Over the past several decades, the chemical industry has implemented process changes and updated practices in R&D and manufacturing in an effort to reduce liquid and solid lab waste. The pharmaceutical industry in particular has taken steps within their drug discovery labs to reduce solvent use by requiring their chemists to find and implement measures that achieve the corporate environmental goals without curtailing their productivity – quite the challenge.
For most organic reaction mixture purifications the process is fairly straightforward. Use hexane/ethyl acetate or, for polar compounds, DCM/MeOH. But what do you do if this doesn't work and your compounds are basic organic amines?
In this post, I re-examine the options available to achieve an acceptable organic amine purification when typical separation methods are insufficient.
This, of course, is always one of the first questions an organic, medicinal, or peptide chemist has when starting the research process for a flash chromatography system. Here at Biotage, we receive this question hundreds and hundreds of times a year, likely within the first couple of minutes of any conversation.
Synthetic organic chemistry is the genesis of new pharmaceutical and commercial chemical products. In short, it is based on the idea that two or more carbon-based compounds can be forced to react using heat, or other energy source, to create a new, novel product – but this we already know.
The newly released Biotage® Selekt flash chromatography instrument can be run at a maximum flow-rate of 300 mL/min or a maximum pressure of 30 bar. These high flowrates and pressures enable a user to perform chromatography using not only dry-packed, single-use plastic flash columns containing small (≥20 μm) spherical silica particles, but also semi-preparative, slurry-packed
HPLC columns for multiple use with smaller (≤20 μm) spherical silica particles.
When Isolera™ was launched, the maximum system pressure that could be reached was 10 bars, but reaching that pressure was a challenge since most of the Flash columns could not withstand the higher pressures. The maximum pressure rating for the Biotage® SNAP columns, for example, is limited to five or seven bars, depending on the size, and columns from most of manufacturers have the same limitation.
I have recently posted on how solvent choice influences the separation of hard to resolve compounds using normal-phase flash chromatography. As a chemist with an inquiring mind, I thought I would expand my research beyond normal-phase and see what happens in reversed-phase.
In this post, I share my results.
Many microwave assisted organic synthesis (MAOS) reactions use polar solvents such as alcohols, DMF, DMSO, because they absorb and transfer microwave energy very efficiently. However, the downside of using polar, microwave absorbing solvents is that they can interfere with normal-phase flash chromatography.
In this post, I discuss why dry loading can be advantageous when purifying polar-solvated reaction mixtures.
Welcome to a second installment of the Biotage Cannabis Application development flash blog. The first post, dated August 20 2016, outlined an orthogonal approach to isolating cannabinoids from winterized extract. Give it read if you have not seen it
Today we investigate the “hot” topic of pesticide elimination from extract. Specifically – Myclobutanil remediation.
Biotage®, a pioneer in Flash Purification, launched the unique, removable cap SNAP flash chromatography columns in 2007. This beneficial column design feature continues with the newest Biotage flash columns named Sfär columns.
Previously, I have posted on a normal-phase flash chromatography method to separate and isolate CBG from a CBD-rich hemp distillate. CBG is just one of many naturally occurring minor cannabinoids of interest in this fast-growing market.
Media particle size and solvent flow rate play major roles in chromatographic separations including flash purification. This is true in both reversed-phase chromatography (aka partition chromatography) as well as normal-phase chromatography. The roles played are related to the overall compound mass-transfer kinetics and diffusion/dispersion as they migrate through the column. Smaller particles reduce sample dilution by reducing interstitial volume, while flow rate impacts the ability of molecules to efficiently pass through the porous particles. In this post, I will show how both particle size and flow rate impact flash chromatography.
In our more environmentally aware climate, chemical and pharmaceutical companies now prioritize reducing organic solvent use in chemistry labs. Employees and shareholders alike are pushing their companies to become greener which impacts how chemistry, both synthesis and purification, is performed.
In many of my previous posts I have used the term column volume, typically abbreviated as CV, as a value used to help determine separation quality and loading capacity. However, I recently was asked a question about this topic from a chemist who understands the column volume concept but wanted to better understand its definition and how it is determined.
In this post I will explain what a column volume is and how it is determined empirically.
On July 26th, 2018, Bob Bickler, Senior Technical Specialist, recorded a webinar on A Roadmap to Successful Flash Chromatography. To learn more, read the description below as well as watch the recording!
For most synthesis and natural product chemists, flash chromatography is the primary tool for purification and isolation of compounds of interest. Purification methods include flash system defaulted linear gradients (e.g. 0-100%), active gradient modification (on-the-fly) during purification, and unique method creation based one either the chemist’s experience or TLC data (typically a linear gradient).