4.6 Article

Measurement of hold-up volumes in reverse-phase liquid chromatography - Definition and comparison between static and dynamic methods

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1161, 期 1-2, 页码 157-169

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2007.05.102

关键词

RP-HPLC; hold-up volume of chromatographic columns; adsorbent characterization; BET nitrogen adsorption (LTNA); inverse size exclusion chromatography (ISEC); pycnometry; thermodynamic hold-up volume; minor disturbance method

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The hold-up volumes, V-M of two series of RPLC adsorbents were measured using three different approaches. The first method is based on the difference between the volumes of the empty column tube (150 x 4.6 mm) and of the material packed inside the column. It is considered as giving the correct value of V-M. This method combines the results of the BET characterization of the adsorbent before packing (giving the specific pore volume), of carbon element analysis (giving the mass fraction of silica and alkyl bonded chains), of Helium pycnometry (providing silica density), and of inverse size exclusion chromatography (ISEC) performed on the packed column (yielding the interparticle volume). The second method is static pycnometry, which consists in weighing the masses of the chromatographic column filled with two distinct solvents of different densities. The last method is based on the thermodynamic definition of the hold-up volume and uses the dynamic minor disturbance method (MDM) with binary eluents. The experimental results of these three non-destructive methods are compared. They exhibit significant, systematic differences. Pycnometry underestimates V-M by a few percent for adsorbents having a high carbon content. The results of the MDM method depend strongly on the choice of the binary solution used and may underestimate or overestimate V-M. The hold-up volume Vm of the R-PLC adsorbents tested is best measured by the MDM method using a mixture of ethanol and water. (c) 2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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