In a previous post I talked about column size, specifically long-thin versus short-fat and the impact of the cartridge’s dimensions on purification performance. With that comparison I showed that in preparative chromatography, purification efficiency is more about the amount of silica than column dimensions. Cartridges of different dimensions containing the same amount of the same media will provide the same separation efficiency.

There are many factors which influence successful flash column chromatography. One of those factors is sample load, which itself is influenced by things like selectivity, efficiency, dissolution solvent, and load technique. Several of these factors I have addressed in previous posts. Of these, selectivity and efficiency are specific to a media's physical and chemical characteristics.

In this post I will show if particle size and/or particle shape can influence loading capacity.  Additionally, I will show the positive impact that surface area has on flash column chromatography purification.

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.

For chemists preferring or needing to dry load their crude sample mixtures to get an acceptable flash purification result, using the right ratio of sample to sorbent can be quite important.  Too much sample and solubility issues can ensue, too little sample and significant band broadening occurs, reducing the separation quality.

In this post, I propose an acceptable ratio range based on my own experimental data.

slash column chromatography has been practiced by chemists since the 1970s. That practice requires the silica in the column be properly wetted to remove trapped gasses and ensure uniform flow (remember those days of not letting air into the column?). Today, with automated flash chromatography systems and pre-packed columns as the norm, chemists ask me – do I really need to pre-equilibrate my column?

In this post I explore the impact on chromatography that equilibration, and lack thereof, has on separation performance.

Plate count is a theoretical number describing the separation efficiency of a chromatography column. In short, it is a measure an eluting compound's bandwidth at the time it elutes from a column, Equation 1.

For chemists needing to purify natural product extracts or synthesis reaction mixtures flash chromatography is typically the tool of choice. In previous posts I have discussed various ways to optimize the purification to obtain the highest purity compounds with maximum load in minimal time.

Sometimes, though, chemistry gets in the way in the form of solubility issues. When this happens most often dry loading is recommended for these sample types. In this post I will show the impact various dry load sorbent options have on chromatography.

In this post I will delve into six key factors that impact your purification success in flash column chromatography.

Previously, I have discussed the use of TLC for solvent scouting and method development and optimization. I have have also talked about cartridge size, particle size, and surface area and their impact on flash purification.  Here I integrate that information into the six factors below.

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.

In order to perform flash chromatography consistently, the equipment you use must be properly maintained by following some “best practices”. These best practices include using clean solvents (I typically use ACS grade), volatile organic modifiers, and quality columns.

Challenging separations, we all have faced this vexing problem. You synthesized your compound, analyzed it, and know your molecule is in there, based on LC-MS or TLC. Then, you do some method development using a silica TLC plate and see a major spot with some minor, early-eluting impurities. You think that the purification will be easy only to find that your “purified” compound has some co-eluting impurities. Now what? Should you change solvents or change stationary phase?

In this post, I will show how changing the column media but keeping the same solvents removed a co-eluting impurity in one of my reaction mixes.

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.

Various flash chromatography sample loading options are available including liquid and dry loading. Choosing the right technique is important because your sample loading choices (sample solvent and dry load sorbent), can have a major impact on the results.

In this post, I compare the two techniques and show the benefits dry loading with a form of diatomaceous earth can bring to your purification.

The answer to this question is yes, reversed-phase can sometimes provide a better separation and thus better purification than normal-phase.  When is reversed-phase likely to be the better choice is a different, and likely better, question.

In this post I will try to demonstrate when reversed-phase is likely the better purification mode.

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.