KR101789315B1 - Method for recovering polypropylene by washing waste sediment filter for water-purifier - Google Patents

Abstract

The present invention relates to a method for recovering polypropylene by cleaning a waste sediment filter for a water purifier, and more particularly, to a method for recovering polypropylene by filtering a waste sediment filter for a water purifier, ) Is recovered.
According to the present invention, the material (polypropylene) inside the filter can be recovered and recycled through the chemical and physical cleaning of the waste sediment filter for the water purifier which is buried or incinerated at the present time. Further, according to the present invention, the purity and intrinsic viscosity of the recovered polypyrrole can be improved.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD [0001] The present invention relates to a method for recovering polypropylene by washing a waste sediment filter for a water purifier,

The present invention relates to a method for recovering polypropylene by cleaning a waste sediment filter for a water purifier, and more particularly, to a method for recovering polypropylene by filtering a waste sediment filter for a water purifier, ) Is recovered.

A water purifier is a device for filtering, adsorbing, ion-exchanging, and sterilizing natural water such as tap water or a weak water, and functions to remove particles, volatile organic substances, ions, or microorganisms in raw water.

Essentially, a filter is used in a water purifier, and a sediment filter, an activated carbon filter, a hollow fiber filter, an ion exchange resin filter, and an reverse osmosis filter are mainly used. Among these, sediment filters (sedimentation filters) are used for mechanical filtration and for removing dust and other particles present in water. The Sediment Filter is a pretreatment sedimentation filter that filters out rust, soil, sand, dust and other debris, including rust, contained in raw water, and removes foreign matter such as rust, Or normal operation of the filter.

In general, the replacement cycle of the sediment filter in household water purifiers will vary depending on the amount of water used and the contamination of the raw water, but in most cases it is replaced once every 3 to 6 months. Currently, all of the used sediment filters (waste filters) have been discarded, and research is needed to find ways to recycle these filters without disposing them.

As a recycling method of the sediment filter, there is a method of recycling the filter itself by washing the sediment filter, and a method of recovering the material (polypropylene) inside by washing the sediment filter.

In the case of recovering the waste sediment filter material, when the filter material is washed and recovered after the filter housing is dismantled, the amount of the washing liquid used increases, so that the cleaning efficiency is low and the polypropylene filter is damaged due to external stimuli during cleaning, There is a problem to be solved.

Korean Patent Publication No. 10-2011-0056724 Korean Patent Publication No. 10-2012-0082754

The object of the present invention is to efficiently recover and recycle a material (polypropylene) inside a filter through chemical and physical in-situ cleaning of a waste sediment filter for a water purifier which is buried or incinerated at the present time have.

The present invention relates to a cleaning step of a waste sediment filter for a water purifier, which comprises a chemical cleaning step using a cleaning agent and a physical cleaning step using a microbubble; Cutting the washed waste sediment filter housing to separate the filter nonwoven fabric included therein; Disrupting the separated nonwoven fabric; And a step of drying the pulverized nonwoven fabric to remove moisture, the method comprising the steps of:

The chemical cleaning step may be performed by circulating the cleaning agent into the sediment filter, and the physical cleaning step may be performed by circulating the microbubble water into the sediment filter.

Also, the cleaning step may be performed simultaneously with chemical cleaning and physical cleaning. In this case, the cleaning step may be performed by generating microbubbles in the cleaning agent, and then circulating the cleaning agent containing the microbubbles into the sedimentation filter.

Wherein the detergent is sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), chlorine dioxide _{(ClO 2), EDTA · 3} 4Na, EDTA, NaOH, citric _{acid, HCl, H PO 4, H} 2 SO 4 and Sodium Bicarbonate (SBS), and the like.

The concentration of the detergent may be 0.1 ppm to 1000 ppm (v / v) or 0.1 ppm to 1000 ppm (wt / wt).

More preferably, the detergent is mixed with 0.01 to 0.1% (v / v) of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 to 0.1% (wt / wt) of SBS (sodium sulfate) in a volume ratio of 1: Lt; / RTI > More preferably in a volume ratio of 1: 1. A sufficient cleaning effect can be obtained by washing in the above-described range according to the degree of contamination of the filter. If the above values are maintained, an excellent cleaning effect can be achieved even at a low chemical concentration, which is advantageous from the environmental point of view.

In the cleaning step, the temperature of the cleaning agent may be set to 20 to 45 캜, and more preferably to 32 to 37 캜.

The amount of microbubbles generated per minute may be 15 to 50 cc / min.

The cleaning step may be performed for 10 to 120 minutes. Specifically, the chemical cleaning step may be performed for 5 to 90 minutes, and the physical cleaning step may be performed for 5 to 30 minutes. If the chemical cleaning and physical cleaning are performed at the same time, the cleaning step may be performed for 10 to 120 minutes. The cleaning time can be adjusted within the above range depending on the degree of contamination of the filter.

The step of removing moisture may be carried out at 40 to 80 ° C for 10 to 24 hours, more preferably at 60 ° C for 12 hours

According to the present invention, it is possible to improve the cleaning efficiency and maximize the effect of disinfecting cleaning chemicals by in-situ chemical and physical cleaning of a waste sediment filter for a water purifier which is buried or incinerated at the present time, Since the damage of the material occurring during the cleaning of the polypropylene can be minimized, the material (polypropylene) inside the filter having better physical properties and purity can be recovered and recycled.

FIG. 1 is a graph showing the results of analysis of the cleaning effect of Example 2 by particle size analysis (Feed is a particle size distribution measured by preparing a 100NTU solution with A4 dust in tap water. New is a filter (New filter), Old is the particle size distribution of the permeate that has passed through the bottom part of the filter (waste filter) after 1 minute of feeding the feed, Cleaning is the same as the particle size distribution of the permeate after passing through the same The size distribution of the permeate at the bottom of the filter.
2 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 15 by particle size analysis.
3 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 17 by particle size analysis.
4 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 19 by particle size analysis.
5 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 25 by particle size analysis.
6 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 29 by particle size analysis.
7 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 30 by particle size analysis.
8 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 31 by particle size analysis.
9 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 32 by particle size analysis.
10 is a graph showing the results of analyzing the cleaning effect of Example 33 by particle size analysis.
11 is a photograph showing the cleaning effect according to Example 54; (a) Waste sediment filter before cleaning (b) Waste sediment filter after cleaning.
12 is a flow chart briefly illustrating a process for recovering polypropylene according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Hereinafter, the present invention will be described in more detail. The objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will be readily understood from the following detailed description. The present invention is not limited to the contents described here, but may be embodied in other forms. It is to be understood that both the foregoing general description and the following detailed description are exemplary and explanatory and are intended to provide further explanation of the invention as claimed. Therefore, the present invention should not be limited by the specific details for carrying out the following invention.

Example 1: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

20 liters of sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was added to the raw water tank, and the cleaning agent was supplied from the raw water tank. After chemical cleaning of the waste sediment filter for 10 minutes, it was physically cleaned with microbubbles for 10 minutes, The sodium chlorate remaining in the filter was removed, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 1. The temperature of the cleaning agent was maintained at 20 ° C to 25 ° C.

The chemical cleaning was carried out by circulating the cleaning agent into the spent sediment filter. In the physical cleaning, 20 L of distilled water is put into the raw water tank, and a micro bubble device is connected to the micro bubble generator to generate micro bubbles in the distilled water to generate micro bubble water, which is circulated in the waste sediment filter Respectively. The waste filter used in domestic water purifier for 3 months was used as the waste sediment filter.

For the flow rate evaluation, tap water was used as the feed liquid. The feed liquid was connected to the chiller and the experiment was conducted at 15 ° C. The flow rate was measured by adjusting the shear pressure to 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 (kgf / cm ² ). At this time, the pressure control was carried out by increasing the pressure from the high pressure to the low pressure order. The flow rate was evaluated by the amount of water (L) per minute (min) after permeation for 30 minutes or more for stabilization. For the evaluation of the differential pressure, water was used as the feed liquid, and the feed liquid was connected with the chiller to conduct the experiment at 15 ° C. The evaluation of the pressure difference was carried out based on the pressure difference between the upstream feed liquid and the downstream permeate of the filter. The conditions for the differential pressure evaluation were performed based on the case where the flow rate of the downstream permeate was 2 L / min or more. The evaluation method was applied to the following examples as well.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.06 0.79 1.7 2.25 2.9 2.4 1.5 0.9 After cleaning 0.2 0.88 1.7 2.3 2.95 2.8 1.85 0.85

Before and after cleaning, the flow rate was increased by 233% at 0.2 L / min, and 11.4% at 1 kgf / cm ² at a pressure of 0.5 kgf / cm ² before cleaning. Although the performance of the new filter was less than that of the new filter, we obtained the flow evaluation results close to the new filter. For the differential pressure (pressure difference between the front and rear ends of the filter), the pressure difference was reduced by 0.05 bar from the existing 0.9 bar to 0.85 bar. In the case of the new filter, there is no clogging due to the suspended material, so it is judged that the flow rate is large even at low pressure. It is judged that the difference of the pressure difference between the front and rear ends appears as above when the pore of the new filter is not clogged.

Example 2: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of used waste sediment filter

The cleaning was performed in the same manner as in Example 1 except that the chemical cleaning was performed for 20 minutes, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 2.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.125 0.81 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.6 1.5 1.1 After cleaning 0.23 0.85 1.75 2.3 2.83 2.5 1.45 0.95

At the pressure of 0.5 kgf / cm ^2, the flow rate was increased by 84% at 0.125 L / min before cleaning, 0.23 L / min after cleaning, and 5% at 1 kgf / cm ² . For the differential pressure evaluation, the result was 0.15 bar less than the existing pressure difference of 1.1 bar.

In order to confirm the pore size of the new filter (before use), the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning), particle size analysis experiments were carried out and the results are shown in FIG. In the particle size analysis experiment, A4 dust was added to the normal tap water to make 100 NTU preparation water. Then, the prepared water was passed through the filter for at least 1 minute, and the permeate discharged to the downstream was sampled and the sampled permeated liquid was analyzed using a particle size analyzer The volume percent of particle size was calculated and plotted. As shown in FIG. 1, the particle size of the feed before sampling was more than 200 μm. It has been confirmed that the performance of the filter after washing is restored to some extent although it does not reach the new filter particle removal rate.

Example 3 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

The cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that the chemical cleaning was carried out for 40 minutes, and the performance of the new filter (before use), the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) was compared and shown in Table 3.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.15 0.8 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.18 0.85 1.7 2.35 2.85 2.4 1.5 0.9

Example 4 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

The cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that the chemical cleaning was performed for 60 minutes, and the performance of the new filter (before use), the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 4.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.05 0.7 1.72 2.3 2.8 2.6 1.1 1.5 After cleaning 0.25 0.9 1.75 2.4 3 2.4 1.5 0.9

When the flow rate of washing before the result had been cleaned was then washed in washing around 0.05L / min at a pressure of 0.5kgf / cm ² to 0.25L / min increased by about 400%, in the 1kgf / cm ² was increased by 28.6%.

 For the differential pressure evaluation, the existing pressure difference was reduced to 0.6 bar at 0.9 bar at 1.5 bar.

When the results of Examples 1 to 4 are compared, when the pressure is 0.5 kgf / cm ² , the flow rate increase rate tends to increase as the cleaning time increases. As a result, the cleaning rate increases as the cleaning time increases.

Example 5: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of used waste sediment filter

The cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 20 ppm (v / v), and the performance of the new filter (before use), the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) Table 5 shows the results. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.135 0.76 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.5 One After cleaning 0.2 0.8 1.75 2.3 2.9 2.45 1.5 0.95

Example 6 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

Cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 20 ppm (v / v) and the cleaning time was set to 20 minutes, and a new filter (before use), a waste filter And after cleaning) are shown in Table 6. < tb > < TABLE > After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.075 0.7 1.6 2.3 2.7 2.65 1.4 1.25 After cleaning 0.22 0.75 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.4 1.6 0.8

Example 7 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

Cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 20 ppm (v / v) and the cleaning time was set to 40 minutes, and a new filter (before use), a waste filter And after cleaning) are shown in Table 7. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.19 0.8 1.75 2.35 2.7 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.33 0.85 1.8 2.4 2.8 2.4 1.6 0.8

Example 8 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

Cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 20 ppm and the cleaning time was set to 60 minutes, and a new filter (before use), a waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) Table 8 shows the performance comparison.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.066 0.7 1.75 2.25 2.75 2.7 1.3 1.4 After cleaning 0.3 0.9 1.8 2.4 2.9 2.3 1.6 0.7

Example 9 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effects of Waste Sediment Filters Used

The cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 100 ppm (v / v), and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) Table 9 shows the results.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.1 0.65 1.65 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.2 0.7 1.7 2.4 2.85 2.4 1.4 One

The flow rate after cleaning was improved than the flow rate of the existing measured waste filter, and the differential pressure was measured as the pressure difference was low because the shear pressure was generally low.

Example 10 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

Cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1, except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 100 ppm (v / v) and the cleaning time was set to 20 minutes. A new filter (before use), a waste filter After washing) were compared and shown in Table 10.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.65 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.4 1.3 1.1 After cleaning 0.25 0.8 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.35 1.35 One

The flow rate after cleaning was improved than the flow rate of the existing measured waste filter, and the differential pressure was measured as the pressure difference was low because the shear pressure was generally low.

Example 11 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

Cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1, except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 100 ppm (v / v) and the cleaning time was set to 40 minutes. A new filter (before use), a waste filter After cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 11.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.085 0.7 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.7 1.5 1.2 After cleaning 0.2 0.8 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.4 1.5 0.9

The flow rate after cleaning was improved than the flow rate of the existing measured waste filter, and the differential pressure was measured as the pressure difference was low because the shear pressure was generally low.

Example 12 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

The cleaning was carried out in the same manner as in Example 1 except that sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was set to 100 ppm (v / v) and the cleaning time was set to 60 minutes. A new filter (before use), a waste filter After washing) were compared and shown in Table 12.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.15 0.7 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.45 1.5 0.95 After cleaning 0.3 0.8 1.7 2.4 2.95 2.3 1.4 0.9

The flow rate after cleaning was improved than the flow rate of the existing measured waste filter, and the differential pressure was measured as the pressure difference was low because the shear pressure was generally low.

Examples 13 to 16: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filters

(Example 14), 20 minutes (Example 14), 40 minutes (Example 15), and 60 minutes (Example 16), respectively, and the other conditions were set as follows: Cleaning was performed in the same manner as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Tables 13 to 16.

Example 13 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.15 0.7 1.7 2.3 2.9 2.6 1.4 1.2 After cleaning 0.2 0.8 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.4 One One

Example 14 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.07 0.65 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.45 1.35 1.1 After cleaning 0.18 0.7 1.7 2.35 2.85 2.35 1.3 1.05

Example 15 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.15 0.8 1.7 2.4 2.8 2.4 1.4 One After cleaning 0.3 0.9 1.75 2.4 2.9 2.3 1.5 0.8

Example 16 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.23 0.95 1.8 2.4 3.05 2.2 1.5 0.7 Before cleaning 0.22 0.75 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.3 0.9 1.7 2.4 2.95 2.3 1.4 0.9

Also, microbubbles after chemical cleaning for 40 minutes using 200 ppm of sodium chlorate according to Example 15 were cleaned for 10 minutes, and particle size analysis was carried out. The results are shown in FIG. The particle size analysis was performed in the same manner as described in Example 2 above. As shown in FIG. 2, the cleaned filter exhibited the same particle removal rate as that of the new filter, and it was confirmed that the contamination source inside the sediment filter was removed and the performance equivalent to that of the new filter was recovered.

Example 17 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent to perform chemical cleaning and physical cleaning at the same time. Specifically, 20 L of 10 ppm (v / v) of sodium chlorate (NaOCl) was added to the raw water tank, and then a micro bubble generator was connected and operated to generate microbubbles in the cleaning agent. The cleaning was performed by circulating the microbubble-generated cleaning agent inside the waste sediment filter for 60 minutes, and the effect was analyzed. Other conditions were analyzed in the same manner as in Example 1. The results of the analysis are shown in Table 17.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.7 1.6 2.4 2.9 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.3 0.9 1.7 2.4 3 2.3 1.4 0.9

As a result of the flow rate evaluation, the flow rate at low pressure was significantly increased, and the results of the differential pressure evaluation showed a decrease with the removal of the fouling material in the conventional filter through the cleaning agent and the bubble.

The particle size analysis was carried out in the same manner as described in Example 2, and the results are shown in FIG. The particle size of the feed before sampling was more than 200um. In the case of the new filter, all particles with a particle size greater than 10 μm were removed. It can be confirmed that the performance after the cleaning is restored to some extent although it does not reach the new filter particle removal rate.

Examples 18 to 21: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filters

10 minutes (Example 18), 20 minutes (Example 18), 40 minutes (Example 6), 10 ppm (v / v) of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) was used as a cleaning agent in place of the sodium chlorate of Example 1 18) and 60 minutes (Example 18). The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performance of the new filter (before use), the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) To 21.

Example 18 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.18 0.7 1.7 2.3 2.9 2.6 1.6 One After cleaning 0.225 0.82 1.78 2.3 2.95 2.3 1.5 0.8

Example 19 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.24 0.8 1.6 2.4 2.95 2.4 1.5 0.9 After cleaning 0.3 1.0 1.7 2.45 2.95 2.3 1.5 0.8

Example 20 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.1 0.4 1.3 1.9 2.3 2.7 1.5 1.2 After cleaning 0.2 0.6 1.4 2.3 2.7 2.4 1.3 1.1

Example 21 Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.097 0.7 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.55 1.35 1.2 After cleaning 0.23 0.85 1.7 2.3 2.85 2.4 1.45 0.95

Also, according to Example 19, chlorine dioxide was cleaned at 10 ppm for 20 minutes, and then cleaned for 10 minutes using microbubbles, and the particle size was analyzed. The results are shown in FIG. The particle size analysis was carried out in the same manner as described in Example 2. As shown in FIG. 4, the cleaned filter exhibited a particle removal rate equivalent to that of the new filter, and it was confirmed that the contamination source inside the sediment filter was removed and the performance equivalent to that of the new filter was recovered.

Example 22: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

10 ppm (v / v) of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) was used in place of sodium chlorate and the rest was cleaned in the same manner as in Example 1, and a fresh filter (before use), a waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) Table 22 shows the performance comparison.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.6 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.5 One After cleaning 0.25 0.65 1.75 2.3 2.9 2.55 1.65 0.9

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 23 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

The sample was chemically cleaned with 10 ppm (v / v) of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) instead of sodium chlorate and a cleaning time of 20 minutes, followed by physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 23.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.25 0.7 1.6 2.3 2.7 2.65 1.4 1.25 After cleaning 0.3 0.75 1.7 2.4 2.8 2.5 1.45 1.05

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 24 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

The sample was chemically cleaned with 10 ppm (v / v) of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) instead of sodium chlorate and a cleaning time of 40 minutes, followed by physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 24.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.085 0.6 1.65 2.35 2.7 2.5 1.4 1.1 After cleaning 0.2 0.8 1.75 2.4 2.8 2.4 1.5 0.9

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 25: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The sample was chemically cleaned with 10 ppm (v / v) of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) instead of sodium chlorate and a cleaning time of 60 minutes, followed by physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 25.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.15 0.7 1.7 2.3 2.7 2.7 1.3 1.4 After cleaning 0.33 0.85 1.75 2.4 2.85 2.4 1.6 0.8

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

The cleaning was carried out and the particle size analysis was carried out. The results are shown in FIG. The particle size analysis was carried out in the same manner as described in Example 2. It was confirmed that particles of 125 m or more were detected in the case of the waste filter before cleaning, but particles of about 25 m or more were removed in the case of the waste filter after cleaning.

Example 26 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

The sample was chemically cleaned by setting chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) at 100 ppm (v / v) instead of sodium chlorate and cleaning time at 10 minutes, and then performing physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 26.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.221 0.92 1.7 2.35 2.9 2.4 1.5 0.9 After cleaning 0.3 0.95 1.7 2.4 3 2.4 1.6 0.8

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 27: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The sample was chemically cleaned by setting chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) to 100 ppm (v / v) instead of sodium chlorate and cleaning time to 20 minutes, and then performing physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 1, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 27.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.18 0.8 1.6 2.35 3 2.65 1.6 1.05 After cleaning 0.23 0.85 1.7 2.4 3 2.5 1.5 One

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 28: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The sample was chemically cleaned by setting chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) at 100 ppm (v / v) instead of sodium chlorate and cleaning time of 40 minutes, and then performing physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The rest of the conditions were cleaned in the same manner as in Example 1, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 28.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.19 0.8 1.65 2.3 2.9 2.75 1.7 1.05 After cleaning 0.25 0.9 1.7 2.4 3 2.5 1.6 0.9

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased.

Example 29: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The sample was chemically cleaned by setting chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) at 100 ppm (v / v) instead of sodium chlorate and cleaning time of 60 minutes, followed by physical cleaning with microbubbles for 10 minutes. The rest of the conditions were cleaned in the same manner as in Example 1, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 29. [

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.22 0.79 1.6 2.25 2.8 2.6 1.6 One After cleaning 0.3 0.85 1.4 2.35 3 2.4 1.6 0.8

After washing, the flow rate increased and the pressure difference decreased. More specifically, at a pressure of 4 kgf / cm ² , the flow rate was increased from 0.2 to 0.2 L / min, and the differential pressure was reduced by 0.2 bar.

The cleaning was carried out and the particle size analysis was carried out. The results are shown in FIG. The particle size analysis was carried out in the same manner as described in Example 2. As shown in FIG. 6, the cleaned filter exhibited a particle removal rate substantially similar to that of the new filter. As a result, it was confirmed that the pollution source inside the sediment filter was removed, and the performance of the filter was almost equal to that of the new filter.

Example 30: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was performed for 60 minutes (see Example 17). The remaining conditions such as the concentration of chlorine dioxide (ClO ₂ ) were cleansed under the same conditions as those in Example 29, and particle size analysis (see Example 2) The performance was compared and the results are shown in FIG. As shown in FIG. 7, the wasted filter after cleaning exhibited a better particle removal rate than that of the existing new filter, and it was confirmed that the cleaning effect was maximized when microbubbles and chemical cleaning were performed at the same time.

Example 31: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The microbubbles of the chemical cleaning agent itself were generated, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was carried out for 60 minutes (see Example 17). EDTA · 4Na 0.05% (wt / wt) was used as a chemical cleaning agent. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 29, and the particle size analysis (see Example 2) Before and after cleaning), and the results are shown in FIG. When the waste filter was cleaned, it was confirmed that particles smaller than that of the filter before washing were removed, and it was confirmed that the performance of the filter was restored to some extent.

Example 32: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of used waste sediment filters

The sample was chemically cleaned by mixing 0.05% (wt / wt) of EDTA and 0.05% (wt / wt) of NaOH in place of the sodium chlorate of Example 1 as a chemical cleanser and washing time of 60 minutes. Respectively. EDTA and NaOH were mixed at a volume ratio of 1: 1. The remaining conditions such as the amount of the chemical cleaning agent were cleaned in the same manner as in Example 1, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) are shown in Table 30.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.25 0.7 1.65 2.3 2.9 2.4 1.5 0.9 After cleaning 0.3 0.8 1.7 2.4 3 2.35 1.4 0.85

As a result of the evaluation of the flow rate of the waste filter after the washing and the pressure difference evaluation,

Further, the particle size analysis after the washing (see Example 2) was carried out, and the result is shown in FIG. In the case of the waste filter after cleaning, it was confirmed that particles smaller than that of the waste filter before cleaning were removed, and it was confirmed that the performance was restored to some extent by washing.

Example 33: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was performed for 60 minutes (see Example 17). The other conditions such as the type and concentration of the chemical cleaning agent were cleaned under the same conditions as in Example 32, and the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) are shown in Table 31.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.23 0.75 1.6 2.35 2.8 2.5 1.5 One After cleaning 0.35 0.9 1.75 2.4 3 2.3 1.7 0.6

As a result of the flow rate evaluation, the performance of the new filter was almost equal to that of the new filter.

As a result of the particle size analysis (see Example 2), the particle removal ratio of the filter after the cleaning was higher than that of the new filter. As a result, when the microbubbles and the chemical cleaning were separately used, (See Fig. 10).

Example 34: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The microbubbles of the chemical cleaning agent itself were generated, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was carried out for 60 minutes (see Example 17). EDTA and citric acid were mixed in a volume ratio of 1: 1 and 0.05% (wt / wt) of EDTA and 0.05% (wt / wt) of citric acid were used as a chemical cleaner. The remaining conditions such as the amount of the chemical cleaning agent were cleaned in the same manner as in Example 32, and the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) are shown in Table 32. [ After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.16 0.62 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.6 1.6 One After cleaning 0.25 0.83 1.8 2.5 2.9 2.6 1.7 0.9

Example 35 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

The microbubbles of the chemical cleaning agent itself were generated, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was carried out for 60 minutes (see Example 17). Chemical cleaning agent was prepared by mixing 0.05% (wt / wt) NaOH and 0.05% (wt / wt) citric acid and 1: 1 volume ratio of NaOH and citric acid. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 34, and the cleaning was carried out. The performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) are shown in Table 33. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.28 0.82 1.6 2.4 2.8 2.7 1.7 One After cleaning 0.35 0.9 1.65 2.45 2.9 2.5 1.6 0.9

Example 36: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

The microbubbles of the chemical cleaning agent itself were generated, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was carried out for 60 minutes (see Example 17). A mixture of NaOCl 100 ppm (v / v), EDTA 0.05% (wt / wt) and citric acid 0.05% (wt / wt) was used as a chemical cleaner and the volume ratio of NaOCl: EDTA: Citric acid was adjusted to 1: Respectively. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 34, and the cleaning was carried out. The performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 34. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.19 0.8 1.7 2.3 2.9 2.5 1.5 One After cleaning 0.275 0.9 1.75 2.4 2.95 2.4 1.55 0.85

Example 37 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

The microbubbles of the chemical cleaning agent itself were generated, and the chemical cleaning and the physical cleaning were simultaneously carried out, and the cleaning was carried out for 60 minutes (see Example 17). The volume ratio of the SBS (Sodium-bi-sulfate) : H 2 SO 4 0.05% with a chemical cleaning agent (v / v) and SBS (Sodium-bi-sulfate) using mixture of 0.05% (wt / wt), and H ₂ SO ₄ 1: 1. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 34, and the cleaning was carried out. The performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) were compared and shown in Table 35. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.24 0.86 1.7 2.3 2.8 2.5 1.6 0.9 After cleaning 0.35 0.95 1.75 2.45 3 2.2 1.6 0.6

Example 38 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent to perform chemical cleaning and physical cleaning at the same time to perform cleaning (see Example 17). After washing the microbubbles with 20 L of NaOH 0.1% (wt / wt) NaOH for 5 minutes, microbubbles were washed with 20,000 mL of EDTA 0.1% (wt / wt) for 5 minutes and 20,000 mL of citric acid 1% The microbubbles were cleaned under the same conditions as in Example 34. The results are shown in Table 36 for comparison of the performance of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning). The flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.07 0.49 1.6 2.3 2.8 2.7 1.5 1.2 After cleaning 0.15 0.6 1.65 2.35 2.85 2.5 1.5 One

Example 39 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Used Waste Sediment Filters

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent to perform chemical cleaning and physical cleaning at the same time to perform cleaning (see Example 17). 0.1% (v / v) of phosphoric acid (H ₃ PO ₄ ) was used as a chemical cleaning agent. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 34 and the cleaning was performed. A new filter (before use), a waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning ) Are shown in Table 37. After washing, the flow rate increased and the differential pressure decreased.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.12 0.6 1.6 2.3 2.9 2.5 1.5 One After cleaning 0.25 0.7 1.7 2.4 3 2.4 1.5 0.9

Example 40: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

Microbubbles were generated in the chemical cleaning agent to perform chemical cleaning and physical cleaning at the same time to perform cleaning (see Example 17). The microbubbles were washed with 20 L of HCl 0.1% (v / v) for 5 minutes and then washed with microbubbles for 5 minutes with H ₂ SO ₄ 0.1% (v / v) 20 L. The remaining conditions were the same as in Example 34 And the performances of the new filter (before use) and the waste filter (before cleaning and after cleaning) are shown in Table 38. The flow rate after cleaning and the pressure difference tend to decrease.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.22 0.86 1.6 2.3 2.95 2.5 1.6 0.9 After cleaning 0.35 0.95 1.75 2.4 3 2.2 1.5 0.7

Example 41: Analysis of the cleaning and cleaning effects of the used waste sediment filter

After putting the cleaning agent 20L into the raw water tank, the microbubble generator was connected and operated to generate microbubbles in the cleaning agent. The microbubble-generated cleaning agent was circulated to the inside of the waste sediment filter, and the washed filter was cleaned with distilled water for 30 minutes to prevent the detergent from remaining, and the performance of the sediment filter was analyzed. . In this case, 0.01 (v / v)% of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 (wt / wt) of SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a volume ratio of 1: 0.5 and used as a cleaning agent. (Room temperature condition). The amount of microbubbles generated per minute 25 cc / min. As a waste sediment filter, a waste filter used in domestic water purifier for 3 months was used.

For the flow rate evaluation, tap water was used as the feed liquid. The feed liquid was connected to the chiller and the experiment was conducted at 15 ° C. The flow rate was measured by adjusting the shear pressure to 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4 (kgf / cm ² ). At this time, the pressure control was carried out by increasing the pressure from the high pressure to the low pressure order. The flow rate was evaluated by the amount of water (L) per minute (min) after permeating the tap water sufficiently for 30 minutes or more and then passing the tap water through the tap water for stabilization. For the evaluation of the differential pressure, water was used as the feed liquid, and the feed liquid was connected with the chiller to conduct the experiment at 15 ° C. The evaluation of the pressure difference was carried out based on the pressure difference between the upstream feed liquid and the downstream permeate of the filter. The conditions for the differential pressure evaluation were performed based on the case where the flow rate of the downstream permeate was 2 L / min or more. The evaluation method was applied to the following examples as well.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
( kgf / cm ² ) 0.5
One
2
3
4
Shear pressure
Rear end pressure
Pressure difference
New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.7 1.68 2.35 2.7 2.5 1.35 1.15 After cleaning 0.3 0.83 1.8 2.4 2.75 2.3 1.3 One

Example 42: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01% (v / v) of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01% (wt / wt) of SBS were prepared and mixed with each other at a volume ratio of 1: 1 to prepare a cleaning agent. The results are shown in Table 40.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.17 0.65 1.7 2.3 2.76 2.6 1.4 1.2 After cleaning 0.2 0.77 1.8 2.4 2.8 2.35 1.55 0.8

Example 43: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01 (v / v)% of H ₂ SO ₄ was prepared and used as a cleaning agent. The remaining conditions were set in the same manner as in Example 41, and the results are shown in Table 41.

Flow rate evaluation (L / min ) Foreclosure evaluation  ( bar ) Shear pressure
( kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.8 1.65 2.18 2.7 2.7 1.3 1.4 After cleaning 0.19 0.8 1.6 2.2 2.65 2.6 2.3 1.3

Example 44: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01 (wt / wt)% SBS was prepared and used as a cleaning agent. The remaining conditions were set in the same manner as in Example 41, and the results are shown in Table 42.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.11 0.72 1.5 2.2 2.6 2.8 1.3 1.5 After cleaning 0.13 0.75 1.5 2.22 2.5 2.75 1.35 1.45

Example 45: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01% (v / v) of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01% (wt / wt) of SBS were prepared and the solutions prepared were mixed in a volume ratio of 1: 2 and used as a cleaning agent. The results are shown in Table 43.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.18 0.6 1.4 2.1 2.55 2.9 1.4 1.5 After cleaning 0.2 0.65 1.4 2.11 2.57 2.9 1.45 1.45

As shown in the results of Examples 41 to 45, it was confirmed that the cleaning effect was the best when the mixing ratio of sulfuric acid and SBS 0.01% solution was 1: 1. Sulfuric acid and SBS were found to have little or no effect when used alone, even with microbubbles.

Example 46 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

0.01 (v / v)% of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed in a volume ratio of 1: 1 to be used as a cleaning agent. And the remaining conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 44.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.3 0.7 1.5 2.15 2.6 2.5 1.5 0.9 After cleaning 0.35 0.75 1.52 2.2 2.6 2.45 1.6 0.85

Example 47: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a volume ratio of 1: 1 and used as a cleaning agent. And the remaining conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 45.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.62 1.4 2.1 2.59 2.43 1.5 0.93 After cleaning 0.35 0.83 1.63 2.3 2.72 2.1 1.5 0.6

Example 48: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.01 (v / v)% of H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a volume ratio of 1: 1 to be used as a cleaning agent. And the remaining conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 46.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.62 1.4 2.1 2.59 2.43 1.5 0.93 After cleaning 0.35 0.83 1.63 2.3 2.72 2.1 1.5 0.6

As shown in Examples 46 to 48, the best cleaning performance was confirmed at a temperature of 35 캜. Especially, it showed excellent performance in differential pressure evaluation.

Example 49 Analysis of Cleaning and Cleaning Effect of Waste Sediment Filters Used

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.05 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a volume ratio of 1: 1 and used as a cleaning agent. And the rest of the conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 47.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.13 0.61 1.5 2.2 2.6 2.6 1.2 1.4 After cleaning 0.18 0.65 1.52 2.24 2.69 2.7 1.2 1.2

Example 50: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.05 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared. The solutions were mixed at a volume ratio of 2: 1 and used as a cleaning agent. And the rest of the conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 48. < tb >< TABLE >

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.17 0.6 1.5 2.1 2.6 2.6 1.4 1.2 After cleaning 0.33 0.75 1.62 2.25 2.78 2.4 1.6 0.8

Example 51: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.05 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a ratio of 1: 2 by volume and used as a cleaning agent. And the rest of the conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41. The results are shown in Table 49.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.048 0.45 1.43 2.0 2.49 2.9 1.3 1.6 After cleaning 0.28 0.69 1.6 2.2 2.6 2.7 1.5 1.2

Example 52: Analysis of washing and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.05 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a ratio of 1: 2 by volume and used as a cleaning agent. And the microbubble generation rate per minute was set at 25 cc / min. The rest of the conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41, and the results are shown in Table 50.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.12 0.61 1.5 2.1 2.6 2.8 1.4 1.4 After cleaning 0.18 0.71 1.55 2.1 2.63 2.5 1.3 1.2

Example 53: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of used waste sediment filter

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.05 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a ratio of 1: 2 by volume and used as a cleaning agent. And the microbubble generation rate per minute was set at 50 cc / min. The remaining conditions were set and analyzed in the same manner as in Example 41, and the results are shown in Table 51.

Flow Rate Evaluation (L / min) Differential pressure evaluation (bar) Shear pressure
(kgf / cm ² ) 0.5 One 2 3 4 Shear pressure Rear end pressure Pressure difference New filter 0.29 0.91 1.76 2.39 3 2.3 1.64 0.66 Before cleaning 0.2 0.7 1.4 2.1 2.6 2.6 1.6 One After cleaning 0.33 0.8 1.46 2.27 2.73 2.5 1.6 0.9

As shown in Examples 52 to 53, it was confirmed that the greater the amount of microbubbles to be generated, the higher the cleaning effect. This is because the inside of the sediment filter is wrapped like a thread by polypropylene, so the surface area is high, and the more the microbubbles are generated, the better the cleaning effect is. However, if the microbubbles are increased to more than 50 cc / min, even if the chiller is operated to maintain the temperature of the feed liquid, the temperature is rapidly increased due to microbubbles. The flow rate temporarily permeated by an increase in temperature may be increased, but the cleaning effect may be lowered because the temperature is higher than 35 ° C, which is the optimum temperature condition shown in the previous embodiment. Therefore, it may be advantageous to keep the microbubble generation rate per minute at 50 cc / min or less.

Example 54: Analysis of cleaning and cleaning effects of spent waste sediment filter

0.05 (v / v)% H ₂ SO ₄ and 0.01 (wt / wt)% SBS were prepared, and the prepared solutions were mixed at a ratio of 1: 2 by volume and used as a cleaning agent. The microbubble generation rate per minute was 25 cc / min. The remaining conditions were set in the same manner as in Example 41 to clean the waste filter, and the results before and after cleaning were shown in Fig. The cleaned filter was disassembled after the housing was disassembled, and the filter nonwoven fabric (polypropylene) was separated and dried sufficiently (at least 12 hours) at a temperature of 60 ° C. As shown in FIG. 11, it was confirmed that the color of the sediment filter, which had been discolored by the contaminant before cleaning, changed to whitish as the color of the new filter. As a result, the cleaning effect was visually confirmed.

Example 55: Analysis of recovery and recovery of polypropylene from a cleaned waste sediment filter

After the waste filter was washed in the same manner as in Example 54, the housing on both sides of the filter was cut, and only the non-woven fabric filter made of polypropylene inside was withdrawn and withdrawn. The recovered filter was placed in a crusher and crushed. At this time, the diameter of the pulverized product was 0.05 to 1 mm. The crushed filter was spread evenly on a glass tray and dried at a temperature of 60 DEG C for 12 hours to dry the moisture (see FIG. 12). The moisture was removed and the polypropylene was recovered. The recovered polypropylene recovered from the washed waste sediment filter and the recovered polypropylene recovered from the pseudodemination filter before washing were analyzed and the results are shown in Table 52. [ The recovery rate refers to the percentage of polypropylene that can be recovered in the waste sediment filter and reused in the form of pellets. Recovery was calculated as the amount of the polypropylene component that can be reused in the total amount of the components of the nonwoven filter using the component analysis. The samples used eight waste filters used in domestic water purifiers for three months.

Recovery rate before washing (%) Recovery after washing (%) Sample 1 38 72 Sample 2 40 75 Sample 3 44 88 Sample 4 36 70 Sample 5 41 83 Sample 6 42 85 Sample 7 39 80 Sample 8 31 68

As shown in Table 52, it was confirmed that the material recovery rate was doubled due to the effect that the foreign substance was removed through the cleaning and the surface of the polypropylene was disinfected.

Example 56: Purity analysis of polypropylene

The purity of the recovered polypropylene according to Example 55 was analyzed, and the results are shown in Table 53. < tb > < TABLE > The pollution analysis (chemical analysis of chemical contaminants and contamination analysis of physical dusts) was used for the analysis of purity. The contamination analysis was performed by dissolving polypropylene in a solvent and pretreating it, and then analyzing the difference in physical properties of each component by Prep-GPC. The purity of polypropylene refers to the purity of recovered pure propylene.

Purity before cleaning (%) Purity after cleaning (%) Sample 1 70 82 Sample 2 69 84 Sample 3 66 98 Sample 4 70 78 Sample 5 65 96 Sample 6 69 90 Sample 7 70 86 Sample 8 71 81

Example 57: Intrinsic viscosity analysis of polypropylene

The intrinsic viscosity of the recovered polypropylene according to Example 55 was analyzed, and the results are shown in Table 54. < tb > < TABLE > The intrinsic viscosity was measured by using an Ostwald viscometer at an intrinsic viscosity in tetralin at 135 占 폚. The intrinsic viscosity was measured five times in total, and the average was calculated using three measurements except for the highest and lowest values. The intrinsic viscosity decreases depending on the reuse frequency. It is considered that the intrinsic viscosity after washing is higher than the intrinsic viscosity before washing. As a result, the purity of the polypropylene is increased by washing, and thus the intrinsic viscosity is also increased.

Intrinsic viscosity before washing (dl / g) Intrinsic viscosity after cleaning (dl / g) Sample 1 1.48 1.94 Sample 2 1.55 2.09 Sample 3 1.61 2.5 Sample 4 1.5 1.8 Sample 5 1.55 2.38 Sample 6 1.3 2.4 Sample 7 1.67 2.3 Sample 8 1.42 1.9

Claims (10)

A chemical cleaning step using a cleaning agent and a physical cleaning step using a microbubble; a cleaning step of a waste sediment filter for a water purifier;
Separating the filter nonwoven fabric contained therein by cutting the housing of the washed waste sediment filter;
Disrupting the separated nonwoven fabric; And
Drying the crushed nonwoven fabric to remove water,
The chemical cleaning step is performed by circulating the cleaning agent into the sediment filter,
The physical cleaning step is performed by circulating microbubble water into the sediment filter,
The temperature of the cleaning agent is set to 20 to 45 캜,
The microbubble generation rate per minute is 15 to 50 cc / min,
The cleaning step is performed for 10 to 120 minutes,
Wherein the chemical cleaning step is performed for 5 to 90 minutes. ≪ RTI ID = 0.0 > 11. < / RTI >
delete The method according to claim 1,
Wherein the cleaning step comprises chemical cleaning and physical cleaning at the same time. The method of claim 3,
Characterized in that the cleaning step is carried out by a method of circulating a cleaning agent containing microbubbles into a sediment filter after microbubbles are generated in the cleaning agent and a method of recovering polypropylene through cleaning of a waste sediment filter for a water purifier .
The method according to claim 1,
Wherein the detergent is sodium hypochlorite (NaOCl), chlorine dioxide _{(ClO 2), EDTA · 3} 4Na, EDTA, NaOH, citric _{acid, HCl, H PO 4, H} 2 SO 4 and SBS (sodium-bi-sulfate). The method for recovering polypropylene according to claim 1,
delete delete delete delete The method according to claim 1,
Wherein the step of removing moisture is carried out at 40 to 80 DEG C for 10 to 24 hours.

Images