Kinetic performance limits of constant pressure versus constant flow rate gradient elution separations. Part I: theory.
We report on a general theoretical assessment of the potential kinetic advantages of running LC gradient elution separations in the constant-pressure mode instead of in the customarily used constant-flow rate mode. Analytical calculations as well as numerical simulation results are presented. It is shown that, provided both modes are run with the same volume-based gradient program, the constant-pressure mode can potentially offer an identical separation selectivity (except from some small differences induced by the difference in pressure and viscous heating trajectory), but in a significantly shorter time. For a gradient running between 5 and 95% of organic modifier, the decrease in analysis time can be expected to be of the order of some 20% for both water-methanol and water-acetonitrile gradients, and only weakly depending on the value of V(G)/V₀ (or equivalently t(G)/t₀). Obviously, the gain will be smaller when the start and end composition lie closer to the viscosity maximum of the considered water-organic modifier system. The assumptions underlying the obtained results (no effects of pressure and temperature on the viscosity or retention coefficient) are critically reviewed, and can be inferred to only have a small effect on the general conclusions. It is also shown that, under the adopted assumptions, the kinetic plot theory also holds for operations where the flow rate varies with the time, as is the case for constant-pressure operation. Comparing both operation modes in a kinetic plot representing the maximal peak capacity versus time, it is theoretically predicted here that both modes can be expected to perform equally well in the fully C-term dominated regime (where H varies linearly with the flow rate), while the constant pressure mode is advantageous for all lower flow rates. Near the optimal flow rate, and for linear gradients running from 5 to 95% organic modifier, time gains of the order of some 20% can be expected (or 25-30% when accounting for the fact that the constant pressure mode can be run without having to leave a pressure safety margin of 5-10% as is needed in the constant flow rate mode).
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Department of Chemical Engineering (CHIS-IR), Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium.
K
K
Broeckhoven
M
M
Verstraeten
K
K
Choikhet
M
M
Dittmann
K
K
Witt
G
G
Desmet
D000097:Acetonitriles / Q000737:chemistry; D002853:Chromatography, Liquid / Q000379:methods*; D007700:Kinetics; D000432:Methanol / Q000737:chemistry; D008956:Models, Chemical; D011312:Pressure; D013696:Temperature; D014783:Viscosity; D014867:Water / Q000737:chemistry
D000097:Acetonitriles; D014867:Water; D000432:Methanol; C032159:acetonitrile