In these two photos from Mint, you can clearly see what in my opinion are water intake filters (as someone has already mentioned) that will be installed on the horizontal canisters that you see near the base of each nozzle. You can see them resting temporarily on top of the nozzles. This, at least to me, confirms that some/many of the water jets will use bay water.
From mint's blog: http://mintcrocodile.blogspot.com/
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1,001 to 1,010 of 2489
Thread: World of Color
08-26-2009 02:20 AM #1001
08-26-2009 02:38 AM #1002
08-26-2009 06:44 AM #1003
Now 100% agreed that Mint's photos show strainers, placed temporarily atop the nozzles, and some sort of electrical units, possibly pumps. The cylindrical metal units already mounted beside the nozzles are likely the pumps, in two (unassembled) parts possibly. As to what the square devices in the boxes might be, I'm lost, unless THEY are the pumps. The silver cylinders themselves are not valves; the valves have a cable leading in, and sit at an angle on a brass or bronze Y fitting. I also see stacks of boxes, long and narrow - maybe these are the pumps, and the square boxed units are controllers or actuators?
Interesting diagram, Simba. First off, taking the route based on normal fountain tech: front projection on water does not work. Period.
...thing is, what Disney is doing here is so different. Their resolution is incredibly high, and it seems to be the work of the projectors, despite the fact that normally, waterscreen projection is low-res no matter the res of the projector, simply because the screen is a thick sheet of mist. So for all I know, you're right, and they've found a way to make front projection work. If they HAVE, if the rear screen is bright enough and the front dimmer, you won't see anything from the front. What with those disappearing towers, now that I think about it, Simba...this is a really good suggestion, and one I hadn't considered. What else would be on those towers besides speakers? (The scale model shows speaker arrays on the disappearing towers).
The ten or twelve tanks surrounding the center are indeed visibly for compressed air, but they're probably not nozzles in and of themselves unless there are only that many Blow Pops - which could still be the case. WET SuperShooters are tall and fairly thin, with a bullet-shaped top. Here, we needn't worry about how they're getting above water - the nozzle tips will break the surface. Since the entire rig doesn't rise at Bellagio (it can, but only does so for repairs) the Shooters have small hat-like tops which raise into position to keep the space between nozzle and surface clear.
Was anyone present for the Blow Pop testing? If so, did you get a clear look at the nozzle, and see what it looked like, what size, and whether it was mounted onto, or poking up through, the platform? And were those in that group allowed on-platform?
Any other observations, Simba? Anyone?
Edit: No. I'm wrong. I see the cylinders are both compressed air input AND water pump input.
Also... Grids and Chasers being connected to pumps means they could be used, with pumps but not compressed air, as low-shooting standard jets as well. All the Grids running like this at once would turn the entire platform into a sea of low-height water jets.
Notice the clear separation of cables in the trays. Cables can create magnetic fields which can and will interfere with each other.
08-26-2009 08:50 PM #1004
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
- under the sea
I looked at the blowpop video and it appears that the silver tanks are the blowpops, nozzle and all. I ask some friends who where there that morning and they confirmed.
08-27-2009 02:07 AM #1005
As for projection not working from the front of water, the counter evidence to that is the Davy Jones effect inside of Pirates of the Caribbean (with a big difference, however - see next paragraph). If you look backwards at the effect, it appears nearly as clear as it does from the back side (facing forward as you approach the effect). So this proves that, at least when dealing with a fine mist, front projection works rather well.
Now, there's a huge difference however, as the "dropping" mist screen used for Davy Jones consists of such fine particles - essentially fog - that would never work for a mist screen that sprays upwards like I presume WoC will do.
I think the basic idea is that the more aerated the water is, the more opaque it becomes, and therefore the better front projection will work. If they have some kind of new technology in mist screens that creates a very "white" aerated water, I could see front projections being more feasible, if not the perfect solution. But considering it would only be used for this theorized secondary mist screen, perhaps resolution and image quality aren't of the utmost importance, and front projection would turn out to suffice.
ETA: Disney is probably going to use something similar to these mist screens (much larger than the Fantasmic ones, at least it seems so). "At the basis is a water screen, which consists of a shining wall of water up to 25m high and 50m across." http://www.arcstreamav.com/multimedia-spectaculars/
08-27-2009 02:27 AM #1006
The case where you might want separation, however, is inbetween high voltage (electricity bearing) and low voltage (signal bearing) cables. In other words, you wouldn't likely place a cable bearing a high voltage/amperage next to a cable that sends the computer programmed data to the water jets, LEDs, etc.
As seen in this picture (thanks again Mint), my guess would be the big cables (right side tray) are for power, and the smaller cables (left side tray) are the data/signal cables, most likely for the LEDs and/or projectors. They've placed some of the electrical cables in bundles, but separated each of the bundles a bit, most likely for heat dissipation and maintenance convenience, if I had to guess. The data cables are bunched without separation as the signal levels are way too low to interfere with each other.
I was an electrical engineering major in college for two years, but it's been a long time, so who knows how jumbled all that information has become.
08-27-2009 02:39 AM #1007
I just noticed that in another of Mint's pictures you can see the filters in place:
There's something very interesting going on there, too, if you look closely. It appears as though the water jets without the "bullet top" (copper color tube nozzle) have the water filters and perhaps air compressors (?) attached to them, while the bullet top water jets do not have the filters or compressors at their base, but rather a hose that's feeding them. This could mean, as you pointed out Jonas, that the blowpops (bullet tops) are powered by a centralized system, while the smaller (non-bullet tops) are self-contained units.
This is all just speculation on my part.
08-27-2009 08:22 AM #1008
The bullet-tops are Chasers, not Blow Pops. They do have hoses - anywhere from three to (in most cases) five are connected in groups to large pumps, one of which is shown front-and-center in that last photo with a block of wood temporarily supporting the near end. The brass or bronze tipped jets are Grid nozzles, forming an even grid over the entire platform on eight-foot centers, each having its own pump, to which these filters (placed temporarily atop the nozzle tips) are being attached. As far as I can see, both types have two valves at the base: one opens the pump to the nozzle; the other may be for compressed air or, if these are not air-powered, vents pressure instead back into the pool, horizontally, when the pump is running and the nozzle isn't. These are extremely fast-acting.
The air tanks for the Blow Pops surround the central circle, and are visible in many of Darkbeer's photos under white tarps. Bucky has given confirmation that these ten tanks ARE the Blow Pops. If so, this definitely shows WET isn't involved - WET's SuperShooter goes 125' or so, and all Shooters are narrow cylinders with no bulbous tank.
Perhaps I'm wrong about the cables. My information about trouble between cables came from a contact at Waltzing Waters, who tells me that cable runs longer than a certain amount have proven troublesome for them for this reason. In their shows, the control system (shows are programmed on CDs, which contain music as well as pump, light and motor commands) interfaces with a cabinet full of relays, and cables run from this cabinet out to the show. So, data cables, no. Power...possibly? Supposedly, WET had unforseen issues with this at Bellagio as well, which required changes in either the type of cable used or the way it was run, but I have no confirmation.
And yes, a cloud of fog will take front projection well. Water generally doesn't - even the third type of projection surface, which is a rain curtain falling downward (Aquatique Show International, out of France, does some extremely large-scale outdoor rain curtains for this purpose, set up with massive trusses). Doesn't mean Disney hasn't solved this issue. I may have just solved it myself...
Look at the layout shown in Part 1 of the Blue Sky Cellar footage. Pause the video and examine it. I just did... Four of the disappearing light towers at the viewing area have notes beside them, same as the six projector spots at the back. I couldn't have spotted that, and had it make sense, without your drawing and idea, Simba - I think you're right. There may very well be front projection. If they've solved that issue, Bravo to Disney.
I would have loved to see a WET show here. I would have loved to see Liquid Fireworks. Yet, I'm excited to see Disney doing their own. Waltzing Waters boasts that its shows do not need video, water screens, lasers; the Liquid Fireworks is all the spectacle that's needed. And their displays are extremely easy to maintain. WET builds some really unique stuff, though it is pricey and takes a lot of maintenance. When well-maintained, as at Bellagio (where it's serviced daily) their displays look excellent. Here in Seattle, their 1990s rebuild of our International Fountain has issues constantly - the Seattle Center, almost always low on funds (I hesitate to say "broke" but it's true) does the fixes itself, and the grumpy fountain tech has told me that, as soon as he fixes something, it goes down again, like the fog machine or the SuperShooters.
In most cases, where a park has built its own show - look at Sentosa Island* - it really doesn't work very well. This, however, looks like it's going to be really amazing, in every sense. Hopefully, they have also made it relatively low-maintenance.
Warning: Off WoC topic below, but for those who are curious:
*Sentosa Island, theme park zone in Singapore. Gunter Przystawic, 2nd gen (Michael Przystawic, 3rd gen, runs the firm now) built a very large show for them. Used to siting shows in pools with well water, the cleaning chemicals ate the aluminum parts, such as the drive links for the waltz arrays. Sentosa, for various reasons, decided not to buy a new show, and built their own based loosely on what they had. Lighting in WW shows is arranged in odd and even groups, front and back separately, in three lengthwise segments. Any formation can be lit in any of five colors, plus mixes. Sentosa simply arranged the lights in a repeating R B G A W R B G A W across front and back, leaving some effects half-lit in one color, fully lit by another, or unlit by yet others. The variable-height (3 per effect) system was abandoned in favor of one large pump and very loud pneumatic valves, meaning the collective height dropped as more nozzles were turned on. The only reason lasers, fire and water screens were eventually added was because the rebuilt show was so lacklustre - embarassingly so, in fact. Its one saving grace was the eventual addition of a life actor on the stage in front of the pool interacting with a cartoon character presented on the mist screen.
08-28-2009 02:07 AM #1009
Cool, thanks for all that info and the clarification on the bullet nozzles
The issue with the long cable runs sounds like an issue of signal strength to me rather than outright interference from neighboring cables, although, as I said, if power cables are adjacent to data cables, especially ones with limited shielding, then there can be a problem.
Additionally, it highly depends on the type of data cables that are used. Many coaxial data cables (think of a standard audio cable that you'd use in a home theater) won't carry a signal nearly as far as, say, a cat-5 or cat-6 cable, for example, due to the cable architecture. This does have to do somewhat with cable noise - the cable architecture can have a significant impact on data integrity over long runs.
So I guess in a way you (and they) are correct, that it's interference over long cable runs can be an issue. I personally feel that it's more of a distance issue than a proximity to other cable issue, though I could be wrong. The only reason I say this is because a single, extended run of the "wrong" type of cable will pick up noise like you wouldn't believe - but from almost anything - and even if they are kept a reasonable distance away from noise inducing sources. Even household appliances that aren't particularly close to a weak-signal data cable can induce significant noise.
That's where cable architecture can comes in, with either noise rejecting construction and/or high-level shielding. An unshielded cable that works fine over a 10ft distance might be literally useless for long cable runs, and perhaps the instances you mention were cases of un-anticitpated noise due to such long cable runs.
The other way to take care of these issues is to have signal converters, where the weak signal is sent over long distances using a different transfer method (such as fiber optics, which aren't subject to EMF noise at all), and then convert the signal back into a form that LEDs, projectors, etc can use. These converters are not uncommon for long cable runs that require strict signal integrity.
As for the projection, I do think that front projection is feasible, but I still think it's clearly not the optimal way to project on water. Again, I don't know a ton about water-based screens, but it does seem like water with significant air introduced may be more suitable for front projection, which is why they may be able to pull of some smaller, less critical mist screens using front projection, while doing the huge main screen using rear projection.
Clearly they were (and probably still are, based on those large "boxes" in front of the viewing area) planning on building telescoping towers of some kind along the front of the WoC viewing area. These could very well just be lighting towers, although I would have thought most of the lighting for the show would be self-contained on the water jets themselves, as well as maybe some additional lighting on the platform. That's what lead me to believe they'd be using at least some kind of front projection with projectors on those telescoping towers.
I'll add my usual disclaimer that nobody take what I'm saying as any sort of knowledgible statement on anything, I'm just pretty much speculating in everything I say based on things I've learned or remembered, so please feel free to correct anything inaccurate!
08-28-2009 05:36 AM #1010
Simba, look at the scale model of the area. The towers near the front, which vanish into hatches when not in use, are shown in the mock-up as holding speakers. If all six of them do, and yet only four have notations beside them in the illustration shown in the video (AND these same notations are beside the six rear projector platforms) I think your guess is quite good. Just run with it, pretend you knew you were probably correct *grin*
Darkbeer added new photos. Nothing too detailed, but one on the 18th page shows the heat relief in use (a misting fan). I notice that the rear few feet of the platform has no nozzles - perhaps the mist screens will be mounted here? Unfortunately, no new detail shots, though I don't think that's all bad - not much appears to be new on the platform. Many of the Chasers on the long (Stinger) end of the platform are not yet connected to their pumps, some of which are in place but without hoses.
It'll be interesting to see how long they wait before installing the many other nozzles and the fog system. Or is the Mee Fog system out there already, and I'm simply not seeing it?
Anyone care to guess whether the Fun Wheel's lighting will be part of the show? It might be distracting, or it might be cool.
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By dlfreak in forum Announcements by DisneyReplies: 0Last Post: 01-21-2010, 02:15 PM
By dlfreak in forum Announcements by DisneyReplies: 0Last Post: 01-18-2010, 12:44 PM
By dlfreak in forum MI PictorialsReplies: 0Last Post: 01-11-2010, 07:22 PM
By dlfreak in forum DLR News and InfoReplies: 5Last Post: 07-15-2009, 03:56 PM
By DL Adventurer in forum Disneyland ResortReplies: 9Last Post: 07-07-2004, 09:51 AM