why are hybrids regulated?

the banned hazardous substance in model rocket motors is of course the black powder propellant charge itself. If a hybrid contains no such banned substances then it is outside the regulation of the CPSC. If it did include a small BP chunk to facilitate ignition, the chunk might first qualify as an igniter. I don't think the CPSC regulates igniters. If the chunk didn't qualify as a igniter, then if as long as the chunk is labeled correctly, it would be exempt from CPSC as is BP model rocket motors if they are labeled correctly. But this all assumes of course that minors will be purchasing G size hybrids, and I think the rocketry community and industry is self-regulating itself by only allowing adults to purchase G(or below) hybrids.

IMO hybrids should stay outside of CPSC regulation. Just say NO to selling them to kidz.

everybody is familiar with 1500.85 but 1500.83 is also interesting:

Sec. 1500.83 Exemptions for small packages, minor hazards, and special circumstances

(36) Individual toy rocket propellant devices and separate delay train and/or recovery system activation devices intended for use with premanufactured model rocket engines are exempt from bearing the full labeling required by section 2(p)(1) of the act (repeated in Sec. 1500.3(b)(14)(i)) insofar as such requirements would be necessary because the articles are flammable or generate pressure, provided that: (i) The devices are designed and constructed in accordance with the specifications in Sec. 1500.85(a) (8) or (9): (ii) Each individual device or retail package of devices bears the following: (A) The statement ``WARNING--FLAMMABLE: Read instructions before use''; (B) The common or usual name of the article; (C) A statement of the type of engine and use classification; (D) Instructions for safe disposal; and (E) Name and place of business of manufacturer or distributor; and (iii) Each individual rocket engine or retail package of rocket engines distributed to users is accompanied by an instruction sheet bearing complete cautionary labeling and instructions for safe use and handling of the individual rocket engines.

Reply to
shockwaveriderz
Loading thread data ...

Hybrids are regulated for the same reason that these motors are regulated: they don't meet the 1122 definition of a model rocket motor. Anything beyond

1122 is HPR.

I'd really like to see someone manufacture and certify a complete micro hybrid package.

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Aside from the metallic parts prohibition of a model rocket motor which would exclude a hybrid and/or a reloadable motors from the age restriction, your interpretation of hazardous substances differes from the CPSC definition of a hazardous substance in Part 1500.3(a)(4)(i)(A) and other places.

4)(i) Hazardous substance means:

(A) Any substance or mixture of substances which is toxic, corrosive, an irritant, a strong sensitizer, flammable or combustible, or generates pressure through decomposition, heat, or other means, if such substance or mixture of substances may cause substantial personal injury or substantial illness during or as a proximate result of any customary or reasonably foreseeable handling or use, including reasonably foreseeable ingestion by children.

(18) "Thermal hazard"-an article may be determined to present a thermal hazard if, in normal use or when subjected to reasonably foreseeable damage or abuse, its design or manufacture presents an unreasonable risk of personal injury or illness because of heat as from heated parts, substances, or surfaces.

formatting link
A hybrid rocket motor get very hot in operation, and the nitrous bottle gets very cold. Both thermal conditions could case severe injury. Unless you could convince CPSC that hybrids deserves an exemption, I believe the current regulations support my interpretation. In reality, I believe that a change in the regulation would only effect a few hundred minors, and really isn't worthwhile from a financial viewpoint. The market is simply not there.

Bob

Reply to
Bob Krech

All I'm trying to point out, is the CPSC should have nothing to do with regulating hybrid rocket motors. They aren't sold to minors, so CPSC doesn't apply. You can't sell SU G or any power class RMS to a minor, and you shouldn't be selling G Hybrids (or any size hybrid) to minors either. As long as we follow those guidelines, theres no reason for CPSC to be sticking its regulatory nose into Hybrids.

shockie B)

formatting link

Reply to
shockwaveriderz

NFP 1122 is not a federal regulation. Also, regulation of hybrids containing none hazardous material should have a site other than Title

16, part 1500. None hazardous materials are not regulated by CSPC, ATF or DOT.

Fred

Bob Kaplow wrote:

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Your right Bob, it appears CSPC has regulatory authority over any substance they decide is harmful to children. The "Nanny State" is here. BTW my RC model airplane engines get very hot; also the batteries in my electric powered models, etc, etc. I guess I better not allow my grandson to purchase any of these items either.

Fred

Bob Krech wrote:

formatting link

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

Probably not going to happen, Bob...the market is too small. I have some prototype E and F monotube hybrids made by Marcus Leech of Propulsion Polymers. Like everything Marcus does, they are exceptionally well designed. But we know that we'd never sell enough to cover the cost of making a production run and getting all the approvals. Not just from the NAR; that doesn't cost much.

Doug Pratt

formatting link

Reply to
pratthobbies

This shoud be in the FAQ.

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Good to have you back, Jerry.

Reply to
I

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

ROTFL!

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Hey Jerry how have you been? Is your sentence up or do they let you on the net once in a while.

Phil

Reply to
Phil Stein

Letting me on the 'net would be dangerous.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

POINT!

Reply to
Dave Grayvis

When is visitation hours??

Reply to
W. E. Fred Wallace

I agree.

Reply to
Darrell D. Mobley

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.