Sep. 1, 2016  18  US 2016/0251602 Al  Experiment 8  TABLE24  TABLE 23  TABLE 22-continued  XPS results for cleaning efficiency  Sample  Treatment  Can 7  1 Minute Control  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  Can 8  1 Minute Treatment  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  Nylon polymeric particles 10 kg  Aluminum  Metal  Content  (%)  17.72  39.13  Alu- Carbon minum/  Content Carbon  (%)  Ratio  31.39  0.56  18.30  2.14  XPS results for cleaning efficiency  Nitrogen  Sodium  Sample  Treatment  Content(%)  Content(%)  Can 1  Control Can - No Treatment  0.93  2.75  Can 2  Can Treated Witb Water Only  0.83  0.40  Can 3  5 Minute Control  1.47  3.56  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  Can4  5 Minute Treatment  0.0  0.39  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  Nylon polymeric particles 10 kg  Can 5  2 Minute Control  0.45  2.21  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  Can 6  2 Minute Treatment  0.0  0.18  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  Nylon polymeric particles 10 kg  Can 7  1 Minute Control  0.35  4.03  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  Can 8  1 Minute Treatment  0.0  0.0  Water 45 kg+ Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  Nylon polymeric particles 10 kg  Sample Details And Formulation Components.  Sample  Can 1  Can 2  Can 3  Can4  Can 5  Can 6  Can 7  Can 8  Formulation components/treatment  Control Can - No Treatment  Can Treated With Water Only  5 Minute Control  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  5 Minute Treatment  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  PET polymeric particles 10 kg  2 Minute Control  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  2 Minute Treatment  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g +  PET polymeric particles 10 kg  1 Minute Control  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  Non-ionic Surfactant 25 g  1 Minute Treatment  Water45 kg+  Citrate 500 g +  [0201]  The data in Table 23 (above) illustrates the results of  XPS analysis for the amounts of other impurities on the  aluminum surface, namely nitrogen and sodium. The cans  treated with the polymeric particles (i.e. cans 4, 6 and 8)  indicated effective removal of nitrogen and sodium. In com› parison, the controls showed relatively high levels of these  impurities. This demonstrated a dramatically improved  cleaning efficiency for the cans treated with the polymeric  particles (i.e. cans 4, 6 and 8) which again indicated that it was  the polymeric particles used that were the essential cleaning  component.  [0204]  In order to carry out the experiments, the treatment  liquor was added to a vessel containing a pump. The treatment  liquor consisted of the polymeric particles (of total mass 10  kg) and tap water (45 kg) and the further formulation com› ponents as shown in Table 24. Aluminum cans were fixed to a  metal rod which was fixed by means of a clamp. Each can was  inserted into the vessel containing the treatment liquor. The  cans were then subjected to contact with the pumped liquor  for a period of 1, 2 and 5 minutes at a temperature of 22°  C.,  ensuring contact between the can and the treatment liquor.  After treatment, the cans were washed with Milli-Q™ water  and isopropanol and subjected to XPS analysis.  [0203]  XPS analysis was carried out with an Axis Ultra  DLD, using an Al ka monochromated radiation source. An  overall survey scan was taken initially, followed by detailed  scans of the main peaks for the elements identified, using a  pass energy of 160 eV and 20 eV respectively. The measured  data was fitted using Casa XPS (Casa Software Ltd, UK),  using relative sensitivity factors based upon the scheme  where Cls=l, and adjusted to correct for any minor charging  using the aliphatic carbon peak at 285 eV. Each sample was  measured in 2 places.  [0200]  The data shown in Table 22 illustrates the results of  XPS analysis for the amount of aluminum metal and carbon  on the can surface following the various treatments. The  amount of carbon can serve as a surrogate measure for the  presence of contaminants (e.g. smut). A higher aluminum/  carbon ratio as indicated in Table 22 thus indicates that more  aluminum is present on the can surface and that more carbon  or contaminant residue has been removed. The cans treated  with the polymeric particles (i.e. cans 4, 6 and 8) showed a  significant increase in aluminum/carbon ratio compared to  the controls (i.e. cans 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7) demonstrating a dra› matically improved cleaning efficiency.  [0202]  The ingredients were Mulan™ 200S (25.0 g), a  non-ionic surfactant supplied by Christeyns, Bradford, UK  and the citrate component consisted of trisodium citrate dihy› drate (500.0 g) supplied by VWR, Loughborough, UK. The  polymeric particles were Polyester (PET) supplied by Teknor  Apex, UK, in the form of beads. The mass of the polymeric  particles used in the apparatus was 10 kg. Uncoated alumi› num metal cans gradeALJSC60ML63X15 were supplied by  Invopak UK Ltd. Hyde, Cheshire.  Aluminum Cleaning & Oxide Removal Using an  Apparatus Fitted with Pumping Means 