4.2 Article

Coupling and optimisation of online nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy and mass spectrometry for process monitoring to cover the broad range of process concentration

期刊

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN CHEMISTRY
卷 55, 期 4, 页码 274-282

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrc.4484

关键词

online; NMR; MS; process monitoring

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Real time online monitoring of chemical processes can be carried out by a number of analytical techniques, including optical and vibrational spectroscopies, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy and mass spectrometry (MS). As each technique has unique advantages and challenges, combinations are an attractive option. The combination of a 500-MHz H-1 NMR and a small footprint mass spectrometer to monitor a batch reaction at process concentration was investigated. The mass spectrometer was coupled into the flow path of an online reaction monitoring NMR. Reaction mixture was pumped from a 100-ml vessel to an NMR flow tube before returning to the vessel. Small aliquots were diverted into a sampling make-up flow using an active flow splitter and passed to the mass spectrometer. Advantages of the combination were observed. H-1 NMR was ideal for quantitation of high level components, whereasMS showed a greater capability for detecting those at low level. In preliminary experiments MS produced a limited linear relationship with concentration (0.02% to 2% relative concentration, 0.01mg/ml-1.25mg/ml), because of signal saturation at the higher concentrations. NMR was unable to detect components below 0.1% relative to concentration maximum. Optimisation of sample transfer to the MS extended the linearity to 10% relative to the concentration maximum. Therefore, the combination of online NMR and MS allows both qualitative and quantitative analysis of reaction components over the full process range. The application of the combination was demonstrated by monitoring a batch chemical reaction and this is described. Copyright (C) 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据