Corrected text why are some reloads HazMat?

[John Taylor]

For example a F40 reload that fits into a RMS 29/40-120 motor requires HazMat shipping, where as a G64 reload does not. Difference being the F40 single grain is over the max weight for
non Haz Mat where as the G64 reload is two seperate smaller grains shipped in the same package is non HazMat.
You can get up to a J520 reload shipped non HazMat due to the individual grain size.
Why are there not many more motors that could be shipped non HazMat by cutting the grains into smaller, lighter individual grains?
I realize there are limits to what can be cut into small enough pieces like large reloads.
But it seems like a F40 reload grain could be in two smaller grains as the G64 reload is.
Is it an equipment manufacturing issue or getting certification on specific reload presents issues?
Anybody?

 

[Handeman]

I don't know why Aerotech doesn't do it, but I do know that when you cut grains like that, you change the thrust curve/profile. It would probably change the designation and require a new certification as a new motor.

 

[UhClem]

where as the G64 reload is two seperate smaller grains shipped in the same package is non HazMat.

The G64 used to be a single 62 gram fuel grain. So the answer to your question is almost certainly demand and marketing. If Aerotech perceives there to be an advantage to making a change that exceeds the cost of that change...

This is of course easier with core burning motors than C-slot since there is no alignment problem.

 

[mikec]

IIRC, AT has posted that they have done tests for a two-grain F40 but had problems with delay accuracy.

 

[AeroTech]

That may have been an issue but as I recall the motor burn profile wasn’t acceptable. Grain L/D too short.

IIRC, AT has posted that they have done tests for a two-grain F40 but had problems with delay accuracy.