Technical Comparison: Analysis of the Stacking Performance of Class A and Class C Disc Spring with the Same Diameter

In the selection and design of disc springs, a practical issue often arises: when two Class C standard disc springs are stacked, their total height approaches that of a Class A disc spring. What is the difference in load-bearing capacity between them? Jiangsu Sunzo Spring provides a clear technical comparison and analysis based on the national standards for disc springs and mechanical principles.

1、Geometric relationship: Approximate but not identical in height

First, we need to clarify the geometric relationship: for Class A and Class C standard disc springs with identical outer and inner diameters:

The total free height of two Class C disc springs stacked together is slightly higher than that of a single Class A disc spring.

Although their heights are nearly identical, their mechanical properties differ fundamentally due to variations in the cross-sectional coefficient (h₀/t).

2、Core conclusion: There are significant differences in force values

Through theoretical calculation and experimental verification, it can be concluded that the total force provided by two superimposed C-type disc springs is obviously less than that of a single A-type disc spring when compressed to the same working height.

Specifically, the former's carrying capacity is only about one-third of the latter's, a difference that is more significant than the mere geometric height difference.

3、Principle Analysis: Fundamental Difference of Stiffness Characteristics

The fundamental reason for this phenomenon is the different stiffness characteristics design of the A-type and C-type disc springs.

A The spring-like spring (h₀/t ≈ 0.4) has a relatively high stiffness, and its force-displacement curve is approximately linear, which can provide a large reaction force under a small deformation.

B The spring-like spring (h₀/t ≈ 1.3) has a significant nonlinear stiffness characteristic, the curve is relatively "flat", and the reaction force provided in the early stage of deformation is slow.

When two C spring are superimposed (parallel), the total stiffness is twice that of a single spring, but the total force provided by the superimposed spring is much lower than that of a single spring with higher basic stiffness because the basic stiffness characteristic curve is flat.

4、Selection Revelation: Focus on Performance Rather than Geometric Size

This comparison provides important enlightenment for the design and selection of disc spring:

1. It is not simple to substitute: two Class C disc springs stacked together cannot replace one Class A disc spring simply because of their similar total height, and the bearing capacity difference between them is huge.

2. The priority of requirements should be clear: when selecting the type, the core requirement should be clear whether it needs a large bearing capacity (type A) or a large deformation and a specific nonlinear curve (type C).

3. Value of professional consultation: Complex combination applications require professional calculation and analysis.

At Jiangsu Sunzo Spring, our technical team not only provides a wide range of products compliant with national disc spring standards, but also offers professional selection analysis and customized combination design services. We help you see through the surface to the core, selecting performance-matched elastic solutions based on actual operating conditions, thus avoiding performance failures or redundant designs caused by improper selection.