Valve Rotators

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Aug 10, 2014
Messages
2,046
Country flag
I believe the majority of late style Evo hogs with 7 mm valves employ the rotating 3-groove keeper that contacts itself and allows the valve to float freely in the collar. When you handle just the valve with the collar and keepers installed it is impressive (at least to me) as the valve spins in the collar as if it were rotating in a precision ball bearing.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vance-Hine...h=item5b4fb78c4f:g:7nIAAOSwpYxb-YAq:rk:1:pf:0

Valve Rotators
 
It was common in auto engines to remove the rotator caps when non-leaded fuels came into use. It was found that when the valves rotated they caused too much wear to the seat without the protection of lead.

I do not think the standard Norton valve seats are hard enough to live very long with rotating valves.
Where rotating valves are used they specify very hard seats and valves. Jim
 
I thought there were videos (here in this forum) of Norton valves spinning on their own?
 
I thought there were videos (here in this forum) of Norton valves spinning on their own?

They do at high enough rpm to cause near separation of the spring-seat and cap assembly. Otherwise the cap will be locked to the stem by the collets and friction between the spring and spring seat will keep the valve in one place.

The rotator is simply a bearing which reduces this friction.
 
They do at high enough rpm to cause near separation of the spring-seat and cap assembly. Otherwise the cap will be locked to the stem by the collets and friction between the spring and spring seat will keep the valve in one place.

Well, that's interesting, :(

Valves in all other engines that I am familiar with rotate as part of the normal operation - typically starting at around 2k RPM; it's essentially inherent in the design of an OHV engine. I'm not sure how/why Norton managed to make an engine so that it WOULDN"T rotate the valves, especially since rotating the valves prolongs valve/seat/guide life. I hunted around and here's a video that show what it looks like:
 
http://rs.unitbv.ro/BU2011/Series I/BULETIN I/Jelenschi_L.pdf


http://courses.washington.edu/engr100/Section_Wei/engine/UofWindsorManual/Valve Train.htm
The primary difference in valve spring retainer styles is most evident when considering valve rotation.

Most valves in an operating small engine rotate about the valve stem axis at varying rates. Valve rotation has an overall positive effect on valve life. Rotation provides improved temperature distribution in the valve head and a mild scraping action that cleans the valve interface of any crushed combustion deposits.


Valve systems equipped with the keyhole valve spring retainer produce minimal rotation. The motion of the valve is inhibited by the constant contact between the retainer and the valve spring. Each time the valve is lifted from the seat by the tappet, the retainer and valve spring apply pressure to the valve stem retainer groove. The valve spring itself influences some rotation of the valve with a keyhole valve spring retainer. The wound spiral wire of the valve spring initiates a small torque through the retainer into the valve stem, which causes some rotation.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-valve-rotation
 
Last edited:
I am not sure of the reason for the rotation of the valve in your video. It may have some type of bearing to allow rotation, or the springs may be out of control due to age or RPM.

A valve will turn a tiny bit each time the valve opens due to the twist imparted by the compressing of the spring. If there is sufficient friction [ie no rotator provisions] then the valve will turn back to it's original position as the spring returns to the seated position.

A valve that rotates all the time requires either a collet designed as a bearing -ie with the ends of the collet butted together or a rotator bearing cap or seat.

Most valves will rotate at some rpm, where there is enough separation from surge to reduce the friction between the spring and cap or spring and seat. This allows rotation without serious spring wear -although it usually signals the beginning of the loss of valve train control.

Rotating valves was once common on gas engines using leaded fuel. It was needed to scrub the lead buildup from the valve and seat.
If the lead is not scrubbed, the valve is insulated from the seat and without heat transfer,
the valve will overheat and burn.

The problem with rotating valves on an unleaded fuel engine is the buildup of hard deposits on the valve that is a byproduct of burning gasoline. These hard deposits on the valve make the valve into something akin to a grinding stone. If the valve lands on the seat while it is rotating, then more wear occurs.
If the valves are rotating at common cruise RPM, then you will have wear problems unless there are designed in precautions. [ special hard parts]

There are a few [rare] engines still rotating the valves with unleaded gasoline. They use very hard, high temp materials for the valve and seat -usually inconel.

Rotating valves are still used on diesel engines to scrub soot from the seat.
Burning diesel does not produce these hard deposits on the valve, so wear is not an issue.
 
Along the lines of what you were saying re:

"Rotating valves was once common on gas engines using leaded fuel. It was needed to scrub the lead buildup from the valve and seat.
If the lead is not scrubbed, the valve is insulated from the seat and without heat transfer,
the valve will overheat and burn."


My point was that valve rotation was inherent in the engine design and that nothing else was needed to rotate the valves UNLESS the factory/engine builder wanted to ensure rotation below approximately 2500 RPM.
When I attended Ford, Chevy and Mopar's racing/performance seminars back in my competition engine building days, they made a big deal out of valve rotation and how that was accomplished. The rocker arm does not contact the tip of the stem at dead center; it is slightly offset. That slight offset imparts a turning motion and causes the valve to rotate as the RPM rises. There was very little or no rotation below around 2500 RPM. The reason they made a point out of it was to ensure that engine builders did not eliminate the rotation by "improving" the alignment of the rocker arms/followers and valve tips. Some builders were noticing that there was a slight offset and thought they were fixing a factory error. IOW, the valve rotation occurred due to the valve train design, not due to a RotoCap or other positive valve rotation device.

I ASSUMED that a Norton valve should/does rotate based on the above but you know what they say about ASSumptiones! ;)
 
Yes, I am familiar with the practice of offsetting the rocker to promote valve rotation. However I have not seen that it made a big difference on the engines I have experimented on.
I know older Chevys and Olds motors had good valve rotation using no offset and nothing but a bearing to allow the spring to cause rotation. Of course they did not rotate at low RPM.

I also experimented with some spring loaded ramped rotators many years ago that made a lot of rotation even at idle on a solid lifter 427 Ford.
They worked great when I installed them but the next time I pulled the covers to adjust the valves they were no longer working at all and were actually preventing any rotation because the disk springs inside them had all broken up and they were locked solid. [but it was a neat idea]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top