Dear Mr. Ammar,

From my point of view, volume distribution is used quite often used for particle size distribution as i read from many of articles. Please check the y axis of the graphs of the articles, which is related with your topic.

Best regards,

@ Omar A little bit of research on this forum (and Google) before you post would benefit you highly.  For example: http://tinyurl.com/mnccs95  & http://tinyurl.com/k29asgq 

You'll find a large number of responses to this already posted question. BTW, SEM is a number-based (not volume-based) analysis and the international standards (ISO13321:1996; ISO22412:2008; ASTM 2490-09(15)) do not recommend converting intensity to number distributions.

Thanks dear Bastan.

Dear Dr. Rawle,

I already checked the google and Mavern blog. Most of the responses recommended the intensity. However, many published articles used the volume distribution and thats what made me meh about what to use.  Thank you so much for your effort to answer my  shallow questions. Again I am a microbiologist and new on these techniques.

All the. Best Omar.

@ Omar  Your questions are not shallow but it is good to indicate what you have done before in terms of research so that we can understand where you have been before and what you've found out - akin to a literature search in a Ph.D thesis. This question has been asked many times on RG and there's no indication in your original question that you had viewed these (or the links to Materials Talks' articles).  Volume comes from other measurements (e.g. laser diffraction and electrical sensing zone) and is intuitive.  However, small particles scatter light as r6 and that's why the intensity distribution (and the derived parameters, z-average and polydispersity index) fall out from a DLS analysis.  This then gives (much) greater sensitivity to agglomerated or aggregated matter in a system.

Thank you very much.