Exploding Soap Bubbles: A question of gasses.

  • Thread starter Thread starter noregsson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bubbles Soap
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on incorporating soap bubbles into a fire-dancing show, with an interest in using flammable, lighter-than-air gases to create an exciting visual effect. The main gases considered include methane, hydrogen, butane, and propane, with a preference for safety and availability. Methane appears to be a viable option, as it is accessible in Norway and is lighter than air. The conversation emphasizes the need for safety precautions and the importance of selecting the least volatile gas for audience safety. Overall, participants are seeking additional ideas and insights on suitable gases for their outdoor performances.
noregsson
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So we're considering adding some soap bubbles to a fire-dancing show.

Why? Because soap bubbles are awesome!

But you know what's even _more_ awesome?

That's right! EXPLODING SOAP BUBBLES!

OK, so we don't really want them to explode (well, _I_ do, but apparently democracy rules), but we're thinking flammable lighter than air gasses.

Question:
What would be our best bet? Methane, hydrogen, butane, propane, dynamite? Obviously, we'll want the safest, least volatile, commercially available alternative. And I have a feeling lighter than air is good, not just for the show, but considering the audience below us as well. Oh, and this is for outdoor shows only, in case you were wondering.

I figure there's bound to be someone here who knows more about this stuff than me - I don't think we discussed this much at uni (if we did I probably slept through that lecture) and the only experience I have with this stuff is old physics and chemistry teachers trying their hands at showmanship in high school - exploding balloons and all that jazz. Not much to go on.

I'm open for some discussion here, and feel free to post any and all warnings you can think of. Being a certified pyrotechnician doesn't mean I'm safety-smart. (If I was I'd still have eyebrows . . .)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hrmm. Have to looked to see which of those are lighter than air? I would guess that butane, methane, or something similar would be best, as they are readily available and not as dangerous as storing Hydrogen, but I don't know which ones are lighter than air off the top of my head.
 
Well yeah, methane and hydrogen are lighter than air. Dynamite is not. =(

I wasn't sure if methane was available to the public here in Norway, but it looks as if it is. Which is great, as that was what we were hoping to use.

Anyone have any other ideas for what can or can't be used? We'd love to get more ideas for things to try out.
 
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Back
Top