On 04/14/2017 08:10 PM, Ken Biba wrote:
As you suggest, likely not intent. But also clearly not a skilled design thatI wondered that, also. The basketball coach?
a likely lack of safety procedures only made worse.
One wonders who was supervising them in university facilities.
K
Ken Biba
Novarum, Inc.
415-577-5496
On Apr 14, 2017, at 5:07 PM, Marcus D. Leech <mleech@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/14/2017 07:58 PM, Ken Biba wrote:That certainly seems to have been the *effect*, but not, perhaps, the
Sounds like they made a pipe bomb, not a rocket motor.
K
Ken Biba
Novarum, Inc.
415-577-5496
intention. Making experimental solid-propellant motors out of
galvanized pipe seems riskier than other choices, for sure.
But the main issue was inadequate safety procedures, I'm guessing. No barricades, and
"in a parking lot"? Seriously? Wow.
I've had my fair share of motor-go-booms. Never been a problem, because of
safety procedures.
On Apr 14, 2017, at 4:26 PM, David Weinshenker <daze39@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Sounds like a static test failure, with inadequate
On 04/14/2017 09:59 AM, Anthony Cesaroni wrote:
http://www.ktvb.com/news/local/idaho/4-university-of-idaho-students-injured-in-explosion/431253358
separation and blast barriers. (Excerpt from linked
source below.)
-dave w
-----
The device was a galvanized metal pipe, between 8 and 12 inches long and about
1 1/2 inches in diameter that had been filled with rocket fuel. It had been
placed on a wooden pallet for the experiment; when it blew up, Ewart [Dan
Ewart, VP for Infrastructure at U of I] said,
the blast also destroyed the pallet.
Moscow Police Chief James Fry said city code prevents the launching of any
projectiles - including fireworks - without a permit from the city of Moscow.
The students performing the experiment did not have a permit, he said.
But Ewart pointed out the students had not planned to launch the device into
the air.
"The device that was exploded was actually a test for the rocket fuel itself, it was
not intended to be a rocket," he said.
-----
