Application Note: PPS 21-5102 Permeation

Water vapor transmission through

metalized films
Measuring the water vapor transmission rate (WVTR)
of metalized films can be difficult. Inconsistencies in data
are typically blamed on the methods, conditions,
and instruments used to conduct the tests. The WVTR can
continue to climb even after 100 hours of testing when
subjected to extreme relative humidity (RH).

A study was conducted to develop a WVTR/RH profile Table 1. Study results comparing the calculated Fickian behavior
of a seemingly Fickian material and also compare and the actual WVTR results.
WVTR across various test methods and instruments. WVTR/Relative Humidity Profile Study Results
The objective of this study was to minimize variation 2.5
in lab to lab comparison of WVTR data and produce
2
meaningful and comparable results.

WVTR g/(m2 • day)

1.5

In the first part of the study a 75 gauge OPP/Print & 1

Adhesive/48 gauge met-PET (corona treatment under 0.5

the metal) material was chosen as the test sample 0
because of its apparent Fickian nature. Fickian refers 50 60 70 80 90 100

to a material and permeant relationship where the Driving Force (%RH)

diffusion rate does not change with concentration Actual WVTR Predicted Fickian Behavior

or time. Accordingly, the WVTR of a Fickian material is
linear with RH. The sample was tested at 50%, 75%,
90%, and 100% followed by 50% RH according to ASTM
F1249 on a MOCON® PERMATRAN-W® Model 3/33.
The tests were conducted for 48 hours at each level in
the order listed above. According to this method, one
side of the sample was challenged with a constant, specific
RH while the flux on the other side was swept into a
modulated infrared detector and quantified.
The results are shown in Table 1. When compared
with the predicted Fickian response as shown in Figure
1, the material clearly acted in a non-Fickian manner. Higher
RH conditions had a greater impact on the barrier
quality of the material than lower RH conditions. In addition,
the moisture barrier was not recoverable at the 50%
RH level after being exposed to 100% RH.
Figure 1. The calculated Fickian behavior vs. the average of the
actual WVTR.
In the second part of the study, the current ASTM test
methods for measuring WVTR were evaluated. The same
material was evaluated according to ASTM F1249, E398,
and E96 under like conditions. For the F1249 tests, the
PERMATRAN-W Model 3/33 and the PERMATRAN-W
Model 700 were used, and for the E398 tests, the
PERMATRAN-W Model 398 was used. Because of
method requirements and instrument limitations,
methods F1249 and E398 were compared using the
PERMATRAN-W Model 3/33 and the PERMATRAN-W
Model 398, respectively, at 90% RH.
The results are shown below in Table 2. Those obtained
by different instruments match closely when tested at
the same RH, but they are not necessarily comparable
across different RH conditions. Also, gravimetric
results correlate with those obtained using a test instrument
when testing at 100% RH.

08.10.15
Application Note # 21-5102 Water vapor transmission through metalized films

Table 2. Evaluation results of current ASTM test methods.

Overall, this study shows that it is not always possible

to extrapolate WVTR results from one RH condition
to another due to non-Fickian behavior. Therefore, in
order to minimize data variation in lab to lab comparisons,
it is important to test at precise, lower RH levels such
as 75% if extrapolations will be made.

Minneapolis, MN 55428 USA

Phone: 763.493.6370
Email: info@mocon.com
www.mocon.com

Copyright 2015 MOCON Inc. All rights reserved.

MOCON and PERMATRAN-W are registered trademarks of MOCON Inc.