| Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 19156 | Food and Bioproducts Processing | 2010 | 5 Pages |
The cleaning step in the ultrafiltration of skim milk is not always complete before the following disinfection start, raising concerns about the effect of disinfectants on any protein remaining. For a Koch polyethersulfone (PES) UF membrane [model HFK131], the fouling in skim milk UF is exclusively due to proteins. Used in right quantity, hypochlorite well finishes the cleaning and can also be used alone as a cleaner [removing 95% of the proteinaceous fouling]. However, if the amount of hypochlorite is not sufficient to end the cleaning, this can lead to large reductions production flux [a 13% decrease on skim milk flux was observed]. Other oxidants such as PVP-iodine, hydrogen peroxide, peracetic acid and sodium perborate do not achieve hydraulic cleanliness [90% of flux recovery]. Oxidants based on hydrogen peroxide and PVP-iodine, when used on a membrane which was still fouled by protein, yielded flux recovery worse than for a single rinsing.
Research highlights▶ The nature of the disinfectant can have a strong incidence on production fluxes if the previous cleaning is not properly done. ▶ The hypochlorite is also a good cleaner as it removes 95% of proteinaceous fouling. ▶ The hypochlorite used as disinfectant on a PES UF membrane where proteins remain finishes first the cleaning. ▶ The hypochlorite used in too lower quantity to well finish the cleaning, lead to large reductions production flux. ▶ Usually efficient cleaner formulated with surfactant becomes inefficient after an incomplete cleaning with hypochlorite of the membrane fouled with proteins. ▶ Oxidants based on hydrogen peroxyde used on a PES UF membrane still fouled with proteins yielded flux recovery worse than for a single rinsing.
