Comparison to conventional glass autosampler vials.

Various test solutes are investigated in this study in order to determine the role that functional groups play in analyte loss to the vial. Percent loss increased in order of increasing number of amine groups and was greatest with permanently cationic species (Thiamine and
Cetylpyridinium chloride).

Furthermore, percent loss was significantly lower using RSA glass vials, which show how the surface chemistry has real end-user advantages for the analytical laboratory. This is due to the fact that RSA glass vials do not have the many surface hydroxyl groups that are found in conventional glass vials.RSA Study Table


Method Conditions
Items Tested: RSA™ v. Market Leading Glass Autosampler Vials.
Columns used in Method:
Diamond Hydride™, 4μm, 100Å
Bidentate C18™, 4μm, 100Å
Vials: 9509S-1WCP-RS (Easy Purchase Pack RSA vials & AQR caps)
Specifications of RSA: Reduced Surface Activity glass, Clear, 2ml, Write-on, screw top vials and AQR non-slit caps,  12 x 32 mm (2 mL)
Mobile Phase: Various isocratic settings were used
Flow rate: 1.0 mL/minute
Sample Preparation: 5.0ppm reference standards in DI H2O diluent. Portions of the same samples were transferred to the two vial types and injected into an HPLC initially and after four hours. Peak areas were recorded and compared to initial injections to calculate percent recovery.


No 277 RSA App Note Compound Dependent Study.pdf.pdf   0.2 Mb   Download File