Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Mike Reilly]

Close enough. The scenario you described above is for the inspections. In addition to that there are the persons I described even further above. They are freelancers, so there might be instances like "this guy is calling it, let's fire him and get the next one on site." But the person is responsible for calling or approving it.
I have a hard time finding english words for "Veranstaltungsmeister", which is the job name and education required.

Christian & gordonmacgregor,

Thanks for the replies.  Both of you seem to feel that European standards & safety have improved over the last few years, and I'd be very interested in any thoughts you (or other European members here) have about how and why they've improved.

Doing some google-searching-&-translating, "Veranstaltungsmeister" seems to be "Master of Stage Technology" - ("master" in the sense of "Master Carpenter" or "Master Stonemason") - which is a position that I don't think we really have here in the U.S.  Possibly there's something roughly equivalent through the union, if any IATSE members here want to chime in.

[gordonmcgregor]

Christian & gordonmacgregor,

Thanks for the replies.  Both of you seem to feel that European standards & safety have improved over the last few years, and I'd be very interested in any thoughts you (or other European members here) have about how and why they've improved.

Mike accidents still happen over here however they tend to be in the setup phase and often are caused IMO by other trades rather than the actual stage builsders, ie crane operators not understanding directions etc.

Not every event gets inspected especially back yard  events however because any real money making ones do get inspected your gear will meet those standards and as the standards have been around for long enough most pro companies work to those standards as that is the way it's done.

In Glasgow where I live the local council want to know about anything that is higher than 2 ft so you should be submitting plans and the building to those plans. When the inspector comes out he/she  will be looking to see if the plans have been followed and most of the ones I've met will know enough to decide whether to approve, ask questions or shut you down, sometimes the local electric inspector will turn up and check earth impedance, condition of cables etc as well. If your licence for the event requires a noise ordinance then there'll be one of these guys around as well.
What all this ends up with is people doing stuff a lot more correctly and equipment being designed to fit the standards so that it's harder to do it wrong, hence the prevelance of trailer stages and the "orbit" style stage systems in the UK. Yes all this inspection activity costs money but IMO its probably worth it in the long run G

[robert davis]

i am an entertainment industry rigger and i have some experience with outdoor roofs, so i thought i might mention a couple of things regarding the construction of this type of stage roof structure, in case i can clarify what appears to be some confusion regarding materials.

note that i was not there, so my assertion of the type of system is based on photographs of the site, and what witnesses have stated.  my description is based on hands on experience in constructing and operating every aspect of the system several times in the late eighties, throughout the nineties, and into the early years of this century (before i wised up and went the lazy, indoor rigging only route).  omissions and utter falsehoods in my description are a function of my memory being shot and my mind being generally pretty porous.   

this is a layher/total scaffolding system with what is known as a hercules roof.

the screwjacks (bases), scaffolding standards (vertical members), ledgers and plan braces (horizontal members), and diags (diagonals) are steel.  the i beams from which audio is suspended can be either steel or aluminum, and often both materials are used in the same system.  the transoms which support the i beams and the deck, and the ladder transoms which support the headblocks are also steel.  the headblocks which the roof hangs from are typically made from paired, outwardly facing aluminum c channels, with steel sheaves (pulley wheels) mounted between.  the roof is made of aluminum up/downstage and cross stage latticed trusses, made essentially rigid with aluminum snap braces stiffening in all three planes throughout.  the roof is suspended with bridles of polyester covered roundslings of either polyester or aircraft cable core, and these are shackled to a wire rope pick cable run up and over the sheaves of the headblock, then shackled to a clew plate which in turn is shackled to a pair of chain motors (typically rated at two metric tons each), which are stoutly rigged to a steel beam anchorage arranged with the weight of the towers sitting on "cups" welded at the ends of the beams.  each of these suspension arrangements is set up in a part of the tower referred to as a "pick bay", and there is a pick bay at or near each corner of the roof, as well as additional pick bays toward midstage, if the size and weight of the roof and/or anticipated production weight mandates it.  in most cases, the roof, once raised to its show trim, is "deaded" off to the towers, providing some redundancy for the load on the chain motors.  the production rig's chain motors are either hung after the roof is raised and deaded off, or hung with roof not yet trimmed, but either way the roof is rarely raised to show trim with full production weight on it.

there- simple, right?  eesh...

there is nothing intrinsically wrong with this stage roof system, nor with steel or aluminum for stage roof system construction, as the materials are selected for their characteristics, and subsequently specified at gauges, weights, and metallurgic composition appropriate to their anticipated loading.  looking at photographs of this roof taken after its failure supports this- the head blocks were still in one piece (though the down left headblock had clearly been torn from its moorings), and the towers were still standing with audio and video suspended.  in fact, it is amazing how much "give" the tops of the upstage pick bays allowed, ostensibly preventing the whole roof from crashing flat onto the stage (i am assuming that the roof was not resting on the remains of the upstage video elements, because the slings at the four upstage picks were still under load, and video just ain't that substantial- heh heh, take that, video!).

in the case of this roof collapse, there were three pick bays per side, one downstage, one upstage, and the third upstage of mid. outwardly this appears to be a case of either an underrated rig weight, an overrated roof capacity, or a combination of the two.  the other possibilities are myriad, including any number of potential hardware failure points.  it appears that after the downstage left failure, seemingly somewhere in the "chain" of suspension components between roof and anchorage, all redundancy in carrying capacity of the roof was sucked out of the equation, and gravity was left to seek equilibrium.  lack of redundancy after one critical failure point in the system is the only real overarching indictment that can be made of the design of the system.  this particular stage and roof might have had flawed hardware, so until the forensic analysis is completed and the accident report is released, most of us won't really know what went wrong (some would contend that we still might not know after the report is released). 

i keep hearing opposing stories about the "engineer", or "engineers", and some of these stories likely have merit, but i have not yet seen anything vetted as gospel.

i flamed one blogger for immediately blaming live nation, and supporting his indictment with erroneous information, but who knows, maybe he's right (man, i hates me some live nation!).

all i know for sure is AUDIO WASN'T THE CULPRIT.

[Christian Tepfer]

Christian & gordonmacgregor,

Thanks for the replies.  Both of you seem to feel that European standards & safety have improved over the last few years, and I'd be very interested in any thoughts you (or other European members here) have about how and why they've improved.

Doing some google-searching-&-translating, "Veranstaltungsmeister" seems to be "Master of Stage Technology" - ("master" in the sense of "Master Carpenter" or "Master Stonemason") - which is a position that I don't think we really have here in the U.S.  Possibly there's something roughly equivalent through the union, if any IATSE members here want to chime in.

Mike,

I have the feeling that we are in a process of transformation from a rock'n'roll, sort of outsider industry into an industry that is regulated like residential building and others. And that this process just begun.

I might not like all aspects of this transformation but all things considered it's the right way to go imho. Stages get bigger, productions in general get bigger, faster. Plus there's some financial "optimizing" going on, so it's a lot of pressure. As I said before, the only way to keep safety up under these conditions is regulation, because without it crew members would rarely blow the whistle, as this usually means "you're fired", plus other potential clients usually don't like whistle-blowers.

Some productions had to raise their budget due to the new laws. (more setup time, different rigging, etc.) Still there's always some risk of minor and major accidents but it is reduced.

On the other hand, when it comes to real big events, there's the chance of an approval in spite of security concerns because politicians want the event. Basically out of an event approval like this we had the big Love Parade disaster, where crowd control failed completely and 21 people were killed, several hundred injured and I think tens or hundreds of thousands traumatized. Very sad story and absolutely avoidable.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/disaster-plan-love-parade-documents-reveal-a-series-of-errors-a-710834.html

So, even with regulation there's room for error or sacrificing security for profits. There wasn't even a PA for emergency announcements in the tunnel.

Now we are discussing cross-approvals, like a big event in one city has to be approved by the authorities of another, unrelated, city.

[James Feenstra]

In Glasgow where I live the local council want to know about anything that is higher than 2 ft so you should be submitting plans and the building to those plans. When the inspector comes out he/she  will be looking to see if the plans have been followed and most of the ones I've met will know enough to decide whether to approve, ask questions or shut you down, sometimes the local electric inspector will turn up and check earth impedance, condition of cables etc as well. If your licence for the event requires a noise ordinance then there'll be one of these guys around as well.
What all this ends up with is people doing stuff a lot more correctly and equipment being designed to fit the standards so that it's harder to do it wrong, hence the prevelance of trailer stages and the "orbit" style stage systems in the UK. Yes all this inspection activity costs money but IMO its probably worth it in the long run G

Canada is much the same in regards to electrical inspectors and noise. As far as building temporary structures, I know there are permits involved, but not certain of inspection regulations as I've never seen an inspector actually show up at a gig.

Ministry of labor and the ESA (electrical safety authority), however, do make frequent visits to larger shows, especially in Toronto, to make sure everything is being done safely.

[Mac Kerr]

i am an entertainment industry rigger

Please go to your profile and change the "Name" field to your real first and last name as required by the posting rules clearly displayed in the header at the top of the section, and in the Site Rules and Suggestions in the Forum Announcements section, and on the registration page when you registered.

Mac

[robert davis]

Please go to your profile and change the "Name" field to your real first and last name as required by the posting rules clearly displayed in the header at the top of the section, and in the Site Rules and Suggestions in the Forum Announcements section, and on the registration page when you registered.

Mac

copy that...

[robert davis]

Mike,

I have the feeling that we are in a process of transformation from a rock'n'roll, sort of outsider industry into an industry that is regulated like residential building and others. And that this process just begun.

christian,

i must agree with your prescience and assertion that this ultimately is the right way to go.  the details of regulation and oversight will have to be worked out, but as i was fond of stating twenty years ago as osha was rearing its regulatory head with eyes on entertainment rigging practices in america, the industry should engage the formative process now, rather than wait to be hamstrung later.

occupational safety regulation has proven invasive, though not pervasive in mandating fall protection measures, and limiting modes of operation in erecting these structures, and performing work therein for production purposes.

the weird otherworld in which we yet maintain a mysterious self discipline (for better or for worse) is in the integrity of the constructs we erect, and also the soundness of the temporary systems in conjunction with the permanent venues in which we emplace them.

by all measures of necessity, the construction design, materials, and structural integrity of high end concert productions merit consideration tantamount to that of any permanent structure.  because of the temporary nature of much of what we do, concessions to established regulatory framework for construction industry standards will certainly be necessary.

the point is, while we (in the american entertainment rigging industry) have been subject to some degree of labor safety scrutiny, the entertainment rigging industry as a whole has been relied upon to self police its structural soundness, which it has largely done with efficacy.  if failures in temporary staging systems are our weakness as an industry, then it is time for regulatory oversight to mandate that which we have not been capable of- structural integrity in the face of all reasonable contingencies.

i do not fancy regulation, nor am i likely to embrace it when it approaches me, but in the broader perspective, certain profiteers in our industry, and unfortunately complicit parties in our trade, have seen to it that this must be.

ignorant promoters, cavalier designers, manipulative riggers, and capitulatory engineers should not be allowed to steer our industry into the ground.  i'll take some degree of regulatory oversight before i'll have another day of that.

[Larry Sheehan]

Just to put a finer point on it, I was at the ballgame and my friend who owns a stage, was emphatic that it was not a stage,  but a roof that collapsed.

He's feeling some repercussions of the press referring to these incidents as stage failures. Has had customers wanting to know how he will prevent his stage from collapsing.

[Chris Johnson [UK]]

Christian & gordonmacgregor,

Thanks for the replies.  Both of you seem to feel that European standards & safety have improved over the last few years, and I'd be very interested in any thoughts you (or other European members here) have about how and why they've improved.

I thought i'd chime in as someone who is based in the UK, and is involved with large scale outdoor events throughout the world, but particularly in Europe.

I will preface my comments with the following disclaimer: I am not a rigger, I am a sound engineer. I have however had rigging experience and training, and obviously rig loads (loudspeakers mainly) as part of my job. While i have never installed a stage/tower/roof product like the ones being discussed here, and do not have the further training or experience to happily do so, i certainly have an above average grasp of the principles involved, and also work closely with many talented riggers who are experts in this field.

In the UK particularly, Health and safety is a big deal. Almost annoyingly so in some situations. However this does lead to increased levels of safety, even if it also brings with it increased levels of annoyance! Statistically, we have the lowest number of workplace deaths per capita in the EU (accross all industries). This is 4 times lower than the US average.

With the recent spate of rigging incidents worldwide, events have come under much greater scrutiny. I recently came back from Coldplay's EU stadium tour, on which we had regular inspections. Some of these were government mandated, some of these were insurance stipulations, but their were regular spot checks. The most stringent were the italians, who insisted on putting safeties on the PA, even though we had 1300kg of PA with 4000kg of lift on 3 motors that were all double braked! And they bypassed each motor individually! In my opinion this actually posed greater risk by removing the option of lowering the PA in high winds without exposing riggers to great risk by having to climb etc... but i digress...

Increasingly the HSE (Health and Safety Executive, our equivalent of OHSA) wants to treat our work like it does the construction industry, which within reason, i think is a good move in the right direction.

We also have an impending move to a mandated national rigging accreditation scheme which is in the process of being developed that may require all riggers to have a particular level of formal certification.

[ProSoundWeb Community]