Maximum separative power

Perhaps the biggest increase in the application and development of the MDLC technique since Cortes s book is in life sciences, which accounts for approximately half of this book. One reason for this may be due to the high level of interest in studying the human proteome (proteomics). Proteomics is such a demanding application that the separating power needed to resolve even the normal proteins in the body is so demanding that maximum separation power is needed to provide this capability. Many aspects of separations in proteomics are discussed in Chapters 9-13, 15 and 16. Chapter 14 discusses enantiomeric compound separations by MDLC. 

Biochemistry deals with an enormous number of chemical compounds with widely differing properties. Some are gases, some are liquids and some are solids either crystalline or amorphous. Wide variation in stability is encountered. Obviously no single fractionation technique will be the most effective for the separation of each t q)e. Since the determination of purity requires maximum separating power under conditions of complete stability, a choice of the most effective method must be made. Fortunately, the different methods often supplement each other and wherever possible, more than one method must be applied. Measurement of physical constants with adequate precision always must be done. Agreement of physical constants implies a degree of purity but is not vigorous proof that the substance is pure. 

In designing a column for a specific type of sample (e.g., proteins in the mnge 20-200 kDa), it is helpful to make use of the model ofTable VIII so as to anticipate problems that may be encountered in actual practice, as well as to provi the maximum separation power that is possible. This approach has been used in the design of a column for separating peptides in the range 500 MS 15,000(76). 

In other words, the key impurity separation power is indicated by the reduction of heavy key impurity from the distillate and the reduction of light key impurity from the bottoms. The maximum separation power that a distillation tower can achieve would be at total reflux, that is, total boilup and reflux with zero feed rate. One rule of thumb for an economical design of a distillation column is to use 2.0 times the minimum number of theoretical stages. This generally coincides with a design for about 1.3 to 1.5 times the minimum... 

Appendix. Hydrodynamic Derivation of the Maximum Separative Power... 

In the limiting case of close separation, both a and SU depend only upon two controllable parameters—the product 0(1 — 9)L and m (which governs g and y). If we regard m (and hence and y) as fixed, the maximum separative power occurs when the right-hand side of Eq. (89) is a maximum, or when... 

The separation factor under conditions that produce the maximum separative power is obtained from Eqs. (88) and (90) ... 

Typical parameters of the thermally driven gas centrifuge of Fig. 2a utilizing uranium hexafloride as a process gas are shown in Table I. The Zippe machine shown in Fig. 2b is somewhat smaller than the Groth model described in Table I. The rotor is 30 cm in length and 3.7 cm in radius. It operates at 350m/sec(15)witha theoretical maximum separation power of 1.5kg/yr. 

The performance of an internally driven countercurrent centrifuge which has been optimized for maximum separative power is governed by Eqs. (92), (94), and (95). All parameters in these equations are known except those which depend upon the axial velocity profile. 

Since the theoretical maximum separative power [Eq. (A-22)] varies as the fourth power of the peripheral speed (or as A ), Eq. (92) shows that 5f/ p, increases only as at high peripheral speed. 

APPENDIX. HYDRODYNAMIC DERIVATION OF THE MAXIMUM SEPARATIVE POWER OF A CENTRIFUGE... 

An expression for the maximum charge that can be placed on a column without impairing resolution has already been derived, but the approach, when dealing with an overloaded column for preparative purpose, will be quite different. For preparative purposes the phase system is chosen to provide the maximum separation of the solute of interest from its nearest neighbor. It should be pointed out that the separation may, but probably will not, involve the closest eluting pair in the mixture. Consequently, the maximum resolving power of the column will not be required for the purpose of separation and the excess resolution of the solute of interest from its nearest neighbor can be used to increase the column load. 

A theoretical model whereby maximum peak capacity could be achieved by the use of 3-D planar chromatographic separation was proposed by Guiochon and coworkers (23-27). Unfortunately, until now, because of technical problems, this idea could not be realized in practice. Very recently, however, a special stationary phase, namely Empore silica TLC sheets, has now become available for realization of 3-D PC. This stationary phase, developed as a new separation medium for planar chromatography, contains silica entrapped in an inert matrix of polytetrafluoroethy-lene (PTFE) microfibrils. It has been established that the separating power is only ca. 60% of that of conventional TLC (28) this has been attributed to the very slow solvent migration velocity resulting from capillary action. 

For example, a 30-m column (regardless of diameter) should have a tR for argon or butane of approximately 100 sec. It appears better to set the linear velocity higher than the optimum rather than lower than the optimum to obtain good column efficiency. Determine the column temperature where the most difficult-to-separate compounds elute and set the linear velocity at that temperature. Now the column will exhibit its maximum resolving power at the point where it is needed most. 

As previously mentioned, resolution in CIEF strongly depends on the ampholyte composition. The estimated maximum resolving power of IEF is 0.02 pH units when carrier ampholytes are used to create the pH gradient.99 The Law of Monotony" formulated by Svensson in 1967 states that a natural pH gradient increases continually and monotonically from the anode to the cathode that the steady state does not allow for reversal of pH at any position along the gradient and that two ampholytes (in stationary electrolysis) cannot be completely separated from each other unless the system contains a third ampholyte of intermediate pH (or pi). The latter explains why better resolution is obtained when mixing ampholytes from different vendors and production batches as the number of ampholytes species increases, the chance that one or more ampholytes have intermediate pi relative to those of the sample components also increases. 

Triazoles with alkyl, aryl, or acyl substituents on N(l) or N(4) can be readily quaternized with powerful quaternizing agents such as trialkyloxonium tetrafluoroborates. Quaternization takes place such that maximum separation of the substituents occurs. 

The selection of column length depends on the required resolution and analysis time. Short columns (10-15 m) are useful for samples containing a relatively small number of chemicals and also for screening purposes. To keep the analysis time short and to minimize the adsorption, a 50 m column is useful only for very complex separations requiring maximum resolution. Intermediate column lengths of 25-30 m, providing sufficient separation power simultaneously with reasonable analysis time, are in most cases used for the separation of CWC-related chemicals. 

Given the separating power of the equipment of approximately 5 eV, emission lines can easily be identified. The search for trace elements in qualitative analysis may be delicate because the counting time at each point is generally low (a maximum of 1 second instead of 100 seconds in quantitative mode). In qualitative analysis, the detection limits are generally around one percent. 

These conclusions are very critical for large values of energy, because the error becomes significantly smaller. We note that it is not the maximum power of the two functions y(x), z(x) that plays critical role for the error propagation rather than each of the maximums separately. That happens because the new value of the derivative y n+x needs the value of r +1 and the derivative z n+x needs yn+1 as seen in (4). This explains the higher efficiency of method (c) opposite to method (b). 

---