Announcement

Collapse

Welcome to the New Seqanswers!

Welcome to the new Seqanswers! We'd love your feedback, please post any you have to this topic: New Seqanswers Feedback.
See more
See less

Liquid Handling Instruments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Hi,

    first of all, i need to disclose i work for https://www.andrewalliance.com - but i have no commercial intention and my purpose is to understand better and/or inform.

    I am very interested in knowing more precisely the 96 channel need. Most of the time, we see that the flexibility of a single channel (or 8 channels) in repetitive mode overcomes the need of multiple heads. The use case is quite different: take for example a single channel device, it can aspirate from a tube and go to a microplate directly. On-the-fly dispensing can take as little as 5 seconds per well, and then you just need one (or few) aspirations from your tube. The moment you move to 8 or more heads, you always need an intermediate step - e.g. you need to transfer the tube content with a large volume (single channel) pipette to a reservoir, and then act with the multi-channel head. Conclusion: can you please clarify WHY the 96 channel head is necessary/enabling for you? We are aware in multiple operations our single channel robot is often as fast/effective than a multi-channel epmotion 5070, that actually has a higher cost.

    Concerning magnetic beads, please don't miss our beadtender solution https://www.andrewalliance.com/wp-co...D_20161005.pdf

    The reason i mention it is the following: we tried to replicate the existing manual beads-separation methods in a robot, and we actually couldn't see any improvement. Only analyzing in details the behaviour of the beads and redesigning the process, we have obtained a reproducibility that is 5x better than any other manual method we could test.

    Comment


    • #17
      @pzucchel

      My answer to your question only applies to our own situation. Depends on what a lab is doing, I think you will get different answers.

      For us, we process 200+ samples a week from picking BACs to loading finished libraries to MiSeq. 96 is absolutely necessaries because we process samples in plate format.

      Aside from long processing time of 96 vs 1 tip, there is also issue of cross-contamination issue with one tip dispensing into multiple wells. Most of the reagents we have are in plate format as well. 80% of our protocol is done in 96, only few steps are in single tube format.

      As for beads clean up, the only thing matter to us is getting enough library to get on the sequencer. Sequencing is cheaper nowadays, therefore, even if some samples fail, it will be cheaper to just prep it again instead of trying to get something working 100%.

      Comment


      • #18
        Replacement for BiomekFX

        Hello,

        We currently have a BiomekFX, but it's getting to be near EOL for support/add-ons. We're wondering what people are using? I will NOT buy Perkin-Elmer; they're overpriced and super-unhelpful for technical support. I also will NOT consider anything from GE Healthcare.

        Other than that, I'm open to suggestions.

        Comment


        • #19
          I am working in a hospital lab and am the happy user of two Sciclone NGS, a NGS Express and a Zephyr NGS. We use the robots for DNA cleanup, NGS lib prep, purification and QC.
          There are a number of ready-to-install APPs for the robots: https://perkinelmer-appliedgenomics....ds-for-NGS.pdf
          You can either pay Perkin Elmer to do the install and validation (expensive - fair enough) or you can get training in installing and validating the APPs yourself. It takes of course some time, but it pays in the end as increased flexibility in modifying and troubleshooting the APPs.
          We find the robots reliable and use them routinely for our certified workflows.

          A new Sciclone has been released with a hotel for tips and an integrated thermocycler: https://perkinelmer-appliedgenomics....q-workstation/

          PS I am not employed or otherwise payed by Perkin Elmer....
          Last edited by JakobHedegaard; 04-16-2019, 12:59 AM.

          Comment


          • #20
            I personally use vibrating cup feeders. And you have to choose which one is better. The choice is enormous. Yes and I use a production line where I need to orient small components so that they can be properly fed into another part of the production process. You need a vibratory feeder for a reliable and efficient solution to feed parts within an automated manufacturing process or application. My goal is to improve profitability and quality while increasing production volumes. I recommend getting them here - https://www.sandfieldengineering.com.../bowl-feeders/.
            Last edited by Lymanara; 02-07-2021, 02:16 PM.

            Comment


            • #21
              TECAN Fluent programming

              Hi All,

              In my lab we have just installed the Tecan Fluent and I have started to find out how to start to program with the FluentControl software. There are a couple of questions that were not clearly addressed by Tecan when I asked them up front.

              1. how can I create a subscript that can perform repeated segments in my normal script. I'd rather have to make one subscript that I can 'call' every time I need it.

              2. Is there an easier way to get the information on all the variables in the script and the script setup besides using the Fluent software?

              I have programming experience with R and I see some similarities, but the software is a bit slow when I compare it to R.

              Dirk

              Comment

              Working...
              X