These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Powder Flow Testing: Judicious Choice of Test Methods.
    Author: Tay JYS, Liew CV, Heng PWS.
    Journal: AAPS PharmSciTech; 2017 Jul; 18(5):1843-1854. PubMed ID: 27844415.
    Abstract:
    Flow property of pharmaceutical powders can be assessed by various flow testers and test methods. In this study, eight commercially available lactose grades were sourced and tested for angles of repose, tapping studies, shear cell measurements, stirred powder rheometry, and avalanching powder measurements. The relationships between various flow parameters and particle size were analyzed. Deviations from the general trend could be attributed to either the insensitivity of the test or differences in particle shape. The basic flowability energy of the powder rheometer was unable to reconcile the effects of shape and particle size on powder flowability. Avalanche time of the revolving drum powder analyzer and angle of repose exhibited good correlation with each other (r = 0.92) but experienced poor resolution for samples of smaller particle sizes due to powder cohesiveness and the propensity for agglomerative flow. Flow test parameters could be categorized into three broad types, based on their relationship with particle size: (i) linear relationship, (ii) test parameter more sensitive to smaller sized particles, and (iii) test parameter more sensitive to larger sized particles. Choice of test parameters used to represent powder flow should be dependent on the sensitivity of the selected flow test methods to the sample types.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]