Comparison of Solid Core HPLC Column Performance: Effect of Particle Diameter
Technical notes | 2013 | Thermo Fisher ScientificInstrumentation
The deployment of superficially porous (solid core) HPLC particles has transformed chromatographic separations by offering enhanced efficiency at reduced backpressures compared to fully porous materials. Selecting the appropriate particle diameter is critical for balancing resolution, analysis time and system capabilities in pharmaceutical, environmental and quality control applications.
This study compares two Thermo Scientific Accucore C18 solid core columns: a 4 µm (Accucore XL) and a 2.6 µm variant. Key performance indicators—column backpressure, separation efficiency and impedance—are evaluated under identical conditions to guide analysts in optimal column selection.
• Columns tested: 150 × 4.6 mm Accucore XL 4 µm and Accucore 2.6 µm C18.
• Mobile phase: water/acetonitrile (50:50 v/v) at 30 °C.
• Flow rates varied from 0.5 to 2.5 mL/min.
• Performance metrics: backpressure measurements, van Deemter HETP profiles for efficiency, and kinetic plots to derive impedance.
• Efficiency and impedance definitions based on standard chromatographic equations (Blake–Kozeny and kinetic impedance formulations).
A conventional HPLC system equipped with a UV detector (standard flow cell) and capillary connections applicable to ESI/APCI interfaces was used. Column dead volume and tubing dimensions were controlled to isolate particle size effects on pressure and efficiency.
• Backpressure: The 2.6 µm column exhibited on average a 2.2-fold increase over the 4 µm variant (202 bar vs 94 bar at 1 mL/min).
• Efficiency: Van Deemter analysis showed ~27% higher efficiency for the 2.6 µm column across tested velocities, with both columns presenting broad, flat optimal regions (0.9–1.4 mL/min for 4 µm; 1.2–1.8 mL/min for 2.6 µm).
• Impedance: Kinetic plots revealed the 2.6 µm phase provides ~20% greater efficiency per unit time and 37% lower impedance relative to the 4 µm material, indicating faster separations and sharper peaks under equivalent pressure constraints.
• Accucore XL 4 µm columns are ideal for systems limited to 400 bar, or setups with significant extra-column volume; they enable improved resolution without method reoptimization.
• Accucore 2.6 µm columns deliver maximal efficiency gains for laboratories equipped with >400 bar pumps and minimal dead volume (<100 µL), suitable for high-throughput or UHPLC workflows.
Advances are expected in sub-2 µm superficially porous particles, integration with low-dead-volume UHPLC systems, and method development aided by modeling and automation. Emerging stationary phase architectures and green solvent systems will further extend the capabilities of solid core technologies in complex separations.
The comparative study underscores that particle diameter selection in solid core HPLC columns should align with instrument pressure limits, extra-column volumes and desired separation speed. While 4 µm phases offer robust method transferability under moderate pressure, 2.6 µm materials yield superior efficiency and reduced impedance when system parameters are optimized.
Consumables, LC columns
IndustriesManufacturerThermo Fisher Scientific
Summary
Significance of the Topic
The deployment of superficially porous (solid core) HPLC particles has transformed chromatographic separations by offering enhanced efficiency at reduced backpressures compared to fully porous materials. Selecting the appropriate particle diameter is critical for balancing resolution, analysis time and system capabilities in pharmaceutical, environmental and quality control applications.
Objectives and Overview of the Study
This study compares two Thermo Scientific Accucore C18 solid core columns: a 4 µm (Accucore XL) and a 2.6 µm variant. Key performance indicators—column backpressure, separation efficiency and impedance—are evaluated under identical conditions to guide analysts in optimal column selection.
Methodology
• Columns tested: 150 × 4.6 mm Accucore XL 4 µm and Accucore 2.6 µm C18.
• Mobile phase: water/acetonitrile (50:50 v/v) at 30 °C.
• Flow rates varied from 0.5 to 2.5 mL/min.
• Performance metrics: backpressure measurements, van Deemter HETP profiles for efficiency, and kinetic plots to derive impedance.
• Efficiency and impedance definitions based on standard chromatographic equations (Blake–Kozeny and kinetic impedance formulations).
Instrumentation
A conventional HPLC system equipped with a UV detector (standard flow cell) and capillary connections applicable to ESI/APCI interfaces was used. Column dead volume and tubing dimensions were controlled to isolate particle size effects on pressure and efficiency.
Main Results and Discussion
• Backpressure: The 2.6 µm column exhibited on average a 2.2-fold increase over the 4 µm variant (202 bar vs 94 bar at 1 mL/min).
• Efficiency: Van Deemter analysis showed ~27% higher efficiency for the 2.6 µm column across tested velocities, with both columns presenting broad, flat optimal regions (0.9–1.4 mL/min for 4 µm; 1.2–1.8 mL/min for 2.6 µm).
• Impedance: Kinetic plots revealed the 2.6 µm phase provides ~20% greater efficiency per unit time and 37% lower impedance relative to the 4 µm material, indicating faster separations and sharper peaks under equivalent pressure constraints.
Benefits and Practical Applications
• Accucore XL 4 µm columns are ideal for systems limited to 400 bar, or setups with significant extra-column volume; they enable improved resolution without method reoptimization.
• Accucore 2.6 µm columns deliver maximal efficiency gains for laboratories equipped with >400 bar pumps and minimal dead volume (<100 µL), suitable for high-throughput or UHPLC workflows.
Future Trends and Applications
Advances are expected in sub-2 µm superficially porous particles, integration with low-dead-volume UHPLC systems, and method development aided by modeling and automation. Emerging stationary phase architectures and green solvent systems will further extend the capabilities of solid core technologies in complex separations.
Conclusion
The comparative study underscores that particle diameter selection in solid core HPLC columns should align with instrument pressure limits, extra-column volumes and desired separation speed. While 4 µm phases offer robust method transferability under moderate pressure, 2.6 µm materials yield superior efficiency and reduced impedance when system parameters are optimized.
References
- Farkas T, Zhong G, Guichon G. Journal of Chromatography A. 1999;849:35.
- Giddings JC. Unified Separation Science. John Wiley & Sons; 1991. p. 65.
- Desmet G, Gzil P, Clicq D. LC GC Europe. 2005;18:403.
- Thermo Fisher Scientific. Technical Note 2064; 2012.
- Pereira L. Chromatography Today. 2012;5(2):20.
Content was automatically generated from an orignal PDF document using AI and may contain inaccuracies.
Similar PDF
Solid Core 4 μm HPLC Column Comparison to Fully Porous 3 μm and 5 μm Columns: Efficiency and Pressure
2012|Thermo Fisher Scientific|Technical notes
Luisa Pereira, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Runcorn, Cheshire, UK Key Words Solid core, fused core, superficially porous, pressure, efficiency, impedance Abstract In this technical note, the chromatographic performance of solid core 4 µm particle packed HPLC columns is compared with that…
Key words
impedance, impedancedrop, droppressure, pressureinterstitial, interstitialchromatographic, chromatographictransformed, transformedporosity, porosityefficiency, efficiencydiameter, diametercolumn, columnlength, lengthexhibit, exhibitviscosity, viscosityflow, flowcomparison
Thermo Solid Core Technical Compendium
2012|Thermo Fisher Scientific|Guides
150-C4 PFP Solid Core 150-C18 Phenyl-Hexyl 150-Amide-HILIC Phenyl-X HILIC XL-C8 C18 aQ C30 XL-C18 Urea-HILIC Polar Premium RP-MS Technical Compendium C8 Want fast, high-resolution separations, plus a range of conventional and unique selectivities to meet all your needs? Thermo Scientific™…
Key words
accucore, accucorecolumns, columnscolumn, columncore, coreefficiency, efficiencyparticle, particlephase, phaseimpedance, impedancehplc, hplcpressure, pressuremobile, mobilehbc, hbcporous, porouschromatographic, chromatographicsolid
Comparison of Solid Core HPLC Column Performance
2012|Thermo Fisher Scientific|Technical notes
Luisa Pereira, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Runcorn, Cheshire, UK Key Words Solid core, fused core, superficially porous, pressure, efficiency, impedance Abstract In this technical note the performance of Thermo Scientific™ Accucore™ HPLC columns is compared to a number of competitive columns.…
Key words
accucore, accucoreimpedance, impedancecolumn, columncolumns, columnsdiameter, diameterhplc, hplccore, corecomparison, comparisoninterstitial, interstitialbackpressure, backpressuredrop, drophetp, hetpporosity, porosityefficiency, efficiencyplot
Thermo Scientific Accucore HPLC Columns
2012|Thermo Fisher Scientific|Brochures and specifications
Te ch ni cal Manu al Thermo Scientific Accucore HPLC Columns Core Enhanced Technology Accucore HPLC Column Range Founded on state-of-the-art Core Enhanced Technology™ and utilizing vast experience in phase bonding and packing, Thermo Scientific™ Accucore™ HPLC columns provide a…
Key words
accucore, accucorehbc, hbccolumns, columnshydrophobicity, hydrophobicityhplc, hplcmau, mauminutes, minutessize, sizeselectivity, selectivityparticle, particlepore, porehilic, hilicpolar, polarcore, corelength