• 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.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.

• 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.

• 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.