Sometimes when changes are made to gradient conditions, the result isn’t what was expected. LCGC 31(5) 382-389 (2013) John W. Dolan ERRATUM: The last word on p. 388 should be “decrease” not “increase.” A change in particle size from 3 microns to 5 should reduce the pressure, not increase it.
Read More →Is it possible to get the same separation under isocratic and gradient conditions? LCGC 31(4) 300-305 (2013) John W. Dolan
Read More →For method development or routine analysis, the minimum gradient time may be a limit of throughput. LCGC 29(8) 652-657 (2011) John W. Dolan
Read More →How to make gradient separations faster without changing the separation. LCGC28(9) 782-789 (2010) Stefan Brand and John W. Dolan
Read More →Here’s a trick to get isocratic conditions quickly. LCGC 25(12) 1178-1182 (2007) John W. Dolan
Read More →How do I get the most out of my efforts? LCGC 25(9) 944-950 (2007) John W. Dolan
Read More →Faster isn’t always better. LCGC 25(8) 704-709 (2007) John W. Dolan
Read More →Different methods require different strategies. LCGC 25(6) 546-552 (2007) John W. Dolan
Read More →Flow-rate changes might or might not be acceptable means to adjust retention. LCGC 21(4)350-354 (2003) John W. Dolan erratum: text associated with equation 3 should have stated “If the flow rate is halved from 2 mL/min to 1 mL/min k* is halved.”
Read More →Just how good is good enough? LCGC 18(1) 28-32 (2000) John W. Dolan
Read More →