JPS635754A - Deodorant - Google Patents

Abstract

(57) [Summary] This bulletin contains application data before electronic filing, so abstract data is not recorded.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION [Technical Field] This invention relates to a deodorant for purifying and deodorizing air.

[Background technology]

In general, the sources of bad odors and strange odors are factory smoke and waste liquid, cigarettes and floor waste, kitchen waste, etc., and the types of bad odors and strange odors are diverse. In the home, odors from toilets, kitchens, pets, cigarettes, etc. can cause discomfort, irritation, and headaches, especially since rooms are often kept closed when air conditioning systems are running. , countermeasures against these foul odors have become a major problem.

There are four ways to eliminate these bad odors and strange odors:
There are two ways.

■ Sensory deodorization method: A method of masking bad odors and foreign odors using aromatic substances (fragrant essential oils, etc.).

■ Physical deodorization methods: Diluting and removing bad odors through ventilation and diffusion, adsorbing odors using silica gel or activated carbon, or enclosing odorous substances with clathrate compounds such as cyclodextrin. How to contact.

■ Chemical deodorization method: A method of chemically reacting (neutralization, addition, condensation, oxidation, etc.) with malodor and off-flavor components to make them odorless.

For example, direct combustion method or oxidation method using oxidizing agents such as ozone or potassium permanganate.

■ Biological deodorization method: A method that reduces and kills microorganisms that cause spoilage, prevents spoilage, and prevents the occurrence of bad odors.

Other methods include deodorizing using wood vinegar obtained by carbonizing wood.

The sensory deodorizing method (2) is a method that is mainly practiced in households, and is a method that uses the fragrance of the deodorant itself to deodorize bad odors and foreign odors. However, aromatic substances have a limited ability to remove odorous substances, and it is difficult to maintain a balance between aromas and odors.Furthermore, people have different tastes in the aromas of deodorants, and sometimes they are disgusting or offensive. It can be difficult to say that it is a deodorizing method suitable for boat fishing. The physical method (2) has been widely used for a long time, but in addition to the problems of requiring equipment and fluctuations in room temperature, the adsorption effect of bad odors and foreign odor components is not sustainable, and the saturated state If so, there is a problem in that it releases odor components.

In addition, chemical deodorization method■ is effective against a wide variety of malodorous components.
It is extremely difficult to select substances that react effectively. Furthermore, care is required in handling the chemicals used, and the chemicals may deteriorate in the air, which is not ideal for -M. The biological deodorization method described in (2) is also not suitable for the purpose of removing odors in the atmosphere, requires equipment, and has the disadvantages of slow onset of effects. The current situation is that each has its advantages and disadvantages.

[Purpose of the invention]

An object of the present invention is to provide a deodorant that does not have the above-mentioned conventional problems and is highly effective against sulfur odor, which is one of the main malodors.

[Disclosure of the invention]

The inventors have conducted various experiments in order to provide a deodorant that does not have the drawbacks of the conventional deodorizers. In the process, they discovered that their goal could be achieved by using extracts from plants.

Therefore, in order to make this layer more effective, after repeated experiments, it was discovered that glutaraldehyde could be added, and the present invention was completed.

That is, the gist of the present invention is a deodorizing agent against sulfur-based odors, which contains extracts from plants as a main component and has glutaraldehyde added thereto.

This will be explained in detail below.

As a result of various studies, the types of raw material plants that are effective against sulfur-based odors are thorn, holly osmanthus, lilac,
Osmanthus, butterbur, Asiatic osmanthus and Forsythia were found to be preferred. However, it is not limited to these. Deodorizing active ingredients are obtained by extracting the leaves, fruits, and bark of these plants.

The extraction method from the plant is not limited as long as it is an extraction method for removing odor components from the raw material plant. For example, a hydrophilic organic solvent such as water, an alcohol such as ethanol or methanol, or a ketone such as methyl ethyl ketone or acetone is added to the raw material plant mentioned above, and the deodorizing component is thermally extracted using a Soxhlet extractor or the like. . This extraction operation may be carried out using a mixed solvent of these hydrophilic organic solvents and water. The extract obtained in this way is used as a mixture or as a mixture. Note that the extraction is not performed in one step as described above, but as necessary, a hydrophobic organic solvent such as hexane, petroleum ether, etc. may be used to elute and remove the odor components of the raw material plant in advance. Alternatively, a steam distillation method may be used.

The amount of glutaraldehyde added is preferably 0.1 to 3 to 1 part of the plant extract.

Adjusting the p)I of the extract thus obtained to a predetermined range,
Enhances deodorizing effect. That is, by adding an alkaline solution such as sodium hydroxide or a buffering solution,
Adjust the pH to neutral to slightly basic, pH 6.5-8.

There are no particular restrictions on how deodorants can be used, but they can be used in a wide variety of ways depending on the purpose, such as liquid, spray, impregnated into a carrier, powdered tablets, or granules. Next, a description will be given based on an example.

(Examples 1 to 4 and Comparative Examples 1 to 5) Kiri, lilac, butterbur, and forsythia were each grown at 60°C.
The mixture was extracted with water for 3 hours and concentrated to dryness. The resulting deodorizing component was adjusted to 9.5% with a phosphate buffer (0.1M) having a pH of 7.0. A 25% aqueous solution of glutaraldehyde was added thereto so that the glutaraldehyde content was 0.3% to obtain deodorants of Examples 1 to 4 in this order.

For comparison, solutions without glutaraldehyde added were designated as Comparative Examples 1 to 4, and a solution containing only phosphate buffer without any plant extract was designated as Comparative Example 5, and the deodorizing ability was investigated as follows. . An aqueous hydrogen sulfide solution was prepared in a container that could be sealed tightly, a certain amount of each of the above methods was added, and the container was sealed. Thereafter, five panelists with a similar sense of smell were asked to smell the odor and evaluate the odor according to Table 1 below. The results are shown in Table 2.

As shown in Tables 1 and 2, the plant extract alone had a deodorizing effect, but when glutaraldehyde was added to it, the -layer effect increased.

(Examples 5 to 7 and Comparative Examples 6 to 8) Holly oleracea, lilac, and osmanthus were each extracted with water at 55° C. for 4 hours, and concentrated to dryness using a rotary evaporator. The resulting deodorizing component was adjusted to 0.1% with a phosphate buffer (0.1M) having a pH of 6.5. This includes 0.3% and 0.01% glutaraldehyde.
, 25% of glutaraldehyde to be 0.1%
By adding the aqueous solution, deodorants of Examples 5 to 7 were obtained in order. For comparison, liquids to which glutaraldehyde was not added were used as Comparative Examples 6 to 8, and their deodorizing effects were examined in the following manner.

A methyl mercaptan solution was prepared in a container that could be sealed tightly, a certain amount of each of the above methods was added, and the container was sealed.

Thereafter, gas was collected from the head space of the container and subjected to gas chromatography to measure the concentration of methyl mercaptan. An FPD was used as a detector. In order to determine the odor removal rate, the odor concentration was also measured when the same amount of water was added instead of the deodorant solution. The odor removal rate was determined according to the following formula.

A: Odor concentration when water is added B: Odor concentration when deodorant is added As shown in Table 3, the addition of glutaraldehyde increases the deodorizing effect.

Further, tests similar to those in Examples 1 to 7 were conducted for other sulfur-based odors, and good results were obtained.

〔Effect of the invention〕

Since the deodorant according to the present invention is constructed as described above, it does not suffer from the above-mentioned conventional problems and exhibits a high effect against sulfur-based odors.

Claims (4)

[Claims] (1) A deodorizing agent against sulfur-based odors, the deodorant mainly consisting of extracts from plants and to which glutaraldehyde is added. (2) The deodorant according to claim 1, wherein the plant is at least one selected from the group consisting of thorn, holly osmanthus, lilac, osmanthus, butterbur, thornbrush, and forsythia. (3) The deodorant according to claim 1 or 2, wherein the ratio of plant extract components to glutaraldehyde is 1:0.1 to 3. (4) The deodorant according to any one of claims 1 to 3, wherein the pH of the solution in which the deodorant is dissolved is 6.5 to 8.