by Sara McCaslin Sara McCaslin No Comments

Choosing a Spring Energizer for 20-Year Wind Turbine Pitch and Yaw Seals

Pitch and yaw bearings for wind energy applications need seals that keep grease in and contamination out for a 20-year lifespan. The catch is that every bit of contact force that makes a seal effective also makes it drag, and in pitch systems that drag loads the pitch motor and gear train directly. The real design question is not how much lip force is needed, but how to maintain that force for two decades without it creeping up or wearing down. That’s as much a spring selection question as a material one, and it’s the focus here. 

Why a Spring Energizer is Needed

A conventional elastomer lip seal relies on interference fit and elastic squeeze for contact force, and holds up reasonably well as long as the rubber’s memory does. PTFE-based lips behave differently: virgin PTFE has excellent chemical/thermal stability and the lowest friction coefficient of any solid, but poor elastic recovery, and creeps (cold-flows) under sustained pressure. Fillers such as glass, bronze, carbon, or moly disulfide reduce creep and improve wear resistance but do not provide spring-back as rubber does. Once a filled PTFE lip has taken a compression set or worn down, it stays that way.

Relying on the PTFE itself to maintain lip force through 20 years of thermal cycling and wear is the wrong approach. That is the job a mechanical spring energizer is built for.

How a Spring-Energized Seal Solves the Retention Problem

A spring-energized PTFE seal separates the sealing surface from the sealing force. The PTFE (or filled PTFE) jacket provides the low-friction contact surface; a precision metal spring seated inside it provides and maintains the contact force, independent of the polymer’s mechanical behavior. Because the spring carries the sustained load, it can deliver a nearly constant force across a wide deflection range and resist compression set almost entirely, which answers the 20-year question. The seal keeps compensating for jacket wear, misalignment, out-of-roundness, and eccentricity as they accumulate, rather than losing contact force as a plain PTFE lip does.

Three Spring Geometries, Three Different Jobs

Advanced EMC builds spring-energized seals with three spring geometries, each suited to different motion and friction requirements:

  • Cantilever (“V” or “M”) spring: offers a moderate load and deflection range, with a positive wiping action at the lip’s front edge. Well suited where the seal also needs to scrape out abrasive contamination off the shaft or race.
  • Canted coil (“W”/slant coil) spring, including Advanced EMC’s proprietary FlexForce design: provides a wide deflection range with a flat, relatively constant load curve, and correspondingly tight, predictable control of friction and torque. Wind industry literature points to this geometry specifically for pitch-drive gear seals. Each coil deflects independently, so canted coil springs also resist compression set well over long dwell periods.
  • Helical spring: offers a low deflection range and high unit load, and is used where the seal is essentially static or very slow-moving, and friction is not the limiting factor.
Spring Energized Teflon Seals

Matching Spring Geometry to Pitch vs. Yaw Duty

Pitch bearings oscillate slowly through a limited arc, reverse direction often, and sit through long dwell periods. Every bit of lip drag shows up as torque the pitch motor and gearbox must overcome, so friction predictability matters most. A canted coil spring is generally the better fit because its flat load curve keeps friction stable through dwell and reversal cycles, rather than relying on the PTFE’s own memory.

Yaw bearings rotate more continuously over a larger diameter, and onshore yaw seals often see more dust and grit than pitch seals buried in the hub. A cantilever spring, especially with a scraper-lip profile, often makes more sense here because the wiping action helps exclude contamination, and the slightly higher friction is easier to tolerate on a larger, more continuously rotating bearing.

The Spring Alloy Is Not an Afterthought

The spring geometry solves mechanical retention; the spring alloy solves corrosion and temperature exposure, and getting it wrong reintroduces the failure mode the spring was meant to eliminate. Stainless steel is the default for general-purpose duty. Hastelloy’s nickel-based chemistry is the step up for aggressively corrosive media. Elgiloy’s fatigue and corrosion resistance suit combined heat and salt-laden exposure, which is a real consideration offshore. Advanced EMC offers all three, plus other high-performance alloys, for FlexForce springs.

The Honest Tradeoffs

A spring energizer is not a free upgrade. It adds design variables, namely geometry and alloy, that must both be specified and qualified correctly. The gland or housing must be sized for the spring’s working deflection range, so a spring-energized seal generally is not a drop-in replacement for a housing designed around a standard lip seal. And it does not solve which PTFE compound should sit at the jacket face contacting grease and the shaft or race for two decades. That is a separate material question, covered in our companion article on jacket material selection.

Talk to a Sealing Engineer

If you are specifying seals for pitch or yaw bearings and need 20-year performance without a rising friction penalty on the pitch motor, Advanced EMC can help with spring geometry and alloy selection for your duty cycle. Contact us today to talk through FlexForce canted coil spring options with a sealing solutions engineer.

by Sara McCaslin Sara McCaslin No Comments

Kynar (PVDF) vs. PTFE: Choosing the Right Fluoropolymer for Fluid Handling Seals


A specification that simply calls out “flouropolymer” is quite incomplete. PVDF and PTFE are both fluoropolymers and grouped under that umbrella term, but they are quite different. When it comes to mechanical and chemical behavior, specifying the wrong material can lead to premature seal failure and expensive downtime. The objective of this blog post is to provide a clear, practical basis for determining which material is the most appropriate.

How PVDF and PTFE Are the Same

Both PVDF (Kynar) and PTFE (Teflon) resist a broad range of acids and solvents, and both handle highly elevated temperatures better than elastomers. They also share low coefficients of friction, low surface adhesion, and non-stick properties. And both have their own specialties in fluid-handling applications.

Where PVDF Pulls Ahead of PTFE 

PVDF (Polyvinylidene Fluoride) has distinct advantages over PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene). It exhibits better mechanical strength than PTFE (by about 2-3x) and has excellent abrasion resistance, which means it can hold up better under slurry or particulate-laden fluid flow. Wear resistance is another property of PVDF that excels over PTFE, especially in dynamic seal contact, such as wear sleeves and piston rings.  It also exhibits lower cold flow and creep under compression, which is very important for seal performance over time under sustained load. 

Finally, PTFE might be more expensive than the equivalent PVDF stock. While PTFE stock is inexpensive, PVDF is melt-processable. Being melt-processable can make PVDF vastly more cost-effective for high-volume molded parts.

Where PVDF Loses Against PTFE

PTFE has an extremely low coefficient of friction compared to PVDF (0.04-0.10 vs. 0.15-0.30). And in the presence of high-pH caustics and strong bases, PTFE performs without issue, whereas PVDF begins to degrade. There are also polar solvents, amines, fuming acids, and some ketones that attack PVDF’s chemical structure and polymer chain. PVDF’s chemical resistance chart has real gaps where PTFE’s is closer to “resistant to everything below its temp limit.” Always check material compatibility at your actual operating temperature, not ambient temperature. It is a fact that many “resistant” ratings degrade at elevated temperatures.

PVDF vs PTFE – Who Wins?

The table below summarizes the similarities and differences between PVDF and PTFE.

*Values are approximate; exact values are based on material grade and blend

* PVDF: Lower for high-volume molding; PTFE: Lower for machined stock

Decision framework

Here is a checklist for fluid handling engineers choosing between PVDF and PTFE:

  1. What’s touching the seal? Check for a strong base or problem solvent first; if it is present, PTFE wins outright
  2. Is there abrasive/particulate content or high dynamic wear? If so, lean toward PVDF if  the compatibility allows
  3. Is the seal under sustained compressive load where creep matters? If so, lean toward PVDF
  4. Static seal, clean chemistry, wide chemical exposure risk (multi-product lines, CIP/COP)? PTFE is the safer default.

The figures below show examples of where each material performs best.

Conclusion

Borderline cases with mixed process streams, elevated-temperature caustics, or unusual solvent blends are exactly where a materials engineer should get involved before committing to tooling. It is always cheaper to change a decision on paper than after seals are cut. Advanced EMC is here to help you choose the right material and seal for your fluid-handling challenges. And keep in mind that Advanced EMC offers several material options if neither material is a fit.