4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Monolithic silica columns with various skeleton sizes and through-pore sizes for capillary liquid chromatography

Journal

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
Volume 961, Issue 1, Pages 53-63

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9673(02)00133-4

Keywords

monolithic columns; stationary phases, LC; alkylbenzenes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Reduction of through-pore size and skeleton size of a monolithic silica column was attempted to provide high separation efficiency in a short time. Monolithic silica columns were prepared to have various sizes of skeletons (similar to1-2 mum) and through-pores (similar to2-8 mum) in a fused-silica capillary (50-200 mum I.D.). The columns were evaluated in HPLC after derivatization to C-18 phase. It was possible to prepare monolithic silica structures in capillaries of up to 200 mum I.D. from a mixture of tetramethoxysilane and methyltrimethoxysilane. As expected, a monolithic silica column with smaller domain size showed higher column efficiency and higher pressure drop. High external porosity (>80%) and large through-pores resulted in high permeability (K=8.10(-14) -1.3(.)10(-12) m(2)) that was 2-30 times higher than that of a column packed with 5-mum silica particles. The monolithic silica columns prepared in capillaries produced a plate height of about 8-12 mum with an 80% aqueous acetonitrile mobile phase at a linear velocity of 1 mm/s. Separation impedance, E, was found to be as low as 100 under optimum conditions, a value about an order of magnitude lower than reported for conventional columns packed with 5-mum particles. Although a column with smaller domain size generally resulted in higher separation impedance and the lower total performance, the monolithic silica columns showed performance beyond the limit of conventional particle-packed columns under pressure-driven conditions. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science BV 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