Hydraulic fluid contamination testing

Methods of assessing fluid cleanliness have become more sophisticated and effective, but also easier and
more convenient to use. Here's a summary of what's happening.
Contamination control involves preventing contaminants from entering a hydraulic system and placing filters
in strategic locations throughout the system to trap any contaminants that do find their way into the fluid. But
for critical equipment, a successful contamination control program also must include regular assessment of
the hydraulic fluid's cleanliness. Often, this must be done every two to si months or after every !"" or #,"""
hours of operation, depending on the equipment's duty cycle, operating environment, and how critical it is to
overall operation.
$ortable contamination detection instruments ma%e it quic% and easy to assess the cleanliness of hydraulic
fluid, whether the equipment is in an industrial plant or at a &ob site. $hoto courtesy of M'()* Machinery
'valuation, www.mevas.eu.
'perts also recommend that fluid be tested immediately after any maintenance event that eposes the
hydraulic system to the eternal environment. +his could be when a hose or other component is replaced or
fluid is added to the reservoir. ,luid replenishment can be particularly troublesome because new fluid is
notorious for being dirty - often from improper storage and handling practices.
Test labs or do-it-yourself?
Before the advent of portable contamination detection instruments, fluid testing was conducted for only the
most critical equipment and sent to a laboratory for analysis. +his is still the most practical route for
companies that do not require fluid testing often enough to &ustify purchasing their own diagnostic equipment
and training their personnel. )nd even if a company has its own equipment, test labs still prove valuable for
running multiple tests, interpreting results, troubleshooting, and recommending appropriate action.
+est labs should also be consulted for periodic chemical analysis of hydraulic fluid. 'ven if contamination
has been brought to within acceptable limits, certain contaminants can alter a fluid's chemical composition
.primarily the additives/ and render it ineffective. ,or eample, additive depletion, over time, can reduce a
fluid's lubricity, oidation resistance, or anti-foaming characteristics.
'cessive water and overheating are two conditions that can upset a fluid's chemical balance relatively
quic%ly. +herefore, if ecessive water is found in a fluid or a system overheats, eperts recommend not only
finding and correcting the source of the problem, but conducting chemical analysis of the fluid as well. 'ven
if these problems do not occur, hydraulic fluid suppliers generally recommend having fluid analy0ed
chemically at regular intervals 1 such as annually 1 to identify potential problems and prevent them from
occurring.
$ortable particle counters and other diagnostic equipment have made it easy and convenient to monitor fluid
cleanliness of even non-critical equipment. 2n fact, many companies that have invested in their own particle
counters and other instruments monitor cleanliness of more equipment more often.
+he higher reliability that results from this more-intense preventive maintenance adds to the return on their
investment. ,urthermore, advanced techniques are being developed to ma%e fluid-monitoring instruments
even more sophisticated. 'quipment currently is under development to continuously monitor the condition of
hydraulic fluid while equipment is running.
Assessment starts with a sample
3egardless of the details of any contamination-monitoring program, its usefulness will depend on fluid
sampling. ,luid samples must accurately represent the condition of the fluid within the hydraulic system.
+his means that the sampling technique and devices, as well as the container, must not contaminate the
fluid sample.
+he point from which samples are etracted should be determined by the information desired from the
sample. ,or eample, sampling fluid from a system's pump discharge line will li%ely produce different results
from a sample ta%en from a return line. ,luid from the pump discharge line is more li%ely to contain pump
wear debris than fluid from a return line because filters would have captured pump wear debris before it
would reach a return line.
'perts advise, however, that samples ta%en from the reservoir usually are the most unreliable. ,irst,
because a reservoir acts as a storage device, its contents have accumulated over a relatively long interval,
whereas fluid from a hydraulic line is more representative of conditions at the time the sample is ta%en.
*econd, most reservoirs are designed to minimi0e turbulent flow so contaminants can settle to the bottom
and air can rise to the top. +his ma%es it difficult to obtain a sample with a representative concentration of
water and other contaminants.
Fluid analysis techniques
Once fluid samples have been obtained, any of several methods can be used to analy0e the si0e,
concentration, and nature of the contaminants. +he most common analysis techniques for hydraulic systems
are4
particle distribution
gravimetric
ferrographic wear debris
proton induced 5-ray, and
water content.
'ach of these tests produces different results according to the type of information desired. +herefore, they
should not be viewed as competing technologies. 3ather, the more tests that are conducted on a sample,
the more %nowledge that can be gained. But no matter which technique is employed, obtaining a pure and
representative sample is essential to achieving accurate results.
Particle distribution summari0es the number of contaminant particles classified by si0e for a sample.
)utomatic particle counters have gained wide acceptance for this previously time-consuming, laborious tas%
that produced inconsistent results. +he widespread use of particle counters is a testament to their ease of
use and consistent reliability. +hey are often used by technicians at manufacturing and maintenance
facilities.
Graimetric analysis summari0es the total mass of solid particles above a given si0e for a specific volume
of fluid. 3esults are reported as mass density, usually mg6l. 7nli%e particle counting, gravimetric analysis
quantifies only solid particles, not water.
However, gravimetric analysis gives no indication of si0e distribution. *o a sample may contain 8! mg6l of
solid particles greater than, say, ! 9m. But this gives no indication as to what percentage of particles are
greater than #" 9m and how many are greater than #! or even 8! 9m. )s with particle counters, gravimetric
analysis instruments often are used by technicians to monitor contaminants in hydraulic systems.
Ferrographic wear debris analysis quantifies wear debris .primarily metals/ in a fluid sample. Because the
most highly stressed wearing parts of of machine components are made of steel, wear debris usually are
influenced by magnetic fields. ,errographic analysis can be used to evaluate a system's wear mechanisms,
assess the severity of wear, and identify the predominant materials being worn away.
Proton-induced !-ray emission "P#!$% summari0es the elemental composition of solid contaminants and
wear debris in a fluid. +he procedure involves eposing the fluid sample to a proton beam. ) computer then
interprets results of the test by producing data on the entire spectrum of elements in the target, not &ust a
single element.
:either particle counting nor gravimetric techniques can differentiate between foreign contaminants and
wear debris, which ma%es $25' useful for gaining insight into the nature of particles found in a fluid.
&ater-content analysis determines how much water is present in a base fluid. :et to particulate matter,
water, by far, is the most damaging contaminant in a hydraulic system - or any oil-lubricated system for that
matter. Higher concentrations of water in hydraulic oil accelerate wear, fluid degradation, corrosion, and
reduction in service life. +herefore, once the amount of water present in a hydraulic fluid has been found, the
challenge becomes determining how much can be tolerated.
+he test itself uses a solution that conducts electrical current based, in part, on the amount of water
contained in a sample. Measuring the current and its duration provides an indication of water content in the
base fluid. +he test can be accurate to within #" ppm, but additive pac%ages common to hydraulic fluid tend
to produce less detailed results.
New technology enhances assessment
;hether your car has an <idiot light< or a real temperature gauge, its designers deemed the engine's water
temperature important enough to monitor it continuously. )fter all, it wouldn't do much good to have your
engine's water temperature chec%ed only when you stop for gas. 2t's much more li%ely that a problem would
occur while you were on the road rather than when you were at the gas station.
Monitoring contamination of hydraulic fluid would at first seem to be much less critical than engine water
temperature. )fter all, fluid usually becomes contaminated gradually, so monitoring its condition frequently
enough can identify problems before they cause any real harm. 'ngine temperature, however, can increase
quic%ly once a problem occurs. 2f a hose ruptures, the water pump gives out, or the radiator lea%s, the
engine can quic%ly overheat.
Contamination, under certain conditions, can also act quic%ly to cause catastrophic failure in a hydraulic
system. ,or eample, if a pump ingests enough air to cause serious cavitation, it can become inoperative
within days. Or if a large quantity of water flows through a system, hydraulic fluid can lose its lubricity, which
will result in rapid wear of components. 2f either of these events occurred a few wee%s before a scheduled
fluid analysis, the machine could undergo costly downtime.
=ranted, these types of problems happen rarely. But if the equipment costs millions of dollars or wor%s in an
operation where downtime is measured in thousands of dollars per hour, it becomes practical to
continuously monitor fluid cleanliness. 2t is for cases li%e these that companies are developing systems to
monitor the cleanliness of hydraulic fluid continuously while a system is running.
One such prototype system routes pressuri0ed fluid from the pump into a tube through which light is
transmitted. ;hen the fluid is clean and relatively free of air and water, a receptor detects the amount and
pattern of light transmitted through the fluid.
)s the fluid becomes more contaminated, the amount and diffraction of light transmitted through the tube
changes. 2f undissolved water or air is present, the transmitted light becomes more scattered. Calibrating the
receptor to these different conditions provides an instantaneous indication of the fluids condition. +herefore,
a potentially catastrophic failure can be averted by ta%ing appropriate action immediately.
)nother emerging technology is a system that enables users to go beyond particle counting and actually
analy0e wear debris. +he system consists of hardware to generate digital photomicrographs and software to
aid in analy0ing the digital images. Once imported to a $C, images can be compared to those in an atlas of
%nown wear debris using wear debris analysis software. +he software also aids in characteri0ing
descriptions, managing data, and generating reports. +he analysis can also be incorporated into
maintenance and *$C software used for plant operation and quality assessment.

'pecial fittings help (eep samples clean
*pecial fittings are available to minimi0e the potential for contamination when sampling fluid from a hydraulic
system. *hown here is a model for sampling fluid from a hydraulic system's return line at pressures to >""
psi. 2t comes in a variety of port si0es and thread configurations. 2mage courtesy of ,luid ?ine $roducts 2nc.,
www.fluidline.com
+apping into a hydraulic system to sample fluid creates the potential to contaminate not only the fluid in the
hydraulic system, but the fluid sample as well. +o help prevent either from occurring, test ports designed for
fluid sampling should be mounted permanently to the equipment and have protective caps to %eep dirt away
from the sampling port. +he cap is removed only when ta%ing a fluid sample and replaced immediately
afterward.
*hown at right is a low-pressure test fitting for sampling fluid from hydraulic return lines without having to
shut down equipment. $ressing on the pushbutton opens a chec% valve that routes fluid from the hydraulic
system out through the sampling port. Models for ta%ing samples from high-pressure lines wor% in a similar
fashion, but use a threaded connection instead of a pushbutton to open the chec% valve.
+he test port avoids introducing eternal contaminants into the fluid etracted from the hydraulic system.
However, to ensure accurate samples, tubing leading to the sampling vessel and the sampling vessel itself
must be absolutely clean. +he tube should be discarded after a sample is drawn and replaced with a new
one before each subsequent sampling.