmaninoff5) Modest Mussorgsky Maybe it was all random, maybe the commander had remarkable insight, but there were no mishaps related to failed handling or implementation of the ordnance in the field. 1
spitfire Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 (edited) my guess is Nr. 1 EDIT: i like these kind of games, Nr.5 has a suspicious first name... hmmm interesting Edited March 26, 2014 by spitfire
Mumbles Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 I looked this up just to be sure. I think I was right, but for the wrong reasons.
hindsight Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 Mumbles, by stating that you had the right answer for the wrong reasons, it indicates that you almost certainly have the right answer; and thank you for witholding the answer at this point. However, back then, guessing the right answer was less important than giving the correct reasons for the answer, revealing the individual's thought processes.
Bobosan Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 I believe there are three items that differentiate the one from other four.
TheExplosionist Posted April 7, 2014 Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) When is it safe to store flash powder?(a Inside a cardboard container(b Inside a plastic container(c Inside a container in a remote storage facility(d Never When is it safe to ball mill black powder?(a Inside a shed(b In the yard(c With the ball mill surrounded by a shield of bricks(d At a remote location What media can't be used to ball mill black powder?(a lead(b brass(c ceramic(d steel Which substance can chlorates be safely mixed with?(a sulphur(b heavy metals(c sulphuric acid(d charcoal Edited April 7, 2014 by TheExplosionist 1
MrB Posted April 7, 2014 Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) DA_D Ok, so for real my answer would be DD_D.Non-sparking stainless steel is a viable milling alternative. Not one that i'd be willing to buy second hand, but then again... non-sparking ceramic media is somewhat of a gamble in that regard to, isn't it? But this (if anything) puts light on the issue at hand. Storing flash isn't ever safe, but yet... Once stuck inside a salute, it's considered reasonably safe, and storing it isn't really "oh no, you cant do that" labeled, nobody really thinks much of it if your stacking salutes and stuff for a shoot. Even if it may take you months to make all the units for said shoot.B! Edited April 7, 2014 by MrB
TheExplosionist Posted April 7, 2014 Posted April 7, 2014 (edited) DDDD is the correct answer. Ceramic is considered to be safe. It can spark but it won't set powder off.You are correct in that stainless steel should be safe but someone theorized that depending on their size and the mill size they can impact each other with enough force to heat black powder to ignition point. Edited April 7, 2014 by TheExplosionist
Mumbles Posted April 7, 2014 Posted April 7, 2014 I just have to say, that is not the best example of an appropriate quiz. The examples are way too ambiguous and really don't establish a good understanding of safety. The first question is fairly standard, though it may be better to emphasize that it's about loose flash powder. The second is totally irrelevant. All of those things are fine as long as condition D is met. The third has no totally correct answer. The forth depends on your definition of safe and your definition of a heavy metal.
TheExplosionist Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 http://www.amateurpyro.com/forums/topic/5154-mumbles-hurt-in-accident/ We all know what your definition of safe is don't we?
Mumbles Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Are you kidding me right now? I know what I did wrong, and take full responsibility for it. It was stupid and totally preventable. I've never claimed to be a beacon of safety. All I really care to do is prevent others from making the same stupid, immature mistakes I did I wouldn't wish the burns I received on anyone. That however doesn't mean you have any idea what you're talking about, or that your proposed quiz still isn't a pile of garbage. You may want to take a look at your own safety practices and qualifications before judging others. http://www.pyrosociety.org.uk/forum/topic/780-close-calls/?view=findpost&p=32085 1
hindsight Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. If a man suffers a catastrophe, but has intellect, judgment and the capacity for introspection, then he can surely become an expert guide for others.Everybody here, I believe, agrees that Mumbles qualifies. 3
ivars21 Posted April 8, 2014 Author Posted April 8, 2014 It's getting out of hand here. Anyway - thanks for your input guys, I have some ideas now.In order to stop this stupidity, someone could close this topic. Thank you.
MrB Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 I'd like to join in, and toss fuel on the fire. No wait, baking soda. Mumbles is, if anything, a surviving victim of his own habits. I don't know enough about the details of what happened to even pretend to know what happened, but i'm pretty sure we all do things, out of habit, that probably isn't the best practice. Have something like that happen to you, and your bound to start thinking about the "Whats if's", and "what could / should i have done differently" Perhaps more then anything else i'm glad Mumbles is still around to share his experiences, and his views, both on the pyrotechnics them self, but also on the safety surrounding making them.Please, lets all try and be civil, there isn't that many of us around, and those that are will only benefit from sharing. Not that i have much to share, i let you guys do that, and take it all to me...B! 1
ollie1016 Posted April 15, 2014 Posted April 15, 2014 (edited) http://www.amateurpyro.com/forums/topic/5154-mumbles-hurt-in-accident/ We all know what your definition of safe is don't we?You sir are a asshole. Accidents happen to the best of people. Show some respect for the guy, and be glad that he is still here with us today. Edited April 15, 2014 by ollie1016 2
Recommended Posts