Defining And Maintaining
Fluid Cleanliness For Maximum Hydraulic Component Life
By Brendan Casey
Many factors can reduce the service life of hydraulic components.
Contamination of hydraulic fluid by insoluble particles
is one of these factors. To prevent particle contamination
from cutting short component life, an appropriate fluid
cleanliness level must first be defined and then maintained
on a continuous basis.
Particle Contamination And Its Consequences
Particle contamination in hydraulic fluid accelerates wear
of system components. The rate at which damage occurs is
dependent on the internal clearances of the components within
the system, the size and quantity of particles present in
the fluid and system pressure. Typical internal clearances
of hydraulic components are shown in exhibit 1.1.

Particles larger than a component's internal clearances
are not necessarily dangerous. Particles the same size as
the internal clearance cause damage through friction. But
the most dangerous particles in the long-term are those
that are smaller than the component's internal clearances.
Particles smaller than 5 microns are highly abrasive. If
present in sufficient quantities, these invisible 'silt'
particles cause rapid wear, destroying hydraulic components.
Quantifying Particle Contamination
Some level of particle contamination is always present
in hydraulic fluid, even in new fluid. It is the size and
quantity of these particles that we are concerned with.
The level of contamination, or conversely the level of cleanliness
considered acceptable, depends on the type of hydraulic
system. Typical fluid cleanliness levels for different types
of hydraulic systems, defined according to ISO, NAS and
SAE standards, are shown in exhibit 1.2.
ISO 4406 defines contamination levels using a somewhat
complicated dual scale numbering system. The first number
refers to the quantity of particles larger than 5 microns
per 100 milliliters of fluid and the second number refers
to the number of particles larger than 15 microns per 100
milliliters of fluid.
The complicated part is that the quantities of particles
these numbers represent are expressed as powers of the numeral
2. For example, a cleanliness level of 15/12 indicates that
there are between 214 (16,384) and 215 (32,768) particles
larger than 5 microns and between 211 (2,048) and 212 (4,096)
particles larger than 15 microns, per 100 milliliters of
fluid. A modified version of ISO 4406 includes 2 micron
particle counts, in addition to the standard 5 micron and
15 micron counts.
Defining A Target Cleanliness Level
As an example, let’s assume that we have a normal-pressure
system and using exhibit 1.2 we define our target cleanliness
level to be ISO 16/13. Having established the minimum fluid
cleanliness level required for acceptable component life
in this type of system, the next step is to monitor the
actual cleanliness of the fluid to ensure that the target
cleanliness level is maintained on a continuous basis. This
involves taking fluid samples from the system at regular
intervals and testing them for cleanliness.
Testing Fluid Cleanliness
There are two ways of testing fluid cleanliness. The first
involves sending a fluid sample to a laboratory for analysis.
The lab results contain detailed information on the condition
of the fluid. The information normally included in a fluid
condition report, along with typical targets or alarm limits,
are shown in exhibit 1.3.
The second way to test a fluid’s cleanliness level
is to use a portable, electronic instrument designed for
this purpose. This method is convenient and results are
almost instant, however it shouldn’t be considered
a total substitute for lab analysis because the results
do not include wear debris levels, viscosity, water content
and other useful data. But when the two methods are used
in combination, the frequency of lab analysis can be reduced.
Whichever method is employed, it is important that the
equipment used to capture and contain the sample is absolutely
clean. If you are taking multiple samples from different
systems, take care not to cross-contaminate one fluid sample
with another, and never take samples from drain plugs or
other low lying penetrations in the system, otherwise the
results will be unreliable. Ideally, samples should be taken
from the return line, upstream of the return filter, with
the system working at operating temperature.
Achieving A Target Cleanliness Level
Going back to our example, let’s assume that we have
sampled the fluid in our system and received the fluid condition
report. The report indicates an actual cleanliness level
of ISO 19/16, well outside our target of 16/13. We know
we are not going to get optimum service life from our system’s
components with this level of contamination in the fluid,
so we need to fix it.
As you can see from exhibit 1.2, there is a correlation
between fluid cleanliness level and the level of filtration
in the system. Therefore, we need to check the system’s
current level of filtration. But first, let me explain filter
ratings in more detail.
Hydraulic Filter Ratings
Hydraulic filters are rated according to the size of the
particles they remove and the efficiency with which they
remove them. Filter efficiency can be expressed either as
a ratio (Beta, symbol )
for a given particle size ( )
or as a percentage. Filter Beta ratios and their corresponding
efficiency percentages are shown in exhibit 1.4.

Filters are commonly classified according to absolute or
nominal ratings. A filter that is classified absolute has
an efficiency of 98% or better at
the specified micron size, and a filter that is classified
nominal has an efficiency of between 50% and 95% ( 2.0
-  20.0)
at the specified micron size.
This can get a bit confusing, but the important thing to
remember when purchasing filters for your hydraulic equipment,
is that there is a significant difference in effectiveness
between a 10-micron nominal and a 10-micron absolute filter
element.
Checking The Filtration Level
According to exhibit 1.2, a filtration level of 10-micron
with an efficiency of 98.67% ( 10
75) is required to achieve a cleanliness level of ISO 16/13.
This means that unless there is at least one filter in the
system with a rating of 10-micron absolute, it is unlikely
that a cleanliness level of 16/13 will be achieved, regardless
of how many times the filters are changed. If a check of
the existing filters reveals that this level of filtration
is not present somewhere in the system, then either the
level of filtration must be improved or the target cleanliness
level must be revised downward.
Don’t automatically assume that the existing filter
elements in a system can be automatically substituted with
elements of a smaller micron size and/or higher efficiency.
This will increase the restriction (pressure drop) across
the filter and consequently the filter may no longer be
able to handle its designed flow rate. If this happens,
the filter’s bypass valve will open and the filter
will be ineffective. Filter manufacturers publish graphs
that plot pressure drop against flow rate at a given fluid
viscosity, according to an element’s area, blocking
size and efficiency. This information should be consulted
before upgrading the elements in existing filter housings.
Rectifying Abnormal Contamination Load
Going back to our example, let’s assume that the
system’s tank-top mounted return filter is rated 10-micron
absolute ( 10
75). Therefore, according to exhibit 1.2, our target cleanliness
level of ISO 16/13 should be achievable with the existing
level of filtration. So how do we explain the high level
of particle contamination in the fluid?
If we are just starting our preventative maintenance program,
this could be explained by a filter change that is long
overdue. If we have some previous history on this system
and the results of our last fluid sample were acceptable,
we need to look for any abnormal source of contamination
that is overloading the filters. Keep in mind that particle
contamination can be generated internally or externally
ingested.
Check the wear debris levels in the fluid condition report.
This will indicate if the level of contamination being generated
internally is abnormal. If wear debris levels are above
alarm limits, this usually indicates that a component in
the system has started to fail. Any metal-generating components
need to be identified and changed-out.
Common entry points for externally ingested contamination
are through the reservoir air space and on the surface of
cylinder rods. Check that all penetrations into the reservoir
air space are sealed and that the reservoir breather incorporates
an air filter of 3-micron absolute or better. If the reservoir
is not properly sealed and/or the breather not adequately
filtered, dust can be drawn into the reservoir as the fluid
volume changes.
Check that the chrome surfaces of all cylinder rods are
free from pitting, dents and scores, and rod wiper seals
are in good condition. Damaged cylinder rods and/or rod
wiper seals allow dust that settles on the surface of the
rod to enter the cylinder and contaminate the fluid.
Flushing The Fluid
The next step is to change all of the filters in the system.
Because our example system’s current fluid cleanliness
level of ISO 19/16 is well outside target, the fluid in
the reservoir should be flushed before the filters are changed.
This involves circulating the fluid in the reservoir through
external filters for an extended period, or ideally, until
the target cleanliness level is achieved. The equipment
for doing this is commonly called a filter cart, which normally
consists of an electric transfer pump and a set of filters
mounted on a trolley.
The benefits of flushing the fluid in the system before
changing the filters are that the system will be operating
with cleaner fluid sooner, and the new filters don’t
have the job of cleaning up the fluid – they only
have to maintain fluid cleanliness.
If you don’t have access to a filter cart or it isn’t
practical to use one, purchase two sets of replacement filter
elements at this time. Fit the first set immediately and
replace them with the second set after 20 to 50 hours of
service. The idea is that the first set of filters cleans
the fluid and the second set keeps it clean. Either way,
the fluid cleanliness level should be checked again after
50 hours of service to ensure the target cleanliness level
has been achieved.
Benefits Of Fluid Condition Monitoring
Monitoring and maintaining fluid cleanliness involves a
continuous cycle of testing and corrective action. The benefits
of regular fluid condition monitoring are illustrated in
the following example.
Several years ago, I was responsible for a preventative
maintenance program in a large, manufacturing plant. This
plant operated 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The manufacturing
process was complex and highly integrated, such that a breakdown
in one section of the plant would stop production across
the whole plant. Consequently, unscheduled downtime was
very costly in terms of lost production. As part of the
preventative maintenance program, the fluid condition of
the plant’s 30 individual pieces of hydraulic equipment
was closely monitored.
One day, as I was analyzing the latest batch of fluid condition
reports, I noticed that one system was showing chromium
levels way above normal. Investigation revealed that these
high levels of chromium wear debris were being generated
by a large diameter cylinder that had started to fail. The
significance of the problem intensified when a check of
the plant’s spare parts inventory revealed that there
was no spare on site and because the cylinder was unique
to this piece of equipment, delivery time on a replacement
was several weeks.
Early warning of this impending failure enabled a replacement
cylinder to be manufactured and downtime to be scheduled
for its change-out. This averted a long and costly period
of unscheduled downtime. The management of this company
needed no further convincing of the value of this aspect
of the preventative maintenance program.
About the Author: Brendan Casey has more than 16 years
experience in the maintenance, repair and overhaul of mobile
and industrial hydraulic equipment. For more information
on reducing the operating cost and increasing the uptime
of your hydraulic equipment, visit his Web site: http://www.InsiderSecretsToHydraulics.com
|