Compression, compaction, and disintegration properties of low crystallinity celluloses produced using different agitation rates during their regeneration from phosphoric acid solutions
- 305 Downloads
The tabletting characteristics of low crystallinity celluloses (LCPC)-LCPC-700, LCPC-2000, and LCPC-4000-prepared using agitation rates of 700, 2000, and 4000 rpm, respectively, during their regeneration from phosphoric acid, were evaluated and compared with those of Avicel PH-102 and Avicel PH-302. The mean deformation pressure values calculated from the linear region of the Athy-Heckel curves indicated LCPC-4000 to be the most ductile material. The area under the Athy-Heckel curve for LCPC-4000 was 330 MPa, whereas LCPC-700 and LCPC-2000 showed a corresponding value similar to that of Avicel PH-102 and Avicel PH-302 (192–232 MPa). The tensile strength of LCPC and Avicel compacts increased linearly with increasing applied pressures. A comparison of the area under the tensile strength-compression pressure curves indicated that LCPC-4000 formed the strongest tablets. The strengths of LCPC-700 and LCPC-2000 compacts, in contrast, were slightly lower than that of Avicel PH-302 and Avicel PH-102, respectively. The compacts of both LCPC-4000 and Avicel PH-102 were intact in water for 6 hours, whereas LCPC-2000 and Avicel PH-302 compacts disintegrated in 4 minutes and 2 minutes, respectively. In conclusion, LCPC-4000 was the most ductile material and exhibited the highest compression and compaction characteristics. The corresponding properties of LCPC-700 and LCPC-2000, in contrast, were comparable to that of Avicel PH-102 or Avicel PH-302.
KeyWordsLow crystallinity cellulose Microcrystalline cellulose Direct compression cellulose excipients Compression and compaction characteristics
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 2.Wei S. Preparation and Physical/Mechanical Evaluation of New Low crystallinity forms of cellulose as pharmaceutical excipients. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota; 1991.Google Scholar
- 3.Banker GS, Wei S. Low crystallinity cellulose. US patent 5 417 984. May 23, 1995.Google Scholar
- 4.Kumar V, Kothari SH, Banker GS. Effect of agitation rate on the generation of low crystallinity cellulose from phosphoric acid. J Appl Polym Sci. 2001; in press.Google Scholar
- 10.Carr RL. Classifying flow properties of solids. Chem Eng. 1965;72:69–72.Google Scholar
- 11.Hausner HH. Friction conditions in a mass of metal powders. Int J Powder Metall. 1967;3:7–13.Google Scholar
- 12.Ramsey PJ. Physical Evaluation of Compressed Powder Systems: The effect of particle size and porosity variation on Hiestand and compaction indicies. Iowa City, IA: The University of Iowa; 1996.Google Scholar
- 15.Wells JI. Pharmaceutical preformulation: the physicochemical properties of drug substances. New York, NY: Wiley; 1988:p. 210.Google Scholar
- 17.Alderborn G, Nystrom C., eds. Pharmaceutical powder compaction technology. New York, NY: Marcel Dekker, Inc; 1996.Google Scholar
- 18.Duberg M, Nystrom C. Studies on direct compression of tablets XII. The consolidation and bonding properties of some pharmaceutical compounds and their mixtures with Avicel PH-105. Int J Pharm Tech Prod Manuf. 1985;6:17–25.Google Scholar
- 19.Sixsmith DG. Microcrystalline cellulose as a tablet excipient. Manuf Chemist Aerosol News. 1976;August:27–28.Google Scholar
- 21.Khan KA, Rhodes CT. Effect of compaction pressure on the dissolution efficiency of direct compression systems. Pharm Acta Helv. 1972;47:594–607.Google Scholar