Advertisement

Pharmaceutisch Weekblad

, Volume 7, Issue 5, pp 186–193 | Cite as

Studies on tableting properties of lactose

Part 2. Consolidation and compaction of different types of crystalline lactose
  • H. Vromans
  • A. H. De Boer
  • G. K. Bolhuis
  • C. F. Lerk
  • K. D. Kussendrager
  • H. Bosch
Original Articles

Abstract

Lactose is available in several crystalline forms, which differ in binding properties. A new method of estimating the fragmentation propensity was applied to investigate the consolidation and compaction behaviour of this excipient for direct compression. Mercury porosimetry was used to demonstrate that crystalline lactose fragments during compaction. Tablet strength was found to be dependent on the degree of fragmentation only. This finding indicates that the nature of the actual binding must be the same for the different types of crystalline lactose.

Keywords

Public Health Internal Medicine Mercury Lactose Actual Binding 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References.

  1. 1.
    Kawakita K, Lüdde KH. Some considerations on powder compression equations. Powder Technol 1970/71;4:61–8.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Heckel RW. Density-pressure relationships in powder compaction. Trans Metal Soc AIME 1961;221:671–5.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Heckel RW. An analysis of powder compaction phenomena. Trans Metal Soc AIME 1961;221:1001–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hersey JA, Rees JE. Deformation of particles during briquetting. Nature Phys Sci 1971:230:96.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hersey JA, Cole ET, Rees JE. Powder consolidation during compaction. In: Proceedings of the first International Conference on the compaction and consolidation of particulate matter. London: The Powder Advisory Centre, 1973:165–70 (Powder Technology Publication Series. Vol. 4).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Boer AH, Bolhuis GK, Lerk CF. Bonding characteristics by scanning electron microscopy of powders mixed with magnesium stearate. Powder Technol 1978;20:75–82.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duberg M, Nyström C. Evaluation of methods for the estimation of particle fragmentation during compaction. Acta Pharm Suec 1982;19:421–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rue PJ, Rees JE. Limitations of the Heckel relation for predicting powder compaction mechanisms. J Pharm Pharmacol 1978;30:642–3.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chowhan ZT, Chow YP. Compression behaviour of pharmaceutical powders. Int J Pharm 1980;5:139–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fell JT, Newton JM. Effect of particle size and speed of compaction on density changes in tablets of crystalline and spray-dried lactose. J Pharm Sci 1971;60:11866–9.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hersey JA, Rees JE, Cole ET. Density changes in lactose tablets. J Pharm Sci 1973;62:2060.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Leuenberger H. The compressibility and compactibility of powder systems. Int J Pharm 1982;12:41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Newton JM, Grant DJW. The relation between the compaction pressure, porosity and tensile strength of compacted powders. Powder Technol 1974;9:295–7.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tsubaki J, Jimbo G. Theoretical analysis of the tensile strength of a powder bed. Powder Technol 1984;37:219–27.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Higuchi T, Narsimha Rao A, Busse LW, Swintosky JV. The influence of degree of compression on properties of tablets. J Am Pharm Ass 1953:42:194–200.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Armstrong NA, Griffiths RV. Surface area measurements in compressed powder systems. Pharm Acta Helv 1970;45:583–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gupte AR. Messung der spezifischen Oberfläche grosser Granulate und der mittleren Porengrösse von Tabletten. Acta Pharm Technol 1976;22:153–68.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Alderborn G, Nyström C, Pasanen K, Duberg M. The measurement of tablet suface area by permeametry. J Pharm Pharmacol 1982;34:51P.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Alderborn G, Duberg M, Nyström C. Measurement of tablet surface area by permeametry. Powder Technol 1985;41:49–56.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Alderborn G, Pasanen K, Nyström C. Characterization of particle fragmentation during compaction by permeametry measurements of tablets. Int J Pharm 1985;23:79–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Carless JE, Sheak A. Changes in the particle size distribution during tableting of sulphathiazole powder. J Pharm Pharmacol 1976:28:17–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Armstrong NA, Haines-Nutt RF. The compaction of magnesium carbonate. J Pharm Pharmacol 1970:22(suppl):8S-10S.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cole ET, Rees JE, Hersey JA. Relations between compaction data for some crystalline pharmaceutical materials. Pharm Acta Helv 1975;50:28–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shangraw RF, Wallaca JW, Bowers FM. Morphology and functionality in tablet excipients for direct compression. Pharm Technol 1981(sep):69–78.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    McKenna A, McCafferty DF. Effect of particle size on the compaction mechanism and tensile strength of tablets. J Pharm Pharmacol 1982;34:347–51.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sheikh-Salem M, Fell JT. The tensile strength of tablets of lactose, sodium chloride, and their mixtures. Acta Pharm Suec 1982;19:391–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sheikh-Salem M, Fell JT. Compaction characteristics of mixtures of materials with dissimilar compaction mechanisms. Int J Pharm Tech Prod Mfr 1981:2:19–22.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vromans H, De Boer AH, Bolhuis GK, Lerk CF, Kussendrager KD. The effect of initial particle size on binding properties and dehydration characteristics of lactose. Acta Pharm Suec 1985;22:163–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hüttenrauch R. Molekulargalenik als Grundlage moderner Arzneiformung. Acta Pharm Technol 1978(suppl 6):55–127.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nakai Y, Fukuoka E, Nakajima SI, Morita M. Estimation of the degree of crystallinity and the disorder parameter by an X-ray diffraction method. Chem Pharm Bull 1982;30:1811–8.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Morita M, Nakai Y, Fukuoka E, Nakajima SI. Effect of crystallinity on mechanical and structural properties. Chem Pharm Bull (Tokyo) 1984;32:4076–83.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lerk CF, Andreae AC, De Boer AH, et al. Increased binding capacity and flowability of α-lactose monohydrate after dehydration. J Pharm Pharmacol 1983;35:747–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sweeley CC, Bentley R, Makita M, Wells WW. Gas liquid chromatography of trimethylsilyl derivates of sugars and related substances. J Am Chem Soc 1963:85:2497–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Buma TJ, Van der Veen HKC. Accurate specific optical rotations of lactose and their dependence on temperature. Neth Milk.Dairy J 1974:28:175–85.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Berlin E, Kliman PG, Anderson BA, Pallansch MJ. Calorimetric measurement of the heat of desorption of water vapor from amorphous and crystalline lactose. Thermochim Acta 1971;2:143–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Buma TJ. The true density of spray milk powders and of certain constituents. Neth Milk Dairy J 1965;19:249–65.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Berlin E, Anderson BA, Pallansch MJ. Effect of hydration and crystal form on the surface area of lactose. J Dairy Sci 1972:55:1396–9.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bolhuis GK, Reichman G, Lerk CF, Van Kamp HV, Zuurman K. Evaluation of anhydrous α-lactose, a new excipient in direct compression. Drug Dev Ind Pharm 1985;11:1657–81.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bockstiegel G. Relations between pore structure and densification mechanism in the compacting of iron powder. I. Compacting properties in relation to the pore structure inside and in between powder particles. Int J Powder Metal 1966;2:13–26.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bockstiegel G. Relations between pore structure and densification mechanism in the compacting of iron powder. II. Theoretical considerations about the change of pore size distribution in compacting. Int J Powder Metal 1976;3:29–37.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    David ST, Augsburger LL. Plastic flow during compression of directly compressible fillers and its effect on tablet strength. J Pharm Sci 1977:66:155–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stanley-Wood N, Johansson M. A porosity -compaction relationship from the compaction of fine powders. Acta Pharm Technol 1980:26:215–9.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Bohn, Scheltema & Holkema 1985

Authors and Affiliations

  • H. Vromans
    • 1
  • A. H. De Boer
    • 1
  • G. K. Bolhuis
    • 1
  • C. F. Lerk
    • 1
  • K. D. Kussendrager
    • 2
  • H. Bosch
    • 3
  1. 1.Laboratory for Pharmaceutical Technology and DispensingAW GroningenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.DMVBA VeghelThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of Chemical TechnologyTwente University of TechnologyAE EnschedeThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations