helical spring washers

according to this:
http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm

they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)

and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
Why are they still made?

On 07/01/2013 08:58 AM, Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat and Body Roll
Bros Suspension Works wrote:
> according to this:
> http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm
>
> they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)
>
> and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
> Why are they still made?

because some people can't/won't be told. once some people quit their
formal schooling, they apparently cease to have the ability to learn -
if they didn't learn something before this cut-off point, they never
will. examples of this extraordinary phenomenon exist on this group.

regarding locking function, using any kind of washer is missing the
point. thread locking compounds are mature technology and highly
effective. as is older technology like locking wire. anyone still
using washers needs their head [and their torque] testing.


--
fact check required

On Mon, 01 Jul 2013 18:58:27 +0300, "Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat
and Body Roll Bros Suspension Works" > wrote:

>according to this:
>http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm
>
>they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)
>
>and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
>Why are they still made?


Interesting.

On 07/01/2013 11:58 AM, Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat and Body Roll
Bros Suspension Works wrote:
> according to this:
> http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm
>
> they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)
>
> and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
> Why are they still made?

Link doesn't work... are you referring to "wave" type washers?

I've seen them used in e.g. ball and socket type linkages to take up
play and prevent rattling... they work well for that application.

For bolted joints current thinking does seem to be that if any washer is
required it should be a simple flat washer, and that any type of "lock"
washer does not really contribute anything to the joint's tendency to
self-loosen in use. If loosening does occur that is a sign that either
the fastener selected was the incorrect one for the application or
something like a thread locking compound, some kind of prevailing torque
locking nut, or something like a Marsden nut should be used.

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Nate Nagel > wrote in news:kqsobp0fl0
@news6.newsguy.com:

> On 07/01/2013 11:58 AM, Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat and Body Roll
> Bros Suspension Works wrote:
>> according to this:
>> http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm
>>
>> they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)
>>
>> and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
>> Why are they still made?
>
> Link doesn't work... are you referring to "wave" type washers?



No, the thick kind that are split and twisted a bit so the ends are out of
phase with each other.

Link works fine for me.

<http://www.boltscience.com/pages/helicalspringwashers.htm>



--
Tegger

On 07/01/2013 06:04 PM, Tegger wrote:
> Nate Nagel > wrote in news:kqsobp0fl0
> @news6.newsguy.com:
>
>> On 07/01/2013 11:58 AM, Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat and Body Roll
>> Bros Suspension Works wrote:
>>> according to this:
>>> http://www.boltscience.com/pages/hel...ingwashers.htm
>>>
>>> they are not effective (making the matter worse actually)
>>>
>>> and yet I think I saw them in some application lately.
>>> Why are they still made?
>>
>> Link doesn't work... are you referring to "wave" type washers?
>
>
>
> No, the thick kind that are split and twisted a bit so the ends are out of
> phase with each other.
>
> Link works fine for me.
>
> <http://www.boltscience.com/pages/helicalspringwashers.htm>
>

Working now, must have just hiccupped when I looked before.

Yeah, the only time I use those is when I'm putting together an old car
and the FSM calls for their use. Not because I believe that it does any
good, but just in case someone calls me out on not being "correct." But
sometimes I will even deviate from that when it's a critical component
(e.g. for control arm shaft mounts on a Studebaker I just use grade 8
flat washers and prevailing torque nuts, because of the consequences of
them coming loose even if someone says "that's not right!")

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Nate Nagel > wrote in
:


> I will even deviate from that when it's a
> critical component (e.g. for control arm shaft mounts on a Studebaker
> I just use grade 8 flat washers and prevailing torque nuts, because of
> the consequences of them coming loose even if someone says "that's not
> right!")


I thought your Stude was highly customized.


--
Tegger

On 07/01/2013 07:23 PM, Tegger wrote:
> Nate Nagel > wrote in
> :
>
>
>> I will even deviate from that when it's a
>> critical component (e.g. for control arm shaft mounts on a Studebaker
>> I just use grade 8 flat washers and prevailing torque nuts, because of
>> the consequences of them coming loose even if someone says "that's not
>> right!")
>
>
> I thought your Stude was highly customized.
>

"Highly" is an overstatement. It's actually pretty close to all Stude,
just not the same one I just took the parts I liked best from all
years and threw them together. Drivetrain is pretty much '64 Avanti
with a custom driveshaft to make it work; electrics are stock but
converted to 12V with a 10SI alternator, I just used the '64 starter and
an aftermarket aluminum flywheel. Fortunately the body was shared with
later cars so finding heater and defrost blowers was not a problem.
Only thing that doesn't work is the radio. The dual-point Prestolite -
which I didn't have anyway - was replaced with a franken-distributor
with a MoPar pickup and Orange Box. Other than the 4-speed lever
inside, it *looks* like a '55 though. The only real "bling" is under
the hood. My goal was to pretty much make it look like a factory R-1
4-speed '55 coupe, if such a thing existed, although I did give into
temptation and throw some aluminum valve covers on it and the louvered
air cleaner from a '62 Corvette. It sounds simple, and probably is to
some people, but there was a lot of fiddle-farting around to make stuff
work where it wasn't intended to... hood clearance was my biggest
challenge.

I have also in the past worked on some more show-oriented cars, the
Stude club hasn't gotten to the point of some other clubs where they
check the bolt head markings, but I do try to not deviate from "what's
right" without a good reason. Critical suspension fasteners potentially
loosening (and they have been known to - there was actually a service
bulletin for the lower control arms directing that loosened fasteners be
replaced with new bolts, special flat-ground washers, and prevailing
torque nuts - so the "fix" was known even back in the late 50's) seems
like a good reason to deviate!

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

> the fastener selected was the incorrect one for the application or
> something like a thread locking compound, some kind of prevailing torque
> locking nut, or something like a Marsden nut should be used.
>
how does marsden work?
(
from some of the pictures googled it looks like a free spinning nut
)

On 07/02/2013 04:06 AM, Brake Dive, Acceleration Squat and Body Roll
Bros Suspension Works wrote:
>> the fastener selected was the incorrect one for the application or
>> something like a thread locking compound, some kind of prevailing torque
>> locking nut, or something like a Marsden nut should be used.
>>
> how does marsden work?
> (
> from some of the pictures googled it looks like a free spinning nut
> )

It's a very old school arrangement, and I was trying to find you a good
explanation online and failing... but basically it *is* free spinning
when installed, then it's staked with a special tool to lock it.

I never had the special tool, nor can I find a picture of it...

nate

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel