Gas phase emission samples of carbonyl compounds (CCs) were collected from a research ship diesel engine at Rostock University, Germany. The ship engine was operated using two different types of fuels, heavy fuel oil (HFO) and diesel fuel (DF). Sampling of CCs was performed from diluted exhaust using cartridges and impingers. Both sampling methods involved the derivatization of CCs with 2,4-Dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH). The CCs-hydrazone derivatives were analyzed by two analytical techniques: High Performance Liquid Chromatography–Diode Array Detector (HPLC–DAD) and Gas Chromatography–Selective Ion Monitoring–Mass Spectrometry (GC–SIM–MS). Analysis of DNPH cartridges by GC–SIM–MS method has resulted in the identification of 19 CCs in both fuel operations. These CCs include ten aliphatic aldehydes (formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, propanal, isobutanal, butanal, isopentanal, pentanal, hexanal, octanal, nonanal), three unsaturated aldehydes (acrolein, methacrolein, crotonaldehyde), three aromatic aldehyde (benzaldehyde, p-tolualdehyde, m,o-molualdehyde), two ketones (acetone, butanone) and one heterocyclic aldehyde (furfural). In general, all CCs under investigation were detected with higher emission factors in HFO than DF. The total carbonyl emission factor was determined and found to be 6700 and 2300 μg kWh−1 for the operation with HFO and DF respectively. Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde were found to be the dominant carbonyls in the gas phase of ship engine emission. Formaldehyde emissions factor varied from 3870 μg kWh−1 in HFO operation to 1540 μg kWh−1 in DF operation, which is 4–30 times higher than those of other carbonyls. Emission profile contribution of CCs showed also a different pattern between HFO and DF operation. The contribution of formaldehyde was found to be 58% of the emission profile of HFO and about 67% of the emission profile of DF. Acetaldehyde showed opposite behavior with higher contribution of 16% in HFO compared to 11% for DF. Heavier carbonyls (more than two carbon atoms) showed also more contribution in the emission profile of the HFO fuel (26%) than in DF (22%).

Highlights:

• DryLab employs to find the optimum time of a simple (or segmented) gradient, yielding best resolution of a particular sample.
• Short silica-based monolithic columns can be used with fast 1 min- gradients up to 5 mL/min.
• Isocratic retention parameters were used for prediction and modeling gradient chromatograms.
• The gradient range was optimized for maximum peak capacities within a fixed gradient time.

Highlights:

• A suitable chromatographic system has to be employed to take the full benefits of modern LC columns.
• Extra-column band broadening and gradient delay volume have to be minimized.
• The upper pressure limit of UHPLC systems is less critical in the case of fast-LC separations.
• Acquisition rate is sufficient with spectroscopic detectors but much more critical with MS devices.
• During the last few years, column technology has evolved faster than instrumentation.

In-silico optimised two-dimensional high performance liquid chromatographic (2D-HPLC) separations of a model methamphetamine seizure sample are described, where an excellentmatch between simulated and real separations was observed. DryLab optimisation reduced 2D-HPLC development time significantly. Targeted separation of model compounds was completed with significantly reduced method development time. This separation was completed in the heart-cutting mode of 2D-HPLC where C18 columns were used in both dimensions taking advantage of the selectivity difference of methanol and acetonitrile as the mobile phases. This method development protocol is most significant when optimising the separation of chemically similar chemical compounds as it eliminates potentially hours of trial and error injections to identify the optimised experimental conditions. After only four screening injections the gradient profile for both 2D-HPLC dimensions could be optimised via simulations, ensuring the baseline resolution of diastereomers (ephedrine and pseudoephedrine) in 9.7 min. Depending on which diastereomer is present the potential synthetic pathway can be categorised.

A new and fast ultra-high pressure liquid chromatographic separation of amlodipine and bisoprolol and all their closely related compounds is described for impurity profiling purposes. Computer-assisted method development with DryLab was applied and the impact of several state-of- the-art stationary phase column chemistries (50 × 2.1 mm, sub-2 μm, and core–shell type materials) on the achievable selectivity and resolution was investigated. The work was performed according to QbD-principles using design of experiment with three experimental factors: gradient time (tG), temperature (T), and mobile phase pH. DryLab proves that the separation of all compounds was feasible on numerous column chemistries within <10 min, by proper adjustments of variables. It was also demonstrated that the reliability of predictions was good, as the predicted retention times and resolutions were in good agreement with the experimental ones. The final, optimized method separates 16 peaks related to amlodipine and bisoprolol within 7 min, ensuring baseline separation between all peak-pairs.