- Volumes 84-95 (2024)
-
Volumes 72-83 (2023)
-
Volume 83
Pages 1-258 (December 2023)
-
Volume 82
Pages 1-204 (November 2023)
-
Volume 81
Pages 1-188 (October 2023)
-
Volume 80
Pages 1-202 (September 2023)
-
Volume 79
Pages 1-172 (August 2023)
-
Volume 78
Pages 1-146 (July 2023)
-
Volume 77
Pages 1-152 (June 2023)
-
Volume 76
Pages 1-176 (May 2023)
-
Volume 75
Pages 1-228 (April 2023)
-
Volume 74
Pages 1-200 (March 2023)
-
Volume 73
Pages 1-138 (February 2023)
-
Volume 72
Pages 1-144 (January 2023)
-
Volume 83
-
Volumes 60-71 (2022)
-
Volume 71
Pages 1-108 (December 2022)
-
Volume 70
Pages 1-106 (November 2022)
-
Volume 69
Pages 1-122 (October 2022)
-
Volume 68
Pages 1-124 (September 2022)
-
Volume 67
Pages 1-102 (August 2022)
-
Volume 66
Pages 1-112 (July 2022)
-
Volume 65
Pages 1-138 (June 2022)
-
Volume 64
Pages 1-186 (May 2022)
-
Volume 63
Pages 1-124 (April 2022)
-
Volume 62
Pages 1-104 (March 2022)
-
Volume 61
Pages 1-120 (February 2022)
-
Volume 60
Pages 1-124 (January 2022)
-
Volume 71
- Volumes 54-59 (2021)
- Volumes 48-53 (2020)
- Volumes 42-47 (2019)
- Volumes 36-41 (2018)
- Volumes 30-35 (2017)
- Volumes 24-29 (2016)
- Volumes 18-23 (2015)
- Volumes 12-17 (2014)
- Volume 11 (2013)
- Volume 10 (2012)
- Volume 9 (2011)
- Volume 8 (2010)
- Volume 7 (2009)
- Volume 6 (2008)
- Volume 5 (2007)
- Volume 4 (2006)
- Volume 3 (2005)
- Volume 2 (2004)
- Volume 1 (2003)
• Three error sources were investigated in estimating particle size distribution by CHDF.
• Small error in diameter calibration can produce large deviation in the estimated average diameter.
• Error in particle refractive index can affect the estimated mode number concentration.
• Instrumental broadening correction can produce PSDs with underestimated width and distorted shape.
• Simulated and experimental examples were used to quantify the errors.
Capillary hydrodynamic fractionation (CHDF) with turbidity detection at a single wavelength is an analytical technique that is often used for sizing the sub-micrometric particles of hydrophobic colloids. This article investigates three sources of errors that affect the particle size distribution (PSD) estimated by CHDF: diameter calibration errors, uncertainties in the particle refractive index (PRI), and instrumental broadening (IB). The study is based on simulated and experimental examples that involve unimodal and bimodal PSDs. Small errors in the diameter calibration curve can produce important deviations in the number average diameter due to systematic shifts suffered by the PSD modes. Moderate uncertainties in the PRI are unimportant in the analysis of unimodal PSDs, but in the specific case of bimodal PSDs, errors in the PRI can strongly affect the estimated number concentration of each mode. The typical IB correction (based on the IB function estimated from narrow standards) produces slightly erroneous average diameters but can lead to PSDs with underestimated widths and distorted shapes. In practice, the three investigated sources of errors can be present simultaneously, and uncertainties in the average diameters, the shape and width of the PSD, and the number concentration of the PSD modes are unavoidable.