Legality of building your own rockets in the US

[Ultimate Steve]

So say I want to build a rocket engine.

I know what you're thinking. This guy is right in the middle of this graph.

 

And you're probably right, so let's treat this as purely a hypothetical question for now, I have no concrete plans to do this yet, and will only have concrete plans if it is sufficiently legal and can be done with a sufficient amount of safety judged by many people other than myself.

So, with that out of the way, say I want to build a rocket engine (and say I live in the US). The NAR and TRA seem to be against non-certified motors, solid and hybrid. The advantage of using an NAR or TRA certified motor seems to be that you don't need any permits to buy, sell, or transport them.

But I can't find any concrete information on whether or not it is legal to make any non-certified motors without various explosives permits (Low permit, Manufacturers permit, etc). Which means that something will most likely say no.

So, making my own solid fuel grains is probably out. Maybe even Rocket Candy, I can't even find a concrete source for that (although I was not planning on making R-Candy). That leaves 2 options, the first being liquid engines. I actually haven't found much against the legality of liquids, but I'm not stupid/smart enough to go out and build my own bipropellant engine (although I have designed a few very simple ones). That left trying a monopropellant "engine" (read: tiny thruster), and I've already gone down that rabbit hole, IIRC it's legal but hard, as the two easiest monopropellants to get are N2O and H2O2. N20 is a gas at room temperature, and gases aren't generally good rocket propellants, getting it liquid would be difficult. H2O2, you can't buy it above a certain concentration and its incredibly dangerous to purify by yourself.

So, liquids are out, for a different reason than solids. That leaves hybrids, but you can't make your own fuel, so you'd need to use something else as fuel. Something commonly available... Like a plastic. Specifically, I'm looking at ABS and Acrylic. With ABS I could 3D print fuel grains, and it's relatively easy to get a large acrylic rod and drill a hole through it. The problem at this point becomes the exhaust gases, ABS products are carcinogenic, not good, and I wasn't able to find anything about Acrylic products, besides the fact that you should use ventilation of you are engraving or laser-cutting it.

But it might not be a concern if I'm testing it from a safe distance, let it air out, and properly dispose of the acrylic later on (and test in a location not near anything people will eat).

 

 

So basically, my point is, does anyone see any legal problem or long-term health problem with doing something like this, a hybrid motor using acrylic and gaseous oxygen?

^^^Like this but way smaller initially.

 

It's worth saying that I only intend to do static fire tests, and maybe thrust measurements, not actual flights (I'd need a lot of certification to do that, and that's just not possible to do, especially being a non-adult).

[K^2]

I'm not a lawyer, but...

AFAIK, there are no federal laws explicitly regulating rocketry. There is, however NFPA 1127, which defines high-power rocketry and it is going to be the basis for governing law in many jurisdictions, as well as be the guideline for many fire marshals who might cite you for violating fire safety. Hence, NAR and TRA certification for HPR that do comply with NFPA 1127.

You also have to be mindful of airspace. Federal regulations require you to clear significant launches with FAA. Well, any potential hazards to air traffic. FAA, however, tend to be pretty friendly about it, so long as you launch in a low population area with no significant air traffic. Generally, they'll just issue a NOTAM for your launch window, and pilots will steer clear of the area.

Then there is the matter of propellant for your rocket. Almost anything you'll be using is some kind of regulated. Either as a fire hazard, material for explosives, or in drug manufacturing. Almost none of it is strictly illegal, but it might require certification, and will probably land you on some watch lists.

Finally, local laws vary. You'll have to research laws specific to your state, county, and municipality. There could be any number of additional hoops to jump through with these.

[FireKerb]

You forgot to add the phase where you know so little about the subject you think you're an expert.

On a serious note, I completely agree with K^2.

Edited July 26, 2018 by FireKerb
and expert

[YNM]

I can only assume it's all "legalese". Like, if you actually have all the knowledge etc, and is actually able to carry it out safely, no one would know... and they'd just one day see what you're doing and before long you have all the certifications.

 

But let's be honest, that's badass hard.

 

So my answer is build up your knowledge slowly and rightly. Then you'll see the legals when you need to.

My best bet of an actual guidance would be to seek help with some hobbyist local to your area. They *should* know much better, having probably tackled the tasks themselves...

[RCgothic]

The best bet is to join TRA and work your way up. I believe they're a little more experimentation friendly than NAR.

 

If you haven't launched an L3 high power hobby rocket chances are you're not going to succeed at anything more ambitious.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

Have you talked to the nearest university? They might have a club or a department that has people that know what they're doing.

[sevenperforce]

On 7/25/2018 at 8:40 PM, Ultimate Steve said:

So say I want to build a rocket engine.

<snip>

It's worth saying that I only intend to do static fire tests, and maybe thrust measurements, not actual flights (I'd need a lot of certification to do that, and that's just not possible to do, especially being a non-adult).

Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, I'm definitely not your lawyer, and if I was a lawyer I wouldn't be posing legal advice on a public forum.

That being said: if your rocket engine is strapped down for the duration of the burn, and you have no intention of launching it, then you are pretty much going to be okay. No one is going to care, as long as you don't violate any local noise ordinances. It's basically no different from building a really loud campfire, using ingredients which are just a little suspicious.

[Mad Rocket Scientist]

11 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, I'm definitely not your lawyer, and if I was a lawyer I wouldn't be posing legal advice on a public forum.

That being said: if your rocket engine is strapped down for the duration of the burn, and you have no intention of launching it, then you are pretty much going to be okay. No one is going to care, as long as you don't violate any local noise ordinances. It's basically no different from building a really loud campfire, using ingredients which are just a little suspicious.

Same disclaimer, but for safety too.

I want to add that there are places where, legality aside, it would be irresponsible to even start a large campfire without appropriate safety precautions because of the risk of wildfire. Especially during the dry season. So keep in mind that just because it isn't against the law, that doesn't mean it's safe, and that you would be the only one affected by any mistakes.

However, clearing the area of anything flammable, possibly putting down gravel if your test stand is on dirt, and keeping a fire extinguisher, hose, and cell phone nearby should be safe in most places.

A couple of other notes on your personal safety, from what I know (which isn't a lot):

First of all, use non-frangible materials for any pressure holding parts. So if you enclose the acrylic pipe with a metal casing, don't use steel, use copper.

Second, treat your engine like a grenade about to go off when you're firing it. Don't ever have a direct line of sight to it, put metal shields between it and anything that you don't want to be hit by pieces of rocket motor (buildings, fuel or oxidizer tanks, but most importantly, anywhere people might be). In addition to shields, you probably want to be in a "blockhouse" made out of dirt or something simple while firing. Use a mirror to see the engine firing, or just stay far away and use remote cameras.

Also, you might want to take a look at this book: http://www.cientificosaficionados.com/libros/cohetes.pdf

[K^2]

12 hours ago, sevenperforce said:

Standard disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer, I'm definitely not your lawyer, and if I was a lawyer I wouldn't be posing legal advice on a public forum.

That being said: if your rocket engine is strapped down for the duration of the burn, and you have no intention of launching it, then you are pretty much going to be okay. No one is going to care, as long as you don't violate any local noise ordinances. It's basically no different from building a really loud campfire, using ingredients which are just a little suspicious.

That's bad advice. First of all, even building a campfire could be illegal. Local laws can be weird. Second, it depends on materials you use. Even packing rocket engine with gun powder without a licence could be a law violation, let alone other materials. Finally, if that thing goes boom, and that's very likely, you'll have very hard time proving that you did not make a destructive device, and that's violation of federal laws with significant jail time attached. You don't want that.

You ought to stick with TRA/NAR rules and get any licensing they require for the engines you're going to test, not only because that's least likely to result in you breaking laws, but also because they tend to provide support if you do run into legal problems. Especially, if you're a member.

A good rule of thumb is, if you wouldn't be ok with detonating a petard of the same fuel/weight as your rocket engine in your backyard, then you shouldn't be testing that rocket engine in your backyard. In many jurisdiction, small sugar rockets pass this test. In some, even these don't.

[sevenperforce]

As we all know, a solid rocket is a pipe bomb that happens to be open at one end. So it may be worthwhile to glance at the BATF's regulations on the importation and manufacture of explosive devices:

https://www.atf.gov/explosives/docs/publication-federal-explosives-laws-and-regulations-atf-p-54007/download

Edited July 28, 2018 by sevenperforce

[Zeiss Ikon]

On 7/28/2018 at 12:26 PM, sevenperforce said:

As we all know, a solid rocket is a pipe bomb that happens to be open at one end. So it may be worthwhile to glance at the BATF's regulations on the importation and manufacture of explosive devices:

https://www.atf.gov/explosives/docs/publication-federal-explosives-laws-and-regulations-atf-p-54007/download

And this is the number one reason  not to use metal parts in the motor itself, and not to store a completed solid propellant motor (of any size).  There are also Federal explosives regulations that govern storage of rocket propellant, either in or out of an assembled motor, and failure to comply with them is not just a felony, but might be labeled as terrorism in today's climate.  For a hybrid, fortunately, the fuel isn't an explosive and the oxidizer is usually something you can legally buy and store (nitrous oxide is used a lot; you at least used to be able to buy the denatured variety -- tainted with sulfur dioxide so folks couldn't get high inhaling it before they got sick from the sulfur -- at speed shops).  Even better, in a hybrid design, the pipe can be both pressure vessel and fuel (hence original discussion of PVC, ABS, acrylic, etc.).

I've seen a number of hybrid "High Power Rockets" (large, expensive model rockets) launched; they were, as of 1999 or so, commercially available and, in some situations, easier on the legality side than high power solid motors (there's no law against storing a small bottle of nitrous in your home or garage, and the fuel used in those was polyethylene -- which burns clean, being just carbon and hydrogen -- or synthetic rubber, which isn't much worse).  The motor casing was aircraft aluminum tube, with screw-in aluminum end caps, one of which held the injector and "pyrovalve" that served as the igniter as well as releasing the nitrouse as it burned away, the other holding the phenolic nozzle.

Nitrous makes a great oxidizer for this purpose -- it self pressurizes to around 800 psi at room temperature, stores as a compressed liquid (much like carbon dioxide), decomposes exothermically into nitrogen and oxygen (so adds energy to the combustion), and requires no catalyst, if an igniter is used, as the decomposition can be triggered thermally (nitrous is also used as a monopropellant, with a catalyst or a thermal start).

[Cheif Operations Director]

On 7/25/2018 at 8:40 PM, Ultimate Steve said:

So say I want to build a rocket engine.

I know what you're thinking. This guy is right in the middle of this graph.

 

And you're probably right, so let's treat this as purely a hypothetical question for now, I have no concrete plans to do this yet, and will only have concrete plans if it is sufficiently legal and can be done with a sufficient amount of safety judged by many people other than myself.

So, with that out of the way, say I want to build a rocket engine (and say I live in the US). The NAR and TRA seem to be against non-certified motors, solid and hybrid. The advantage of using an NAR or TRA certified motor seems to be that you don't need any permits to buy, sell, or transport them.

But I can't find any concrete information on whether or not it is legal to make any non-certified motors without various explosives permits (Low permit, Manufacturers permit, etc). Which means that something will most likely say no.

So, making my own solid fuel grains is probably out. Maybe even Rocket Candy, I can't even find a concrete source for that (although I was not planning on making R-Candy). That leaves 2 options, the first being liquid engines. I actually haven't found much against the legality of liquids, but I'm not stupid/smart enough to go out and build my own bipropellant engine (although I have designed a few very simple ones). That left trying a monopropellant "engine" (read: tiny thruster), and I've already gone down that rabbit hole, IIRC it's legal but hard, as the two easiest monopropellants to get are N2O and H2O2. N20 is a gas at room temperature, and gases aren't generally good rocket propellants, getting it liquid would be difficult. H2O2, you can't buy it above a certain concentration and its incredibly dangerous to purify by yourself.

So, liquids are out, for a different reason than solids. That leaves hybrids, but you can't make your own fuel, so you'd need to use something else as fuel. Something commonly available... Like a plastic. Specifically, I'm looking at ABS and Acrylic. With ABS I could 3D print fuel grains, and it's relatively easy to get a large acrylic rod and drill a hole through it. The problem at this point becomes the exhaust gases, ABS products are carcinogenic, not good, and I wasn't able to find anything about Acrylic products, besides the fact that you should use ventilation of you are engraving or laser-cutting it.

But it might not be a concern if I'm testing it from a safe distance, let it air out, and properly dispose of the acrylic later on (and test in a location not near anything people will eat).

 

 

So basically, my point is, does anyone see any legal problem or long-term health problem with doing something like this, a hybrid motor using acrylic and gaseous oxygen?

^^^Like this but way smaller initially.

 

It's worth saying that I only intend to do static fire tests, and maybe thrust measurements, not actual flights (I'd need a lot of certification to do that, and that's just not possible to do, especially being a non-adult).

Not legal advise:

I think you just need an FAA permit also I'm think of making my own liquid rocket too.

[Zeiss Ikon]

If the test isn't on the grounds of an airport, and the engine never leaves the ground (as with the static test in the video) FAA won't have a word to say about it.  As long as you don't illegally store "explosives," produce something that's illegal to possess, or create a hazard to life or property (don't do this in a rural area during high fire risk), there shouldn't be any legal repercussions.

That said, it wouldn't be at all a bad idea to notify your neighbors that you're testing safe and legal rocket motors, just so they don't call the emergency responders when they hear the test.  This kind of rocket can produce a very distinctive sound, as the chamber pressure produces oxidizer flow rate changes, leading to thrust oscillation that sounds very much like a pulse jet.  This happens with liquid oxidizer, when the chamber pressure exceeds approximately 50% of the pressure available at the injector (which will always be less than tank pressure, due to throttling losses).