Electrophoretic mobility vs. zeta potential

This is a recording of a webinar I gave on How To Measure Zeta Potential More Confidently.

I show you how you can maximize the confidence in your measurements - and their interpretation - needed for robust decision making.

Please sign up for my newsletter at http://tinyurl.com/zetanewsletter

Visit my website at https://enlightenscientific.com

Online training courses are being added to my school at https://learn.enlightenscientific.com

TRANSCRIPT

Question: “Is there any point in reporting zeta potential if we don’t know the true equation to use? Is it okay to just report electrophoretic mobility?”

Firstly, the instrument measures electrophoretic mobility and anything else it reports (zeta potential) is derived from it. So you aren’t going to lose anything by doing so and it is more appropriate to be raw data than zeta potential because of all the problems I’ve described about calculating zeta potential from the mobility.

I can’t recall a single instance of when I needed an absolute value for zeta potential – except for checking against a standard. Just about everything I’ve done has been relative – relative to something – a specification limit, an initial timepoint and so on. And if I’m normalizing the data against something or comparing to limits generated with the same method, then it’s unnecessary to calculate zeta. Just stick with electrophoretic mobility. You’ll reach the same conclusions and avoid having to contend with all the assumptions and caveats this webinar has been concerned with.

I have discussed nonpolar dispersions at all – which was the primary purpose for developing PALS – but the concept of zeta potential in nonpolar media is questionable, at least. Given one or two elemental charges, how can you define a double layer. What or where is zeta?

So, quite honestly, most of the time I stick with mobility.

Видео Electrophoretic mobility vs. zeta potential канала John Miller