• Proceedings of the Korea Society of Environmental Toocicology Conference
• /
• 2001.05a
• /
• pp.136-136
• /
• 2001

CFC-113 (1, 1, 2-trichloro-1, 2, 2-trifluoro ethane )과 1, 1, 1-trichloroethane은 여러 산업체에서 세정제로서 광범위하게 사용되었으나, 오존층 파괴물질로서 규제함으로써, 대체 세정제의 사용이 불가피하게 되었다. 대체 세정제는 세정성, 경제성 및 안전성을 평가하여 선정하는데, 최근 환경에 대한 관심의 증가로 세정제가 인체 건강 및 환경에 미치는 독성을 평가하는 안전성 평가에 대한 중요성이 부각되고 있다. (중략)

• Analytical Science and Technology
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.65-75
• /
• 1993

A number of alternative cleaning solvents to CFC 113 which was identified as a ozone-depleting meterial were collected to measure their experimental physecal properties of density, surface tension, Refractive Index, boiling point, pH, viscosity, flash point, and soltbility. They might be classified as aqueous, simi-aqeous, alcohol ketone, and halogen cleaning solvents. The solubilities of abietic acid, a major component of flux used in PCB (Printed Circuit Board) of the electronic indystry, into the cleaning solvents including CFC 113 were determined for comparison. The assorted cleaning solvents have their own advantages and disadvantages. Therefore a end-user carefully needs to choose the best-fit cleaning solvent after the safety, stability, and economics as well as the effectiveness by physical properties of the alternative cleaning solvents are integratedly considered.

• Analytical Science and Technology
• /
• v.6 no.5
• /
• pp.521-530
• /
• 1993

According to the Montreal Protocol, CFC 113, one of the ozone-depleting substances, will be prohibited to use as a cleaning solvent essentially in the electronic industry. Therefore, the development of the alternative cleaning solvents to CFC 113 is being accelerated. A number of the alternative cleaning solvents are avialable on the market. The alternatives of Axarel 32(DuPont), Cleanthru 750H(KAO Chemical), and EC-Ultra(Petroferm) are chosen for the comparison of cleaning performance with CFC 113. The test methods for measuring the cleaning performance were composed of the measurement of the physical properties, the experiments on the material compatibility with cleaning solvents, the measurement of the evaporation rate, and finally the experiments of the removal efficiency. Normally the basic physical properties of the alternatives had higher boiling points, viscosity and surface tension, which were quite different to those of CFC 113. In terms of solubility of rosin-based flux, the solubilities of abietic acid (nonpolar organic) were similar, but those of the activator (polar organic) in the alternatives were better than CFC 113. The evaporation of the alternatives was very slow, compared to CFC 113, which had much lower boiling point. All the cleaning solvents showed the good material compatibility with FR4 and Cu-coated PCB. The better removal efficiencies of abietic acid were obtained when using the ultrasonic mechanical energy over the dipping method. The experiments also indicated the very slow-eavaporating solvent was not desirable with the dipping cleaning method, and the differences in the removal efficiency of the alternatives with the ultrasonic cleaning method were negligible. Among the alternatives, the overall cleaning performances were obsorved as almost similar. Before selecting the ultimate cleaning solvent, the application of cleaning machine, environmental issues, and economics are simultaneously considered with the cleaning performance.

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.11 no.3
• /
• pp.129-139
• /
• 2005

Fluoride-type cleaning agents such as TFEA (2,2,2-trifluoroethanol) and HFE (hydrofluoroether) are noticed to be next generation cleaning agents alternative to CFCs since they do not destruct ozones in the stratosphere due to no containment of chloride in the molecule, have lower global warming potential compared to HFCs and HCFCs, and are thermally stable compounds. Thus, the physical properties and cleaning agents were measured and compared with those of CFC-113, 1,1,1-TCE and HCFC-141b which are ozone destruction substances. They were also compared and evaluated with those of IPA and methanol which are currently employing as alternative cleaning agents. And TFEA-based cleaning agents consisted of TFEA and alcohols or HFEs were formulated, their physical properties and cleaning abilities were measured and their utilization as alternative cleaning agents was evaluated. As a result, TFEA and HFEs have lower cleaning ability for their removal of various soils compared to chloride-type cleaning agents, but theyshow excellent cleaning ability for Fluoride-type soils. And it is observed that the formulated cleaning agents of TFEA and alcohols or HFEs caused to increase cleaning ability of flux and unsoluble cutting oil more than 100% compared to their individual component. Therefore, the fluoride-type cleaning agents are expected to be utilized for development of environmental-friendly non aqueous cleaning agents with excellent cleaning ability if they are formulated with proper solvents or additives.

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.103-109
• /
• 2008

In this study, in order to develop evaluation method of the cleaning efficiency of residual flux which remains on the surface after soldering with solder paste, a specially designed metal tool is used to reduce spread uncertainty of flux while soldering. Using this tool, the measurement of cleaning efficiency of flux after soldering for some typical alternative semi-aqueous cleaners and 1,1,1-TCE by weighing method was conducted. As the test result of cleaning efficiency for each cleaner at several different cleaning times, the precision of the data is confirmed to within about 4% relative standard deviation (RSD) range. So, it is considered that this would be a good evaluation method for evaluating the cleaning efficiency of the residual flux which remains after solder paste soldering in the alternative cleaning. The results of this test method shows that the cleaning efficiency of ST 100SX and Neozal 750H in the cleaning of residual flux was better than other semi-aqueous cleaners, but its cleaning efficiency was clearly inferior to 1,1,1-TCE.

• Air Cleaning Technology
• /
• v.7 no.2 s.25
• /
• pp.33-47
• /
• 1994

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.184-192
• /
• 2008

Fluoride-type cleaning agents such as 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (TFEA) and hydrofluoroethers (HFEs) do not destroy ozone in the stratosphere and have low global warming potential compared to hydrofluorocarbons(HFCs) and hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs). Especially, HFEs which have no flash point are paid attention as next generation type of cleaning agents for chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) since they are safe in handling and have excellent penetration ability compared to hydrocarbon cleaning agents with low flash point. Here, the physical properties and cleaning abilities of fluoride-type cleaning agents such as TFEA, HFE-7100, HFE-7200, HFE-476mec, HFE-449mec-f, AE-3000 and AE-3100E and silicide-type cleaning agents such as trifluoroetoxytrimethylsilane (TFES) and hexamethyldisilazane (HMDS) were measured and compared with those of ozone destruction substances such as CFC-113 and 1,1,1-trichloroethane. They were also compared with toxic methylene chloride (MC) and isopropyl alcohol (IPA) which are now being used as an alternative cleaning agents. As a result, TFEA and HFEs had lower cleaning ability for removal of various soils compared to chloride-type cleaning agents, but they showed excellent cleaning ability fur fluoride-type soils. TFES and HMDS also showed excellent cleaning ability for silicide-type soils.

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.172-181
• /
• 2010

Hydrofluoroethers (HFEs) with fluoride molecules in their structure which are evaluated as the third generation replacement alternatives to chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) are known to be excellent for removal of nanoparticles and fluoride-type soils due to their low surface tension and high wetting index. In addition, HFEs have good physical properties with no flash point and excellent drying characteristics. But, HFEs also have shortcomings in that they are not effective for removal of organic soils due to their poor solubility in soil. In this study, $C_5$ HFE-based cleaning agents were formulated through addition of solvents such as isopropyl alcohol (IPA), ethyleneglycol monoether (EG), propyleneglycol monoethylether (PM) to HFE-7100 [$CF_3CF_2CF_2CF_2OCH_3$] or HFE-mec-f [$CF_3CHF=CF_2OCH_2CF_3$] with its maximum amount, respectively, in order to have no flash point for the safety in the working environment. These solvents are known to be excellent for dissolving organics in soil. Their physical properties and cleaning abilities for fluxes, water-insoluble cutting oils, and fluoride-type oils were evaluated and compared with those of other cleaning agents with single components. The experimental results show that the HFE-based formulated cleaning agents have various good physical properties which are almost similar to those of a single type of HFE cleaner. They show excellent cleaning ability for fluxes, water-insoluble cutting oils, and fluoride-type oils. These results indicate that the HFE-based formulated cleaning agents can be applicable to various industrial cleaning fields because of their good physical properties and cleaning abilities for various soils.

• Clean Technology
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.1-12
• /
• 1999

Cleaning Processes are widely employed in the manufacturing processes of many industries and various environmental contaminants are generated during their operation. Thus, as the environmental and safety regulations are getting severer at home and abroad, it is indispensable that the existing cleaning agents which are causing environmental and safety problems should be replaced by the more environmentally-friendly alternative ones. In order to select alternative cleaning agents, it is necessary that their cleaning power is equivalent to or better than that of existing cleaning agents. However, the evaluation methods of cleaning power of industrial cleaning agents have not been established for comparison of cleanliness. In this study, various kinds of evaluation methods of cleanliness which can be utilized in the laboratory or in the industrial field are examined and their field application cases are reviewed and analyzed.

• Applied Chemistry for Engineering
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.533-541
• /
• 2005

Non-aqueous cleaning agents were formulated with 2,2,2-trifluoroethanol (TFEA) and hydrofluoroether (HFE), and their physical properties and cleaning abilities were examined. TFEA-based aqueous cleaning agents were also formulated with nonionic surfactants, hydrotropes and builders, and their cleaning abilities were compared. Possibilities of these cleaning agents as substitutes for CFC-113 and 1,1,1-TCE were finally evaluated. In this work, fluxes, cutting oils, greases, and fluoric oils were selected as model contaminants for cleaning experiments. These contaminants have different properties of water-solubility or hydrophilicity, and fat-solubility or lypophilicity. Cleaning abilities of TFEA-based cleaning agents were analyzed and compared through the measurement of contaminant weight changes as a function of cleaning time, and their possibilities as alternative cleaning agents were evaluated. As a result, it was shown that TFEA and HFE-based non-aqueous cleaning agents have quite a good cleaning power for fluxes and fluorine soils but low one for greases. And TFEA-based agueous cleaning agents which consisted of nonionic surfactants, hydrotrope, and builders were very effective for cleaning fluxes and greases under certain formulation conditions. Thus, it was revealed that the TFEA-based cleaning agents were very effective for cleaning specific contaminants and can be used as substitutes for CFC-113 and 1,1,1-TCE in some industrial applications.