PMF Filter Handbook 2016

Porous Metal Filters Inc.
19994 Hickory Twig Way Spring TX 77388

Toll Free: 866-288-2522 Tel: 281-719-1352
Fax: 281-719-1351
www.pmfilter.net sales@pmfilter.net
pmf-filter-handbook-2016
PMF Handbook of Filtration and Metal Filter Technology

Table of Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Filter Applications ........................................................................................................................................ 3
Composite Filter Foundations ...................................................................................................................... 6
Sintering and Diffusion Bonding ................................................................................................................ 11
Calendering................................................................................................................................................. 13
Multi-layer Meshes and Composite Structures......................................................................................... 15
Filter Fabrication ........................................................................................................................................ 16
Filter Types ................................................................................................................................................. 19
Depth filters ............................................................................................................................................ 19
Surface Filters and Cake Filtration ......................................................................................................... 19
Pore size ratings ......................................................................................................................................... 21
Nominal vs AbsoluteRatings .................................................................................................................. 21
Absolute rating – Spherical bead test.................................................................................................... 22
Absolute rating – retention efficiency test............................................................................................ 25
Filter Pore Size Characterization – Bubble Point and Capillary Pressure ............................................. 26
Dirt Holding Capacity ............................................................................................................................. 31
Flow/DP and Permeability Calculations ................................................................................................ 32
Product Quality Control Testing ................................................................................................................ 40
Industry Standards for Screen Manufacturing, Testing and Service Environment .................................. 41
Glossary of Terms ....................................................................................................................................... 42
References .................................................................................................................................................. 44
PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

www.pmfilter.net Spring, TX 77388 Fax: 281-719-1351
2
Introduction
Porous Metal Filter Inc. (PMF), part of the Dorstener Group, specializes in providing solutions for filtration,
separation, flow control, noise reduction, powder fluidization and other applications through its
Sinterpore® brand of porous metal materials. Founded in 2008, PMF has leveraged the collective
knowledge of 120 years’ experience in porous metal media to create products with accurately controlled
pore size, pore geometry and permeability characteristics.
Sinterpore® products are created by using PMF’s unique knowledge in manufacturing diffusion bonded
metal laminates. The diffusion bonding process bonds the materials together into a single structure with
added strength and rigidity. The range includes single- or multiple-layered woven meshes, non-woven
metallic fiber mats, fiber/woven media composites and perforated sheet or foils. PMF’s goal is to utilize
its extensive experience to promote porous metal media for the next generation of advanced filtration
and separation products.
Porous metal filter elements have proven to be leading edge technology widely practiced in many
industries from clarification of nature fruit juices such as apple and orange to waste water treatment and
waste streams containing detergents, polymers and organic solvents. Sinterpore® filter elements
cartridges are available in a broad range of micron ratings, permeability and alloys.
Filter Applications
A short list of applications for multi-layered diffusion bonded wire meshes and diffusion bonded/diffusion-
bonded laminates include:
Filtration – One of the principle uses of

diffusion-bonded wire mesh and laminate
composites. Owing to the material’s
stainless steel or alloy construction it is
inherently high-temperature compatible
and corrosion-resistant. Most structures are
designed to be surface filters and therefore
are back-washable, providing cost-effective
long-term replacements for short-life
disposable filter elements.
Whether filtering liquids or gases, diffusion-

bonded wire mesh has proven effective for
several decades.

3
Refinery, Oil and Gas – Diffusion-bonded wire mesh

laminate construction can be custom constructed to
achieve maximum performance in refinery and
upstream sand control applications. PMF has
thousands of meters of premium sand control screen
cartridges installed downhole for sand control
applications where reservoir sand must be retained in
place and out of the oil and gas flowstream.
Membrane Supports – With the plate-like construction of

diffusion-bonded multi-layered laminates, rigidity and
flatness are exceptional, thereby offering permeable
support to delicate membrane filters.
Fluidizing Porous Plates – In air gravity conveyors, hoppers, silos, bins and shuts, conveying bulk solids
can often be problematic. Challenges include erosion, rat-holing, particle bridging, and clumping. Multi-
layer diffusion-bonded stainless steel wire mesh laminates have been proven effective for more than 40
years for these applications. They can be manufactured to specific permeabilities and for specific powder
particle size distributions to withstand extremely abrasive or high temperature bulk solids.

4
Acoustic Attenuation (sound absorption) – Single

layer or multiple layer diffusion-bonded wire mesh
laminates can be manufactured to achieve target
RAYL (specific acoustic impedance) values and non-
linearity factors. Due to the inherently uniform
geometry of woven wire mesh, structural variations
within sheets and from batch to batch is minimal to
non-existent.
Infrared Emitter Media (for

infrared burners) When
manufactured in the proper high-
temperature oxidation resisting
alloy, diffusion-bonded wire mesh
laminates may achieve vastly
superior longevity than other
porous metallic media.
Spark and Flame Arrestors –

Diffusion-bonded wire mesh
laminates are excellent choices in
pipeline flame/detonation arrest
and can be manufactured in
virtually any estimated hydraulic
diameter with minimal pressure
drop.
Fuel Cell Bipolar Plates, Electrolysis, Flow Fields – For Polymer Electrolyte Membrane (Proton Exchange
Membrane) PEM fuel cells. Drawing upon the work performed by Mahlon Wilson of Los Alamos National
Laboratory (patents 5,798,187 and 6,037,072) diffusion-bonding companies may be able to offer
improvements and enhancements of the bipolar plate and its associated flow fields.
Pulp Molding Screens – Diffusion-bonded wire mesh laminates can provide vastly superior screen
longevity.
Hot Gas – In incineration, Roasting or Flue gas applications, Mesh and diffusion-bonded Mesh based
products can withstand operating conditions in excess of 350⁰C.
Heat Pipes – Capillary wicks can be custom constructed with diffusion-bonded wire mesh for maximum
performance.

5
Wire Mesh and Composite Filter Foundations

PMF uses a wide variety of primary components for its composite metal structures. Below are brief
descriptions of the most common components used in constructing the media and filter cartridges.
Woven Wire Meshes

For most metallic filter products, wire cloth is used either as the primary filtration layer or as the support
layer in composite structures which may contain fiber mats or diffusion-bonded metal powders as the
primary filter. Although weave structures are offered in nearly infinite varieties, the most commonly used
weaves come in 4 distinct geometries: Plain square weave, Twilled square weave, Plain Dutch (Hollander)
weave, and twilled Dutch weave. Other weaves include reverse Dutch and reverse twilled Dutch, crimped,
crimped flat top, double crimped, multiple heddle, herringbone (zig-zag) and more.
Currently, available wire mesh and wire cloth alloys include the 300 series austenitic stainless steels (304,
304L, 310, 316, 321 and 347), nickel, phosphor bronze, copper, Monel 400, Inconel 600, Hastelloy C-22,
Hastelloy-X, Nichrome V-Cb, Alloy 20 et. al. Thus highly corrosion-resistant, high temperature oxidation-
resistant, thermally conductive and electrically conductive or resistive materials may be offered.
The diffusion-bonded mesh products offered by PMF in the Sinterpore® product line typically use 5
different weave types as described below, but a large range of specialty meshes are also available.
Plain Square Weave

 Also referred to as just Plain weave. This is the simplest and
most common weave type.
 Warp and weft count per Linear inch are the same.
 Warp and weft diameters are the same.
 Warp and weft wires are woven in a simple over and under
pattern (over one - under one) 1/1.
 The openings are square and non-obstructed
with maximum in-flow area.
 Commonly used for accurate sieving applications.
 Precise contact opening.
 This mesh can be described as an “open aperture” mesh
because it is possible to visually see through the mesh when
viewed perpendicular to the mesh surface.

6
Plain Twilled Weave

 Also referred to as Twilled Square Weave.
 Warp and weft count per Linear inch are often the same the same.
 Warp and weft diameters are often the same.
 Less rigid than plain weave and often with larger wire diameters.
 Weft wires are typically woven in a more complicated over two and
under two pattern, 2/2.
 The purpose of the “skip” is to allow larger diameter wires offering a
much more robust cloth with a smoother surface.
 The openings are square and non-obstructed
with maximum in-flow area.
 It is also an open aperture mesh.
Plain Dutch Weave

 The Plain Dutch weave is the most common filter cloth.
 Warp and weft diameters are not the same, warp wires are larger.
 Warp and weft wire count per Linear inch are not the same, warp
wires have a lower count per Linear inch.
 Weft wires are woven in the plain over one under one pattern,
1/1, without space between the weft wires.
 The strength is higher in the weft direction.
 Triangular open pores 90° to surface plain.
 Zero – aperture mesh.
 By varying diameter and wire density, special filtration effects
and micron ratings can be achieved.

7
Dutch Twilled Weave

 Warp and weft diameters are not the same, warp wires are
larger.
 Warp and weft wire count per Linear inch are not the same,
warp wires have a lower count per Linear inch.
 Weft wires are woven as closely as possible against each
other in the ever two under two pattern, 2/2.
 Triangular open pores 45° - 90° to surface plain with a
more tortuous path.
 This weave utilizes smaller weft wires allowing an even
denser weave than Plain Dutch Weave yielding finer
filtration.
 Typically, the cloth surface is smoother than that of the
simple Dutch weave
 Zero aperture mesh.
Reverse Plain Dutch Weave

 Usually referred to as just Reverse Dutch Weave or PZ mesh.
 Weave is similar to the Twill Dutch except the weft and warp
wire characteristics are reversed: the weft wires are larger
and have smaller count than the warp wires
 Warp and weft wire count per Linear inch are not the same,
warp wires have a higher count per Linear inch.
 The smaller diameter warp wires are positioned as close as
possible to each other and the larger weft wires are woven in
at a defined distance.
 Woven in the one over - one under - one pattern, 1/1.
 Triangular open pores 90° to surface plain,
slight openings between warp wires.
 The warp direction in this
weave has a higher strength.

8
Table 1 shows typical weave details that can usually be obtained from mesh suppliers. These details
include the weave type, wire count in the warp and weft direction, and the warp and weft wire diameters.
Table 1. Typical Mesh Weave Details
Weave Mesh wire/inch Wire Diameter (in) Rating Porosity

Type (micron) (%)
Warp Weft Warp Weft
Plain
120 120 .0037 .0037 117 30.7
Square
Twill
270 270 .0016 .0016 53 32.2
Square
Plain Dutch 80 400 0.005 0.003 35 55
.0028
Twilled
200 1400 .0016 5 33
Dutch
Reverse
175 50 .0059 .0118 60 53
Plain Dutch
Reverse
400 120 .00256 .00394 60 61
Dutch Twill
Reporting of additional details such as thickness, airflow resistance, bubble point, water and oil flow
permeability are left up to the supplier and can be based on a number of different approaches to
determining these factors. The micron rating in particular can be confusing. For simple meshes, the micron
rating is usually referred to as an “absolute” rating if it is based on either geometric formula derived from
the mesh structure or a standardized particle challenge test method. However, sometimes nominal
ratings are used which are either based on the effectiveness of the mesh under process conditions or
some other more subjective factors.
Therefore, it is important to understand what method the screen manufacturer used to obtain the
reported pore size. The differences between rating methods are discussed in detail in the Pore Size
Ratings section of this document.

9
Other Filter Materials

Metal Fibers
Metal fibers are very thin metal filaments ranging from 4

microns to about the size of a human hair at 80 microns. These
are processed into sheet form for fabrication into metal media.
Pore size and filtration efficiency are controlled by the selection
of fiber diameters and the degree of calendering that is applied
to compact it during manufacture.
The media is made with either a narrow or wide range of fiber

diameters depending upon the application and filtration
requirements. By adjusting the fiber diameter from the outside
to the inside of the filter the pore size can be graded to allow
larger particles to be trapped on the outer layers while allowing
smaller particles to penetrate deeper into the medium matrix. The result is high dirt holding capacity and
subsequent longer on-screen life.
The fibers are bonded together and can also be bonded to a stainless steel woven wire support mesh for
added strength and flexibility. The resultant Sintered Metal Fiber (SMF) structures are depth filters with
controlled complex pre geometry designed to meet the fine micron filtration needs with the added benefit
of lower pressure drop across the media. Should there be a need for surface filtration characteristics, the
flow direction can be reversed allowing particles to be trapped on the outer surface for subsequent
backflush or backpulse regeneration.
Filters made from metal fibers have extremely high open area, much greater than woven media and well
in excess of 50%. In fact, structures with 70-80% open area are common. The high open area results in
media with very low pressure drop and long service life.
Powdered Metal
Structures made of bonded metal powders are extremely

strong and can be tailored to very specific pore sizes based
on the powder particle size distribution. The powders can be
spherical for tight pore size control or more irregular for
higher porosity. Generally, powdered metal filters have 25-
55% open area, depending upon the powder particle shape.
In bulk, bonded powders can be brittle, but the powders can

be diffusion-bonded to wire mesh substrates to create new
structures that have the flexibility of the wire mesh and the fine filtration properties of the powder.

10
Sintering and Diffusion Bonding

Diffusion bonding is a unique process developed over a half-century ago which continues to find new
applications today. It is virtually unknown by many in our Engineering schools and technical community,
but it is the foundation for bonding together multiple separate metallic elements into one cohesive whole.
Diffusion bonding, formally called “Sintering” when referring to metal powders, is a process applied to
one or more layers of standard woven wire mesh, wire cloth, or other metallic structures or powders to
create complex continuous materials with diverse physical properties and forms. Diffusion bonding has
been applied not only to meshes, but to metal powder, shattered metals, non-woven fiber mats,
reticulated metal foams, perforated metals and photo-etched foils.
Diffusion bonding is a process involving high temperature, controlled atmosphere and some degree of
force (pressure). These conditions cause metal-metal diffusion at the contact points where the metal
surfaces of the substructures meet and result in metallic bonds at all contact points. In effect, the structure
bonds together within its own metallurgy: no catalyst, flux or filler material is used. In single layer meshes,
diffusion bonding permanently bonds all wire tangential surfaces (locking in the structure at the woven
wire contact points in a woven screen, as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2).
Figure 1. Diffusion Bonded vs As-Woven Structure

In multi-layer materials, not only are all wire crossover and other tangential surfaces bonded within
each and every layer, but all contact points between all layers are effectively bonded as well. This is
shown in the photomicrograph in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Diffusion Bonded Multi-Layer Mesh Structure

11
Diffusion bonding results in enhanced mechanical properties that include:
 Workability: Materials can be worked and fabricated just like other metal products
 Multiple layers bonded into a monolithic structure with greater strength for enhanced collapse
and bursts pressure requirements of filter elements
 Rigidity, strength, resistance to creep and stretch, resistance to abrasion and puncture
 Greater strength permitting higher pressure backwashing
 Non-compressible fixed pore geometry
 Uniformly solution annealed condition resulting in improved tensile and thermal/electrical
conductivities
 Reduced internal stress resulting in improved formability and more precision parts.
Diffusion bonding is performed in a furnace, normally in a vacuum or other suitable atmosphere, with
some means of applied pressure or force. The temperature is usually near but not at the lower end of the
melt range or “solidus” of the particular alloy involved. Bonding does not occur through melting and in
fact, any melting discovered in the intermediate or final product is rejected. Bonding occurs from
diffusion, and proper diffusion bonding will leave the material surface shiny, clean, un-pitted and for most
alloys, fully annealed. Passivation of diffusion-bonded austenitic alloys is not necessary since the passive
chromium oxide layer forms naturally with time after removal from the furnace and exposed to ambient
atmosphere.
However, depending upon what fabrications processes are used to create “parts” from the diffusion-
bonded sheet, passivation of the parts may be desirable if their service environment warrants. Proper
furnace control, atmosphere and technique will also tend to reduce carbon in 300 series stainless steels.
Decarburization is very desirable in that it can minimize the potential for intergranular attack.
Most diffusion bonded products are created out of woven metal sheets generally of sizes 18”x24”, 24” x
48”, 36” x 36” or 48” x 48” (500 x 1000 mm for metric sheets). This is because most commercially available
wire meshes are woven in widths of 36”, 48” or 1 meter. This costly scrap loss is mitigated or completely
eliminated. Mesh can be woven up to 120” wide or larger, but the vast majority is 48” wide.
Once the weaving loom is set up, the woven length can be quite long, however for ease of handling and
processing, the length is truncated to usually 100’ and the mesh is rolled onto a core. Be cautious of “Roll
Sintered” meshes. These are claimed to be diffusion-bonded mesh, but they may actually be processing
single layer fine weave mesh in long rolls generally less than 36” wide at temperatures close to the
annealing temperature but far below the effective diffusion-bonding temperature. While some degree of
bonding occurs at this lower temperature, the material has not been properly diffusion-bonded. The
advantages of this process is lower cost due to the “bulk diffusion bonding” of a large amount of mesh,
but in actuality it can fail in service because it is not truly a diffusion-bonded product. It if were actually
taken to the true diffusion bonding temperature, the entire long roll would be bonded together into a
useless porous cylinder, paper weight or boat anchor. Thus if the application requires the strength of true
diffusion-bonded bonds, one needs to identify and avoid “roll-sintered” product.

12
Diffusion bonding can be performed on the same metallurgies that are available for the woven meshes
which, as noted above, include 300 series austenitic stainless steels (304, 304L, 310, 316, 321 and 347),
nickel, phosphor bronze, copper, Monel 400, Inconel 600, Hastelloy C-22, Hastelloy-X, Nichrome V-Cb,
Alloy 20 et. al.
What is the purpose of diffusion bonding a single layer of perfectly woven mesh and adding significant
cost? The answer lies in the function of the component part fabricated from this mesh. Woven wire mesh
is desirable for its extremely uniform pore geometry. However, under load or after fabrication, the
uniformity may be compromised if the mesh is stretched or otherwise stressed, resulting in wires sliding
past each other, changing the pore size.
For example, consider 165x800 Twilled Dutch Weave (TDW) having a mean aperture of 20-25 microns,
wire diameters of 0.0028” and 0.0020” and an as-woven thickness of 0.007”. Now consider that the
required parts are simple filter disks of 0.187” diameter for high pressure filtration of a fluid. Assume the
differential pressure across them may exceed 3000 psid, such as in high viscosity polymer filtration service.
Without diffusion bonding, the first concern is that some stray wires at the ends of the disk may be pulled
out of the weave and foul downstream equipment or get into the product. Second, under load, the wires
may shift and 25 micron pores could deform to become 50 micron pores in various places of the disk.
Diffusion bonding this single layer prior to punching the disks eliminates these concerns.
Diffusion-bonded wire mesh and wire mesh laminates are normally “worked” as solid sheet or coil stock
of equivalent thickness. The only difference being that diffusion-bonded wire mesh materials are porous,
with some apertures as small as 2 microns or less. This diffusion-bonded porous materials must be kept
clean and free of oil during handling and fabrication. Even though the end use for some materials might
involve filtration of petroleum or mineral-based oils or other harsh and dirty fluids, cleanliness is critical
during fabrication.
In summary, no other form of porous metal can be produced in as many custom configurations, offering
the designer almost unlimited possibilities for mechanical strength, porosity, permeability, pore size,
density and tortuosity, symmetry or asymmetry, and enhanced temperature, corrosion or oxidation
resistance. With focus on education of the technical community to the existence and potential uses of
these materials, diffusion-bonded wire mesh and wire mesh laminates should find more important and
unique applications in the next decade.
Calendering
For diffusion-bonded materials, bond strength and efficacy are directly proportional to local and global
contact area. A process known as calendering improves this contact. A material is calendered when it is
run through compression rollers, uniformly compressing and reducing the cross-sectional thickness of the
layers.

13
A calendering mill essentially compresses the material

between two or four parallel horizontal hardened steel rolls
vertically aligned with the two innermost rolls performing
the “cold” work (Figure 3).
The bottom roll is usually fixed while the top roll may be
raised or lowered such that the gap between the rolls may
be precisely set. Precision mills can control the thickness to
less than 0.09 mm. Calendering is as equally critical in the
manufacturing process as proper selection and diffusion
bonding of the materials to achieve the desired physical
Figure 3. Calendering Mill properties of the medium. Therefore, it requires the same
level of quality control.
For diffusion bonding purposes, a pre-diffusion bonding

run in the calendering mill will flatten out the “knuckles”
in coarse meshes where the wires pass over each other,
resulting in more contact area between each wire
intersection during the diffusion bonding process,
resulting in stronger bonds between the wires.
Calendering is also used to reduce media permeability,
porosity, thickness, or to increase density, depending upon
the application’s requirements.
Calendering is a vital step in the manufacturing of most

multi-layer diffusion-bonded wire mesh laminates.
Without precision calendering, these materials could not achieve their intended purpose. By compressing
individual layers or the diffusion-bonded multi-layer Figure 4. Screen with flattened "knuckles"
laminate in the calendering mill, thickness, porosity and
permeability are all reduced.
The calendering process also provides a smoother surface texture and can improve sheet flatness. If the
alloy processed is austenitic, it will work-harden. Some hardening is desirable but an experienced
diffusion-bonder will minimize deleterious effects of work-hardening by proper sequence of diffusion
bonding and calendering, with rigid quality control at each step.
A fluidizing medium, for example, must allow a specified air or gas flow at a desired pressure differential
to perform its function. While proper selection and diffusion bonding of the component layers is critical,
processing the material in the correct manufacturing sequence with appropriate calendering is equally
critical and will determine whether the final product meets all its physical requirements.

14
Multi-layer Meshes and Composite Structures

Multi-layer meshes and composite structures comprised of
some combination of meshes, metal fibers, metal powders,
perforated sheets or foils are used where the best mechanical
properties of each material is exploited to make a structure
that is greater than the sum of its parts. For example, very fine
weaves have high porosity (plugging resistance), and small
pore sizes, but very low tensile strength. However, bonding
these meshes to much stronger and larger wire mesh support
layers will result in a very strong structure with all the filtration advantages of a finer mesh.
Citing the example above for high pressure viscous polymer service, the mesh strength can be greatly
increased not only by diffusion bonding, but by diffusion bonding a heavier support mesh to the fine mesh,
and if desired, one could also bond a top protective layer creating a 3-layer laminate in the event of
abrading or otherwise damaging the fine filtration mesh. In fact, one could bond any number of meshes
upstream and downstream of the central filtration mesh depending upon requirement and good
engineering judgement.
An experienced composite metal manufacturer can advise diffusion-bonded mesh combinations to

achieve design properties such as filtration rating, surface or depth filtration design, backwash or backflow
capability, symmetry/asymmetry, mechanical strength, permeability, specific acoustic impedance and
many other physical properties. They can also advise alloy choices where potential corrosion, oxidation,
elevated temperature or a combination of challenging operating conditions. Diffusion-bonded laminates
comprising of upwards of 1000 components have been produced in order to meet required specifications.
Since there are thousand permutations of weave types, geometry and styles, the potential combinations
of multiple layered media are infinite. Without careful design, problems may be encountered with
multiple mesh lay-ups, as the following simple example illustrates:
Question: Would there be a problem laminating two square weave meshes together?
The short answer: Yes.
The long answer: No, as long as the composite was designed properly.
The reason a problem may exist stems from the tendency of two meshes of identical properties stacked
against each other aligning themselves in phase such that the meshes interfere with each other’s pore
structure. In effect, the natural state of rest for two such meshes results in wires of one layer nesting into
the pore space of the other layer, resulting in a low permeability interface between the meshes, a uneven
and uncontrolled pore size distribution, and uneven thickness across the composite. In this case, the
meshes need to be layered with some angular bias between them to prevent nesting. PMF has the design
capabilities to anticipate these problems and create rapid prototype samples to evaluate complicated
multilayer designs.

15
Diffusion bonding is not limited to wire mesh products. For example, diffusion bonding commercially
produced perforated sheet to wire mesh is desirable in services where strength, thickness and cost
requirements are paramount. In this example, the perforated plate is the structure’s base. The next layer
of mesh is a stress and flow distribution layer to ensure the fluid flow is spread uniformly across the
perforated plate. A fine mesh layer tops the structure for fine filtration. Addition structures can include
very thin permeable stainless steel foils or even non-permeable foils to wire mesh. Other structures can
include fine metal powders or fibers diffusion-bonded to woven meshes for support. Again, an almost
infinite possibility exists.
Filter Fabrication
Filters are assembled from the basic media structures described above into integral structures which
contain a number of different features depending upon the application. Filters are usually pleated to
increase the surface area, resulting in lower pressure drop and longer service life. Depending upon the
application, the filters can have outer protective cages which protect the filter media during handling and
also to provide support for backwashing or reverse pressure water hammering. A range of standard
fittings are available for all types of filter housings.
Porous metal media such as PMF Sinterpore® laminates can be fabricated in many custom configurations
to optimize mechanical strength, porosity, permeability, pore size, density, tortuosity, and
symmetry/asymmetry. A large range of alloys are available to tailor the product to the requirements of
temperature compatibility and corrosion or oxidation resistance.
Diffusion-bonded laminates can be fabricated much like sheet metal, in any number of shapes and sizes
from simple discs to complex conical assemblies. The following list contains some of the methods used in
its fabrication process to produce such articles as flat disks, tubes, formed shapes and composite
assemblies:

16
Laser and Water Jet Cutting

The material can be cut like metal plate to make small runs in a
multitude of possible shapes (both 2D shapes and 3D conical
structures).
Electropolishing
 Removes iron from the surface and enhances the
chromium/nickel content providing the most superior
form of passivation for stainless steel
 Provides a clean and smooth surface that is easier to
sterilize
 Polishes areas inaccessible by other polishing methods
 Improves the surface finish by leveling micro-peaks and
valleys
Sintering/Diffusion bonding
 Laminating capability of 1 to 1500 layers.
 Standard sheet sizes are 18”x48”, 20”x48”,
24” x 48” and 48”x48”.
 Maximum width is 120” with welds, and the
lengths are unlimited.
Stamping/Forming/Punching
 Capability to form pleated elements, cones and
cylinders. Diameters ranging from 0.375” to 20” and
lengths available up to 48” long in a single tube or longer
lengths with additional weld joints.
 Extensive range of punching capabilities, with large
inventory of dies in many shapes and sizes. Custom
shapes and sizes available upon request.
 Capabilities to treat flat sheets, tubes and cylinders.

17
Welding
 Like metal plate, porous metal materials can
be welded with resistance, TIG, Plasma, and
Electron-beam welders.
Assembled Filter Units

The fittings, end caps and cages must
be seamlessly assembled to the filter
without any pinholes or gaps
between the filter media and the
other fittings that would
compromise the filtration integrity.
All parts are welded together to
ensure permanent bonds that will
not be compromised by chemical
attack and thermal or pressure
cycling. Production lot tests, such as
bubble point or airflow, will ensure
that the filter is properly
constructed.
This handbook describes in detail the basic structure and components in the Sinterpore® products, the
basic metal mesh weave types used in the products, the main elements of the diffusion bonding process,
filter rating definitions, filter flow characteristics, and test methods for filtration and mechanical
properties.

18
Filter Types
Depth filters
Depth filters, as the name suggests, are thick filter elements that allow particles to migrate through the
structure before becoming captured within the depth of the media (Figure 5). Typically, depth filters have
a range of pore sizes and work on the principle that, eventually, a particle will find a pore it cannot pass
through during its progress through the media. An additional capture mechanism occurs through
electrostatic interactions between the particle and filter media, literally sticking the particle to the filter
fiber, resulting in much finer filtration levels than the pore size of the media would suggest. This type of
capture is highly efficient in gas filtration service.
Figure 5. Depth Filtration

Surface Filters and Cake Filtration
Surface filters are designed, as the name implies, to capture particles on the surface of the media, resulting
in little particle capture within the media itself. A single layer screen is the most basic type of surface filter.
Multi-layered surface filters are usually designed with supporting structures of larger pore size than the
filter surface to minimize particle capture in the depth of the media (Figure 6).
Figure 6. Surface Filtration

19
Surface filters obviously capture particles at and larger than their pore size, but they also capture particle
smaller than the pore size due to a mechanism referred to as particle bridging. This is where two or more
particles smaller than the pore size form stable bridges across the pore. The requirement for bridging is a
high particle load where many particles attempt to flow through the same pore at the same time. The
general rule of thumb is that stable bridges can occur if the particle are 1/3 to 1/7 the diameter of the
pore (Figure 7).
Figure 7. Particle Bridging Across Pore

Clearly the bridges formed by the smallest particles can easily be disrupted, but even stable bridges from
larger particles can be broken up under vibration, high differential pressure, or flow surges (such as water
hammering), allowing particles that were initially captured to “unload” or release downstream. Unloading
also occurs if the pore size increases under stress. This can occur in weaves which are not diffusion-bonded
where the wires can slide around under load.
Advantages to using surface filters include:
 Applications where the contaminants themselves form a permeable filter cake on the surface of
the media, allowing flow yet preventing particles even smaller than the media rating to pass into
the flowstream (Figure 8). This is sometimes referred to as “cake filtration”. In this respect, the
filter essentially serves as a substrate for the particles to bridge across. Oil and gas downhole sand
control screens are a prime example of this type of application.
Figure 8. Permeable Cake Build-Up on Filter Surface

 Applications where backwashing the filter is an option. Surface filters are ideal for backwashing
because few particles are caught in the depth of the media. Therefore, a significant portion of the
screen can be returned to nearly-new condition by a strong blast of fluid in the reverse direction.
This can be a cost saving measure compared to replacing disposable depth filter elements.

20
The many advantages of surface filters over depth filters makes this type of filtration a very attractive
option for many different types of applications, and diffusion-bonded metal meshes are ideal for this type
of application. However, the “one chance” capture mechanism and higher plugging risk requires more
upfront engineering expertise to ensure the right product is used in the application.
Pore size ratings

The above description of filter types show that particle capture can occur through different means
depending upon the filter design and service environment. This particle capture may or may not be related
to the pore size of the media, thus when discussing the pore size of a given filter, the real question is:
what exactly is meant by pore size rating and what does the user really need to know? While it may be
comforting to know the exact dimension and shape of a pore created by a woven mesh, does that really
correspond to the particle size retention rating of the media?
For simple single-layer square weave meshes in surface filtration service, the answer is pretty much “yes”.
Particles smaller than the length or width of the square pore space will pass through the screen, and
particles larger than those dimensions will be retained. But what about stacks of square weave meshes,
or zero-aperture twill-type weaves with complicated pore geometry, or combination stacks and other
complicated composites such as diffusion-bonded multi-layered laminates?
Nominal vs AbsoluteRatings
Nominal Ratings, as the name implies, can range from a fairly well-defined geometric opening size in a
mesh to pretty much whatever number a vendor wishes to apply to their product. A common definition
is the filtration effectiveness under a particular service condition, such as the average particle size
captured downstream of the filter. However, this rating that can change from one type of filter service to
the next, and it can even change within the same process as process conditions change (pressure,
contaminant loading etc.). This is particularly true for non-diffusion-bonded (otherwise known as “non-
fixed pore structure”) media where the pore size can change under high pressure or high loading
conditions. Sometimes it is reported as either the maximum or the average expected pore size of the
structure based on the weave type, or it can be a guess as to what the effective pore size would be if one
weave nests within another, creating an altogether new pore structure.
For critical filtration service, it is required to have a definable, testable, and reliable pore size rating
method. This is an “Absolute” rating. While the word “absolute” indicates there is only one pore size rating
that can be applied to the filter, in fact many different types of absolute ratings exist for filters based on
the particular test method involved. For a filter to be “Absolute” rated, the rating method must be from
a well-defined and rigidly followed test standard. An absolute filter will return the same rating from batch
to batch, filter to filter, and different filters rated by the same standard can be directly compared to one
another regardless of media type.
For example, absolute ratings for sieving service defines the absolute rating as the calculated geometric
pore size created by the weave structure. This type of rating is limited in that it does not address the
weave tolerances or the shape of the woven pore with respect to the shape of the contaminant.

21
Other absolute ratings address these deficiencies by using standardized test particles under standardized
test conditions to determine filtration efficiency. However, be aware that these types of absolute ratings
do NOT necessarily describe the actual performance of the filter under any specific real-world service
condition. For example, the real contaminate shape and loading, and the actual fluid viscosity and flow
rates may greatly differ from the test contaminant characteristic and test flow conditions. But the absolute
rating does provide a good place to start an investigation into the proper filter media for the considered
application.
Absolute rating – Spherical bead test

For example, the simplest absolute rating scheme is to pass a range of particles with known particle size
through the media in a very controlled and specified manner, and apply a rating to the screen at the
largest particle that is observed downstream (referred to as the Maximum Particle Passed or MPP). But
other methods may involve statistical probabilities, such as rating the screen using the exact same test
but at the particle size where 97% of the particles are captured, neglecting the 3% larger sizes as
statistically insignificant. Clearly these two rating systems cannot be compared to each other. Figure 9
shows an example of a latex bead efficiency test on a PMF SMF20S metal filter which has a 20 micron
rating at 99% efficiency, but a 16 micron rating at 97% efficiency.
Figure 9. Latex Bead Efficiency of a SMF20S Filter

The above example is not hypothetical: For downhole Oil and Gas sand control screen service the simple
“glass bead” test using glass spheres instead of latex has become the standard as established by
Whitehouse Inc. The Whitehouse test reports list both the MPP and the 97% rating, leaving it up to the
user to determine which one to use. Some use the MPP, but others use the 97% rating. Therefore, it is
critical to know which rating definition is being used.1

22
An example of a Whitehouse report is shown in Figure 10. The 97% Whitehouse rating is obtained by ratio
of the upstream and retained weight of a standard glass bead distribution. This ratio is the “percent
passing”. This percent is used in a Standardized Retention Curve or Microsphere Calibration Graph for
each media type to yield the 97% filter cut point.
This somewhat confusing approach to obtaining cut point, rather than just counting and sizing upstream
and downstream particles, is done to save time in the analysis. Once a filter type is carefully analyzed to
obtain the Standardized Retention Curve, the cut point can be quickly obtained with simple upstream and
downstream glass bead weight measurements.
For the example in Figure 10, the percent passing is 67%, and using either the standard calibration curve
or entering the 67% passing ratio into the Microsphere calibration equation yields a 97% cut point of 49
microns. The MPP is 54 microns.

23
Figure 10. Whitehouse Glass Bead Test Report

24
Another type of filter rating definition is used for the Shaker Screen market. These screens are rated at
“D100” as per API 13C specs (“Recommended Practice on Drilling Fluid Processing Systems Evaluation”),
which refers to the size at which 100% of the particles below this size are retained by the screen. It’s the
same as MPP in concept, but with different terminology and different test procedures than the glass bead
test (including aluminum oxide instead of glass beads for the challenge particles).
Absolute rating – retention efficiency test

In other applications, coming from more traditional fluid filtration and clarification markets, the retention
efficiency or filtration efficiency is used as a basis for the rating system. This type of rating method is the
only one that can be applied to depth filters, where the pore size distribution of the media may not directly
correspond to particle capture efficiency.
The retention efficiency is measured with standard test dusts covering a large range of particle sizes and,
like the glass bead test described above, particle sizes are compared upstream and downstream of the
filter. However, in addition to the sizes, the concentrations at each size range are also measured, giving a
statistically quantifiable account of the retention efficiency of the filter at each size ratio. The ratio of the
upstream to downstream is called the Beta ratio and is defined as:
n = Cu/Cd ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………1
Where n is the beta ratio at particle size n, Cu is the upstream concentration at that size, Cd is the
downstream concentration at that size. In reality, experimental limitations prevent each and every
particle of a given size from being measured, and n usually refers to a narrowly defined size range within
the larger size distribution.
Beta ratios can be turned into filtration efficiency ratings by the simple equation
%Effn = 100-(100/n) ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..2

Where %Effn is the percent efficiency at particle size n.
As the filter becomes more efficient at removing particles at ever increasing particle sizes, the Beta ratio
increases. This is shown in Figure 11.

25
Figure 11
The absolute filter rating is that at which the filter can remove particles at a defined beta ratio or percent
efficiency. In the illustration above, the filter has a 98.6% efficiency ( 75) at capturing 33 micron
particles, 99.5% efficiency ( 200) at capturing 37 micron particles, and 99.9% efficiency ( 1000) at
capturing 42 micron particles.
What beta ratio should be used to determine the rating? It depends on the application. As illustrated
above, some industries use  = 75, some use  = 200, but some – the medical industry for example – use
very large ratios ( = 1 million) because they cannot have viruses pass through the filters under any
circumstances. [In fact, the pharmaceutical industry is so stringent it uses viruses as test particles and
redefines the beta ratios in log10 terms as “log reduction values”].
The details of the test contaminant, test conditions, particle counting methodology, and even test type
(single pass vs. multi pass) are beyond the scope of this introduction to the topic and vary from industry
to industry. References to filter test standards in a variety of industries are found in the Industry
Standards for Screen Manufacturing, Testing and Service Environment Section of this document.
Filter Pore Size Characterization – Bubble Point and Capillary Pressure

Filter ratings may be obtained by an analysis of the pore size and distribution obtained from porosimetry
or capillary pressure tests. However, caution is required with ratings based on these methods because,
unlike absolute filter ratings discussed above, these methods will yield the pore structure but not the
manner in which particles are captured within it.

26
The pore size is related to the pressure required to break the surface tension of a wetted fluid bridging it
through the simple equation:
D = K/P ……………………………………………………………………………………………………3
Where D is the pore diameter, P is the air pressure, and K is a physical property of the media related to its
permeability and other related dimensional properties. The bubble point method applies for pores in the
range of 0.05 to 50 microns and mercury intrusion applies for pores in the 0.003 to 400 micron range.
Bubble Point Test
For the bubble point test, a filter is wetted and submersed in a liquid (usually in denatured alcohol or
alcohol-water mixture) and pressure is slowly applied to the filter. The pressure at which the first bubble
is observed is called the “bubble point pressure” and can be related to the largest pore in the media as an
inscribed circle within the pore structure with the following equation:
D =[4(cos)/P]x106 ……………………………………………………………………………………4
Where D is the equivalent pore diameter in mm,  is the surface tension of the liquid in N/m,  is the
contact angle between the liquid and the pore wall (degrees), and P is the bubble point pressure (Pa). For
fully wetted liquids used in the test, the contact angle is 0 degrees, and cosSee “SAE ARP901 Rev A”
Bubble Point Test Method” for a full description of the standardized bubble point test. 
Capillary Pressure Test
Capillary Pressure tests can be used to obtain the largest pore size, smallest pore size, median pore size
and the pore size distribution of the media. This test can either be performed in the manner of a bubble
point pressure test where the filter is initially wetted or where the filter is initially dry and the fluid is
forced into the pores under increasing pressure. This test is most typically performed with Mercury and
therefore referred to as a Mercury intrusion test. For the Mercury intrusion test, the volume of fluid is
accurately measured during the pressure ramp, yielding the media porosity.
A capillary pressure test with an initially wetted media is performed by comparing the bubble point
pressure curve (wet flow curve) to the dry pressure curve (dry flow curve). An example for a 325x2300
0.0014 x 0.0011 Dutch Twill Weave mesh is shown in Figure 12.

27
Figure 12. Capillary Pressure Test

The maximum pore size is obtained at the lowest pressure on the wet flow curve – the minimum pressure
required to either intrude a fluid (e.g. mercury intrusion test) or expel a wetted fluid (i.e. bubble point
test). The minimum pore size is the highest pressure observed in the test or where the wet and dry flow
curves intersect. The median pore size is the where the wet flow curve crosses over half of the dry flow
curve.
For the example in Figure 12, the pressure at the maximum pore size was 0.8825 psid, corresponding to
9.45 micron from Equation 4. The pressure at the mean pore size was 0.898 psid, corresponding to 9.28
micron, and the pressure at the smallest pore size was 1.876 psid, corresponding to 4.45 micron.
The pore size distribution for the material can be obtained by calculating the amount of pore space filled
(or expelled) at an incremental pressure (or pore size) interval by comparison to the dry pressure curve.
The percentage of pores filled within these intervals is given as:
PP% = 100 x [Qwet1/Qdry1 – Qwet2/Qdry2] …………………………………………………………..5

Where PP% is the percentage of pores filled between pressure (or pore size) increments 1 and 2, Qwet is
the wet flow rate and Qdry is the dry flow rate. Table 2 shows an example of this calculation of the first
few pressure increments for the test in Figure 12, and Figure 13 shows the resultant pore size
distribution over the entire test range.

28
Table 2. Example Calculation of Pore Size Distribution
Figure 13 Mesh Pore Size Distribution Analysis

Turning the frequency distribution chart into a cumulative distribution chart (Figure 14), it can be seen
that the average pore size (50% cumulative as highlighted in red) is 9.28 microns and the largest pore is
9.45 micron, the same as derived from the pressure curve analysis in Figure 12.

29
Figure 14. Mesh Cumulative Frequency Distribution

Keep in mind that the pore size data obtained from capillary pressure tests only reveals the pore structure
in the media, it does not necessarily reflect how the particle is captured in the media. For surface filters,
the pore size of the media can be closely related to the retention rating, but as mentioned above, for
media with complex flow paths, depth, or complicated pore structures, this may say nothing about how
the filter retains particles below the maxim measured pore size or the pore size distribution. For example,
Figure 15 shows the pore size distribution obtained for the SMF20S filter whose latex bead efficiency
curve is shown in Figure 9. This is a depth filter, and it is clear that the media has pores much larger than
the 20 micron rating at 99% efficiency. Therefore, a 20 micron particle has a very high probability of
capture within the media despite the larger pores in the structure. For this reason, it is recommended to
use the absolute rating based on one of the standard retention test procedures and leave the bubble point
test to quality control work, as described under the Testing section in this document.

30
Figure 15. Pore Size Distribution of the SMF20S Filter in Figure 9
Dirt Holding Capacity

Dirt Holding Capacity is the weight of contaminant held by the filter at a specified maximum life of the
filter unit. Usually the life is determined by the maximum differential pressure that can be allowed across
the filter element before the flow rate drops below usable levels. Under standard absolute micron rating
test conditions as described in the Pore Size Rating and Testing sections of this document, the total
amount of contaminant challenging the filter is recorded up to the maximum allowable differential
pressure and is turned into a dirt holding capacity for some prescribed filter element length or area. Figure
16 shows and example of dirt holding capacity of the same 20 micron SMF20S metallic filter referenced
in the latex bead challenge test in Figure 9. This test was conducted using the ASTM F785-8 test standard
and the data shows that this filter has a standard dirt holding capacity of 93.5 mg/cm 2 @ 3.86 kpa
differential pressure.

31
Figure 16. Dirt Holding Capacity of the SMF20S Filter in Figure 9 and Figure 15
Using standardized test procedures like ASTM F785-8, the dirt holding capacities of different filter
elements can be compared and, to a first approximation, the life of a filter element can be estimated
based on assumptions of the service conditions compared to the test conditions.
Flow/DP and Permeability Calculations

Permeability is an intrinsic property of porous media and is non-dimensional (i.e. thickness or area
independent). It describes the resistance to flow, or the rate at which a fluid will flow through the material
given certain dimensional parameters (analogous to the intrinsic parameter of density and how it will
determine how heavy a material is given its dimensions).
The basic Darcy formula, derived from observing water percolate through sand beds, defined permeability
as:
K = (Q x L x /(A x DP) …………………………………………………………………………………………………………6

Where K is the filter media permeability, DP is the differential pressure across the media, Q is the flow
rate, L is the media thickness, is the fluid kinematic viscosity, and A is the filter area. In this expression
it is readily apparent how permeability affects the flow rate at a given pressure drop. The Darcy formula
is for laminar flow through the porous media. This limitation encompasses most applications, however,
and it is especially true for viscous fluids such as polymers. Note that once K is known for one fluid type,
to a first approximation the pressure drop can be calculated for any fluid based on a simple ratio
relationship between the viscosity of the fluid of interest and the viscosity of the test fluid.
Air permeability is the most common form of reporting a filter’s flow characteristics. This is usually
experimentally measured by the measured air flow rate under a given differential pressure. Figure 17
32
shows an example of data for air permeability measurements for a 320x3200 Dutch Twill Weave mesh. In
this case the differential pressure is in inches of water (variously reported as in. water, in. H20 or in. W.G.),
and the flow rate is normalized to filter area (SCFM/ft2). Note that the DP vs flow relationship is nearly
linear over the range of test flow rates.
Figure 17
When Equation 6 is used in SI units [DP (Pa), Q (m3/s), L (m),  (kinematic viscosity, Ns/m2), A (m2)],
permeability is in units of m2. The Oil and Gas market usually expresses permeability in units of Darcy per
convention for formation permeability. Darcy is in cgs units [Q in cm3/s, L in cm, u in centipoise (dynamic
or absolute viscosity), A in cm2, and DP in atm].
Frazier Number is typically used for industrial applications. The Frazier number is commonly referred to
as the “air permeability” but this is incorrect. The Frazier number is really a flow coefficient instead of
permeability that combines the permeability and thickness of the media with the viscosity of the test fluid,
per the rearranged Equation 6 below.
K/(L* = Q/(A x DP) ………………………………………………………………………………………………..7

The defined Frazier number is the flow rate through 1 square foot media surface using air as the test fluid
with units of cubic feet per minute at a differential pressure of 0.5” water gauge (W.G.). The Frazier
number is therefore typically reported as cfm/ft2 @ 0.5” W.G.
Conductance is similar to Frazier number in that it combines the permeability and thickness of the media
into a flow capacity coefficient and is primarily used in the shale shaker screen market. Conductance uses

33
equation 6 in cgs units as described above but rearranged to combine the permeability (darcys) and media
thickness (cm) into one term:
K/L = (Q x /(A x DP) ……………………………………………………………………………………….8

And defining the Conductance, C, as:
C = 10-4 x K/L ……………………………………………………………………………………………………..9

Conductance is in units of kilodarcys per millimeter. API RP 13C “Recommended Practice on Drilling Fluid
Processing Systems Evaluation” describes conductance tests and reporting in detail.
Table 3 shows an example of the variety of permeability-related flow coefficients that can be applied to a
mesh, in this case a single Dutch Twill mesh with flow coefficients reported to water, air and oil. Note that
these flow coefficients are NOT permeability terms, even though some data tables in the literature may
report them as “permeability”.
Permeability is an intrinsic property of flow capacity of a porous media due to the size and
interconnectedness of the pores and the tortuosity of the flow path through it. The best analogy for
permeability might be density: a material has a set density regardless of where it is or how big it is, but
the weight of that material depends on its size and what gravitational pull is exerted on it. Permeability is
analogous to density, viscosity is analogous to gravitational pull, and weight is analogous to pressure drop.
For example, the difference between the oil vs. water flow coefficient in Table 3 is a factor of 15.5,
indicating that under the same flow conditions the filter will yield 15.5 times more pressure drop in oil
than water, reflecting the higher oil viscosity. Some refer to this as permeability to oil vs permeability to
water, but using the strict definition of permeability in Equation 6 the fluid viscosity is a separate term in
the pressure drop equation and the media in fact has the same permeability whether to oil or water. The
permeability and conductivity reported in Table 3 was calculated from Equation 6 using air flow data,
media thickness and air viscosity.
Table 3. Reported Mesh Flow Coefficient and Permeability

Mesh
Permeability-Related Flow Coefficients Permeability
wire/inch
Nominal Frazier Oil
Weave
Rating Water Number MIL-H-
Type Conductance
Warp Weft (micron) GPM/in2 cfm/ft2 5606 m2 darcy
Kd/mm
at 1 psid @ 0.5" GPM/in2
W.C. at 1psid
Dutch 7.6e10-
325 2300 2 0.93 11 0.060 0.09 13 0.77
Twill

34
Table 4 can be used for permeability unit conversions between SI and Darcy (cgs) permeability units.2
Table 5 and Table 6 contain additional conversion factors for flow/area/time and pressure units,
respectively.2
Table 4. Permeability Unit Conversions
1 darcy 0.99x10-12 m2
1 m2 1.013x1012 darcy
1 m2 9.8x108 cms-1 (for water at 20C)
1 m2 2.78x1012 ftday-1
1 m2 2.08x1013 US gal day-1ft-2
Table 5 Permeability Flow Measurement Unit Conversion
l/m2/s l/dm2/min cm3 /cm2/s cfm/ft2 m3/m2/min m3/m2/h

2
1 l/m /s 1.00 0.600 0.100 0.197 0.0600 3.60
1 l/dm2/min 1.67 1.00 0.167 0.328 0.100 6.00
1 cm3 /cm2/s 10.0 6.00 1.00 1.97 0.600 36.0
1 cfm/ft2 5.08 3.05 0.508 1.00 0.305 18.3
1 m3/m2/min 16.7 10.0 1.67 3.28 1.00 60.0
1 m3/m2/h 0.278 0.167 0.0278 0.0547 0.0167 1.00
Table 6 Permeability Measurement Pressure Unit conversions
Pa mbar cm WG in WG
1 Pa 1.00 0.0100 0.0102 0.00402
1 mbar 100 1.00 1.02 0.402
1 cm WG 98.1 0.981 1.00 0.394
1 in WG 249 2.49 2.54 1.00
WG = water gradient
Filter sizing (number of filters rather than filter pore size) for the application is based on using the screen
permeability or flow capacity. Given an application’s expected flow rate, fluid viscosity, fluid density,
upstream pressure, downstream pressure and maximum allowable filter pressure drop requirements, the
filter area (size or number of filters) can be adjusted to provide the optimum flow characteristics while
minimizing the filter pod footprint or cost.

35
As noted above, the Darcy formula is for laminar flow through the porous media and to a first
approximation describes the clean flow of a filter under typical flow operating flow rates. However, a
more complete treatment of flow characteristics through porous media includes flow regimes beyond
simple laminar flow, and the pressure drop through porous media is given by the general formula:
DP = R  Vp + I Vp2 ………………………………………………………………..…………10
Where
R = specific resistance to viscous flow
= fluid viscosity
I = specific resistance of inertia
= fluid density
Vp = pore velocity
For simplification, the fluid and filter properties can be combined and expressed as coefficients C1 and C2
for a specific fluid viscosity and density:
DP = C1 Vp + C2 Vp2 ……………………………………………………………………………11
The coefficient C1 refers to the Darcy component of the pressure drop, and the coefficient C2 refers to the
non-Darcy flow. Non-Darcy flow only occurs at very high rates or high plugging of the mesh. For woven
wire meshes, these coefficients can be calculated for specific weave patterns by considering the pore
structure as a series of parallel pipes whose diameter and thickness are related to the weave’s pore
dimensions3, but more often they are obtained from flow tests which include rates high enough for the
second term to take effect (for example, ISO 4022:1987 E “Permeable diffusion-bonded metal materials
– determination of Fluid Permeability” describes a test procedure to obtain these terms). The shape of a
typical DP vs flow rate curve for a filter mesh is shown in Figure 18.

36
Figure 18
Notice in this curve the differential pressure dependence on flow rate appears linear at low flow rates.
This is because the C2 term is usually much smaller than C1, typically by several orders of magnitude. Good
filter design seeks to minimize the non-Darcy term as much as possible.
The non-Darcy term also has an effect on the pressure drop through the media even at low upstream rate
when the media becomes plugged. As a filter plugs, the pore velocity increases and the non-Darcy term
begins to make a significant contribution to the pressure drop. The effect of filter plugging on the pore
velocity is non-linear and depends upon the pore structure of the media. The simplest media to illustrate
the effect of plugging on pressure drop is a square weave mesh, and Figure 19 shows the effect of the
open area as the contaminants block the pore spaces over time.

37
Figure 19
In this illustration, the upstream or face velocity is 0.1 m/s and the nominal pore velocity, Vp, is the face
velocity divided by the open area. The contaminant load is constant, therefore for every given time unit
the media plugs by a constantly increasing amount (+20% in this illustration). But because there is a finite
amount of pore space available, the pore velocity increases non-linearly with time. This not only increases
the pressure drop due to the inertial and viscous forces shown in the equations above, but also an
additional increase is observed due to the increase in Reynolds number at the higher pore velocities. This
is illustrated in Figure 20 for a 50 micron pore size screen with 1 cP fluid as it becomes plugged per the
illustration in Figure 19.
Figure 20
The nearly step-change increase in Reynolds number is graphically illustrated as the filter media plugging
exceeds 80%. This corresponds to most observations of filter plugging, such as the Dirt Holding Capacity
38
Test in Figure 16 – the filter can last a long time in service, but once the end of life is approached, it will
rapidly plug. This is why it is very difficult to predict the amount of life left in a filter based on its pressure
drop – it is nearly impossible to tell where the filter is on the curve, and each type of filter has its own
type-curve. In general, depth filters can last a long time before hitting a pressure ramp; surface filters
much less so. Filter life can only be predicted if long-term historical data of a filter in a particular service
environment is available where the filter is challenged by a steady stream of contaminants.

39
Product Quality Control Testing

Below is a brief list of typical quality control tests for filters.
Permeability Testing – This test is performed in local zones generally in a 2-4” diameter area on the
diffusion-bonded sheet and measured air flow vs pressure drop across the sheet. The results be reported
in units of Ft3/min/Ft2 or M3/sec/M2 and a specified pressure drop in either inches H2O, inches Hg, PSI,
KPA, Bar or other popular pressure units.
Bubble point Testing – The bubble point test correlated the pore size of a porous medium with the
capillary pressure required to overcome the surface tension at the largest pore. The test is used to
determine maximum pore size (or the absolute filter rating) of a given material. For quality control
purposes it is very useful to pinpoint larger than acceptable pores at weld seams, braze joints and the like
of fabricated tubular filter elements. It is also used to spot test incoming fine weave wire meshes. One
such method for this test is Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) – 901. ARP standards and
specifications are now administered by SAE.
Mechanical Strength Testing – Diffusion-bonded multi-layer

laminates are functional only to the extent that all their layers are
properly and permanently bonded. Delamination, either during
fabrication prior to entering service or worse, during service,
constitutes ultimate failure of the material. Bend and Tensile
Strength test facilities are used daily to measure critical mechanical
strength properties to ensure the products meet or exceed the
requirements. For the bend test, a simple test for proper bonding
utilizes a small diameter cylindrical stainless steel mandrel. By
bending a small representative sample of the diffusion-bonded
laminate around the mandrel through some specified degree and
back, any delamination, if present, will quickly be observed. The
mandrel diameter and bend duration angle are dependent upon
the thickness and construction of the diffusion-bonded laminate.
Tensile strength tests involve a frame (Figure 21) which pulls on the
material until yield or breakage occurs. Figure 21. Tensile Strength
Tester
Test of Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack – commonly known as
the Strauss Test. Since diffusion-bonding is fundamentally a heat treating process, if performed
improperly and with elevated carbon levels, austenitic stainless steels may become metallurgically
compromised and subject to intergranular attack or corrosion. The appropriate test method to determine
any such deficiency in 300 series stainless steels is ASTM A262, Practice “E”. The test is performed on a
small coupon cut from the diffusion-bonded sheet and results are usually available within 24 hours.

40
Industry Standards for Screen Manufacturing, Testing and

Service Environment
The following is a list of the most common standards (ASTM, API, ISO, SAE, MIL etc.) for filters and
filtration service in a variety of industries and applications.
 ASTM: E2016 -11, Standard Specifications for Industrial Woven Wire Cloth.
 ASTM: 2814-11, Standard Guide for Industrial Woven Wire Filter Cloth.
 ISO: 4782, Metal Wire for Industrial Wire Screens and Woven Wire Cloth.
 ISO: 9044, Industrial Woven Wire Cloth – Technical Requirements and Testing.
 ISO: 3310-1, Test Sieves – Technical Requirements and Testing.
 ASTM: A370-11, Standard Test and Definitions for Mechanical Properties of Steel Products.
 ISO: 4022, Permeability Diffusion-bonded Metal Materials – Determination of Fluid
Permeability.
 ASTM: E8-01, Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials.
 SAE: ARP 901, Bubble Point Test Method.
 SAE: AMS 2750, Pyrometry (Furnace Temperature Uniformity Surveys).
 MIL: H-6875H, Process for Heat Treatment of Steel.
 ASTM: A262-02a, Standard Practice for Detecting Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack in
Austenitic Stainless Steel.
 API RP 13C Recommended Practice on Drilling Fluid Processing Systems Evaluation
 API 19S Petroleum and Natural Gas Industries –Downhole Equipment – Sand Screen
 ASTM D737 Standard Test Method for Air Permeability of Textile Fabrics

41
Glossary of Terms
Absolute filtration rating: a quantifiable, repeatable method for establishing a filter pore size.
Methods to determine absolute rating can include glass bead challenge tests, single pass tests
and multi-pass tests yielding beta ratios at each particle size range. Contrary to the name, there
is no single pore size to reference in an absolute rating; a pore size is referenced to a defined
rating method (for example, specified beta ratio in a multi-pass test or maximum particle size
passed in a glass bead challenge test).
Beta ratio: The upstream vs downstream particle count ratio at a given particle size. Can be
converted to filter efficiency through a simple relationship.
Bulk Porosity: The displaced volume of the filter media divided by the bulk volume
Calendering: Flattening process for metallic media between two rollers
Conductance: The flow vs pressure relationship of a porous media. It includes the permeability
of the media but also includes the media thickness and therefore is not an intrinsic (size-
independent) property of the media. S.I. Units of conductance is kilodarcys per mm (Kd/mm).
Differential pressure: Difference in pressure upstream and downstream of a filter
Diffusion Bonding: See diffusion bonding.
Dirt holding capacity: The amount of contaminant a filter can hold before reaching a terminal
differential pressure. A relative reference determined by standard test conditions.
Dynamic or Absolute viscosity: The measure of a fluid’s resistance to shearing flow, where
adjacent layers move parallel to each other at different speeds. In cgs units dynamic viscosity is
in centipoise.
Effective porosity: The volume of the filter media that is accessible to particle flow. Differs from
bulk porosity in that areas inaccessible to the particles due to tortuosity or restricted flow paths
are not accounted for in the effective porosity. Therefore, effective porosity is equal or less than
the bulk porosity
Efficiency: The percent removal of a contaminant at a specified particle size. Directly related to
the beta ratio.
Frazier number: The flow vs pressure relationship of a porous media. It includes the permeability
and thickness of the media and also the viscosity of the test fluid and therefore is not an intrinsic
(voscisity or thickness independent) property of the media. The Standard Frazier test uses air as
the fluid at 0.5” water column pressure and is typically reported in cfm/ft2 @ 0.5” W.G.

42
Kinematic viscosity: ratio of absolute viscosity (poise) to the specific gravity of a fluid. S.I. unit of
kinematic viscosity is N*s/m2 .
Multi-pass test: Standard test where a filter is challenged with particles in a flow loop where the
contaminant stream is cycled through the filter multiple times and the upstream and
downstream contaminants are compared in terms of particle size and concentration to yield a
beta ratio. This test simulates typical hydraulic service conditions where the hydraulic fluid is
circulated through the filter multiple times such as typical engine oil service.
Nominal filtration rating: a pore size estimation of a filter based on any number of approaches
including: the short axis of a weave pore dimension, the long axis of a weave pore structure, the
average long and short axis of a pore structure the diameter of a circle of same effective area of
a pore structure, , the average pore size determined by capilliary pressure tests, the largest pore
sized determined by capillary pressure or bubble point tests or some other method.
Permeability: an intrinsic property of a porous media relating its capability to transmit fluid flow.
Single pass test: Standard test where a filter is challenged with particles in a single pass and the
upstream and downstream contaminants are compared in terms of particle size and
concentration to yield a beta ratio. This tests simulates service conditions where fluids pass
through the filter system only once, as in point of use water filtration at a faucet.
Diffusion bonding: Metal-metal diffusion bonding process.
Unloading: The subsequent release or contaminant that had be previously caught in the filter
element. Usually associated with non-bonded pore structures that can increase in pore size under
stress.
Warp: Mesh wires running lengthwise to a fabric roll. These are the wires that are raised and
lowered while the weft wires pass through them to create the weave pattern.
Water Gauge (W.G.): Pressure unit related to inches of water column.
Weft: Mesh wires perpendicular to warp wires, or wires that are on the shuttle, or the wires
across the width of the fabric, or wires that are perpendicular to the length of a fabric roll.

43
References
1
Comparative Methods for the Pore Size Distribution of Woven and Metal Mesh Filter Media, R. Lydon, E. Mayer,
G.R. Rideal, 2004
2
Handbook of Filter Media, D.B. Purchas and K. Sutherland, second edition, 2002
3
Filtration and Wire Cloth, Gantois Wire Cloth Division, B. Bruncher

44

PMF Filter Handbook 2016

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

PMF Filter Handbook 2016

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Porous Metal Filters Inc.

19994 Hickory Twig Way Spring TX 77388

PMF Handbook of Filtration and Metal Filter Technology

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Filtration – One of the principle uses of

Whether filtering liquids or gases, diffusion-

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Refinery, Oil and Gas – Diffusion-bonded wire mesh

Membrane Supports – With the plate-like construction of

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Acoustic Attenuation (sound absorption) – Single

Infrared Emitter Media (for

Spark and Flame Arrestors –

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Wire Mesh and Composite Filter Foundations

Woven Wire Meshes

Plain Square Weave

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Plain Twilled Weave

Plain Dutch Weave

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Dutch Twilled Weave

Reverse Plain Dutch Weave

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Table 1. Typical Mesh Weave Details

Weave Mesh wire/inch Wire Diameter (in) Rating Porosity

Plain Dutch 80 400 0.005 0.003 35 55

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Other Filter Materials

Metal fibers are very thin metal filaments ranging from 4

The media is made with either a narrow or wide range of fiber

Structures made of bonded metal powders are extremely

In bulk, bonded powders can be brittle, but the powders can

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Sintering and Diffusion Bonding

Figure 1. Diffusion Bonded vs As-Woven Structure

Figure 2. Diffusion Bonded Multi-Layer Mesh Structure

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Diffusion bonding results in enhanced mechanical properties that include:

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

A calendering mill essentially compresses the material

For diffusion bonding purposes, a pre-diffusion bonding

Calendering is a vital step in the manufacturing of most

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Multi-layer Meshes and Composite Structures

An experienced composite metal manufacturer can advise diffusion-bonded mesh combinations to

The short answer: Yes.

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Laser and Water Jet Cutting

 Capabilities to treat flat sheets, tubes and cylinders.

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Assembled Filter Units

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Figure 5. Depth Filtration

Figure 6. Surface Filtration

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Figure 7. Particle Bridging Across Pore

Advantages to using surface filters include:

Figure 8. Permeable Cake Build-Up on Filter Surface

PMF 19994 Hickory Twig Way Tel: 281-719-1352

Pore size ratings