JPH06264397A - Slime controlling agent for papermaking - Google Patents

Abstract

PURPOSE:To obtain a slime controlling agent, comprising o-phthalaldehyde as an active component and thereby good in controlling effects on slime in industrial water in papermaking processes. CONSTITUTION:This slime controlling agent comprises o-phthalaldehyde of the formula as an active component. The o-phthalaldehyde is preferably added in an amount of 0.1-100ppm, preferably 0.5-50ppm as the active component based on water.

Description

Detailed Description of the Invention

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to a slime control agent for industrial water in a papermaking process.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art It is known that slimes are formed in the pulp preparation and papermaking processes of pulp mills and paper mills by the propagation of microorganisms such as bacteria, yeasts and filamentous fungi, which causes various problems. Slime adheres to almost every part of the process that uses water, such as the riffler wall, screen, inlet or chest wall, white water pit, inner wall of the recovered white water pipe, etc. during the papermaking process, gradually increasing its thickness and finally peeling off. Mix into pulp slurry or clog screens and pipes. Small slime lumps mixed in the pulp slurry cause yellow or brown spots on paper, so-called eyeballs, and deteriorate the paper quality.
Large slime lumps can even cause paper to run out. In recent years, improvement of white water recovery, eutrophication by additives such as starch and polyacrylamide, deposits containing inorganic fillers, resin components of wood, increase of pitch-like deposits due to adhesives derived from waste paper, etc. As a result, the paper manufacturing process has become an environment more suitable for the reproduction of microorganisms.

[0003]

In particular, the improvement of the white water recovery rate causes the emergence of resistant bacteria to the slime control agent and the bacterial replacement phenomenon, which causes a decrease in the efficacy of the slime control agent. Therefore, many slime control agents have been developed and used from the past, but the present situation is that no slime control agent capable of sustaining satisfactory efficacy under such conditions is found.

[0004]

The present invention has the following formula:

[Chemical 2] A slime control agent for papermaking, which comprises o-phthalaldehyde represented by the following formula as an active ingredient.

The compound of formula (I) is known as a medical, odorless and high level disinfectant and bactericide (JP-A-63-31).
3705). However, the use of this compound (I) is a medical disinfectant and a medical instrument disinfectant, and it has not been known that it has a remarkably excellent slime control action as a paper (industrial) disinfectant.

The compound of formula (I) is preferably dissolved in a solvent and used in the form of a liquid or as a water suspension. Examples of the solvent include alcohols such as methanol and ethanol, glycols such as ethylene glycol, polyethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, diethylene glycol monomethyl ether and cellosolves, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, toluene and xylene, ethyl acetate, butyl acetate and adipine. Esters such as ethyl acid and ethyl lactate, dimethylacetamide, dimethylformamide, dimethylsulfoxide, dioxane and the like are used.

Dispersants such as surfactants and other slime control agents may be added to the liquid agent. It can also be used as a water suspension agent by wet fine pulverization using a ball mill, an attritor or the like. In the case of producing a water suspension agent, a thickener such as xanthan gum or guar gum and a nonionic, anionic or cationic surfactant as a dispersant can be used. The addition amount of the slime control agent of the present invention in the papermaking process varies depending on the water source, papermaking, etc., but is generally 0.1 to 100 ppm, preferably 0.5 to 50 ppm, as an active ingredient with respect to water.
Is.

[0008]

EXAMPLES Examples will be described below. The formulation of the formulation example is as follows. The parts in the formulation examples mean parts by weight. Formulation Example 1. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether 90 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid agent. Formulation example 2. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Ethylene glycol 90 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid agent. Formulation example 3. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Diethylene glycol 90 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid agent.

Formulation Example 4. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether 70 parts Nonion NS-204.5 3 parts Water 17 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid agent. Formulation example 5. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether 50 parts Diethylene glycol 40 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid preparation. Formulation example 6. o-Phthalaldehyde 10 parts Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether 50 parts Ethylene glycol 40 parts Dissolved with stirring to obtain a liquid agent.

Test Example 1 The slime collected from the stock inlet during the corrugated fiberboard core papermaking process was pre-cultured in Waxman liquid medium to prepare a test bacterial solution. Add 50 mL of sterile water to a 100 ml shake flask.
ml, Waxman liquid medium 10 ml and test bacterial solution 10
Add 5 ml to the culture solution, and add 5 ml to the culture solution.
It was added so as to be 0 ppm (0.5, 2 and 5 ppm as an active ingredient) and shake-cultured at 37 ° C. The absorbance at 660 nm of this culture solution was measured over time to compare the degree of suppression of slime-forming bacterium growth. The results are shown in Table 1.
Shown in. The inhibition time in the table is the time until the absorbance of each culture reached 0.1, and the stronger the effect, the longer the inhibition time. The prescription preparation shown in the preparation example was used as the reagent. The formulations of the comparative examples in the table are as follows. Comparative Example 1 Methylenebisthiocyanate 10 parts Polyethylene glycol # 200 90 parts Comparative Example 2 2,2-dibromo-2-nitrilopiopionamide 10 parts Diethylene glycol monomethyl ether 90 parts

[0011]

[Table 1]

Test Example 2 Two stainless steel water tanks each having a diameter of 30 cm and a depth of 30 cm were used as a temperature control device, a stirrer, a thermometer and a slime measuring plate, and two lauan materials having a width of 5 cm, a length of 30 cm and a thickness of 1.5 cm. I installed it vertically. To a Waxman liquid medium diluted 1000 times, 1% of pulp and white water culture solution (culture solution of white water collected from newsprint paper making process in Waxman liquid medium) were added at a rate of 0.1 ml / liter, and then sulfuric acid was added. Artificial white water adjusted to pH 5 with aluminum was supplied to this tank at a flow rate of 2 liters / hour, and the same amount of artificial white water was discharged. The test reagent agent was added to the supplied artificial white water by a pump at a rate of 5 ppm three times a day for once for 3 hours. The white water temperature was kept at 30 ° C. and stirring was continued, and after about 10 days, the slime control effect was evaluated. The white water used for the white water culture solution is white water (A) collected from the corrugated board-centered paper manufacturing process.
And white water (B) collected from the newspaper making process.

For evaluation, the slime measuring plate was visually observed, and the amount of adhered slime was scored by a 10-point method. The outline of the scoring criteria is as follows. 0: No adhesion of slime is observed. 5: Slime is thinly attached to the entire surface. 10: The slime adheres thickly to the entire surface, and part is peeled off. The amount of adhered slime varies from test to test depending on the white water used and other conditions. Therefore, it is a relative and comprehensive evaluation with no added slime control agent and with the comparative agent. The results are shown in Table 2. As the reagent agent, the preparation having the formulation shown in Preparation Example was used. The test results are shown in Table 2. The formulation of the comparative example in the table is the same as that of Test Example 1.

[0014]

[Table 2]

Test Example 3 300 ml of white water collected in the corrugated fiberboard core papermaking process was placed in an Erlenmeyer flask, and the test reagents were added to white water at 5, 20,
50 ppm (0.5, 2 and 5 as active ingredients, respectively)
ppm). After stoppering with a paper stopper and shaking culture at 32 ° C. for 1 hour, the viable cell count is measured. At the same time, a culture solution containing no drug is also tested, and the bactericidal activity is compared depending on the degree of reduction of the viable cell count by adding the drug. As the reagent agent, the preparation having the formulation shown in Preparation Example was used.
The test results are shown in Table 3. The formulation of the comparative example in the table is Test Example 1
Is the same as.

[0016]

[Table 3]

Front Page Continuation (72) Inventor Michio Watanabe 14-29 Torihama-cho, Kanazawa-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa Prefecture Permachem Asia R & D Center

Claims (1)

[Claims] 1. The following formula: A slime control agent for papermaking, which comprises o-phthalaldehyde represented by the following as an active ingredient.