Call us : 406-227-0477

Liquid Helium/Cryo/High Radiation

Engineering Research Report: Advanced Sealing Architectures for Liquid Helium Cryogenic Systems under High-Radiation ConditionsM-cor logo

1. Executive Overview and Operational Context

The construction of a new cryogenic system for a linear accelerator at Fermilab National Accelerator Laboratory represents one of the most demanding engineering challenges in modern fluid handling. The specified relief valve flange seals must maintain integrity at the intersection of three extreme physical regimes: deep cryogenic temperatures characteristic of liquid helium (LHe), high-vacuum environments essential for beamline purity, and cumulative ionizing radiation exposure over a multi-decade operational lifespan. This report provides a comprehensive materials science and tribological analysis to recommend the optimal core and jacket materials for these seals, specifically addressing the user’s constraints regarding sizes -023, -028, -245, -238, -254, and -247.

The operational parameters defined—vacuum (30 mbar) to 3.1 bar g pressure cycling, temperatures approaching 4 Kelvin (-269°C, noted as -420°F/-251°C in the query), and a total ionizing dose (TID) of 85 kGy—effectively eliminate the vast majority of commercial sealing elastomers and standard thermoplastics. While 85 kGy is a moderate dose for metals and ceramics, it lies in a critical transition zone for fluoropolymers, where degradation mechanisms such as chain scission and oxidative embrittlement can lead to catastrophic failure.1 Furthermore, the requirement to seal helium, a monatomic gas with the smallest atomic radius and lowest viscosity of any fluid, necessitates seal materials with exceptionally low permeability and high conformability, properties that are often diametrically opposed to the high modulus and hardness required for radiation resistance.

This report critically evaluates the user’s proposed solutions—an ETFE-encapsulated O-ring and a stainless steel vented encapsulated seal—and contrasts them with advanced Spring-Energized Seal (SES) architectures. The analysis draws heavily on heritage data from the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) at CERN and NASA’s deep space propulsion programs, where similar conditions of superfluid helium containment and radiation exposure are encountered.2

The findings indicate that while ETFE offers superior radiation resistance compared to PTFE, its cryogenic ductility at 4 Kelvin is insufficient to guarantee leak-free performance during thermal cycling. Consequently, this report recommends a divergence from the “encapsulated O-ring” concept (which relies on an elastomeric core that freezes at cryogenic temperatures) toward a Spring-Energized Seal (SES) utilizing a Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) or Modified Polyimide (Vespel® SP-21) jacket energized by an Elgiloy® helical spring. This architecture decouples the sealing force from the thermal contraction of the polymer, ensuring consistent gland contact throughout the 30-year service life.

2. Physics of the Operating Environment

To select the appropriate materials, one must first deconstruct the failure modes induced by the specific environmental stressors present in the Fermilab linear accelerator application.

2.1 The Cryogenic Challenge: Liquid Helium at 4 Kelvin

The query specifies a temperature range extending to -420°F (-251°C). It is critical to note that Liquid Helium (LHe) boils at 4.2 K (-269°C) at 1 atmosphere. In accelerator applications, superfluid helium (He II) is often utilized at 1.9 K to maximize the efficiency of superconducting magnets.4 Sealing systems for relief valves must effectively function at these absolute extremes, as the valve seats and flanges will thermally equilibrate with the cryogenic fluid during static hold or relief events.

At 4 Kelvin, the physics of polymer behavior changes thoroughly.

  • Glass Transition and Embrittlement: All elastomers (Nitrile, Viton®, Silicone) and most thermoplastics pass through their glass transition temperature ($T_g$) well above cryogenic conditions. Below $T_g$, the amorphous polymer chains lose their mobility, and the material transforms from a rubbery, compliant solid to a rigid, glass-like substance. For a standard encapsulated O-ring, the core—typically Silicone or FKM—freezes effectively solid below -60°C. At 4 K, it retains zero elastic recovery or “memory.” If the seal is deformed by the flange, it will not rebound; if the flange faces separate due to thermal contraction, the frozen core cannot expand to bridge the gap, leading to immediate leakage.5
  • Thermal Contraction Mismatch: A fundamental challenge in cryogenic sealing is the Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (CTE) mismatch. Polymers typically exhibit a CTE that is an order of magnitude higher than metals. As the stainless steel or aluminum flange cools from ambient (293 K) to 4 K, it contracts. The polymer seal contracts much more. Without an external energizing force (like a metal spring), the polymer seal will pull away from the gland walls, creating a leak path.7
  • Helium Permeability: Helium atoms are small enough (approx. 140 pm kinetic diameter) to diffuse through the intermolecular spaces of many polymers. At cryogenic temperatures, permeation rates generally decrease due to reduced molecular agitation; however, leak paths often form at the seal-hardware interface due to the material’s inability to conform to microscopic surface asperities (roughness) when it becomes hard and glassy.8

2.2 Ionizing Radiation: The 85 kGy Threshold

The specified accumulated dose of 85 kGy (8.5 Mrad) over 30 years presents a nuanced challenge.

  • Degradation Mechanisms: Gamma radiation interacts with organic polymers by ejecting electrons, creating ions and free radicals. These reactive species drive two competing processes:
  1. Chain Scission: The breaking of the main polymer backbone, leading to a reduction in molecular weight. This manifests macroscopically as a loss of tensile strength, elongation, and impact resistance. The material becomes “cheesy” or brittle and may crumble under stress.
  2. Cross-linking: The formation of covalent bonds between adjacent polymer chains. While this can increase hardness and modulus, it drastically reduces ductility and elongation, making the material prone to cracking during thermal cycling.9
  • The Oxygen Effect: The presence of oxygen during irradiation profoundly accelerates degradation (oxidative degradation). Free radicals react with $O_2$ to form peroxides, which subsequently decompose and cleave the polymer chain. The Fermilab application operates in a vacuum (30 mbar). Research indicates that for fluoropolymers like PTFE, radiation resistance in a vacuum is improved by a factor of 10 to 50 compared to air because the oxidative pathway is blocked.1 This implies that materials marginally acceptable in air might be robust in vacuum.
  • Material Thresholds:
  • PTFE (Teflon): In air, severe degradation occurs at 2–7 kGy. In vacuum, it may survive up to 100 kGy, but 85 kGy is dangerously close to the limit where elongation drops below useful levels for a static seal.1
  • FEP/PFA: Marginally better than PTFE (up to 50 kGy in air), but still susceptible to embrittlement.1
  • ETFE: Excellent radiation resistance, tolerating up to 1,000 kGy (100 Mrad) while retaining mechanical function.13
  • Polyimides (Vespel): Superior resistance, unaffected by doses up to 10,000 kGy.14

2.3 Vacuum and Pressure Dynamics

The seal must transition between vacuum (30 mbar) and positive pressure (3.1 bar g).

  • Outgassing: In high-vacuum beamlines or insulation vacuums, materials must not release volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Standard elastomers often contain plasticizers that outgas. Fluoropolymers and polyimides are generally low-outgassing, provided they are unfilled or filled with inorganic compounds.15
  • Venting: Encapsulated O-rings (polymer jacket over elastomer core) are prone to “ballooning” in vacuum. Gas trapped inside the jacket expands during rapid pump-down, potentially rupturing the jacket or forcing the seal out of the gland. Vented designs (holes in the jacket) mitigate this but expose the non-compatible core to the process fluid.16

3. Analysis of User Proposals

The user suggested two potential solutions: an ETFE-encapsulated O-ring or a stainless steel vented encapsulated O-ring. A rigorous analysis reveals significant deficiencies in both for this specific application.

3.1 Critique of the ETFE-Encapsulated O-Ring

The user’s interest in ETFE is logical given its high radiation tolerance. However, for cryogenic sealing, it presents a fatal flaw.

  • Mechanical Suitability: ETFE (Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene) is a copolymer designed for toughness and abrasion resistance. However, it has a relatively high stiffness compared to PTFE. Crucially, while ETFE can function down to -185°C (-300°F), its performance at liquid helium temperatures (-269°C) is compromised by extreme brittleness.13
  • The Core Problem: The fundamental weakness of an encapsulated O-ring in cryogenics is the core. Whether Silicone or Viton, the core provides the “push-back” force. At 4 K, the core is a frozen, shrunken solid. The ETFE jacket, also stiff and contracted, will separate from the flange face. There is no stored energy in the system to maintain the seal footprint.
  • Conclusion: The ETFE-encapsulated O-ring is likely to leak during the first thermal cycle to LHe temperatures due to the loss of resilience in the core and the stiffness of the jacket.

3.2 Critique of the Stainless Steel Vented Encapsulated O-Ring

This description likely refers to a Spring-Energized Seal (SES) or a Metal O-Ring with a jacket. If the user means a metal O-ring (hollow metal tube, possibly vented for pressure equalization):

  • Pros: Immune to radiation; unaffected by cryogenic temperatures; zero permeability.
  • Cons: Metal seals require extremely high flange clamping forces (often >1000 N/mm linear load) to plastically deform the seal or the flange into sealing contact. They require a surface finish of Ra < 0.4 µm (polished). Standard O-ring grooves (like the AS568 sizes listed: -023, -028, etc.) are rarely designed with sufficient bolting to crush a metal O-ring effectively. Furthermore, metal seals have poor elastic recovery; if the flange moves due to thermal, vibration, or pressure loads, the seal leaks.18
  • Conclusion: While viable for permanent, ultra-high vacuum flanges, metal O-rings are generally unsuitable for relief valves which may need to open/close or where flange bolt loads are limited by standard groove dimensions.

4. The Recommended Architecture: Spring-Energized Seals (SES)

The engineering consensus for dynamic and static sealing at liquid helium temperatures in radiation environments—supported by data from CERN’s LHC and NASA—points to the Spring-Energized Seal (SES) as the only viable architecture.

4.1 Mechanics of the Spring-Energized Seal

An SES replaces the problematic elastomer core of an O-ring with a precision-engineered metal spring.

  • Cryogenic Compensation: Unlike an elastomer, a metal spring (Stainless Steel or Elgiloy) retains its elasticity and spring constant down to absolute zero. As the polymer jacket shrinks thermally (pulling away from the flange), the pre-compressed spring expands, forcing the seal lips outward against the gland walls. This active energization compensates for the CTE mismatch.7
  • Radiation Immunity: The metal spring is unaffected by the 85 kGy gamma dose. The seal’s radiation life is determined solely by the jacket material.20
  • Venting: SES designs are inherently “vented” or U-shaped. The open side of the U-cup faces the high pressure (or is oriented based on vacuum direction). This geometry prevents pressure entrapment and allows the system pressure to further energize the seal lips.21

4.2 Spring Core Material Selection

For the “core” (energizer) of the seal, two materials are dominant:

  • 300 Series Stainless Steel (301/302/316): Standard for cryogenic springs. Good performance, but modulus drops slightly at extreme temperatures.
  • Elgiloy® (Cobalt-Chromium-Nickel Alloy): The superior choice for LHe service. Elgiloy exhibits higher fatigue strength and maintains its spring force better than stainless steel at cryogenic temperatures. It is non-magnetic and highly corrosion-resistant.
  • Recommendation: Elgiloy® Helical Spring. Helical springs provide a high “unit load” (force per mm of circumference), which is necessary to crush the relatively hard cryogenic polymer jacket into the flange irregularities to seal helium.22

5. Jacket Material Selection: The Core Research

The jacket material determines the seal’s conformability, wear resistance (for valve motion), radiation tolerance, and permeability. We evaluate the top candidates against the 85 kGy / 4 K / 30-year requirement.

5.1 Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) – “Kel-F” / “Neoflon”

PCTFE is the “gold standard” for cryogenic valve seats and static seals.

  • Cryogenic Performance: PCTFE retains mechanical integrity and dimensional stability down to 4 K better than PTFE. It has a lower coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) than PTFE, meaning it shrinks less, reducing the gap the spring must bridge.24
  • Permeability: PCTFE has extremely low gas permeability, significantly lower than PTFE or FEP. This is critical for sealing helium, which leaks through the smallest molecular voids.26
  • Radiation Resistance: PCTFE has a radiation threshold in air of approximately 200 kGy. This provides a safety factor of >2 for the user’s 85 kGy requirement. In vacuum, this tolerance is likely higher.27
  • Limitations: It is harder and less compliant than PTFE. It requires a high spring load to seal.
  • Recommendation: Primary recommendation for static flange seals. Its balance of low permeability and radiation hardness is ideal for the flange interface.

5.2 Polyimide (PI) – “Vespel® SP-1”

Vespel is utilized in the most demanding sectors of the LHC and aerospace propulsion.

  • Radiation Resistance: Unmatched. Polyimides can withstand doses in excess of 10,000 kGy (10 MGy), effectively making them immune to the 85 kGy requirement.14
  • Cryogenic Performance: Vespel SP-1 remains ductile at 4 K and has high compressive strength. It does not suffer from cold flow (creep) like PTFE, ensuring the seal dimension remains constant over 30 years.3
  • Application: Because Vespel is very hard (rigid), it is difficult to use as a static seal in a standard O-ring groove without extreme clamping force. However, it is the premier material for the relief valve seat (poppet) itself, where it must impact the metal seat repeatedly without deforming.29
  • Recommendation: Best for dynamic valve internal seals (seats/stems).

5.3 Modified PTFE (TFM / Fluoroloy®)

Standard PTFE is risky at 85 kGy (limit ~2-7 kGy in air, ~100 kGy in vacuum). However, “Modified PTFE” (like TFM 1600 or proprietary blends like Rulon/Fluoroloy) offers improved performance.

  • Vacuum Radiation Effect: In the absence of oxygen, PTFE cross-links rather than degrading. Data suggests PTFE can survive 85 kGy in vacuum, but it is on the edge of the performance envelope.1
  • Cryogenic Performance: Excellent ductility at 4 K. Softer than PCTFE, allowing it to seal with lower spring forces.
  • Recommendation: Secondary option for static seals if the flange bolts cannot generate the force needed for PCTFE. Must be verified for vacuum-only radiation exposure.

6. Sizing and Groove Design Considerations

The user specified O-ring sizes: -023, -028, -245, -238, -254, -247.

These are standard AS568 dash numbers.

  • -023: ID 1.049″ (26.64mm), CS 0.070″ (1.78mm)
  • -028: ID 1.364″ (34.65mm), CS 0.070″ (1.78mm)
  • -2xx Series: Cross Section 0.139″ (3.53mm).

Critical Engineering Constraint:

Spring-Energized Seals typically require a wider and deeper groove than a standard elastomer O-ring to accommodate the jacket and spring hardware.

  • Cross-Section 0.070″ (-0xx sizes): This is very small for an SES. Manufacturing a spring and jacket to fit a 1.78mm cavity is difficult and may result in a seal with low compliance.
  • Recommendation: The user should check if the groove dimensions can be modified. If strictly limited to AS568 grooves, “Flanged” or “Heel” SES designs can be manufactured to retrofit into O-ring grooves, but tolerance stack-up becomes critical at cryogenic temperatures. The -2xx sizes (3.53mm CS) are well-suited for SES retrofits.30

7. Comparative Data Analysis

Property Standard PTFE ETFE (User Proposal) PCTFE (Recommended) Vespel SP-1 (Alt.) Metal C-Ring (User Proposal)
Min. Service Temp 4 K ~100 K (Brittle at 4K) 4 K 4 K 0 K
Rad. Limit (Air) ~5 kGy 1,000 kGy 200 kGy 10,000 kGy Unlimited
Rad. Limit (Vac) ~100 kGy >1,000 kGy >500 kGy >10,000 kGy Unlimited
He Permeability Moderate Low Very Low Low Zero
Cryo Ductility High Low Moderate Moderate N/A (Elastic)
Sealing Force Req. Low Moderate High Very High Extreme
Suitability Risk (Rad) Fail (Cryo) Excellent Excellent Good (Static only)

Data synthesized from 1

Key Insight on ETFE: While ETFE is often cited for radiation resistance (e.g., wire insulation in nuclear plants), its application as a cryogenic seal is flawed. The molecular structure that gives it toughness at room temperature leads to a high ductile-to-brittle transition temperature relative to helium. At 4 K, an ETFE jacket would likely crack under the dynamic stress of a relief event or thermal shock.33

8. Final Recommendations and Specification

For the Fermilab Linear Accelerator Relief Valve Seals, the following “Custom Solution” is recommended to replace the standard encapsulated O-ring concept.

8.1 Primary Recommendation: Static Flange Seals

For the flange seals (sizes -023, -028, -245, -238, -254, -247):

  • Seal Architecture: Spring-Energized Seal (SES) with a “Heel” profile to fit AS568 O-ring grooves.
  • Jacket Material: PCTFE (Polychlorotrifluoroethylene).
  • Trade Name: Neoflon® M-400H or equivalent Kel-F type.
  • Justification: PCTFE provides the lowest helium permeability of any fluoropolymer, retains dimensional stability at 4 K, and possesses a radiation threshold (>200 kGy) well in excess of the 85 kGy requirement.
  • Core (Energizer): Helical Wound Spring made of Elgiloy®.
  • Justification: Elgiloy (Co-Cr-Ni alloy) is non-magnetic, corrosion-resistant, and maintains high spring force at cryogenic temperatures to crush the PCTFE jacket into the flange face, preventing leakage during thermal contraction.
  • Groove Prep: Surface finish of the sealing faces must be better than 8-16 µin Ra (0.2-0.4 µm) to seal helium with the harder PCTFE jacket.34

8.2 Secondary Recommendation: Dynamic Valve Seat

If one of these sizes corresponds to the actual relief valve seat (poppet):

  • Seal Architecture: Solid Poppet / Seat Seal.
  • Material: Vespel® SP-21 (15% Graphite filled Polyimide).
  • Justification: Vespel SP-21 offers the highest resistance to wear and deformation (creep) over 30 years. It is used in LHC relief valves for its ability to reseal reliably after lifting.28 It is immune to the radiation levels specified.

8.3 Supplier Engagement Strategy

The user should approach manufacturers specializing in “Extreme Environment” sealing (e.g., Omniseal Solutions, Bal Seal, Parker) with the following specification string:

“Cryogenic Spring-Energized Seal, retrofit for AS568- groove. Jacket: PCTFE (Neoflon M-400H) or TFM-1600. Spring: Elgiloy Helical High-Load. Service: Liquid Helium (4K) to Vacuum/3.1 bar. Rad Load: 85 kGy Gamma (Vacuum). Leak Rate Req: < $1 \times 10^{-6}$ mbar L/s He.”

This specification moves away from the failure-prone “encapsulated elastomer” concept and adopts the proven architecture used in high-energy physics and aerospace propulsion.

9. Conclusion

The unique combination of liquid helium temperatures and accumulated radiation dictates that standard elastomer-based solutions—including the proposed ETFE-encapsulated O-ring—are unsuitable due to cryogenic embrittlement and “frozen core” failure modes. The path to a 30-year maintenance-free seal lies in Spring-Energized Seals utilizing PCTFE jackets and Elgiloy springs. This solution leverages the radiation hardness of fluorinated polymers while utilizing mechanical energization to overcome the physics of thermal contraction at 4 Kelvin.

Prepared For: Fermilab Engineering

Focus: Cryogenic Relief Valve Sealing Systems

Date: December 12, 2025

1. Introduction

The design and construction of cryogenic systems for linear accelerators (linacs) impose some of the most stringent material requirements in engineering. The user, an engineer at Fermilab National Accelerator Laboratory, has identified a critical need for relief valve flange seals capable of surviving a “triad of extremes”: Liquid Helium (LHe) temperatures (nominally 4 K), high-vacuum environments (30 mbar) transitioning to positive pressure (3.1 bar g), and a cumulative gamma radiation dose of 85 kGy over a 30-year service life.

The failure of a relief valve seal in a linac cryomodule is not merely a maintenance inconvenience; it can lead to the loss of insulating vacuum, catastrophic quenching of superconducting cavities, and significant downtime for the accelerator complex. Standard commercial sealing solutions, such as elastomeric O-rings or standard Teflon (PTFE) seals, are known to degrade under these specific conditions—elastomers freeze and lose sealing force at cryogenic temperatures, while PTFE is susceptible to rapid mechanical degradation under ionizing radiation.1

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of the materials science governing polymer performance at 4 Kelvin under irradiation. It specifically evaluates the user’s proposed solutions (ETFE-encapsulated O-rings and stainless steel vented seals) against the physics of the application. Based on this evaluation, the report proposes an alternative architecture—the Spring-Energized Seal (SES)—and recommends specific core and jacket materials that offer the highest probability of success for the 30-year mission duration.

1.1 Scope of Analysis

  • Thermal Regime: 4 Kelvin (-269°C) to ambient. Note: The user query specified -420°F (-251°C), but Liquid Helium exists at ~4.2 K (-269°C). The report assumes the more rigorous 4 K requirement to ensure safety margins for components in contact with LHe.
  • Radiation Regime: 85 kGy (8.5 Mrad) Total Ionizing Dose (TID).
  • Pressure Regime: Vacuum ($3 \times 10^{-2}$ bar) to 3.1 bar g.
  • Components: Relief Valve Flange Seals (Sizes -023, -028, -245, -238, -254, -247).

2. Physics of Sealing in Cryogenic Radiation Environments

To select the correct material, it is necessary to understand the fundamental degradation mechanisms at play. The interaction between cryogenic stiffness, radiation-induced chemical changes, and vacuum physics creates a narrow window of viable materials.

2.1 The “Frozen Core” Problem: Why Elastomers Fail

The user’s proposal to use an “encapsulated O-ring” implies a two-part system: a fluoropolymer jacket (like ETFE or PTFE) surrounding an elastomeric core (typically Silicone or FKM/Viton). This design is fundamentally flawed for liquid helium service.

2.1.1 Glass Transition ($T_g$) Mechanics

Elastomers function as seals because they are viscoelastic; they store elastic potential energy when compressed and push back against the mating surfaces (the “energizing force”). However, all elastomers have a Glass Transition Temperature ($T_g$).

  • Viton (FKM): $T_g \approx -20^\circ\text{C}$ to $-50^\circ\text{C}$.
  • Silicone (VMQ): $T_g \approx -55^\circ\text{C}$ to $-100^\circ\text{C}$ (for phenyl-based grades).

Below $T_g$, the polymer chains lose their long-range mobility. The material transforms from a rubber to a brittle, glass-like solid. At 4 Kelvin (-269°C), a silicone core is essentially a rock. It retains zero elastic recovery. If the seal is compressed at room temperature and then cooled to 4 K, the core shrinks. If the flange gap widens even monotonically due to pressure or thermal contraction, the frozen core cannot expand to fill the void, creating an immediate leak path.5

2.1.2 Thermal Contraction Differentials

A major driver of leaks in cryogenic systems is the Coefficient of Thermal Expansion (CTE).

  • Metals (Stainless Steel): CTE $\approx 16 \times 10^{-6} \text{ m/m K}$.
  • Polymers (PTFE/FEP/ETFE): CTE $\approx 100\text{–}150 \times 10^{-6} \text{ m/m K}$.

As the system cools from 293 K to 4 K, the polymer seal contracts roughly 10 times more than the stainless steel gland holding it. This volumetric shrinkage causes the seal to pull away from the gland walls. In a standard O-ring, the squeeze is lost. In an encapsulated seal with a frozen core, the shrinkage is catastrophic. Successful cryogenic seals must have a mechanism to compensate for this shrinkage, typically a metal spring that retains elasticity at 4 K.7

2.2 Radiation Chemistry: The 85 kGy Limit

The cumulative dose of 85 kGy is a critical threshold. While low for metals, it is significant for fluoropolymers.

2.2.1 Chain Scission vs. Cross-linking

Ionizing radiation (gamma rays) creates free radicals within the polymer matrix. These radicals drive two primary degradation pathways:

  1. Chain Scission: The polymer backbone is cleaved, reducing molecular weight. This leads to softening, loss of tensile strength, and eventual crumbling. PTFE is dominated by this mechanism in the presence of oxygen.9
  2. Cross-linking: Radicals on adjacent chains form covalent bonds. This increases stiffness and hardness but drastically reduces elongation (ductility). ETFE and PVDF tend to cross-link.10

2.2.2 The Vacuum “Benefit”

Crucially, the presence of oxygen accelerates chain scission (oxidative degradation). In a vacuum (as in the Fermilab beamline application), the lack of oxygen inhibits the formation of peroxy radicals. Research indicates that PTFE, which fails at ~5 kGy in air, can survive doses up to ~100 kGy in vacuum because the dominant degradation pathway is suppressed.1 This implies that while standard PTFE is risky, it is not guaranteed to fail at 85 kGy in vacuum. However, relying on this “vacuum effect” is a calculated risk; materials with inherent radiation resistance (like PCTFE or Polyimide) offer a higher safety factor.

2.3 Helium Permeability

Helium is the ultimate leak detection gas because its small atomic radius allows it to permeate through materials and bypass seals through microscopic asperities.

  • Permeation: Polymers are permeable to helium. The rate depends on the polymer’s free volume. Amorphous polymers permeate more than crystalline ones.
  • Surface Sealing: At 4 K, polymers become hard. A hard seal cannot “flow” into the surface finish of the metal flange to block helium paths. High contact stress (clamping force) is required to mash the hard polymer into the metal asperities.8

3. Critique of User Proposed Solutions

The user put forward two specific concepts for evaluation. This section analyzes their viability based on the physics established in Section 2.

3.1 Proposal A: ETFE-Encapsulated O-Ring

Concept: A seal with a Silicone or FKM core and a jacket made of Ethylene Tetrafluoroethylene (ETFE, brand name Tefzel®).

  • Radiation Analysis: Pass. ETFE has excellent radiation resistance, tolerating doses up to 1,000 kGy (100 Mrad) before significant loss of properties.13 It far exceeds the 85 kGy requirement.
  • Cryogenic Analysis: Fail. ETFE is a copolymer of ethylene and tetrafluoroethylene. While tougher than PTFE at room temperature, it has a higher stiffness and a higher brittle transition temperature. Most literature cites ETFE service limits around -100°C to -185°C.17 At -269°C (4 K), ETFE is liable to undergo brittle fracture under the compressive stress of the flange. Furthermore, the “frozen core” issue (Section 2.1.1) remains unsolved. The ETFE jacket will shrink, the core will freeze, and the seal will leak.
  • Verdict: Not Recommended. The risk of cryogenic leakage outweighs the benefit of radiation resistance.

3.2 Proposal B: Stainless Steel Vented Encapsulated O-Ring

Concept: This description is slightly ambiguous but likely refers to a Metal O-Ring (a hollow metal tube, vented to allow pressure equalization) or a Spring-Energized seal with a metal jacket (rare). Assuming a Metal O-Ring:

  • Radiation Analysis: Pass. Stainless steel is immune to 85 kGy.
  • Cryogenic Analysis: Pass. Metal seals function perfectly at 4 K.
  • Sealing Analysis: Conditional Fail. Metal seals rely on plastic deformation of the seal or flange coating (silver, indium) to create a seal. They require extremely high flange bolt loads—often requiring A286 bolts and reinforced flanges.18 Standard O-ring grooves (AS568 sizes provided) are typically designed for elastomer compression loads, not metal crush loads. Using a metal O-ring in a standard groove often results in insufficient sealing force or damage to the flange. Additionally, they have very poor “springback”; if the flange separates microscopically due to pressure spikes, the seal leaks.
  • Verdict: Not Recommended unless the flanges are specifically designed for metal seals (ConFlat or similar). For relief valves that may need to operate or see pressure cycling, a polymer seal with better compliance is preferred.

4. The Engineered Solution: Spring-Energized Seals (SES)

The industry standard solution for the conditions described (LHe + Radiation + Vacuum) is the Spring-Energized Seal (SES). This architecture directly addresses the shortcomings of the user’s proposals by replacing the elastomer core with a mechanical spring and using a high-performance polymer jacket.

4.1 Anatomy of a Cryogenic SES

  1. The Jacket: A machined polymer ring (U-cup shape) that provides the sealing interface. It must be made of a material that remains sufficiently ductile at 4 K to conform to the flange, yet radiation-hard enough to survive 85 kGy.
  2. The Energizer (Core): A metal spring (Helical, V-Spring, or Canted Coil) inside the jacket. The spring provides a constant mechanical load. As the polymer jacket shrinks thermally at 4 K, the spring expands to maintain contact pressure with the sealing surfaces. The spring is unaffected by the “frozen core” physics of elastomers.7

4.2 Core (Spring) Material Selection

The user asked for the “best core material.” For an SES in this environment:

  • Material: Elgiloy® (Co-Cr-Ni Alloy).
  • Reasoning: Elgiloy is the superior choice over 301/316 Stainless Steel for cryogenic springs. It has a higher modulus of elasticity and fatigue strength. Crucially, it retains its spring properties better at cryogenic temperatures, ensuring the “energizing” force is maintained even when the seal is at 4 K. It is non-magnetic (important for accelerator environments) and corrosion-resistant.36
  • Radiation: Immune to 85 kGy.

4.3 Jacket Material Selection

The user asked for the “best jacket material.” We must balance radiation tolerance with cryogenic sealing ability.

Candidate 1: Polychlorotrifluoroethylene (PCTFE) – “Kel-F” / “Neoflon”

  • Cryogenic Performance: PCTFE is widely regarded as the best fluoropolymer for cryogenic sealing (LOX, LH2, LHe). It has a lower CTE than PTFE, meaning it shrinks less. It retains mechanical stability down to near absolute zero.24
  • Permeability: PCTFE has the lowest helium permeability of any fluoropolymer, making it exceptional for vacuum/pressure sealing.26
  • Radiation Resistance: Good. In air, PCTFE tolerates ~200 kGy before degradation. This is well above the 85 kGy requirement. In vacuum, its tolerance is likely higher.27
  • Constraint: PCTFE is harder (higher modulus) than PTFE. It requires high spring loads (Helical spring) to seal effectively.

Candidate 2: Modified Polyimide (PI) – “Vespel® SP-1”

  • Radiation Resistance: Exceptional. Polyimides can tolerate doses >10,000 kGy. It is the most radiation-hard polymer available.14
  • Cryogenic Performance: Vespel SP-1 is used in the CERN LHC for relief valve seats at 1.9 K. It is extremely stable and durable.2
  • Constraint: Vespel is very hard (Rockwell E 45-60). It acts almost like a soft metal. It is excellent for the valve seat (poppet) where it must withstand repeated impacts, but it is difficult to use as a static flange seal because it requires immense clamping force to create a gas-tight seal against helium.

Candidate 3: Modified PTFE (TFM / Rulon)

  • Performance: “Modified” PTFEs (like TFM 1600) have a denser polymer structure than standard PTFE, reducing permeability and improving creep resistance.
  • Radiation: In vacuum, they will likely survive 85 kGy. They are softer than PCTFE, making them easier to seal with lower bolt loads.
  • Constraint: Higher risk of radiation damage compared to PCTFE/Vespel.

4.4 Design Recommendation for Fermilab

The optimal solution depends on the specific function of the seal (Static Flange vs. Dynamic Valve Seat). Given the request is for “flange seals,” the Static recommendation is primary.

Recommendation A: Static Flange Seals (The O-Ring Replacements)

  • Type: Spring-Energized Seal (Helical Spring).
  • Jacket Material: PCTFE (Neoflon M-400H).
  • Why: Best helium barrier, extremely stable at 4 K, radiation hard >200 kGy.
  • Spring Material: Elgiloy®.
  • Why: High load to crush the PCTFE jacket; cryogenically stable.
  • Profile: Flanged / Heel Design.
  • Why: Standard O-ring grooves are often too wide for stable SES operation. A “flanged” SES design clips onto the gland or has a heel to prevent twisting during installation.30

Recommendation B: Dynamic Valve Seat (Poppet)

  • Type: Solid Seal or SES.
  • Material: Vespel® SP-21 (Graphite filled Polyimide).
  • Why: Standard at CERN for LHe relief valves. The graphite allows for smooth operation (if sliding), and the polyimide matrix survives the radiation and repeated valve cycling without deformation.28

5. Technical Data Comparisons

Table 5.1: Material Properties at Cryogenic & Radiation Extremes

Material Min. Service Temp (K) Radiation Limit in Air (kGy) Radiation Limit in Vacuum (kGy) Helium Permeability Cryogenic Suitability
Standard PTFE 4 5 ~50-100 Moderate High Risk (Rad limit)
ETFE ~100 1,000 >1,000 Low Fail (Brittle at 4K)
PCTFE (Kel-F) 4 200 >500 Very Low Excellent
Vespel SP-1 4 10,000 >10,000 Low Excellent (High Load)
UHMWPE 4 100 >200 Moderate Good (Backup)

Data synthesized from.1

Table 5.2: Seal Architecture Comparison

Feature Encapsulated O-Ring Metal O-Ring Spring-Energized Seal (SES)
Energizer at 4 K Frozen Elastomer (Zero Force) Elastic Metal (High Force) Elastic Metal Spring (Const. Force)
CTE Compensation None (Leak Path forms) N/A Excellent (Spring expands)
Sealing Force Low Extreme High (Tunable)
Vacuum Venting Requires holes (Risk) Vented designs exist Inherently vented (U-cup)
Verdict Unsuitable Impractical (Bolt load) Recommended

6. Detailed Sizing and Installation Analysis

The user listed specific dash sizes. This section analyzes the implications of these sizes for SES manufacturing.

  • Small Cross-Sections (-023, -028): These sizes have a cross-section (CS) of 0.070″ (1.78mm). Manufacturing a Spring-Energized Seal with a helical spring in this small CS is challenging but possible (often called “Nano” or “Micro” profiles). However, the spring wire will be extremely fine, reducing the available sealing force.
  • Action: Verify if the groove can be widened to -1xx series (CS 0.103″ / 2.62mm) or -2xx series. If not, verify with the supplier (Omniseal/Bal Seal) that they have “Micro” spring capabilities for PCTFE jackets. A softer jacket (TFM 1600) might be required for these tiny sizes to ensure the small spring can seal it.
  • Large Sizes (-2xx Series): Sizes -245 to -254 have a CS of 0.139″ (3.53mm). This is an ideal size for a Helical Spring SES. There is ample room for a robust Elgiloy spring and a machined PCTFE jacket.

Surface Finish Requirements:

For PCTFE seals at 4 K to seal Helium:

  • Sealing Surface: $\text{Ra} < 0.4 \, \mu\text{m}$ ($16 \, \mu\text{in}$).
  • Method: Polished circular lay (no radial scratches).
  • Cleanliness: Class 100 cleaning is mandatory to remove hydrocarbon oils that would freeze or outgas in the vacuum.

7. Commercial Availability and Heritage

The recommended solution is not theoretical; it relies on heritage from major physics and aerospace programs.

  • CERN LHC Heritage: The Large Hadron Collider operates with 1.9 K superfluid helium. Their relief valves utilize PCTFE and Vespel seats. They do not use encapsulated O-rings for cryogenic boundaries due to the leak risks analyzed above.2
  • NASA Heritage: For the James Webb Space Telescope (approx 40 K) and LH2 propulsion, Spring-Energized Seals are the standard. Omniseal® RACO® seals (U-shaped spring with fluoropolymer jacket) are specifically cited for cryogenic fluid handling.23
  • Suppliers:
  • Saint-Gobain Omniseal Solutions: Offers “103A” and “RACO” profiles. Material codes often include “Fluoroloy” blends tailored for radiation.23
  • Bal Seal Engineering: specializes in “Canted Coil” springs. While excellent for friction control, helical springs (offered by others or as custom) often provide higher load for static cryogenic sealing.21
  • Parker Hannifin: “FlexiSeal” line includes cryogenic profiles.

8. Conclusion and Next Steps

The proposal to use an ETFE-encapsulated O-ring for Fermilab’s linear accelerator relief valves is rejected based on the material’s poor cryogenic ductility and the failure of elastomer cores at liquid helium temperatures. Similarly, standard Teflon O-rings pose a radiation risk, and metal O-rings require impractical flange loads.

Recommendation:

The Fermilab team should proceed with a Spring-Energized Seal (SES) specification.

  • Core: Elgiloy® Helical Spring (High load, Cryo-stable, Rad-hard).
  • Jacket: PCTFE (Neoflon/Kel-F). This offers the best balance of helium leak tightness ($< 10^{-6}$ mbar L/s), radiation tolerance (>200 kGy), and cryogenic stability.
  • Alternate Jacket: If PCTFE is too hard for the existing bolt spacing, Modified PTFE (TFM 1600) is the fallback, as it will likely survive the 85 kGy dose in vacuum, though with a lower safety margin than PCTFE.

Specification for Procurement:

“Spring-Energized Seal, Helical Elgiloy Spring, PCTFE Jacket. Cryogenic Service (4 K), Vacuum to 3.1 bar. Radiation Environment: 85 kGy Gamma (Vacuum). Sizes: AS568 -023, -028, -245, -238, -254, -247. Vented/U-cup design for vacuum service.”

By adopting this architecture, Fermilab aligns its cryogenic sealing strategy with proven methodologies from CERN and NASA, ensuring the reliability of the new linear accelerator system.

Works cited

  1. PTFE and High-Radiation Environments: 5 Important Facts – TriStar Plastics, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.tstar.com/blog/ptfe-and-high-radiation-environments-5-important-facts
  2. (PDF) Characterization of Prototype Superfluid Helium Safety Relief Valves for the LHC Magnets – ResearchGate, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/41586915_Characterization_of_Prototype_Superfluid_Helium_Safety_Relief_Valves_for_the_LHC_Magnets
  3. DuPont™ Vespel® Parts & Shapes for Valves, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.dupont.com/content/dam/dupont/amer/us/en/vespel/public/documents/en/DuPont%E2%84%A2%20Vespel%C2%AE%20Parts%20&%20Shapes%20for%20Valves_VPE-A40120-00-A0525.pdf
  4. Cryogenics: Low temperatures, high performance – CERN, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.home.cern/science/engineering/cryogenics-low-temperatures-high-performance
  5. O-rings for cryogenic applications – sealing even in extremely low temperatures, accessed December 12, 2025, https://powerrubber.com/en/blog/o-rings-for-cryogenic-applications
  6. fep ptfe teflon® encapsulated o-rings – AllOrings.com, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.allorings.com/teflon-encapsulated-o-rings
  7. Spring-Energized Seal vs O-Ring | When to Upgrade, Extreme …, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.canyoncomponents.com/post/spring-energized-seals-vs-o-rings-when-to-upgrade-for-cryogenic-and-aggressive-chemistries
  8. Seal Processing for Lowest Leak Rates and the New MIL-STD-883 TM 1014 Seal – MicroCircuit Laboratories, accessed December 12, 2025, http://microcircuitlabs.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Final-MCL-Paper-041917.pdf
  9. Radiation induced embrittlement of PTFE | Request PDF – ResearchGate, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228463288_Radiation_induced_embrittlement_of_PTFE
  10. Modification of PTFE nanopowder by controlled electron beam irradiation – Express Polymer Letters, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.expresspolymlett.com/letolt_EPL.php?file=EPL-0000593&mi=c
  11. THE EFFECTS OF SPACE ENVIRONMENTS ON INSULATION OF TEFLON (TRADE NAME) TFE AND FEP RESINS – DTIC, accessed December 12, 2025, https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/citations/AD0656064
  12. Differences Between FEP, PFA, PTFE, And ETFE in Cable Applications – News, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.greaterwire.com/news/differences-between-fep-pfa-ptfe-and-etfe-i-85205012.html
  13. ETFE vs PTFE: Material Comparison – PBY Plastics, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.pbyplastics.com/blog/comparison-between-etfe-and-ptfe
  14. Radiation resistant Plastics | Ensinger, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.ensingerplastics.com/en-us/plastic-material-selection/radiation-resistant
  15. RTV Silicone Sealing Method for Component Interfaces | T2 Portal, accessed December 12, 2025, https://technology.nasa.gov/patent/MSC-TOPS-127
  16. Explore Cryo-Ring™ Seals, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.vulcanseals.com/sub-category-product/cryo-ring-seals
  17. ETFE – Wikipedia, accessed December 12, 2025, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ETFE
  18. Metal Seals for Extreme Environments: The Complete 2026 Buyer’s Guide, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.sonkitsealing.com/Technical-Articles/metal-seals-extreme-environments-complete-buyer-guide-2026
  19. Effective Sealing for Cryogenic Liquids – Reliability Matters, accessed December 12, 2025, https://blog.chesterton.com/sealing/springenergized/effective-sealing-for-cryogenic-liquids/
  20. O Rings Vs. Spring Energized Seals – Which one to choose? – Parjet, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.parjetseals.com/en-US/newsc30-o-rings-vs-spring-energized-seals-which-one-to-choose
  21. Bal Seal® spring-energized seal, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.balseal.com/seal/
  22. Duruseal® Spring-energized Static Seals – Performance Sealing Inc, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.psiseal.com/static-seals/
  23. Spring-Energized Seals – Omniseal Solutions, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.omniseal-solutions.com/sealing-solutions/spring-energized-seals
  24. PCTFE Kel-F®, Neoflon® Cryogenic Applications & Material Properties | Curbell Plastics, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.curbellplastics.com/materials/plastics/pctfe/
  25. PCTFE – Engineered Plastics, accessed December 12, 2025, https://engpoly.co.uk/pctfe/
  26. Drake PCTFE, accessed December 12, 2025, https://drakeplastics.com/drake-pctfe/
  27. Gamma Compatible Materials | Nordion, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.nordion.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/GT_Gamma_Compatible_Materials.pdf
  28. Relief, 11069 Valve – ValveTech Inc., accessed December 12, 2025, https://valvetech.net/product/relief-11069-valve/
  29. Valve Seat Soft Sealing Characteristics of Cryogenic Control Valve(Ⅱ): Sealing Characteristics at Liquid Nitrogen Temperature and Comprehensive Analysis – 学术期刊, accessed December 12, 2025, http://journal.bit.edu.cn/zr/en/article/doi/10.15918/j.tbit1001-0645.2015.05.002
  30. ESE Seal (Elastomeric Spring Energized) – Greene Tweed, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.gtweed.com/wp-content/uploads/ese-seal-as-pb.pdf
  31. Spring Energized Seals | PTFE Seals | American High Performance Seals, accessed December 12, 2025, https://ahpseals.com/spring-energized-ptfe-seals/
  32. Advancing Aerospace Cryogenic Seals With High-Performance Polymers, accessed December 12, 2025, https://aipprecision.com/advancing-aerospace-cryogenic-seals-with-high-performance-polymers/
  33. Fluon® ETFE | Fluon® | Product information | Fluoroproducts Business | AGC Chemicals Company, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.agc-chemicals.com/jp/en/fluorine/products/detail/index.html?pCode=JP-EN-F007
  34. SPRING ENERGIZED SEALS IN SPACE APPLICATIONS Kha Le Saint-Gobain Seals, kha.v.le@saint-gobain.com ABSTRACT Spring energized seal, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.spacefoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Le-Kha-SPRING-ENERGIZED-SEALS-IN-SPACE-APPLICATIONS.pdf
  35. ETFE – Holscot – Experts in Fluoropolymers Solutions, accessed December 12, 2025, https://holscot.com/glossary/etfe/
  36. Spring Energized Seals & Metal O-Rings for Extreme Environments, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.marcorubber.com/spring-energized-seals.htm
  37. Vacuum and leak detection technologies at CERN – CDTI, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.cdti.es/sites/default/files/2024-01/bsbf2022_presentations_c3_3._cern_jose_antonio_ferreira_v2.pdf
  38. Space | Internal & External Pressure Seals | Cryogenic – Omniseal Solutions, accessed December 12, 2025, https://www.omniseal-solutions.com/industries/space
Loading…