Please feel free to contact me regarding the Roche LC1536.

Tom.Lade@...



This communication is for use by the intended recipient and contains
information that may be Privileged, confidential or copyrighted under
applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby
formally notified that any use, copying or distribution of this e-mail,
in whole or in part, is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender by
return e-mail and delete this e-mail from your system. Unless explicitly
and conspicuously designated as "E-Contract Intended", this e-mail does
not constitute a contract offer, a contract amendment, or an acceptance
of a contract offer. This e-mail does not constitute a consent to the
use of sender's contact information for direct marketing purposes or for
transfers of data to third parties.

Francais Deutsch Italiano  Espanol  Portugues  Japanese  Chinese  Korean

            http://www.DuPont.com/corp/email_disclaimer.html


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I am interested in this instrument and would like feedback from anyone who has
one or has worked with one.
                 Thanks
                 Lynn Rasmussen
                 HTS Center
                 Southern Research Institute



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello Oliver,
Unfortunately none of those materials especially if made by rapid
protoyping will withstand LN2 cryogenic temperature -70. This is from
my polymer material knolwedge and anectodal tales of failures. I
recall at CO2 cryogenic -40 is when all of these materials start to
experience failure.

Regards,

Amer El-Hage

On Nov 23, 2009, at 10:42 AM, "Oliver de Peyer"
<opeyer@...> wrote:

> Hello everybody,
> We're trying to make some replacement components that need to be
> immersed in
> liquid nitrogen - nothing fancy, just a one piece carrier for some
> samples.
> The workshop cost for one in metal is high; about £1000.
> I am trained in Rhino and I'm sure I could knock up a .3dm file of the
> .item. But could I then rapid prototype it in something fairly
> cheap? A.
> cryo-resistant plastic perhaps?
> For instance, I could access one printer that uses ABS and another
> (an EOS
> P385) that likes PA12 nylon. Are these or any compatible variety LN2-
> proof?
> Any advice gratefully received!
> Thanks
> Oliver
>
> ------------------
> Oliver de Peyer PhD
> Lab 209
> Division of Molecular Structure
> National Institute for Medical Research
> The Ridgeway
> Mill Hill
> London
> NW71AA
> United Kingdom
> Tel 0208 816 2688
> Fax 0208 816 2580
> Mobile phone +44 7908 783367
> opeyer@...
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> The LRIG Discussion Group is a feature of the
> Laboratory Robotics Interest Group.
> http://www.lab-robotics.org/
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Yahoo!
> Groups Links
>
>
>

So V11 provides information to program around their OCX, they give examples in
VB and one of the C's.  I suppose I could put a port sniffer on it and then just
try it.




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Does anybody send commands to a V11 PlateLoc Sealer via the Command Prompt? 
This works for the Alps Sealer, havent been able to find any info on Google.

Hello,

         I actually did this with a Tecan Genesis in the mid 90s - it works
OKish.  You can be accurate to about 100ul.  The problems I had were mainly
to do with meniscus of the liquid.  You're better off sticking with weighing
or using colormetric systems like Artel or a (cheaper but more labour
intensive and less accurate) tartrazine setup.

   If you search the JALA articles there are references to tartrazine methods
and there is a reproduced paper my Mike Jones and Victoria Clark of (what
was then called) Cambridge Antibody Technology which runs through an SOP for
tartrazine based QC detection though if you want to reduce labour and have
cash then the Artel system looks pretty good.

Cheers,

Neil

2009/11/19 Paul <paul@...>

>
>
> We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
> verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into
> pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating. It's slow and boring.
>
> Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
> anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ? I was
> thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
> well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and
> measuring the liquid level again. Assuming the wells are roughly
> vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to volume.
>
> Any comments ?
>
> Paul.
>
>



--
--

Neil Benn Msc
CEO
Ziath Ltd
Phone : 07508 107942
Website - http://www.ziath.com
Blog - http://www.labauto-lounge.com


IMPORTANT NOTICE:  This message, including any attached documents, is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify Ziath Ltd immediately by email at info@.... Thank you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello,

         Here are my comments:

1) do you have special air handling requirements,

DMSO will absorb (the proper term is adsorb I think) water from the air
which will reduce the solubility of compounds in DMSO and depress the
freezing point.  This is not good if you are using the DMSO for a long time
so you should really handle the DMSO under a layer of inert gas to reduce
this.  However it depends how important frozen DMSO and solubility is - some
small labs may not bother; this is a matter of judgement for the people in
charge!

2) do you work with large quantities at a time (>2 liters), or small total
quantities

I've used both; in a compound store you have to have large bottles.  In
addition I've flushed out my liquid handlers with DMSO (to reduce water in
my system).  In that case I've used larger quantities.  Recently I have
preferred to wash with water and/or use air based systems where I can.

3) how do you dispose of your waste

For large quantities we incinerate, for v. small quantities down the sink.
According to where you live you can throw larger quantities down the drain
(pah who needs wildlife ;) ).

   A very good source on this is the lecture notes from Chris Lipinski (a
DMSO guru - dubious title but a worthy one) on the LRIG website.

Cheers,

Neil

2009/11/23 John Bradshaw <JBradshaw@...>

>
>
> Hello All,
>
> I am looking for information on working with DMSO. I know many readers
> on LRIG are regular users of compounds in DMSO. If anyone is willing,
> could I please give you a call to ask about safety handling precautions
> you take when working with DMSO? Some of the specific things I am
> interested in are:  2)
> do you work with large quantities at a time (>2 liters), or small total
> quantities, 3) how do you dispose of your waste.
>
> If you'd be willing to take a call from me, please respond to my email
> directly (jbradshaw@... <jbradshaw%40artel-usa.com>).
>
> Last related item, I have looked for a consultant on manufacturing
> processes, but have not been successful. Can anyone steer me in a
> direction on this?
>
> JTB
>
> John Thomas Bradshaw, Ph.D.
>
> ** Confidential Notice **
>
> The information contained in this message may be privileged
> and is confidential information intended for the use of the
> addressee listed above. If you are neither the intended recipient
> nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message
> to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> disclosure, copying, distributing or the taking of any action
> in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
> please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message
> and deleting it from your computer.
>
> Thank You
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
--

Neil Benn Msc
CEO
Ziath Ltd
Phone : 07508 107942
Website - http://www.ziath.com
Blog - http://www.labauto-lounge.com


IMPORTANT NOTICE:  This message, including any attached documents, is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is
addressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential and
exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If the reader of this message
is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for
delivering the message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is
strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify Ziath Ltd immediately by email at info@.... Thank you.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello All,



I am looking for information on working with DMSO.  I know many readers
on LRIG are regular users of compounds in DMSO.  If anyone is willing,
could I please give you a call to ask about safety handling precautions
you take when working with DMSO?  Some of the specific things I am
interested in are: 1) do you have special air handling requirements, 2)
do you work with large quantities at a time (>2 liters), or small total
quantities, 3) how do you dispose of your waste.



If you'd be willing to take a call from me, please respond to my email
directly (jbradshaw@...).



Last related item, I have looked for a consultant on manufacturing
processes, but have not been successful.  Can anyone steer me in a
direction on this?



JTB



John Thomas Bradshaw, Ph.D.










** Confidential Notice **

The information contained in this message may be privileged
and is confidential information intended for the use of the
addressee listed above. If you are neither the intended recipient
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, distributing or the taking of any action
in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message
and deleting it from your computer.

Thank You


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hello Paul,

I am the Sales and Marketing Director for BioMicroLab, Lisa Simmons.

BioMicroLab offers two solutions for volume detection and tracking.

1. An automated balance via the XL20/XL9 Tube Handling Instrument.  The XL20/XL9
Tube Handler weighs Matrix, Micronic, and ABgene type mini-tubes at a rate of
~300 vials per hour.  You would be able to automate the process you describe
below.

2. Volume verification with the VolumeCheck Instrument.  The VolumeCheck works
with standard SBS formatted labware.  The VolumeCheck utilizes an ultra-sonic
sensor to detect the sample meniscus and returns volume data on a well-by-well
basis.

There is additional information at our website:  www.biomicrolab.com

Thanks,

Lisa Simmons
BioMicroLab, Inc.


--- In lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com, Paul <paul@...> wrote:
>
> We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
> verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into
> pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating.  It's slow and boring.
>
> Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
> anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ?  I was
> thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
> well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and
> measuring the liquid level again.  Assuming the wells are roughly
> vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to volume.
>
> Any comments ?
>
> Paul.
>

Hello everybody,
We're trying to make some replacement components that need to be immersed in
liquid nitrogen - nothing fancy, just a one piece carrier for some samples.
The workshop cost for one in metal is high; about £1000.
I am trained in Rhino and I'm sure I could knock up a .3dm file of the
.item. But could I then rapid prototype it in something fairly cheap? A.
cryo-resistant plastic perhaps?
For instance, I could access one printer that uses ABS and another (an EOS
P385) that likes PA12 nylon. Are these or any compatible variety LN2-proof?
Any advice gratefully received!
Thanks
Oliver

  ------------------
Oliver de Peyer PhD
Lab 209
Division of Molecular Structure
National Institute for Medical Research
The Ridgeway
Mill Hill
London
NW71AA
United Kingdom
Tel 0208 816 2688
Fax 0208 816 2580
Mobile phone +44 7908 783367
opeyer@...



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Paul,

At Caliper we have experimented with this (we have a user-extensible consumable
geometry database, conductance and ultrasonic detection hardware that provide
dV/dH functionality.)  liquid level detection (LLD) is good for gross volume
estimates. It is likely that you are interested in measuring accuracy to within
a few percentage points, and this will be hard to achieve with LLD. There are
good reasons for this mentioned in previous emails concerning physical
variations in the processes. But the geometric relationship between a liquid
height and it's volume in a well is a core problem with the approach: any
variation at all in the linear height of the liquid will appear as a squared
error in the estimate of volume, so you get an explosion of error in the
quantity of interest, even in a "good" height measurement. (Another way to think
of this is that the liquid level will be a function of the square root of the
volume - or some other root in a
  non-cylindrical vessel.)

Your gravimetric approach is the most direct, linear means you have: 1ul of
volume yields ~1ug of change in mass per well. Period. If you need to measure
individual volumes for each well, you'll need to use some kind of optical
technique, which in turn should generally be calibrated to a traceable mass (ie
gravimetric) measurement such as the traceable calibration of the scale used to
weigh out a dye powder etc etc.

You may be able to increase confidence in an "average" LLD height, by
clalibrating it to your gravimetric tests...hmmm)

One thing I would caution: You describe using tubes OR plates to measure the
accuracy. Keep in mind that all of the physical circumstances of a transfer will
determine the actual amount of material getting into your reactions, and an
effort should me made replicate assay conditions to the extent possible. The
physics of interaction of your liquids with your tips and vessels are important;
i.e. water dispensed into a tube of water at a slow dispense and withdrawal
speed is not a good predictor of accuracy of a fast dispense of isopropanal into
a plate full of 20% glycerol. That's an extreme example, but surprisingly subtle
variations in materials and techniques have a measurable impact when looking at
accuracy down to a few percentage points. Along with your careful creation of
test methods, something like the ability to recreate your buffers (such as Artel
has begun to accommodate with their system) can be worth the effort.

Cheers,
Mike



________________________________
From: Paul <paul@...>
To: lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, November 19, 2009 4:24:14 PM
Subject: [lrig-discussion] Volume Calibrations of Packard Multiprobe


We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into
pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating.  It's slow and boring.

Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ?  I was
thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and
measuring the liquid level again.  Assuming the wells are roughly
vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to volume.

Any comments ?

Paul.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Paul,
Best calibration is done with several volumes. What volumes are you
dispensing and what level of accuracy you expect? What is the
precision or even the resolution of the liquid level sensing? You are
correct microplate well dimensions are not that consistent nor will
the liquid surface shape be. The precision from such method in my
opinion is dubious. There are more reliable methods for your
instrument that others on this listserv will undoubtly suggest.

Regards

Amer El-Hage

On Nov 19, 2009, at 1:24 PM, Paul <paul@...> wrote:

> We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
> verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing
> into
> pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating.  It's slow and
> boring.
>
> Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
> anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ?  I was
> thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
> well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume
> and
> measuring the liquid level again.  Assuming the wells are roughly
> vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to
> volume.
>
> Any comments ?
>
> Paul.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> The LRIG Discussion Group is a feature of the
> Laboratory Robotics Interest Group.
> http://www.lab-robotics.org/
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Yahoo!
> Groups Links
>
>
>

In this economy, successful businesses and organizations take nothing for
granted. Travel and training budgets are carefully scrutinized, and
opportunities are weighed in terms of which can generate the greatest return on
investment. These decisions can be tough, but they're just good business.

The following statement by the U.S. Department of Labor regarding continuing
education for those immersed in scientific research is particularly important:

"Continuing training is necessary for workers to keep pace with current
developments in their fields. It may take the form of on-the-job training or
formal training, or it may consist of attending conferences or meetings of
professional societies. Workers who fail to remain current in their field and
related disciplines may face unfavorable job prospects if interest in their
specific area declines." - From the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S.
Department of Labor, Career Guide to Industries, 2008-09 Edition, Scientific
Research and Development Services

... all of which brings me to my point about belonging-to and participating-in a
scientific society such as ours – the Association for Laboratory Automation
(ALA).

Year after year, we host the LabAutomation Conference and Exhibit and deliver
programming, hands-on access to new technologies and applications, and a
worldwide network of diverse scientific professionals. From practical
grab-and-go ideas to thought-provoking strategies for game-changing innovation,
our five-day conference and exhibition has consistently provided value for
short- and long-term success. 2010 will be no exception.

In fact, we just added a fourth plenary speaker – Kei Koizumi from the White
House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

But don't take my word for it—do the math yourself, and you'll see that
LabAutomation more than measures up as a promising and cost-efficient business
investment. Read through the information on the LabAutomation2010 Web site;
calculate the breadth and depth of topics addressed; analyze the caliber of the
speakers and the companies they represent; consider the global reach of impact
of other attendees; notice the degree of program personalization that's
available; and evaluate the relevance to your personal and professional goals.
The members of the Scientific Committee, ALA Board of Directors, and I are
confident you will conclude that LabAutomation2010 is the best, most productive,
most enriching way to begin the new year.

We also are happy to let you know that our menu of creative discounts and travel
programs will stretch travel dollars for students, academics and professionals
alike.

ALA exists to serve the educational needs of the scientific and technological
specialists who make the lab automation community unique. LabAutomation2010 is
the cornerstone of the ALA mission, the heart of its annual curriculum, and your
best bet for an unbeatable bottom line.

Hmm, that would seem very unlikely to provide useful data due to the variations
in many of the factors that play a part in your result.  These are:
-Variations in the tip's length
-Variations in the tip being seated on the barrel
-Variations in the tubes, tube bottoms, tube sides
-Variations in the electronics sensitivity (affected by humidity we think as in
the winter we've noticed higher frequency of liq level sense related issues).
-Variations in tips 1-8 as to their Z positions, used to determine the height
above the deck (so if you tested the same well with each tip, separate from the
disp tip length variations, there would be variation I think).

I think at larger volumes this could work perhaps, with a certain accuracy, but
not at the smaller volumes you mentioned.

To assess the variability of some of the factors I mentioned above you could
hand pipette the same volume into a column of a plate and run a protocol I know
I have seen exist (created already vs you having to make it).  This protocol
will detect liquid then record the height. . .I think it will do it multiple
times to your choosing, set in the protocol or prompted upon running the
protocol.

This would be a quick way to ascertain the variations in the tips, tip seating,
and well variability. .. and you could do different volumes so see where things
fall apart on the lower vols.  (you'd have to do the calc by hand for the
volume, using the height found and the volume of a cylinder formula etc).

I know I've seen this protocol..hmm. ..I looked quick and in the
C:\Packard\MultiPROBE\bin\Samples directory there is a Top off wells.mpt that
does do a find liquid step. .. but I don't think this is quite it. . .thought
I'd seen before a prebuilt script or something that reported the levels.  Perkin
Elmer may be able to point you to the right direction.

I'm assuming you are using disposable tips I guess so if not then that removes
some of the variability, but, it seems "iffy" to me as whether this would work.

Kent

--- In lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com, Paul <paul@...> wrote:
>
> We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
> verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into
> pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating.  It's slow and boring.
>
> Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
> anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ?  I was
> thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
> well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and
> measuring the liquid level again.  Assuming the wells are roughly
> vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to volume.
>
> Any comments ?
>
> Paul.
>

Hello Paul,



First off, I should state that I work for Artel, and we manufacture and
sell products for calibrating liquid delivery for handheld pipettes,
robotic pipettors, etc.  I will send a separate email directly to you
about our technology.



Now on to your question.  Can you use the PE Multiprobe liquid level
sensing to verify your dispense volume?  My experience tells me that you
will have a hard time with this.  In fairness, I have not worked much
with PE's liquid level sensing, but I have done a reasonable amount with
Tecan and Hamilton.  What I have seen is that the capability to sense
the liquid can be very "touchy".  What I mean by that is there are
sensitivity settings associated with the settings on your probe.  These
settings can significantly change where the probe actually starts to
detect the solution (i.e., right at the air/water interface, or will it
require more surface area of the probe to be exposed, meaning the tip
will need to be immersed slightly deeper).  An example is if you have an
8 tip robot, each tip seems to find the liquid level at a different
height, when in reality the volume in each well is much closer than the
final tip height would suggest.  Also, I have seen the liquid level
sensing not be able to detect the presence of a buffered solution in
plate wells, but that same tip easily found DI water.



Now, please do not infer from this that I am saying liquid level sensing
does not work, or is no good.  I think it is a great technology, but to
get the most out of it, you need to spend time understanding what it can
or cannot do (like any other liquid handling parameter).  In essence, I
think the liquid level sensing can be a great tool, but I question the
accuracy with which you will be able to know the exact height of the
air/water interface.  Errors in knowing that height are going to have a
direct (nearly 1:1) impact on your volume determination.  Now, could you
develop a standard curve of volumes that remove the potential height
error?  Possibly.  But, to do this you must consider: 1) the accuracy of
the volume delivery from the device you have used to create your
standard curve, and 2) the liquid level sensing capabilities for
different volumes in the plate.  For item 1), the accuracy of your
"golden pipette" used to set up your standard curve will carry directly
through your analysis, or rather any uncertainty in that device will
impact how well you can actually know the performance of your
multiprobe.  For item 2), I would suspect the liquid level sensing will
not be biased by the actual solution height, but I do not actually know.



JTB



John Thomas Bradshaw, Ph.D.

Senior Development Scientist

Artel

25 Bradley Drive

Westbrook, ME  04092

phone: (207) 591-6369

cell: (207) 400-1427

www.artel-usa.com



________________________________

From: lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 4:24 PM
To: lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [lrig-discussion] Volume Calibrations of Packard Multiprobe





We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into

pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating. It's slow and boring.

Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ? I was
thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and

measuring the liquid level again. Assuming the wells are roughly
vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to
volume.

Any comments ?

Paul.








** Confidential Notice **

The information contained in this message may be privileged
and is confidential information intended for the use of the
addressee listed above. If you are neither the intended recipient
nor the employee or agent responsible for delivering this message
to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
disclosure, copying, distributing or the taking of any action
in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error,
please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message
and deleting it from your computer.

Thank You


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

We have two Multiprobes in our GLP bioanalysis lab, which we currently
verify the dispensed volume of weekly gravimetrically by dispensing into
pre-weighed tubes then reweighing and calculating.  It's slow and boring.

Given that the multiprobe has liquid level sensing capabilities, has
anyone considered using this to verify the dispensed volume ?  I was
thinking of dispensing a small volume into multiple wells of a 96 deep
well plate, measuring the liquid level, then dispensing a set volume and
measuring the liquid level again.  Assuming the wells are roughly
vertical and quite narrow (~8x8mm) this should relate direclty to volume.

Any comments ?

Paul.

Several meetings ago (in the Mid-Atlantic Chapter), an exhibitor was showing a
centrifuge tube that had mixing blade inserts.  The purpose was to disperse,
extract and separate samples in one tube to prevent problems related to sample
transfers.

I've lost that contact information.  Does anyone have it?

David Allen

Hello, we bought a used Genmate, but without software.  Does anyone have a spare
copy to run it?  Tecan no longer has it available.
===
Please understand that Tecan discontinued making or selling the Genmate over 7
years ago and we do not offer spare parts or service support for the Genmate any
longer.

I am checking with one of our senior field service engineers who thinks he may
still have on old copy of the GenEditor software. If he does, I will certainly
make it accessible to you to download from an ftp site. We do not have the
software discs to sell any longer and we do not offer any service support for
the Genmate. The GenEditor software was written to run on Windows NT computers I
believe. We do not know if the software will run on a computer with a more
current operating system.

Gregory,

We have had luck running room temp air (68F) with a fan for thawing 1mL septa
sealed Matrix Tubes in a 96 well rack format.  We basically use a large 130mm
computer fan and Beckman single position ALP, which allows nicely for automated
loading.  Thawing takes approximately 20min for full matrix tubes.  We have
found that shaking while blowing air will increase the thawing speed also but
have not found a suitable holder.

Bryan Rushing


--- In lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "GregoryRRyan" <gregory.r.ryan@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> We would like to relieve a small bottleneck in thawing racks of compounds.
Passive thawing even at moderately elevated temps is fairly slow and annoyingly
uneven in the rack. It was suggested that passing warmed air up through the rack
would help with the uniformity and speed of thawing. If you have automated or
semi-automated this function I would be interested in your observations and
suggestions. I would appreciate contact off-list from Vendors who have a product
to rapidly thaw tube racks.
>
> Thanks
> Gregory Ryan, Ph.D.
> Sr. Scientist,  Discovery-HTS
> PTC Therapeutics Inc.
> South Plainfield, NJ 07080
> Phone: 908-222-7000 x 9243
> Cell: 732 690 4125
> Skype: gregory.r.ryan
> mailto://gryan@...
>

Dear Gregory Ryan,

FluidX is best solution for you...
http://www.fluidx.co.uk/html/xtt-96.html

Best rgds,
Hashimoto

--- In lrig-discussion@yahoogroups.com, "GregoryRRyan" <gregory.r.ryan@...>
wrote:
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> We would like to relieve a small bottleneck in thawing racks of compounds.
Passive thawing even at moderately elevated temps is fairly slow and annoyingly
uneven in the rack. It was suggested that passing warmed air up through the rack
would help with the uniformity and speed of thawing. If you have automated or
semi-automated this function I would be interested in your observations and
suggestions. I would appreciate contact off-list from Vendors who have a product
to rapidly thaw tube racks.
>
> Thanks
> Gregory Ryan, Ph.D.
> Sr. Scientist,  Discovery-HTS
> PTC Therapeutics Inc.
> South Plainfield, NJ 07080
> Phone: 908-222-7000 x 9243
> Cell: 732 690 4125
> Skype: gregory.r.ryan
> mailto://gryan@...
>

Dear colleagues,

We would like to relieve a small bottleneck in thawing racks of compounds.
Passive thawing even at moderately elevated temps is fairly slow and annoyingly
uneven in the rack. It was suggested that passing warmed air up through the rack
would help with the uniformity and speed of thawing. If you have automated or
semi-automated this function I would be interested in your observations and
suggestions. I would appreciate contact off-list from Vendors who have a product
to rapidly thaw tube racks.

Thanks
Gregory Ryan, Ph.D.
Sr. Scientist,  Discovery-HTS
PTC Therapeutics Inc.
South Plainfield, NJ 07080
Phone: 908-222-7000 x 9243
Cell: 732 690 4125
Skype: gregory.r.ryan
mailto://gryan@ptcbio.com

OK, I'm going to answer myself.  I have had lots of great interactions with
people both directly through email and through the Group.  So I don't want
anyone who actually followed this thread (or somehow comes across it in a
search) to not find our resolution.

After extensive testing and optimization, we are now able to comfortably
dispense 0.5ul DMSO into 5 dry assay plates from 1 compound plate using 1 box of
tips.  Our solution did involve some "voodoo" (the word used by a sales rep for
a liquid handler that competes with the one we have).  In our case, the protocol
that works is to aspirate an airgap and the 0.5ul (slowest plunger speed),
dispense the 0.5ul plus most of the airgap at 90% of the well depth along the
side of the wells (almost fastest plunger), then go back to the compound plate
and empty the rest of the airgap.  We do side tip touches in the assay plates
and at the compound plate.  We repeat the protocol 5 times.  CVs are constant
for the 5 plates.

It's taken a while and I don't know why this works as well as it does and what
we were doing before wasn't working.  So I have no idea if this will work
forever…

Thanks for all the comments,
Jonathan