Return-Path: X-Real-To: stagecraftlist [at] theatrical.net Received: by prxy.net (CommuniGate Pro PIPE 4.2.6) with PIPE id 13767492; Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:00:57 -0800 X-ListServer: CommuniGate Pro LIST 4.2.6 List-Unsubscribe: List-ID: Message-ID: From: "Stagecraft" Sender: "Stagecraft" To: "Stagecraft" Precedence: list Subject: Stagecraft Digest #258 Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 03:00:46 -0800 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on prxy.net X-TFF-CGPSA-Version: 1.4f2 X-prxy-Spam-Filter: Scanned For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- Stagecraft Digest, Issue #258 1. New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes by "Andrew Nikel" 2. Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes by "CATHERINE BRUMM" 3. Source Four Bench Focus by Johan Godwaldt 4. Re: Source Four Bench Focus by Mike Brubaker 5. Re: Windoze by Mark O'Brien 6. Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Daniel Daugherty" 7. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Michael J. Banvard" 8. Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes by "Jon Ares" 9. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Delbert Hall" 10. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Paul Schreiner" 11. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Cyr, Dale" 12. Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes by Nicholas Kuhl 13. Re: Windoze by Richard Wright 14. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Stephen E. Rees" 15. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Waxler, Steve (waxlers)" 16. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Delbert Hall" 17. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Jack Morones" 18. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by Greg Bierly 19. Re: Scrim Scallops (Hour Glassing) by Barney Simon 20. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Paul Schreiner" 21. Re: USITT by "richard j. archer" 22. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Delbert Hall" 23. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by Michael Heinicke 24. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Jonathan S. Deull" 25. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by Michael Heinicke 26. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by Greg Bierly 27. Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats by "Delbert Hall" 28. AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! by mconn [at] cumberlandcollege.edu 29. Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! by Herrick Goldman 30. Angle iron by "Scott C. Parker" 31. Re: Angle iron by "Delbert Hall" 32. Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! by Stuart Wheaton 33. Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! Thar be water in me Dimmer Rax!!! by "Alf Sauve" 34. Re: Angle iron by Jared Fortney 35. Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! by Dale Farmer *** Please update the subject line of your reply to use the subject *** line of the message you are replying to! Please only reply to *** one message subject in each reply. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Andrew Nikel" Subject: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:54:12 -0500 Message-ID: Dear Friends - Please note my new contact info. I started here at City Theatrical this week. It's pretty cool. On a more personal note, my wife offered to help out on the costumes for the production of Gypsy at our older boys high school. Does anyone have any good sources for the stripper and cow costumes, the blanket coat and anything else a small school in northern NJ might not be able to come up with creatively? Thanks, all. Andrew Andrew Nikel - Sales City Theatrical, Inc. 752 East 133rd Street, Bronx, NY 10405 Voice: 718-292-7932 x23, Fax: 718-292-7482 email: anikel [at] citytheatrical.com web: www.citytheatrical.com ------------------------------ Message-Id: Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:06:18 -0500 From: "CATHERINE BRUMM" Subject: Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes Your wife may want to contact the Costume Collection of the theater = Development Fund. They might have the costumes or something that will work = and they prorate rental costs for schools and based on the size of the = house. They are located in NYC and she may be able to make an appointment = to talk with one of there people if she googles Theater Defense Fund she = will get the wedsite and can get more information about the Costume = Collection I just can't seem to put my fingers on the web address right = now. Catherine K. Brumm, General Manager Minnie Evans Arts Center Wilmington, NC P910-)790-2360 x821 F)910-790-2356 cbrumm [at] nhcs.k12.nc.us www.geocities.com/nhcscbrumm/index.html All e-mail correspondence to and from this address is subject to the North = Carolina Public Records Law, which may result in monitoring and disclosure = to third parties, including law enforcement. >>> anikel [at] citytheatrical.com 01/12/05 08:54AM >>> On a more personal note, my wife offered to help out on the costumes for = the production of Gypsy at our older boys high school. Does anyone have any = good sources for the stripper and cow costumes, the blanket coat and anything else a small school in northern NJ might not be able to come up with creatively? Thanks, all. Andrew Andrew Nikel - Sales City Theatrical, Inc. 752 East 133rd Street, Bronx, NY 10405 Voice: 718-292-7932 x23, Fax: 718-292-7482 email: anikel [at] citytheatrical.com=20 web: www.citytheatrical.com=20 ------------------------------ Message-Id: From: Johan Godwaldt Subject: Source Four Bench Focus Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:03:54 -0500 We are in the process of bench focusing our 36 degree source four instruments and are unhappy with the results. When we attempt to bench focus the 36 degree instruments to a flat field we get a shadow of the lens holders. As an experiment we exchanged the 36 degree barrel with 26 and 50 degree barrels and did not have the same problem. Has anyone else out there had this problem? If so have you found a solution or are you just accepting the problem. It almost looks like there is a field stop missing but ETC does not use these. Any suggestions? Johan Godwaldt Technical Director SUNY Oswego Theatre 47 Tyler Hall Ph# 315 312 2987 Fax 315 312 3394 ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.1.2.0.0.20050112094438.01caa650 [at] mail.insightbb.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:46:54 -0500 From: Mike Brubaker Subject: Re: Source Four Bench Focus In-Reply-To: References: Have you tried calling ETC's technical support? (1-800-688-4116) That is, after all, why they are there. Mike At 09:03 AM 1/12/2005, Johan Godwaldt wrote: >but ETC does not use these. Any suggestions? ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: Cc: marko [at] email.arizona.edu (Mark O'Brien) From: Mark O'Brien Subject: Re: Windoze Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:52:39 -0700 On Jan 11, 2005, at 4:45 PM, FrankWood95 [at] aol.com wrote: > You are probably right. If I were starting from scratch, I should > probably go > for a Mac. > But, I'm not. I go back to 8080 processors, Z80s. and ti writing in > machine > code or assembler.I know the PC architecture, which stems from the > 8080. The > Mac stems from the 6800, and its successors. > > > Frank Wood > Although I did not hand-build a Heath-kit, and write the code, My first computer was a Kaypro-2 running, I believe, an 8086. It ran CPM, an early "version" of DOS. I really think it was worthwhile to learn these newer, faster machines in my shop. I do not think it would be wise to try to do ASCII Auto-cad with it to make shop drawings. That said, I imagine it would be quite a sight if someone showed up for a corporate gig, with a truckload of resistance dimmers, just because they thought that a rack of Sensors, and a Expression were too newfangled. Mark O'Brien Opera Technical Director University of Arizona, School of Music Tucson, AZ 520/621-7025 520/591-1803 Mobile ------------------------------ Message-id: Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:56:04 -0500 Subject: Rigging "hollywood" flats From: "Daniel Daugherty" References:

In-Reply-To: Hi all, I am hoping those of you with more expertise in rigging could settle a difference of opinion I have with our Facilities Manager. Our stock of flats are primarily Hollywood style 1x4 framed hard covered flats. During our last show I had rigged a couple of the flats by drilling through the top rail and internal toggles and running GAC to a D ring bolted onto the bottom rail. The Facilities Manager has told me that I must run the cable down the sides of the flat to some form of bottom hanger that attaches underneath the bottom rail. That this "bottom attachment method is the only acceptable way of rigging anything". Is my method acceptable? is he correct that bolting to the bottom rail is not enough and that you must pick up beneath the bottom rail? Thanks in advance. Dan Daugherty Technical Director School of Performing Arts University of Maine Orono, ME 04469 207-581-1767 daniel_daugherty [at] umit.maine.edu ------------------------------ From: "Michael J. Banvard" Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 10:09:12 -0600 In-Reply-To: Message-Id: > Is my method acceptable? is he correct that > bolting to the bottom rail is not enough and that you must > pick up beneath the > bottom rail? Thanks in advance. The main point that he is correct on is that lifting from the bottom of the flat is the way you want to go. As long as the stiles aren't Swiss cheese, drilling a hole for GAC will not interfere in their stability. A good option would be to have a steel plate under the bottom rail, at the point at which the cable would go through, and then sending a forged eye though the bottom rail, threading into the plate. Attach to the eye with a turnbuckle, and you have adjustability and concealability. The worry about bolting through from the top is that the load is concentrated on the bolts as opposed to being distributed over an area. Given a shock load, there is the possibility that the bolts could pull through or fail (unlikely). That being said, you could use the above mentioned plate and bolt through it, sandwiching the rail between D-ring plate and bottom plate. That way the load is distributed over an area, and the rail is reinforced. Just some thoughts, - Michael Banvard ____________ Virus checked by Guardian Worm Killer && AntiVirus Version: AVK 15.0.2348 from 11.01.2005 Virus news: www.guardianproducts.com ------------------------------ Message-ID: <000301c4f8c3$e7e08a20$0600000a [at] BRUTUS> From: "Jon Ares" References: Subject: Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 08:29:36 -0800 > production of Gypsy at our older boys high school. Does anyone have any > good > sources for the stripper and cow costumes, Maybe City Theatrical could add the Electra costume to its product lines? -- Jon Ares Program Director, West Linn HS Theatre Arts www.hevanet.com/acreative www.wlhstheatre.org ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:29:37 -0500 Generally speaking, it sounds as if you did it correctly, assuming you terminated the GAC properly. You say you "bolted" the D-ring to the bottom rail, so I assume you mean that the bolts ran completely through the bottom rail. If so, you are lifting from the underneith the bottom rail since the the heads of the bolts (and maybe some washers) are below the bottom rail. Since the stiles rest on top of the bottom rail, and the top rail rest on top of the stiles, the entire frame is in compression, which is what you want. Now if you had attached the D-ring to the top rail, it would be in compression, but the rest of the frame would be in tension. This would have been a bad choice, but you did not do it this way. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) >During our last show I had rigged a >couple of the flats by drilling through the top rail and internal toggles >and running GAC to a D ring bolted onto the bottom rail. The Facilities >Manager has told me that I must run the cable down the sides of the flat to >some form of bottom hanger >that attaches underneath the bottom rail. That this "bottom attachment >method is the only acceptable way of rigging anything". Is my method >acceptable? is he correct that bolting to the bottom rail is not enough and >that you must pick up beneath the >bottom rail? Thanks in advance. ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 11:37:40 -0500 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C68C [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" A few not-so-random thoughts of my own on this... > > Is my method acceptable? is he correct that > > bolting to the bottom rail is not enough and that you must=20 > > pick up beneath the > > bottom rail? Thanks in advance. As long as the bottom rail (1) extends underneath the sides of the flat, (2) is in good condition, and (3) is fastened correctly, your method is fine...but see the caveat below. > The main point that he is correct on is that lifting from the=20 > bottom of the flat is the way you want to go. As long as the=20 > stiles aren't Swiss cheese, drilling a hole for GAC will not=20 > interfere in their stability. Completely in agreement here... > A good option would be to have a steel plate under the bottom=20 > rail, at the point at which the cable would go through, and=20 > then sending a forged eye though the bottom rail, threading=20 > into the plate. Attach to the eye with a turnbuckle, and you=20 > have adjustability and concealability. If the flat is flown repeatedly, I'd avoid the turnbuckle and go with trim chain instead. Turnbuckles overhead? Not where I can help it...at least not unless it's a completely static application. Even so, and while this would be an extremely secure procedure, it is something of overkill (and here's the caveat) unless the flat itself is rather substantial in weight. It depends on the application here, and the size of the flat. Some very lightweight ones I've made have been flown by attaching the GAC to a good (and carefully-installed) screw eye rather than a bolt...but I wouldn't do that with something 8'x22'. For a piece of that magnitude, I might instead attach a steel plate beneath the bottom rail, drill through both the lumber and the steel, run the GAC all the way through, and terminate it with a swaged stop. Just another option... I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd probably, if I were in your shoes, object less to the FM's insistence upon bottom hangers and more to his propensity for blanket statements like this. There's more than one way to hang a flat safely, but you have to have a good grasp of the principles involved... > The worry about bolting through from the top is that the load=20 > is concentrated on the bolts as opposed to being distributed=20 > over an area. Given a shock load, there is the possibility=20 > that the bolts could pull through or fail (unlikely). =20 FWIW, it's not the bolts failing or pulling out that I'd be worried about, but the possibility of the bottom rail breaking at the point of attachment. That would seem to be the weakest link in the system here, but we also (should) have a fairly good idea of what sort of forces are involved in breaking a stick of 1x4 that way--which then allow us to factor that into the decision process. The shock loads would have to be reasonably large--which also means that it either has to weigh a lot on its own, or have some goodly amount of mass attached to it (or strike it) while it's in the air for this to be a concern. IMO, of course... :) And, as Delbert alluded to, rigging flats is like you and your significant other...being in compression is a lot better than being in tension! ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:17:14 -0800 Message-ID: <407DF7D68DD30440B5CEB70ED234D1CF0316E2D2 [at] excuswa100.americas.unity> From: "Cyr, Dale" dan: any chance of seeing a picture or your arrangement? specifically the point of attachment at the bottom? (noah can host, at least temporarily, one or two) those of us with rigging knowledge can then provide a definitive answer. dale cyr Training Supervisor IA Local 93 >Generally speaking, it sounds as if you did it correctly, assuming you=20 >terminated the GAC properly. You say you "bolted" the D-ring to the bottom=20 >rail, so I assume... ------------------------------ Message-ID: <41E56051.3040209 [at] bu.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:37:21 -0500 From: Nicholas Kuhl Subject: Re: New Contact Info and Gypsy Costumes References: In-Reply-To: Andrew Nikel wrote: > Does anyone have any good >sources for the stripper and cow costumes, the blanket coat and anything >else a small school in northern NJ might not be able to come up with >creatively? > > Check out "Anything But Costumes" if they can afford the rental (I have no idea how much they were, I just know my old HS could afford the rental while I was there). Other than that, I could probably put you in touch with the director at my old HS (in Montclair NJ), and see if he will let you borrow or rent from our costume "stock". Talk to me off list if you're interested. Nick Kuhl ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References:

Message-Id: From: Richard Wright Subject: Re: Windoze Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 09:52:32 -0800 Mark; Another Kaypro user! I bought my first, single-sided disc Kaypro back about 1984. When I got a double-sided I thought I'd died and gone to heaven. Then I used a Compugraphic at a newspaper, then IBM and then Mac. I just threw out one of my three Kaypros. I remember using dbase with the Kaypro and carefully constructing my data bas to use one or two less characters. Cheers Richard Wright On 12-Jan-05, at 7:52 AM, Mark O'Brien wrote: > > Although I did not hand-build a Heath-kit, and write the code, My > first computer was a Kaypro-2 running, I believe, an 8086. It ran CPM, > an early "version" of DOS. I really think it was worthwhile to learn > these newer, faster machines in my shop. I do not think it would be > wise to try to do ASCII Auto-cad with it to make shop drawings. > > That said, I imagine it would be quite a sight if someone showed up > for a corporate gig, with a truckload of resistance dimmers, just > because they thought that a rack of Sensors, and a Expression were too > newfangled. > > > Mark O'Brien > Opera Technical Director > University of Arizona, School of Music > Tucson, AZ > 520/621-7025 > 520/591-1803 Mobile > > > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <41E5713C.7000102 [at] fredonia.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 13:49:32 -0500 From: "Stephen E. Rees" Reply-To: Rees [at] fredonia.edu Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats References: Hi, I notice that all the responses thusfar are bolting the attachment point to the bottom rail. What is the list's opinion of bolting the attachment point, typically a top hanger iron mounted vertically, at the bottom of the stiles? This puts the bolts in shear instead of in tension. Problem?? The wire rope runs through holes in the toggles at the point where the toggle mates w/ the stile. Opinions?? Steve Rees, TD SUNY-Fredonia Paul Schreiner wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > A few not-so-random thoughts of my own on this... > > >>>Is my method acceptable? is he correct that >>>bolting to the bottom rail is not enough and that you must >>>pick up beneath the >>>bottom rail? Thanks in advance. >> > > As long as the bottom rail (1) extends underneath the sides of the flat, > (2) is in good condition, and (3) is fastened correctly, your method is > fine...but see the caveat below. > > >>The main point that he is correct on is that lifting from the >>bottom of the flat is the way you want to go. As long as the >>stiles aren't Swiss cheese, drilling a hole for GAC will not >>interfere in their stability. > > > Completely in agreement here... > > >>A good option would be to have a steel plate under the bottom >>rail, at the point at which the cable would go through, and >>then sending a forged eye though the bottom rail, threading >>into the plate. Attach to the eye with a turnbuckle, and you >>have adjustability and concealability. > > > If the flat is flown repeatedly, I'd avoid the turnbuckle and go with > trim chain instead. Turnbuckles overhead? Not where I can help it...at > least not unless it's a completely static application. > > Even so, and while this would be an extremely secure procedure, it is > something of overkill (and here's the caveat) unless the flat itself is > rather substantial in weight. It depends on the application here, and > the size of the flat. Some very lightweight ones I've made have been > flown by attaching the GAC to a good (and carefully-installed) screw eye > rather than a bolt...but I wouldn't do that with something 8'x22'. For > a piece of that magnitude, I might instead attach a steel plate beneath > the bottom rail, drill through both the lumber and the steel, run the > GAC all the way through, and terminate it with a swaged stop. Just > another option... > > I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'd probably, if I were in your > shoes, object less to the FM's insistence upon bottom hangers and more > to his propensity for blanket statements like this. There's more than > one way to hang a flat safely, but you have to have a good grasp of the > principles involved... > > >>The worry about bolting through from the top is that the load >>is concentrated on the bolts as opposed to being distributed >>over an area. Given a shock load, there is the possibility >>that the bolts could pull through or fail (unlikely). > > > FWIW, it's not the bolts failing or pulling out that I'd be worried > about, but the possibility of the bottom rail breaking at the point of > attachment. That would seem to be the weakest link in the system here, > but we also (should) have a fairly good idea of what sort of forces are > involved in breaking a stick of 1x4 that way--which then allow us to > factor that into the decision process. The shock loads would have to be > reasonably large--which also means that it either has to weigh a lot on > its own, or have some goodly amount of mass attached to it (or strike > it) while it's in the air for this to be a concern. IMO, of course... > :) > > And, as Delbert alluded to, rigging flats is like you and your > significant other...being in compression is a lot better than being in > tension! ------------------------------ Message-ID: <886EF25AF8BEF64EB89A820EF84064FF0B77A3EF [at] UCMAIL4> From: "Waxler, Steve (waxlers)" Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:38:27 -0500 Aside from the rest of the conversation, I teach that screw eyes are not rigging hardware. It might be acceptable on a very, very light and small prop but even then I would prefer another attachment. I would rather trust the turn buckle than the screw eye. Now that that is off of my chest, I have rigged Hollywoods just as originally described with a D-ring on the top of the bottom rail & bolted through and have also supported the bottom attachment with other than just the 3/16 bolts through the bottom rail. I think you have to make a "risk assessment" and then make a choice of how best to do it in that situation. Steve Waxler Technical Director College Conservatory of Music University of Cincinnati Some very lightweight ones I've made have been flown by attaching the GAC to a good (AND CAREFULLY-INSTALLED) SCREW EYE RATHER THAN A BOLT...but I wouldn't do that with something 8'x22'. For a piece of that magnitude, I might instead attach a steel plate beneath the bottom rail, drill through both the lumber and the steel, run the GAC all the way through, and terminate it with a swaged stop. Just another option... If the flat is flown repeatedly, I'd avoid the turnbuckle and go with trim chain instead. Turnbuckles overhead? Not where I can help it...at least not unless it's a completely static application. This is good, also. > A good option would be to have a steel plate under the bottom > rail, at the point at which the cable would go through, and > then sending a forged eye though the bottom rail, threading > into the plate. Attach to the eye with a turnbuckle, and you > have adjustability and concealability. ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 14:51:11 -0500 I agree with Steve about screw eye (and everything else in his post). Screw eyes are great for a screen door latches, but they are not rigging hardware. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) >Aside from the rest of the conversation, I teach that screw eyes are not >rigging hardware. It might be acceptable on a very, very light and small >prop but even then I would prefer another attachment. I would rather trust >the turn buckle than the screw eye. > >Now that that is off of my chest, I have rigged Hollywoods just as >originally described with a D-ring on the top of the bottom rail & bolted >through and have also supported the bottom attachment with other than just >the 3/16 bolts through the bottom rail. I think you have to make a "risk >assessment" and then make a choice of how best to do it in that situation. > ------------------------------ From: "Jack Morones" Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 12:04:46 -0800 Organization: Saddleback College Message-ID: <000401c4f8e1$f69a1680$6500a8c0 [at] SCJACKLT> In-Reply-To: I hear you on eye screws. It took some work to get my shop from buying whatever was at the local hardware store and calling it rigging gear. I spent many an hour throwing out aluminum sleeves, quick links, dog clips and the like. I am also interested in what the list has to say about attaching Hollywood flats at the bottom of each stile instead of the bottom rail. Jack R. Morones Production Manager McKinney Theatre -----Original Message----- From: Stagecraft [mailto:stagecraft [at] theatrical.net] On Behalf Of Delbert Hall Sent: Wednesday, January 12, 2005 11:51 AM To: Stagecraft Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see --------------------------------------------------- I agree with Steve about screw eye (and everything else in his post). Screw eyes are great for a screen door latches, but they are not rigging hardware. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) >Aside from the rest of the conversation, I teach that screw eyes are >not rigging hardware. It might be acceptable on a very, very light and >small prop but even then I would prefer another attachment. I would >rather trust the turn buckle than the screw eye. > >Now that that is off of my chest, I have rigged Hollywoods just as >originally described with a D-ring on the top of the bottom rail & >bolted through and have also supported the bottom attachment with other >than just the 3/16 bolts through the bottom rail. I think you have to >make a "risk assessment" and then make a choice of how best to do it in >that situation. > ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:31:31 -0500 > I spent many an hour throwing out aluminum sleeves, quick links, dog > clips > and the like. What is wrong with aluminum sleeves (I am assuming nicopress sleeves) and quicklinks (unless they are unrated chinese steel)? > I am also interested in what the list has to say about attaching > Hollywood flats at the bottom of each stile instead of the bottom rail. Me too! Especially if you use are bolting through the next flat for junction. Would you use three or four cables to hang 2 adjacent 4x12 hollywood style flats? Greg Bierly Technical Director Hempfield HS ------------------------------ Message-ID: <41E58F5A.4070909 [at] JosephCHansen.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:58:02 -0500 From: Barney Simon Subject: Re: Scrim Scallops (Hour Glassing) References:

In-Reply-To: zhamm [at] email.unc.edu wrote: > a product called textilene... I think some other companied probably > have it as well. Yes, others of us do carry it. Barney Simon J C Hansen Co. Drapes Drops and Dance Floors ------------------------------ Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:05:53 -0500 Message-ID: <6E497ADB607656479C24E6D7BF6B505A0196C68E [at] exchange.rmwc.edu> From: "Paul Schreiner" > I hear you on eye screws. =20 By way of clarification...when I mentioned eye screws, I did include the note that it was for very lightweight things. What I failed to include was a note to the effect that I never, when using such beasties, use anything other than the forged ones with a whole "eye". In that sort of scenario, the only practical risk of failure is in the screw portion pulling out of the stock, rather than a failure of the eye itself. I would never recommend the cheapie malleable ones for anything...hell, I don't even use them at home! :) > I am also interested in what the list has to say about=20 > attaching Hollywood flats at the bottom of each stile instead=20 > of the bottom rail. I know, logically, that if you rig it this way that the only thing in tension (on the flat itself) is the bottom rail; and that the only thing pulling on it is its own weight. But it isn't something I do, just because it doesn't feel right in my gut, y'know? I figure that the rail is there for a reason, and the flat is constructed with the rail supporting the sides, so I lift from the rail. ------------------------------ Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References:

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 16:47:28 -0500 From: "richard j. archer" Subject: Re: USITT List members, Anybody know what parking costs in Toronto , say at the Convention Center, if I'm not staying at one of the convention hotels? thinking about it now before students arrive back from break. Thanks Dick A TD, Cornell U ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:45:24 -0500 >What is wrong with aluminum sleeves (I am assuming nicopress sleeves) and >quicklinks (unless they are unrated chinese steel)? Aluminum sleeves work well in situations where there can be no signficant shockloads on the cable. Aluminum breaks under repeated shockloading much sooner than copper or steel. For performer rigging, I always use copper sleeves. Some quicklinks (aka rapidlinks) are load rated, but most are not, so most people just rule them out totally for overhead lifting. This is probably a good practice unless you know that your quicklinks are load rated. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) >From: Greg Bierly >Reply-To: "Stagecraft" >To: "Stagecraft" >Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats >Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:31:31 -0500 > >For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see >--------------------------------------------------- > >>I spent many an hour throwing out aluminum sleeves, quick links, dog clips >>and the like. > >What is wrong with aluminum sleeves (I am assuming nicopress sleeves) and >quicklinks (unless they are unrated chinese steel)? > > >>I am also interested in what the list has to say about attaching >>Hollywood flats at the bottom of each stile instead of the bottom rail. > > >Me too! Especially if you use are bolting through the next flat for >junction. Would you use three or four cables to hang 2 adjacent 4x12 >hollywood style flats? > > > >Greg Bierly >Technical Director >Hempfield HS > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050112233029.16630.qmail [at] web81701.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:30:29 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Heinicke Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats In-Reply-To: --- Delbert Hall wrote: > Some quicklinks (aka rapidlinks) are load rated, but > most are not, so most > people just rule them out totally for overhead > lifting. This is probably a > good practice unless you know that your quicklinks > are load rated. That is why I try to only keep ones around that have a rating stamped on them, much like a good shackle does. If they have that rating, I trust them as much as I do any other rated rigging hardware. Mike H ------------------------------ From: "Jonathan S. Deull" Subject: RE: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 18:39:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ..... That is why I try to only keep ones around that have a rating stamped on them, much like a good shackle does. If they have that rating, I trust them as much as I do any other rated rigging hardware. Mike H I was taught to beware hardware -- even if stamped with a load rating -- from unknown manufacturers. There are lots of bulk items produced in China and elsewhere with "ratings" on them but who knows the quality control or consistency from batch to batch. Jonathan Deull Edmund Burke School ------------------------------ Message-ID: <20050112234452.9220.qmail [at] web81709.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:44:52 -0800 (PST) From: Michael Heinicke Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats In-Reply-To: --- "Jonathan S. Deull" wrote: > I was taught to beware hardware -- even if stamped > with a load rating -- > from unknown manufacturers. There are lots of bulk > items produced in China > and elsewhere with "ratings" on them but who knows > the quality control or > consistency from batch to batch. I follow much the same advice. If I am not sure of the manufacturer, I assume the rating to be the breaking strength. Even if it is stamped as WLL. At that point I use the hardware in the appropriate fashion with the appropriate safety factors. Mike H ------------------------------ In-Reply-To: References: Message-Id: <909D0B3D-64F8-11D9-9292-000D936BFA94 [at] dejazzd.com> From: Greg Bierly Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:17:52 -0500 > Some quicklinks (aka rapidlinks) are load rated, but most are not, so > most people just rule them out totally for overhead lifting. This is > probably a good practice unless you know that your quicklinks are load > rated. I hope Uncle Bill will stand under the ones he sold me ;-) Thanks for the aluminum sleeve clarification. I won't fly people... period... at least till I get to you workshop Delbert. ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: Re: Rigging "hollywood" flats Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 19:53:26 -0500 You may or may not know that one common use for rated quicklinks is in skydiving, so skydiving equipment vendors are a good place to find rated quicklinks. Some high end sailing equipment vendors also sell stainless steel quicklinks that are load rated. There are certainly other vendors who sell rated quicklinks, but the ones sold in most hardware stores and industrial suppliers (like McMaster-Carr) are not rated for overhead lifting. Dispite this fact, quicklinks get used for many rigging applications. Even equipment manufactures don't always follow the guidelines set by other manufacturers whose components they use. For example: wire rope manufactures recommend that the D:d ratio of a sheave be a minimum of 25:1 for 7x19 GAC. They also state that a D:d ratio of less than 16:1 will in a cable life that is relatively low. This not only reduces the life of the cable, but also decreases its strenght efficiency to 86% of that stated by the manufacturer. I saw a new cable hoist in a store on Monday where the D:d ratio on sheave was approximately 10. Of course the manufacturers of the hoist did state that the hoist was not to used for overhead lifting (etc) - so they did cover their asses. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) ------------------------------ Message-ID: <1105579377.41e5cd710e6f6 [at] mail.cumberlandcollege.edu> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:22:57 -0500 From: mconn [at] cumberlandcollege.edu Subject: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! Hello Listers, Have just finnished pulling all of my dimmers (25) from my rack which has just had multiple gallons of water poured through them when the HVAC system just, well, took a major whizzzz. It soaked my sound rack too! I currently have a couple of students blowing water outof them with the compressor. Beyond that and calling insurance folk, anyone have any words of wisdom? The system was on and running when this happend. Several fault lights were lit. SIGH!! I won't put anything back until Monday more than likely. Oh and just outta luck today was our first day back from Christmas Break. Whata way to start the semester!!! Moe Maurice "Moe" Conn Designer/Technical Director Kohn Theatre Cumberland College 606-539-4520 mconn [at] cumberlandcollege.edu Thank You Everyone for Supporting the Long Beach Long Riders efforts to Raise money for Broadway Cares/Equity Fights Aids. Check Out: www.sapsis-rigging.com/LBLR.html ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:45:06 -0500 Subject: Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! From: Herrick Goldman Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Hey Moe! Before Babbie can get a hold of ya you better correct your spelling. I believe in Pirate-ese it's spelled "Thar" as in "Thar be water in me Dimmer rax" Bummer dude. It could be worse it could have leaked onto your soft goods and caused your line-sets to run. Let us know how Monday works out. _herrick Herrick Goldman Lighting Designer, NYC www.HGLightingDesign.com "To the scores of silent alchemists who wreak their joy in darkness and in light bringing magic to life, we bow most humbly. "-CDS ------------------------------ Message-Id: <6.2.0.14.2.20050112204317.02a6b550 [at] mail.hstech.org> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 20:50:27 -0500 From: "Scott C. Parker" Subject: Angle iron In-Reply-To: References:

Greetings All, I'm working on a set of specifications for a steel project. I have a piece of 1/4"angle iron that has one leg at 1 1/2 inches and the other leg at 3 1/4 inches. My steel supplier claims that angle iron doesn't come in this size. He insists that it is either from a custom order, or it was 3 1/4 x 3 1/4 with one leg sheared down to 1 1/4". Does anyone have a chart, or a steel supplier that can support my claim? I would, of course, go to where I found this piece but that was the scrap bin. Thanks, Scott Scott C. Parker Production Designer/Technical Director High School Tech Production Web Site hstech~AT~hstech.org High Schoolers: come visit the HS Tech Web Site... http://www.hstech.org Our Mission: To assist High School Technical Theater students in their desire to learn about, create, and execute theatrical productions. ------------------------------ Message-ID: In-Reply-To: From: "Delbert Hall" Subject: RE: Angle iron Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 21:09:43 -0500 Scott, I think your steel supplier is correct. I checked my Central Steel and Wire Co. catalog and the closest thing I could find to what you have is 3.5" x 2.5" x .25". Maybe someone else has other information for you. -Delbert Delbert L. Hall 423-773-HALL (4255) > >I'm working on a set of specifications for a steel project. I have a piece >of 1/4"angle iron that has one leg at 1 1/2 inches and the other leg at 3 >1/4 inches. My steel supplier claims that angle iron doesn't come in this >size. He insists that it is either from a custom order, or it was 3 1/4 x 3 >1/4 with one leg sheared down to 1 1/4". > >Does anyone have a chart, or a steel supplier that can support my claim? I >would, of course, go to where I found this piece but that was the scrap >bin. > >Thanks, >Scott > > > > Scott C. Parker > Production Designer/Technical Director > High School Tech Production Web Site > hstech~AT~hstech.org > >High Schoolers: come visit the HS Tech Web Site... http://www.hstech.org > >Our Mission: To assist High School Technical Theater students in their >desire to learn about, create, and execute theatrical productions. > ------------------------------ Message-ID: <41E5E851.2040807 [at] fuse.net> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:17:37 -0500 From: Stuart Wheaton Subject: Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! References: In-Reply-To: mconn [at] cumberlandcollege.edu wrote: > Hello Listers, > > Have just finnished pulling all of my dimmers (25) from my rack which has just > had multiple gallons of water poured through them when the HVAC system just, > well, took a major whizzzz. It soaked my sound rack too! If the water was clean, you might be better off than you think...If it was dirty, rusty, etc... you might be best off rinsing the stuff with clean water. Water doesn't hurt the stuff half as much as all the crud that was dissolved in the water will. Put it all under some pars to dry nice and thoroughly. Power cubes will fail if shorted while on, so be prepared for a few of those, anything that gets hot, or is bolted to a heat sink might have been thermally shocked by the water. I'd try to get the insurer to total it because you never know if it will be a source of recurring corrosion and stressed component related failures for the next 20 years. Be glad you were there and it didn't happen the first day of break! Good luck! Stuart ------------------------------ Message-ID: <01fa01c4f91f$ae263b20$0400a8c0 [at] ALFOFFICE> Reply-To: "Alf Sauve" From: "Alf Sauve" References: Subject: Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! Thar be water in me Dimmer Rax!!! Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:03:21 -0500 AARRrrrGGGHHhhh, of course, is the first letter in the pirate alphabet. Fortunately, in my main venue, the dedicated HVAC for the dimmer room is all beneath the floor. One 3'x3' metal grate in one corner for supply and one in the other corner for return. Only problem is we loose small objects down the grates. Since the room also is used for sound storage, there's a fortune in connectors, maybe even a few microphones down there. Reminds me of one of my computer stories. [Oh no. Here he goes again with his war stories.] An HVAC unit was dripping on the top of a major mainframe unit. So the brilliant operators put one of those 5 gallon size office trash cans on top of the mainframe to catch the water. Nobody ever bothered to empty it. So rather than an occasional drip which really wasn't doing much harm, the can filled with water at about the same time the plastic grate on top of the cabinet reached it's weight limit. Amazing how that worked out almost exactly, the plastic top could hold 39.9999 pounds. Talk about the drip that broke the computer's back. Alf ------------------------------ Message-ID: <45c56d34050112200850af2afc [at] mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2005 23:08:00 -0500 From: Jared Fortney Reply-To: Jared Fortney Subject: Re: Angle iron In-Reply-To: References:

Scott, I also didn't find your specified angle in the American Metal Supply reference. Does your sample show the standard production features of angle, i.e the rounded and tapered edges on both legs and a fillet at the inside junction of the legs? Is it possible that it could be cut down tee? Just my initial thoughts... -Jared Fortney UC-CCM ------------------------------ Message-ID: <41E60D14.C5458BFC [at] cybercom.net> Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2005 00:54:28 -0500 From: Dale Farmer Subject: Re: AARRrrrrGGGHHhhh!!! There be water in me Dimmer Rack!!! References: mconn [at] cumberlandcollege.edu wrote: > For info, archives & UNSUBSCRIBE, see > --------------------------------------------------- > > Hello Listers, > > Have just finnished pulling all of my dimmers (25) from my rack which has just > had multiple gallons of water poured through them when the HVAC system just, > well, took a major whizzzz. It soaked my sound rack too! > > I currently have a couple of students blowing water outof them with the > compressor. Beyond that and calling insurance folk, anyone have any words of > wisdom? The system was on and running when this happend. Several fault > lights were lit. SIGH!! I won't put anything back until Monday more than > likely. > > Oh and just outta luck today was our first day back from Christmas Break. > Whata way to start the semester!!! Quick, quick quick, while they are still wet, rinse well with distilled or deionized water. ( Available at walmart by the gallon. ) The AC system water probably had all kinds of possibly corrosive and or conductive contaminants in it. What spilled on it? Condensate water ( relatively pure, except for dust/grime/mold ) or chilled water loop water? ( Relatively clean, but usually has various treatment chemicals and dyes in it. ) Then blow dry with *low* pressure air. ( High pressure air jets on components can screw up mechanical connections and break fine jumper wires. ) --Dale ------------------------------ End of Stagecraft Digest #258 *****************************