• Journal of Environmental Health Sciences
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.109-120
• /
• 1997

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of wastewater treatment containing surfactant. For that, comparative analysis of effectiveness of Featon Oxidation, Aluminum Sulfate, PAC (Poly Aluminum Chloride) on the treatment of the synthetic wastewater containing LAS (Linear Alkyl Sulfate), a main component of the commercial detergent was carried. Then, the optimum pH, the dosage of reagents, and the concentration of the LAS in each treatment were determined. The results of the study were summarized as following. 1. In Fenton Oxidation, optimal pH was 3 and 97.92% removal of LAS was achieved. However, the increase of the pH reduced the efficiency of LAS removal. The proper chemical dosages of FeSO$_4$ and $H_2O_2$ were 300 mg/l and the increase of dosages didn't affected the removal efficiency. Therefore, it was concluded that the economic chemical dosage was 300 mg/l of FeSO$_4$ and $H_2O_2$. 2. In case of Alum treatment, optimal pH was 11 with 61.13% removal efficiency. At other pH range, the removal efficiency was very low indicating that removal efficiency is greatly influenced by pH. The proper chemical dosage was 200 mg/l with the removal efficiency of 77.65%. The increase of chemical dosage, however, reduced the removal efficiency. 3. In case of using PAC, optimal pH was 6 with 97.99% removal efficiency. The result showed that wastewaters containing surfactant were almost completely removed at pH 6 by PAC. Removal efficiency was decreased by increasing PAC dosage higher than 400 mg/l and dosage over 700 mg/l of PAC abolished the treatment. 4. The comparative analysis of three methods revealed that the effective pH ranges were at pH 2-5 with Fenton oxidation, at pH 6-11 with PAC, and pH 11 with Alum. The removal efficiencies at these pH were 83.95-97.92%, 75.98-97.99% and 61.13%, respectively. 5. Increase in LAS concentration reduced the removal efficiencies of all three methods. In the case of PAC or Alum treatment, treatment abolished at LAS concentration higher than 700 mg/l.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Building Construction
• /
• v.9 no.4
• /
• pp.63-73
• /
• 2009

Recently, the use of lightweight panels in building structures has been increasing. Of the various lightweight panel types, styrofoam sandwich panels are inexpensive and are excellent in terms of their insulation capacity and their constructability. However, sandwich panels that include organic material are quite vulnerable to fire, and thus can numerous casualties in the event of a fire due to the lack of time to vacate and their emission of poisonous gas. On the other hand, lightweight foamed concrete is excellent, both in terms of its insulation ability and its fire resistance, due to its Inner pores. The properties of lightweight concrete is influenced by foaming agent type. Accordingly, this study investigates the insulation properties by foaming agent type, to evaluate the possibility of using light-weight foamed concrete instead of styrene foam. Our research found thatnon-heating zone temperature of lightweight foamed concrete using AP (Aluminum Powder) and FP (animal protein foaming agent) are lower than that of light-weight foamed concrete using AES (alkyl ether lactic acid ester). Lightweight foamed concrete using AES and FP satisfied fire performance requirements of two hours at a foam ratio 50, 100. Lightweight foamed concrete using AP satisfied fire performance requirements of two hours at AP ratio 0.1, 0.15. The insulation properties were better in closed pore foamed concrete by made AP, FP than with open pore foamed concrete made using AES.