HPLC Solvents, Acetonitrile and Methanol, Key Differences and Properties

Widely used in RP HPLC method development, Acetonitrile (ACN) and Methanol (MeOH) are the two most common solvents you will use with water or aqueous buffers to develop methods. So, besides the fact that Acetonitrile is well know to have a higher elution strength / capacity than Methanol [*but NOT at high organic concentrations (e.g. 95% Methanol vs 95% ACN) where Methanol has a higher elution strength than Acetonitrile does], what other properties should chromatographer's be aware of? Let's discuss a few that all chromatographers should know.

PREPARATIONS of MIXTURES (A/B):
First, a few comments about the preparation of mobile phase solutions. 

• Only the purely aqueous portion can be correctly adjusted for pH. Do not try and measure or adjust the pH of the organic or organic solution mixture. 

     There are two common methods of preparing binary mixtures (V/V) of mobile phase solutions.

• Method #1 is to fill a volumetric flask with a specific volume of the "A" solution, then fill the flask up to the line with the "B" solution.

• Method #2 is to fill a graduated cylinder (or volumetric flask) with a specified amount of "A" solution; fill a second graduated cylinder (or volumetric flask) with a specified amount of the "B" solution and then mix the contents of both together.

Whichever method you use, please fully document it in your HPLC method so anyone reading it will be able to accurately reproduce it. The two methods described above are both correct in design, but will result in solutions with different properties.

ABSORBANCE of UV LIGHT:
For HPLC grade solvent (*we should always use HPLC or LC-MS grade solutions in HPLC analysis), ACN has the lowest absorbance (~ 190 nm) of the two making it well suited for low UV applications. HPLC grade MeOH has a slightly higher UV cut-off, around 205-210 nm, limiting its use in the very low UV ranges. *Methods which require low UV wavelengths (<230 nm) should not use Methanol as the primary solvent.

SOLVENT SOLUBILITY:
There is a significant difference between ACN and MeOH in their ability to dissolve many types of buffer salts AND samples. These differences may be critical during method development as higher salt concentrations could lead to plugs, clogs or precipation. 

Solubility of the Mobile Phase:

• A common reason for gradient runs to show poor reproducibility or to fail may be associated with running high concentrations of buffer combined with high concentrations of organic solvent. Most aqueous / organic solutions containing salt solutions of less than 10 mM concentration are not likely to precipitate under most gradient conditions (running to a max of 95% organic, not 100%). If high percentages of organic solvent are mixed with more concentrated buffer solutions, then the higher salt concentrations may precipitate out of solution during the analysis (resulting in clogs, leaks, plugs and/or inaccurate results). Be cautious when mixing organic solvents and buffers together for gradient analysis. Make sure the solutions used will stay in solution and be stable at all concentrations used. Also verify that the buffering capacity is still present when high organic concentrations are used (as your buffer will be diluted). *Not sure if the salt will stay in solution? Just mix up a sample at the same concentration for a test. Look at it. Is there any turbidity or particulate visible? You should have your answer.

• Methanol's overall better solubility characteristics (better than ACN) mean that it often does a better job of dissolving most salts (esp NH4, K and Na) at higher concentrations resulting in better performance and less precipitation.

Solubility of the Samples (changes to Peak Shape, Selectivity & Retention):

• A fundamental requirement of liquid chromatography is that the sample fully dissolves in the mobile phase (initial mobile phase). Dissolve the sample in the mobile phase or in a slightly weaker strength solution (not a stronger solution) before analysis. This insures it will be loaded onto the head of the column as a concentrated slug improving peak shape and RSD. If the sample does not fully dissolve in the mobile phase then you are not in fact analyzing the whole sample. Another area where Methanol may be superior to ACN can be found in its ability to fully dissolve more types of samples. This improved solubility may result in better overall peak shape. Methanol also has different selectivity, often better than ACN (not just the elution strength) which may result in peaks eluting at different retention times than expecting. This is another reason why we always try different mobile phase mixtures containing either ACN or MeOH when developing RP methods. Please never assume that one solvent will be better than the other. Too many novice chromatographer's use only ACN as their main organic solvent for method development. Please don't make their mistake as such a strategy indicates a lack of practical experience and knowledge. You must first try them both separately (ACN & MeOH) to evaluate the results with your own sample (best to start with comprehensive gradients at different pH values, as applicable). You will be rewarded for putting in the initial time to test both types of solutions as no simulator has yet been developed which can predict a truly accurate result with your own sample(s). You may be surprised to learn how many samples show better peak shape and performance using MeOH solutions. If no improvement is seen, document it and move forward with more confidence.

BACKPRESSURE & OUTGASSING:

• ACN is less viscous than MeOH ( 0.34 vs. 0.54 viscosity, respectively) and if used alone will result in lower column and system back-pressures overall. Less gas will dissolve into ACN vs MeOH. Mixtures of ACN and Water will also exhibit an endothermic reaction (cooling the solution) which can trap gas inside the solution. If you pre-mix your mobile phase, let it rest for several minutes after preparation.Mixtures of ACN and Water will show a pressure max around 70% ACN (*This is an unusual characteristic well worth learning).
  

• MeOH is more viscous than ACN alone. It also has an unusual property where a 50/50 mixture of MeOH and Water will result in a much higher system and column back pressure than either MeOH or Water alone will (*ACN has a similar property, but the peak pressure occurs between 60-70%). The effect with methanol is very Gaussian with a peak pressure observed with a 50/50 mixture. An exothermic reaction results from an initial mixture of the two solutions (MeOH and Water) releasing some gas. When preparing solutions it is best to allow the solution to rest for a few minutes to out-gas before topping off or using in the HPLC system.

I hope that this short discussion about some of the differences between these two popular HPLC solvents will aid you in developing better quality HPLC and LC-MS methods.

Reference: Table of HPLC Solvent Properties

HPLC Solvent Properties Table (e.g. Polarity, Density, Boiling Point...)

Here is a link to a table listing common chromatography solvents and their physical properties (e.g. viscosity, polarity, UV absorption...). 

http://www.hplctools.com/lcsolvent.htm

HPLC PUMP SOLVENT COMPRESSIBILITY VALUES

Have you ever noticed excessive pump ripple (baseline noise) that is not caused by a defective check valve ? The ripple might be due to an incorrect HPLC Pump solvent compressibility setting.

We normally think of liquids as not being compressible in general. Hydraulic systems take advantage of this physical fact and many innovations have been developed using this concept. However, in high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) we routinely subject different liquids to very high pressures which can result in measurable liquid compression. The degree of actual compression varies for each liquid (see table). Though the amount of compression is very small, it is enough to change the flow rate of the system. When multiple solvents are mixed together at different proportions, such as is common when running a gradient, the measured flow rate can vary from the set flow rate during the entire run. This flow rate accuracy issue can be compensated for using the built-in solvent compressibility compensation software which is found in most modern HPLC systems. Many of these systems will allow you to manually enter the actual liquid compressibility values for each solvent (pump channel) used. This can result in better baseline stability and less pump noise. I would like to point out that the small improvement gained in performance is best implemented AFTER other major changes have been addressed first (i.e. such as fully degassing your solvents; filtering samples before injecting; selecting the best signal bandwidth and sampling rate values for your detector and insuring that your pumping system has received regular maintenance). 
 
Note how Water has a compressibility value of ~ 46, but a very common solvent such as Methanol has a value of 120. These two are very different. *Most pumps are pre-set with a compressibility value of '100'. A 50/50 mixture of the two run isocratically might benefit from a manually edited compressibility value of 83 [(46 + 120) = 166 / 2 = 83)]. *This is a best guess value as the best compressibility value for a mixture of liquids must be determined through actual experiments. Choose the value which results in the lowest pump pressure ripple and/or noise. 

SOLVENT COMPRESSIBILITY VALUES TABLE:

Solvent	Compressibility (10-6 per bar)
Water	46
Acetone	126
Acetonitrile	96
Benzene	95
Carbon Tetrachloride	106
Chloroform	100
Cyclohexane	113
Dichloromethane	99
Ethanol	112
Ethyl Acetate	113
Heptane	144
Hexane	158
Isopropanol	100
Methanol	120
Tetrahydrofuran	97
Toluene	90

Notes: 
(1) The values shown above are approximate and assumed to be accurate. They were recorded at a temperature of 20C (Reference: Handbook of Chemistry and Physics #90). Various grades/purity of solvent may have different compressibility values so please verify the values of your own solvents before use. These should serve as a general guideline only.

(2) The variation in pressure which occurs between the pump piston compression and decompression strokes are sometimes reported by the pump's electronics to aid in troubleshooting. Agilent/HP brand systems refer to it as the pressure "ripple" (should be less than 0.5 %) and Waters brand systems report the calculated ratio, "Compression / Decompression Ratio" value using this guideline [1.0 - 1.4 = Normal; 1.4 -1.8 = Fair; > 1.8 = Possible Bubble]. In all cases, continously degass all liquids and input the correct compressibility values for each mobile phase solution to achieve the most stable flow.

How Do C18 HPLC Phases Differ ?

Reversed phase HPLC columns which utilize the octadecyl functional group often differ in many ways. Besides the particle size and shape of the stationary phase (irregular or spherical), other parameters must be considered including: Porosity (fully porous or superficially porous) the coating chemistry and degree of end-capping used. Two other very important ways that columns can differ from one another are in their available surface area and the extent to which those surfaces are covered with the phase coating (i.e. covalently bonded or non-covalently coated onto the support, plus the total carbon %). When comparing columns for use in validated methods, be sure and consider these factors to minimize the number of changes to your method. Always test several columns of the same exact type to determine the batch-to-batch reproducibility and variation. Some manufacturers have mastered the art of preparing and packing columns which achieve high batch-to-batch reproducibility. After all, what good is a specific column in your method if the results are not reproducible ?