2019
DOI: 10.1016/j.xphs.2018.12.010
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Size Analysis of Small Particles in Wet Dispersions by Laser Diffractometry: A Guidance to Quality Data

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2025
2025

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Figure 2 B provides more details regarding the size distribution data, fitting, and data quality at 500, 1500, 2500 and 3500 rpm. At the lowest stirring rate, 500 rpm ( Figure 2 B, panel 1), due to agglomeration and heterogenous distribution, the residual and weighted residual values reached >3%, above the recommended threshold of 1–2% [ 25 , 26 ], suggesting unacceptable data quality and unrealistically large particle sizes (e.g., Dv90 > 2500 µm) that were poorly aligned with the light scattering patterns and models. At 1500, 2500, and 3500 rpm ( Figure 2 B, panels 2–4), the distribution curves became smooth and continuous, with the gradual disappearance of the dominant artifact peak (most frequently occurring size > 1000 µm) observed at 500 rpm.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Figure 2 B provides more details regarding the size distribution data, fitting, and data quality at 500, 1500, 2500 and 3500 rpm. At the lowest stirring rate, 500 rpm ( Figure 2 B, panel 1), due to agglomeration and heterogenous distribution, the residual and weighted residual values reached >3%, above the recommended threshold of 1–2% [ 25 , 26 ], suggesting unacceptable data quality and unrealistically large particle sizes (e.g., Dv90 > 2500 µm) that were poorly aligned with the light scattering patterns and models. At 1500, 2500, and 3500 rpm ( Figure 2 B, panels 2–4), the distribution curves became smooth and continuous, with the gradual disappearance of the dominant artifact peak (most frequently occurring size > 1000 µm) observed at 500 rpm.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although microscopy did not identify the smaller particles, it did result in lower mean particle sizes in the PCPs compared to laser diffraction with the CILAS data (Table 3). It has been reported that microscopy tends to result in smaller particle size value averages compared to laser diffraction techniques, as a consequence of the different physical properties of the particles being measured and the magnification of the microscope used (De Cleyn et al 2019).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This complex analysis was done to ensure the most accurate particle size determinations possible. Method suitability was confirmed my measuring the particle size of a suspension added to the dispersion media over 10 min, which produced similar particle size distributions for all three compounds and the obtained sizes of particles were reanalyzed if air bubbles occurred as peaks in the particle size distribution to exclude those from the measurements [17].…”
Section: Particle Size Measurements By Laser Diffractionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1), in particular at compression pressures above 75 MPa. Plastic materials tend to form tablets more easily due to increased bonding strength across the particles as compared to fragmenting materials [17,30,31]; [21][22][23][24]), which provided indications of the mechanical properties of the investigated compounds. These were furthermore supported by the changes in particle size distributions of recovered particles that were observed with increased compression pressures during tableting (Fig.…”
Section: Deformation Propertiesmentioning
confidence: 99%