I'm sure I recently read some safety code-type content that said something about not permanently gluing anything to the motor, but I did a search and can't find in in NAR, TRA or NFPA 1122. Anyone know what I was reading?
Discussed elsewhere, but I figure I'll land the plane. Pretty sure that what I'd recently read was the text below, which is the rule book for competition, but not specifically part of any safety code. So my post quoted above was clearly confused and/or confusing:
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF ROCKETRY
UNITED STATES MODEL ROCKET SPORTING CODE
4 MODEL ROCKET MOTOR STANDARDS
4.4 Alterations
A model rocket motor must not be altered in any manner that changes its dimensions and/or its performance characteristics. No material may be permanently affixed to the motor.
This explains why "flying motor" records are excluded for NAR, but are allowed in Tripoli.
As far as glue vs. tape, although there are tapes that are effectively permanent, most tapes, especially masking or foil tape that is generally used for retaining motors, are reasonably considered temporary, whereas most glues will sufficiently damage a paper motor case when removed that they are reasonably considered permanent. I suppose if someone wanted to push on it, a rubber cement that would peel off without damaging the surface of the paper might squeak by. Or the idea in the OP of this thread could be executed with peelable rubber cement and likely be reasonably defensible.
For non-competition use, it would be subject to interpretation whether permanently affixing something to the motor constituted tampering. There doesn't seem to be a red line there, especially if the performance characteristics are not changed, but a discussion could be had around whether that changed the dimensions, at least if the Sporting Code is held to provide relevant context for interpreting the safety code. Ultimately, because the safety code only includes the language "tamper with," there is flexibility that makes the final call subject to the judgement of a particular RSO. Or jury, if a plaintiff's attorney happens to be included in a discussion much lengthier than anyone would like.
Turning a -0 booster motor into a -P plugged motor would be changing its performance characteristics. The powers that be seem to be OK with doing so in a reversible manner with tape (perhaps that is just the "installation" of the motor in the rocket that is designed around the performance characteristics of the motor), but not OK with doing so in a permanent manner with epoxy or other glue (which alters the design of the motor itself).
Non-permanent plugging to keep -0 motors from spitting fire out the front has been demonstrated to be sufficiently easy and effective as to be completely practical. Having gotten my head around the methods, I see no reason to complain about the status quo today.
Also, I second the suggestion of 1/4-inch wide masking tape making tape thrust rings easier to install, although it ironically costs a little more than the cheap 3/4 inch wide stuff, which can be easily trimmed flush with the end of the motor once applied.
One last thing: Obviously, putting epoxy or CA on/around the clay nozzle to prevent it blowing out and CATOing is not changing overall dimensions or performance characteristics, so I would judge is in compliance with the safety code, but would not expect it to be permitted in NAR competition.
![0911231051[1].jpg](https://cdn.imagearchive.com/rocketryforum/data/attachments/520/520371-5fd737000ed5e1409ba81f463033e8dc.jpg "0911231051[1].jpg")
