by
krickos » Wed May 19, 2010 2:23 pm
Hi
Regarding your calculation, I do not get the "1000" factor you have added, then formula below is straight from USP and harmonised with Ph Eur it seems.
The unit of H and h (or hn in USP) is the same, like picoAmpere or milliVolt...So the expresion is unitless
Appearantly, the measurement can be tricky in gradient methods, but have done your initial trials on a solution corresponding to your LOQ or monograph requirement?? A too concentrated test solution may be the source of your problem as width at half peak height increases and leads to longer measurement range for hn.
Ph Eur used to have a factor 20, now it is five like in USP for measuring distance of hn, so if it is a diluted narrow peak you should be fine, but then again there are always a risk with pharmacopiea methods when they implement stuff retrospectively.
Last, it seems like the S/N calculation addition in USP is for information, not a general requirement (was under discussion earlier though as Ph Eur have) such as precision/RSD, so if you have a S/N requirement in your monograph, how did you do before?
The signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) is a useful system suitability parameter. The S/N is calculated as follows:
S/N = 2h/hn
in which h is the height of the peak corresponding to the component concerned; and hn is the difference between the largest and smallest noise values observed over a distance equal to at least five times the width at the half-height of the peak and, if possible, situated equally around the peak of interest