Andrzejewska Anna, Kaczmarski Krzysztof, Guiochon Georges
Department of Chemistry, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996-1600, USA.
J Chromatogr A. 2009 Feb 13;1216(7):1067-83. doi: 10.1016/j.chroma.2008.12.021. Epub 2008 Dec 13.
The adsorption isotherms of selected compounds are our main source of information on the mechanisms of adsorption processes. Thus, the selection of the methods used to determine adsorption isotherm data and to evaluate the errors made is critical. Three chromatographic methods were evaluated, frontal analysis (FA), frontal analysis by characteristic point (FACP), and the pulse or perturbation method (PM), and their accuracies were compared. Using the equilibrium-dispersive (ED) model of chromatography, breakthrough curves of single components were generated corresponding to three different adsorption isotherm models: the Langmuir, the bi-Langmuir, and the Moreau isotherms. For each breakthrough curve, the best conventional procedures of each method (FA, FACP, PM) were used to calculate the corresponding data point, using typical values of the parameters of each isotherm model, for four different values of the column efficiency (N=500, 1000, 2000, and 10,000). Then, the data points were fitted to each isotherm model and the corresponding isotherm parameters were compared to those of the initial isotherm model. When isotherm data are derived with a chromatographic method, they may suffer from two types of errors: (1) the errors made in deriving the experimental data points from the chromatographic records; (2) the errors made in selecting an incorrect isotherm model and fitting to it the experimental data. Both errors decrease significantly with increasing column efficiency with FA and FACP, but not with PM.
所选化合物的吸附等温线是我们了解吸附过程机制的主要信息来源。因此,选择用于确定吸附等温线数据和评估所产生误差的方法至关重要。我们评估了三种色谱方法,前沿分析法(FA)、特征点前沿分析法(FACP)和脉冲或扰动法(PM),并比较了它们的准确性。利用色谱的平衡分散(ED)模型,生成了对应于三种不同吸附等温线模型(朗缪尔等温线、双朗缪尔等温线和莫罗等温线)的单一组分穿透曲线。对于每条穿透曲线,使用每种等温线模型参数的典型值,针对四种不同的柱效值(N = 500、1000、2000和10000),采用每种方法(FA、FACP、PM)的最佳传统程序来计算相应的数据点。然后,将这些数据点拟合到每种等温线模型,并将相应的等温线参数与初始等温线模型的参数进行比较。当用色谱方法获得等温线数据时,可能会出现两种类型的误差:(1)从色谱记录中推导实验数据点时产生的误差;(2)选择不正确的等温线模型并将实验数据拟合到该模型时产生的误差。对于FA和FACP,随着柱效的增加,这两种误差均显著减小,但对于PM则不然。