Chapter 1

Introduction

This chapter explains who this publication is intended

for, what 1550 does and does not cover, and why the
EI has produced it.

Who is 1550 for?

Equipment/component
users at airports are
This publication provides information for:
typically major
international oil
• Designers of aviation fuel handling systems (including aviation filter systems and
companies, national
other fuel cleanliness monitoring/control equipment).
oil companies,
independent into- • Those responsible for specifying and purchasing equipment/components for use
plane agents, airlines, in aviation fuel handling systems.
or in some cases,
• Manufacturers of equipment/components (including vehicles) typically used in
airports.
aviation fuel handling systems.

EI/JIG Standard 1530 • Pipeline operators.

Quality assurance
requirements for the • Pre-airport/pre-airfield and intermediate depot/terminal operators.
manufacture, storage
• Operators of aviation fuel supply facilities at airports/airfields.
and distribution of
aviation fuels to • Equipment/component operators/users.
airports.
• Those responsible for purchasing aviation fuel.
EI 1560
Recommended • Those who have read EI/JIG 1530 or EI 1560 and would like more information
practice for the on fuel cleanliness.
operation, inspection,
maintenance and • Other standards developing organisations that may wish to reference EI or EI
commissioning of equipment/component specifications.
aviation fuel hydrant
systems and hydrant What does 1550 cover?
system extensions.

This publication provides information on:

For definitions of • Maintaining aviation fuel cleanliness from batch release/point of fuel certification
batch and into-plane to into-plane delivery for civilian (mainly commercial) applications.
see chapter 2.
• The design, installation and operation of filtration/water removal equipment used
in aviation fuel handling systems to ensure fuel cleanliness.

• Operational characteristics of different system components as applied in the

aviation fuel handling system. This includes discussion of known limitations in

1
 the use of particular types of components.

• Key issues to be considered in the selection and use of combinations of various

technologies/quality assurance procedures to achieve the required fuel
commercial cleanliness.
In this sense refers to
the supply of aviation • Other standards or publications that should be consulted for additional in depth
fuel to a company that information.
typically operates a
fleet of aircraft for the
transport of paying Why the need for 1550?
passengers or freight,
such as major
international airlines. This publication has been prepared to:
Civilian (civil) refers to
any operation that is
non-military. • Communicate key information on the above topics to assist all those listed
above.

• Provide information based on operational experiences that may benefit the

EI specifications for industry and provide specific references to other publications where appropriate.
filters are primarily
written for use by filter • Disseminate key findings from relevant industry research to users of equipment/
manufacturers in filter components who may not be directly involved in all research activities.
design and laboratory • Provide information that may assist in the optimisation of aviation fuel handling
qualification of a system components in terms of safety and efficiency.
model design. EI 1550
is primarily intended • Highlight the benefits of using combinations of components.
for equipment/ • Incorporate developments in good practice and EI specifications that have
component users. occurred since the publication of the first edition of EI 1550 in 2007.

What 1550 does not cover

• 1550 does not specifically address military applications. However, much of the
1
information may be applicable .
• 1550 has been written by technical specialists involved primarily in the supply of
Note 1: jet fuel to commercial aircraft. The information may therefore have limited
Further advice should application to maintaining cleanliness of aviation gasoline fuels (which may form
be sought from a large part of the ‘general aviation’ market), or to very small airfield installations.
manufacturers and It is hoped that a future edition of 1550 will cover some of the more specific
suppliers of fuel requirements for aviation gasoline cleanliness. (Note some aviation gasoline
handling equipment points are included in chapter 3 and chapter 16.)
for specific military
applications. • 1550 should not be considered an operations manual. All operators of aviation
fuel handling systems and equipment/components should have their own
detailed operating procedures.

• 1550 does not include detailed information or operational recommendations from

equipment/component manufacturers. Such information should always be
provided by manufacturers, and followed by users.

• 1550 does not provide general fuel handling design and operational
recommendations that do not specifically relate to fuel cleanliness, see ‘Where
can I find further information?’ below.
EI 1570 Handbook on • 1550 does not provide specific information on cleanliness control at refineries.
electronic sensors for
For further information see EI/JIG 1530.
the detection of
particulate matter • 1550 does not provide information on electronic sensors for particulate
and/or free water
matter/free water detection during aircraft refuelling. Information on that topic is
during aircraft
refuelling. provided in EI 1570.

2
Where can I find further information?

If what you are looking for is not outlined above, you might not find it in 1550. Other
sources of related information are included in Annex O (see also inside back cover).

3

batch
After production at a refinery,
aviation fuel is required to be
analysed and certified. This
process has to be undertaken on
the quantity of fuel contained in a
single storage tank, rather than
continuously, so once analysed
and certified as aviation fuel, that
material is described as a batch.
into-plane
Is a term used by fuel handling
companies to describe the point
of delivery of fuel to an aircraft.
Also sometimes referred to as
into-wing.
For the definition of the industry
see Annex A.
For the definition of
contaminants see chapter 3.
Chapter 2
Aviation fuel handling
systems
Fuel cleanliness is a property that must be
managed throughout the process of moving
jet fuel from production to use
Fuel quality
With over 20 specified performance parameters, jet fuel remains one of
the most highly specified fuels (products) produced by refineries. All but
one of these parameters have quantifiable limits that are measured by a
range of well-defined, industry-recognised analytical methods. The
parameters measured relate to fuel performance or compositional
features determined by crude oil type and refinery processing, see box
below. The single exception is fuel cleanliness. Whilst the other
parameters remain relatively unchanged from the batch process at the
refinery until it is delivered into-plane (cross-contamination between
different products is unusual), it is inevitable that cleanliness is affected by
the entrainment of particulate matter, microbes and dispersed water. Such
contamination can be introduced into fuel at any stage in the distribution
system. For further details of fuel cleanliness see chapter 3.
Key measurable parameters for aviation fuel
Appearance Fluidity Stability Lubricity
Composition Combustion Contaminants Additives
Volatility Corrosion Conductivity
Philosophy for maintaining fuel cleanliness
The typical contaminants found in fuels can have undesirable effects on
many of the operations carried out both on the ground and in aircraft.
Over many years of experience the industry has developed robust
measures to deal with, and manage this. The philosophy adopted may be
summarised as follows:
• The presence of contaminants in jet fuel is undesirable.
• Prevention is safer, and more cost effective, than remediation.
4

Note 2:
Prior to 2000, laboratory test
specifications were published
separately by API and the former
Institute of Petroleum (which
became the Energy Institute in
2003). During 2000-2010 joint
API/EI publications were issued.
Since 1st July 2010 the EI has
been the sole provider of the
specifications.
Note 3:
This wording is included in jet
fuel specifications, see page 11.
Figure 1: EI aviation fuel cleanliness publications
• Aviation fuel handling systems should be designed and constructed
so as to not adversely affect fuel cleanliness and to facilitate the
maintenance of fuel cleanliness.
• Jet fuel is usually filtered at each transfer to remove dispersed
contaminants down to acceptable levels.
• System monitoring is encouraged.
Monitoring, and the application of preventative measures, should be part
of any aviation fuel handling system and procedures. Specific details
greatly depend on the particular location (fuel throughput) and stage in the
distribution system.
Methods for the removal of contaminants are so critical to the industry that
they are the subject of specific industry publications. Several laboratory
test specifications for filtration components are published by EI 2 and are
shown in Figure 1 (described more fully in chapter 4), which also
highlights the relationship between those publications and this one. It is
recommended that, where an EI specification exists for a specific
component, only components meeting, or exceeding, the requirements of
the relevant specification should be used in the aviation fuel handling
system.
Into-plane requirements for fuel cleanliness can be achieved with certainty
only by the combined use of stringent quality assurance procedures and
filtration and water removal equipment deployed throughout the aviation
fuel handling system.
3
Aviation fuel needs to be kept clean, dry and free from particulate matter.
5
Aviation fuel needs to be kept clean, dry and
free from particulate matter

To maintain the highest level of fuel cleanliness, the industry has

developed an operational strategy that uses combinations of available
technologies rather than depending on just one. Such a strategy
recognises that reliance should not be placed in one type of technology,
even if it is claimed, or considered to be, ‘fail-safe’. One aspect of this
publication is to provide information to help decision makers evaluate
which combination options are available, and which might yield optimal
commercial and technical performance.

Aviation fuel handling system description

A schematic diagram to provide an illustration (generic) of the aviation fuel

handling system (typical jet fuel manufacture, distribution and supply) is
shown in Figure 2. It also shows locations where fuel filtration (F) may be
applied. These are:
• into pre-airfield/terminal storage,
• out of pre-airfield/terminal storage,
• into airport storage,
• out of airport storage, and
• into-plane through refuellers, hydrant services/carts or kerbside
pumping equipment).
Note that local regulations and practice may cause actual systems to be
slightly different. However the essential steps are the same.

6
Figure 2: Generic aviation fuel handling system

7
Jet A is the most commonly
used jet fuel in the USA. The
main difference from Jet A-1 is
the freeze point of the fuel.
(UK) Ministry of Defence
Defence Standard 91-91
Turbine fuel, Aviation kerosine
type, Jet A-1, NATO Code F-35,
Joint service designation:
AVTUR (free to download from
www.dstan.mod.uk)
ASTM D 1655 Standard
specification for aviation turbine
fuels
Note 4:
The method used will vary
between locations. It may
involve a check of paperwork, a
short list of typically five tests
(e.g. if fuel has arrived from a
dedicated system), or full
certification.
Note 5:
Smaller airfields may also utilise
fixed refuelling points.
Manufacture
Most aviation fuel originates from refinery processing of crude oil. It is
made to a local specification or, more commonly, one of the major
international specifications (e.g. for jet fuel, Defence Standard 91-91 (for
jet A-1) or ASTM D 1655 (for jet A or jet A-1)). Once a batch is analysed
and certified as aviation fuel a Refinery Certificate of Quality (RCQ) is
issued. Further downstream of the refinery a Certificate of Analysis (CoA)
can be issued for a batch of fuel (includes analysis of all parameters of the
fuel specification, but not details of additives). For further information see
EI/JIG 1530.
Distribution
Following manufacture, batch production and certification the fuel is moved
to a holding tank (usually within the refinery, but not always) and from
there it is released into the distribution system (part of the aviation fuel
handling system). The distribution system may use a number of
transportation methods, such as pipelines, road trucks, rail cars, river
barges and sea-going (marine) ships. The system may also carry other
types of fuels (e.g. diesel), in which case it is referred to as ‘non-
dedicated’. After a batch of fuel has been distributed in a non-dedicated
system it has to be rebatched and a new analysis performed. This
Recertification Testing verifies that the quality of aviation fuel has not
changed. Whatever transport method is used during distribution, the fuel
will eventually reach another storage tank. This may be at an airport or at
an intermediate storage facility. In Figure 2, a dashed line in the
distribution sector shows that it is possible for a fuel to be moved a number
of times through a number of intermediate storage facilities. The risk of fuel
cleanliness being compromised by particulate matter, water or microbial
growth, is highest within this stage of the handling system. The final
movement of fuel from the distribution system to airport storage has to be
via a single fuel grade dedicated system.
Supply
On arrival at the airport the fuel is delivered into a storage tank where its
quality is assessed, after a period of settling. Once it is determined that it is
acceptable4, it is available for use. Large uplifts of fuel into-plane typically
utilise a hydrant servicer/dispenser vehicle, or cart, connected to an
underground hydrant system, or a refueller having a tank for transporting
fuel that is filled via a gantry or loading rack 5. Airport practice adopted
worldwide utilises filtration into-storage, out-of-storage and into-plane.
Most of the information included in the rest of this publication applies
directly to this operational area.
Airport practice adopted worldwide utilises
filtration into-storage, out-of-storage and into-
plane
8
 Chapter 3

Fuel cleanliness

Key points of this chapter

The typical contaminants that impact on fuel cleanliness are free water,
particulate matter and microbiological growths.

The majority of particulate contamination in the fuel supply and distribution

system occurs as rust.

A predominance of iron oxides and silica was found in an industry survey

of fuel cleanliness at major international airports.

Fuel contamination can cause potentially serious operational problems.

There is no industry consensus to a single definition of fuel cleanliness.

A range of ‘contamination limits’ exist for free water and particulate matter
at various stages of aviation fuel handling systems.

An industry survey of international airports found that for the most part,
airport fuel handling systems receive and handle only clean fuel, well within
known quality limits.

Note 6: What are the contaminants?

It should also be noted
that there may be
contamination of The typical contaminants6 that impact on fuel cleanliness are free water,
aviation fuel by other particulate matter and microbiological growths.
fuels, surfactants or Free water: It is inevitable that dissolved water is present in aviation fuel, and at
additives used in other trace levels it does not cause any problems in aviation fuel handling
fuels, that are not operations. When the level of dissolved water exceeds the solubility limit of
‘approved’ by the the fuel (e.g. as the fuel cools), free water precipitates, forming water
aviation fuel droplets, see Figure 3. Free water may also be introduced into fuel by gross
specifications. Such contamination from an external source (e.g. in marine deliveries or via
‘cross-contamination’ leaking tank floating roof/cover seals). Bulk water can be removed from fuel
may affect other by draining, but finely dispersed water droplets with very slow settling
properties of the fuel, velocities can only be removed quickly by the use of a separation process –
but does not affect fuel coalescence, see Figure 4.

9
cleanliness. It is only
considered further in this
publication in chapter 7,
regarding the effects of
such cross-
contamination on the
performance of
filter/water separators.
Note also the effect of
FSII on filter monitors
(chapter 9). For further
information on measures
to mitigate the risk of
cross-contamination see Figure 3: Water solubility in jet A-1 (from The Handbook of Aviation Fuel
EI/JIG 1530 or API 1595 Properties (CRC Report No. 635), 2004, (average from large sample)
Design, construction,
operation, maintenance,
and inspection of
aviation pre-airfield
storage terminals.
Particulate matter: Particulate matter contamination can occur from several
sources, including:

• Pipeline, storage tank, ship or tank rust and scale (Fe 3O4 and Fe2O3).
• Product carry-over from ship cargos.

• Ingress of airborne dusts such as sand, lime, gypsum etc.

• Process salt from refinery salt driers, see chapter 4.

• Sea salt from marine distribution.

• Equipment component failure.

The majority of particulate contamination in the fuel supply and distribution

system occurs as rust. Table 1 lists a number of common particulate
materials that have been found in fuel samples taken at airports. (The
examples given are a compilation of many individual results of analyses of
contaminant samples obtained in an airport fuel cleanliness survey,
described later in this chapter.)

10
 Table 1: Examples of common minerals found in field samples

The process of
Element Crystalline phases Comments
identification of
particulate matter may Aluminium (Al) Al(OH3), α-Al2O3 Many Al oxides and hydroxides are
begin with elemental amorphous
analysis. In the case of Calcium (Ca) CaCO3, Calcite, CaCl2 CaCl2 is often used in salt driers;
a simple result in which, sea salt
for example, only
sodium (Na) and Chlorine (Cl) Many as a chloride Chloride anion
chlorine (Cl) are found, Chromium (Cr) Should be trace
the conclusion would be
rapidly reached that the Copper (Cu) Should be trace
contaminant comprises
salt (NaCl) since there Iron (Fe) FeO wustite The form of rust and scale depends
is only one material with α-Fe2O3 hematite on the specific corrosion conditions
Fe3O4 magnetite
that elemental
α-FeOOH goethite
composition. However, β-FeOOH akagonite
when an elemental γ-FeOOH
analysis yields a lepidocrocite
number of elements,
Potassium (K) KCl Marine salt, minerals as silicate
such as sodium (Na),
aluminium (Al) and Magnesium Should be trace, sea salt
silicon (Si), the simplest (Mg)
conclusion that this
Manganese Should be trace
indicates the presence (Mn)
of sand (silica – SiO2)
and alumina (Al2O3) etc, Sodium (Na) NaCI Salt, minerals as silicates
may be incorrect. These
Nickel (Ni) NiO Should be trace
elements are also
components of more Phosphorus (P) Many Phospate anion
chemically complex
Sulfur (S) Sulfate anion, sulphide anion
materials, e.g. feldspars
that are found in many Silicon (Si) SiO2 (quartz) Quartz: from sand or concrete as
soil types. In such silicate minerals
circumstances, the
contaminant analysis Titanium (Ti)
strategy must include a
Zinc (Zn) Should be trace
range of tests, including
for instance X-Ray
The following were the findings from an airport fuel cleanliness survey
Diffraction, to described later in this chapter. Contamination compositional analysis found that
unambiguously identify the frequency of elements ranked in the following order:
the nature of the
particulate Fe >>Si >S = Ca >Al >Cl >Na = Cr >trace elements
contamination.
Fe was identified as a variety of oxides or hydrated oxides (rust and scale)
which is to be expected in a distribution system made mostly of steel. Si was
identified in almost all cases as quartz (SiO2) (sand). S was surprisingly
common, indicating the presence of anaerobic bacterial action. Al and Ca are
commonly associated with soil derived clay minerals. NaCl (salt) was found in a
small number of cases. Clearly the predominance of iron oxides and silica in
the field supports the use of such materials as test dusts in filter qualification
testing.

11
 The predominance of iron oxides and silica in the field
supports the use of such materials as test dusts in
filter qualification testing
Note 7:
1 µm = 1 thousandth Large particles (for instance those greater than 40 µm)7 readily settle out in storage
of a millimetre. 70 µm tanks. This is because large particles have high settling velocities, as shown in
is the average Figure 4. Consequently smaller particles require some form of filtration to remove
diameter of a human
hair, but 40 µm is them, as their settling velocities are so low.
considered relatively
large in the context of
particulate matter
contamination.

Figure 4 shows that

40 µm particles take
16 min to settle 1 m
while 10 µm particles
require nearly three
hours to settle 1 m.
When particulate
matter is less than 10
µm, settling may
never occur due to
thermal circulation.
Rust, scale and silica
particles have
densities, hence
settling velocities, an
order of magnitude
higher than water and
so settle out much Figure 4: Relative settling velocities for some common contaminants as a
more rapidly on a function of particle size in jet fuel
size for size basis.
Microbiological growths: Freshly distilled fuels from refineries are usually sterile
due to the high temperatures of the processes involved. However, because micro-
organisms naturally occur in air and water, fuel readily comes into contact with them
in aviation fuel handling systems. Microbes survive and proliferate at the fuel/water
interface. They live in the water phase but metabolise fuel as their source of energy.

Three types of micro-organisms – bacteria, yeasts and moulds – can proliferate in

water associated with fuels. Yeasts and moulds are collectively known as fungi. The
most common types of microbiological contamination in aviation fuel are fungi and
bacteria. Fungi may manifest themselves as slimy deposits on tank surfaces or other
structures containing fuel. During fuel movements both microbes and the by-products
of their growth (such as slimes) may spread into the bulk fuel. Microbiological activity
can be found in aviation fuel handling systems where water has been allowed to
accumulate undisturbed (e.g. pipeline and hydrant low points, filter vessel sumps).
Regularly draining water from systems removes many microbes. Filtration may also
remove this material but spores pass through most filters. In extreme cases of
stagnant water bottoms, anaerobic bacteria such as Sulfate Reducing Bacteria
(SRB) can occur, particularly on, or near, steel surfaces. Significant SRB activity is
mostly found when sea water, a prime source of sulfate, contaminates fuel, but SRB
are rarely found in large numbers. SRB activity is particularly problematic with
uncoated steel tanks because acids produced are very corrosive.

12
More detailed
information on
microbiological
contamination can be
found in:
IATA Guidance material
on microbiological
contamination in aircraft
fuel tanks,
EI Guidelines for the
investigation of the
microbial content of
petroleum fuels and for
the implementation of
Figure 5: Advanced Figure 6: ‘Leopard spotting’ caused by
avoidance and remedial advanced microbiological growths on
microbiological growths at the
strategies, outer sock of filter
fuel/water interface
ASTM D 6469 Standard
guide for microbial
Micro-organisms cannot grow without the presence of free water, emphasising the
contamination in fuel
importance of good aviation fuel handling system design (enabling water to
and fuel systems, and
effectively drain to low points within the system), and the implementation of
ASTM Manual 47 Fuel
regular dewatering procedures. Note that extremely small amounts of water can
and fuel system
support millions of microbes.
microbiology:
Fundamentals, Why do contaminants need to be removed?
diagnosis, and
contamination control.
Table 2 provides examples of the undesirable operational effects of contaminants.
This is not an exhaustive list, but gives an indication of how serious fuel
contamination can be.
Table 2: Typical contaminants that can be introduced into aviation fuel and
their operational effects
Microbiological
Particulate matter Free water
growths
Note 8:
• Blockage of fuel • Corrosion • Blockage of fuel
At fuel temperatures supply pipes and supply pipes and
below the freezing point • Microbiological
lines (distribution lines (distribution
infestations
of water, ice crystallites system, and on- system, and aircraft
can form in a wet fuel, board aircraft fuel • Engine flameout (fuel fuel supply system)
supply system) starvation from large
potentially blocking on- • Premature blocking
water slugs)
board engine filters. • Equipment failure of both aviation fuel
Whilst most commercial due to wear • Blocked aircraft handling system
engine filters due to filters and aircraft
aircraft have hydraulic • Premature blocking
ice formation8 engine filters
heat exchangers fitted of both aviation fuel
to the filters to handling system • Corrosion
filters and aircraft
overcome this problem, • Disarming of
engine filtersa
most military aircraft filter/water
and some smaller • Additive depletion separators (FWS)b
civilian jets do not and • Deposition in • Biofilms on fuel
for this reason a Fuel storage tanks sensors
System Icing Inhibitor • Extensive ground
(FSII) is added to the time for microbial
fuel in some growth cleanup and
treatment
applications.
a
For brief details of aircraft engine filter ratings and aircraft engine tolerance to
fuel contamination, see Annex B.
b
See Annex G.

13
 How is fuel cleanliness defined?

There is no industry consensus to a single definition for fuel cleanliness because

of:
• the lack of any universally accepted analytical protocols and test methods for
the contaminants.

• the lack of definition of negligible levels, and

• the large number of fuel specification authorities.

What are the contamination limits?

There are no
quantitative
contamination limits for
microbiological growths
in aviation fuel handling
systems.
Some limits for particulate matter and free water, applied at various stages in jet
fuel handling systems, are given in Table 3, including their source (relevant
specification or guidance issuing organisation). This is not meant to be an
exhaustive list but an example of how variable the limits are. The origin of these
limits is unknown but the industry has been comfortable with the fact that
operating in this way for many decades has produced an excellent safety record.

Limits taken from: Table 3: Examples of contamination limits used within the jet fuel handling
• (UK) MoD Defence system
Standard 91-91
Turbine fuel, Aviation
Contaminant limit
kerosine type, Jet A-
Location Particulate Authority Comments
1, NATO Code F-35, Water
(gravimetric)
Joint service
No
designation: AVTUR Def. Stan. 91-
Clear and quantitative
• ASTM D 1655 Refinery 1,0 mg/l 91,
bright limit for
Standard specification production JIG AFQRJOS
water
for aviation turbine Clear and bright ASTM D 1655
fuels Kinder Morgan
• JIG Aviation fuel 0,5 mg/l
pipeline
quality requirements MIL-DTL-
Distribution Clear and
for jointly operated 1,0 mg/l 83133E US Air Force
system bright
systems (AFQRJOS) (JP8)
• MIL-DTL-83133E MIL-DTL-5624T
1,0 mg/l US Navy
Turbine fuels, (JP4/JP5)
aviation, kerosene Canadian
Airport
types, NATO F-34 General Safety
into- 2,2 mg/l
(JP-8), NATO F-35, Board 3.23-
storage
and JP-8+100 2005
• MIL-DTL-5624T After-fuelling
Clear and bright
Turbine fuel, aviation,
check
grades JP-4, JP-5,
Rejection
IATA Guidance
limit for
and JP-5/JP-8 ST Material
30 ppm 1,0 mg/l monthly
• Canadian General
equipment
Safety Board 3.23- check
2005 Aviation turbine Canadian
fuel (Grades JET A Into-plane Clear and General Safety
and JET A-1) 0,44 mg/l
bright Board 3.23-
• IATA Guidance 2005
material for aviation A2, B2, and Colorimetric
turbine fuel G2 (Dry)
15 ppm interpretation
specifications
(maximum A3, B3, and ATA 103 of a
• ATA 103 Standards allowable) gravimetric
G3 (wet)
for jet fuel quality membrane.
control at airports
0,5 mg/l

14
Note 9: In certain parts of the World major airport operations follow either IATA Guidance
IATA (International Air material for aviation turbine fuel specifications (currently 5th edition)9 that
Transport Association), incorporates the most stringent requirements of the major fuel specifications or
- the trade association ATA 103. The IATA Guidance stipulates that fuel cleanliness is to be assessed by
for major airlines, the simple visual criterion of “clear and bright”. This is known as the fuel’s
working with major oil “appearance”. For further details of IATA guidance material see Annex C. More
companies, aircraft quantitative, but less timely, is the Gravimetric assay of fuel cleanliness. This
engine manufacturers, requires controlled sampling of fuel through a special filter membrane followed by
and other stakeholders, a laboratory assessment but, of course, this measures only the amount of
issues this publication, particulate material present in the fuel, i.e.- not any free water. Techniques used
that defines minimum for the measurement of free water mainly rely on various field assessment
standards to be met by methods, some of which are described in Annex D.
fuel suppliers to ensure
clean dry fuel is
delivered to aircraft.
See Annex C.

Airport fuel cleanliness survey

Note 10: To gauge how realistic some of the particulate matter contamination limits actually
See Proceedings of the are, and to check target levels for filtration specifications, an industry survey of
7th International airport fuel cleanliness was undertaken in 1995. Although that was more than a
Conference on the decade ago the data produced remain unique. The work was presented in the
Stability, Handling and public domain10.
Use of Liquid Fuels
(IASH), A survey of Twenty airport locations distributed around the world (chosen to be representative
solid contaminant types of the variety of operational environments) were surveyed for particulate matter
and levels found in a contamination levels in jet fuel. At each airport a sample was taken from the
range of airport fuel upstream (dirty) side of filters in the into-storage, out-of-storage and into-plane
handling systems, V.B. positions. Because only single data points were taken for each sample point at
Hughes and P. D. each location, the data are best described as a ‘snap-shot’ of the particulate
Rugen. matter contamination likely to be encountered. Nevertheless, a useful data set (for
18 locations) was produced with the following findings:

• Average into-storage particulate matter contaminant loading: 0,12 mg/l

• Average out-of-storage particulate matter contaminant loading: 0,11 mg/l

• Average into-plane particulate matter contaminant loading: 0,07 mg/l

15
 The averages appear to be very
low and well within the previously
described gravimetric limits for jet
fuel. For into-storage, the highest
value was 0,34 mg/l (see Figure
7A) which is still within the
“notification” limit of IATA Guidance
for into-plane fuel quality.
Undoubtedly there may be times
when systems fail, and fuel with
excessive contaminant loading is
encountered, but the survey
suggests that this is an unusual
circumstance. For the most part,
airport fuel handling systems
receive and handle only clean fuel,
well within known quality limits.

Interestingly, the data indicated that

Figure 7A,B,C: Particulate matter
contaminant loading data (gravimetric
contaminant loadings per ASTM D 2276)
the least demanding point of
filtration at some airports could well
be out-of-storage, which feeds both
hydrant systems and refuelling
trucks, as shown in Figure 7B.
Many locations returned similarly
low levels of contamination into-
plane (Figure 7C, note change of X
axis), but a few indicated significant
increases in contamination at this
point, most likely due to re-
contamination of the fuel by the
hydrant system.

Within the distribution Electronic sensors for detection of particulate matter and/or free
system, fuel cleanliness water
levels are often agreed
between interested
parties and therefore The aviation industry has used the gravimetric and appearance test methods from
not always its very earliest beginnings. There is no doubt that the use of these methods
standardised. However, coupled with very conservative limits and well specified procedures to achieve
the growing costs of them, have given the industry the very highest levels of confidence in supplying
clean-up at airports fuel that is fit-for-purpose. Due to the ever present possibility that these
mean that increasingly procedures may break down and developments in sensing technology, the
there are pressures on industry has evaluated other cleanliness assessment methods. The EI has also
distribution operators to published EI 1598 Design, functional requirements and laboratory testing
use filtration and protocols for electronic sensors to monitor free water and/or particulate matter in
cleanliness practices aviation fuel, 2nd edition, which provides minimum performance requirements for
similar to those used at electronic sensors stated to be able to detect low levels of particulate matter
airports. Refineries and/or water in aviation fuel in mobile applications (into-plane). For further
supplying to Def. Stan. information see EI 1570.
91-91 or AFQRJOS
now meet a gravimetric
limit of 1,0 mg/l (by IP
423 or ASTM D 5452).

16
Some refineries include The use of automatic particle counters for cleanliness monitoring
filtration in their
processing to ensure
this limit is met. All The requirement to measure and report the number of ‘particles’ in jet fuel at point
companies involved of manufacture, using an automated particle counter, has been included in Def
with aviation fuel Stan 91-91 for several years. It is a mandatory requirement of the specification for
handling from refinery particles to be reported for six channel sizes, ranging from ≥ 4 μm(c) up to
to aircraft are ≥ 30 μm(c) in accordance with following test methods:
encouraged to apply  IP 564 Determination of the level of cleanliness of aviation turbine fuel –
the cleanliness controls Laboratory automatic particle counter method;
recommended in this  IP 565 Determination of the level of cleanliness of aviation turbine fuel –
Portable automatic particle counter method, or
publication, and
described in EI/JIG  IP 577 Determination of the level of cleanliness of aviation turbine fuel –
Automatic particle counter method using light extinction.
1530. For into-plane
applications the quality
Each of the test methods includes an optional procedure (Annex B) that may be
and cleanliness of
used to eliminate the effects of water droplets from being counted as particulates.
aviation fuel is not
negotiable.
So what should I do about fuel cleanliness?

It is recommended that operators have procedures in place for:

• the assessment of fuel cleanliness,

• the actions required if agreed fuel cleanliness limits are exceeded (these may
include a lower ‘notification limit’ and a higher ‘rejection’ limit), and

• the maintenance of fuel cleanliness through the appropriate use of quality

assurance equipment and procedures…..the subject of the remainder of this
publication.

17
Chapter 4

Description of components

This chapter is intended to provide a general

description of the components used for fuel cleanliness
control, especially those that are within the scope of EI
publications.

Table 4 highlights certain design features of components that are within the scope of
the following EI publications:

 EI 1581 Specifications and qualification procedures for aviation jet fuel

filter/separators, 5th edition
 EI 1583 Laboratory tests and minimum performance levels for aviation fuel filter
monitors, 6th edition
 EI 1590 Specifications and qualification procedures for aviation fuel microfilters,
2nd edition

Table 4: Design features of components used for fuel cleanliness control

Component EI spec Particulate Dispersed Bulk Typical
matter water water location
removal removal removal applied
Filter/water EI High Intermediate Low Into and out of
separator 1581/ capacity capacity capacity airport storage
Type S 1582

Filter/water EI Low Intermediate Low Out of airport

separator 1581/ capacity capacity capacity storage,
Type S-LD 1582 Downstream of
a microfilter

Filter/water EI High Low None Into-plane only

separator 1581/ capacity
Type S-LW 1582

Filter monitor EI 1583 Low Low Blocks Into-plane

(50 mm, 2 in.) capacity capacity filter (refueller and
hydrant
servicer)

Filter monitor EI 1583 Intermediate Intermediate Blocks Into-plane

(150 mm, capacity capacity filter
6 in.)

Microfilter EI 1590 High None None Upstream of

capacity FWS

Note: The filters listed above have to be housed in a filter vessel. The
recommended minimum requirements for vessels are included in EI 1596 Design
and construction of aviation fuel filter vessels.

18
element
Term used to
describe the
Filter/water separator (FWS) (EI 1581 and EI 1582)
‘disposable’ part of a
filter system (for A FWS is a vessel containing two types of elements: filter/coalescers and separators,
either a filter monitor, see Figures 8 to 11. A FWS is designed to continuously remove particulate matter
filter/coalescer, and water from aviation fuel to acceptable levels. As the workhorse of aviation fuel
separator or filtration, the FWS can be used in any filtration application anywhere in the fuel
microfilter). Also manufacturing, distribution and supply system.
referred to as a
cartridge.

Figure 8: Schematic of a vertical filter/water separator

Figure 9: Illustration of a horizontal filter/water separator

19
 Figure 10: Cross-sections of current models of filter/coalescers

Firstly fuel enters the

filter vessel and
passes through a
combined filtration
and water
coalescence element
(in-to-out flow filter/
coalescer), where
particulate matter is
filtered out and finely
dispersed water
droplets are
coalesced into larger
Figure 11: Separator elements droplets, which easily
settle out of the fuel under gravity. Secondly, fuel passes through a separator
element (out-to-in flow separator), which is usually a simple water-repelling
rated flow (hydrophobic) screen. The separator element ensures water droplets are not carried
downstream in fuel. Coalesced water droplets settle out of the fuel rapidly in the
Is the flow per unit
space between these two types of element and accumulate in the sump of the vessel,
of length of the
where bulk water can be drained off. Vessels usually contain more than one of each
element below
element type. Each element has a maximum recommended flow rate (rated flow).
which the limits of
This may change depending on the application. It is not unusual to find vessels with
EI specifications
over 20 filter/coalescer elements (fewer separators) fitted. The length of
can be met, see
filter/coalescer and separator elements can vary, up to 1 420 mm (56 in.). The FWS
also chapter 12.
can be oriented either vertically or horizontally.

Figure 12: Out of storage horizontal filter/water separators

20
 Filter monitor (EI 1583)

A filter monitor is a vessel containing one type of element that contains water
absorbent media called super-absorbent polymer (SAP) (similar to that used in
disposable diapers). The intention of the design is to remove small amounts of
particulate matter and dispersed free water from aviation fuels to levels acceptable
for servicing aircraft. It is also intended that in service, a filter monitor system will
restrict the flow of fuel before its capacity for particulate matter and/or water removal
is exhausted. On contact with water, whether finely dispersed or as bulk water ‘slugs’,
the water absorbent media form a gel that swells to fill the element, see Figures 13
and 14. This causes the fuel flow to reduce and/or the differential pressure to rise. In
extreme situations the gelling process may shut off the flow completely (and cause
high differential pressure across the filter vessel). Such devices are intended to
‘activate’ when something is dramatically wrong in the aviation fuel handling system,
i.e. gross bulk water contamination of fuel. However, they are also designed to be
able to remove low levels of particulate matter and dispersed water over a longer
time period, without the need for frequent replacement (change-out). Filter monitors
can be of vertical or horizontal orientation. The filter monitor elements are typically 50
mm (2 in.) nominal diameter with out-to-in fuel flow format (see Figure 13), or 150
mm (6 in.) nominal diameter with out-to-in or in-to-out fuel flow format.

Figure 13: Cut-away

of a two inch
nominal diameter
out-to-in flow filter
monitor element

Filter monitors are

sometimes referred to
as ‘fuses’. This is
inappropriate,
however, as a filter
monitor can fail (in
terms of its ability to
remove free water
from fuel) and still
allow the passage of
fuel, as can a FWS.
An electrical fuse
always ‘fails’ to
safety, by preventing
the passage of further
current. Figure 14: Principles of water absorbent media

21
 Figure 15: Beakers of super-absorbent polymer in powder form, before and
after the addition of water to beaker B.

Microfilters are Microfilter (EI 1590)

sometimes referred to
as micronic filters or
prefilters. A microfilter is a vessel containing elements that continuously remove, from aviation
fuels, particulate matter of a nominal minimum particle size (element nominal rating in
deep-bed µm). The vessel may have a vertical or horizontal orientation. A schematic of a
filtration vertical microfilter is shown in Figure 16. This type of filter utilises a single-pass flow
format and elements comprising fibrous media that constitute a ‘deep-bed’ filtration
A filter with process. The filter medium does not restrain the particles absolutely. Particles larger
multiple layers of than the maximum pore size are held on the surface of the medium, but smaller
fibres (three-
particles can, and do, enter the pore system. Once inside the medium some particles
dimensional), see
Figure 17. may be large enough to block internal pores. Other particles may adhere to the
surfaces of the medium due to physico-chemical forces. These latter particles are
For further typically much smaller than the average pore dimensions. Thus it is possible for a
information on fairly coarsely graded deep-bed filter to remove particles much smaller than would
nominal rating, see have been expected from porosity considerations alone, see Figure 17. Consequently
Annex E. these filters can only be described as having nominal performance ratings.

Air eliminator
Pressure relief valve

Microfilter element

Pressure
differential gauge

OUT IN

Drain valve

Figure 16: Schematic of a vertical microfilter

22
 The blocking of internal pores by discrete particles or aggregates of adsorbed
particles leads to an increase in the pressure drop across the medium (differential
pressure). As the differential pressure increases, or if there are any sudden pressure
fluctuations, the transmission of captured particles (especially of the adsorbed type)
becomes more probable and so the performance of such deep-bed filters is often
assessed by measuring filtrate quality under defined flow and pressure drop
conditions.

Figure 18: Cross-

section view of a
microfilter

Figure 17: Fibrous media of a deep-bed filter

Filter vessels (EI 1596)

Filter vessels are pressure vessels incorporating an inlet and outlet for fuel flow. They
are designed to house filter elements (FWS, filter monitors or microfilters). They may
be used in fixed or mobile applications, and oriented horizontally or vertically. Design
and construction requirements for new filter vessels are specified in EI 1596 2 nd
edition.

Other components (not within the scope of EI publications)

There are many other types of equipment/components in use in aviation fuel handling
systems that are not covered by EI publications. Very often the use of such
equipment is for specific applications, and may sometimes be used on a temporary
basis to achieve a specific fuel quality property. This publication identifies a number
of such components, see Table 5, but does not provide further details. They are
included here to provide the operator with information on the broader use of such
technologies. The list below is not exhaustive, but includes those
devices/technologies most likely to be encountered in aviation fuel handling systems.

23
Table 5: Equipment/components in use in aviation fuel handling systems not covered
by EI publications
Component Description
Silica gel A granular material that has high
affinity for both dissolved and free-
water. Often supplied with a colourant
to indicate when the material is
exhausted (blue to pink).
Salt drier Sodium chloride crystals are able to
absorb huge amounts of free and
dissolved water. Salt driers may be
units measuring 10 m or more in height
and need to be regularly monitored for
condition.
Hydro- Passive hydromechanical devices that
cyclone induce a cyclonic flow in a system.
Capable of removing coarse (>40 µm)
particles and water droplets. A low
cost, efficient component for removing
the bulk of a heavily contaminated fuel.
Bag filter More refined than the hydrocyclone but
still less sophisticated than filtration
components covered by EI
publications, bag filters can be used to
remove coarse contamination quickly
and cheaply. 20 X 250 Hollander
Weave stainless steel or monel metal
mesh filters can be capable of filtration
down to 40 µm.
Hay pack Vessels filled with wood fibre
(excelsior), wood shavings or
polypropylene mesh. Intended for
removal of large volumes of bulk water.
Magnetic A basic system using rods that are
rods magnetised such that they attract ferro-
magnetic particles, (Fe), from the fuel.
They require regular cleaning to
remove any attracted particles.
Clay treater A large vessel containing Attapulgus
clay, either in bulk or in replaceable
cartridges. This special clay adsorbs
surface-active agents and colour
bodies in the fuel which are not
otherwise removable. For further
details see Annex F.
24
Common use
As a very expensive material it
is usually used in laboratories
or in applications where
components need to be kept
away from any level of
humidity.
Used in refinery wet
processing of aviation fuels as
a dehydration unit, especially
upstream of a clay treater (see
below).
On large pipelines, especially
downstream of ship cargo.
These can be used to reduce
the contaminant loading on
finer filtration components in
any applications where grossly
contaminated fuel is
encountered anywhere from
the refinery to the airport
receipt facility.
May be used at marine receipt
facilities where the threat of
bulk water contamination may
be high. Also sometimes used
to prevent water contamination
entering clay treaters.
Sometimes used in
conjunction with microfilters at
pipeline receipt points (old
steel unlined pipelines) from
sea vessel receipt.
Refineries and pipeline break-
out stages. Most likely of the
components included in this
table to be found at airports
(into-storage), especially when
supplied by multi-product
pipelines. Found most
frequently in the US.
Strainer A gauze or basket to prevent large
(visible) debris passing downstream.
Bulk water A simple electronic device that detects
detector the presence of bulk free water in
flowing fuel on a refuelling vehicle, and
alarms.
25
In the hose end connector
between the into-plane
filtration on refuelling
equipment and the aircraft
tank. Note: there are a few
potentially vulnerable
components such as hose
couplings and the hoses
themselves, after final into-
plane filtration that in extreme
circumstances may produce
debris. Also upstream of
pumps anywhere in the
distribution system.
A new initiative, proposed for
use in conjunction with filter
monitors on hydrant
dispensers.
Chapter 5

Relating EI specifications to
end use of filters
How do specifications relate to end use of filters?

Figure 19 shows the recommended process that should be followed in the

adoption of filter components used in aviation fuel handling systems.

Figure 19: Relationship between EI or EI specifications and end use of

filters

26

EI filter specifications are
not complete product
specifications. They
provide only general
mechanical requirements,
some minimum
performance requirements
and laboratory
qualification tests, so-
called ‘First Article
Testing’.
Why is this process recommended?
This process has been demonstrated over many years to provide users with
confidence in the suitability of components used to control fuel cleanliness in
aviation fuel handling systems.
The key points for each of the steps are as follows:
Specification
• Provides minimum performance requirements for selected aspects of
performance only, under laboratory conditions.
• Provides series of Qualification Tests for a model of filter. Due to their
destructive nature, Qualification Tests cannot be used for every component
testing of production filters.
• Laboratory testing alone cannot replicate all operating and environmental
parameters to which filters will be exposed when in use.
• Provides consistent methods for conducting tests.
• Prepared by technical specialists from industry stakeholders (including filter
manufacturers and major users), based on consensus agreement.
• Incorporates findings from industry research (e.g. that funded by the EI, see
next chapter), that provided by manufacturers, and experience from users.
• Should never be considered as restrictive to new innovation/manufacturers’
developments.
• Reviewed for continued technical validity at least every five years.
Manufacturer
• Chooses whether to qualify a model of filter in accordance with specification
requirements.
• Is responsible for the development of suitable prototype filters, that in
addition to meeting specification requirements, will be suitable for the
intended application.
• Undertakes in-house testing.
• Provides feedback to EI regarding specification requirements.
• Notifies potential users that a design is to undergo qualification testing.
Qualification
• Is the process of demonstrating that a model/design of filter successfully
meets, or exceeds, all of the mandatory test requirements of the relevant
specification.
• Some specifications require that the laboratory qualification testing is
‘witnessed’ by a purchaser’s representative.
• Manufacturers may also choose to invite other industry stakeholders to their
qualification testing.
• EI operates a program to provide witnesses for filter qualifications.
• The inability of a filter to successfully meet all of the mandatory test
27
 requirements leads to a filter redesign, or if the specification test is new, a
potential re-evaluation of the test requirements by EI.

• The qualification process results in a qualification report from the

manufacturer, which is confirmed as being accurate by the witness.

• If the qualification report is acceptable to the purchaser (user) the

manufacturer can claim that their filter is ‘qualified to the relevant
specification’.

Field Evaluation
• It is recommended by EI that users evaluate the field performance of a
newly qualified model of filter.

• Laboratory testing alone cannot assess the long-term durability, mechanical

integrity and performance of filters in aviation fuel handling systems.

• Is required to help demonstrate that a filter is ‘fit-for-purpose’ or ‘suitable for

the intended application’.

• Users may choose to undertake this process at a number of selected

locations, which offer minimal risk and maximum component monitoring
capabilities.

• If a filter model is not deemed to be suitable for use as a result of field

evaluation (does not meet operational requirements), it may result in a filter
redesign, or if the specification test is new, a potential re-evaluation of the
test requirements by EI.

User approval
• It is only user companies that finally decide if a specific model of filter is
acceptable for their use. EI does not issue ‘approvals’.

• The user approval process is usually unique to each user company.

• Requires the user to recognise that the ‘qualification’ is valid.

• Some users may choose to issue approvals without undertaking field

evaluation of qualified filters. This is not recommended.

Production
• The production of filter elements is the responsibility of the manufacturer.
• It is a requirement of the EI specifications that every filter element is
identical to the design/model that was qualified.

• Filter element manufacturers should have in place a quality management

system for their production, which includes controls on their individual
suppliers. See Chapter 19 for more information.

Non-qualified filters
• The use of filters that are within the scope of an EI specification, but are not
qualified in accordance with one, is not recommended.

• For filters outside the scope of EI specifications it is recommended that the

user undertakes a complete programme of field evaluation to confirm to
themselves that the filter is suitable for its intended use.

28
Use
• Requires there to be no variance between filters from the production line,
and the model/design that was qualified. See also chapter 15.

• Filters should always be used in accordance with manufacturer’s

recommendations.

• Feedback received from users of their operational experiences may lead to

a re-evaluation of specification test requirements by the EI.

EI filter specifications are not complete product

specifications. They provide only general
mechanical requirements, some minimum
performance requirements and laboratory
qualification tests.

29
 Chapter 6

Laboratory testing
requirements
This chapter provides information on the laboratory
testing requirements included in EI specifications for
filters. It is intended to make potential users aware of
the scope of laboratory testing to which a qualified
filter model/design has been subjected.
Introduction

The purpose of ‘qualifying’ a filter model/design, in accordance with qualification test

protocols included in EI publications, is to confirm to a potential user that a particular
filter design is capable of meeting selected performance requirements under
laboratory conditions. It should therefore be understood that to determine whether a
filter is ‘fit-for-purpose’ or ‘suitable for its intended application’ there may be other
parameters that require further testing/field evaluation. See also ‘What types of test
are not currently specified in EI publications and why?’ later in this chapter.

In devising test protocols for components, there are a number of issues to overcome
or accommodate to reflect the variety of operational needs. As shown in the previous
chapter, test protocols develop over time in response to experience and new
technology. They need to be generally applicable (to avoid frequent protocol revision
programmes, and to not be excessively onerous), but also comprehensive (to ensure
that they reflect selected operational conditions). These two aspects conflict and so
the protocols included in EI publications (described in this chapter) reflect a
compromise that produces a minimum level of testing agreed across the industry
after many hours of stakeholder review and technical debate. The EI publications
also contain minimum performance limits for a specific range of tests applicable to
filter components – but – they are only selected parameters and as such should
never be assumed to be absolute in terms of operational applicability.

General testing features

A model/design of filter is tested by subjecting it to standard fuel contaminants

(defined later) and quantitatively measuring its responses. However filters are also
tested for their mutual effects on the fuel (compatibility) and structural stability.
Single-element and full-scale testing: Test protocols are identified as being either
single-element or full-scale. Single-element testing refers to testing being
undertaken on the minimum number of elements for the filter system to operate.

30
The settling velocities
for typical
contaminants in
Avgas (in comparison
with Figure 4 for jet
fuel) are substantially
higher. Hence,
separation of
contaminants is
easier in Avgas.
Testing with jet fuel
therefore represents
worst case.
In the case of filter monitors and microfilters this is one element only. In the case
of filter/water separators, a single-element test requires testing of a combination
of one filter/coalescer and one separator. Full-scale testing refers to testing
being undertaken on a vessel filled with a number of elements. EI 1590 only
includes single-element tests. Full-scale testing is more relevant to water
removal performance where the flow patterns through multiple elements in a
vessel, and fuel/water residence time in the vessel, play a significant role in
water removal efficiency.
Test fuel type: Due to safety issues with the handling of low flash point fuels,
almost all testing is carried out only using jet fuels, with an acceptance, based on
industry experience, that the measured performance of filters in jet fuels
translates across to filter performance in low flash products such as aviaton
gasoline, jet B etc. However, compatibility of filters and fuels is tested across the
whole range of fuel types due to noted solvency differences (see following).

Test fuel composition: Test fuels are procured locally by the test facility, and are
required to meet jet A or jet A-1 specifications. Clay treatment of the test fuel is
required to return the fuel (which could be from a number of sources), to a
baseline condition in terms of its surface activity – an important property in terms
of contaminant stability and filterability/separation. Jet fuels contain molecular
components, either added as additives to enhance certain fuel properties, or in
trace amounts from their source or processing. To reflect a severe operational
environment there are a number of additives that are added to the test fuel to
challenge the performance of the component. These additive combinations have
varied over the years but those that apply currently are shown in Table 6.
Reference to the individual EI publications gives the actual levels and
combinations of these additives in test fuels. No aviation gasoline additives are
included in component testing.
Table 6: Additives used in EI test protocols

Test fuel type Additive Dosage

level

STADIS® 450 (a static dissipater additive) 1 mg/l

Civilian (C)
Category
DCI4A (a corrosion inhibitor/lubricity enhancer) 15 mg/l

STADIS® 450 (a static dissipater additive) 2 mg/l

Military (M)
Category DCI4A (a corrosion inhibitor/lubricity enhancer) 15 mg/l

FSII (an icing inhibitor – diethylene glycol monomethyl 0,15% v/v

ether)
M+100 The additives for M category and +100 additive (a thermal
256 mg/l
Category stability enhancer)

ISO 12103-1 – Road
vehicles - Test dust
for filter evaluation -
Arizona test dust
Test particulate: Current test protocols require the use of a test ‘dust’ (intended to
simulate particulate matter found in aviation fuel handling systems) that is
traceable to an ISO standard (ISO 12103-1). The particular test dust is a silica
material coded A-1 (Ultrafine) with a particle size distribution given in Figure 20.

31
 Figure 20: Particle size distribution for ISO 12103, A-1 Ultrafine test dust

Note 11: With a particle size distribution in the range 1-15 µm, this dust is ideal for testing
EI Research Report aviation fuel filters rated within that range.
The effects of shear
and fuel chemistry on Another dust, a red iron oxide identified as Elementis R9998, is added to the A-1 test
the particle size dust (in a 10:90 mass ratio respectively) or, as in the case of 1,0 µm-rated
distribution of Fischer microfilters, used on its own. R9998 is primarily a paint pigment and as such is not
I-116 and Elementis traceable to a standard. However, its particle size distribution was measured through
R9998 red iron EI-funded research11 during the development of EI 1581 4th edition, and was found
oxides and ISO to be largely sub-micronic when fully dispersed, see Figure 21.
Ultrafine silica test
dusts in jet fuels, V.B. As can be seen from Figure 21, R9998 is a relevant test dust for filters claimed to
Hughes & P.D. have very small particle size removal ratings. Because of its colour it is also very
Rugen. Available useful for tracing weaknesses in all filters when testing (passage of the test dust
from the EI library. downstream of a filter under test is readily visible). The 90:10 mass % A-1
Ultrafine/R9998 test dust mixture is the standard ‘particulate’ challenge in EI filter
specifications.
Typically filter
manufacturers
undertake
qualification testing
using their own test
rigs. It is not a
requirement of the
specifications for a
filter to be qualified
on multiple test rigs,
or at a test facility
appointed by the
user.

Figure 21: Particle size distributions of test dusts in jet fuel dosed with STADIS®
450, Hitec 580 and a model surfactant
(Note: Hitec 580 is another type of corrosion inhibitor, and is similar in terms of its
composition to DCI4A.)

32
Material compatibility: Any component that is to be used in aviation fuel has to be
shown to have no effect on the quality of the fuel and not be affected by exposure
to the fuel – they must be mutually chemically and physically compatible.
Compatibility testing is a mandatory requirement of each EI specification.

Test Rig: Filter qualification requires testing on a test rig that has the features shown
schematically in Figure 22. Although each EI specification contains specific
requirements for the test rig, Table 7 highlights some of the general key features.

Repeat Testing: It is a requirement of EI 1583 for filter monitors (typically used in into-
plane applications), for qualification tests to be repeated. Results from the repeat
tests are required to be consistent.

Figure 22: Schematic of typical test rig used in filter qualifications

Table 7: Key features of filter test rigs

Fuel volume Minimum fuel volume is governed by the requirement for
single pass test (fuel only passes filter once, not recirculat
and twin fuel storage tanks are required to accommodate
this.
Pump and flow meter Pump is required to be capable of achieving a minimum o
115% of the full rated flow of the filter being tested withou
excessive temperature rise. Flow to be measured with a
calibrated meter.
Heat exchanger Test fuel temperature should not exceed 30 °C and shoul
be maintained at a consistent temperature during the cou
of the test.

33
 Contaminant injection Required to be injected continuously and evenly throughout
(free water or test dust) the test. For dispersed water tests, the water is injected at a
point upstream of the main pump and this will produce fine
water droplets, considered to be consistent with those found
in aviation fuel handling systems. Particulate is injected at a
point upstream of the test vessel as well-mixed slurry from a
hopper into the test fuel.
Fuel clean-up To maintain test fuel cleanliness, or return the fuel to
baseline condition, fuel may be passed through a suitable
downstream filter/clay treater. Further treatment may be
required to remove FSII.
Sampling points Test fuel samples are taken by upstream-facing, probe-type
sampling devices situated within ten pipe diameters of the
outlet or inlet of the test vessel.
Test vessel A test vessel to house specific filter element(s), incorporating
a means for fuel to by-pass the filter being tested, differential
pressure measurement.
Fast-operating shutdown Required to operate within four seconds to simulate rapid
valve valve closure experienced in fuelling operations, and pump
start up.

What types of test are not currently specified in EI publications and

why?

As noted at the start of this chapter test protocols are required to be generally
applicable. It is therefore not possible to include tests covering every possible
operational parameter in qualification testing. The selected aspects of performance
that are tested, are those for which consensus has determined there to be the
greatest need. Several performance issues that are not currently covered within the
publications referred to, as they are not perceived by the industry to be significant and
are more appropriately addressed on an operational basis, are:

• Inclusion of more stop/starts of a severity that simulates valve closures that may
introduce pressure surges in the into-plane fuelling system.

• Extremes of operational temperature.

• Vibration (especially for on-vehicle applications).

The above issues, and others yet to be identified, may be considered in future test
protocols, subject to sufficient research that demonstrates them to be relevant, and
that provides valid test protocols.

Each of the EI specifications highlight that users can specify any additional tests they
consider relevant for their specific application(s). Any users that obtain test data or
field experience for parameters not currently covered by EI specifications, are
encouraged to submit details to the EI (www.energyinst.org.uk/filtration).

Test protocols for specific types of filter

The rest of this chapter summarises the test protocols described in EI 1581, 1583 and
1590. These form the basis for qualification testing of those types of filter. For further
specific details, the reader is referred to those publications.

34
 Filter/water separators (EI 1581)

Single-element Test: A combination of one new filter/coalescer element and one

new separator element is subjected to a continuous test sequence summarised
in Figure 23. After a preconditioning step in which the elements are exposed to
the test fuel under low flow conditions, the flow rate is increased to the rated flow.
The elements are then subjected to (‘challenged’ with) dispersed water and test
dusts under specific conditions.

Key points of the EI 1581 single-element test protocol:

• Establishes the rated flow of the element.

• Includes low level water removal, followed by test dust removal, further low level
water removal over an extended period, by the filter loaded with test dust, and
finally a short period of ‘high’ level water removal (for Type S and Type S-LD
only).

• For Type S-LW, the final short period of water challenge is 0,5%.
• Test incorporates 13 stop/starts.

• Effluent fuel samples are required to be taken at various times during the test.

• At the end of the test the elements are visually assessed and disposed of.

Figure 23: Schematic of the EI 1581 single-element test protocol

ASTM D 2276 Test The tested elements have to meet the minimum performance criteria specified in EI
method for 1581:
particulate
contaminant in
aviation fuel by line Minimum performance criteria specified in EI 1581 for FWS
sampling
IP 216 Determination Effluent fuel samples shall not exceed:
of particulate a. Total solids content of 0,26 mg/l (1,0 mg/gal.) by ASTM D 2276/IP 216.
contaminant of
b. Free water content of 15 ppmv by ASTM D 3240.
aviation turbine fuels
by line sampling c. Media migration of 10 fibres/l (40 fibres/gal.).
ASTM D 3240
Standard test method
for undissolved water
in aviation turbine
fuels

35
The capacities of the elements in achieving these performance limits are different
according to the type of element (Type S, S-LD or S-LW). A summary of these
differences is given in chapter 7.

Full-scale Test: Following a successful single-element test, a full-scale test is carried

out using multiple elements in a vessel operating at a flow rate representative of
that experienced in service. The continuous full-scale test sequence is
summarised in Figure 24. The full-scale test confirms that the water and
particulate removal of a filter/water separator (the vessel containing multiple
elements, as used in the field) is in accordance with minimum performance limits
included in EI 1581. The performance requirement for the single-element test and
the full-scale test is the same.

Whilst the full-scale test is of a shorter duration, larger volumes of fuel are used.
This is therefore the only test that is performed with the test fuel flowing in
recirculation. Only flow rates up to 9 500 lpm (2 500 gpm) are within the scope of
EI 1581.

Figure 24: Schematic of the EI 1581 full-scale test protocol

Key points of the EI 1581 full-scale test protocol:

• Confirms that the system as a whole meets minimum selected aspects of

performance.

• Confirms the rated flow of the elements.

• Includes the same water and test dust challenges, but of shorter duration, as the
single-element test protocols.

• Test incorporates eight stop/starts.

• Effluent fuel samples are required to be taken at various times during the test.

• At the end of the test the elements are visually assessed and disposed of.

36
 Filter monitors (EI 1583)

The 5th edition of EI The qualification of filter monitors is based on a large number of single-element tests,
1583 also included and two full-scale tests. The mandatory single-element tests are summarised in Table
suggestions for 8, with the full-scale tests included in Table 9.
additional optional
single-element tests.
For further details The tested elements have to meet the minimum performance criteria specified in EI
see Annex H. 1583:

Minimum performance criteria specified in EI 1583 for filter monitors

Effluent fuel samples shall not exceed:

1. Media migration - 10 fibres/l and less than 0,26 mg/l (1,0 mg/gal.) debris.

2. Free water - 15 ppmv

3. Total solids - 0,26 mg/l (1,0 mg/gal.) average - 0,5 mg/l (1,9 mg/gal.) maximum

4. Appearance - the effluent fuel shall be clear and bright

Table 8: EI 1583 Mandatory filter monitor single-element test protocols

The initial pressure Qualification Description Comments
differential across a Test Number
new element at rated
flow is an indication 1 Test to confirm limited filter Intended to ensure integrity
of media material migration and initial element when exposed to fu
permeability. This differential pressure across flow and pressure, and efflu
needs to be tight element. fuel quality.
enough to filter
efficiently but not so 2 50 ppm water challenge at 50 ppm ensures a practical
tight as to cause rated flow working capacity of the filter
excessive pump an into-plane application. Ra
12 50 ppm water challenge at flow and 10 % rated flow cov
energy losses.
10% of rated flow operational range.

3 Bulk water challenge at rated Intended to assess the

Tests using free water

flow efficiency of filter blocking/fu

flow shutdown within the
5 Bulk water challenge at 10% operational range.
of rated flow

15 50 ppm saline water Intended to demonstrate a

challenge at rated flow minimal level of water
absorbing performance of ‘d
16 Saline bulk water challenge water.
at rated flow

4 Mechanical integrity of The water saturated elemen

element saturated with water tested up to 175 psi (12 bar)
differential pressure must no
disintegrate.

6 Test dust removal (filtration) Particulate filtration is tested

dusts
Tests

The component must not

using

7 Mechanical integrity of disintegrate mechanically as

test

element blocked with test result of particulate loading (

37
 dust to 175 psi (12 bar)) differential
pressure.

8 Performance after a Intended to confirm that any

freeze/thaw cycle water in the element does not
cause damage to the filter
integrity when it freezes and
thaws.

9 Full element immersion in Intended to confirm that gel

water formation, which exerts a
mechanical expansion force on
10 Partial element immersion in the element, is not detrimental
water to integrity.
Other tests
11 Compatibility Considerations covered earlier
in this chapter apply

17 Element end-to-end electrical Introduced to ensure that

resistance electrostatic charges on
elements are dissipated during
operation.

18 End cap adhesion integrity Introduced to provide a

standardised approach for
manufacturers to confirm that
element end caps/fittings are
sufficiently secure.

Table 9: EI 1583 Mandatory filter monitor full scale-test protocols

Qualification Description Comments
Test Number

13 Full scale 50 ppm water Minimum flow rate of vessel is

removal 1 136 l/min (300 gpm). Intended to
confirm that performance of a full se
14 Full scale water slug response of elements in a vessel is suitable.

Although microfilters Microfilters (EI 1590)

are tested at a
specified flow rate (to
enable comparison The role of a microfilter is the removal of particulate matter. Its design therefore
between products), covers two parameters: high particulate capacity and particle size rating. The
they can be used at qualification of a microfilter requires six single-element tests, with no full-scale
any flow rate as long testing. The mandatory single-element tests are conducted on 150 mm (6 in.)
as maximum nominal diameter elements with out-to-in flow format only, and are summarised in
differential pressure Table 10. The protocols require testing at a minimum flow rate of 10 l/sec/m of
is not exceeded. effective media length (equivalent to 6 l/min/cm or approximately 4 gpm/in.).

38
 Table 10: EI 1590 mandatory microfilter single-element test protocols
Qualification Test Comments
Test Number

The test particulate 1 Test to confirm limited filter Intended to ensure integrity of
material migration and element when exposed to fuel flow
used in the
initial differential pressure and pressure, (and effluent fuel
qualification testing of across element. quality).
microfilters:
2 Filter rating at 10 l/sec/m These are the tests where the
For 1,0 µm rated of manufacturer proves the filtration
effective media length rating at two flow rates. Test
elements: R9998
particulate is added at a
3 Filter rating at 5 l/sec/m of concentration of 50 mg/l until a
For 2,0 and 3,0 µm effective media length differential pressure of 22 psi (1,5
rated elements: bar) across the element is achieved.
90:10 ratio of A-1 (No test duration is specified).
(ultrafine) silica and 4 Water resistance Many media that can be used for
R9998 filtration are incompatible with water.
Some cellulosic media in particular
For 5,0 µm are very unstable and so this test is
included, not to test for water
rated elements: A-1
removal but for media stability in the
(ultrafine) silica presence of water. The component
must not disintegrate.
For 10,0 µm
5 Compatibility Considerations covered earlier in this
rated elements: A-2
chapter apply.
(fine) silica
6 Structural This test establishes a reasonable
level of structural strength to assure
the user that the component will not
disintegrate under high differential
pressures and subsequently
recontaminate the system.

Since the life of such components is very variable according to the variations in
operating conditions (flow, level of particulate, type and size distribution of
particulate) no contaminant holding capacities are specified. However, the minimum
performance limits that are required are:

Minimum performance criteria specified in EI 1590 for microfilters

The effluent fuel downstream of the microfilter element shall contain less than 0,15
mg/l particles greater in size than the stated filter rating. Test dust transmissions
shall be measured by the use of membranes according to the specific element
rating as follows:
1,0 µm rated element 0,8 µm membranes
2,0 µm rated element 2,0 µm membranes
3,0 µm rated element 3,0 µm membranes
5,0 µm rated element 5,0 µm membranes
10,0 µm rated element 10,0 µm membranes

39

Example of side-by-side
layout from EI 1582
(separators shaded)
Example of end-opposed
layout (side view)
Note12:
The additive package
includes static dissipator,
metal deactivator, anti-
oxidant, corrosion
inhibitor, and fuel system
icing inhibitor.
Chapter 7
Filter/water separators (EI 1581)
Key concepts for users
• Filter/water separators are designed to remove free water and particulate
from fuel.
• They are the basic units in aviation fuel cleanliness control and are
mandated in many industry operations, particularly in airport fuel handling
operations.
• Note key recommendations below.
What are the choices of filter/water separator?
Filter/water separators are available to operate in a number of specific fuel
formulations that represent different operational challenges (“categories”). Within
those categories there are also options for the level of expected fuel cleanliness,
these options being designated “types”. They may operate in either horizontal or
vertical “orientation’’ and finally the filter/coalescer and separator elements within
a vessel can be arranged with either a ‘side-by-side’, or ‘end-opposed’ “layout”
(described further in EI 1582). Each configuration requires separate qualification.
Within the categories and types, element flow rates may differ according to the
particular manufacturing source, and so operators should carefully check the
performance details of these elements as given by the manufacturer. As with
many other elements, they can have screw-based or open-ended mountings, and
be of varying length up to 1 422 mm (56 in.). Whilst they are most commonly
encountered as 150 mm (6 in.) nominal diameter elements, other diameters are
available particularly in military applications. Filter/coalescer elements flow in an
in-to-out flow format whilst separator elements flow out-to-in.
Options Considerations for selection
What Category C filter/water separators (C for Commercial
category? aviation fuel)
Are tested with a fuel containing an additive package
simulating a severe jet A-1 and are used in most commercial
fuel handling systems.
Category M filter/water separators (M for Military aviation
turbine fuels (JP8)). Are tested with fuel containing an additive
package12 used in military fuels.
40
 Category M100 filter/water separators (M100 for thermal
stability enhanced military aviation fuels (JP8+100)).
Are tested with category M fuel that contains an additional
dispersant additive used to enhance thermal stability.

What type? Type S

Intended for use at filtration points where significant levels of
free water and particulate matter in the fuel can be expected.
Equivalent to the performance of B Class in previous editions
of EI 1581.

Type S-LD
Intended for use at all filtration points where significant levels
of free water but minimal amounts of particulate matter (LD =
low dirt) can be expected in the fuel. Examples of suitable
locations could be immediately after a microfilter or at
locations where acceptable particulate matter levels can be
achieved without filtration (e.g. out-of-storage).

Type S-LW
Intended for use at filtration points where very low levels of
free water (LW = low water) are encountered (e.g. into-plane).

What • For certain flow rates there may only be a qualification in

orientation? one orientation.

• Ease of access – it can be difficult for operators to replace

A filter/water separator
can have either a vertical
or a horizontal
orientation.
Consequently, the
elements used in these
vessels also have to be
“qualified” in whichever
orientation they are to be
used.
long elements in horizontal vessels, or to clean long
narrow vertical vessels (where access platforms are
typically required).
• Horizontal vessels may be the only practical option for
mobile applications, or those with height restrictions, but
require a larger footprint than vertical ones.
• The sump of a horizontal vessel has a smaller water to
fuel interface ratio, which may offer benefits such as
greater control of separated water (automatic detection)
thus alleviating potential microbial activity. Horizontal
vessels may incorporate larger defined sumps to provide
greater flexibility in managing higher free water
challenges.

Screw-based • New vessels can be ordered to accommodate either

or open- option.
ended?
• Existing vessels either dictate mounting type, or require
Side-by-side modification.
configurations are the • Dependent on vessel mounting.
most widely used in both
vertical and horizontal • The filtration and water removal performance is not
vessels. affected by either mounting option.

41
FWS sumps should be What layout? • Vessel design dictates element layout.
drained regularly to
prevent coalesced water • A larger range of side-by-side models are qualified to EI
exceeding sump volume. 1581, providing greater commercial flexibility.
FWSs cannot handle this
situation because the Length of • The vessel layout and flow rate requirements dictate the
water repellent separator element (up to length of elements.
element is still a 1 422 mm (56
• For ease of handling shorter elements may be preferred.
permeable material and in.))?
if there is a sufficient
pressure of water What are the key points to consider in FWS application/use?
against it (the sump level
increases significantly),
the water will migrate
through. Water level
Key points to consider in application/use of
indicators are available filter/water separators
to notify the operator
when the sump is full. • They coalesce fine water droplets into large drops that settle out. It is
If the operation recommended that a minimum of daily draining of FWS sumps at system
encounters large pressure is carried out.
amounts of water, as
• Where fuel contains excessive particulate matter causing short life of
evidenced by the need
filter/water separator components, a microfilter (see chapter 4) may be
for frequent sump
considered for installation upstream to extend life.
draining, then level
indicators should be • They are not tested for the removal of amounts of water greater than 3% of
fitted. Similarly, water the rated flow of the vessel. Water level alarms should be used if larger
level alarms may be amounts of water are likely to be encountered.
fitted if the outlet of the
• Since water freezes at 0 °C, operations at or below this temperature may
FWS is directly into-
require vessel sump heating.
plane. Note automatic
drain valves may be • The structural integrity of elements is compromised by large pressure
fitted to periodically drain differentials and they should not be operated above 15 psi differential
the sumps of water. pressure.
Checking of the sump
after a fuelling should be
undertaken to qualify as
a non-mechanical water
defence system

FWSs coalesce fine water droplets into large

drops that settle out of fuel. It is recommended
that a minimum of daily draining of FWS sumps
at system pressure is carried out.

42

See also, EI Research Report
Investigation into the effects
of lubricity additives on the
performance of filter/water
separators
In this context ‘single-use’
means the filter/coalescer is
used until it reaches the end
of its service life and is then
disposed of.
A user should conduct an
appropriate risk assessment
before specifying Type S or
Type S-LW. Some general
guidelines are:
- Hydrant servicers intended
for use with hydrant systems
known to periodically be wet
should use Type S to
maximise water handling
capability.
- Mobile applications which
have an independent system
to detect water (e.g. water
probe, optical sensor or
appropriate procedure) may
normally use Type S-LW
even when used on wet
hydrant systems.
- Refuellers operated such
that free water content is well-
controlled normally would be
fitted with Type S-LW.
Key points to consider in application/use of
filter/water separators continued
• They should not be operated at greater than the vessel rated flow as
this will impair water separation.
• Operating a vessel at less than 30 % rated flow, coupled with
extended periods of vessel inactivity, has been reported to increase
the risk of establishing microbial activity (leopard spotting) due to free
water not being released from filter/coalescer elements.
• The water removal performance may be adversely affected by
surfactants or additives in fuel, a condition known as “coalescer
disarming” (see Annex G for more information). EI 1581 5th edition
qualified FWS are more resistant to surfactants than FWS qualified to
previous editions.
• Elements from different manufacturers have different differential
pressures. If these are used in the same vessel, initial fuel flow will
follow the path of least resistance and therefore preferentially flow
through the elements with the lowest differential pressure. This may
result in some of the elements being over-rated. Only elements of the
same model/manufacturer should be used in a single vessel at one
time.
• Filter/coalescer elements are designed for single-use only (cannot be
regenerated) but some separator elements can be checked.
• Allowing water to remain in vessels will promote microbiological
colonisation and this can cause “disarming”. In low flow conditions
water droplets may remain on filter/coalescer elements.
• The means of disposal of water drains should be carefully considered,
particularly where FSII is being used.
• Where the FWS is exposed to fuel containing FSII it is recommended
that category M or M100 elements only are used.
• Sumps should be drained of free water at least daily, or their capacity
may be exceeded.
• Although Type S-LW systems can be smaller and lighter than other
FWS systems, rendering them easier to use in mobile applications,
users should appreciate that it is not appropriate to use Type S-LW
systems in all mobile applications.
• Type S-LW systems are not intended for, and should not be used in,
fixed applications.
• Filter/coalescers and separator models are qualified as a system
within a vessel. This means that filter/coalescers and separators (for
use in a FWS) must be obtained from the same supplier. Note that
separators can have a longer service life than filter/coalescers, and
can be reused according to manufacturer’s recommendations.
43
• Element change-out criteria/separator inspection criteria should
comply with manufacturer’s recommendations, see also chapter 19.
These typically include high filter membrane readings, hazy fuel in the
sump, evidence of microbial growth in sump water (including
sulfurous odour), sudden drop in differential pressure, high levels of
free water indicated in the outflow by water detection devices,
exceeds 15 psi corrected differential pressure.

• Sumps containing hazy fuel could be an indication that the

filter/coalescer is no longer functioning correctly. Further investigation,
including repeated sump drains, should be undertaken.

44
 Chapter 8

Similarity for filter/water separators

(EI 1582)

Key concepts for users

Similarity applies only to filter/water separators and is a protocol for:

Qualifying the dirt water/removal performance of a FWS to EI 1581 by using a

calculation methodology (given in EI 1582) rather than laboratory testing.

Ensuring that a FWS, whether existing or new, remains qualified to EI 1581, when
the model/type of elements used is changed. This ensures that the maximum
qualified flow rate through the elements within the vessel is not exceeded.

Allowing manufacturers to supply a range of vessel sizes without the need to

perform laboratory qualification tests on every one.

What is similarity?

• Similarity is the methodology developed to minimise the number of full-scale tests

that would otherwise be required to qualify a large range of FWS sizes to EI 1581.
This is desirable because the scale and complexity of full-scale testing places
significant demands on testing resources. This is qualification by similarity.

• The concept is that full-scale testing is not needed if a candidate filtration system
can be shown to be sufficiently similar to a system already qualified (by full-scale
testing) to support the expectation that full-scale testing would meet EI 1581
requirements. Such a system is said to be “qualified to EI 1581 by similarity”.

• As discussed further in Chapter 13, compliance with EI 1582 similarity is the

process of demonstrating that the dirt/water removal performance of the system
meets EI 1581. Similarity does not address all of the mechanical requirements of
vessels.

Similarity sheets should be provided by manufacturers

EI 1582 2nd If a FWS user wishes to replace the elements in a vessel with those of another
edition model/type it is recommended that a similarity sheet be provided by the new element
supersedes the supplier as the suppliers declaration of continued compliance with EI 1581 5 th edition
1st edition. Since
January 2012 it (the FWS remains qualified to EI 1581). In some cases, this may require the new
has been invalid element supplier having to obtain detailed dimensional information for the vessel in
for a question. The similarity documentation should be requested by the user and retained on
manufacturer to file for the service life of the elements. The similarity sheet should indicate that all of the
use 1582 1st operational parameters meet or exceed the requirements stated for the original elements
edition
methodology. installed in the vessel. Such parameters include flow velocities through the elements,
how they are oriented, how they were qualified, inter-element spacings, etc. A similarity
sheet and corresponding data plate, should also be issued with each new vessel, to
document the qualification to EI 1581 by similarity.

45
 With the publication of EI 1582 2nd edition, the industry was provided with a standardised
similarity sheet. It is a mandatory requirement of EI 1582 2nd edition that the standard
sheet be used. An example of a blank sheet is included as Figure 25. The sheet is also
required to be provided with prescribed explanatory notes, as shown in Figure 26.

Note for existing

FWS rated above
Key points to consider in the application of similarity for
9 500 lpm (2 500 FWS
gpm):
Although similarity • A similarity sheet should be specific to a FWS vessel, and include the vessel’s serial
criteria are not to number.
be used to qualify • Similarity criteria may only be used to qualify a FWS at a flow rate equal to or lower
new vessels of a than the design which was qualified by full-scale testing.
higher flow rate
than the qualified • The range of flow rates for which similarity is valid is 0 – 9 500 lpm (0 – 2 500 gpm).
vessel (by full- • Manufacturers are required to provide customers with similarity documentation
scale testing), (similarity sheet and vessel plate) for the use of their elements in any vessel, and for
existing vessels any new vessel.
qualified to
• A completed similarity sheet should include only ‘passes’ in the relevant column. A
previous editions
‘fail’ indicates that the system does not comply with EI 1582 2 nd edition. If a
(1st –3rd) of 1581 candidate FWS does not meet the requirements of EI 1582 it cannot be represented
with flow rates as being qualified to EI 1581.
greater than
• A similarity sheet becomes invalid if the FWS elements are changed to those from
9 500 lpm (2 500 another supplier. The new supplier should provide a new similarity sheet.
gpm), but no
• The use of elements from a different supplier may result in the maximum flow rate
more than
through the vessel being reduced. Note: a vessel can never be operated above the
19 000 lpm original flow rate included on the vessel plate.
(5 000 gpm), may
• Since January 2012, similarity sheets should comply with the standard format, as
be qualified by
shown in Figure 25.
meeting similarity
criteria with • Compliance with EI 1582 similarity requirements will be compromised when
modifications are made to the configuration of elements within a vessel for
vessels full-scale
operational reasons, i.e. down-rating a vessel using blank elements. In such cases
tested at 9 500 a new similarity sheet will be required.
lpm (2 500 gpm).

EI 1582 2nd edition

The main changes introduced by EI 1582 2nd edition are:

• Greater clarity of the relative sump location and inlet/outlet location requirements for
vessels.

• Greater clarity of the general element mounting location requirements within a

vessel.

• Clearer definition of vessel measurement requirements (to determine volume).

• Excluding the continued use of vessels that do not have positive water drainage (a
requirement of 1581 since 1989).

• Requiring similarity calculations to be performed by manufacturers using a

standardised spreadsheet.

• Requiring manufacturers to provide a standardised sheet to customers.

“If a vessel does not have positive water drainage it can

no longer qualify to EI 1581 5th edition by similarity.”

46
 Insert Filter Company Logo
1
and/or Name and Address Here

2 EI 1582 2nd edition Similarity Sheet Reference Number/ID Code: Insert ID here
Insert report
3 1581 Qualification Report Number: number here Prepared for:
Insert customer name here
Qualified Candidate
4 Parameter Select Units Pass/Fail Notes
Vessel Vessel
5 Vessel Manufacturer
6 Vessel Model Number
7 Vessel Serial Number
8 EI 1581 Category (2.6) Fail Category must be the same
9 EI 1581 Type (2.6) Fail Type must be the same or Qualified = S
10 Number of Element Stages EA Fail Stages must be the same
11 Vessel configuration
12 Orientation (2.2a) Fail Orientation must be the same
13 Vessel Inside Diameter

14 Element Layout (2.2b & 2.4) Fail

Layout must be the same
15 Sump
16 Location (2.2c) Fail Location must be the same
* Pass, but requires water defence system
17
Volume (2.2c) * per 1581 5th ed. 3.2.4.5
18 Inlet Connection Position (2.2d) Fail Inlets must be in the same location
19 Outlet Connection Position (2.2e) Fail Outlet must be in the same location
20 Element mounting positions (2.2f) Fail Location must be the same
21 Water Defense System Present?
Candidate must be < or = to Qualified or
22 when qualified is at max (9464 litres, 2500
Rated flow of vessel (2.5) Fail USG) candidate must be <= 2 times
23 1st Stage (filter/coalescer element)
24 Model Number (2.6) Model/Series/Family = Qualified
25 Quantity EA
26 Number of Elements/Cartridges in Stack EA
27 Element/Cartridge Overall Length
28 Element/Cartridge Effective Media Length
29 Outside Diameter
Number of filter/coalescer plugs and their part
30
number EA
31 Spacing
32 Between 1st Stage Elements (2.3a) Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
33 Between 1st & 2nd Stage Elements (2.3c) Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
34 Between 1st Stage Elements & Vessel (2.3d Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
35 Mean Linear Flowrate (2.7) Fail Candidate must be < or = to Qualified
36 Volume
37 2nd Stage (separator element)
38 Model Number (2.6) Model/Series/Family = Qualified
39 Quantity EA
40 Number of Elements/Cartridges in Stack EA
41 Element/Cartridge Overall Length
42 Element/Cartridge Effective Media Length
43 Outside Diameter
44 Number of separator plugs and their part number EA
45 Spacing
46 Between 2nd Stage Elements (2.3b) Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
47 Between 2nd Stage Elements & Vessel (2.3 Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
48 Length/Outside Diameter (L/D) Ratio (2.6) Fail Candidate must be < or = to Qualified
49 Liquid Entrance Velocity (2.8) Fail Candidate must be < or = to Qualified
50 Volume Volume of all 2nd Stage Elements
51 3rd Stage (filter monitor elements in separators)
52 Model Number
53 Quantity EA
54 Quantity per 2nd Stage Separator EA
55 Vessel
56 Length of Vessel Deck plate to lid opening
57 Vessel Volume Volume inside of the vessel
58 Vessel Void Volume Empty space not occupied by elements

59 Positive water drainage (2.10) Fail Candidate must have positive water drainage
60 Area Ratio
61 Void Volume Ratio (2.9) Fail Candidate must be > or = to Qualified
62 SAe/Acv (2.9a) Side-by-side N/A N/A Candidate must be < or = to Qualified
63  e/Acv (All elements to v essel) (2.9b) End opposed N/A N/A Candidate must be < or = to Qualified

For the candidate system to meet EI 1581 by similarity, each entry is required to produce a pass in the pass/fail column.
Data are not required in any cells shaded grey.
The passes above confirm that the candidate vessel meets all requirements of EI 1582 2nd edition, and therefore is qualified to EI 1581 5th
edition

Name: Company:

Signed: Date:

Figure 25 – Blank EI 1582 2nd edition Similarity Sheet (first page)

47
 Unique identifier on sheet which should also be found on removable
2 EI 1582 2nd edition Similarity Sheet Reference Number/ID Code:
name/data plate on vessel
The unique number given on the report of the filter/water separator system qualification, against which
3 1581 Qualification Report Number:
the candidate vessel/system is being compared

4 Parameter Notes
5 Vessel Manufacturer Fabricators name, normally different than the Filter company supplying elements
6 Vessel Model Number Located on the original data plate fixed to the vessel
7 Vessel Serial Number Located on the original data plate fixed to the vessel
8 EI 1581 Category (2.6) Three EI 1581 Categories, C (Commercial), M (Military), or M100 (Military Thermal Enhanced).
3 types: S significant levels dirt/water, S-LD low dirt/significant amount of water, S-LW significant levels
9
EI 1581 Type (2.6) dirt/low water, for mobile applications only. If Qualified = S, the Candidate can be S, S-LD or S-LW
Two possibilities: a 2 stage (filter/coalescer + separator) or 3 Stage (filter/coalescer, separators and
10
Number of Element Stages monitors)
11 Vessel configuration
12 Orientation (2.2a) Vertical or Horizontal vessel orientation
13 Vessel Inside Diameter
Two groups of element layouts: Side-by-Side - filter/coalescers and separators are fixed to the same
14 Element Layout (2.2b & 2.4) end of the vessel, and End-Opposed - fixed to opposite ends. 'Side-by-side, side-to side' candidate
systems can qualify against 'Side-by-side, engaged' systems
15 Sump
16 Location (2.2c) Sump location for candidate shall be in relatively the same location as the qualified vessel
17 Volume (2.2c) Need not scale with flow rate if Water defence present. Otherwise calculate vol/flow.
18 Inlet Connection Position (2.2d) Inlet location for candidate shall be in relatively the same location as the qualified vessel
19 Outlet Connection Position (2.2e) Outlet location for candidate shall be in relatively the same location as the qualified vessel
20 Element Mounting Positions (2.2f) Element mounting positions shall be in relatively the same location as the qualified vessel
21 Water Defense System Present? Float valve or electronic water sensor that alarms or shuts off flow when water detected
Candidate flow rate shall be less than or equal to qualified system or when qualified vessel at max flow
22
Rated flow of vessel (2.5) (9464 litres, 2500 USG) candidate must be <= two times qualified flow rate.
23 1st Stage (filter/coalescer element) The filter/coalescer acts to stop dirt and remove free water from the fuel, inside to outside flow
Manufacturers model/series/family number. Candidate shall be the same generic family as qualified.
24
Model Number (2.6) May vary in length and type of fitting (end cap)
25 Quantity The total number of filter/coalescer elements/cartridges in the vessel
26 Number of Elements/Cartridges in Stack Some filter/coalescers are stacked on top of each other, two 20" stacked = one 40" filter/coalescer
27 Element/Cartridge Overall Length Linear length from end cap to end cap
28 Element/Cartridge Effective Media Length Linear length without the end caps
29 Outside Diameter
Number of filter/coalescer plugs and their part Number of filter/coalescer plugs in Candidate is not directly compared with those in Qualified. Note part
30
number number.
31 Spacing
32 Between 1st Stage Elements (2.3a) Closest distance between filter/coalescers, 1581 5th ed. requires at least 0.5" spacing for new vessels
33 Between 1st & 2nd Stage Elements (2.3c) Closest distance between a filter/coalescer and a separator
34 Between 1st Stage Elements & Vessel (2.3dClosest distance between a filter/coalescer and the vessel wall
35 Mean Linear Flowrate (2.7) The mean flow per linear inch of the effective filter/coalescer length
36 Volume Total volume of the filter/coalescers, used to calculate the remaining empty space in the vessel
37 2nd Stage (separator element) Separator stage allows fuel to pass into the outlet but not water
Manufacturers model/series/family number. Candidate shall be the same generic family as qualified.
38
Model Number (2.6) May vary in length and type of fitting (end cap)
39 Quantity The total number of separators in the vessel, normally less than half the number of filter/coalescers
40 Number of Elements/Cartridges in Stack Rarely separators are stacked on top of each other, two 20" stacked = one 40" separator
41 Element/Cartridge Overall Length Linear length from end cap to end cap
42 Element/Cartridge Effective Media Length Linear length without the end caps
43 Outside Diameter
44 Number of separator plugs and their part number Number of separator plugs in Candidate is not directly compared with those in Qualified. Note part numbe
45 Spacing 1581 5th ed requires at least 0.5" spacing
46 Between 2nd Stage Elements (2.3b) Closest distance between separators
47 Between 2nd Stage Elements & Vessel (2.3 Closest distance between a separator and the vessel wall
Ratio of the total length/outside diameter must be less than or equal to qualified ratio (each stack when
48
Length/Outside Diameter (L/D) Ratio (2.6) stacked)
49 Liquid Entrance Velocity (2.8) The mean liquid entrance velocity at the surface of the separator
50 Volume Total volume of the separators, used to calculate the remaining empty space in the vessel
51 3rd Stage (filter monitor elements in separators) Normally monitor elements located inside the separators. Not to be used with Cat M or M100.
52 Model Number Manufacturers model number
53 Quantity Total number of monitor elements in the vessel
54 Quantity per 2nd Stage Separator Normally 5 per each separator
55 Vessel
56 Length of Vessel Linear length from deckplate to lid opening
57 Vessel Volume The total volume of a vessel measured from deckplate to lid opening
58 Vessel Void Volume Vessel volume minus the volume of all elements; > empty space = easier performance
Water shall be able to drain freely from the entire vessel and sump of the candidate vessel. If it cannot,
59
Positive water drainage (2.10) the FWS system cannot qualify to 1581 5th edition
60 Area Ratio
61 Void Volume Ratio (2.9) Void vol/vessel vol candidate must >= qualified; > void vol ratio = easier performance
62 SAe/Acv (2.9a) Side-by-side Ratio of the effective element surface areas to cross sectional area (CSA) of the vessel
63  e/Acv (All elements to v essel) (2.9b) End opposed Ratio of the CSA of the elements to the inside CSA of the vessel

Figure 26 – Blank EI 1582 2nd edition Similarity Sheet (second page)

48
 Chapter 9

Filter monitors (EI 1583)

Key concepts for users

• The intended performance of a filter monitor system is to remove low levels of
particulate matter and trace levels of free water from aviation fuel to levels
acceptable for servicing modern aircraft. It is also intended that in service a filter
monitor system will restrict the flow of fuel before its capacity for particulate matter
and/or water removal is exhausted.
• Filter monitor elements should not be considered fail-safe, and should only be
regarded as one component in the comprehensive system to protect aviation fuel
quality.
• Note recommendations below.

Introduction
EI 1583 6th
edition includes a
new laboratory During the 1980s and 1990s filter monitors became the preferred filtration option into-
testing protocol to plane, because at the time they were regarded as being ‘fail-safe’ and able to stop water
quantify any under conditions where filter/coalescers are disarmed. Given the degree of quality
migration of trace assurance required for equipment used into-plane, much research has been conducted
super-absorbent into the performance of new unused filter monitor elements, and also those removed
polymer (SAP) from service and tested under laboratory conditions. That which has been generated
downstream of under contract to the EI, or made available by test houses, has been used in the
filter monitor development of EI 1583 6th edition.
elements under What are the choices of filter monitor?
laboratory
qualification test
conditions. The types of filter monitors specified in EI 1583 6th edition are as defined in Table 12.
Table 12: Types of filter monitors specified by EI 1583 6th edition

Flow Considerations for

Options Lengths Fitting
format selection

“push-in” Flows up to 2,5 l/sec/m

50 mm Up to 762 mm
Out-to-in bayonet (o-ring (1gpm/in.) of element length
(2 in.) (30 in.)
seal)

150 mm Up to 1 422 screw-based or Flows up to10 l/sec/m (4

Out-to-in
(6 in.) mm (56 in.) open-ended gpm/in.) of element length

150 mm Up to 1 422 screw-based or Flows up to 10 l/sec/m

In-to-out
(6 in.) mm (56 in.) open-ended (4 gpm/in.) of element length

49
 Filter monitors can be of vertical or horizontal orientation.

NOTE: Any of the above categories of element can also be qualified as ‘High Salt’
(HS) if they meet the requirement of EI 1583 6th edition Qualification Tests 15 and 16
using synthetic seawater (ASTM D 1141) rather than 0,5% (m/m) NaCl which is
mandatory for all categories. In such cases ‘/HS’ should be added to the category
designation.

The fifth edition of EI 1583 contained a greater number of element categories (outlined
in Table 13 in EI 1550 1st edition) to provide manufacturers with greater flexibility in their
manufacturing techniques and product development programmes to reduce the
possibility of super-absorbent polymer (SAP) migrating from the elements. The number
of categories was reduced for the 1583 6th edition after an investigation into the actual
levels of SAP migration experienced in operation, and consultation with filter
manufacturers.

What are the new developments in EI 1583 6th edition?

The development of EI 1583 6th edition followed two years of industry research into SAP
migration from new elements under laboratory conditions. The most significant cause of
trace SAP migration was found to be debris from the element manufacturing/production
process. Filter manufacturers have implemented new production techniques to minimise
this as far as practicable. Industry research included the development of a more robust
technique for quantifying the level of SAP migration during qualification testing, which is
included in EI 1583 6th edition (as part of Qualification Tests 1 and 10). In previous
editions the migration levels were determined by sidestream sampling, but in the new
method all fuel that passes through the element under test subsequently passes through
one or two bag filters (depending on flow rate). The bags are removed after the test and
the quantity of the captured SAP determined. Manufacturers are required to declare this
value in their qualification test report.

Until testing experience is generated it is not possible to specify a robust performance

limit for the quantity of SAP measured during laboratory qualification testing, and
establishing repeatability and reproducibility values for the procedure, within the required
trace level range of SAP, is unlikely to be possible. The industry expectation is that no
SAP shall occur downstream of an element during Qualification Tests 1 and 10, but
because of the nature of the media, and the measurement technique used, this may not
be achievable and some tolerance may be required. Users are therefore encouraged to
review the SAP result from Qualification Tests 1 and 10 with their filter monitor suppliers.
Airframe or engine OEMs have not specified an acceptable level of SAP in fuel.

The other major addition in the new edition is the requirement for a structural test to
confirm adequate adhesion of element end caps (applicable to 50 mm nominal diameter
and 150 mm nominal diameter screw-based versions only). This has been included
following reports of element manufacturing issues (see chapter 15, Table 16). Users are
encouraged to consider requesting, and manufacturers to consider implementing, this
test as a regular part of manufacturing quality control programmes.

50
 What are the key points to consider in the application/use of filter
monitors?

Key points to consider in the application/use of filter

monitors
• The intended performance of a filter monitor system is to remove low levels of
particulate matter and trace levels of free water from aviation fuel to levels
acceptable for servicing modern aircraft. It is also intended that in service a filter
monitor system will restrict the flow of fuel before its capacity for particulate matter
and/or water removal is exhausted.

• Filter monitors are not suitable for applications that may experience continuous
water in fuel.

• The water removal performance of filter monitor elements that comply with the
mandatory requirements of EI 1583 6th edition may become degraded in service to
a level that is unacceptable, (see Annex H). Therefore filter monitor elements should
not be considered fail-safe, and should only be regarded as one component in a
comprehensive system to protect aviation fuel quality.
SAP is non- • The use of filter monitors that meet the requirements of EI 1583 6th edition alone
Newtonian in cannot provide assurance that SAP migration from filter monitor elements will not
nature and so occur.
under high shear • If filter monitors qualified to EI 1583 6th edition become available and appropriate
it “thickens” – just field evaluation confirms they are suitable for the intended application, (see chapter
as custard does. 5), a programme should be implemented to replace filter monitors qualified to earlier
Non-drip paints editions of EI 1583.
are the opposite –
• Elements should be changed out in accordance with manufacturers’
if you shake a can
recommendations. Typically these include 12 months’ service life, or a stated
of non-drip paint it
differential pressure, whichever is sooner.
becomes more
fluid. For water • In the event of a sudden filter blockage, it is possible that fuel containing
absorbent unacceptable levels of free water has passed downstream of the vessel. Procedures
chemicals, should be in place to investigate the cause, and if the filter monitor is in an into-
shaking them plane application, agree an appropriate course of action with the customer. (Note
makes them more this will depend on factors such as length of delivery hose.)
rigid and it is this • If short filter life is encountered (i.e. less than 12 months), the fuel handling system
rigid resistance to should be checked for cleanliness and suitable maintenance carried out.
flow that is utilised • Filter monitor integrity is tested to 175 psi (12 bar) differential pressure and is
to block the designed to withstand system pressure surges.
passage of water
• Filter monitors can be used as a third stage in filter/water separators downstream of
through the
the separator.
elements.
• Filter monitors are typically used in into-plane applications, rather than further
upstream in the aviation fuel handling system.
• Filter monitor vessel sumps should be drained regularly of free water when the
vessel is in use/under pressure, to ensure that water bottoms do not accumulate to
a level that could compromise performance. Allowing water to remain in vessels will
also promote microbiological growth. Simple routine draining when the vessel is not
under pressure would result in monitor elements becoming exposed to air and the
media drying out.
• Filter monitors have a greater resistance to the adverse effects of surfactants than
FWS.
• Filter monitors should never be used in fuels containing FSII (see following text).
Any FSII injection systems should be located downstream of filter monitors.

51
 • A filter monitor should be operated as closely as possible to its rated flow. Element
and vessel sizing therefore needs to be carefully considered for each application.
• Consistently operating a filter monitor at a flow rate considerably lower than its rated
flow (see manufacturers’ recommendations) is not advisable as this will reduce the
ability of the elements to stop free water, especially slugs (consider down-rating the
vessel by inserting blank elements. These can be supplied by filter monitor
manufacturers so that the deck or base plate is blocked off and the interlock system
of the vessel lid accommodated). For further information see Chapter 13.
• Elements from different manufacturers have different differential pressures. If these
are used in the same vessel, initial fuel flow will follow the path of least resistance
and therefore preferentially flow through the elements with the lowest differential
pressure. This may result in some of the elements being over-rated. Only elements
of the same model/manufacturer should therefore be used in a single vessel at one
time.
• Electrostatic discharges may occur in a vessel if it contains unbonded charge
collectors (noted by sharp “clicking” noises during flow, and visible damage to
elements removed from the vessel, see Figure 27). Such damage can reduce water
removal performance and lead to potentially incendiary discharges. In such cases
check the vessel for unbonded charge collectors (see Annex L).
• Elements are designed for single-use only (cannot be regenerated).
• After installation filter monitor elements should always be immersed in fuel. During
maintenance operations elements should not be allowed to dry out.
• Operators of 150 mm (6 in.) diameter elements should ensure that the direction of
fuel flow through the element is correct.
• After new elements have been installed it is recommended that the vessel be
flushed with fuel of intended use for a minimum of three minutes at the maximum
achievable flow, prior to the vessel going into service.

EI 1583 does not Research has shown that FSII in fuel (most commonly diethylene glycol monomethyl
include ether (DiEGME)) interferes with proper water absorption by the SAP, significantly
qualification
reducing the water removal performance of filter monitors in fuels containing this
testing for military
fuels (that contain additive. This has been a warning included in 1583 since its 3rd edition (2000). Further
FSII). details are included in EI Research Reports Aviation fuel handling: The performance of
filter monitors in fuel containing FSII and Investigation into the water holding
performance of aviation filter monitors with absorbent-type elements, intended for
military applications (available from the EI library). FSII can also cause the migration of
SAP. The US Air Force reported extensively on the appearance of a light-coloured,
gelatinous material present in vessel drains and coating elements. Analysis showed it to
be mainly FSII with some water and varying amounts of SAP. The US Air Force and the
US Navy have now discontinued the use of filter monitors in their systems.

52
Research
commissioned by
the IP in 2001
identified that
electrostatic
charge could
accumulate on
two inch diameter
filter monitor
elements, causing
possible
incendiary
discharges.
Element end-to-
end resistance
requirements
were
subsequently
included in EI
1583 4th edition,
which resulted in
manufacturers
producing
elements with
conductive end
caps. For further
information see EI
Research
Reports:
Electrostatic
discharges in two-
inch fuel filter
monitors and
Electrostatic
discharges in two-
inch aviation fuel
filter monitors. Figure 27: Examples of electrostatic damage to monitor elements
Phase 2: Note: The damage may be subtle dark stains on the outer media wrap or more dramatic
Properties tears in media layers accompanied by burn marks.
needed to control
discharges.

53
 Chapter 10

Microfilters (EI 1590)

Key concepts for users

 Microfilters are not designed to remove free water from fuel and should not be
considered for that function.

 Most frequently used to remove particulate matter thereby protecting

downstream filter components.

 Note recommendations below.

What are the choices of microfilter?

Microfilters qualified to the first or second editions of EI 1590 were only 150 mm (6 in.)
nominal diameter elements with out-to-in flow format. EI 1590 3rd edition has introduced
the option for microfilter elements to be supplied in 50 mm (2 in.) and 100 mm (4 in.)
nominal diameters. Microfilters are supplied as one of five micron ratings (defined in EI
1590 as 1,0 µm, 2,0 µm, 3,0 µm, 5,0 µm or 10,0 µm). They can have screw-based or
open-ended mountings, and vary in length up to 1 422 mm (56 in.).

Options Considerations for selection

Users should be
aware that What micron • The micron rating does not affect the physical dimensions of
rating? the element.
microfilters
qualified to EI • Since element life in a given application is a function of both
1,0 µm,
1590 will only be particulate loading and flow rate, it is recommended that
2,0 µm,
marketed by purchasers consult with their microfilter suppliers to establish
suppliers as one 3,0 µm,
the optimum flow rate or vessel size for their applications. It
of these five 5,0 µm
should be noted that operational experience is likely to be
micron ratings. If 10,0 µm
required to determine the optimum micron rating for the
another rating is microfilter system. The rating should be sufficient to protect
encountered, that downstream filter components from developing increased
filter should not differential pressure.
be regarded as
• The 10,0 micron rated element was introduced in EI 1590 3rd
being qualified to
edition, and is specifically intended for use in the distribution
EI 1590.
system rather than at airports.

54
 What nominal • Microfilter elements can be provided in one of three nominal
diameter? diameters: 50 mm (2 in.), 100 mm (4 in.) and 150 mm (6 in.).

• Only elements of the same nominal diameter should be used in

any one microfilter vessel.

Screw-based • New vessels can be ordered to accommodate either option.

or open-
• Existing vessels either dictate mounting type, or require
ended?
modification.

• Dependent on vessel mounting.

• The filtration performance is not affected by either mounting

option.

Length of • Determined by the element mounting arrangement within

element (up to existing vessels.
1 422 mm
• Required surface area of filter for new vessels.
(56 in.))?

Other selection choices?

There is a relationship between the surface area of the microfilter (that is exposed to fuel
flow) and its capacity to hold particulate matter (at a given flow rate and particulate
loading). The relationship is not linear, so there are benefits in maximising the surface
area of the microfilter (i.e. doubling the surface area gives more than double the
particulate holding capacity). Consideration can be given to the operational benefits of:

• selecting elements that have the greatest number of pleats, assuming that their
operational surface area is always exposed to fuel (pleats are not compressed), or

• the use of elements of a multi-layered construction to improve filtration efficiency, or

• installing a greater number of elements in a vessel.

What are the key points to consider in microfilter application/use?

Key points to consider in application/use of microfilters

• Microfilters are not designed to remove free water from fuel and should not be
considered for that function.
• Where fuel may contain excessive particulate matter causing short life of filter
components in the aviation fuel handling system, microfilters can be used for the
‘protection’ of other filter components.
• Microfilter integrity is compromised by large pressure differentials. They should not
be operated above the manufacturer’s recommended maximum differential
pressure.
• Microfilter integrity can be compromised by prolonged exposure to water bottoms.
• The dirt removal performance of a microfilter is not adversely affected by surfactants
or additives in fuel, however, an additive-containing fuel may subsequently disperse
dirt particles collected by a microfilter from an additive-free fuel such that particles
are released to the fuel stream.
• Not recommended for use in jet fuel into-plane applications. Microfilters are

55
 specified in operating standards for fuelling with aviation gasoline.
‘Single-use’
• Microfilter elements are designed for single-use only (cannot be regenerated).
means the
microfilter • Element change out criteria should comply with manufacturer’s recommendations.
elements are
• Elements from different manufacturers have different differential pressures. If these
used until they
are used in the same vessel, initial fuel flow will follow the path of least resistance
reach the end of
and therefore preferentially flow through the elements with the lowest differential
their service life
pressure. This may result in some of the elements being over-rated. Only elements
and are then
of the same model/manufacturer should be used in a single vessel at one time.
disposed of.

56
 Chapter 11

Three-stage filtration
(vessels)

What is three-stage filtration?

It is possible for filter/coalescer, separator and filter monitor elements to be combined in

a single vessel. In such vessels the filter monitor elements are located downstream of
separators (positioned inside them) see Figure 28 below, and are referred to as the
‘third-stage’. The concept is that if the FWS becomes disarmed, and allows water to
pass, the filter monitors provide the required protection, and subsequent shutdown of
flow.

In Figure 28 fuel
flows from inside
to outside of the
filter/coalescer
elements, and
outside to inside
the separator and
filter monitor
elements.

Figure 28: Schematic of three-stage filtration

57
 What are the key considerations in the application/use of three-stage
filtration?

Key considerations in the application/use of three-

stage filtration
• It should be noted that in such vessels the filter/coalescer and separator elements
Three-stage should meet the requirements of EI 1581 and the filter monitor elements should
systems are not meet the requirements of EI 1583.
widely used in
commercial • The combination of the elements in the three-stage vessel should be qualified to
aviation fuel EI 1581 by meeting full-scale testing requirements (described in 4.4.5.6 of the 5th
handling systems. edition.)
• The flow rate through the vessel should not exceed the flow rate used during
qualification testing (in accordance with EI 1581 or EI 1583) of any of the
elements. Manufacturer’s recommendations should be followed.
• There may be confusion when continuously monitoring the differential pressure
across the vessel, as the stage contributing to the change in differential pressure
is not identified (all elements in vessel would require replacing), unless there are
separate differential pressure readings across each of the stages.
• Vessel designs to accommodate the third stage are typically quite complex,
meaning non-standard lengths of elements may be required.
• The media migration barrier used in the filter monitor element is protected from
exposure to fine particulate matter as it is removed by the filter/coalescer.
• Additional protection may be offered by the filter monitor elements in the event of
the filter/coalescers becoming disarmed, or if a water slug occurs that is sufficient
to overflow the separators.
• Also see ‘Key considerations’ for both FWSs and filter monitors.

Can a three-stage system be modified to a FWS?

It is possible to modify the three-stage system to be only a FWS by the removal of the
filter monitor elements. However, the FWS will then need to be requalified to confirm it
meets the requirements of EI 1581, by using similarity (EI 1582). Achieving
requalification may require the use of different separator elements.

58
 Chapter 12

Filter vessels (EI 1596)

What is EI 1596?

Since the first edition of the specification for filter/water separators (API 1581) in 1973,
the general design specifications for the pressure vessel used to house filter elements,
have been an integral part of the publication. The same applied when the former
Institute of Petroleum (EI) published the first edition of the specification for filter monitors
(1987) and microfilters (1999). However, to facilitate consistency the vessel design
requirements from the filter testing publications were combined into the first edition of EI
1596 Design and construction of aviation fuel filter vessels in 2006. EI 1596 is now in its
second edition (2013) and provides the industry with minimum mechanical specifications
for the design and construction of the three main types of aviation fuel filter vessels:
filter/water separators, filter monitors and microfilter vessels.

It is recommended that any new filter vessels used in aviation fuel handling systems be
designed and constructed in accordance with the minimum requirements of EI 1596.
(Note 1596 does not cover vessels intended to be used as clay treaters.)

The second edition of EI 1596 introduced the following updates, intended primarily for
new vessels:

 Clarification on internal epoxy coating requirements, including by reference to EI

1541.

 Clarification that it is not acceptable for work platforms to be welded or physically

attached to vessels after they have been fabricated. Attachment during fabrication is
acceptable (e.g. see ASME Section VIII).

 Clarification that a specially installed clean-out connection is not required for

vessels with an interior diameter of less than 71 cm (28 in.).

 The inclusion as an optional accessory of an automated device to ensure that a pre-

set differential pressure is not exceeded in service, e.g. proximity sensor, electronic
switch, pressure switch, or high point tracker (peak hold reading). See Chapter 19
for more information.
The second edition of EI 1596 also introduced standardised templates to be used for
vessel data plates, and consistency in the requirements across the plates for different
filtration systems. See ‘vessel data plates’ below. Printed copies of each of the data
plates (and a similarity data sheet compliant with EI 1582 for filter/water separators) are
also required to be provided to facilitate record keeping by operators.

What vessel design parameters are considered ‘General’?

EI 1596 specifies the parameters shown in Table 14 that are considered to be applicable
to any type of vessel intended to house filters (that meet the requirements of EI 1581, EI
1583 or EI 1590).

59
Table 14: Design requirements applicable to all types of filter vessel

Main construction Connections Internal Exterior

Design pressures Piping connections Access to elements Branch and port

markings
Design codes Ports and Element supports
connections Data plates
Hydrostatic test
pressure Pressure ports Exterior paints

Materials of Vent and pressure Standard

construction relief ports accessories

Electrical continuity Drain and sample Drawings/records

ports
Optional
Clean-out accessories
connections
Work platforms

Figure 29: Illustration of a filter vessel in vertical orientation

What vessel design parameters are specific to the type of filter?

Table 15 shows the parameters that are included in EI 1596 that are specific to vessels
intended for use with one of three types of filter element.

60
 Table 15: Vessel design requirements specific to filter elements to be housed
Filter/water Filter
Microfilters
separators monitors

Hydrostatic test   
pressure

Element spacing   

Element mounting   

Element sealing   

Interlock systems 

Head lift retaining device 

Data plate   

Standard accessories 

Optional accessories   

Non-sloped flat-
bottom filter/water
What about my ‘old’ vessels?
separator vessels
have not been Where a vessel that was designed and constructed to a specification pre-dating EI 1596
compliant with the 2nd edition, is considered for continued use (with filter elements that meet current
requirements of editions of EI 1581, EI 1583 or EI 1590), the purchaser should be satisfied that the
1581 since the vessel is suitable for its intended service. The following items may assist in this
publication of the assessment:
3rd edition in
1989. Such • Is the vessel fit-for-purpose?
vessels are no
longer able to • Does the vessel meet current applicable design codes?
meet the • Do vessel/element configurations meet the element manufacturers’
requirements of recommendations?
similarity, and are
• For filter/water separators, does the vessel element orientation and flow rate meet
therefore not EI
(by test or similarity) the requirements of the latest edition of EI 1581?
1581 compliant.
The accumulation • Does the vessel require the addition of an internal lining to prevent corrosion?
of water on non-
• When converting to filter monitor use, does the deck plate require strengthening or
sloped flat level
protection by the addition of a pressure limiting device?
surfaces in such
vessels supports • Is additional care required to ensure that elements are installed correctly?
the growth of
• For filter/water separators, does the vessel have positive water drainage? If this
microbes resulting
cannot be proved, it will no longer be able to meet EI 1581 by similarity (EI 1582 2nd
in microbiological
edition), and will require modification or replacement.
contamination
problems.
Can vessels designed to house one type of filter be converted to house
a different type?
For certain applications, yes they can. Annexes I and J provide recommendations on the
types of conversions that are technically possible. It is recommended that when deciding
whether to convert a vessel from one application to another, the user obtains suitable
technical information from one or more filter manufacturers, to ensure that the
conversion will be technically successful and commercially viable.

61
 Vessels for use in FWS systems
Recent editions of EI 1581 (and since November 2006, EI 1596) have introduced
additional requirements for the design and construction of new filter vessels, compared
with earlier editions. These developments recognised evolving good practice/operational
benefits, based on user and manufacturer experience. However, it is recognised by
Industry that some vessels pre-dating EI 1581 5th edition (July 2002) may continue to be
suitable for their intended service.

A management of change process should be followed in the transition from using

elements that met API 1581 3rd edition testing requirements, to those that meet EI 1581
5th edition performance requirements, if the user is intending to retain and continue
using existing (pre 5th edition) vessels. A key part of this requires a filter element
manufacturer to follow EI 1582 2nd edition similarity criteria to confirm that the
particulate matter and free water removal performance of the combination of new
elements in an old vessel is not compromised. In other words, the qualification of the
FWS system to EI 1581 5th edition remains valid.

Importantly, the similarity process defined by EI 1582 2nd edition covers the
‘performance requirements’, namely particulate matter and free water removal
performance, of the FWS only. EI 1582 2nd edition does not cover the assessment of
whether the vessel complies with the mechanical aspects of EI 1596 2nd edition.

Considerations for FWS vessels

The 1581 5th edition laboratory performance requirements for particulate matter/free
water removal may be achieved with 5th edition elements housed in an existing vessel
that does not meet all of the mechanical requirements of EI 1596 2 nd edition (or 1581 5th
edition before it), which are intended primarily to assist in the acquisition of new vessels.
In such cases the FWS would be referred to as ‘compliant with the performance
requirements of 1581 5th edition’.

“…vessel mechanical requirements of EI 1596 2nd edition are intended

primarily to guide the acquisition of new vessels.”

It is the users’ decision whether they wish to replace existing vessels with new vessels
that meet the mechanical requirements of EI 1596 2nd edition, or whether existing vessels
continue to be fit-for-purpose (assuming the requirements of similarity in EI 1582 2 nd
edition are met). It should also be noted that the use of EI 1596 2 nd edition compliant
vessels may be a mandated requirement for certain operations.
The vessel
Management of To assist users in this decision making process, the checklist in Figure 30 has been
Change process prepared, which lists the key changes to vessel mechanical requirements that have
described here, occurred between (or before) API 1581 3rd and EI 1581 5th editions. It is recommended
which is optional that this be used in the review of existing FWS vessels, pre-dating EI 1581 5th edition/EI
for users, is 1596 2nd edition requirements (note EI 1596 2nd edition has not introduced any new
separate from the mechanical requirements for vessels, just clarified some that were already in place).
process of EI 1582 Consideration should be given to reviewing parameters that are not met by the existing
similarity, which vessel, and the benefits of any modifications. The views of manufacturers may assist this
documents process.
qualification to the
The checklist may also be of use during facility inspections, to enable an inspector to
particulate
record those items that no longer meet EI 1581 5th edition/EI 1596 2nd edition vessel
matter/free water
requirements, and to discuss these with the operator.
removal
performance It is recommended that the vessel review process be conducted when a new model of
requirements of element is considered for use in a vessel pre-dating EI 1581 5th edition. Note: there may
1581 only. be benefit in requesting that this process is undertaken by a filter manufacturer.

62
 Does not Comments and/or
Requirement Complies
comply Action Required

Carbon steel vessels to be internally

coated with light-coloured epoxy coating

Lid fall prevention device for vertical

vessels

Anti-vibration plate (spider) – the free ends

of all cartridges greater than 46 cm (18 in.)
long shall be stabilised to minimise
vibration

Thermal (pressure) relief valve

Automatic air eliminator

Direct reading pressure differential gauge

with stainless steel sensing lines

Length to diameter ratio for vertical

vessels to not exceed 1,75:1 (for vessels ≤
61 cm (24 in.) diameter), or 2,5:1 (for
vessels > 61 cm (24 in.) diameter), except
where the items can easily be reached by
hand i.e. the lid to mounting plate length is
less than 500 mm (20 in.).

Clean-out/inspections connection

Work platform, access steps and handrails

Electrical continuity – all metal items

inside the vessel shall be in electrical
contact with each other and the vessel
body. The resistance between any two
items shall be less than 10 ohms. See EI
1550, Annex L for procedure.
For further information regarding specific requirements see EI 1596 2 nd edition.
NOTE: Positive water drainage within a vessel (entire vessel drains freely to sump and water drains
freely from sump) is a mandatory requirement of EI 1582 2nd edition. It is not possible for a vessel that
predates the publication of EI 1581 5th edition, to be qualified to the performance requirements of EI
1581 5th edition, unless it has positive water drainage. (Positive water drainage has been a
requirement for new 1581 FWS vessels since 1989.)

Signed………………………………………………………. Date………………………………..……….

Company……………………………………………………

Figure 30: EI 1581 5th Edition / EI 1596 2nd edition vessel mechanical compliance assessment

63
Data plates
For effective operations and compliance assessment it is essential that vessels are
provided with external data plates. EI 1596 2nd edition specifies three types of plate:

 A vessel data plate providing information about its mechanical design, in particular
the design code to which it was manufactured.

 An operational data plate, to convey information in relation to the current

configuration of elements in the vessel and the testing of the system (flow
rate/element combination).

 A vessel conversion plate, which is required to be provided if the vessel is

converted from use as one type of filtration system to another. This plate is a new
‘vessel plate’.

Vessel data plate

The vessel data plate is required to be made from stainless steel or non-ferrous metal,
and be permanently attached to the vessel, never being removed or obstructed during the
service life of the vessel.

Operational data plate

The operational data plate is required to be made from plastic or metal, and be securely
attached, but removable. It is required to be replaced or amended whenever elements
are changed within the vessel. If elements are replaced with ones of the same model, the
operational data plate can be updated by the operator (e.g. by the use of embossing tape
or similar). If elements are replaced with ones of a different model (e.g. different
manufacturer/supplier) a new operational data plate should be provided by that supplier.
The operational data plate is always required to convey accurate information relating to
the elements currently housed in the vessel.

Vessel conversion plate

In the case of vessels which were originally built for use as FWS but are converted for
use as filter monitors or microfilters, the vessel will carry three plates (a vessel data plate,
a vessel conversion plate (which is a new ‘vessel plate’) and the new operational data
plate). Note: It is not appropriate for the original vessel data plate to be removed, as this
provides critical design pressure information.

In addition to introducing consistency in the requirements across the plates for different
filtration systems, EI 1596 2nd edition also specifies standardised templates to be used for
each type of plate. It is intended that the use of the templates will ensure the consistent
provision of information. Users are encouraged to request from their suppliers operational
data plates that meet the EI 1596 2nd edition requirements. The templates for data plates
are shown in Figures 31a and 31b (for filter/water separators), Figures 32a and 32b (for
filter monitors) and Figures 33a and 33b (for microfilters). The templates provide ‘optional
data plate fields’ after the other mandated fields: these are intended to provide
manufacturers with the means of recording other pertinent information, such as the part
number for seals. For further information on data plates and definitions see EI 1596 2 nd
edition.

64
Figure 31a: FWS vessel data plate Figure 31b: FWS operational data plate for
current configuration

Figure 32a: Filter monitor vessel data plate Figure 32b: Filter monitor operational data plate
for current configuration

65
Figure 33a: Microfilter vessel data plate Figure 33b: Microfilter operational data plate for
current configuration

66
 Chapter 13
De-rating filter monitor vessels with
blank/dummy elements and FWSs with
blinds/caps

This chapter provides information on blank or dummy

elements that can be fitted inside a filter monitor vessel to
reduce the flow rate for the filtration system, and on
blinds/caps for use in FWS.

What are blank or dummy elements for filter monitors?

It is desirable to ensure that filter monitors are operated at or close to their rated flow.
Blank/dummy
element Ideally, when a filter monitor is purchased it should be sized for the flow rate of its
intended application (see chapter 9). In situations where it is necessary to reduce the flow
A full length rate of the system, elements can be removed from a vessel and replaced with blank or
element which
fits in a filter dummy elements. This is referred to as de-rating or down-rating a filter vessel/filtration
monitor vessel system.
and prevents
fuel flow through This can be achieved with the use of full length blank/dummy elements which have solid
the orifice. centre tubes (no filtration or water separation capability). These are usually required for
use in vessels that have an interlock, to ensure a full suite of elements is fitted before the
Microfilters are
vessel lid can be closed.
rarely derated as
they remove
In some operations (and in vessels without lid interlocks), use has been made of an O-
particulate matter
ring sealed plug/cap type arrangement instead of blank elements. However this is not
and their efficiency
considered to be good practice and should not be used in monitor vessels.
is dependent on
the surface area of
filtration media. A
full suite of
elements in a
microfilter vessel is
therefore desirable.

FWS blind/cap What are blinds/caps for FWSs?

A fitting which is In contrast to filter monitors, water separation in FWSs may be more efficient below the
secured over the rated flow of the system (but note that as explained in Chapter 7, significantly reducing
filter/coalescer flow rate is not desirable). The decision to derate a FWS may be driven by operational
mounting
(e.g. to meet void volume requirements for EI 1582 similarity compliance) or financial
adaptor/stool in
a FWS to considerations. Reducing flow rate in a FWS is achieved by the use of blinds/caps, rather
prevent fuel flow than by using blank or dummy elements.
through the
oriface.

“when filtration systems are purchased they should be sized for the
flow rate of their intended application”

67
What are the issues for blank/dummy elements or blinds/caps?

 There is a critical need to ensure that any blank/dummy elements or blinds/caps

fitted in a vessel cannot be dislodged by back pressure/a reverse flow or by a
pressure surge. It is primarily for this reason that it is good practice to avoid the use
of plugs in filter monitors, and only use full length blank/dummy elements.

 The fuel flow dynamics within a filter monitor are changed when blank/dummy
elements are used and the water removal performance of the system may be
compromised. For FWSs changes in void volume caused by the use of blinds/caps
will alter the water removal performance.

 Blank/dummy elements should meet the conductivity requirements of EI 1583 6 th

edition Qualification Test 17.

 Blank/dummy elements should meet the structural requirements of EI 1583 6th

edition (withstand a pressure of 12 bar for five minutes without distortion).

 Blank/dummy elements and blinds/caps should only be manufactured from materials

that are compatible with aviation fuel (tested in accordance with EI 1583 6th edition
or EI 1581 5th edition).

 Guidance should be sought from the manufacturer/element supplier on optimum

positioning of blank/dummy elements within a filter monitor vessel, or blinds/caps
within a FWS to ensure an even distribution of flow through the remaining elements.
The manufacturer should provide a diagram showing the location of the
blank/dummy elements or blinds/caps, and the diagram should be retained on file at
the location.

Key points to consider

 In the first instance, is it feasible to replace the vessel with one that is correctly
designed for the application?

 If a FWS is to be de-rated, the manufacturer should be asked to confirm by similarity

that the system remains in compliance with the requirements of EI 1581 5th edition.
Note: The use of blinds/caps changes the void volume.

 Only blank/dummy elements or FWS blinds/caps provided by, or endorsed by, a filter
manufacturer should be used. This is to provide assurance that they have been
appropriately pressure tested, and are considered compatible with the system into
which they are being installed.

 It is beneficial for manufacturers of blank/dummy elements to provide a means of

facilitating their recognition when installed in a vessel.

 Installations should be in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations.

 After installation of blank/dummy elements in a filter monitor vessel, continuity

checks on the vessels should be conducted (see Annex L) to ensure that none of the
blank/dummy elements are electrically isolated.

 It is recommended that the security of blinds/caps/gaskets should be checked

annually, or during every element change.

 After installation of blank/dummy elements or FWS blinds/caps, the operational data

plate and associated records will require to be updated. This will also apply in the
event that the filtration system is subsequently changed back by the removal of
blank/dummy elements or FWS blinds/caps.

68
 The design of blank/dummy elements or FWS blinds/caps shall not trap or hold
particulate matter or water droplets.

 After installation of blank/dummy elements or FWS blinds/caps, the resulting flow

rate of the system should not be exceeded.

Figure 34a Blind/cap for use Figure 34b Blinds/caps in a FWS vessel
in a FWS

69
Chapter 14
Filtration system installations (fixed facilities)

This chapter provides information on some of the

design/engineering issues to consider when planning the
installation of fixed filtration systems.

What are the considerations?

New filtration system installations, or modifications to existing ones, at fixed facilities
require planning and specialist input to ensure that they provide the intended level of
particulate matter/free water removal, are fit-for-purpose and provide optimised
operational efficiency. In addition to the performance requirements of the system, there
are also health, safety, environmental protection and economic considerations that
influence the design of the installation.

Key points to consider in planning/design of fixed filtration

system installations

 Filtration equipment used for aviation fuel distribution should comply with the latest EI
specifications (EI 1581 5th edition for FWS, EI 1583 6th edition for filter monitors and
EI 1590 2nd edition for microfilters). There are, however, certain exceptions to this,
particularly in the case of strainers, small vessel housings (screw on filters, e.g. VF-
61, VF-21/22, superflex), and clay treaters where no EI specifications exist. However,
strainers are designed to protect a system rather than specifically to ensure product
quality.

 Refineries are advised to use filtration systems on certified aviation fuel that are
qualified to EI specifications, which facilitates ease of selection.

 What downstream fuel quality is required? Is there further filtration downstream?

 What is the capacity of any existing pumps?

 Does the location experience high particulate matter/water?. This may determine
element selection particularly for microfilter vessels.

 What type of contaminant is being removed: particulate matter, water, or both. This
will determine if a FWS is required or a microfilter.

 Orientation – Is the vessel to be vertical or horizontal?

 What is the required range of flow rates, for current and future operations? – Will one
vessel suffice or is it better to have two or more plumbed in parallel with built in by-
pass valve/s to accommodate filter change outs

 What will be the provision for filling vessels? Will there be sufficient/too much head
pressure from a tank?

 What flexibility is required for downtime for element changes? Having more than one

70
 vessel allows flexibility for the operation.

What are the operational ambient temperatures? Is cold temperature steel required?
Are sump heaters required?

New vessels should be constructed in accordance with the latest edition of EI 1596.
In the case of filter monitor vessels an interlock should be fitted to ensure filters
cannot be inadvertently left out during element changes.

Provision of sufficient working areas around vessels and their associated work
platforms, to enable all operations to be performed safely and easily, e.g. water
draining and sampling.

Inclusion of isolation valves in connecting pipework to facilitate vessel drain down for
maintenance and element changeout (and the suitable means of handling drained
fuel).

Provision in the inlet and outlet pipework of each filtration vessel for suitable sampling
points for fuel quality assessment and filter membrane testing.

Pipework design and fuel flowrate to provide adequate time for relaxation of
electrostatic charge between a filter and the inlet to a storage tank or vehicle.

Provision of protection from adverse weather conditions for personnel undertaking

vessel inspection/maintenance activities.

Ensuring that fuel flows in the intended direction through the vessel.

Ensuring that vessels and/or associated pipework are earthed/grounded.

Ensuring that vessels do not inadvertently drain when fuel is not flowing.

 The inclusion in all vessels of air eliminators, as there is a risk of internal fire or
explosion if product is pumped into a vessel that contains air. All vessels should also
be fitted with thermal/pressure relief valves. The outlet pipework from air eliminators
and thermal/ pressure relief valves should be routed to suitable spill containment. Air
eliminators should be maintained in accordance with filter manufacturer’s
recommendations. This pipework has to be open all the time and therefore any
isolation valve shall be wire-sealed in the open position during normal operation.

Provision to always ensure the slow filling of vessels after maintenance to prevent
element damage, internal fire or explosion during filling (see note in chapter 13 for
further information). This may be in associated pipework.

Provision of high and low DP alarms, preferably automatic, or preset lockout switches
set in the system that trigger an investigation or stop the fuel transfer.

The industry recognises both SI and imperial units when describing filtration
equipment and predominantly uses imperial units. This publication makes reference
to both terms.

Microfilters used in the aviation industry are usually given a micron rating, having
been extensively tested using specific test dirt contaminant, sized for the application.

Clay treatment vessels are primarily used in refineries or at the end of multi-product
pipelines for the removal of unwanted polar species from the fuel. These clay treaters
are often wrongly termed filters and whilst they are capable of removing large debris
by entrapment they should not be considered as direct filters.

The whole-life cost of the filtration system, including variability of cost of filter
elements and service parts, labour costs associated with element change outs,
potential downtime costs and the cost of element disposal.

71

EI 1583 6th edition
mandates manufacturers
to implement a ‘quality
conformance test
programme’, which as a
minimum includes
annual single element
testing of all models of
filter monitor element,
and quarterly testing
using Qualification Tests
2 (50 ppm water
challenge at rated flow)
and 3 (bulk water
challenge at rated flow).
Purchasers are entitled
to request sight of results
from the quality
conformance test
programme.
Similarly, EI 1590 3rd
edition mandates
manufacturers to
implement a ‘quality
conformance test
programme’, which as a
minimum includes
running all of the
mandatory single
element tests on an
annual basis.
Manufacturing methods/techniques for filter elements
are not specified by EI laboratory qualification
specifications.
Chapter 15
Quality assurance of filter
element and vessel manufacture
Production processes and product quality assurance
• Manufacturing methods/techniques for filter elements are not specified by EI
laboratory qualification specifications. However, manufacturers should be able
to demonstrate compliance with an appropriate quality assurance and
management system. As a minimum this should be ISO 9001 Quality
management systems - requirements or equivalent. It is recommended that it
includes regular testing of elements taken from the production line, using
qualification tests. Documented evidence should be available that confirms
this is being undertaken.
• Production runs of elements should be assigned a unique batch number for
traceability.
• It is the responsibility of the manufacturer to ensure that all production filters
have a performance that is consistent with the model that was qualified.
• Once a filter model is qualified, no design, materials or construction changes
are to be made by the manufacturer to production elements. Should such
changes be required, requalification of the filter model may be necessary.
Minimum recommendations for the requalification of previously qualified filter
monitor elements are included in EI 1583 6th edition and for microfilters in EI
1590 3rd edition. It is the intention to include similar recommendations for
FWS when EI 1581 is revised in future.
• Manufacturing techniques should ensure that filters do not contaminate or
adversely affect aviation fuel when in service.
• Although certain aspects of vessel construction are covered by EI 1596, that
publication does not include details of manufacturing methods or techniques.
• Manufacturing processes and facilities should follow good health, safety and
environmental procedures, and production engineering practices.
• There has been Industry experience of counterfeit elements entering the
market, which have obvious performance/fuel quality implications. Users are
encouraged to confirm the validity of their element suppliers with the Original
Equipment Manufacturers.
72
What types of element manufacturing problems have been
experienced?

Manufacturing faults may be apparent prior to element installation. In other cases,

faults may only be identified during operation, or element removal. Some
examples of operational experience of filter manufacturing faults are outlined in
Table 16.

Table 16: Examples of filter element manufacturing faults

Fault Consequence

End cap coming off Will allow fuel to bypass the element media.
due to inadequate
adhesive bonding

End caps not level Causes difficulty in installation and may permit fuel to
bypass media when filter is installed to required
torque.

Burst element casings Allows fuel to bypass media and can also contaminate
the fuel with media. (Note: this may also be caused by
high surge pressures during operation, and hence is
not necessarily a manufacturing fault.)

Media seam weld May cause fuel to bypass media. Diagnosis is difficult
defects without dissecting filter.

Media migration Can occur if media are not compatible with operational
requirements. (Note: this may be caused if filter is
used outside of manufacturer’s
recommendations/operational design envelope.)

What should I do if element faults are experienced?

• In the event of element faults occurring (either identified prior to installation, or

during operation), the manufacturer should be immediately alerted.
Manufacturers then have a duty of care to their customers to clearly
communicate known manufacturing defects that may have affected a
particular batch of elements (which can be traced via their unique batch
number).

• In such circumstances the severity of the failure should be assessed. In

certain cases it may be necessary for a manufacturer to recall the entire batch
of elements.

• Where element faults are identified during operation, it should be confirmed

that the failure was not caused by the filters being operated outside of
manufacturer’s recommendations.

• If operators are not satisfied with the quality of filters being replaced they
should make direct representations to the manufacturer concerned.

73
What types of vessel manufacturing problems have been
experienced?

Some examples of filter vessel manufacturing faults are outlined in Table 17.

Table 17: Examples of filter vessel manufacturing faults

Fault Consequence

Interior vessel coating Coating will contaminate fuel and cause filter
coming off due to blockage.
inadequate preparation of
surface, or inadequate
coating application

Incorrect positioning of If the brackets subsequently contact installed

spider plate support elements, localised element wear may occur.
brackets

Low point drain hole being Potentially reducing integrity of weld and deck
drilled through weld root plate pressure test compliance.

Incorrect position of Element misalignment and reduced dirt/water

element adaptors in deck removal performance.
plate

Construction techniques Potential for microbiological growth

leading to creation of water contaminating fuel.
traps

74
 Chapter 16

Application of filtration
components in aviation fuel
handling systems

Readers should also

note the
The previous chapters in this publication have introduced a number of
recommendations filtration components that may be used either on their own or in
for low point
sampling included in
combination to maintain fuel cleanliness in an aviation fuel handling
Annex K. system. It is important that careful consideration be given to the
selection of components and where they are used in the aviation fuel
handling system. The following information is provided to assist with
identifying possible options.

JIG 1 Guidelines for

aviation fuel quality
Minimum requirements for filter application for compliance with industry
control and operating standards/guidance
operating
Minimum requirements/recommendations for the application of filter components at six
procedures for joint
into-plane fuelling locations in the jet fuel handling system (outlet from storage installation/terminal
services (‘intermediate terminal’/refinery) if supplying another storage installation upstream of an
airport; outlet from refinery if supplying directly to airport service tanks; into pre-airfield
JIG 2 Guidelines for storage/terminal; out of pre-airfield storage/terminal; into airport storage; out of airport
aviation fuel quality
storage and into-plane) are given in JIG 1, JIG 2, ATA 103, API 1595 and EI/JIG 1530.
control and
operating The requirements of those publications are summarised below and in Figure 35.
procedures for joint
airport depots. Minimum requirements for filter application for compliance with industry
JIG requirements guidance for jet fuel handling
are typically applied
at joint-venture Outlet from storage installation/terminal (‘intermediate terminal’) if supplying
locations, typically another storage installation upstream of an airport:
outside of the US. • Mesh strainers of at least 60 micron nominal rating (200 mesh/linear inch) installed
ATA 103 and API at road or rail tank car loading points and at entry into lined delivery pipelines
1595
(meets EI/JIG 1530 requirement).
recommendations
are intended for, and Outlet from refinery if supplying directly to airport service tanks:
typically • FWS at road tanker or rail tank car loading points or entry into delivery pipelines
implemented, in the
US only. The (meets EI/JIG 1530 requirement).
requirements of any Into pre-airfield storage/terminal:
of the publications
may be mandated • FWS (meets API 1595 recommendation for truck transport/rail receipt points, see
anywhere worldwide also discussion under ‘Key points’ to note of recommendations/good practice later
by the fuel customer in this chapter)
(airline), or applied
anywhere at the Outlet from pre-airfield storage/terminal:
discretion of the • FWS (meets API 1595 recommendation)
operator.
• FWS at road tanker or rail tank car loading points or entry into delivery pipelines

75
 (meets EI/JIG 1530 requirement for movement directly to airport service tanks).
Into and out of airport storage:
• FWS (meets both ATA 103 and JIG 2 requirements), or filter monitor (meets JIG 2
requirement)
Into-plane (on refueller, hydrant servicer or cart):
• FWS or filter monitor (meets both ATA 103 and JIG requirements)

Minimum requirements/recommendations for the application of filter components in

systems handling aviation gasoline are as follows:

API 1595 recommends the use of a FWS, filter monitor or 5 micron microfilter into
pre-airfield storage and a FWS, filter monitor or 5 micron microfilter at the outlet from
pre-airfield storage.

EI/JIG 1530 recommends an EI 1590 2nd edition compliant micofilter into pre-airfield
storage.

JIG 2 requires the use of an EI 1590-compliant 5 micron or finer microfilter, or FWS,

both into and out of airport storage.

JIG 1 requires an EI 1590-compliant 5 micron or finer microfilter, a filter monitor or a

FWS into-plane.

76
Figure 35: Schematic of minimum requirements for filter application for jet fuel
handling systems

Options for application of filtration components

At locations where EI/JIG 1530, JIG 1 or 2 or ATA 103 recommendations/requirements

are not being applied/followed, it is possible to adopt a wide range of combinations of
filter components at locations within the aviation fuel handling system. Figures 36 and 37
provide examples of the component types that could be applied, and give key factors that
should be considered when deciding on the suitability of the components for each of the
locations. The key considerations in the application/use of the components outlined in the
previous chapters should also be consulted as part of the decision making process. Any
decisions will be dependent on the operating parameters and environment prevalent at
the specific location. Figure 36 highlights the two types of filtration system that could be

77
applied into-plane (on vehicles). Figure 37 highlights the filtration systems (including
those in combination) that could be applied (in separate vessels) at any one of four
locations (into and out of pre-airfield/terminal storage, and into or out of airport storage).
The factors for consideration given are those which apply to the combination of the two
types of filter, rather than the filters separately.

Key considerations for filtration system combinations

• Utilising different filter technologies at different stages in the fuel handling system
may help to mitigate the risk of one type of filter component being rendered
ineffective by an unusual operating parameter.

• It is important to have a full appreciation of the operating environment (in terms of

particulate matter and/or free water contamination) and the most suitable filtration
component for that application.

• The level of protection required at each of the five stages in the aviation fuel
handling system.

• Where fuel may contain excessive particulate contamination causing short

filter/coalescer life, it is recommended to “protect” the FWS with a microfilter of an
appropriate micron rating, qualified to EI 1590.

• Generally it should not be necessary to “protect” the FWS with a microfilter system
in the out of storage location, because particulate matter should be removed before
the fuel is received into airport storage and the storage should be managed to
avoid contamination. It is, however, possible that local conditions may result in
high levels of airborne particulate matter, which may enter the fuel handling system
through tank vents. In such cases it is recommended to protect the FWS with a
microfilter.

• Hydrant systems operate at high pressure, easily high enough to burst a heavily
loaded (blocked) filter/coalescer. Filter monitor elements are designed and tested
to tolerate much higher differential pressure.

• Filter monitors should not be used in fuel containing FSII additive.

• Filter components should be sized for the flow rate required. In situations where
combinations are used and flow rates differ, no component should be subjected to
flow rates above its rated flow.

• Future changes in vessel service should be considered prior to procurement of

new vessels (i.e. FWS to filter monitor).

• The ease of installation and maintenance.

• The efficiencies and most effective means of optimising the fuel handling system
(consideration of lifetime of different components).

78
Filter location - into-
plane (refueller,
hydrant servicer or
cart)

Filter system that Filter monitor FWS

could be applied (EI 1583) (EI 1581)

Key decisions Which diameter? Which category?

required by specifier - 50 mm (2 in.)
- 150 mm (6 in.)
- M100
For 150 mm (6 in.) Which type?
which flow format?
in-to-out S-LD
out-to-in S-LW + water detection?

Key factors to • Tolerant to surfactants in fuel • Provides no bulk water removal

consider in selection • Intended to provide bulk water function
of filter system, • Coalescers vulnerable to disarming
and low level water removal
see relevant chapters • Should not be used in fuel that by surfactants leading to degradation
for further information contains FSII in water removal performance

• May be subject to trace levels of • Operational limitation of relatively

SAP migration large vessel size

• Water removal performance may • Diligent application of procedural

degrade in service
• Use of bulk water detection
probe may identify bulk water
contamination on vehicles
checks required to prevent microbial
growth in water sumps (see chapter
7)
• Overcomes any concern with trace
SAP migration into fuel
• Category M or M100 only should be
used in fuel containing FSII
• Type S-LW systems not suitable for
all mobile applications

Figure 36: All options for into-plane fuelling (jet fuel)

79
Draft of proposed EI 1550 second edition for stakeholder review.
Please submit any feedback using form provided to mh@energyinst.org by 16 Dec.
Filter location -
Into or out of-
storage at either
a pre-airfiled/
terminal, or at
an airport
Filter system Filter monitor
that could be (EI 1583)
applied
Key decisions Which diameter?
required by - 50 mm (2 in.)
specifier - 150 mm (6 in.)
For 150 mm (6 in.)
which flow format?
- in-to-out; - out-to-in
Key factors to • Tolerant to surfactants
consider in in fuel
selection of • Intended to provide
filter system bulk water shutdown
and low level water
removal
• Should not be used in
fuel that contains FSII
• May be subject to trace
levels of SAP migration
• Water removal
performance may
degrade in service
• Requires large filtration
surface area to have
high capacity for
particulate matter
• Into storage location
may suffer short
service life if fuel
contains high water
loading
• Out of storage location
may suffer short
service life if tank
draining procedures
not diligently applied
Figure 37: All options for into pre-airfield/terminal storage, out of pre-airfield/terminal storage, into-airport storage and out of airport
storage
EI13/060
Copyright © EI, 2013
FWS Microfilter Combination of Combination of Combination of
(EI 1581) (EI 1590) microfilter FWS upstream of microfilter upstream
upstream of FWS filter monitor of filter monitor
Which category? Which micron Choices as for Choices as for FWS Choices as for
-C rating? microfilters and and filter monitors microfilters and filter
-M FWS separately separately monitors separately
- M100
Which type?
-S
- S-LD
• Provides a combined • This option does • Extends service • Provides • Extends service life
particulate matter and not meet life of FWS at additional of filter monitor at
low level water recommendations locations with high protection in locations with high
removal function /requirements of particulate matter applications particulate matter
• Provides no bulk water ATA 103 or loading (into- receiving fuel loading (into-
removal function but JIG/IATA. storage). Usually that may contain storage). Usually
sump water level • Vulnerable if unnecessary out surfactants unnecessary out of
detectors can alert subjected to of storage • Sudden change storage
operator prolonged • Provides greater in differential • Provides greater
• Coalescers vulnerable exposure to fuel capacity for pressure of one capacity for
to disarming by with high free particulate matter vessel requires particulate matter
surfactants water levels removal investigation of removal
• Overcomes concerns • Overcomes • Sudden change in both • Sudden change in
with trace SAP concerns with differential differential
migration into fuel from trace SAP pressure of one pressure of one
filter monitors migration into fuel vessel requires vessel requires
• Relatively large vessel from filter investigation of investigation of
size may be monitors both both
operationally limiting • Provides no water
• Diligent application of removal function
procedural checks
required to prevent
microbial growth due
to retained water
• Category M or M100
only should be used in
fuel containing FSII
80
Recommendations/good practice for application of filter systems in
aviation fuel handling systems

Figure 38 shows an example of good practice in the application of filter components in the
aviation fuel handling system. Despite the apparent complexity of filtration options
available for each filtration location, typical fuel handling systems can be fairly
straightforward.

Key points to note

• As noted in chapter 2, because of the challenges posed by the complex distribution
system, a means of removing both particulate matter and free water is required. A
FWS provides the most efficient and economical method of achieving this, and is
the workhorse of the aviation fuel handling system.

• The installation of appropriate filtration at pre-airfield storage receipt points should

be considered if a site has a history of excessive particulate matter and/or water
ingress or has a significant probability that receipts might have particulate matter
and/or water content. Note the recommendation of API 1595 and EI/JIG 1530 to
install filtration at points receiving from truck/rail transport is intended to address
the latter because it can be difficult to ensure trucks and rail cars are managed to
aviation standards.

• In applications where high particulate matter loading may occur, a FWS can be
protected by the positioning of a microfilter upstream.

• It is recommended that microfilters are not used in applications where there may be
high levels of free water, such as may be experienced at marine receipt locations.

• Although the application of clay treaters is not covered in this publication, it is

recommended that microfilters are installed downstream of clay treaters to prevent
carryover of clay into the fuel handling system.

• Consideration should be given to protecting the clay treater by the positioning

upstream of a filtration component (hay pack, microfilter, or FWS depending on
operational parameters).

• Filter monitors are not widely used outside of the supply system (at airports), as the
challenge of water in the distribution system can be significant. FWSs allow for the
continuous removal of low levels of free water, whereas filter monitors would
regularly shut-down and require replacement.

• Filter monitors into-plane are designed to shut down in the event of excessive
particulate matter and/or free water contamination. An additional safeguard to alert
an operator to unacceptable levels of free water on a vehicle is the application of a
bulk water detector.

81
Figure 38: Schematic of recommendations/good practices for application of
components in aviation fuel handling systems

82
 Chapter 17

Operation of filter vessels -

general health and safety
considerations

This chapter highlights key health and safety issues for

the operation of filter vessels; it is not intended to be a
detailed operations manual. Regional regulations
should always be complied with.

Lifting operations

Lifting operations associated with the operation and maintenance of filter vessels will
most commonly involve the raising and removal of the cover, but may also involve the
removal of other components.

All lifting operations should be planned, supervised and carried out in a safe manner by
trained and competent persons using approved and properly maintained equipment. The
area underneath or potentially affected by the lift must be kept under control and clear of
unnecessary persons or equipment.

The minimum recommendations for lifting equipment are that it should be:

• Sufficiently strong, stable and suitable for the proposed use. Similarly the load and
anything attached (e.g. lifting / jacking points) should be suitable.

• Positioned or installed to prevent the risk of injury.

• Inspected and certified with a minimum frequency of 12 months.

• Visibly marked with appropriate information regarding its safe use (e.g. safe working
load).

Control of work

Due to the potential hazards that may exist, or be created during filter vessel
maintenance and subsequent recommissioning, such tasks must be carried out in a safe
and controlled manner. The control of work process should ensure that these tasks are:

• Carried out by trained and competent staff.

• Subject to a written method statement.

83
• Risk assessed.

• Subject to a relevant Permit-to-Work where required.

Safe isolation of plant

Prior to the draining and opening of a filter vessel for maintenance, an appropriate
means of isolation of the vessel must be provided to ensure that there can be no harmful
release of product. This typically requires a minimum of two isolation points – upstream
and downstream – and often more to cover additional pipework, instrument connections
etc.

The adequacy of isolation depends upon a number of factors such as the system
pressure, flammability and toxicity of fuel and the period that isolation is required.
Isolation can vary from simple single valve closure before and after the vessel, to the
use of double valve or spades (for more extended periods, or if the filter is to be left
open unattended), through to complete disconnection of the vessel from the system.

Where appropriate, a lock-out tag-out (LOTO) system should be used to prevent

inadvertent operation of pumps, valves etc. associated with the vessel undergoing
maintenance.

Confined space entry

A confined space is one that is large enough for personnel to enter, has limited or
restricted means of entry, and is not designed for normal or continuous occupancy.
Some filter vessel maintenance tasks, such as internal cleaning or access to certain
components, may require confined space entry. This is subject to specific regulation in
some regions.

Confined space entry should not occur unless:

• There is no practicable alternative.

• The activity is covered by a Permit-to-Work, including gas-testing and a stand-by

person.

• The vessel is adequately isolated.

Where confined space entry involves a vessel that has contained leaded aviation
gasoline, specific guidance should be followed.

Working at heights

Some filter vessels are mounted at a height above the ground that makes a fall during
maintenance a potential hazard. This is best addressed by providing an adequate
access platform around the vessel.

Working at heights from which a fall may cause personnel injury should not proceed
unless:

• A fixed platform is used with guard or hand rails, or

• Fall arrest equipment is used, and
• Persons are competent to carry out the work.

84
 Chapter 18

Recommendations for
operation of filter vessels

This chapter provides recommendations to operators of

filter vessels.

Commissioning new vessels

Upon receipt of a new vessel the purchaser should satisfy himself that the vessel
complies with the requested specification. Subsequent set-up, installation and initial
commissioning procedures (including vessel flushing) should be in accordance with
manufacturer’s recommendations.

Filter/water separator, filter monitor and microfilter installations and their associated
pipework should be designed to prevent the vessels draining either partially or completely
during normal operation. It is especially important that filters are never operated unless
the vessel is full of fuel. If air is present in a filter housing, the atmosphere above the jet
fuel could be flammable in hot climates. The taking of routine samples may result in air
being introduced into the filter vessel. Whenever a filter vessel is less than full, it should
be refilled slowly before being operated, see Refilling of vessel with fuel after opening.

During the installation of any filter vessel it is important that correct vertical and horizontal
alignment is achieved to ensure that free water and particulate matter can be drained
from sample points and are not trapped in “dead” areas of deck plates, sumps or
pipework. Correctly aligned vessel systems minimise the risk of microbiological growth.

Checking for electrical continuity

In an electrostatically charged environment, such as that found inside a filter vessel

during fuel flow, conductive (usually metallic) components that are not in electrical
continuity can accumulate significant electrostatic charge. (Conductive items that are not
in electrical continuity are known as “unbonded charge collectors”.) The electrostatic
charge can accumulate to the point where destructive and potentially incendiary
discharges occur.

For all vessels the resistance between all metallic components and the reference point
(e.g. the external vessel support foot) should be less than 10 ohms. This is relatively easy
to measure and ensures that all the conductive components are well connected. This
provides a large safety margin because the voltages are high and the currents are small
in electrostatic charging.

There must be no unbonded charge collectors (electrically isolated components) in a

85
vessel used to filter aviation fuel. This can be confirmed by testing using the method
described in Annex L. If testing indicates that any metallic (conductive) component is
electrically isolated then the system should not be returned to service until this is
remedied.

It is also critical to ensure that filter vessels (fixed or mobile) are earthed or grounded.

Figure 39: Checking for electrical continuity of spider plate

Filter vessel external inspection

Filter vessels should be included in the regime of inspection and maintenance for the
facility/vehicle. Some of the key items that should be assessed, including during third-
party audits, are listed below.

Key considerations for filter vessel external inspections

– Ensure that work platforms, including access steps and handrails, are provided
where necessary to permit a vessel to be internally inspected and elements
replaced without risk to personnel.

– Ensure that the vessel is equipped with a direct reading dp gauge, air eliminator
and thermal/pressure relief device. Sense lines for the dp gauge are required to
be stainless steel.

– Confirm that the air eliminator is positioned at the top of the vessel (for maximum
effectiveness).

– Ensure that any valve positioned downstream of the air eliminator is secured in
the open position to prevent accidental closure during normal operation.

– Ensure that the air eliminator spill line terminates close to the ground, with an
appropriate means of containment. If the line routes to a slop tank, there should
be a means to see flow (in order to identify failure of any seals).

– Ensure that sampling connections are provided at the inlet and outlet of the vessel
to permit the taking of representative influent and effluent fuel samples under flow
conditions for membrane tests or other fuel quality checks.

– Horizontal vessels with lid weights exceeding 18 kg (40 lbs) are required to have
lids that are hinged or pivoted to the vessel body.

86
 – Vertical vessels with a diameter of 46 cm (18 in.) or greater should incorporate a
sleeved lift column attached to the lid, operated by a hydraulic jack or cam lever. If
so equipped, the lift column is required to incorporate a safety device so that the
lid, once raised, cannot inadvertently drop and cause injury.
– The vessel may be equipped with one or more valves to allow it to be completely
drained of fuel. The height between any drain or sample port and the ground is
recommended to be a minimum of 600 mm (24 in.). This is to allow for the
installations of valves, fittings and extension lines whilst leaving enough clearance
for the use of a bucket.
– The exterior of carbon steel vessels should be primed and painted to provide
protection against weathering.

– Larger filter vessels (i.e., interior diameter greater than or equal to 71 cm (28 in.))
in fixed (versus mobile applications) may be fitted with a clean-out connection. If
so equipped, the clean-out connection should be 100 mm (4 in.) diameter and
fitted on the horizontal axis to minimize water collection.
– Confirm that the vessel if fitted with at least two data plates, as described in
Chapter 13.

For further information and guidance on specific tasks associated with the external
inspection of a filter vessel, see the ‘Task Card’ included as Table 18.

Preparation for filter element change-out

Prior to opening a vessel to change elements, the following should be confirmed:

 That all required HSSE precautions are in place.

 That the correct models and number of replacement elements/components are

available.

 That all required tools are available.

 That the required procedures are understood by all personnel involved.

 That an updated operational data plate is available.

 There is provision for the safe handling, draining and disposal of elements to be
removed.

 That for fixed facilities, the weather conditions are suitable, or that precautions
against the effect of inclement weather are in place.

 That for filter vessels installed on vehicles/carts, there is a suitable location for
the change-out to occur (e.g. with facilities to handle fuel drained from
elements).

For further information and guidance on specific tasks associated with changing filter
monitor elements in a vessel, see the ‘Task Card’ included as Table 19.

Opening a filter vessel

 Confirm that the filter vessel has been isolated, see ‘safe isolation of plant’ in
Chapter 17, and fully drained of fuel.

 Undo the vessel lid retention nuts/bolts.

 Remove the lid and ensure it is retained safely.

87
Removal of filter elements

For vessels that have been in-service:

 Visually inspect the general condition of the vessel and the mounting
configuration of any element retaining plates/spiders/interlock systems. Note any
unusual observations, such as evidence of electrostatic discharges, microbial
growth etc. It is recommended that when old elements are removed and new
ones installed, the elements being removed are carefully inspected. Much can
be learned from the state of components that have been in service – leopard
spotting of filter/coalescer elements indicates microbiological activity, heavy
particulate deposits result from excessively dirty fuels being handled and, subtly,
fine white particles on the cotton socks of filter/coalescers indicate salt has been
removed from the fuel.

 If the filter element replacement is ‘like-for-like’ note the number and location of
any blank/dummy elements for filter monitors, or blinds/caps for FWS.

 Remove element retaining plates/spider plates, where fitted.

 Remove elements and position in a location where they can be effectively

drained of residual fuel.

Internal inspections of filter vessels

Recommendations regarding annual internal vessel inspections (which may not coincide
with element changeout frequency) can be found in JIG 1, JIG 2 and ATA 103. The main
items covered by those documents are:

• Cleanliness of the vessel.

• Element appearance.

• Correct installation of elements and torque setting.

• Condition of element seats/sealing faces.

• Condition of internal lining.

• Checking of continuity.

• Condition of cover seal.

• Replacement of damaged or contaminated elements.

• Testing of separator elements.

• Checking of vessel fittings (air eliminator, relief valve, sump water detector/float
mechanism etc.)

Key points to consider for internal inspections are detailed below.

88
Key considerations for the internal inspection of filter
vessels

– The inspection should be scheduled to minimize the time the elements will not be
fuel-wetted (i.e., do not drain the vessel one day and inspect it the next). Filter
monitor elements are required to remain fuel-wetted. Ensuring that the required
tools, extensions and sockets are readily available will help expedite the
inspection process.

– See steps for ‘Preparation for filter element changeout’ and ‘Opening a filter
vessel’ outlined above.

Sealing of the lid to the vessel end flange or reinforcing ring is recommended by
EI 1596 to be done using an O-ring seal rather than a flat gasket. The condition of
the rim seal should be checked (see example in Figure 40).

Figure 40: Rim seal in good condition

Note that if cover bolts require undue force to unscrew, they were probably too
tight and this may have caused damage to the rim seal. In such cases the torque
setting recommended by the manufacturer should be confirmed.
A replacement frequency for rim seals should be determined (e.g. when damaged,
or after every 3 compressions). The manufacturer’s recommended lid seal
material (typically Viton A, Buna N) should be used, never cork as this rapidly
deteriorates in service.

– The interior of carbon steel vessels (which meet the requirements of EI 1596 2nd
edition) is required to be coated with an epoxy conforming to EI 1541. The coating
should be light-coloured, to facilitate detection of microbial growth or particulate
matter, unless local regulations specify otherwise. The interior of aluminium or
stainless steel vessels do not have to be coated. Closely inspect the condition of
the vessel interior lining, particularly around the rim area as this is where lining
deterioration is most likely to start (see Figure 41). Repair of small areas of
damaged coating can be affected by epoxy repair kits supplied by filter
manufacturers. Time for curing will need to be made prior to vessel closure and
refilling.

89
 Figure 41: Deterioration of internal coating near rim area

– The underside of the vessel lid should be examined for any signs of sooting and/or
internal fire damage (see Figure 42). If detected, the matter should be investigated
further (check for correct air eliminator functioning, that the procedures that have
been used previously for slow-filling of the vessel after element changeout are
appropriate, confirm whether any metal components in the
vessel are electrically isolated etc).

Figure 42: Evidence suggesting a fire on the underside of a vertical vessel

lid

– Elements longer than 46 cm (18 in.), regardless of type (i.e. filter/coalescer, filter
monitor or microfilter) are required to be stabilised against excessive vibration.
This is typically accomplished via the use of ‘spider’ plates, so named for the
‘spider-like’ appearance of retaining arms. Confirm that such plates are present
(The requirement for a spider plate in FWS vessels was first introduced in API
1581 2nd edition). Spider plates are required to be electrically bonded to the
interior of the vessel. Using a torque wrench, ensure that the spider plate(s) was
properly installed.
– Check that all fixing materials (nuts, bolts, spider plates etc.) and mounting rods
are either stainless steel or aluminium (not chrome-plated, brass or carbon steel).
There should be no signs of any rust.
– The internal inspection should confirm that the high velocity fuel inlet does not
directly impact elements. Flow should either be directed to an element-free
location, or elements should be protected via the use of a baffle (as required by EI
1596).
– Vessels should be confirmed to allow the complete drainage of water from the
vessel and the sump. Vessels having a flat, level base do not meet this

90
 requirement. Once drained, there should be no pools of liquid visible within the
vessel. Note that the manufacturer’s diagram of the vessel may need to be
reviewed to confirm this.

Figure 43: Example of good practice for weld around sump, allowing
drainage from vessel

– If so equipped, any clean-out connection on the vessel should be opened to

confirm there is no accumulation of either free water or particulate matter. A build-
up of particulate matter on the clean side of the vessel is likely to indicate one or
more ruptured elements.
– Any signs of microbiological growth on the vessel should be noted, and the
vessel, including any inspection orifices, cleaned, see below. This may include
biofilms on the vessel walls. If an element shows spotting, (see Figure 6), the set
of elements should be replaced.
– The inspection for a FWS should confirm that both filter/coalescer and separator
elements are from the same manufacturer (unless the specific combination has
been qualified). For all vessels, ensure that the type and number of elements
inside the vessel matches the information on the vessel operational data plate.
Note that this may include a number of dummy/blank elements in filter monitor
vessels, or blinds/caps in FWSs.

– Using a torque wrench confirm that the elements and blinds/caps are/were
installed in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations. In the case of
FWS, this should be for both the filter/coalescers and separators. This will require
the removal of the spider plate. A torque wrench with the appropriate adjustment
range is required for this purpose (5 to 40Nm). JIG requires the torque wrench to
be calibrated. Some operators find wrenches with a “click” indicator to offer
advantages over those with indicator needles. [Note the operator will need to have
appropriate adapters and sockets for effective checking of the elements in situ].

Figure 44: Use of torque wrench to confirm elements installed in

accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations

91
– Dished end caps on elements are only acceptable where they are horizontally
mounted. If vertically-mounted they become non-drainable areas, see Figure 45.

Figure 45: Dished element end caps contributing to excessive

microbiological growth

– Confirm that elements are not stacked on a single mounting. This is a requirement
of JIG 1 Issue 11, and is recommended to be avoided as good practice.

– Confirm that elements, regardless of type, are not touching each other or the
vessel wall. The layout of elements in FWS vessels is required to provide a
minimum of 12,7 mm (0,5 in.) clearance between elements and between any
element and the vessel wall. In FWS vessels the centre-to-centre distance
between elements is required to be a minimum of 16,5 cm (6,5 in.). Filter monitor
elements of 50 mm (2 in.) nominal diameter are required to have a minimum
distance of 6,4 mm (0,25 in.) between each other and between elements and the
vessel wall. Filter monitor elements of 150 mm (6 in.) nominal diameter are
required to have a minimum distance of 12,7 mm (0,5 in.) between each other and
between elements and the vessel wall.

– Carefully inspect the elements for signs of leopard spotting, which is indicative of
microbiological activity. Carefully check for burst or collapsed elements, and
associated particulate matter. If during the inspection one or more elements are
found to be defective, the entire set is required to be replaced (to avoid creation of
preferential flow paths through the vessel and potential for qualified flowrates to
be exceeded.)

– If threaded-base adapters are installed, inspect their sides with the aid of a mirror
for evidence of corrosion (corrosion may not be apparent if observed from above
only).

– For 150 mm (6 in.) filter monitor elements, confirm that the appropriate flow
configuration is in use (elements are available in both in-to-out and out-to-in flow
formats). Note that a vessel that was previously used as a FWS may be converted
for use as a filter monitor and utilise filter monitor elements with both flow
configurations (in-to-out elements where the filter/coalescers were previously
installed, and out-to-in elements where the separators were installed).

– Closely examine filter monitor elements and the inside of the vessel for any signs
of element media (super-absorbent polymer). A viscous gel within the vessel
might indicate exposure of elements to fuel containing FSII, see Figure 46.

92
 Figure 46: Viscous gel present within a filter monitor vessel

– Confirm that all filter monitor elements (including blanks/dummies) have black end
caps.

– For filter monitors utilising 50 mm (2 in.) elements and fitted with a vessel lid
interlock (to ensure that a complete set of filter monitor elements is installed),
confirm that the interlock has not been altered to defeat its intended purpose.

Key considerations for the testing of separator elements after their use in service are as
follows:

Key considerations for the testing of separator

elements
– For the annual inspection of FWSs in accordance with JIG Standards it is
necessary to check 20 % of the separator elements to confirm their continued
effective water repellency. This should be in accordance with manufacturer’s
instructions, and involves pouring a quantity of water over the outer surface of the
separator, and visual assessment of repellency. Handling elements with any
ungloved hands may leave an oily residue that will impair water repellency.

– Any obvious physical damage should automatically result in element replacement

(e.g. see Figure 47).

– The separator element should be wetted with fuel prior to testing. If the element
has dried out it will most likely fail the test. One method that is adopted throughout
industry is to wet the element with fuel from a bucket, immediately prior to the
water test.

– The flow of water onto the separator element needs to be carefully controlled. The
maximum drop height of water should be 10 cm (4 in.), with the water dripped
steadily. This can best be done using a small plastic bottle fitted with a small
nozzle outlet tube. Dropping water from higher heights, or the use of water flowing
under pressure, will force water through the separator resulting in test failure
which is unrelated to the condition of the element.

– It is important to observe the inside of the element during the water test to check
for water penetration rather than waiting until afterwards, as water can drain away
leading to false passes.

– Suitable test apparatus is shown in Figure 48.

93
 Figure 47: Seam defect causing separator to Figure 48: Separator testing
fail water repellency test apparatus

Prior to the installation of elements, confirm that:

 the inside of the vessel (including the inside of the vessel lid and the clean-out
connection on larger vessels) is clean and dry. If cleaning is required, see
‘cleaning filter vessel’ section below.

 the internal coating of the vessel is in good condition;

 any gaskets/seals have either been replaced or are in good condition;

 if any adhesive has been used for gasket installation, or internal coatings
repaired, that sufficient time has been allowed for curing;

 the integrity of the element mounting is satisfactory.

Cleaning filter vessels

Where it is determined that the inside of a vessel needs to be cleaned of microbial

growth, it is recommended that it be washed with clean fresh water, and then for a bleach
(sodium hypochloride) treatment to be applied. The concentration of the bleach solution
should be within the range 5-8%. After application of the bleach the vessel should be left
open to atmosphere for at least one hour to allow effective disinfection. The cleaning
process should include a final rinse with potable water and then wiping dry.

Mechanical cleaning, e.g. using a new soft-bristled brush that will not damage the epoxy
coating, may be necessary in some circumstances.

Filter element installation

 It is important to follow the manufacturer’s recommendations and local operating

procedures when handling filter elements. Care should be exercised to keep them
scrupulously clean during installation (see example in Figure 49).

94
Figure 49: Installation of filter/coalescer element to ensure its cleanliness

 Ensure that filter elements are installed with the correct torque (using a torque
wrench) in accordance with manufacturer’s recommendations to prevent fuel
bypassing the elements. The installation torque should be applied to the element
(screw-based) or element installation nut (open-ended) before the spiderplate is
installed.

 All new filters being fitted should be checked for structural and dimensional integrity,
paying particular attention to the rigidity and positioning of end-caps.

 If nuts, washers or other metal components require replacement, ensure that

replacements used are either stainless steel or aluminium, and preferably supplied
by filter supplier.

 Ensure elements are correctly spaced (minimum 5 mm from each other and vessel
walls) using the adjustment available on the spider plate. If elements have to be
forced to fit the spider plate position (mounting bolt movement is greater than 5 mm
from static position) it is likely that the bottom seal will be compromised. Either
modification of the spider plate is required, or the element mounting plate needs
resetting. This may require the specialist involvement of a filter manufacturer/
supplier.

 Ensure that the spider plate is both bolted in place and correctly bonded to the
vessel.

 Perform a final check to confirm that all is in good order and that tools have been
removed before closure of the vessel lid

Closure of vessel lid

When securing the vessel lid it is important to evenly tension the bolts to the correct final
torque. Uneven or incorrect bolt tensions cause the gasket to not seat properly and the
end result will be a lid that is likely to leak in service. It is recommended that the following
procedure should be used:

a) Check condition of sealing ring round the opening of the filter vessel. Replace if it
shows signs of deterioration. O-ring type seals should be replaced after every three
compression cycles. Replacement gaskets should be provided by the filter
manufacturer or their authorised representative only. Note: Petroleum jelly may be
used sparingly on the vessel seals.

95
 b) Carefully inspect condition of cover securing bolts, nuts, washers and, if of a pivoting
design, the bolt pivot assemblies and housings for signs of deterioration such as
corrosion, distortion or other damage. Any damaged items are to be replaced with
new ones supplied by the filter manufacturer or their authorised representative. Note:
Surface rust on bolts may be removed by use of a wire brush when the vessel cover
is closed.

c) Close filter vessel cover and tighten bolts evenly to approximately one third of the
final torque, working on diametrically opposed bolts. Repeat the tightening sequence
in at least three more steps to the full torque using a calibrated torque wrench. Finally
retighten adjacent bolts using the torque wrench. The final torque setting should be
that recommended by the filter vessel manufacturer.

Over-length tools should not be used when tightening the vessel’s cover bolts or
nuts.

Refilling of vessel with fuel after opening

EI 1596 (section Controlled filling of vessels after installing elements is critical to limit static charge
2.6) includes the
generation and minimise the possibility of fire or explosion. Controlled gravity feed is
recommendation
that for new recommended where applicable (liquid level of tank should be above that of filter vessel).
vessels “A fitting Where pumping is unavoidable (e.g. from underground tanks) the flow should be as per
for a narrow bore filter element manufacturers’ recommendations. New installations should consider
(25 mm, 1 in.) incorporating slow-fill lines (small bore piping), see EI 1596 (and example shown in
filling line should
Figure 50). During filling, the correct operation of the automatic air eliminator should be
be provided
either in the filter verified. After filling, the integrity of the cover seal arrangement should be confirmed by
vessel inlet applying pump pressure while the joint is carefully examined. Uncontrolled filling of empty
pipework (for the filter vessels with fuel may result in internal filter fires.
filling line to
connect either
side of the gate
valve), or in the
base of the filter
upstream of the
filtration stage, as
agreed between
the purchaser
and
manufacturer.”

Figure 50: Example of slow-fill line

Differential pressure

The measurement of the differential pressure across a vessel is used to determine the
status of the elements within. It is therefore imperative that differential pressure checks
are made, logged and analysed. The differential pressure across a vessel is measured
using a piston gauge connected to pressure-sensing lines up and downstream of the
vessel. It is important that this gauge, e.g. the Gammon gauge™, is regularly checked for
proper functioning (e.g. free movement of the piston).
A sudden drop in the differential pressure (at the same operational flowrate) or a drop in
the rate of increase of differential pressure should be investigated as either may indicate
that the elements have ruptured or otherwise failed.

96
Flow rates

It is recommended that filter vessels be operated in accordance with manufacturer’s

recommendations. Minimum flow rates should also be in accordance with manufacturer’s
recommendations.

Housekeeping

It is important to maintain the filter system in satisfactory order by following the required
quality control and inspection and maintenance procedures. Reference should be made
to the most recent editions of JIG 1, JIG 2 and ATA 103 for further information.

Some key issues and procedures covered by those publications include:

• Daily sump drains under pressure.

• Recording and correcting filter differential pressure at maximum operating flow rate.

• Filter membrane tests downstream of the filter vessel.

• Changing filter elements when either maximum differential pressure has been
reached or maximum service life if sooner.

• Any contra indications observed during any routine check or inspection that should
be investigated.

• Annual, documented internal vessel inspections.

• The inspection and testing of Teflon™ coated and synthetic separator elements.

• Maintenance of accessories in line with manufacturer’s recommendations.

Record keeping

It is good practice, and a requirement of operational standards such as ATA 103 and JIG
1 and JIG 2, for records of filter vessel operation and maintenance to be kept. Records
should include:

 dates of element changes;

 dates of seal changes and current number of compressions;

 free movement and proper zero of dP gauge;

 periodic evaluation of thermal relief device (both lift and reset pressures);

 results of vessel inspections;

 evaluation of any water defense system (for FWSs only);

 the similarity sheet (for FWSs);

 a vessel diagram;

 copies of vessel data plates;

 details of any other vessel maintenance.

Industry best practice is to log all water drains and closely monitor dP (either manually or
electronically). For further information on dP, see Chapter 19.

97
Table 18: Filter vessel external inspection task card

Task Card
Filter Vessel External Inspection

Frequency: Annual

General: Task to be undertaken by Hydrant Operator, Maintenance Personnel or Contractor.

Gather together any required materials and tools:
 Records/forms and pen

Safety:  Use standard PPE for refuelling and maintenance activity.

 Advise Control Room of tank compound or pump area entry and task to be performed
 Use designated walkways, stairs, platforms and access routes. Don’t stand or walk on
pipes or unstable areas.

Activity:

a) Confirm there are no fuel weeps or leaks.

b) Confirm there is no physical damage to the vessel or its components.

c) Confirm there is no corrosion. Pay particular attention to where sockets and fittings are
attached to the vessel and the data plate support bracket which is often only stitch welded
to the vessel shell. Excess corrosion will render the vessel unsafe.

d) Ensure required labels are in place and legible.

e) Ensure any maintenance painting has not obliterated labels or coated threads.

f) In harsh environments, such as in close proximity to the sea, additional corrosion

prevention methods such as anti-corrosion sprays or wrapping certain components such
as bolts in Denso tape may be required. Ensure that, where adopted, such preventive
measures remain adequate or refresh where required.

g) Ensure that the DP gauge scale and associated spring are appropriate for the vessel type.
For example red spring/15 psi scale for monitor vessel and blue spring/30 psi scale for
FWS vessels on Gammon piston type DP gauges.

Inspection Results/Comments/Equipment Identification Number:

Date of Check:

Check Undertaken by:

Defect Report Completed Forms/Records Updated

98
Table 19: Mobile filter monitor vessel internal inspection and changeout task card

Task Card
Mobile Filter Monitor Vessel Internal Inspection and Changeout

Frequency: Annual (or earlier if DP exceeds limits)

General: Task to be undertaken by Hydrant Operator, Maintenance Personnel or Contractor.

Gather together any required materials and tools:
 Form and pen.
 Hand tools for removing end caps/covers.
 Lifting aids for heavy end caps where these are not fitted with hinges.
 Torque wrench and socket for end cap bolts.
 Anti-seize compound for lubricating end cap bolts.
 Drain trays and absorbent materials to store any wet elements removed from
vessel.
 Fire extinguishers.
 Clean aviation fuel pumps and hoses for draining filter vessel.
 Confirm new/spare elements are available in stock before commencing
inspection.
 Lint free cleaning rags.
 Approved gloves for handling elements.
 Gasket/O-ring material, suitable glue and sharp knife or razor for cutting O-ring
material.
 Hand tools for replacing DP gauge filter element.
 Spare DP gauge filter element.

Safety:  Use standard PPE for refuelling and maintenance activity.

 Complete hazard identification and permit-to-work documents.
 Isolate and lock-out vessel from pressure sources.
 Release stored pressure from the vehicle.
 Remove keys from vehicle to ensure it is not driven away while personnel are
working around the vehicle.
 Ensure the vessel is fully drained before opening end caps.

Activity:

a) Ensure inlet and outlet valves are closed, locked and out-of-service warning tags
fitted.

b) Reduce the pressure by draining fuel from the low point and fully drain the vessel.

c) Loosen and remove the vessel lid bolts.

d) Swing the lid away from the vessel. For some small vessels, the lid may not be
hinged and care needs to be taken as these may be heavy. A drain tray should
be placed under the end of horizontal vessels to catch any residual fuel as they
often do not completely drain.

e) Carry out an initial visual inspection of the spider plate, element ends and vessel
walls looking for any indications of physical damage, residues, water retention or
any other unusual deposits, and to confirm that elements have not collapsed.

99
f) Remove the spider plate.

g) Remove each element and carry out a more detailed inspection of them, looking
for discolouration, “leopard” spots (especially towards the base of the element,
which may indicate the presence of microbiological growth). Also check for
physical damage, severe sagging of the outer cover, sediment, solid particles. A
full description of the position, location, type, size, colour, volume of any
observations should be included in the records for future reference and trend
monitoring.

Place the elements in a drain tray to retain any spillage.

h) With elements removed, inspect the interior of the vessel for sediment, solids,
corrosion, trapped water, or lining delamination. Also check the back plate for
wear marks or damage in the element seating area. There should be a full
circular wear mark or shiny pattern where the element seats against the back
plate. There should also be no dark stains across this seat area which could
indicate that the element is bypassing.

i) Clean the vessel if required.

j) Carry out lining repairs if required or note for observation or repair at the next
inspection.

k) Inspect the cap seal condition. “O” rings should have about 10 % crush for best
sealing performance. “O” rings should be replaced after 3 inspections or earlier if
damaged.

l) Check the cap swing bolts to endure the pivot pins are not bent, they are free to
move, the bolt threads and nuts are free to move and suitably lubricated. Ensure
no excess lubricant enters the vessel.

m) Install the correct number of new monitor elements relative to the maximum
achievable flow rate for the vehicle at this location. Install ‘blank/dummy’
elements in any spare holes.

Never handle elements with bare hands or dirty gloves as this will disarm
elements due to surfactants. Handle only by the end caps or use the clean plastic
bags from new elements. Non-silicon or non-powder coated nitrile gloves may
also be used.

To make the installation of the elements in the end plate easier, dip the end of the
element in clean fuel to lubricate the element “O” ring.
Before installation, check each new element for condition and check the inside to
ensure no debris or packing materials are present.

Note: When installing elements, align an element reference point in the same
direction. For example all seams placed vertically. This aids in detailing location
of any element damage, dirt leopard spotting, discolouration, etc. for future
inspection trend analysis.

n) Tighten the spider plate nuts in rotation and ensure the interlock device is
correctly positioned. Most vessel manufacturers use stainless steel spider plate
support bolts or studs and nuts. Care must be taken to ensure these do not “pick
up” and cause thread damage. Thread types (Metric, UNC, etc) may vary
depending on the supply location and the market sold into, therefore care should
be taken to use the correct replacement nuts to prevent thread damage and cross
threading.

o) Check no tools, plastic bags or dirt are left inside the vessel and the vessel lid

100
 seal area is clean.

p) Swing the vessel lid over the top of the vessel and refit the swing bolts and
tighten in a cross/opposite pattern to the correct torque, in accordance with
vessel manufacturers’ torque values.

q) While the vessel is drained, replace the DP gauge filter element.

r) Unlock the inlet valve and slowly, but only partially, open the valve to allow fuel to
enter the vessel using the pressure provided from the head of fuel in the fueller
tank. For dispensers, briefly activate the deadman a number of times with the
vehicle coupled to the test rig.

s) Observe the air eliminator sho-flo indicator. When the indicator stops spinning or
the ball stops’ bouncing air in the vessel has been purged.

t) Check all fittings and seals for signs of any fuel leakage.

u) Fully open the inlet valve and unlock and fully open the vessel outlet valve.

v) Fully pressurise the vehicle from the pump or the test rig and check for leaks.

w) Flush the vessel by circulating fuel for 5 minutes at normal flow rate either back to
main storage or into the fueller tank. Confirm the DP and record.

x) After flushing is complete, check the hose end screens for any fibres or other
debris and record results.

y) Carry out a Millipore check and record the results.

z) Remove all tools and materials from the area and dispose of any used elements
in accordance with local procedures.

aa) Update all records and vessel labels.

Inspection Results/Comments/Equipment Identification Number:

Date of Check:

Check Undertaken by:

Defect Report Completed Forms/Records Updated

101
 Chapter 19

Differential pressure: its

measurement, monitoring and
correction

This chapter provides information on the differential

pressure that occurs across a filter vessel, how it is
measured, how it is managed and used to limit the
conditions to which filtration systems are exposed,
what equipment and procedures can be used and
why this topic is so important to the operation of
filtration systems.
What is it?
If fuel flowing in a contained a system is maintained at a constant flow rate, there will
be a change in the line pressure between two points in the system for reasons such
as a change in pipe diameter, a restriction i.e. a valve or filter vessel, or by different
pipe configurations (e.g. a 90 degree bend). The difference in pressure between two
points in a system is called the differential pressure (abbreviated to DP, dP, Delta P
or ΔP). In the context of aviation fuel filtration, the restriction is caused by filter
vessels and the elements installed in them, and the differential pressure is the
difference between the inlet/upstream pressure (P1) and the outlet/downstream
pressure (P2) of a filter vessel, as shown in Figure 51.

Differential
pressure
The difference in
pressure on the
upstream/inlet and
downstream/outlet
sides of a filter
P1 P2
vessel. Sometimes
referred to as the
‘pressure drop’
across a vessel.
Abbreviated to DP,
dP, Delta P or ΔP.
Figure 51: Sensing lines for measurement of differential pressure

Differential pressure changes depending on the fuel’s flow rate. As the flow rate
increases, the differential pressure also increases (the filtration system provides a
greater restriction to the passage of fuel). Similarly, a reduction in flow rate causes a
reduction in the differential pressure. This variation is important for aviation fuel
filtration, as described below.

102
How does filtration affect differential pressure?

A filter vessel containing no filter elements, operating at a given flow rate, will
generate differential pressure, also sometimes termed pressure drop. The vessel
design/configuration has an impact on this value. Ideally the filter vessel
designer/manufacturer should ensure this value is as low as possible to prevent
excessive dP when elements are first installed. After installation, clean filter elements
generate further restrictions to fuel flow which increases the dP. The increase in dP
due to filter elements depends on the porosity of the media that they contain to
effectively remove contaminants of a known size and type. The smaller the
contaminants that can be removed (the lower the porosity), the greater the restriction
that a filter causes to fuel flow, and hence the higher the pressure it creates. This is
generally referred to as the ‘start-up’ dP, i.e. clean elements with minimal restriction.

During service, when elements are removing particulate matter/free water which is
held up within their media, the restriction to fuel flow increases, and the dP will
increase (if the fuel is kept at the same flow rate). This is the dP that occurs during
fuelling operations. Under normal operating conditions there will be a progressive
increase in the dP as particulate matter/free water in the system is removed (and
gradually accumulates on elements). This increase is dependent on fuel cleanliness
and the rate of increase may vary, but once elements have been exposed to
particulate matter/free water the dP should never decrease (at the same flowrate).

Industry operating standards and filter manufacturer recommendations have

requirements for the replacement of all filter elements in a vessel when a specified
dP across it is reached. Maximum in-service lifetime is also set and the changeout
of elements will be to whichever comes first; the dP limit or the lifetime date.

During filter qualifications, filters are tested to ensure they provide the required level
of contaminant removal performance and that this performance is not compromised
when they are subjected to elevated differential pressure (up to a specified maximum
value). During its qualification a filter model is assigned a maximum flow rate
(determined from the flow rate per linear length of each element contained in the
filter system). In service, filter systems can be operated up to their maximum
qualified flow rate – their rated flow – but never at higher flowrates.

Why does differential pressure need to be measured?

The importance of dP cannot be over-stated. It is the primary means by which a

filtration system alerts an operator to fuel contamination (by particulate matter/free
water) events or the failure of a filtration system.

Differential pressure is measured and monitored over time to ensure that the filtration
system is not exposed to conditions outside of those which it was tested during its
qualification. This is described as the filtration system’s qualified dirt/water removal
performance envelope. In other words, a means to provide assurance that the filter
system effectively removes contaminants as intended.

Differential pressure is also required to be measured and monitored as one of the

means to establish when elements need to be replaced, see Chapter 19 Service life.

During operations changes in differential pressure may alert the operator to a

mechanical/structural failure of elements within a filter vessel.

If particulate matter/free water contamination is excessive then filter elements can be

exposed to elevated pressure that may result in contamination breakthrough or
damage to the filter structure or media. In systems with automatic flow control that

103
 are trying to maintain flow this may be a real threat to filter system integrity and fuel
cleanliness.

dP monitoring is critical for detecting whether a filtration system

is exposed to high levels of particulate matter/ free water, or
has failed.

What happens if a filter system is operated outside of its qualified

performance envelope?
If a filter system is exposed to a flow rate/dP that exceeds its qualified performance
envelope – its rated flow – then the effective removal of particulate matter/free water
may be compromised. The degradation in performance, or potential for mechanical
failure of the element, will be dependent on the flow rate (and the amount of
particulate matter/free water in the fuel). In the case of into-plane filtration systems,
the level of particulate matter/free water may not be acceptable for aircraft servicing.
If a filter system is exposed to a flow rate above its rated flow the filter media and/or
the filter elements themselves may also become damaged and their ability to remove
particulate matter/free water be compromised. It is for these reasons that a filter
system should never be operated above its rated flow.

“a filter system should never be operated above its rated flow”

How is differential pressure measured?

Differential pressure The measurement of the differential pressure across a filter vessel requires the
can be expressed installation of sensing lines from the inlet/upstream and the outlet/downstream sides
using a variety of units of the vessel (see Figure 51). EI 1596 specifies that sensing lines and fittings be
from kilopascals (kPa) made from stainless steel.
in SI units (used by
EI 1596 specifies the use of a differential gauge giving a direct reading (electronic
standardization bodies)
pressure transducers or piston-type devices). The gauge should be protected with
to pounds per square
suitable isolating valves (with thermal pressure relief) and for piston-type devices
inch (psi), (expressed
provided with a means for testing free movement of the piston
as psi (g) referring to
gauge pressure, or psi Vessels are required to be individually monitored for dP using a permanently
(a) referring to installed gauge.
absolute, or bar gauge,
In many small vessels, typically housing one or two elements only, where flow rates
bar (g)). Most aviation
are low, visual indicator gauges are currently typically used. These gauges operate
fuel filtration
on a traffic light system; green for good and red for stop (see Figure 52). Operators
practitioners and
of small vessels observe such gauges, but generally these systems will reach the
industry documents
recommended service life before a high dP condition (unless there is a
quote dP in psi (g).
contamination issue). The use of analogue gauges/those with graduated scales are
recommended.

Figure 52: Piston-type red/green indicator gauge

104
Does differential pressure always increase?

No. The dP may be highly variable depending on the flow rate. This is why it is
important for dP to be monitored at all times and measured at a consistent flowrate
over time for trend monitoring purposes.

A sudden drop in dP may also occur if an element suffers from some form of
mechanical failure/rupture.

Filtration system overpressure protection devices

The installation of certain dP measurement devices may afford critical protection

against filter elements exceeding their change-out dP. Some have been mandated
for fitment by A4A and JIG, as noted below.

Differential pressure switch

Simple pressure switches pre-set to the changeout dP are recommended to alert the
operator to an issue, and also provide a lock-out to prevent the filtration system from
being exposed to over-pressure. Such pressure switches can be of a simple
pneumatic type that is triggered when the pre-set value is reached, through to ones
that convert a pneumatic signal to an electrical signal that can be linked to the
vehicle interlock system. This function is mandated for switches by some industry
operating standards.

Pressure switches are positioned in the filtration system to detect the dP, which is
usually done in tandem with the piston-type dP gauge.

Tracking of piston travel

Several devices exist which can be purchased as an integral as the piston-type

gauge, or as an ‘add-on’ for retrofitting, to detect the travel of the piston.

The units are pre-set at the required dP, and a rise in dP and associated travel of the
piston, triggers the system. As for dP switches, this may be linked to the vehicle
interlock system.

Peak high

Devices similar to the tracking devices can be used to provide a record of the highest
dP reached during a fuelling. This may have occurred when the dP gauge was not
being viewed by the operator (and there has been a subsequent decrease in dP, e.g.
attributable to reduction in flow rate, or filtration system failure).

Automatic dP correction devices

Proprietary devices are available which automatically monitor dP during fuel

throughput and provide corrected dP data (using proprietary algorithms, see below).
These can be configured to alert the operator in the event of over-pressure, or
pressure loss.

What is ‘corrected’ differential pressure and why is it required?

Differential pressure correction – to establish ‘corrected dP’ - is a method of taking

an observed or actual dP reading and extrapolating it to determine what the dP
would be if the filter was being operated at an increased flowrate. The extrapolation
requires the use of a proprietary algorithm. The increased flowrate can be up to the
rated flow of the filtration system as configured, or (more typically) the maximum
achievable flowrate to which the system can be exposed at the specific
location/application. The distinction between these two flow rates is important, and

105
 worth remembering.
Maximum
achievable As an example, if the dP is high across a filtration system operating at a low flow
flowrate rate, and the filtration system is subsequently exposed to a higher flowrate, there is a
This is the risk that the resulting dP will exceed the maximum that is specified by industry
maximum flowrate operating standards/filter element manufacturer recommendations. This situation
that a filtration would be recognised by dP correction, so an operator would know to replace
system can be
elements before moving the vehicle on to a higher flow rate uplift.
exposed to in
service – e.g. the Differential pressure correction is required to take account of the variability in
maximum flow that
observed/actual dP at varying flow rates, e.g. such as those experienced at an
can be achieved by
the pumps installed airport when fuelling different aircraft.
in the system.
It is the only means available to establish dP trends for a filtration system over time.

In operation, filtration systems are rarely operated at their maximum rated flow, and
in many cases the fuel handling system is not capable of increasing fuel flow to such
flow rates. It is therefore only meaningful to correct the pressure to the maximum
achievable flowrate.

It should be noted that ‘dP correction’ does not imply that an observed or actual dP is
‘incorrect’. Far from it.

Differential pressure correction is a robust/conservative means of ensuring that

filtration systems are never exposed to high dP (e.g. after a period of time operating
well below rated flow, and then being required to be used for a high flowrate uplift).
This is particularly important for filter monitors used into-plane.

“Industry operating standards require dP to be ‘corrected’ to

maximum achievable flowrate”
What are the means of dP correction?

As noted above, dP correction requires the application of an algorithm. This may be

provided in the form of charts/wheels available from filter manufacturers, by
electronic calculation (e.g. via spreadsheets typically used by some of the major fuel
suppliers) endorsed by the filter manufacturer, or in real time during each fuelling via
the use of an automatic electronic correction device.

It is important to note that charts/wheels are specific to element/manufacturer

models/types.

A manual approach can also be used for mobile filtration, involving exposing the
system on a test stand to the maximum achievable flowrate at that site, and
recording the dP.

Requirements for dP in operating standards

Operational standards include specific requirements relating to filtration system dP.

Some of the key points from those standards are included in Table 20:

106
 Table 20 – Requirements from operational standards
JIG 1 - Six-monthly checking of piston-type dP gauges for free movement
throughout the full piston travel and visually for correct zeroing.
- During each pumping/fuelling operation, the dP gauge shall be
observed and the dP and flow rate recorded during every underwing
pressure fuelling.
- At least daily, the dP and flow rate shall be recorded for every vehicle
in service and the records checked to ensure that the dP at
maximum operating flow rate for the vehicle does not exceed the
limits of 22 psi for monitors and 15 psi for filter/water separators.
- Weekly graphs of dP shall be prepared, correct to, or recorded at,
maximum achievable flow rate. (It is noted that the conversion from
observed dP to corrected dP at maximum achievable flow is not
accurate when dP readings are taken at low flow rates and is not
valid where a reading is taken at less than 50% of rated flow).
- If the corrected dP is 5 psi or more below the previous corrected dP
reading, an investigation shall be conducted and the filter vessel
should be opened for inspection and elements replaced if necessary.
ATA 103 - dP readings shall be taken and recorded daily. For accuracy, these
checks should be undertaken when the flow rate is steady, and as
close as possible to maximum operating flow rate.
- Tests on individual filter vessels should be carried out at the same
Note 13 flow rate, if possible.
The ATA 103 - Filter elements are to be replaced when a sudden drop in differential
requirement for filter pressure occurs under similar flow conditions or the filter vessel
monitor replacement differential pressure exceeds 15 psi (for filter/coalescer elements)
when dP reaches 15 and 15 psi13 (for filter monitor elements).
psi is being considered - Proper operation of filter differential gauge(s) to be verified in
for amendment to 22 accordance with gauge manufacturers’ procedures. Accuracy must
psi. be within +/- 2 psi. The dP gauge lines and valves should be checked
periodically to ensure they are not plugged or restricted. Where small
filters are fitted in direct reading gauge inlets, they should be
replaced at each filter element changeout.
- dP should be checked and recorded under normal flow conditions.
- dP to be periodically monitored during the fuelling operation.
JIG 2 - Six-monthly checking of piston-type dP gauges for free movement
throughout the full piston travel and visually for correct zeroing.
- During each pumping operation, the dP gauge shall be observed to
ensure maximum dP is not exceeded.
- Once a week, when pumping at the highest flow rate normally used,
the dP and flow rate shall be recorded.
- Weekly graphs of dP shall be prepared, correct to, or recorded at,
maximum achievable flow rate. (It is noted that the conversion from
observed dP to corrected dP at maximum achievable flow is not
accurate when dP readings are taken at low flow rates and is not
valid where a reading is taken at less than 50% of rated flow).
- If the corrected dP is 5 psi or more below the previous corrected dP
reading, an investigation shall be conducted and the filter vessel
should be opened for inspection and elements replaced if necessary.
API 1595 - To be added
EI/JIG  During each pumping operation the dP shall be observed to ensure
1530 that the maximum limit is not exceeded. Unexpected variations shall
be reported and investigated.
 Once a week, when pumping at the maximum operating flow rate
normally experienced, the differential pressure and flow rate shall be

107
 recorded.
 Weekly graphs of dP shall be prepared, corrected to, or recorded at,
maximum achievable flow rate.
 If the corrected dP is 0,35 bar (5 psi) or more below the previous
corrected dP reading, an investigation shall be conducted and the
filter vessel should be opened for inspection and element
replacement if necessary.

How is dP measured for three-stage filter systems?

In three-stage vessels, containing three element types (see chapter 12), dP is still
measured across the vessel, meaning that all elements in the vessel will require
replacing when the changeout dP is reached.

Key points to consider

 The safe operation of a fuelling system relies on operators being aware of the
implications of filter systems being operated at elevated differential pressures.
This is particularly important when using water absorbent filter monitors.

 During aircraft refueling, operators are required to observe the actual dP reading
and react if the dP exceeds the maximum allowable value. Prior to the vehicle
being deployed for aircraft servicing the operator should be aware of the status
of the dP across the filter vessel.

 All sudden changes in differential pressure, positive or negative, should be

investigated. If the operating flow rate is the same then a sudden increase could
indicate the presence of contamination, whereas a sudden loss could indicate
that an element has become dislodged or experienced mechanical failure.

 An unexpected low start-up dP may indicate that the required number of

elements for a vessel have either not been installed, or not been installed
correctly.

 Sense lines should be positioned as close as possible to the vessel inlet and
outlet, and the pressure measuring units should be positioned using the
minimum length of pipe.

 Consideration can be given to the use of electronic transducers for pressure

measurement.

 The free movement of the piston check is complicated where multiple sense
lines feed into one gauge, and requires understanding of the piping
configuration.

 Requirements for calibration should be observed.

 dP switches should provide a shut-off function, and should require operational/

supervisory intervention to enable them to be reset.

 In the event of activation of a dP switch, the vehicle should be removed from the
fuelling operation and the cause investigated.

 Resetting the dP switch should only occur when the cause of the pressure
increase has been investigated.

 It is important to understand piping configurations to ensure that dP gauge

sense lines are always correctly connected to the filtration system.

108
 Chapter 20

Service life of filter

elements
This chapter briefly describes the options available to
the user in determining when to replace elements.
Provided the operating conditions are compatible with a
particular manufacturer’s elements, the operator
chooses which elements to use as replacements
(vessels have universal fittings to allow
interchangeability of elements).

Manufacturer’s recommendations

Each manufacturer issues recommendations on service life intervals. For instance,

currently all manufacturers recommend that filter monitor elements should not be used
for more than 12 calendar months. For filter/coalescer elements, the recommendations
of manufacturers vary (between one and two years), ATA 103 specifies service life of
one year, with possible extension based on six-monthly single-element testing, and JIG
Standards enable use for a maximum of three years. Operators should ensure that they
know the recommended change-out interval for the particular products that they are
using so that they can plan the change-out process.

Manufacturers may also issue recommendations on maximum shelf-life of products.

Further confusion may arise as manufacturers also recommend the shorter of the time-
based service life and a performance-based service life. For FWS the performance-
based service life is when the differential pressure across the vessel exceeds 22 psi (1,5
bar). For filter monitors it is when the differential pressure reaches 22,5 psi (1,55 bar),
(unless otherwise specified by the manufacturer). Elements will require changing
because of an increase in differential pressure much earlier than one, two or three years
if the fuel is not clean and dry. A key factor affecting actual operational life is fuel
throughput. This is far more important than time. For a given operation, experience will
soon indicate typical throughputs that can be expected for given filtration devices. A final
point: if operating costs are high from short service life of filter elements, an operator
may want to protect the elements from particulate matter by installing microfilters (see
chapter 10) and/or better management of water removal.

109
Operating conditions

In several locations the aviation fuel handling systems are clean and dry. Therefore the
differential pressure across filter vessels does not increase significantly during the
recommended time-based service life for elements. In these cases it is reasonable to
ask why they should be changed. The short answer is that there is no technical reason.
Elements do not suddenly disintegrate once the manufacturer’s recommendation for
service life has been exceeded. If elements continue to be used beyond this, the
operator assumes greater liability for the performance of the filtration system and may
be out of compliance with JIG Standards, ATA 103, API 1595 or EI/JIG 1530.

Blocked elements

Under no circumstances should elements be operated when the differential pressure of

the vessel exceeds the manufacturer’s recommendations. Qualification testing requires
proof that elements can operate many times higher than this to ensure a reasonable
factor of safety is available for occasional short-lived high pressure transients (surges).
Operating at higher pressures effectively removes the safety margin. Further, there is no
practical incentive for extending the life of elements beyond their recommended
differential pressure maximum.

Short life of elements (rapid differential pressure rise)

Many operators complain about the short life of their filter elements without realising the
implications of what has happened. Filters are designed to stop the transmission of
particulate matter and free water. When they do so they become less permeable and
resistance to fuel flow increases with a consequent rise in differential pressure. A rapid
rise in differential pressure indicates that:

1. the filter has removed contamination, and

2. the fuel was contaminated.

This requires that the filters be changed immediately and there to be an investigation to
find the cause of the contamination.

110
 Chapter 21

Disposal of used filter

elements

General considerations

Used filter elements are classified as hazardous waste because they contain some
amount of fuel. Hazardous waste has to be carefully disposed of in a responsible
manner – in many cases there will be local legislation governing this process that will
have to be observed.

Some filter manufacturers supply elements that include components that can be
recycled after collection or that can be crushed for easier disposal. Users are
encouraged to consider this when selecting elements.

Elements that have been used in aviation fuel handling systems containing leaded
aviation gasoline (such as Avgas 100 / 100 LL) could contain sludge or scale that
contains toxic lead compounds. Such elements require specialist disposal. Further
information may be found in Innospec Environmental Ltd publication Leaded gasoline
tank cleaning and disposal of sludge.

Storage

Used filter elements should be drained when first removed from vessels (see Figure 53)
and then stored in a suitable container prior to collection for disposal.

Figure 53: Draining of filter/coalescers when first removed from a vessel

111
The design and size of the container depend upon the number of elements stored and
the storage duration. Storage of a small number of used elements for a short period
could be in an open top metal drum. A larger number of elements, which are collected
less frequently, will require a more elaborate storage arrangement. Storage should not
allow any leakage of fuel into the environment. Storage arrangements should also be
adequately ventilated to prevent an explosive atmosphere developing. All storage
containers for used filter elements should be appropriately marked to show their
hazardous content. Such markings must comply with local regulations where applicable.

Disposal

Where local legislation dictates the disposal process, this must be observed. Used filter
elements are typically disposed of by specialist contractors who will collect and transport
them to a waste treatment plant for high temperature incineration. In some cases, used
filter elements may be disposed of in landfill sites but only after treatment.

Users of filter elements will need to use a specialist waste disposal contractor for these
services. Filter suppliers may be able to recommend such a company. Contractors
collecting used elements for disposal should provide a record of the dates and number
of elements removed from the operating site, and a written declaration that they will be
properly disposed of and in accordance with any relevant legislation. Users should
execute their duty of care to ensure that the contractors carry out this service in a proper
and professional manner.

112
Chapter 22

Management of change

This chapter provides information on the critical concept

of ‘Management of Change’ to ensure that consequences
of any changes to an effectively functioning and safe
operating system are assessed and anticipated/
controlled.

What is management of change (MoC)?

Management of change is a process of documenting and reviewing proposed changes to

a system, to ensure that risks arising from the proposed changes are recognised and
managed accordingly.

An MoC process provides a system to evaluate, authorize and document changes and
ensure proper closure after the changes are complete.

The process should apply to all permanent and temporary changes that could impact fuel
cleanliness or the safety of facilities/personnel, including changes related to organisation,
staffing, systems, procedures, equipment, products, materials or substances. The impact
of multiple minor changes as a cumulative effect should also be reviewed.

The process requires competent personnel fulfilling clearly defined roles and
responsibilities with clearly defined technical authority levels for the approval of changes.
Note: Personnel with wide ranging areas of expertise should be involved so that all the
hazards and consequences can be listed and worked through.

Appropriate training, support and competency assessments should be provided for those
with accountabilities in the MoC process.

In terms of filtration systems, the following list includes some of the more frequently
occurring changes that should be assessed with an MoC.

Key changes to consider

 Changing equipment (including changing between filter element suppliers,
introducing filter elements qualified to a new edition of an EI specification, changes to
filtration system accessories (e.g. air eliminators, PRVs etc)).

 Conversion from one filter system to another; FWS to FM and flow direction,
changing vessels round, and their associated equipment; for FWS to FM pressure
rating of vessel and deck plate; manifolds for conversions; spider plates; ensuring
electrical continuity; labelling/ documentation;

 Downrating a vessel to modify operational flow; element layout (which element(s) to

be removed first), interlock with blanks, for FWS blanks changing void volume –
need to update similarity

113
 Changing from open end to screw-based elements;

 Addition of vessels in parallel out of storage, and potential changes in flow dynamics
leading to preferential flow and over-rating of vessels.

 Changes to hydrant pumps/control valves and their impact on filtration.

 Publication of a new edition of EI 1596 and design and construction requirements for
filter vessels.

 Changes in personnel and staff competencies.

 Changes in the time that elapses between filtration system use (e.g. from daily to
weekly or monthly).

 Changes in throughput volume.

Key risks to consider

Some of the risks that may occur when changes are introduced, but may not necessarily
be obvious, include:

Particulate matter/water removal performance of a system being compromised by

over-rating.

Fuel flowing in the wrong direction through a vessel.

Incorrect installation of elements leading to fuel by-pass.

Filling a vessel to quickly leading to static charge generation and potential ignition of
flammable vapour within the vessel.

Incorrect O-ring/gasket leading to fuel leakage from the vessel.

Failure to assemble the spider-plate resulting in a lack of electrical continuity in

vessel.

A valve being placed downstream of the air eliminator to prevent leakage, causing
the loss of the air elimination function.

Application of incorrect torque causing elements to become dislodged in service.

Incorrect elements being installed in a vessel.

 Vessels in parallel out of storage, and potential changes in flow dynamics leading to
preferential flow and over-rating of vessels – so changes to hydrant pumps/control
valves and impact on filtration

Vessels not remaining fully flooded with fuel during operation.

A loss of accessibility for gauges and maintenance requirements after modifications.

Incorrect sealing of end caps leading to fuel by-pass.

It is recommended that changes are discussed in detail with filter manufacturers.

114
Annex A

Definition of ‘the industry’

115
 Annex B
Aircraft engine fuel filters and
engine tolerance of particulate
matter and free water

Key points of this Annex

• Filtration used in aviation fuel ground handling systems is designed to permit no
more than 0,15 mg/l particulate matter down to a nominal size of 1,0 µm, and free
water to a maximum of 15 ppmv.

• The use of aircraft engine filters provides protection against potential debris from
aircraft fuel tanks and fuel systems, airborne debris entering aircraft through vents
and large-sized particulate matter that may have been uplifted to the aircraft as a
result of a rare failure of the into-plane filtration (including hose-end strainer).

• The rating of filters used on-board aircraft to protect commercial transport engines
(such as those operated by major international airlines) is in the range of 25-40
µm absolute, and as small as 10 µm nominal. The rating of engine fuel filters used
in military aircraft is similar.

• The rating of small specialist turbine engine filters can be as small as 10 µm

absolute and 7 µm nominal.

• Aircraft engine fuel-wetted components are tested for operability during exposure
to specified levels and types of contaminants in test fuel during engine
design/certification.

• There is a significant factor of safety between the performance of aviation fuel

handling filtration (both particulate matter and free water) and aircraft engine
tolerances. This is of paramount importance in providing operational contingency
when dealing with a rare fuel contamination event. It is certainly not the intention
of this annex to suggest that fuel handling system filtration should be relaxed.

• This annex is provided for information only.

Chapter 3 includes details of some of the operational effects of fuel contaminants. These
include the blockage of aircraft engine fuel filters by particulate matter or microbial
growths and potential engine flameout (caused by fuel starvation and in extreme
situations by bulk water). The purpose of engine fuel filters is to prevent particulate
matter from getting into the close tolerance fuel control and injection components of the
engine fuel system. Small hard particles have been noted as being of particular concern
as they can erode surfaces (increasing tolerances) in fuel-flow control spool valves,
hindering performance or even jamming the valve.

Engine fuel filters protect specific components and therefore have a range of nominal

116
ratings as shown in Table B1. These filters are specified by engine and airframe OEMs
(original equipment manufacturers) and performance tested by suppliers or component
assemblers. Some use Beta ratios (see Annex E) whilst others use gravimetric methods
but they are rarely tested directly by the engine or airframe OEM. Note: the closest
tolerance in engine hardware encountered today is a nominal 10 µm. The 1 µm nominal
EI filter specification limits provide fuel suppliers with an order of magnitude safety
margin.

Table B1: Ratings of different engine filters

Component Nominal filter rating, Absolute filter rating,

microns microns

Hydro mechanical unit 10 35

(fuel control)

Servo 270

Actuator inlet 230-270

Actuator outlet 230-270

Fuel flow inlet 50

Electro hydraulic servo 70

valve

EHSV/HMU 154

HMU EHSV 74

There is also an “air-worthiness” engine component test requirement for continuous

operation at 2 mg/l of a specified test dust. When compared with the EI filter
performance limits of <0,15 mg/l, another contaminant mass safety margin is apparent.

Dissolved water in aviation fuel condenses out as the fuel cools at higher altitudes. This
is a normal situation which the fuel handling systems on board aircraft are designed to
accommodate. Features include aircraft fuel tank design, with water draining to low
points, and the use of fuel scavenging/pumping systems within fuel tanks. The scavenge
pick-up points are typically sited at various low points in the wing tanks and move any
free water generated to the engine inlet. These low levels of free water pass harmlessly
through the engines. The free water created by fuel changing temperature is not a
significant concern, because it does not happen all at once, or at least does not reach
the pump inlets at the same time. The main concern is the potential for uplifting large
amounts of water that could cause a flameout during takeoff roll or climb.

Within general aviation there is a greater variety of aircraft engine types, which in
addition to turbine engines include spark-ignition piston engines that operate on aviation
gasoline and compression ignition (diesel) piston engines that operate on jet fuel.
Further details of engine fuel filter specifications and the engine performance testing
using fuel containing contaminants should be sought from relevant engine
manufacturers.

117
 Annex C

IATA guidance material for

fuel contamination limits

To be updated to reflect latest edition

Introduction

The following information is taken, with permission, from IATA Guidance material for
aviation turbine fuels specifications, Part III Cleanliness and handling, 5th edition, 2004.

The recommendations of that publication are for fuel delivery into aircraft to be protected
by a system of quality control. This includes systematic and regular spot and/or
continuous monitoring to test the quality and cleanliness of the fuel and the efficiency of
the fuel supply system defence. Fuel is required to be sampled regularly and tested for
the presence of particulate matter and free water.

The IATA recommendations are provided, in part, to ensure safe continuity of fuel
supply, and are minimum recommendations. Operators are encouraged to ensure these
are comfortably met within the constraints of their particular operational conditions.

IATA contamination limits

Fuel cleanliness is required to be assessed for each aircraft refuelling. The refuelling
process does not permit elaborate laboratory analysis to be carried out on each delivery
and so simple, rapid tests are required that constitute a final check on a system that is
intensively monitored and controlled. The IATA recommendations for such tests are
shown shaded in Table C1.

In addition, more stringent testing of fuel cleanliness is required on a monthly and six-
monthly basis. These tests are used to confirm that the equipment employed is effective
in maintaining fuel cleanliness. For those tests, two limits are provided: ‘Notification’ and
‘Rejection’. The IATA recommendations for such tests are also shown in Table C1 (not
shaded). The guidance also provides recommendations for actions that a fuel supplier
should take if notification and/or rejection limits are exceeded.

The recommendation is also included that a Gravimetric test should be carried out on all
new or re-commissioned vehicles, when new hoses or filters are fitted and on new
hydrant lines and storage tanks before commissioning.

118
Table C1: IATA contamination limits (content of table reproduced with permission of
IATA)

When sample
Contaminant Test Method Limit
is to be taken

Visual inspection
After loading
of fuel in glass jar Clear & Bright
the refueller
(minimum 1 l)

ASTM D 2276 or No unusual

IP 216 (5 l result (colour
Monthly samples) using difference
Particulate
colorimetric should be two
matter
procedure or less)

ASTM D 2276 or
Notification
Refueller IP 216
0,2 mg/l
Truck Six-monthly (5 l samples)
Rejection
using Gravimetric
1,0 mg/l
procedureA

Visual inspection
of fuel in glass jar Clear & Bright
(minimum 1 l)
Before
Free water refuelling the 30 ppm
aircraft Visual inspection
maximum at the
and water
temperature of
detectorB
delivery

Visual inspection
Daily of fuel in glass jar Clear & Bright
(minimum 1 l)

ASTM D 2276 or No unusual

IP 216 result (colour
Monthly (5 l samples) difference
Particulate
using colorimetric should be two
matter
procedure or less)

ASTM D 2276 or
Hydrant Notification
IP 216
Servicer or 0,2 mg/l
Six-monthly (5 l samples)
Cart Rejection
using Gravimetric
1,0 mg/l
procedureA

Visual inspection
of fuel in glass jar Clear & Bright
(minimum 1 l)
During each
Free water 30 ppm
fuelling Visual inspection
maximum at the
and water
temperature of
detectorB
delivery

Note A – A Gravimetric test may not be required if into-airport storage and out-of airport
storage filtration uses FWS qualified to EI 1581, storage tanks are fully epoxy lined, have
coned down bottoms and floating suctions and into-plane filtration uses FWS qualified to
EI 1581 or filter monitors qualified to EI 1583. The six-monthly Gravimetric test may not
be required if the monthly colorimetric tests produce a colour rating of 2-Dry or less.

Note B - This can be by the use of the Shell Water Detector™, Velcon Hydrokit™, Mobil
Moisture Detector™, Aqua-Glo™, POZ-T™, YPF Capsulas detectoras de agua libra,
Aquadis or Aqua Indica. For further information on these detectors see Annex D.

119
 Annex D

Traditional methods for the

assessment of fuel
cleanliness

Traditional methods for the assessment of fuel cleanliness

This annex includes brief descriptions of the following commonly used field assessments
of fuel cleanliness (where applied the test methods themselves should be followed):

• Clear and bright (ASTM D 4176)

• Gravimetric (Millipore) analysis (ASTM D 2276/IP 216)

• Colorimetric analysis of Gravimetric membranes

• Aqua-glo (ASTM D 3240)

• Shell Water Detector™ and Velcon Hydrokit™

• POZ-T™

ASTM D 4176 Clear and bright (ASTM D 4176)

Standard test
method for free
water and ASTM D 4176 describes a test that is well known in the field as the “clear and bright”
particulate test (C&B). Whilst the fuel may typically have a colour from water white to pale straw,
contamination in the test aims to visually identify any water droplets or dirt particles in the fuel. Note that it
distillate fuels is impossible for the human eye to see droplets and particles much less than about 40
(visual inspection µm in diameter so this is not a very sensitive test unless the number of droplets and
procedures) particles are so great that the fuel appears hazy. However, it is a very useful, quick and
easy test to carry out. One important precaution in performing this test is to ensure the
sample test jar is clean. This may seem an obvious statement but there have been
many instances in the field where dirty, unsuitable containers have been used leading to
incorrect assessments. Note also the following advice:

• Air bubbles may sometimes be slow to clear - the sample should therefore be
allowed to stand for at least one minute before making an assessment.

• Swirling the sample to create a vortex concentrates contaminants in the middle of

the bottom of the jar facilitating the assessment.

• If the sampling tap is some distance from the bulk fuel to be sampled it will be
necessary to purge sufficient fuel to ensure that the sample taken is representative
of the fuel batch.
• With experience, an operator can differentiate between water and particulate matter.

120
Figure D1: Examples of the clear and bright test

Gravimetric (Millipore®) analysis (ASTM D 2276/IP 216)

Quantitative assessments of particulate contamination in fuel can be made using

Gravimetric membrane filter analyses for particle sizes >0,8 µm described in method
ASTM D 2276 or
IP 216. The test is often called the “Millipore®” test as the Millipore company was the
first to supply the delicate membranes and test kit that are used in this type of analysis.

The principle of the method is shown in Figure D2 and some important points to note
are:

• The ASTM/IP recommended minimum volume can result in pad-blocking in the case
of dirty fuels and therefore it is recommended that a smaller volume be sampled. In
this case it is important to record the actual volume sampled.

• Pads can be purchased as “matched weights” so that it is not necessary to know the
original pad weights. When matched-pads are not used it will be necessary to
weigh both pads before and after use and to note which pad is the “working” and
which the “control”.

• Not all pads are compatible with aviation fuels and a large range of pad filtration
ratings is available – it is recommended that the user establishes that the pad is
rated at 0,8 µm, is the correct diameter for the pad holder and is suitable for use
with aviation fuels and additives. (Note membranes can swell and disintegrate when
DiEGME is present in fuel.)

• ASTM/IP precision statements only apply to total particulate loadings of up to 2 mg/l

(calculated on a 5L sample). Anomalous results can be obtained for very dirty fuels.

• Anomalous results can occur if the membrane weights change during the analysis
or if particulate matter leaks through to the control membrane. If there is any doubt
about a gravimetric result then it should be repeated.

• The analysis involves sampling and then laboratory processing of the pads to obtain
accurate results. This takes time and the method cannot yield instant values.
Colorimetric assay of pads for a real time result is an option and described below.
• The method does not measure water contamination.

121
Figure D2: Principle of Gravimetric (Millipore®) analysis

Colorimetric analysis of Gravimetric membranes

The membranes or pads used above are white in colour and any build-up of particulate
matter on them will discolour them. ASTM/IP test methods also include a visual
assessment method (of wet or dry pads) to assist in more timely analysis of fuel
cleanliness. The working membrane is visually matched in terms of colour and shade to
samples contained in a commercially available booklet giving a result in terms of:

a letter - A, B or G depending on the coloration,

a number - 1-10 with 10 being the most intense.

This method is a useful rapid diagnostic tool but does not yield quantitative data.

Aqua-glo (ASTM D 3240)

This method measures free water in a 500 cm3 sample of aviation fuel quantitatively up
to 12 ppmv. By reducing the sample volume the range of application can be extended
but each time the volume is reduced, the method will suffer progressive reduction in
accuracy. Nevertheless, with most fuel specifications mandating 15-30 ppmv free water
as a maximum limit, the method is relevant. The analysis can only be carried out by line
sampling as the fuel needs to be forced through the sensitive pad. The pad is then
placed in a special detector where the quantitative measurement is made.

This method is used extensively in laboratory testing of water separator/removal

equipment.

122
Shell Water Detector™ and Velcon Hydrokit™

Two proprietary methods are available for the rapid detection of free water in aviation
fuels. They are both based on a colour change in the supplied medium on contact with
very low levels of free water (<30 ppmv). The methods do not have formal ASTM or EI
protocols but each is easy to use and instructions are included with the kits.

Both methods require a fuel sample to be taken in a suitable container (sampling

precautions) and then transferred to the sensitive media.

Note: They provide non-quantitative, go-no-go advice in terms of levels of free water.
They do not measure particulate contamination.

POZ-T™

This is a method commonly encountered in the former Soviet Union (especially in

Russia). It combines the colorimetric capabilities of the above water detectors and the
particulate membranes and as such should be viewed only as a go-no-go method.

The device is used in a similar way to the water detectors in that a fuel sample is taken
and then transferred to the sensitive media. There are two media layers one of which
produces a colour change if free water is present, and one that is white and indicates the
presence of particulate matter by the development of dark spots.

Other water detection kits

There are also other water detection kits that are applied regionally, including the YPF
Capsulas detectoras de agua libre in South America and Aquadis and Aqua Indica in
India.

Check against IATA Guidance Material

123
 Annex E

Filtration ratings, absolute,

nominal and Beta ratios

Note 14: Filtration Ratings, Absolute, Nominal and β-Ratios.

From the Laplace
Equation which
relates the Filter performance or rating may be assessed on the basis of ability to remove particles
maximum of a specified size from a flowing medium. The National Fluid Power Association (NFPA)
pressure defines an Absolute Rating of performance as:
developed to form
a bubble of gas at
an orifice “The diameter of the largest hard spherical particle that will pass through a filter under
immersed in a specified test conditions. It is an indication of the largest pore opening in the filter.”
liquid as a
function of the
Thus, filter media with exact and consistent pore sizes such as Millipore membrane
orifice size and
the surface filters will have an absolute rating. A complication in the testing and application of such
tension of the filters is that particles with a distribution of sizes will soon result in the formation of a
liquid, the Bubble surface cake on the upstream side of the filter (the side first exposed to the flowing
Point test liquid). This cake effectively becomes the filtration medium changing the filtration
determines the mechanism from surface filtration to deep-bed filtration. Deep-bed filtration invariably
maximum pore
size in a filter results in an improvement in particle interception efficiency and the filter rating will
medium. appear to improve progressively. The question then arises“ at what point in testing is the
Practically this Absolute Rating established?” Thus, it is preferable with such filters to use the
can be done supplementary definition for Absolute Rating –
using test
methods such as
the ASTM E 128 “...the largest pore opening in the filter.” This can be determined by a Bubble Point
Standard test Test14
method for
maximum pore More commonly, filtration media comprise woven and non woven papers, felts and
diameter and cloths, all having a wide range of randomly distributed pore sizes. With such media it is
permeability of
rigid porous filters not possible to assign an Absolute Rating and when done so, is meaningless.
in laboratory use. Besides operational flow and pressure conditions, the randomness of the weave and the
Porometer depth of the filter will determine the particle size cut off point or maximum size of
instruments are particles transmitted by the media. Performance can therefore only be described in
commercially terms of a Nominal Rating defined by the NFPA as follows:
available to
measure the full
pore size “An arbitrary micron value assigned by the filter manufacturer based upon removal of
distribution of filter some percentage of all particles of the given size or larger. It is rarely well defined and
media. These not reproducible.”
instruments
measure the
downstream gas At present the only relevant standards are MIL-F-5504A and MIL-F-5504B Filters and
flow as a pressure filter elements, fluid pressure, hydraulic micronic type where version A defines the
ramp is applied to Nominal Rating as the removal of 98% of particles of size larger than the quoted size
the upstream side and version B, the removal of 95% of those particles. This inevitably means that such
of a sample that

124
has been soaked filters will allow a few particles larger than the rated size value to pass through the filter
in an organic but it also means that many particles smaller than that size will be intercepted albeit at
liquid with an progressively lower efficiencies.
extremely low
surface tension.
The onset of One further term that may be encountered in defining filtration efficiency is that of Beta
downstream gas Ratio (β). This is defined as:
flow is equated
with the “Bubble β = Ni/Ne
Point” and from
the Laplace where:
Equation the Ni = The number of particles of a given size and larger in the influent
maximum pore Ne = The number of particles of that same size and larger in the effluent.
size is computed.
The instrument It follows that the higher the β Ratio the greater the efficiency of the filter. For a given
then continues to
monitor the gas particle size, x, the Filtration Efficiency, Ex is given by:
flow rate as a
function of
progressively
increasing gas
pressure until all
of the liquid has
This type of performance testing requires the use of particle size analysis equipment and
been blown out of
the sample to this is currently not specified in EI filtration publications. (NOTE: A β Ratio value of 200
yield the represents a calculated efficiency of 99,5% and is considered in many industries to
distribution of represent performance sufficiently close to 100% efficiency to be considered Absolute.)
pore sizes.

125
 Annex F

Clay treatment

Aviation fuels are What is clay treatment?

made up of a
variety of
molecules that When aviation fuel is transported through multi-product pipelines the fuel may acquire
contain primarily trace additives and other “polar” materials from previous consignments of other fuels,
carbon and e.g. diesel. These additives can be surface active compounds (otherwise known as
hydrogen. These surfactants) which may affect a number of fuel properties such as thermal stability and
burn to produce especially filter/coalescer performance, (see Annex G). Such surfactants may also be
energy, carbon present in fuels produced by certain refinery processes. Clay treatment of aviation fuel
dioxide and water has proven to be an effective means of removing these surfactants and is used
vapour. The extensively by refineries and some distribution facilities (particularly in the US).
presence of trace
levels of other How does clay treatment work?
atoms such as
oxygen, sulphur
Clay treatment is an adsorption process that is completely different to filtration even
or nitrogen in the
though it is sometimes referred to as “clay filtration”. With its large surface area
hydrocarbon
(approximately 110 m2/g (1 200 ft2/g)), and affinity for polar materials, surfactants are
material is
adsorbed on the surface and within the porous structure of the clay. Removing
generally
surfactants improves the water separation properties of aviation fuels. Clay may also
unavoidable and
remove unwanted colouration from the fuel.
introduces effects
that are
undesirable.
How is clay treatment applied?
Energy yield may
be reduced, This annex relates primarily to cartridge-type clay treatment units as opposed to units
thermal stability which utilise bulk clay (used mostly in refinery and large fuel depot applications). Clay
deteriorate, but cartridges are available as either bags or canisters for installation in large vessels.
more relevant to Compared to canisters, the bags are typically less expensive, and contain more clay, but
this publication – can be difficult to install. The clay used in the bags and canisters is typically low volatile
particulate matter matter (LVM), 50 - 90 mesh, attapulgite clay mined in Attapulgus, Georgia. (Note
filtration and coarser 30-60 mesh can also be supplied.) LVM clay has better water tolerance and
water separation therefore less tendency to cake or agglomerate, compared to regular volatile matter
may be (RVM) clay (used primarily in bulk units). Initial differential pressure is typically low for a
compromised. clay treatment unit containing fresh clay (approximately 5 psi). Use of clay with a larger
mesh number (smaller clay particles and more compact structure) causes higher initial
and accumulated differential pressure throughout its service life, however, it can provide
substantially more capacity. Aviation fuel flow through cartridge-type clay treatment units
should be 19 - 26 l/min (5 - 7 gpm) per 178 mm x 457 mm (7 in. x 18 in.) element. Lower
jet fuel flow rates result in longer contact times, which increases clay effectiveness.

126
 What are the issues?

Clay treatment also removes additives such as static dissipator (SDA) and corrosion
i
nhibitors, which may be required in the fuel by specification or customer agreement.
Therefore, clay treatment vessels should be located upstream of any additive injection
points, or re-dosing may be necessary.

If cartridges are not installed properly, aviation fuel can bypass the clay.

Without appropriate maintenance, there is a possibility that the clay bags or canisters
can suffer structural failure, releasing clay into the aviation fuel stream. Some sites have
i
nstalled a microfilter immediately downstream of the clay treatment vessel to intercept
any migrating clay.

The effectiveness of clay treatment should be regularly monitored. This is best done by
making comparative measurements of fuel properties that relate to the presence of
surface-active materials upstream and downstream of the clay treater.

Fuel properties that relate to the presence of surface-active materials

(and hence the effectiveness of clay treatment)

1. Conductivity can be used if the upstream fuel value is significant (>25 pS/m).
ASTM D 3948
Downstream conductivity should be lower than the upstream value.
Standard test
method for 2. Water Separability: If measured by MSEP (ASTM D 3948), the downstream value
determining water should be higher (better separability) than that for the upstream fuel, and close to
separation 100.
characteristics of
3. Interfacial Tension: The downstream value should be higher than the upstream
aviation turbine
fuel, unless the upstream fuel value is close to that of pure fuel.
fuels by portable
separometer. 4. The differential pressure reading should also be no more than 15 psi at rated flow,
to confirm that bed plugging (blocking of porous structure) has not occurred.

Note 15:
L.Z. Pillon, 2001, If any of the conditions in 1-4 above are not met, then the clay bed is probably
Surface active exhausted and should be changed. Furthermore, one or more of the following
properties of clay- observations from a FWS located downstream of a clay treatment vessel can also
treated jet fuels, i
ndicate that the clay bed is exhausted:
Petroleum
Science & • Disarmed filter/coalescer (surfactants not being removed)
Technology, 19,
• Significant volume of water drains (wet system/clay)
pp 1109-1118.
This paper • Brown water drains (surfactants not being removed)
highlights the
tendency for To maximise the life of clay cartridges, care should be taken to minimise exposure to
some surface- water and rust or other particulate matter. Water is attracted to the clay. Over time the
active water can disarm the clay and potentially flush adsorbed surfactants from the clay media
components in i the aviation fuel stream (Pillon, 2001)15. Excessive water contact can also cause
nto
the fuel to flow channelling and clay dispersion, resulting in high particulate content in the aviation
preferentially
fuel. If there is any chance of high water content in the aviation fuel to be clay treated, it
adsorb at the
si recommended to use coarse water separators or hay-packs upstream of the clay
fuel/water
treatment vessel to protect the clay bed. In refineries salt driers are often used.
interface rather
than on the clay
Particulate matter can disarm the clay by occluding adsorption sites on the surface of,
surface.
and within, the clay structure. Exposure to rust or particulate matter also plugs the clay

127
bed increasing the differential pressure. If there is any chance of high particulate matter
content in the jet fuel to be clay treated, it is recommended to install a microfilter
upstream of the clay treatment vessel to protect the clay bed.

For information on clay treatment at refineries see EI/JIG 1530.

128
 Annex G

Filter/coalescer disarming

Filter/coalescer disarming

Water dispersed in fuel is not very stable and will naturally separate over a
very short time. However, if the droplets are very small (micronic in size),
this will take too long because of their very slow settling velocity (many days
– see chapter 3) and so a separation device such as a coalescer has to be
used. The processes that occur within the coalescer are complex and
outside the remit of this publication, but essentially the droplets of water are
made to contact fibres within the coalescer, and after multiple collisions they
coalesce into larger droplets that can be easily settled out by gravity. The
presence of “surfactant” molecules in either the fuel, or the water phase, can
destroy this process rendering the device useless. In Figure G1 a
surfactant, known as Aerosol OT, was added to jet fuel and the effect on
water transmission through a coalescer measured. As can be seen, below
0,4 mg/l, (an extremely low concentration), coalescence is proceeding
satisfactorily with less than 30 ppm water being transmitted. However, at
concentrations above 0,4 mg/l Aerosol OT interferes with the coalescence
process, and above 0,8 mg/l the negative effects are so dramatic that none
of the water droplets are coalesced at all. This effect of surfactants has
been termed “coalescer disarming”.

Figure G1: Effect of fuel surfactant level on the water coalescence

performance of a commercial filter/coalescer

129
 For operators in the field, it is not possible to see the processes occurring
within the vessel and pipework, and the only indication that this is
happening would be high water transmission readings when using a water
detector, or haziness in fuel samples taken downstream. Figure G2
i
llustrates the difference in water drop sizes and fuel clarity between a
normally operating coalescer and one that is disarmed. The photographs
were taken looking through a test vessel with windows, showing the space
between the coalescer and the separator.

The industry has made many attempts to find ways of dealing with this
situation. Tests such as WSIM (Water Separation Index, Modified) and
MSEP® (Micro-separometer®) were developed to test coalescence of jet
fuel/water mixtures to predict the performance of installed systems. This
was partially successful, but it is now known that no single test can predict
coalescer disarming because there are multiple mechanisms which can
cause it.

EI 1581 5th edition has addressed the issues in part by increasing the
surfactant content of test fuels to drive the development of more surfactant
resistant coalescers. It is not currently known whether this has resulted in
products that have improved field performance.

Coalescer disarming will remain a challenge for this type of equipment for
many years to come, and was the main reason that filter monitors were
i
ntroduced. Filter monitors are not affected by surfactants in the same way
Good coalescence as coalescers and can stop water under conditions where coalescers are
disarmed.

The phenomenon seems to occur mostly in dry systems! This is probably a

consequence of the nature of the coalescer media – there is an affinity
between the chemistries of surfactants and the surfaces of the fibre media –
that results in a concentration of trace surfactants from the fuel onto the
media. The build up of surfactants can be released when free water passes
through the system, which can cause the water to form very fine droplets
that pass through coalescers and separators. In laboratory testing, disarmed
coalescers often recover coalescence performance when the surfactants
are “washed off”, indicating the reversible nature of the phenomenon. This is
not an option for field use. Visual water coalescence testing of used
coalescers was once quite popular for determining if coalescers were
disarmed. The difficulty in interpreting the results when used coalescers
from dry service showed a small puff of dispersed water, followed by good
coalescence performance, is one reason this testing has fallen out of favour.

Disarmed coalescer
Figure G2: Photographs to What can an operator do?
show the nature of
filter/coalescer disarming by • Always be aware of the limitations of FWSs.
surfactants dissolved in jet • Assume the filter/coalescer can be disarmed!
fuel
• Check the quality of the fuel downstream of the FWS regularly.

• Check samples from the sump for hazy fuel.

• In the future consider applying electronic sensors as an independent

check on the integrity of FWSs.

130
 Annex H

Super-absorbent polymer
(SAP)

As noted in chapter 9 the water removal performance

of filter monitor elements that comply with the
mandatory requirements of EI 1583 may become
degraded to a level that is unacceptable if the design is
sensitive to certain operational parameters.

The removal by absorption of water from fuel relies on chemical interactions that can be
disrupted by extraneous agents. The performance of filter monitor elements that comply
with the mandatory requirements of EI 1583 may also be sensitive to certain
environmental or operational conditions, such as low temperatures or high salinity of free
water. Filter monitor elements may differ in design in the selection of filtration and water
absorbing materials. Different water absorbing materials may respond differently to field
parameters such as free water content, fuel/water temperature, the salinity of free water,
and the presence of trace contaminants. Further, the possibility of filter monitor elements
releasing SAP into the fuel stream (SAP migration) can depend upon materials
selection, element design, element production methods, environmental and operational
factors. This annex provides details regarding issues suspected or known to impact the
performance of filter monitors in service. It is recommended that these issues be
addressed between the user and manufacturer to ensure that the performance
capabilities of the filtration equipment are suitable for the intended application.

Current designs of filter monitor elements incorporate SAP to provide water-removal and
water-stopping performance. Under many different operational conditions and over
many years of use, the technology has proved reliable in preventing the uplift of
contaminated fuel to aircraft during refuelling. However, there have been instances of
loss in performance of this type of filter that have eluded explanation that would have led
to remedies.

Known or suspected issues that impact SAP performance:

• Water-soluble components – Impure water, such as that containing dissolved

salts, is absorbed by SAP more slowly and to a lesser extent than pure water. Filter
monitor elements may not be capable of effectively stopping an impure water slug.
Operators should use monitors with care if it is possible that the water phase may
contain a solute. Note EI 1583 6th edition includes a category of monitor (HS for

131
 ‘High Salt’) that is qualified using synthetic seawater (all categories are required to
pass a 50 ppm water challenge containing 0,5 % NaCl).

• pH – The water absorption of SAP can vary with the pH of the water. Note that it is
also possible, in principle, for acidic or basic components in fuel to ion exchange
with the active sites of the SAP reducing its water absorption capacity.
• Cross-linking – Some level of cross-linking is essential in the manufacture of SAP
to stabilise it. However, multivalent cations, such as calcium or magnesium (e.g.
from seawater), are known to cause additional cross-linking that reduces the ability
of SAP to absorb water. There may be a multivalent cation concentration in water
above which a filter monitor element cannot stop a contaminated water slug.
• Degradation – SAP is known to degrade by a number of mechanisms including
those related to thermal, hydrolytic, freeze/thaw cycles, stop-start cycling, low flow
and electrostatic processes.
• Temperature response – Water is absorbed by SAPs at rates which vary with
temperature. Specifically as the ambient temperature approaches freezing, water
absorption rates have been found to decrease. Around freezing a filter monitor
element may not stop a water slug depending upon the materials and design of the
element. At temperatures below freezing, in the absence of solutes, water (now ice)
is removed by a filtration process rather than by absorbency. Testing of filter monitor
elements suggests that this issue, by itself, is adequately controlled. However, it is
not possible to dismiss temperature as a factor when other challenges are also
present.

EI 1583 5th edition included optional performance experiments, covering some of the
above topics, that may give additional characterisation of filter monitor element
performance under laboratory conditions. Any data generated are requested to be
provided to the EI (www.energyinst.or.uk/filtration).

132
 Annex I

Conversion of filter/water
separator vessels for use
with microfilter elements

Many filter/water separators are used in fuel receipt

applications where the risk of contamination by water is
minimal but particulate matter loading may be high. It is
possible for a FWS to be converted to a microfilter by
any of three schemes.

FWS vessels with side-by-side or concentrically configured elements

These vessels may be converted by installing out-to-in flow microfilter elements on the
separator (outlet) stools. A disadvantage of this method is that capacity may be limited
because usually there are relatively few separator stools in a FWS vessel. Other
disadvantages are based on the fact that microfilter elements are made in relatively few
lengths compared with separator elements. Thus, in some situations, either a shorter
microfilter than desired has to be selected, or new tie rods of a different length installed
to complete the conversion.

A preferable method is to install out-to-in flow microfilter elements on the filter/coalescer

stools and reverse the direction of fuel flow through the vessel (causing the separator
stools to become the inlet). This method combines the benefits of the previous method,
while avoiding the disadvantages. Note that items such as flow markings and differential
pressure gauge connections require attention when vessel flow is reversed.

FWS vessels with end-opposed elements

If an element mounting/sandwich plate is fitted between the cover and vessel shell, the
conversion should generally be such that the microfilter elements are fitted to the plate
at the opposite end. The sandwich plate can then be removed, any hinges being
modified to suit.

With elements mounted at only one end of the vessel, greater length is available for
elements. Accordingly, the flow capacity can be increased or, for a given flow rate, fewer
long elements used (vacant ports blanked off). There is less flexibility to do this with
side-opening vessels because of reduced access for element installation.

133
Spider plates

In modified vessels, where the capped ends of the microfilter elements do not align with
the existing spider mounting lugs welded to the vessel, support for the spider can be
achieved by adding adjustable bars, capped with rubber sleeves. The electrical
resistance between the spider and an earth point on the vessel (not the mounting rods)
should be measured to confirm that it is 10 ohms or less. If it is not, a separate bonding
wire should be connected between the spider and the original support lug.

Requirement for vessel conversion plate on vessel

As described in Chapter 13, it is a requirement of EI 1596 2 nd edition, and considered

good practice, for FWS vessels that have been converted for use as microfilter systems
to be fitted with a third data plate. Note: It is not appropriate for the original vessel data
plate to be removed, as this provides critical design pressure information.

134
 Annex J
Conversion of filter/water
separator or microfilter
vessels for use with filter
monitor elements

A vessel built for use as a FWS or microfilter can, in

most cases, be converted for use with filter monitor
elements. The following information is applicable to the
majority of FWS vessel types.

In most cases the design differential pressure rating of the element mounting plate or
manifold is lower than the 225 psi (15,5 bar) required for filter monitors. Additional fittings
are required to prevent pressure surges from damaging the mounting plate or manifold,
which can cause bypassing. Typically, this comprises a pneumatic or electrical switch
triggered by a differential pressure of 29 psi (2 bar) and linked to stop fuel flow (e.g.
close a valve or stop a pump).

The switch should be a ‘lock-off’ type i.e. once it has been activated, it should stay in
that position. The reset mechanism should be lockable or accessible only with the use of
tools. The arrangement should also include isolating and drain valves to enable
simulation of a high differential pressure for routine test purposes.

50 mm (2 in.) and 150 mm (6 in.) conversions

For 50 mm (2 in.) nominal diameter elements it is possible to use a manifold designed to

accommodate a cluster of five elements which fits onto the original mounting for an 89
mm (3,5 in.) inside diameter open-ended separator element.

This arrangement, using as many manifolds as necessary for the required flow rate,
together with blanking caps, can generally be used in side opening FWS with an end-
opposed coalescer/separator configuration, and also in side-by-side designs where
there are sufficient separator mounting stools.

With end opening horizontal filter/water separators having end-opposed elements and a
sandwich plate between the cover and vessel shell, it is preferable to install monitor
elements on the plate at the rear of the vessel. The sandwich plate can then be removed
completely and the cover hinges altered to suit.

In the case of 150 mm (6 in.) nominal diameter elements, there is a choice of using out-
to-in or in-to-out models. Those selected will depend on the required flow direction.

135
Where the flow is from out-to-in, a manifold holding five x 50 mm (2 in.) elements may
also be used (as above).

Figure J1: Simple vessel conversion in which 150 mm diameter filter/coalescer

elements are directly replaced by filter monitor elements with equivalent in-to-out
flow format
Figure J1 shows the simplest form of conversion where 150 mm diameter in-to-out flow
monitor elements have directly replaced the 150 mm diameter filter/coalescers which
also have an in-to-out flow format.

To enable the use of out-to-in flow monitors, they should be mounted at the outlet of the
vessel either directly on the separator mounting stools, or on a specific manifold
mounted on the separator stools with an increased number of element positions. This
applies to either 50 mm (2 in.) diameter elements or 150 mm (6 in.) out-to-in flow
elements (see Figures J2 and J3). However, most end opening FWS with a side-by-side
coalescer/separator arrangement have a limited number of outlet ports, or utilise a
manifold with perhaps one to three separator elements. In this case, accommodating the
number and/or length of monitors to achieve the desired flow usually requires mounting
150 mm out-to-in elements in place of the filter/coalescers and reversing the flow
through the vessel.

Figure J2: Separator stool manifold conversion for 50 mm diameter filter monitor
elements

136
Figure J3: Separator stool manifold conversion for 150 mm diameter out-to-in
filter monitor elements

Vessels with a large basket-type separator element can also be modified with a new
manifold installed on the outlet position (see Figures J4 and J5).

Figure J4: FWS vessel with large basket-type separator before conversion

Figure J5: Vessel in Figure J4 showing outlet manifold conversion for 50 mm

diameter filter monitor elements

137
 Annex K

Low point sampling/draining

Although this publication focuses on the application of

filtration systems in the aviation fuel handling system,
it should be recognised that manual low point
sampling and draining procedures are also vital to the
maintenance of fuel cleanliness.

For example, the removal of low levels (parts per million) of water by a FWS is a
normal operating mode. Over time, the level of coalesced water in the sump of a FWS
will rise and there will be a need to drain the water. This is normal operation. If the
water is not drained from the sumps of vessels, and low points of tanks and pipelines,
then large amounts of bulk water (“slugs”), can find their way into the handling system.

Because FWS may become disarmed by contaminants or naturally occurring

surfactants, it should not be assumed that they remove all free water. It is
recommended that an independent system, such as visual inspection of sump drains,
be used with fuel receipts to ensure that particulate matter and free water
contamination is controlled. Similarly it should not be assumed that filter monitor
elements will remove all free water from fuel. Filter monitor vessel sumps should
therefore be checked and drained daily when the system is in use/pressurised.

On-site tests for A final point to highlight is that stagnant water bottoms in any fuel system can harbour
microbes in fuel are microbiological growths leading to fuel contamination and tank corrosion. For this
available. For reason airport fuel storage should be managed with a regular programme of water
further information bottom removal to deprive microbes of conditions needed for growth. Water drains
contact should be inspected for signs of microbiological contamination (foul sulfurous odours
info@energyinst.org and debris) to identify a problem before it becomes disruptive.

There is also operator’s experience of free water contamination of fuel in a refueller

being caused by blockage of drainage channels on the top of the tank. This may be
caused by leaves, snow, ice and other debris. Pooled water over the recessed manlid
may seep into tanks through any minor defects in manlid seals. It is therefore
recommended that checks be made after heavy rain, or when the vehicle has been
washed, to confirm that water has not entered the tank.

138
Table K1: Recommended low point sampling/draining

Low point sampling of:

• Storage tanks

• Filter vessels (including strainers)

• Hydrants

• Into-plane fuelling equipment

139
 Annex L

Electrical resistance
measurement procedure for
filter vessels

EI specifications require all metal items inside the

vessel (and elements) to be in electrical contact with
each other and the vessel and its supporting
chassis/frame. The resistance between any two items
must be less than 10 ohms.

Introduction

This annex provides a procedure for performing electrical resistance measurements to

identify the presence of any isolated internal components (unbonded charge collectors)
in a filter vessel. The procedure indicates a general approach, but each vessel should
be treated on an individual basis because of the differences in designs and materials
used. The procedure addresses only resistance measurements within the vessel; other
earthing and conductivity checks required for the vessel when installed on a vehicle
should also be undertaken. Further information on these should be sought from
equipment suppliers.

The key requirement in avoiding the presence of unbonded charge collectors is to

ensure that there is electrical continuity between all metal components within a vessel.

It is intended that this procedure will be performed only by personnel who are
competent and trained to undertake such tasks. It is recommended that this procedure
is performed by the vessel manufacturer, and for mobile applications, the manufacturer
of the vehicle upon which the vessel is mounted.

If filter monitor Safety considerations

elements are
removed from a
vessel to conduct If the ambient temperature is near or above the flash point of fuel then the test
this test (with the procedure should NOT be performed unless fuel residue/vapour is entirely absent or a
intention to reinstall meter is used that is certified safe to use in a hazardous area. The method assumes:
them), it is
important that they • That all the relevant safety precautions that are normally taken during routine
are kept in a fuel- maintenance are observed.
wetted condition by • Normal safety precautions will be observed when using electrical equipment
placing in a including work permits.
container of clean
dry fuel. If elements • The correct personal protective equipment is used.

140
are allowed to dry, • The vessel is drained of fuel, and if possible the vessel is allowed to vent to
they should be release any hydrocarbon vapours.
discarded.

Equipment required

The following equipment is needed for this procedure:

Meter: It is preferable to use an insulation tester (500 V minimum, e.g. megger)

reading to at least 10 MΩ. The high probe voltage of a megger helps to reduce
interference from hydrocarbon films and oxide surface coatings. However, any
continuity tester capable of measuring 10 MΩ resistance will give an acceptable
indication of electrical continuity if used with adequate care and persistence.

Reference connection: A reference connection is an electrically continuous

connection from one terminal of the meter to an earth reference point. It is
recommended to use one of the vessel support feet as the reference point. The
connection to the reference point should be bolted or made via a secure clamp.

Test probe: The test probe should consist of a strong, sharp point mounted on a long
pole that can reach inside the vessel (Figure L2). The test probe should be connected
to the other terminal of the meter by an insulated cable. The pole and cable should be
long enough to allow free access to all points inside the vessel.

Issues to consider prior to measurement

• Electrical continuity needs to be established at the reference point. Paint and

coatings may need to be removed to achieve this.

• A good contact to each tested component is essential. In some cases paint/epoxy

coatings may need to be removed. In the case of aluminium vessels careful
consideration will need to be given where metal bushes (bushings) are installed, or
if oxides have formed (although the probe will probably be able to pierce the oxide
layer with firm pressure and the 500 V+ test equipment will break down thin oxide
coatings).

• Care is required to ensure that the disassembly process does not isolate any well-
bonded items before they can be measured (i.e. test each item before any objects
that might provide a bonding link are removed).
• The list of items to be tested should include large fixing bolts and threaded rods. It
may not be necessary to test small fixing bolts.

Testing procedure (based on a filter monitor vessel)

Perform steps 1 to 7 (see Figure L1 for explanation of any of the following terms):

1) Attach the reference point connection to a suitable location, such as one of the
vessel support feet. Connect the reference point and the probe to the meter.

2) Before opening the lid/end cover check the resistance to the outside of the lid/end
cover.

3) Open the lid/end cover and check the resistance to the:

A. Pressure plate/interlock or spider (if fitted).

141
 B. Any detachable components on the pressure plate or spider (measure these
individually).
4) Remove pressure plate/interlock or spider and check the resistance to:

A. Each screw rod or other mounting plate fitting (unless welded to case),

B. The inlet fuel deflector if fitted and accessible (defer until later if not
accessible), and

C. The support plate (when in position if removeable).

5) Remove elements and support plate if appropriate and check the resistance to:

A. The manifold plate, and

B. The check valves or inserts in manifold plate (individually).

6) Check the resistance to the inlet fuel deflector, if previously inaccessible, and any
other features not previously checked.

7) If no unbonded charge collectors are found then reassemble the vessel, checking
the resistance of metal pieces as they are reinstalled.

Figure L1: A typical vessel

142
Figure L2: Test probe

143
 Annex M

Concept of aviation fuel

regulation

The following is a generic description of regulation of

aviation fuel used for commercial service.

Commercial aviation activities are regulated in most countries by Government

Agencies and Federal Authorities that oversee aviation hardware, maintenance, and
operation. Such oversight typically focuses on manufacturers with respect to the
design and construction of aircraft and operators (airlines) for maintenance and
operation procedures.
In regulatory terms aviation fuel generally is considered a disposable item regulated
quite differently than aviation hardware. For example, while the US Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) does not directly control aviation fuel specifications, quality or
cleanliness, it does require an aircraft manufacturer to state which of the available
industry specification fuels16 are appropriate for use in a given aircraft model and
provide data demonstrating that the aircraft can operate safely on those fuels. When
the FAA accepts these data the aircraft is said to be certified for operation on those
specified fuels which are listed by the manufacturer in the aircraft operating manual.
FAA regulations do not permit the use of other fuels in commercial service. Operators
Note 16: are responsible for observing these limitations in the use of the aircraft. (Note that the
The major
above description of the typical situation does not necessarily cover the application of
international
“Supplemental Type Certificates”.)
aviation fuel
specifications for jet As described in chapter 3, fuel cleanliness is not well defined by aviation industry fuel
A/A-1 jet fuel are
specifications, even though it is important in aviation operations, because usually
ASTM D 1655 and
Def. Stan. 91-91. cleanliness directly results from fuel handling practices, not from intrinsic fuel
properties at the point of production. Normally operators declare their fuel handling
procedures, which are then accepted by the appropriate regulatory agency as required
procedures and become subject to regulatory oversight. Both ATA (Air Transport
Association of America) and IATA airline trade associations write, or endorse, fuel
handling guidelines that are usually incorporated into operator procedures by
reference. For example, an operator in the US usually states in his contract with the
fuel supplier that he handles fuel according to ATA 103. This causes compliance with
ATA 103 guidance procedures to be mandatory, subject to FAA audit, for the operator.

Aviation fuel handling procedures upstream of the aviation operator usually are not
directly subject to regulatory oversight; however, most entities handling aviation fuel
have a well defined set of procedures. The most important of these are the JIG (Joint
Inspection Group) Guidelines commonly used where three or more suppliers operate
in partnership and endorsed by IATA. (However, the JIG Guidelines are usually not
used in the US.) The application of an agreed set of handling procedures is usually
mandated by the supply contract between the aviation operator and its supplier. Other
common aviation fuel handling guidelines include ATA 103 and specific supplier
procedures.

144
 Annex N

Definitions

The following definitions apply in this publication:

Aviation fuel The infrastructure required to safely distribute aviation fuel from its point of manufacture
handling system to its point of use. Can be sub-divided into ‘manufacture’, ‘distribution’ and ‘supply’.

Batch After production at a refinery, aviation fuel is required to be analysed and certified. This
process has to be undertaken on the quantity of fuel contained in a single storage tank,
rather than continuously, so once analysed and certified as aviation fuel, that material is
described as a batch.

Cartridge See element.

Commercial The supply of aviation fuel to a company that typically operates a fleet of aircraft for the
transport of paying passengers or freight, such as major international airlines.

Components used Any type of filter or electronic sensor.

for fuel cleanliness
control

Corrected The measured pressure across the vessel at the measured flow rate, after correcting the
differential rated flow of the vessel.
pressure

Deep-bed filtration A filter with multiple layers of fibres (three-dimensional).

Electronic sensor An automated device for the detection of particulate matter and/or free water.

Element Term used to describe the ‘disposable’ part of a filter (for either a filter monitor,
filter/coalescer, separator, microfilter or dirt defence filter). Also referred to as a
cartridge.

Filter/coalescer An element that contains a porous media through which fuel is passed to remove free
element water by causing very small droplets of water to form larger drops (coalesce) which
separate from fuel by gravity. Typically made from fibre-glass. Coalescers also contain
pleated filter media for the removal of fine particulate matter.

145
Filter monitor An element that contains water-absorbent media (super-absorbent polymer) that
element removes small amounts of free water from fuel, and is designed to restrict the flow of
fuel through it if it is exposed to bulk water. Also has limited particulate matter removal
capacity.

Filter monitor A vessel containing a number of filter monitor elements.

system

Filter/water A vessel that contains filter/coalescer elements to remove solid particulate matter and to
separator coalesce fine dispersed water droplets, and separator elements to prevent coalesced
water droplets from passing downstream of the vessel. Free water from the fuel collects
in the sump of the vessel from where it must be periodically drained.

Free water Any water in fuel that is not dissolved. Can occur as finely dispersed droplets or in larger
quantities as bulk water.

Full-scale test A laboratory qualification test of a vessel containing multiple elements at a flow rate
representative of that experienced in service.

In-to-out Description of the direction of fuel flow across a filter element. The only filter elements
designed for in-to-out flow are filter/coalescers and 150 mm (6 in.) nominal diameter
filter monitor elements.

Into-plane Term used by fuel handling companies to describe the point of delivery of fuel to an
aircraft. Also sometimes referred to as into-wing.

Into-wing See into-plane.

Microfilter element Elements, typically of a pleated paper design, that have a very high particulate matter
holding capacity, and are rated to remove a nominal minimum particle size (in microns).

Microfilter system A vessel equipped with microfilter elements. Typically applied for the gross removal of
particulate matter to protect more sophisticated (and expensive), filter/water separators.
Note: Microfilters have no water removal capability. Also referred to as a ‘prefilter’, a
‘micronic filter’, or as ‘pre-filtration’.

Out-to-in Description of the direction of fuel flow across a filter element. Filter elements that are
designed for out-to-in flow are 50 mm (2 in.) and 150 mm (6 in.) nominal diameter filter
monitor elements, microfilter elements, dirt defence filter elements and separators used
in filter/water separators.

Particulate matter Solid material found in fuel, typically mostly rust and silica.

Rated flow The flow per unit of length of an element below which the limits of EI specifications can
be met.

Separator A simple water-repelling (hydrophobic) screen (element), that prevents water droplets
from passing downstream of the vessel.

Single-element test A laboratory qualification test of one filter element, or in the case of a filter/water
separator, a combination of one filter/coalescer and one separator.

Three-stage A vessel containing filter coalescers and separators, with filter monitor elements located
filtration inside separators.

146