화학공학소재연구정보센터
Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, Vol.12, No.4, 531-538, July, 2006
Separation of Hot Particulate from a PFC Decontamination Solution forReuse by Filtration Equipment
E-mail:
Recently, PFC (perfluoro carbonate) decontamination technology was found to be excellent for the removal of smaller sizes of hot particulate from a hot cell. Due to the high cost of a PFC solution, it is necessary to purify it and reuse it for the next decontamination process. This study presents the results of a hot particulate separation from a contaminated PFC solution by the manufactured filtration equipment. SEM (Scanning Electron Microscope) results showed that contaminated hot particulates was present in the PFC solution, and their size ranges were from 0.2 to 10 μm, however, the radioactive level of the PFC solution was very high. Ceramic filter was found to be highly stable with the high alpha radioactivity. The equipment mainly consisted of two sizes of filters, 1.4 μm primary filter and 0.2 μm final filter. Removal efficiency of these filters was found to be more than 99 %. Turbidity of the PFC solution increased with the particulate concentration. Turbidity and pressure play a significant role in the removal efficiency. The removal efficiency initially was slightly low at a high pressure, but it gradually increased with the time, the change was found to be greater when the turbidity was high. At a low pressure and a high concentration, the removal efficiency was relatively high and remained constant with time. At a high pressure and a high concentration, the removal efficiency in the beginning was low but it gradually increased with time. The flux was high at high pressure for individual filters, and it slightly decreased with time but in the case of the final filter this change was a little high. When the experiment was executed with both filters insitu, the flux remained constant.
  1. Kaiser R, Desrosiers AE, Industry Partnerships for Environmental Science and Technology Conference, Morgantown, October (2001)
  2. Desrosiers AE, Kaiser R, Final Report DEAC26-01NT41308 (2002)
  3. Parsons EL, Waste Management Project Contingency Analysis DOE/FETC-99/1100
  4. Lee MC, Choi W, J. Ind. Eng. Chem., 10(1), 107 (2004)
  5. Lin DJ, Chang CL, Chen TC, Cheng LP, Tamkang J. Science and Engineering, 5, 95 (2002)
  6. Zhao YJ, Zhong J, Li H, Xu NP, Shi J, J. Membr. Sci., 208(1-2), 331 (2002)
  7. Zhao Y, Xing W, Xu N, Shi J, Sep. Purif. Technol., 32, 99 (2003)
  8. Burns DB, Zydney AL, J. Membr. Sci., 172, 39 (2000)
  9. Bacchin P, Aimar P, Sanchez V, J. Membr. Sci., 115(1), 49 (1996)
  10. Ohmori K, Glatz CE, J. Membr. Sci., 153(1), 23 (1999)
  11. Sousa AC, Cabral JMS, Mateus M, J. Membr. Sci., 207(2), 171 (2002)
  12. Wakeman RJ, Akay G, Filtr. Sep., 34(5), 511 (1997)
  13. Yuan W, Zydney AL, Desalination, 122(1), 63 (1999)
  14. Desrosiers AE, Kaiser R, Separation and Extraction of Plutonium in Mixed Waste, Bartlett Services Inc., Plymouth, MA, USA, p. 2 (2002)
  15. Rea TH, Jay P, Miner. Eng., 18, 927930 (2005)
  16. Keyoumu A, Sjdahl R, Henriksson G, Ek M, Gellerstedt G, Lindstrm ME, Industrial Crops and Products, 20, 143150 (2004)
  17. Jia Z, Shia M, Powder F, Technology, 139, 200207 (2004)