I get what you’re saying but this what is called the “Jesus Nut”. That’s because it’s one piece that essentially holds your entire helicopter up. To quote the Wikipedia page: …“whose breakdown would result in catastrophic consequences, the suggestion being that in such case the only thing left to do would be to pray to Jesus, or that the component’s importance could be likened to the importance of Jesus to Christianity.”
You don’t prototype this. You don’t make these. You get the tested, real part. There is no scenario in which making your own is advisable. Unless you’re an engineer for an aircraft manufacturer who is going to be doing rigorous testing then you should just buy the part ready made and certified.
UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 days ago
Aerospace manufacturing has a paper trail longer than you can imagine. The company selling this part can tell you (well, the FAA) the exact ingot out of the foundry and every single process and every person who has touched it since then.
No machine shop will take this job; the moment this guy is unable to produce a serial number and paperwork from the real manufacturer (likely during preflight if not installation) the FAA will track down the owner of said shop. At best that owner will lose their business and pay a massive fine, at worst spend a good long time in prison.
The FAA doesn’t fuck around and for that I am thankful.
EtherWhack@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Also, one-offs aren’t really allowed outside of r&d. Everything has to have at least one piece in a batch go through testing, including destructive.
explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 day ago
How is the machine shop supposed to know it’s an aerospace part? The customer could just give them a reverse-engineered CAD file.
(Academic question, because making this part actually work will cost >$1500 without economies of scale)
UniversalBasicJustice@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 day ago
Depends on how much effort went into reverse engineering the part, but most likely when tolerancing enters the conversation. Most machine shops aren’t able to hit those tolerances and would laugh you out of the shop.
A shop that can hit those tolerances will kick you out of the shop; there’s a good chance they already work in aerospace. They have a deeply vested interest in avoiding the accompanying FAA inquiry should it be installed or, Satan forbid, actually flown.
A non-aerospace shop capable of meeting those tolerances would start laughing at the desired price point. Purchasing a suitable blank alone would cost over $1500, much less cover the actual machining.
BanMe@lemmy.world 1 day ago
A part like this can have some tolerance because it experiences wear and tear and oxidation, if it had to be down to a few microns perfection, the helicopter wouldn’t fly in both hot and cold temps even on day one. Die and investment metal casting especially with CNC machining, which are common enough processes in metal shops, can actually get down to single digit microns. But this is all moot as no one would ever do this for many reasons.
CookieOfFortune@lemmy.world 1 day ago
It would have to be an experimental aircraft. Someone died recently when they installed a 3D printed intake that melted on their experimental single seater.