4.6 Article

Size exclusion chromatography with superficially porous particles

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 1480, Issue -, Pages 11-19

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2016.12.016

Keywords

Size-exclusion chromatography; Core-shell particles; Superficially porous particles; Efficiency; Pore diffusion; Peak capacity

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [R44-GM108122-02]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A comparison is made using size-exclusion chromatography (SEC) of synthetic polymers between fully porous particles (FPPs) and superficially porous particles (SPPs) with similar particle diameters, pore sizes and equal flow rates. Polystyrene molecular weight standards with a mobile phase of tetrahydrofuran are utilized for all measurements conducted with standard HPLC equipment. Although it is traditionally thought that larger pore volume is thermodynamically advantageous in SEC for better separations, SPPs have kinetic advantages and these will be shown to compensate for the loss in pore volume compared to FPPs. The comparison metrics include the elution range (smaller with SPPs), the plate count (larger for SPPs), the rate production of theoretical plates (larger for SPPs) and the specific resolution (larger with FPPs). Advantages to using SPPs for SEC are discussed such that similar separations can be conducted faster using SPPs. SEC using SPPs offers similar peak capacities to that using FPPs but with faster operation. This also suggests that SEC conducted in the second dimension of a two-dimensional liquid chromatograph may benefit with reduced run time and with equivalently reduced peak width making SPPs advantageous for sampling the first dimension by the second dimension separator. Additional advantages are discussed for biomolecules along with a discussion of optimization criteria for size-based separations. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available