Curved spring washers on the cylinder bolts

MXD
Posts
2650
Joined
4/1/2008
Location
MA US
Edited Date/Time 4/27/2019 9:57am
What is the purpose of these? A buddy of mine just did his top end and he replaced them. But before finishing the job and after the head bolts had been torqued, he realized that the head needed to come back off. The washers have been flattened but never heat cycled. Can he reuse them or are they truly one and done once they’ve been crushed flat?



|
mysterion117
Posts
60
Joined
4/27/2019
Location
La Porte, IN US
4/27/2019 4:02am
It’s just a washer, it’s fine. Not sure why these twisted like that though. Some washers are actually designed with a curve to keep tension on threads without having to tighten the shit out of a bolt/nut also
2
JM485
Posts
5409
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
4/27/2019 8:30am
In that application, a lock washer is doing absolutely nothing to help you.

Consider this, in order for that lock washer to begin becoming useful in holding a nut on, there would need to be a physical gap between the nut and the washer forming. At that point, considering this is a head nut, you've already lost the critical tension and "stretch" in the head studs that keep the head firmly in place, ie the damage is already done. Once that tension is lost, you've already lost your head gasket and likely dumped cool and into your cylinder, no Bueno. I don't see any reason not to just replace those with regular copper washers.
1
2
Tiki
Posts
10338
Joined
8/1/2006
Location
Corona, CA US
Fantasy
1695th
4/27/2019 9:11am
JM485 wrote:
In that application, a lock washer is doing absolutely nothing to help you. Consider this, in order for that lock washer to begin becoming useful in...
In that application, a lock washer is doing absolutely nothing to help you.

Consider this, in order for that lock washer to begin becoming useful in holding a nut on, there would need to be a physical gap between the nut and the washer forming. At that point, considering this is a head nut, you've already lost the critical tension and "stretch" in the head studs that keep the head firmly in place, ie the damage is already done. Once that tension is lost, you've already lost your head gasket and likely dumped cool and into your cylinder, no Bueno. I don't see any reason not to just replace those with regular copper washers.
Are you the engine designer? With the gaskets, the O-Rings and all other factors that the engine has you are just going to defeat the engineers recommendations who probably spent more than eight months designing the proper pressure put on the threads, not to mention any electrolysis that might occur with hardening processes and coatings that could possibly weld the nuts to the studs.

Yeah, how about we go screw up your hard work because, yaknow it makes not difference?

I'd stay with stock. There's a brazilian reasons to stay, and one to fuck it all up. Jus' sayin'

The Shop

JM485
Posts
5409
Joined
10/1/2013
Location
Davis, CA US
4/27/2019 9:57am
JM485 wrote:
In that application, a lock washer is doing absolutely nothing to help you. Consider this, in order for that lock washer to begin becoming useful in...
In that application, a lock washer is doing absolutely nothing to help you.

Consider this, in order for that lock washer to begin becoming useful in holding a nut on, there would need to be a physical gap between the nut and the washer forming. At that point, considering this is a head nut, you've already lost the critical tension and "stretch" in the head studs that keep the head firmly in place, ie the damage is already done. Once that tension is lost, you've already lost your head gasket and likely dumped cool and into your cylinder, no Bueno. I don't see any reason not to just replace those with regular copper washers.
Tiki wrote:
Are you the engine designer? With the gaskets, the O-Rings and all other factors that the engine has you are just going to defeat the engineers...
Are you the engine designer? With the gaskets, the O-Rings and all other factors that the engine has you are just going to defeat the engineers recommendations who probably spent more than eight months designing the proper pressure put on the threads, not to mention any electrolysis that might occur with hardening processes and coatings that could possibly weld the nuts to the studs.

Yeah, how about we go screw up your hard work because, yaknow it makes not difference?

I'd stay with stock. There's a brazilian reasons to stay, and one to fuck it all up. Jus' sayin'
Yes I am, because I’m an engineer and I know the things I stated above.

1. A different washer is not going to change electrolysis, and good coating of anti-seize will keep those nuts from welding themselves to the studs. Everyone should be using anti-seize on their cylinder and head nuts.

2. If it took them 8 months determining he proper pressure on those threads then god help them, they need it desperately. The stud diameter is known, we want the tension in the stud to approach its yield point so that under the cyclical loading it undergoes during each engine cycle, it will not fail in fatigue because the applied load will not exceed that of the pre-tension inflicted on it during tightening.

3. Just because something left the factory a certain way, doesn’t make it correct. Here’s an example:

Cr500s do not have alignment dowels for the head to cylinder interface. They rely only on the studs to align the head. This is not an optimal design, nor is it technically “correct”, since studs and bolts should not be used to align parts, that’s what dowels and pins are for. It ended up working, but the design could be better. Since wave washers are being used here I’d venture to guess it’s an older bike as well.

I’d recommend looking into Carrol Smith’s theory on bolted joints and the use of locking washers. He will go much more in depth than I could ever hope to and explain things in a way that probably is easier to understand and more enjoyable to read than my bumbling.
3

Post a reply to: Curved spring washers on the cylinder bolts

The Latest