Basic Spiral Wound Design Guidelines for Valve Bonnets

a) Suggested Clearances
As a spiral-wound gasket is compressed, it tightens-up within itself (think of pulling a tape
measure tight for example). As the element is compressed from the axial forces, it tries to
spread both inwards and outwards generating a radial force, as well as having a certain
amount of folding inwards of the V-profile. As the windings contact the outer wall of
the recess they will deform from a V to a flattened C shape, and this support helps to
densify the gasket within itself as well as supporting the windings. If the clearance is too
great or the compression too high there could be a risk of bursting the welds on the outside
of the element. Often, we will tighten the clearance a little on a high pressure gasket
compared to a low pressure one.
The I/D clearance is typically double that of the O/D clearance to allow more room for the
inward folding of the windings.
If the housing is open to the bore, we would typically allow double the I/D clearance
compared to the closed recess, to avoid the winding entering the bore, as of course any
unsupported element under compression would buckle and fail. Open to the bore recesses
can often use a C/IR type gasket having a solid metal inner ring.
Tongue & Groove Housing

2-3X

Spigot & Recess Housing

5-6X

Diameter

Suggested clearance x
(graphite)
0.6-0.8
0.8-1.0
1.0-1.2
1.2-1.5

<100
100-300
300-600
600-1000

b) Compression:
Nominal Thickness
mm
2.5
3.2
4.5
7.3

Compressed
thickness mm
1.9 / 2.1
2.4 / 2.6
3.2 / 3.45
5.0 / 5.25

Typical diameter
range
22 300
10 760
12 1520
60 - 3550

c) Tolerances (type C)
Tolerances are generally +ve on I/D and ve on O/D thus:
Diameter
<300
300-600
600-1500

I/D tolerance
+0.5 / -0.0
+0.8 / -0.0
+1.5 / -0.0

O/D tolerance
-0.5 / +0.0
-0.8 / +0.0
-1.5 / +0.0

d) Suggested element widths

There are no precise guidelines or definite rules to prove width of element vs. system
pressure etc., but the following table gives typical width guidelines that have proven to be
reasonable over a number of years. Again, things such as clearance in the recess can have
an effect and there is the need for the gasket to be practical to manufacture and handle.
(For example if less than square in section there are almost no turns of filler as the inner
and outer plain windings lose too much of the overall width.) The element widths might
be varied a little in practice, but these should be a reasonable starting point for a design:
Gasket I/D
<50
50-100
100-150
150-200
200-250
250-300
300-450
450-750
750-1250

<40 bar
5
6
6.5
8
9.5
11
12
14
16

40-60 bar
5.5
7
8
9.5
11
12.5
13.5
16
18

60-80 bar
6.5
8
9.5
11.5
12.5
14
15.5
18
20

80-100 bar
7.5
9
11.5
13
15
16
18
20
22

>100 bar
8.5
11
13.5
15.5
17
19
20.5
22.5
24

e) Flange finish
Typically for spiral-wound gaskets, a traditional light gramophone finish in the 3.26.3mRa range is considered appropriate. Both opposing flange faces should have a
similar finish wherever possible. We find that more problems tend to arise through poor
application of bolt load than through incorrect flange finish. However, be aware that some
more ductile metals can leave too deep a groove i.e. if the machining tool plucks out a
deep chip of metal. The typical finish when machined as above is perhaps only 0.002
deep. We have seen problems when a finish has been cut too deep, although at the right
pitch of serrations, as of course the graphite only protrudes above the steel windings by a
fraction of a mm, so cannot fill-in a particularly deep surface finish.

f) Load compression leakage

We are presently undertaking a range of gasket tests on various gaskets for EN13555 to
characterise gaskets for the EN1591 design method. However, the type C Metaflex are not
currently part of our test programme. We have done some work on Type SG/IR with inner
and outer support rings, for use on regular raised face flanges. Obviously the addition of
the support rings will harden the gasket in terms of load-compression characteristics to
some degree, as there is less room for the sealing element to spread under compression.

Below is a typical load-leak graph of an SG/IR with helium. The sample is 1.1/2 N.B..
Leakage curve
Metaflex 66.0x54.5x5.16 mm
Test number: 07-067
1.00E+00

leak rate [mg/m/s]

1.00E-01

p = 40 bar
T = 20 C
He

1.00E-02

1.00E-03

1.00E-04

1.00E-05

1.00E-06
0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

gasket stress [MPa]

The next is a load-compression-recovery graph of an SG/IR from another test of several

years ago, but of 3 N.B. :-

Below is another from rather a long time ago of a 4 type SG (outer ring only), which
compresses a little easier than the SG/IR.
Compression Curve:Metaflex Type SG - graphite filled
5
4.8
Thickness (mm)

4.6
4.4
4.2
4
3.8
3.6
3.4
3.2
3
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Stress (MPa)

Unfortunately these are the only graphs I have readily to hand at present, however, it
should be noted that in the case of type C in a recess they will differ also.

70

The major things which will influence the load-compression characteristics are:
a) The tightness of fit in the recess
b) The diameter and therefore the hoop strength of the wound element, along with the
winding tension used. (Note that it is possible to tune gaskets a little in this way,
though we do have a standard tolerance of number of turns per unit width etc.).
c) The element width in relation to the diameter.
Thus, we would suggest that as an initial estimate, to compress a standard graphite filled
type C from 4.5 mm into the working zone of 3.2-3.45mm might take something in the
region of 50-100 MPa depending on clearances and sizes. Note that a typical loadcompression graph does tend to take an exponential format, so getting from 3.45 to 3.2mm
thick can take quite a bit of additional load.
(As an example of a slightly softer gasket example, I found one I tested many years ago in
my files 250 x 266 for a relatively low pressure nuclear job (17 bar duty) where the
customer wanted compression between 38 and 58 MPa. The recess was 247 x 267 and
thus slightly greater clearance than the guidelines given above, and on average these
gaskets compressed to 3.45mm at around 40 MPa and 3.3mm at around 49 MPa.)
For the SG/IR tested above, we also have typical unloading modulus values, but again these may
differ on a type C which is in a recess with clearances.
Unloading modulus values (typical) (MPa)
Gasket stress [MPa]

ambient temperature

20

1273

30

1657

40

2524

50

2650

60

3403

80

3665

100

4601

120

5038

140

5682

160

6866

180

8753

200

7848

There is of course the problem of actually achieving the theoretical load in practice. Note
that torque-tightening of bolts is relatively inaccurate, as is hydraulic tensioning. One
particular problem we encounter with hydraulic tensioning of studs in pump and valve
casings, is that of short bolts with low strains e.g.:-

Regular pipeline flanges

Strained length

Strained length

Pump or valve body

Thus, where hydraulic tensioners are used, it should be noted that they have a certain
degree of load-transfer relaxation when their oil pressure is removed. Whilst an overload
is used to try and compensate for this it is based on assumed deflections based on the
length to diameter ratio of the bolts. Thus, when short bolts are employed the assumptions
become even more inaccurate and the available overload is insufficient to compensate for
this, resulting in under-tensioned bolts.
Therefore, despite many calculations in theory regarding gasket load-compressionleakage, we still find occasional problems with the actual measurement of the installed
fastener tension.
I hope this is at least a start in terms of answering some of your questions.

Regards

Dennie Huisman
Sales Executive Business Development