by Sara McCaslin Sara McCaslin No Comments

The Two Failure Modes That Define Hydrogen Sealing

Hydrogen infrastructure, including electrolyzers, refueling stations, fuel cells, storage and distribution, is rapidly scaling, and seal manufacturers are responding with dedicated hydrogen product lines. But hydrogen is not just “another gas to seal against.” Its molecular size and behavior create two distinct failure modes that do not appear with conventional gases, and a seal rated “hydrogen compatible” on a generic datasheet can still fail in service if the selection does not account for the specific duty cycle.

Failure Mode One: Permeation

Hydrogen has an extremely small molecular size. So small, in fact, that it can diffuse through elastomers far more readily than larger gas molecules; this is a diffusion problem rather than a chemical attack problem: the elastomer is simply not an effective barrier, as opposed to degrading. 

Permeation is a serious issue in hydrogen sealing solutions. It reduces system efficiency by causing hydrogen loss, poses serious safety risks in enclosed spaces, and can, over time, contribute to internal damage as the gas accumulates within the polymer matrix.

FKM generally exhibits lower hydrogen diffusivity than NBR or EPDM, though all common elastomers permeate to some degree. Keep in mind that this is a matter of degree, not absolute barrier vs. non-barrier. There is, however, a better polymer barrier material.

PTFE is virtually inert to hydrogen with markedly lower permeation than any common elastomer, which is why it has become the default choice as pressure and criticality increase

Failure Mode Two: Rapid Gas Decompression (RGD)

Rapid gas decompression (RGD) is the failure mode most specific to hydrogen sealing and the one most likely to be underappreciated by engineers accustomed to conventional gas sealing. In this failure mode, hydrogen molecules that have diffused into the elastomer during sustained high-pressure exposure need time to escape when pressure drops; if depressurization happens faster than the gas can diffuse back out, it becomes trapped and forms internal voids, blisters, or cracks as it expands within the material.

This is also an instance where the failure mode is not solely a chemical compatibility issue. A material can be chemically compatible with hydrogen yet still fail catastrophically under rapid depressurization (RGD) if the duty cycle involves fast pressure drops. This highlights the importance of understanding the kinetics of gas escape and the mechanical response of the seal material.

This is why RGD damage can range from subsurface blistering to structural rupture, especially in high-pressure hydrogen systems such as fueling stations, electrolyzer connections, and pipeline seals. Recognizing these failure modes is essential for preventing field failures during pressure cycling, which are common in applications like rapid fueling or frequent pressure adjustments.

Material Selection Is Not One-Size-Fits-All

Here are some suggested material selections.

EPDM (Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer)

This is often the default for lower-demand applications, and specifically for alkaline electrolyzers, offering good general hydrogen compatibility and low-temperature flexibility at a reasonable cost. It exhibits excellent low-temperature flexibility, a good compression set, and resistance to alkaline media. However, it has a higher hydrogen gas permeation rate than some other options, namely fluoropolymers such as PTFE. It is primarily used with alkaline electrolyzers (AEL/AEM), water/coolant loops, low-pressure distribution, and low-temperature static seals.

FKM (Fluoroelastomer / Viton)

FKM is favored where chemical resistance matters more broadly (e.g., acidic environments in PEM electrolyzer balance-of-plant). However, it is incompatible with certain hydrogen-adjacent process chemistries, where EPDM may be required instead. It exhibits very low hydrogen permeation compared with synthetic rubbers and has excellent thermal stability across a wide temperature range. However, it becomes brittle at extremely low temperatures, which can lead to leakage during cold thermal cycling. Note that FKM and EPDM are not interchangeable substitutes for each other. It is often used with PEM fuel cells and PEM electrolyzers (oxygen-side/stack sealing), high-temperature gas processing, and high-pressure static connections.

HNBR (Hydrogenated Nitrile Butadiene Rubber )

This material is often specified for fueling-station dispenser seals where low-temperature performance (down to around -40°C) matters, since dispensing frequently involves pre-cooled hydrogen. It has excellent mechanical strength, wear resistance, and extrusion resistance. It is also highly resistant to RGD when compounded properly and retains its flexibility at low temperatures. However, it has a moderate hydrogen permeation rate, and its continuous-use temperature is capped at 300°F. HNBR is commonly used for high-pressure hydrogen valves, compressors, sour gas blends, and pipeline seals, as well as dynamic applications subject to rapid cycling

PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene)

PTFE is the default across nearly all pressure tiers once RGD resistance and minimal permeation become priorities. It is inert, low-permeation, and functional across an unusually wide temperature range, though it comes with its own design considerations. It is non-elastic in the sense that it has no inherent memory. It is also prone to creep under continuous pressure loads. Note that it is typically used in energized seal configurations rather than as a standalone elastomer substitute. . It is often used with spring-energized dynamic shaft/stem seals in high-pressure valves, cryogenic liquid hydrogen valves, compressor packing rings, and anti-extrusion back-up rings..

Material Selection and the Duty Cycle

Material selection must consider the actual duty cycle, including pressure cycling frequency, depressurization rates, and temperature swings, rather than relying solely on a generic ‘hydrogen compatible’ rating. For example, two systems operating at the same peak pressure may have vastly different RGD risks depending on their depressurization speed and cycling frequency, which directly impact seal longevity.

Conclusion

Hydrogen sealing involves two key failure modes, permeation and RGD, and understanding these helps engineers feel more equipped to select appropriate materials as infrastructure scales. If you need further assistance finding an effective, reliable sealing solution for your system, contact the sealing experts here at Advanced EMC.

by Sara McCaslin Sara McCaslin No Comments

Kynar (PVDF) vs. PTFE: Choosing the Right Fluoropolymer for Fluid Handling Seals


A specification that simply calls out “flouropolymer” is quite incomplete. PVDF and PTFE are both fluoropolymers and grouped under that umbrella term, but they are quite different. When it comes to mechanical and chemical behavior, specifying the wrong material can lead to premature seal failure and expensive downtime. The objective of this blog post is to provide a clear, practical basis for determining which material is the most appropriate.

How PVDF and PTFE Are the Same

Both PVDF (Kynar) and PTFE (Teflon) resist a broad range of acids and solvents, and both handle highly elevated temperatures better than elastomers. They also share low coefficients of friction, low surface adhesion, and non-stick properties. And both have their own specialties in fluid-handling applications.

Where PVDF Pulls Ahead of PTFE 

PVDF (Polyvinylidene Fluoride) has distinct advantages over PTFE (Polytetrafluoroethylene). It exhibits better mechanical strength than PTFE (by about 2-3x) and has excellent abrasion resistance, which means it can hold up better under slurry or particulate-laden fluid flow. Wear resistance is another property of PVDF that excels over PTFE, especially in dynamic seal contact, such as wear sleeves and piston rings.  It also exhibits lower cold flow and creep under compression, which is very important for seal performance over time under sustained load. 

Finally, PTFE might be more expensive than the equivalent PVDF stock. While PTFE stock is inexpensive, PVDF is melt-processable. Being melt-processable can make PVDF vastly more cost-effective for high-volume molded parts.

Where PVDF Loses Against PTFE

PTFE has an extremely low coefficient of friction compared to PVDF (0.04-0.10 vs. 0.15-0.30). And in the presence of high-pH caustics and strong bases, PTFE performs without issue, whereas PVDF begins to degrade. There are also polar solvents, amines, fuming acids, and some ketones that attack PVDF’s chemical structure and polymer chain. PVDF’s chemical resistance chart has real gaps where PTFE’s is closer to “resistant to everything below its temp limit.” Always check material compatibility at your actual operating temperature, not ambient temperature. It is a fact that many “resistant” ratings degrade at elevated temperatures.

PVDF vs PTFE – Who Wins?

The table below summarizes the similarities and differences between PVDF and PTFE.

*Values are approximate; exact values are based on material grade and blend

* PVDF: Lower for high-volume molding; PTFE: Lower for machined stock

Decision framework

Here is a checklist for fluid handling engineers choosing between PVDF and PTFE:

  1. What’s touching the seal? Check for a strong base or problem solvent first; if it is present, PTFE wins outright
  2. Is there abrasive/particulate content or high dynamic wear? If so, lean toward PVDF if  the compatibility allows
  3. Is the seal under sustained compressive load where creep matters? If so, lean toward PVDF
  4. Static seal, clean chemistry, wide chemical exposure risk (multi-product lines, CIP/COP)? PTFE is the safer default.

The figures below show examples of where each material performs best.

Conclusion

Borderline cases with mixed process streams, elevated-temperature caustics, or unusual solvent blends are exactly where a materials engineer should get involved before committing to tooling. It is always cheaper to change a decision on paper than after seals are cut. Advanced EMC is here to help you choose the right material and seal for your fluid-handling challenges. And keep in mind that Advanced EMC offers several material options if neither material is a fit.