This type of laser cutting is fiber.  Look into it before panning it.  The cut width is .002 - .003".  At my shop we were cutting with CO2.  Much bigger cut width, much more heat.  The fiber laser has no HAZ.  The part can be picked up right after cutting and it is luke warm to the touch.  If the tolerances can be held, and the part is proven to be stronger, why it is it "just not worth the cost of proving it"?  We are just trying to solve a design problem.

TheSneeze wrote on 01/27/22 at 22:07:11:


Several of us have done this a time or two.....none of us are getting rich, and it is more a labor of love.  Lancer provides performance parts, Verslagen makes tensioner upgrades, Arman and I have done some machining.....we likely make $10 an hour for our time.

Thanks for taking on the clutch cam issue.

And I agree......testing the original part to failure - followed by testing the new part to prove it is significantly stronger is fine.  I don't believe it is necessary to test a new part to failure if the applied force is significantly improved.  It is likely that a 50% improvement in strength is probably adequate.  If we install stronger springs they won't be a lot stronger - as your prediction of breaking other parts will likely prove true.  I think the next weak link is probably that outer piece that holds the center bearing and pushes on the 4 springs....as we just machined part of it away to reduce the spring preload (although we might not have to machine that away if the cam is stronger).

We still need a few more takers to hit the threshold for a manufacturing run.   Four or five more and I will get moving on this.

I am headed off to the machine shop today to pull the trigger on a run of these AR500 clutch actuator pawls.  I will make sure they know the critical features are the distance from the cup to the shaft centerline, the depth of the cup, and the flat to flat distance on the double D hole.  I am looking forward to seeing how these turn out.  Of course, I will post detailed pictures of them when I receive them prior to shipping.  Thanks go out to all the guys willing to join me in this experiment!  Here's to finding the next weakest link!  Cheers!

The part will retain the same profile as the OEM part.  We are tightening up the tolerance and clearance of both the flat-to-flat dimension and the diameter of the double D.  There was as much as .012" of clearance on some of these features.  Crazy.  No wonder there are wear marks on the edges of the flats on the shaft.

One change is necessary.  We are cutting these from .25" thick AR500, and they will be fuse welded together using TIG.  The parts will still be ground to the OEM thickness. He does not have any .500" thick AR500, and would need to buy an entire sheet to get it.  This will not detract from the strength of the part as there are no forces being applied to try and separate the halves.  Fuse welding will eliminate any "proud" filet that could reduce clearance to the case.  If this approach makes anyone leery, speak up now.  I will post pictures of the finished parts prior to shipping so everyone can see what they are getting.  The strength increase should be huge with this material, so I looked at the two piece approach as a moot point.

Won’t welding two 1/4” pieces together place the centerline of the cup right on the parting line?

The AR500 is quenched & tempered.  What happens to the mechanical properties once you weld it?

The welding doesn’t sound good.

Just got off the phone with him.  After voicing those concerns, he actually found a smaller chunk of .500" thick from a different supplier and won't need to procure a whole sheet.  So we are back to one piece, no welding.  I think he was leaning toward the two piece method as they cut .25" thick every day, and didn't have any .500" in stock.  Sorry about the hiccup.