Rocketry Planet

SALT LAKE CITY, Utah USA — As the last day of the National Fire Protection Association's Technical Committee on Pyrotechnics meeting draws to a close, word coming from the event cites changes that will expand, not restrict, the available products from hobby rocketry's motor manufacturers.

This past Sunday saw the members of the Rocket Work Group come together for an advance day-long caucus of issues involving the hobby rocketry industry and NFPA 1125, the "Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors," guidelines that motor manufacturers use in the manufacture of hobby rocket motors.

Hobby rocketry motor making legends Gary Rosenfield of AeroTech and Anthony Cesaroni of CTI worked side-by-side at the Salt Lake NFPA meeting together with the other Rocket Work Group members to create industry-changing fire code.

According to sources, members of the Rocket Work Group were able to reach a general consensus that sets NAR's initial recommendation of restructuring 1125 and its treatment of G-class sparky motors aside.  Specifically, the recommendations to change the particle size threshold from 150 micron (100 mesh) to 74 micron (200 mesh) while eliminating the 80 Newton requirement of a model rocket motor were not as beneficial as the solutions that were worked out by the overall group. 

While the Rocket Work Group members were amenable to finding other criteria to limit the effects from sparky model rocket-sized motors, such as motor flame length, etc., the overall agreement was on the group's need to collaborate together with all of the committee members while defining and structuring better testing criteria that everyone could agree with.

One item that will be changed due to the group's recommended restructuring of 1125 is references to the 62.5 gram propellant weight limit, which the group agreed needed to be removed from the model rocket motor definition. While the 62.5 gram propellant weight limit will not specifically affect the classification of a model or high power rocket motor, the limit will come into play in restricting the purchase of model rocket motors with greater than 62.5 grams of propellant weight by those individuals under the age of 18, in line with the U.S. CPSC.

The 80 Newton/160 Newton-second language will stay in 1125's definition of a model rocket motor, with a change of the 62.5 gram propellant weight limit to a 125 gram (4.4 ounce) propellant upper weight limit, also referenced in the new FAA regulation as it applies to a Class 1 model rocket. This change also means the definition of a high power rocket motor would also be changed, raising the 62.5 gram propellant weight lower limit to 125 grams accordingly. Language will also be added specifies that model rocket motors are solid propellant only, removing any ambiguity about the existence of hybrid model rocket motors.

But the most obvious change will be the rewording of 1125 to specify that any motor that doesn't fit the definition of a model rocket motor shall automatically qualify it to be defined as a high power rocket motor. In doing this, the definition of a high power rocket motor will also be changed to remove the 80N/160Ns lower threshold.

This change will allow for the existence of sparky E or F motors joining the current sparky G motors down the road, all of which would automatically be classified as high power rocket motors, and comes with a requirement for any high power rocket motor of G-impulse or lower to have an "HP" prefix added to the motor's letter designation to eliminate consumer, vendor and RSO confusion, a requirement that will be stated on motor labeling and in accompanying instructions. Markings to add the words "high power rocket motor" and "for sale only to certified users 18 years of age or older" on all high power packaging will also become mandated in 1125.

Other items making the grade were adjustable delay testing standards, a somewhat new technology that hasn't been coded at the NFPA level before, and an increase in motor case operating temperatures for high power rocket motors, raised the specification from 200C to 220C. The 200C limit still applies to model rocket motors, since those are more likely to be built with thinner paper motor mount tubes. Also new, the labeled value of average thrust on certified motors must be within 20 percent, or 10 Newtons, whichever value is greater, of the motor's average thrust. Average thrust is determined by dividing the motor's total impulse by the propellant's burn time.

"The NFPA 1125 meeting at Salt Lake City went very well," said Patrick Miller, chairman of the Rocket Work Group. "I am very, very pleased with the hard work and professional interaction that has lead to a better document."

Miller went on to congratulate the committee members on their hard work, stating that the industry, manufacturers and users have been well served by their hard work.

Today concluded the event with presentation of the various recommendations to the full committee. The Rocket Work Group in attendance was made up of, alphabetically, Trip Barber, Anthony Cesaroni, Ted Cochran, Patrick Miller, Mary Roberts, Gary Rosenfield, Bill Stine and Darren Wright. Guests included Karl Baumann of AeroTech as well as a quick visit by Matt Steele, founder of North Coast Rocketry.

Reader comments:

#1 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Great work. Thanks all for your time and input.

Small Skidmarks?! Just in time for Pro24! .... [edit: They will still be HPR motors, but won't require >80N average thrust anymore to be NFPA compliant.>

Jeroen

Jeroen_at_CTI on 02-02-2010 06:14 PM

#2 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

So am I reading this rite? No sparkies except for people who are over 18 and certified? Regular motors for people up to 125 grams if over 18 and up to 62.5 grams if under 18? Last will this change the BATFE definition of an exempt motor?

gregkdc on 02-02-2010 06:21 PM

#3 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Quote:

Last will this change the BATFE definition of an exempt motor?

? APCP is not regulated by BATFE anymore. Are you thinking Black Powder?

UncleVanya on 02-02-2010 06:27 PM

#4 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Sorry I do most everything with nitrates and forgot that the majority of rocket enthusiasts use AP so yes anything that is not AP.

gregkdc on 02-02-2010 06:36 PM

#5 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

I think this is the first picture I've ever seen of Anthony.

daveyfire on 02-02-2010 06:44 PM

#6 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

The only thing that's a bit funky is that you will need to be set back 1500' from any inhabited structures in order to fly that sparky G.. or E... or any hybrid.

Kevin

Nesssalco on 02-02-2010 06:58 PM

#7 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Thank you Pat Miller.

Just Jerry on 02-02-2010 07:11 PM

#8 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Quote:

The only thing that's a bit funky is that you will need to be set back 1500' from any inhabited structures in order to fly that sparky G.. or E... or any hybrid.

Kevin

1127 needs a little work too. We should be able to fly our 125 gram and under motors under the new FAA regs for class 1 rockets. 500 ft. set back would be sufficient for those motors. Sure would help alot of us out!!!!

rcktnut on 02-02-2010 07:27 PM

#9 Re: Article: Salt Lake NFPA meeting redefines hobby rocket motors

Kudos to all that worked on this, great photo as well.

The other codes come up for revision later.

Art Upton on 02-02-2010 08:01 PM

#10 Statement on NFPA Meeting

Earlier today (February 2) we completed the first of two 2010 meetings of the National Fire Protection Association’s Committee on Pyrotechnics to do the quadrennial review and update of NFPA Code 1125, “Code for the Manufacture of Model Rocket and High Power Rocket Motors”. This NFPA Committee has 32 people who include the pyrotechnics and rocketry industries and user organizations, safety experts and public safety officials. It has jurisdiction over all the rocketry codes and several of the pyrotechnics codes. The rocketry members who were in attendance at this meeting were Mary Roberts, Bill Stine, Gary Rosenfield, and Anthony Cesaroni from the industry and Patrick Miller, Trip Barber, Ted Cochran, and Darren Wright from the user organizations.

This meeting’s purpose was to review public proposals for changes to NFPA 1125 and to develop Committee proposals for changes. There were 14 public proposals and the rocketry members of the Committee generated 15 proposals at this meeting. All proposals had to be decided upon by the full Committee at the meeting; then these decisions have to be confirmed by mail ballot of the Committee afterward. They are next posted for public comment in the late spring, with comments due by September 3. The Committee will meet again, probably on September 30 in Phoenix, to review any public comments and update then re-vote the revisions. After this, the full NFPA has to review the changes before the revised code takes effect in the summer of 2011. So changes made at this week’s meeting are the first step of a long process and are not yet final decisions, nor do they take effect approved by the full NFPA in summer 2011. The user codes (1122 and 1127) will be going through this same process at this time next year.

There were six major areas where this meeting resulted in proposed changes to NFPA 1125:

1. The propellant mass limit for “model rocket” motor was raised to 125 grams while maintaining the 160 N-sec total impulse limit and 80 N average thrust limit; and model rocket motors were explicitly characterized as being “solid propellant” only. Per Consumer Product Safety Commission regulations, motors with more than 62.5 grams of propellant and reloadable motors of all types may not be sold to persons age 17 or younger.

2. Language was added to make it clear that all motors which do not meet every element of the definition of “model rocket motor” are therefore as a result “high power rocket motors”, clearing up some ambiguous situations such as small hybrid motors.

3. The requirements for labeling and for the instructions for high power motors, particularly for those high power motors that intentionally generate enhanced spark effects, were significantly strengthened. There were almost no such requirements in the code previously, although some manufacturers did some of this labeling on their own. This met the common concern of the rocketry representatives of ensuring that “sparky” motors not become available, deliberately or inadvertently, to non-HPR-certified consumers or flown on non-HPR ranges. All sparky motors are unambiguously HPR motors.

4. Motors that are G power class and below but are “high power” because they are hybrids, sparky, or have an average thrust over 80N must have a prefix of “HP” added before their motor type designation

5. The allowable maximum casing temperature for high power motors was raised from 200C to 220C.

6. Testing procedures were added for certification testing of motors with interchangeable or user-adjustable delay systems.

The rocketry group worked very cooperatively at the meeting to develop the best way to address the areas of concern brought into the meeting by various stakeholders. All the actions that the group agreed on were unanimous, and the rocketry group’s recommendations were unanimously approved by the full Committee in this first step of a long process leading to a new edition of NFPA 1125 in the summer of 2011. Appropriate adjustments will be made to Safety Codes and motor certification procedures to reflect what actually ends up in the new NFPA 1125 when it is officially approved.

Trip Barber
NAR 4322
NAR President

Trip Barber on 02-02-2010 08:20 PM

Comments 1-10 of 80 shown. Click here to read comments 11 through 80.

Registered users can add comments and discuss this article. To participate, please login or register.