Failed eyebolts?

[qquake2k]

I've seen a lot of talk on this forum about failed wire eyebolts, but have yet to actually see one. Does anyone have a photo of a failed eyebolt in a rocket, and if so, can you give me details (rocket weight, eyebolt size, centering ring thickness, etc.)?

[neond7]

I've seen a lot of talk on this forum about failed wire eyebolts, but have yet to actually see one. Does anyone have a photo of a failed eyebolt in a rocket, and if so, can you give me details (rocket weight, eyebolt size, centering ring thickness, etc.)?

I have heard that same thing mentioned several times since I joined this forum a few months ago. Got me a bit paranoid.... With that in mind, I upgraded to a U-bolt on my LOC Bruiser. "Just in case". Because I didn't want to be the guy who was able to provide you with a photo of a failed bolt.

The Binder Excel I'm building with a 54mm mount in a 4" tube was too tight to fit a u-bolt. But its a pretty light rocket, so it should be fine with an eye bolt. If not, I know who to send the pic too!!

[troj]

Do a search -- just a few months back, this topic came up, and someone posted pictures of one that had failed on them.

I, personally, have never had one fail. Why? Because I don't use bent-wire eyebolts. Everything is either forged or a U-bolt.

But I've seen enough of them fail to never be willing to use one myself.

And yes, I've seen it on a rocket that weighs about 5 pounds.

-Kevin

[sylvie369]

I'm not utterly convinced that some other part wouldn't have failed had the open eyebolt not failed, but I've seen several of them pulled straight, and I won't use them.
If there's room, I use u-bolts. If not, sigh, I spring for the forged eyebolts. Fortunately I've only needed them twice.

Of course the best answer is a reliable deployment system that doesn't put undue stress on the components. If I ever become good at packing my parachutes properly, I'll start bragging about how my reliable deployments make these questions moot.

[terryg]

For whats its worth, 1/4" eyebolt with jb weld, on a 10 lb rocket with 1/4" plywood bulk head. Short delay on an I600 redline flight. Loc swivel was stretched a bit. Tubular nylon not damaged at all, and the chute was not stripped and the shroud lines were not damaged. If the eyebolt had not opened I might have gotten a serious zipper but I do not think I would have gotten the separation that occurred. Bottom line in my opinion, spend a couple of bucks more for a forged eyebold or a couple of bucks less for a "U" bolt.

[JDcluster]

How long was the recovery harness?


JD

For whats its worth, 1/4 " eyebolt with jb weld, on a 10 lb rocket with 1/4 in plywood bulk head. Short delay on an I600 redline flight. Loc swivel was stretched a bit. Tubular nylon not damaged at all, and the chute was not stripped and the shroud lines were not damaged. If the eyebolt had not opened I might have gotten a serious zipper but I do not think I would have gotten the separation that occurred.

[terryg]

As I recall, 20' tubular nylon from a climbing supply store. The rocket was 78" long.

[crossfire]

Just think if the eye bolt didn't fail it would have cost you a lot more the whole rocket. was the bulk head tore out?
gp

[MountainRocketeer]

Just think if the eye bolt didn't fail it would have cost you a lot more the whole rocket. was the bulk head tore out?
gp

Sorry, gp, but that would have been better. Those of us standing under falling rocket segments (in other words, everyone else at a launch) would much prefer the whole rocket be destroyed than to have a 5 or 10 pound chunk of fiberglass, motor casing, etc, plummet out of the sky on us. *Maybe* I could dodge it, but I could not count on grabbing up my 1 year old and my 2 year old sons, and making sure my very blonde 7 year old daughter and my wife and 8 year old son all jump out of the way.

So, if a recovery system is going to fail, we should hope the rocket will go to pieces in the air or, at the least, when it impacts the ground. I am not suggesting that terryg's airframe wasn't appropriately fragile; likewise, I know the bent bolt was the last thing he wanted, and I am not casting stones--I had the same thing happen to me in a midpower using a snapswivel once. I just have a problem with the suggestion that it would be better to have a separation than to destroy the rocket.

Indestructable rockets are a bad thing, not a good one.

[mainer]

JB WELD!!!!! Did you actually think it would act as a weld!!!? Or was it to seal up the hole the eyebolt was going through?

For whats its worth, 1/4" eyebolt with jb weld, on a 10 lb rocket with 1/4" plywood bulk head. Short delay on an I600 redline flight. Loc swivel was stretched a bit. Tubular nylon not damaged at all, and the chute was not stripped and the shroud lines were not damaged. If the eyebolt had not opened I might have gotten a serious zipper but I do not think I would have gotten the separation that occurred. Bottom line in my opinion, spend a couple of bucks more for a forged eyebold or a couple of bucks less for a "U" bolt.

[qquake2k]

For whats its worth, 1/4" eyebolt with jb weld, on a 10 lb rocket with 1/4" plywood bulk head. Short delay on an I600 redline flight. Loc swivel was stretched a bit. Tubular nylon not damaged at all, and the chute was not stripped and the shroud lines were not damaged. If the eyebolt had not opened I might have gotten a serious zipper but I do not think I would have gotten the separation that occurred. Bottom line in my opinion, spend a couple of bucks more for a forged eyebold or a couple of bucks less for a "U" bolt.

That's pretty intense. But my heaviest rocket is 4lbs. And a 20ft tubular nylon harness seems on the short side to me. Did it do any structural damage to the rocket?

[crossfire]

so you would rather have the rocket come down in many sections than as one? I would rather have to watch out for one section than many. Even small sections will hurt. And how do watch that many sections all coming in at once.
gp

[MountainRocketeer]

Maybe I am misunderstanding your first post. My point is that, above all else, I would much prefer the eyebolt to hold and keep the fincan connected to the chute, even if it zippers the whole body tube or rips out some of the shroud lines. A fincan and payload bay attached to even a shredded chute will usually fall a lot slower than a fincan by itself. I have even seen a couple of rockets shred to small, fluttering pieces when the chute deployed during boost. Since the recovery train held together, the large heavy parts stayed with the chute and the fins and airframe pieces fluttered down like giant leaves. Yes, I would rather the rocket go to pieces like that (with large parts still attached to the chute) than to have the fincan cleanly separate from the shockcord.

I understood your first post to mean that you would prefer the eyebolt to give out rather than ruin the whole rocket; sorry if I misunderstood. My point is that we should try to keep the large parts connected to the chute, even if that damages the rocket.

[cavecentral]

I made a small dual deploy rocket. BT is a 54mm LOC tube w/ nose cone. I had a 3/16" wire eye bolt on the cone istead of the little plastic hook molded into the cone. I put too much BP in the charge (1.5 to 2.0gm). About what I normally use in a 4" rocket. Heard a boom and had separation. I thought I forgot to hook the quicklink to the nose cone. After taking it apart the eye was opened up just like in the picture about.

I thought a rocket would need to be much heavier or moving real fast to do that. I was wrong.

[crossfire]

MountainRocketeer
It looks like we both agree how we would like a rocket to fall if things go wrong. This eyebolt coming apart it just seems a little strange for a rocket of that size. I have used unwelded eye bolts and have never had one come apart. Larger projects I like to use U-bolts.
GP

[GRIFFIN]

Sorry, gp, but that would have been better. Those of us standing under falling rocket segments (in other words, everyone else at a launch) would much prefer the whole rocket be destroyed than to have a 5 or 10 pound chunk of fiberglass, motor casing, etc, plummet out of the sky on us. *Maybe* I could dodge it, but I could not count on grabbing up my 1 year old and my 2 year old sons, and making sure my very blonde 7 year old daughter and my wife and 8 year old son all jump out of the way.

So, if a recovery system is going to fail, we should hope the rocket will go to pieces in the air or, at the least, when it impacts the ground. I am not suggesting that terryg's airframe wasn't appropriately fragile; likewise, I know the bent bolt was the last thing he wanted, and I am not casting stones--I had the same thing happen to me in a midpower using a snapswivel once. I just have a problem with the suggestion that it would be better to have a separation than to destroy the rocket.

Indestructable rockets are a bad thing, not a good one.

[cwbullet]

Hmm up to a 48 lb rocket and I have never had an eye bolt fail, but then again, I am pretty careful on my delay. I either go long on the delay. If over 10 lbs, I used forged eyebolts.

[G_T]

Last fall at Red Glare I launched an 18# 4" rocket on an L. Flight was expected to be about 10Kft or thereabouts. Boost went well, but the rocket hit some wind shear at just under mach. It took a solid turn towards the new upwind, and covered the next horizontal mile in perhaps 15 seconds, while climbing. It only made around 8Kft. To add insult to injury, drogue deployment was a couple seconds late. It was seriously moving when it deployed. Everything held together, though the lower tube did zipper. This rocket was built quite solidly... Eyebolts were forged. The rocket recovered fine, in one piece. No parts falling out of the sky. Had I built the rocket in a weaker fashion, there would have been parts coming down somewhere. Things happen. Things go wrong. This is rocketry. Plan on it. Plan how you want failures to occur. Failing to plan is planning to fail.

Yep, corny. 0.02c.

Gerald

[rocketsmith]

I think one thing people are missing is that you need to keep the rocket together during a failed recovery. Recovery is the important part, up is easy. A 10 lb. rocket flat spinning from 5000 feet is safer than a 2 lb. nosecone coming in ballistic. Nobody really cares if your rocket survives after you hurt someone. And remember folks, if you hurt someone at a launch, you are still liable. Club insurance covers the laibility of the club as a whole, not the individual. So, know what you are doing first, then use tried and true procedures and materials and USE U BOLTS OR FORGED EYE BOLTS! If you hurt someone by trying to save a buck it should wind up being a very unpleasant experience for you.

[David]

I don't disagree with anything Rocketsmith is saying, except the insurance part could be confusing. Members of TRA and NAR are provided individual liability insurance as part of membership. This appears to cover damages to property and injuries to people caused by your rockets, as I read the FAQs on thir websites. You never want to use the insurance, so build strong, and use rocket science.

[karlbaum]

For whats its worth, 1/4" eyebolt with jb weld, on a 10 lb rocket with 1/4" plywood bulk head. Short delay on an I600 redline flight. Loc swivel was stretched a bit. Tubular nylon not damaged at all, and the chute was not stripped and the shroud lines were not damaged. If the eyebolt had not opened I might have gotten a serious zipper but I do not think I would have gotten the separation that occurred. Bottom line in my opinion, spend a couple of bucks more for a forged eyebold or a couple of bucks less for a "U" bolt.

That's an impressive picture. I am a welder and I haven't welded all my eybolts. You know what they say. "The cobler's children have no shoes."

[jeffgeraci]

I've Developed a method/ invention to solve this problem. It is cheap, easy, and will reduce the shock on both the eye bolt AND the shock cord. Give me a week to get the video tutorial filmed and posted. I'll post it under the "Techniques" category and title it "The Geraci mount"

I really think you'll like it. Again, give me about a week or so.

[atxcple]

i recently dodged the failed eyebolt gremlin....the forces on the airframe were extreme enough to break the three shear pins i had in the nose cone releasing the main. Luckly everything held together all the way to the ground



Dont worry Gary T the Blastcaps have been cleaned up since this pic was taken...

[qquake2k]

I've Developed a method/ invention to solve this problem. It is cheap, easy, and will reduce the shock on both the eye bolt AND the shock cord. Give me a week to get the video tutorial filmed and posted. I'll post it under the "Techniques" category and title it "The Geraci mount"

I really think you'll like it. Again, give me about a week or so.

Very intriguing...

[rocketsmith]

I don't disagree with anything Rocketsmith is saying, except the insurance part could be confusing. Members of TRA and NAR are provided individual liability insurance as part of membership. This appears to cover damages to property and injuries to people caused by your rockets, as I read the FAQs on thir websites. You never want to use the insurance, so build strong, and use rocket science.

I guess I should have clarified: the insurance covers the victim for personal injury and property damage. Then the insurance company will likely sue you to recover damages. I don't believe there is an indemnification clause with the club insurance. Most likely they will go after your homeowners insurance or a balloon policy, if you have one. This is how liability insurance works. In the end a person will be held accountable to one degree or another. So, as a standard operating procedure, please make sure a atypical recovery event stays together.

[David]

I guess I should have clarified: the insurance covers the victim for personal injury and property damage. Then the insurance company will likely sue you to recover damages. I don't believe there is an indemnification clause with the club insurance. Most likely they will go after your homeowners insurance or a balloon policy, if you have one. This is how liability insurance works. In the end a person will be held accountable to one degree or another. So, as a standard operating procedure, please make sure a atypical recovery event stays together.

If your read on the insurance is accurate, I'm extremely concerned about every rocket flier's exposure. What good is the insurance, if it simply changes who sues you? And, what about those who are not homeowners and have no policy to sue? Are you saying they are totally exposed for the pay out? Any launch is potential personal bankruptcy? Yikes. I'm not saying you are wrong, but something just doesn't sound right. I would like to read the actual policy, which is not posted on TRA site (just FAQs). I've emailed the question to TRA HQ. I'll pass on what they say.

[David]

<<<Well, without seeing the entire post, I really can’t fully comment, but as a TRA Member, you are a named insured under the policy, and an insured can’t sue himself.
*
Jeffrey J. Barnes
Your American Family Agent
Phone 319-377-3379
Fas 319-365-3385>>>

Hmmmm. This is the answer from TRA to my question about their insurance. To be fair, Jeff Barnes probably needs more information in order to provide a better answer. I'm going to request the entire policy in writing and I'll provide Mr Barnes at TRA with additional questions. More to come...

[rocketsmith]

I don't mean to spread mis-information so I will say this: If both persons, i.e. the flyer and the injured party are insured under the same policy then there is no mechanism for remedy when it comes to assigning liability. As was stated, the insurance company won't sue itself. However, any time an insurance company pays out a claim it seeks to recover damages from the "at fault" party, in this case the flyer. If another insurance company gets involved it would be a mess.

Another point, if for any reason you drop a rocket at high speed through the roof of my car, I would not be turning it in to my insurance but rather to the flyers, or the club insurance if it actually covers this. If the club insurance covers that then fine, but I am unaware of anyone having to file such a claim and can therefore make no statement as to the outcome. My whole point here is this: Do you really want to find out how it works or is it better to just spend a couple extra bucks to build a rocket that won't come apart when even the most unexpected events occur? If I or someone I cared about was permenantly harmed by a flyer trying to save a buck I am certain the insurance company would be the least of his or her worries. So, lets do the right thing, pay attention, build correctly and not hurt anyone, okay?

[bobkrech]

<<<Well, without seeing the entire post, I really can’t fully comment, but as a TRA Member, you are a named insured under the policy, and an insured can’t sue himself.
*
Jeffrey J. Barnes
Your American Family Agent
Phone 319-377-3379
Fas 319-365-3385>>>

Hmmmm. This is the answer from TRA to my question about their insurance. To be fair, Jeff Barnes probably needs more information in order to provide a better answer. I'm going to request the entire policy in writing and I'll provide Mr Barnes at TRA with additional questions. More to come...

David

If both the victim and the rocket owner are covered, the policy pays. Period. The end.

The victim is paid whether or not he is insured and the rocket owner is covered if they are NAR or TRA members because both insurances are primary policies. Only if the damages exceed the policy value, or if there is a minimum deductible does the rocket owner have to pay out of pocket, or via a secondary insurance policy. That it. It is group insurance policy.

The insurance policy premiums are in the $50K to $60K range annually. The very few claims have been a few thousand dollars.

If the claims were to get large, the the next years premium would increase, possibly to the level where affordability could become an issue, which is one of the reasons why safety is such a big issue, as the FAA requires that rocketry activities have the permission of the landowner, and virtually all landowners want insurance to indemnify them in the case of a loss which both NAR Section and TRA Prefecture launch insurance do.

Bob

[Sully]

I don't mean to spread mis-information so I will say this: If both persons, i.e. the flyer and the injured party are insured under the same policy then there is no mechanism for remedy when it comes to assigning liability. As was stated, the insurance company won't sue itself. However, any time an insurance company pays out a claim it seeks to recover damages from the "at fault" party, in this case the flyer. If another insurance company gets involved it would be a mess.

I was involved in a car accident (not my fault) where both I and the other driver were covered by the same insurance company. There was no problem: instead of duking it out with the other insurer over who was at fault, the company moved directly to trying to find the cheapest way to pay out and fulfill the policy terms.

If you launch a rocket and adhere to the NAR code, you are not "at fault" if your rocket goes astray and causes damage. There would be no reason for the insurance company to sue you because they had to pay out on a policy. If you weren't following the code, however, I assume the insurance company would simply abandon you as being negligent and violating the terms of the policy. The the property owner or injured party would sue you directly and you wouldn't have the benefit of the insurance company's lawyers or deep pockets. Another reason for following the safety code and just generally using good sense and safe practices (most important reason to do this is to avoid injuries and damages in the first place).