, Volume 20, Issue 6, pp 335–342 | Cite as

The new generation of L. C. columns; A critical evaluation of their systems compatibility and performance

  • Pamela J. Naish
  • D. P. Goulder
  • C. V. Perkins


The demand for faster, more economic and convenient high-efficiency LC analyses has led to the development of microbore and fast columns. However, to utilize their benefits, the low column dispersions produced by these new technologies necessitate low external variances in the total system.

This paper describes the determination of the external variance of microbore, fast and conventional LC systems by a column method. Compatibility with the relevant column technologies is evaluated by a method involving the comparison of the external and column dispersions.

Direct comparison of chromatograms of an 8-component mixture, on a set of columns of various diameters and lengths, shows the relative speed, economy and sensitivity obtainable in practice.

The problem of reduced sample loadability is considered and the practical solution of peak compression illustrated.

Key Words

Column liquid chromatography External variance determinations Column and system compatibility Microbore and fast LC 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    E. Katz, K. L. Ogan, R. P. W. Scott, J. Chromatogr.289, 65 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    H. Menet, P. Gareil, M. Claude, R. Rosset, Chromatographia18, 73 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    L. R. Snyder, J. J. Kirkland, Introduction to Modern Liquid Chromatography, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1974; p. 34.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    P. A. Bristow, Liquid Chromatography in practice, h.e.t.p., Wilmslow U.K., 1976; p. 170.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    K. P. Hupe, R. J. Jonker, G. Rozing, J. Chromatogr.285, 253 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    R. P. W. Scott, J. Chromatogr. Sci.9, 641 (1971).Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J. G. Atwood, M. J. E. Golay, J. Chromatogr.218, 97 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. H. Lauer, G. P. Rozing, Chromatographia14, 641 (1981).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    W. Th. Kok, U. A. Th. Brinkman, R. W. Frei, H. B. Hanekamp, F. Nooitgedacht, H. Poppe, J. Chromatogr.237, 357 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    J. J. Kirkland, W. W. Yau, H. J. Stoklosa, C. H. Dilks Jr., J. Chromatogr. Sci.15, 303 (1977).PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    D. J. Anderson, R. R. Walters, J. Chromatogr. Sci.22, 353 (1984).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    R. Delley, Chromatographia18, 374 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. [13]
    J. J. Van Deemter, F. J. Zuiderweg, A. Klinkenberg, Chem. Eng. Sci.5, 24 (1956).Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. L. DiCesare, M. W. Dong, L. S. Ettre, Chromatographia14, 257 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Friedr. Vieweg & Sohn Verlagsgesellschaft mbH 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pamela J. Naish
    • 1
  • D. P. Goulder
    • 1
  • C. V. Perkins
    • 1
  1. 1.Philips AnalyticalPye Unicam Ltd.CambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations