4.8 Article

Characterization and evaluation of C18HPLC stationary phases based on ethyl-bridged hybrid organic/inorganic particles

Journal

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 75, Issue 24, Pages 6781-6788

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac034767w

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The characterization and evaluation of three novel 5-mum HPLC column packings, prepared using ethyl-bridged hybrid organic/inorganic materials, is described. These highly spherical hybrid particles, which vary in specific surface area (140, 187, and 270 m(2)/g) and average pore diameter (185, 148, and 108 A), were characterized by elemental analysis, SEM, and nitrogen sorption analysis and were chemically modified in a two-step process using octadecyltrichlorosilane and trimethylchlorosilane. The resultant bonded materials had an octadecyl surface concentration of 3.17-3.35 mumol/m(2), which is comparable to the coverage obtained for an identically bonded silica particle (3.44 mumol/m(2)) that had a surface area of 344 m(2)/g. These hybrid materials were shown to have sufficient mechanical strength under conditions normally employed for traditional reversed-phase HPLC applications, using a high-pressure column flow test. The chromatographic properties of the C-18 bonded hybrid phases were compared to a C-18 bonded silica using a variety of neutral and basic analytes under the same mobile-phase conditions. The hybrid phases exhibited similar selectivity to the silica-based column, yet had improved peak tailing factors for the basic analytes. Column retentivity increased with increasing particle surface area. Elevated pH aging studies of these hybrid materials showed dramatic improvement in chemical stability for both bonded and unbonded hybrid materials compared to the C-18 bonded silica phase, as determined by monitoring the loss in column efficiency through 140-h exposure to a pH 10 triethylamine mobile phase at 50degreesC.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available