METHOD TRANSFER BETWEEN THE MASTERSIZER

2000 AND MASTERSIZER 3000 PARTICLE SIZE

ANALYZERS

Figure 1: Mastersizer 2000, 0.02μm to 2000μm

Figure 2: Mastersizer 3000, 0.01μm to 3500μm

Transferring methods between different laser diffraction particle size instrumentation

requires consideration of the following three method variables;
 Particle size calculation parameters such as optical properties and analysis
models
 Measurement parameters such as instrument size range, obscuration range, and
measurement duration.
 Sample dispersion state, which can be affected by pump and stirrer speed,
sonication times and disperser pressure settings.

Malvern Instruments Worldwide

1
Sales and services centres in over 65 countries
www.malvern.com/contact ©2013 Malvern Instruments Limited MRK1837-02
When all of the above are transferred correctly, and the particle size is within the range of both instruments, then excellent
agreement can be achieved. Differences are expected when the particle size is towards the extremes of the size range due to the
improved performance of newer instruments.
The aim of this note is to compare the calculation, measurement and dispersion settings of the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer
3000 systems. Where parameters are not directly transferrable, tests will be suggested to determine the appropriate settings to
achieve comparable results.
The ease of method transfer between two systems can depend on the robustness of the initial method. More detailed descriptions
of method development and validation are provided in separate application notes [1, 2, 3].

Calculating the size distribution

Laser diffraction instruments use an optical model to interpret the measured scattering data and calculate a particle size
distribution.

Optical properties
The most comprehensive optical model is Mie theory, which requires the user to input the optical properties of the sample
(refractive index and absorption) and the dispersant, (refractive index).
Both the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000 use the exact values of refractive index and absorption (imaginary refractive index)
which can be selected from a database, to which new materials can also be added. As such there is no change in the way optical
properties are defined between the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000.
However, for accurate method transfer it is important to make sure that the optical properties are correct. If incorrect optical
properties are used then, due to the difference in detector designs, the results obtained on each system may be different.
Figure 3 shows the results of a measurement of a calcium carbonate sample on the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000 using
the default (incorrect) optical properties from the Mastersizer 2000 (refractive index=1.52, and absorption = 0.1). The results show
a difference in the shape of the fine end of the distribution and significant variation in the value of the Dv10.

Figure 3: Result of calcium carbonate sample analyzed using default optical properties on Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000

However, if the correct optical properties are used then excellent agreement between the two systems can be achieved. Figure 4
shows the results of the same calcium carbonate sample measured on both instruments and analyzed using a refractive index of
1.6 and absorption of 0.01. This shows much closer agreement between the two size distributions, and the percentiles measured
on both instruments are within the ISO limits for repeatability [4].
The figures also show the analysis residuals (lower values indicate a better fit to the data) for each set of optical properties. Using
1.6 and 0.01 reduces the reported residuals on both instruments. This indicates that the fit between the measured and calculated
scattering data has been improved and that these optical properties are more appropriate for the sample.
This example shows that good agreement can be achieved when appropriate optical properties are used; however it is important to
note that incorrect optical properties may not give the same results on both systems.

application note - MRK1837-02 2

Figure 4: Result of calcium carbonate sample analyzed using 1.6/0.01 on Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000

Analysis models
In addition to the optical models used to interpret the scattering data, diffraction instruments use analysis models to better
interpret data from distributions of different widths. For example, a general purpose model is suitable for most milled, precipitated
and emulsion samples. However, a model for narrow modes may be more appropriate for classified or standard materials.
Table 1 shows a comparison chart for the analysis models available on Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000. Although the
names may have changed, most analysis models can be directly transferred between Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000.

Model type
Sample type
Mastersizer 2000 Mastersizer 3000

Most materials General purpose General purpose

Narrow modes
Single mode, narrow sample Single narrow mode
(+Advanced, keep single mode)

Multiple mode narrow sample Multiple narrow modes Narrow modes

Latex spheres Single/multiple narrow modes Verification latex

Particle shape Spherical or irregular Spherical or irregular

Dry fine powders Fine powder mode Fine powder mode

Table 1: Analysis model selection

Measurement Parameters
In order to ensure that equivalent data can be recorded on both systems, comparable measurement parameters should be set and
where there is no direct comparison the effect of these parameters on the results should be considered.

Instrument size range

One potential source of differences in results may occur when samples are at the extremes of the instruments dynamic range, due
to improvements in the dynamic range of the Mastersizer 3000 [6]. Figure 5 shows the results of a coffee sample measured on
both instruments, where excellent agreement between the systems has been achieved. This is also a sample which uses the narrow
modes model to improve the fit to the data.

application note - MRK1837-02 3

Figure 5: Coffee results at the top end of the instrument range

Samples containing particles greater than 2000μm will show larger results on the Mastersizer 3000 and may show a cut off on the
Mastersizer 2000 results. In these cases the result comparability may be improved by restricting the size range of the analysis used
in the Mastersizer 3000.

Obscuration ranges
The appropriate obscuration (related to concentration) range for a laser diffraction measurement is a balance between recording
sufficient scattering data and avoiding multiple scattering.
If the amount of sample added to the dispersion unit is too low then the results will not be reproducible due a low signal to noise
ratio. The reproducibility of the measurement can be tested by measuring separate sub samples of the materials.
If the obscuration is too high then the measurement becomes affected by multiple scattering, causing a reduction in the measured
particle size at higher obscurations. Due to improvements in the optical design the Mastersizer 3000 is less susceptible to multiple
scattering. Therefore it is important to carry out an obscuration titration, particularly if the sample is smaller than 1μm, in order to
determine over what obscuration range the particle size is stable.
Figure 6 shows two obscuration titrations carried out on the same emulsion sample on both instruments; where the Dv10 (as this is
most sensitive to changes in fine particles) has been plotted against the obscuration. This shows that the Dv10 measured on the
Mastersizer 2000 starts to decrease above 1% obscuration, whereas the decrease in size with increasing obscuration is much more
gradual on the Mastersizer 3000.
As multiple scattering is dependent on particle size, different obscuration ranges are recommended for different particle sizes, as
shown in Table 2.

Obscuration
Sample
Mastersizer 2000 Mastersizer 3000

Wet (>20μm) 5 – 25% 5 – 25%

Wet (1-20μm) 1 – 10% 1 – 13 %

Wet (<1μm) 1 – 5% 1–8%

Dry 0.5 – 6 % 0.5 – 8%

Table 2: Suggested obscuration ranges.

Obscuration levels for dry measurements are specified in order to optimize the dispersion efficiency of the venturi, for example fine
cohesive samples may be measured over a lower obscuration range. Due to changes in the disperser geometries the Aero
dispersion unit can work over slightly wider obscuration ranges than the Scirocco.

application note - MRK1837-02 4

 0.35
MS3000
MS2000
0.30

0.25
Dv10 / m

0.20

0.15

0.10

0.05
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

Obscuration / %
Figure 6: Obscuration titration, Dv10 vs obscuration

Measurement duration
The duration of a laser diffraction measurement affects sampling of the material added to the dispersion unit.
If the measurement duration is too short, there may be insufficient time for all particles to circulate through the measurement cell.
If a small number of coarse particles are missed from a polydisperse sample then this may cause a significant change in the results.
The duration of a diffraction measurement is set in seconds, the Mastersizer 2000 shows the duration in both seconds and detector
scans. The number of detector scans per second depends on the data acquisition rate of the instrument; this is 1 kHz for the
Mastersizer 2000 and 10 kHz for the Mastersizer 3000.
Even though the data acquisition rate has increased, it is recommended that the measurement duration is kept the same. The
increase in the data acquisition rate will further improve sampling of the material. The greatest benefit from this increased data
acquisition rate may be seen in dry measurements, due to increased sensitivity to particle sizes present in small quantities..

Sample Dispersion
Achieving the same state of dispersion on both systems is key to obtaining comparable results on both instruments.

Wet sample dispersion

A range of wet dispersion units with different volumes are available with both instruments. To ease method transfer, choose the
corresponding dispersion unit with the closest volume.

Stir speed
The stir speed can affect the suspension of coarse or dense particles, or breakage of fragile particles. The Hydro MV and Hydro LV
share similar tank designs, with an integrated centrifugal pump and stirrer.
Due to similarities between dispersion units such as the Hydro S and Hydro MV, and Hydro MU and Hydro EV, in the majority of
cases the stir speed should be directly transferrable. However, as the Hydro G uses a separate pump and stir compared to the
integrated pump stir of the Hydro LV, it is recommended that a stir speed titration is carried out in order to ensure that equivalent
results are obtained.
For large or dense materials a stir speed titration will determine the speed at which all of the material has been suspended. Figure 8
shows a stir speed titration on the Hydro LV for a dense copper powder, where all of the material is suspended above 2500rpm.

application note - MRK1837-02 5

Figure 7: Dispersion unit tank design

Figure 8: Stir speed titration on the Hydro LV

The Hydro SM dispersion unit is used on both the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000, therefore the dispersion unit parameters
will be directly transferrable for the vast majority of materials. However, as the flow path has changed it may be necessary to test
the effect of stir speed for some samples, particularly plate like particles.

Ultrasound
Wet dispersion units use ultrasound to disperse agglomerates, the Mastersizer 3000 dispersion units use in line sonication to
increase dispersion efficiency. In the Hydro MV and LV the ultrasound transducer forms part of the pump chamber, whereas the EV
uses a separate ultrasound chamber. In both designs the particles must pass close to the ultrasound transducer, improving the
dispersion efficiency.
Therefore, using the new dispersion units may reduce the ultrasound duration required to disperse a sample. Figure 9 shows a
dispersion trend for an agglomerated sample on a Mastersizer 2000 dispersion unit compared with the new Mastersizer 3000
dispersion unit. This shows that it takes over 300 seconds to disperse the sample using the Mastersizer 2000 dispersion unit,
whereas a stable particle size is reached in half the time using the new dispersion unit.

application note - MRK1837-02 6

Figure 9: Dispersion trend with ultrasound on the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000

Dry sample dispersion

In dry measurements, dispersion is achieved using compressed air and varying the air pressure allows the level of dispersion to be
controlled.

Figure 10: Scirocco, Aero Standard, and Aero High Energy dispersers

140
Standard Dv50
High energy Dv50
Wet result
120 Scirocco Dv50

100
Size / m

80

60

40
0 1 2 3 4

Air pressure / bar

Figure 11: Pressure titration for Milk powder, measured on both Aero S dispersers, and the
Scirocco compared with a wet reference measurement.

application note - MRK1837-02 7

In moving from Scirocco to Aero the dry powder disperser has been completely redesigned. The Aero uses a modular disperser
design to enable different dispersion mechanisms to be used for fragile, cohesive or robust samples (a more detailed description of
the Aero disperser is available in a separate technical note [6]).
Due to this change in dispersion mechanisms, it is recommended that a pressure titration should be carried out in order to
determine which disperser and what pressure is appropriate for the sample. Figure 11 shows pressure titrations (Dv50 vs. pressure)
measured for a milk powder using both the Scirocco and the standard and high energy venturi units with the Aero. The dispersed
wet result has also been added to the graph to evaluate the corresponding pressure at which the sample has been correctly
dispersed.
The results show that the sample is dispersed at 1bar using the Scirocco and the high energy Aero venturi, and at between 3bar
and 4bar using the standard Aero venturi. Therefore, the standard Aero venturi would be recommended for this sample as it shows
that the sample is dispersed in a region where the result is stable with pressure (between 3 and 4 bar).

Case Studies
The flowing section contains three method transfer case studies, where each example illustrates some of the principles described in
this application note.

1: Silicon Carbide
The first example is a Silicon carbide sample with a large particle size, the Dv50 is approximately 600μm. Due to the large particle
size, when measured in wet dispersion the important parameters for transferring this method are adequate sampling of the
material and ensuring that all of the particles in the dispersion unit are suspended.
This sample was measured using the large volume dispersion units, Hydro G and Hydro LV, which allow a larger volume of sample
to be measured which improves sampling. For this sample it was also important to carry out a stir speed titration on the Hydro LV
to ensure that all particles were suspended. As the particles are large, a stir speed of 3500rpm was determined to be sufficient to
suspend all of the particles in the sample.
Considering these two important factors in transferring the method has resulted in comparable size distributions and percentiles
which are within the ISO limits for repeatability, as shown in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Silicon carbide, Wet dispersion on Hydro G and Hydro LV (at 3500rpm)

2: Pigment
The second example is a mineral pigment, with particles in the size range of tens to hundreds of microns. As the sample contains
particles smaller than 50μm, the important factors to consider are the optical properties and state of dispersion.
In this example the sample has been measured wet using the Hydro S and Hydro MV dispersion units. The sample dispersed well in
water and ultrasound was not required to provide any further dispersion.

application note - MRK1837-02 8

As the sample is neither very large nor dense, then the stir speed is unlikely to affect the results. In this case the sample has been
measured at a stir speed of 2000 rpm on both systems.
The refractive index of this material is given in the reference material as 1.68, and an absorption of 0.1 is appropriate for a colored
material. These optical properties produced a good fit to the data, with residuals well below 1% .The results from the Mastersizer
2000 and Mastersizer 3000 are shown in Figure 13 where excellent agreement between the two particle size distributions was
achieved and the differences between the calculated percentiles are well within the ISO limits for repeatability.

Figure 13: Pigment sample measured wet using the Hydro S and Hydro MV

3: Calcium carbonate
The final case study is a calcium carbonate sample with a size range between 1μm and 10μm. Due to the small size of this sample,
the important factors to consider with this sample will be dispersion and optical properties.
This sample has been measured on the Hydro MU and Hydro EV. Calcium carbonates often require chemical stabilization, such as
sodium phyrophosphate, as well as a short duration of ultrasound to disperse any agglomerates. In this case 1 minute of
ultrasound at full power has been used on both systems. In both cases the stir speed has been set to 2000rpm.

application note - MRK1837-02 9

Figure 14: Calcium carbonate sample measured wet on both Hydro MU and Hydro EV

The refractive index for calcium carbonate is in the region of 1.5 to 1.7. In this case a refractive index of 1.6 and an absorption of
0.01, appropriate to a crystalline milled material, have been used. Figure 14 shows the results of the calcium carbonate samples on
the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000, this shows good agreement between the particle size distributions and the calculated
percentiles.

Conclusions
Method transfer between diffraction instruments requires consideration of the analysis parameters, measurement parameters and
the sample’s state of dispersion.
This application note has discussed the transfer of these parameters between the Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000, and
suggested tests which can be carried out to ensure that results are comparable when parameters cannot be directly transferred.
Following such a method transfer process enables excellent agreement between Mastersizer 2000 and Mastersizer 3000 results to
be achieved.

Reference
[1] Wet method development for laser diffraction measurements, MRK561-01
[2] Developing a method for dry powder analysis, MRK524-02
[3] Method validation for laser diffraction measurements, MRK671-01
[4] ISO13320 (2009). Particle Size Analysis - Laser Diffraction Methods, Part 1: General Principles
[5] Extending the boundaries of laser diffraction: Increased dynamic range and sensitivity with the Mastersizer 3000, MRK1821-01
[6] Extending the boundaries of laser diffraction: Enhanced dry powder dispersion with the Aero S, MRK1829-01

Malvern Instruments Ltd

Enigma Business Park • Grovewood Road
Malvern • Worcestershire • UK • WR14 1XZ
Tel: +44 (0)1684 892456
Fax: +44 (0)1684 892789

Malvern Instruments Worldwide

Sales and service centers in over 50 countries
for details visit www.malvern.com/contact
© Malvern Instruments Ltd 2013

more information at www.malvern.com

application note - MRK1837-02 10