i wouldn't say that this is the most frequent usage of laser diffraction particle sizer, but yes: for that purpose it works well...another_jim wrote:I think the laser sizer works for the application for which it is most frequently used -- adjusting bulk grinders so the peak is at a given mm level.
of course it does. what i meant was that if the instrument is getting its data as counts and converting it into volume based data, you are multiplying the error, especially in the case of non-spherical particles.another_jim wrote:The two distributions themselves (rather than the samples, which is the normal case for statistical testing) have an uncertainty band, and these will usually overlap. This odd problem of uncertain distributions affects all three of the data formats: count, area and volume.
i am not sure if it is exactly the same for laser diffraction methods (probably not, since measuring principles and calculation is quite different), but in dynamic light scattering you have an error multiplication when going from counts to volume by the factor of 10^3 and going from counts to number by the factor of 10^6.
because of that i would view volume and number distributions from those methods always critically...