- Joined
- Jan 22, 2009
- Messages
- 537
- Reaction score
- 221
NAR Safety Committee Request for Proposals: Expired Motor Flight Testing
Background
The NAR Board of Trustees in its July 2006 meeting authorized a Safety
Code Commensurate Compliance Program whereby the Board or its
designees may review and approve proposals for commensurate methods of
compliance with the Safety Code(s) of the Association for activities
that may otherwise be perceived to technically violate some portion(s)
of the Safety Code, provided:
The activities are conducted in accordance with applicable laws, and
The activities, if conducted on behalf of the Association, are
consistent with the purposes of the Association and can not otherwise
be reasonably achieved, and
The activities are fully described as to time and place, and
alternate methods of compliance enumerated, and
The alternate methods of compliance provide for equal or greater
safety margins as would other obtain from the existing Safety Code, and
The Association receives a report of the results of the event.
Authorization currently requires a two-thirds majority of those
members of the Board of Trustees voting on the proposal.
Members who in good faith apply for, receive, and act in accordance
with approval for alternate methods of compliance are considered in
compliance with the Safety Code, and may not be subject to the
sanctions of Section 11 of the bylaws for actions related to the
approved activity.
[As a side note, the resolution also states that members carrying out
legal activities that are not associated with, sanctioned, nor insured
by the Association are exempt from the requirements of this procedure,
so for example TRA Research activities are not affected.]
The Board of Trustees then authorized the Safety Committee to carry
out a study of the impact of motor age on motor safety for motors that
have been decertified some years after production has ended. The
authorized program is described as follows:
-------------------------------------
Title of this launch/project/program: Impact of motor age on motor safety
Provision(s) for which alternative compliance is sought:
HPRSC item 3: "I will use only certified, commercially-made rocket
motors...."
Risk:
This project involves the study of previously NAR-certified, and now
decertified, model rocket motors in order to determine whether they
pose a greater than average safety hazard. It is possible that these
motors will malfunction at a higher-than-average rate.
Justification for project and benefit to NAR:
Current NAR practice is to decertify motors some years after they go
out of production. The primary justification for this practice is the
uncertainties surrounding the performance of old motors. However, the
practice is inconsistent with the fact that motors that are still in
production remain certified regardless of their age. In order to
institute a fact-based policy on motor expiration, we need to collect
data on the performance of these motors.
Alternatives to launch/project/program:
Static firing old motors. There are three issues with this
alternative: First, it uses up the stock of remaining motors. Second,
it would rely on the generosity of those who happen to have the motors
(or require their purchase), making the collection of adequate data
difficult. Third, the available facilities and personnel for static
firing motors are already overworked.
Limiting tests to old, but still certified, motors. The primary
problem with this alternative is that we don't know whether the data
for popular motors with a decades-old production history generalize to
more-specialized motors produced in smaller quantities.
Methods for mitigating risk:
Testing will be restricted to those clubs and NAR members, on insured
sites, and at specific times and places, who agree to comply with the
following conditions:
1) Motors shall have been decertified only due to being out of
production and shall not have been decertified for safety reasons
2) Minimum distances shall be at least doubled, depending on the
characteristics of the vehicle under test. Tests shall not be
conducted when elevated fire hazard conditions are present, and
appropriate firefighting equipment shall be available.
3) All test flights will be conducted with spectators alerted and aware.
4) All test flights shall use a single motor. The sole exception to
this restriction is that black powder booster motors may be staged to
an appropriate, currently certified black powder sustainer motor. No
clustered motors shall be used.
5) The following data shall be provided to the Chair of the Special
Committee on Safety no later than seven days following the event, for
each motor tested, regardless of outcome:
a) Motor designation
b) Date of manufacture and/or motor coding
c) Any available information on storage (e.g., "it's been in my cool,
dry basement for 10 years.")
d) Flight outcome, including timed delay. If the outcome was a failure
motor, details of the failure AND A MESS REPORT shall be submitted.
6) In the event two motors from the same date and of the same type
CATO, no further testing of motors of that date and type shall be
conducted.
Other requirements:
Clubs desiring to conduct test launches shall apply to the Chair of
the Special Committee on Safety, specifying the date and time of the
launch and itemizing the motors to be tested. Motor tests shall not be
conducted without specific written authorization from that Chair.
Motors tested under this policy shall be considered to be certified
for the date and location specified in the authorization.
The Special Committee on Safety shall issue an RFP for testing
conforming to these conditions, and shall authorize no more than ten
such events prior to 15 March 2007. An interim report of the results
shall be provided to the Board of Trustees at the Winter 2007 meeting.
------------------------------------
The good stuff:
The NAR Board of Trustees intends for this activity to be productive
(i.e., to provide valid data on the question of the safety of old
motors), but there is no reason why it can not also be fun. We're
hoping that Sections will be interested in supporting this activity
and will find ways to increase the data collected.
The Board of Trustees will consider extending and/or expanding this
program depending on the results of the first ten events.
Request for Proposals
In order to maximize the quality and quantity of data to be collected,
I am asking that interested NAR members and/or Sections submit a
proposal to me no later than 5:00 PM August 15, 2006.
Proposals shall include:
The name and NAR number of the person responsible for conducting the
test and reporting on the results,
The date and place of the test (include a brief description of the
field, e.g., "school football field," "25 square miles of desert"),
An itemized list of motors to be tested (In addition, any data that
the proposer can provide on the certification history of the motors
proposed for testing will be greatly appreciated!), and
A statement of agreement to comply with the conditions listed above,
and any other conditions that may be attached to the authorization
(e.g., safe distances, restrictions on the list of motors to be tested).
Note that only model rocket motors that have not been decertified for
safety reasons are eligible for this program.
Proposals will be selected based on the quantity and quality of the
data to be provided, the opportunity to carry out statistically valid
samples from a variety of such motors from around the country, and the
ability of the applicant(s) to conduct the activity safely. I intend
to issue authorization for at least three and as many as ten events by
August 25. [My goal is to get great data, and to get the program
started by Labor Day].
I reserve the right to modify this RFP as I get more sleep.
Please feel free to distribute this RFP (unedited) to rocketeers
everywhere.
Please help us get some great data, and not mess up what could be the
beginning of broader ability to fly. Let's all continue to make sport
rocketry safe, educational, and fun!
Regards,
Ted Cochran
Chair, NAR Safety Committee
Background
The NAR Board of Trustees in its July 2006 meeting authorized a Safety
Code Commensurate Compliance Program whereby the Board or its
designees may review and approve proposals for commensurate methods of
compliance with the Safety Code(s) of the Association for activities
that may otherwise be perceived to technically violate some portion(s)
of the Safety Code, provided:
The activities are conducted in accordance with applicable laws, and
The activities, if conducted on behalf of the Association, are
consistent with the purposes of the Association and can not otherwise
be reasonably achieved, and
The activities are fully described as to time and place, and
alternate methods of compliance enumerated, and
The alternate methods of compliance provide for equal or greater
safety margins as would other obtain from the existing Safety Code, and
The Association receives a report of the results of the event.
Authorization currently requires a two-thirds majority of those
members of the Board of Trustees voting on the proposal.
Members who in good faith apply for, receive, and act in accordance
with approval for alternate methods of compliance are considered in
compliance with the Safety Code, and may not be subject to the
sanctions of Section 11 of the bylaws for actions related to the
approved activity.
[As a side note, the resolution also states that members carrying out
legal activities that are not associated with, sanctioned, nor insured
by the Association are exempt from the requirements of this procedure,
so for example TRA Research activities are not affected.]
The Board of Trustees then authorized the Safety Committee to carry
out a study of the impact of motor age on motor safety for motors that
have been decertified some years after production has ended. The
authorized program is described as follows:
-------------------------------------
Title of this launch/project/program: Impact of motor age on motor safety
Provision(s) for which alternative compliance is sought:
HPRSC item 3: "I will use only certified, commercially-made rocket
motors...."
Risk:
This project involves the study of previously NAR-certified, and now
decertified, model rocket motors in order to determine whether they
pose a greater than average safety hazard. It is possible that these
motors will malfunction at a higher-than-average rate.
Justification for project and benefit to NAR:
Current NAR practice is to decertify motors some years after they go
out of production. The primary justification for this practice is the
uncertainties surrounding the performance of old motors. However, the
practice is inconsistent with the fact that motors that are still in
production remain certified regardless of their age. In order to
institute a fact-based policy on motor expiration, we need to collect
data on the performance of these motors.
Alternatives to launch/project/program:
Static firing old motors. There are three issues with this
alternative: First, it uses up the stock of remaining motors. Second,
it would rely on the generosity of those who happen to have the motors
(or require their purchase), making the collection of adequate data
difficult. Third, the available facilities and personnel for static
firing motors are already overworked.
Limiting tests to old, but still certified, motors. The primary
problem with this alternative is that we don't know whether the data
for popular motors with a decades-old production history generalize to
more-specialized motors produced in smaller quantities.
Methods for mitigating risk:
Testing will be restricted to those clubs and NAR members, on insured
sites, and at specific times and places, who agree to comply with the
following conditions:
1) Motors shall have been decertified only due to being out of
production and shall not have been decertified for safety reasons
2) Minimum distances shall be at least doubled, depending on the
characteristics of the vehicle under test. Tests shall not be
conducted when elevated fire hazard conditions are present, and
appropriate firefighting equipment shall be available.
3) All test flights will be conducted with spectators alerted and aware.
4) All test flights shall use a single motor. The sole exception to
this restriction is that black powder booster motors may be staged to
an appropriate, currently certified black powder sustainer motor. No
clustered motors shall be used.
5) The following data shall be provided to the Chair of the Special
Committee on Safety no later than seven days following the event, for
each motor tested, regardless of outcome:
a) Motor designation
b) Date of manufacture and/or motor coding
c) Any available information on storage (e.g., "it's been in my cool,
dry basement for 10 years.")
d) Flight outcome, including timed delay. If the outcome was a failure
motor, details of the failure AND A MESS REPORT shall be submitted.
6) In the event two motors from the same date and of the same type
CATO, no further testing of motors of that date and type shall be
conducted.
Other requirements:
Clubs desiring to conduct test launches shall apply to the Chair of
the Special Committee on Safety, specifying the date and time of the
launch and itemizing the motors to be tested. Motor tests shall not be
conducted without specific written authorization from that Chair.
Motors tested under this policy shall be considered to be certified
for the date and location specified in the authorization.
The Special Committee on Safety shall issue an RFP for testing
conforming to these conditions, and shall authorize no more than ten
such events prior to 15 March 2007. An interim report of the results
shall be provided to the Board of Trustees at the Winter 2007 meeting.
------------------------------------
The good stuff:
The NAR Board of Trustees intends for this activity to be productive
(i.e., to provide valid data on the question of the safety of old
motors), but there is no reason why it can not also be fun. We're
hoping that Sections will be interested in supporting this activity
and will find ways to increase the data collected.
The Board of Trustees will consider extending and/or expanding this
program depending on the results of the first ten events.
Request for Proposals
In order to maximize the quality and quantity of data to be collected,
I am asking that interested NAR members and/or Sections submit a
proposal to me no later than 5:00 PM August 15, 2006.
Proposals shall include:
The name and NAR number of the person responsible for conducting the
test and reporting on the results,
The date and place of the test (include a brief description of the
field, e.g., "school football field," "25 square miles of desert"),
An itemized list of motors to be tested (In addition, any data that
the proposer can provide on the certification history of the motors
proposed for testing will be greatly appreciated!), and
A statement of agreement to comply with the conditions listed above,
and any other conditions that may be attached to the authorization
(e.g., safe distances, restrictions on the list of motors to be tested).
Note that only model rocket motors that have not been decertified for
safety reasons are eligible for this program.
Proposals will be selected based on the quantity and quality of the
data to be provided, the opportunity to carry out statistically valid
samples from a variety of such motors from around the country, and the
ability of the applicant(s) to conduct the activity safely. I intend
to issue authorization for at least three and as many as ten events by
August 25. [My goal is to get great data, and to get the program
started by Labor Day].
I reserve the right to modify this RFP as I get more sleep.
Please feel free to distribute this RFP (unedited) to rocketeers
everywhere.
Please help us get some great data, and not mess up what could be the
beginning of broader ability to fly. Let's all continue to make sport
rocketry safe, educational, and fun!
Regards,
Ted Cochran
Chair, NAR Safety Committee
