Intra-tablet coating variability for several pharmaceutical tablet shapes

Freireich, Ben; Ketterhagen, William R.; Wassgren, Carl

doi:10.1016/j.ces.2011.02.052

Cited by 46 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In previous studies default CoR values of EDEM™ software (0.5) were used (12,27 (29). For different kinds of coated tablets they found CoR values that ranged from 0.4 to 0.9 (30).…”

Section: Coefficient Of Restitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Experimental Analysis of Tablet Properties for Discrete Element Modeling of an Active Coating Process

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Coating of solid dosage forms is an important unit operation in the pharmaceutical industry. In recent years, numerical simulations of drug manufacturing processes have been gaining interest as process analytical technology tools. The discrete element method (DEM) in particular is suitable to model tabletcoating processes. For the development of accurate simulations, information on the material properties of the tablets is required. In this study, the mechanical parameters Young's modulus, coefficient of restitution (CoR), and coefficients of friction (CoF) of gastrointestinal therapeutic systems (GITS) and of activecoated GITS were measured experimentally. The dynamic angle of repose of these tablets in a drum coater was investigated to revise the CoF. The resulting values were used as input data in DEM simulations to compare simulation and experiment. A mean value of Young's modulus of 31.9 MPa was determined by the uniaxial compression test. The CoR was found to be 0.78. For both tablet-steel and tablet-tablet friction, active-coated GITS showed a higher CoF compared with GITS. According to the values of the dynamic angle of repose, the CoF was adjusted to obtain consistent tablet motion in the simulation and in the experiment. On the basis of this experimental characterization, mechanical parameters are integrated into DEM simulation programs to perform numerical analysis of coating processes.

show abstract

“…In previous studies default CoR values of EDEM™ software (0.5) were used (12,27 (29). For different kinds of coated tablets they found CoR values that ranged from 0.4 to 0.9 (30).…”

Section: Coefficient Of Restitutionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The glued-sphere approximation was used because it is the current state-of-the-art for DEM simulations of tablet-coating processes. It is widely used in the community (5,(26)(27)(28).…”

Section: Dem Simulationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Experimental Analysis of Tablet Properties for Discrete Element Modeling of an Active Coating Process

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Freireich and Wassgren [117] and Freireich et al [118] used Monte-Carlo simulations in conjunction with the orientation data obtained from DEM to estimate the intra-particle coating uniformity.…”

Section: Tablet Coatingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discrete Element Modeling of Solid Dosage Manufacturing Processes

Barrasso

Ramachandran

2016

Methods in Pharmacology and Toxicology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solid dosage manufacturing primarily involves powder process operations, such as mixing, granulation, and compaction. A model-based approach can be used to develop a better scientific understanding of these processes and implement Quality by Design. These models must predict the critical quality attributes of the product based on process parameters, equipment geometry, and material properties. Discrete element modeling (DEM) is often used to capture mechanistic, particle-scale information, such as velocity and force profiles. In this chapter, recent literature studies that use the DEM to model solid dosage manufacturing processes will be presented and discussed.

show abstract

“…Indeed, substrate characteristics, coating formulation, equipment and processing conditions can affect polymer deposition and film performance (Wilson and Crossman, 1997;Freireich et al, 2011;Cunningham et al, 2001;Wesseling et al, 1999;Mehta, 2008). In addition, these variables may be strongly inter-connected (Pandey et al, 2014a).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%