Abstract��OBJECTIVE To discuss the problem of instrumental test method of clarity and degree of opalescence of liquids in the general notice 0902 of China Pharmacopeia(Ch.P)2015, find out the causes and offer solutions. METHODS The test methods of clarity in Ch.P 2015 and European Pharmacopeia (EP) 8.0 were compared, including instrumental types, applicability, sample requirements, and result evaluation. RESULTS The primary opalescent suspension for the instrumental method is the same as the visual method, using the absorbance (A=0.12-0.15) at 550 nm to control the opalescence. Because the resolving power of the instrumental method is far higher than the visual method, the limit becomes interval distribution instead of simple point. The opalescent value (NTU) of the upper limit (A=0.15) is about 1.35 times of the lower limit (A=0.12).When the NTU value of the test liquid is in this interval, the result evaluation will be hard.CONCLUSION The preparation of the primary opalescent suspension in Ch.P 2015 is different from EP8.0. For this reason, the limit set by Ch.P 2015 is actually stricter than that of EP8.0. The opalescent value of the standard solution used by Ch.P 2015 is about 75% of that used by EP8.0.
����, ���, ������. 2015��桶�й�ҩ�䡷����ȼ�鷨�о�[J]. �й�ҩѧ��־, 2017, 52(9): 802-808.
CHANG Yan, YU Fang-jian, HU Chang-qin. Discussion on the Test of Clarity and Degree of Opalescence of Liquids in Ch.P 2015. Chinese Pharmaceutical Journal, 2017, 52(9): 802-808.
GU L S, HU C Q. Introduction of clarity of solution, color of solution, dissolution,particulate matter, test for bacterial endotoxin for antibioticsin the Chinese Pharmacopoeia 2005 [J]. Chin J Antibiot (�й���������־), 2005, 30(12):731-736.
[2]
GAO D L, LIU S, WANG Y L, et al. Quality assessment for domestic cefazolin sodium for injection [J]. Chin J Antibiot (�й���������־), 2013,38(5):344-347.
[3]
LI Q, LIU Y, YANG S X. Study on the compatibility between capreomycin sulfate for injection and packing materials [J].Chin J Antibiot (�й���������־), 2015,40(8):603-606.
[4]
ISO 7027-1 Water quality --Determination of turbidity-Part 1:Quantitative methods[S]. 2016.
[5]
APHA:Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater (22nd Edition) [S]. 2012.
[6]
USEPA 1993:Determination of turbidity by nephelometry (Method 180.1). Methods for the determination of inorganic substances in environmental samples(Revision 2.0) [S].1993.
[7]
YANG J J, SHI Z C. Measurement technology and application of turbidity in drinking water [J]. Inform China Construction Water-Industry Market (�й�������Ϣ.ˮ��ҵ�г�), 2010, 6:25-29.
[8]
Whipple, Jackson. A comparative study of the methods used for the measurement of turbidity of water [J]. MIT Quarterly, 1900, 13:274.
[9]
LIU H B, YANG P, SONG H, et al. Generalized weighted ratio method for accurate turbidity measurement over a wide range [J]. Opt Express, 2015, 23(25):32703-32717.
[10]
EP(8.0) Vol I [S]. 2014:21-22.
[11]
BP(2016) Vol V [S]. 2016:Appendix ��A.
[12]
MAFFIONE R A, DANA D R. Instruments and methods for measuring the backward-scattering coefficient of ocean waters [J]. Appl Opt, 1997, 36(24):6057-6067.
[13]
BARTER P J, DEAS T. Comparison of portable nephelometricturbidimeters on natural waters and effluents [J]. New Zealand J Marine Freshwater Res, 2003, 37(3):485-492.
[14]
DARAIGAN S G. The development of multispectral algorithms and sensors setup for total suspended solidsmeasurement[D]. Malaysia:University Science Malaysia, 2006.
[15]
SUN Z,LIU J,XU S. Study on improving the turbidity measurement of the absolute coagulation rate constant [J]. Langmuir, 2006, 22(11):4946-4951.
XU S H, SUN Z W. Evaluation of the uncertainties caused by the forward scattering in turbidity measurement of the coagulation rate[J]. Langmuir, 2010, 26(10):6908-6918.
2017, Vol. 52 
