Agilent 1100/1200 HPLCs have bad design & construction

[Alfred88]

Hi all
I am writing this post with the hope that Agilent can deliver a better product in the future.
1/From the outside, all the modules are blank. There is nothing to distinguish between a UVD or DAD or RID or heater. All modules look similar. One cannot know if one module is operating. If the pump is running, I may hear a big noise, but I cannot know the flow rate. All modules have only one on-off buttons. All modules have one large front covers, and the covers can fall off easily.
2/ Many names are used for different modules, and they may cause confusion, such as G1632A, G1613A, G1362B, etc.
3/ The degasser unit makes loud noise.
4/ The pump used multiple channels and combined them at low pressure. There is no simple way to purge to remove air bubbles. There is no back seal washing mechanism. There is no inline filter for the combined mobile phase.
5/ The autosampler is the worst in many ways. I recorded a small video, and found that total time for one injection is 4 minutes.
The vial griper must move out of its home position, then aligns above the chosen vial, then descents to the vial, then holds the vial, then moves up, then moves to align with the needle, then drops off the vial on the injection port, then moves out. Then, the needle descents and penetrates the vial, and withdraws sample. Then, the needle is moved up, and the vial griper moves in, to take out the vial. Then, the vial is returned to its initial position, and the needle moves down to load the injection.
The bad design cause the huge delay. Other vendors have better design, such as Shimadzu: < 30 seconds for one injection.
Overtime, the aged griper may not move to the programmed positions, such as those in the back row. Also, the needle port may be contaminated with dirt and particles, and they lead to high back pressure.
The design also may cause high carry over. There is no mechanism to wash the needle.
6/ The UVD/DAD has a flow cell rated at 120 bar. The flow cell will pop easily.
7/ The RID has W-lamp that cannot be changed easily. Rated at 40,000hrs, the lamp must be changed by the factory (Agilent), together with internal mirrors, at a high cost (approx. 70% of brand new RID).
8/ The oven/heater has a deep trap for liquid spill, and it is not easy to clean this part.
Also, each time, when there is a leak, all the modules stop functioning, and they turn "RED." All the modules must be turned off, and turned on again, and we waste time for the UV lamp to warm up and re-start the connections.
9/ All units are connected by outdated CAN (control area network), except the detectors (RID or DAD) have a LAN card to connect to computer. It will cost >$3,300 for a new LAN card. User must know the IP address of the instrument.
10/ The chromatographic software (Chemstation A/B/C/D) is not compliant with 21 CFR Part 11 requirements. There is no audit trail, and no data security.
The OpenLab CDS will cost $50,000. (I have not use this new one yet).

Thank you for your time reading!

Alfred

[HPLCaddict]

It's been quite some time, actually ~8 years since I worked with a 1100. So I have to rely heavily on my memory, but if my memory serves me correct, some of the point you've listed are, at least, unfair.
A 1100 was the first machine I started chromatography during my professional career. I remember it as reliable and robust, easy to work with even for a beginner.

And with all the points you listed, I'd like to point out that
- the 1100 has been introduced 20 years (!!) ago.
- it's one of the most widespread HPLCs in the world (probably even the #1). Can it really be THAT bad, then?
- with the 1200 series, several successors exist

>There is nothing to distinguish between a UVD or DAD or RID or heater.
Don't they have a tag on the right side?

>Many names are used for different modules, and they may cause confusion, such as G1632A, G1613A, G1362B,
Yes, but what would be the alternative? "Pump V01", "Pump V02", and so on? And, honestly, with just a bit of effort you're pretty quick in the "Agilent world" and would not mess up the modules' numbers.

>The degasser unit makes loud noise.
Well, that one is true, if I remember correctly. But I've heard vaccum degassers of other vendors which give pretty much the same noise.

>The pump used multiple channels and combined them at low pressure.
Erm, yes. So what? That's the definition of an LPG system.

>There is no simple way to purge to remove air bubbles.
Really? I never had problems removing air bubbles by purging.

>The autosampler is the worst in many ways. I recorded a small video, and found that total time for one injection is 4 minutes.
What? 4 minutes?? I don't recall how long it took my 1100 back then, but 4 minutes???? No way. Are you using some kind of weird autosampler parameters?

> such as Shimadzu: < 30 seconds for one injection
With a 20 years old machine? I don't think so. It would be fair to compare a contemporary Shimadzu to a contemporary Agilent such as the 1290.

>Also, the needle port may be contaminated with dirt and particles, and they lead to high back pressure.
The 1100 has a FTN autosampler design, which it shares with alot of other machines from other vendors. This is a common design. If the needle port accumulates dirt and particles, you need better sample prep.
>The design also may cause high carry over.
No. The FTN design usually shows very low carryover, because the needle is continuously swept by the mobile phase.
>There is no mechanism to wash the needle.
Of course, there is! As already said, the inside of the needle is swept by the mobile phase during the run. The outside can be washed in a designated wash vial.

>The UVD/DAD has a flow cell rated at 120 bar. The flow cell will pop easily.
What?? Are you serious?? 120 bar is a VERY high pressure limit for a flow cell! The are others which are rated to something like 20 bars. And no it does NOT pop easily, unless your wasteline is restricted or even blocked. And that would be definitely not Agilent's fault.

>The RID has W-lamp that cannot be changed easily. Rated at 40,000hrs, the lamp must be changed by the factory (Agilent), together with internal mirrors, at a high cost (approx. 70% of brand new RID).
Don't know, I've never worked with Agilent RIDs. But judging from the other modules, with just a bit of technical understanding and skilled fingers you can perform pretty much the complete maintenance yourself. AFAIK there are courses available from Agilent for learning this. Should this be so much different for the RID?

>Also, each time, when there is a leak, all the modules stop functioning, and they turn "RED."
Erm, yes. Of course. That's the sense of a leakage alarm. What else should they do, keep on running?
>All the modules must be turned off, and turned on again
I'm not sure about this, but if I recall correctly, you could "reset" them from within Chemstation without a hard reboot. I'm pretty sure that I caused a lot of leakage errors in my early years of chromatography .

>All units are connected by outdated CAN (control area network)
LAN connections were not that much widespread when the 1100 was introduced. My 20 year old TV doesn't have a LAN connection,too, but I wouldn't blame the manufacturer for this. Remember, we're talking about 1995!
>It will cost >$3,300 for a new LAN card
I's always expensive to update old hardware to new standards.

>The chromatographic software (Chemstation A/B/C/D) is not compliant with 21 CFR Part 11 requirements.
Yes. Of course. When it was introduced, 21 CFR Part 11 didn't even exist.
Chemstation is an old peace of software. There has been a compliant alternative (EzChrom) for a long time, but most users held on to Chemstation. Now, they are both dead.
>The OpenLab CDS will cost $50,000. (I have not use this new one yet).
What? No! About what extent of software are you talking? A single license? Definitely not.
AFAIK our client-server system of Openlab EzChrom for 50+ machines and 20+ client workstations was in that price range. Including IQ/OQ.

As already said, my work with the 1100 has been some time ago, so I'm not absolutely sure about all statements. But as the 1100 provided me an excellent, mostly trouble-free start into the HPLC-world, I just HAD to answer to your post.

[HPLCaddict]

Forgot to mention: I am NOT working for Agilent. I am NOT affiliated with Agilent in any way. Right now, I'm not using any Agilent products despite some of their columns.

[scottythree]

I believe the user manuals for the equipment address the bulk of your comments.

Questions: Do you have non-Agilent equipment? What do you like/dislike about them? How old is your equipment and has it been maintained well? Was it purchased new or used?

[kubowicz.tomasz]

Hello

I read post carefully and all I can say is: bad workman blames his tools...

Regards

Tomasz Kubowicz

[Gerhard Kratz]

Have you already addressed your complaints to Agilent??? http://www.chem.agilent.com/en-US/Techn ... fault.aspx
I'm sure they will take it very serious.
So far I remember Agilent started several surveys in the past 2 years were they ask specific features for new instruments.
In the meantime you should know under which segment you can find the pump or the detector.
Which instrument from which manufacturer you plan to purchase next?
How often do you change your car, from model/manufacturer to another. God bless your local car dealer.

[Fernando]

Hi All

I agree fully with HPLCaddict, no equipment is perfect o software is perfect I' m using an HP1100 (Hewlett-Packard) since 9/1998 with this configuration:

Binary pump
Column thermostat
DAD
Manual injector
Chemsation

And I am very happy with the performance of the equipment, I work in the pharmaceutical industry in R&D and I'm not related with Agilent other than been a satisfied costumer.

Regards

Fernando

[Klaus I.]

I agree to the answers given by HPLCaddict (Thank you very much HPLCaddict) and here are my “two cents”:

1) With the optional ‘gameboy’ you can observe e.g. flow and pressure when you are in front of your instrument.
There should be no need to use the covers, especially when the can fall off easily ;o) (I have never observed this by myself).

2) This may be confusing at the beginning but it is sometimes very helpful to have an exact description easily accessible. Nevertheless sometimes it is also needed to have a look on serial number or board revision.
Feel free to label the modules yourself.

3) It’s a degasser with good performance. Other degassers may be surely more silent but are not able to remove small but visible air-bubbles.
Also the degassers were enhanced over the time, what is the concrete description of your module series (e.g. G1379A)?

4) I personal prefer such easy accessible manual purge valves like in the mentioned Agilent systems, since purge flow is often limited with other designs.
Seal wash options are offered by Agilent.
I have never seen a 1100 pump (includes modules which are labeled with HP) without inline filter (purge valve frit)?

5) 4 Minutes sounds very very exaggerated.
Agilents offers also different autosamplers without movement of the vial: Look for Wellplate or High-performance autosampler
Working with dirt and particles in the hplc vial is not exactly a gold-standard ;o)
Ok, needle-wash options were only rudimentary for the early designs. Otherwise the newer options are not needed in most cases in my opinion. I use several autosamplers from different vendors usually without needle-wash when a flow-thru-needle design is used.

6) The limit of 120 bar is really adequate, but there is also an optional high-pressure cell available.

7) I have no experience with RID from Agilent or other vendors. Maybe there are technical reasons non-specific for Agilent instruments. What is the procedure for RID from other vendors?

8 ) Yes, the liquid-trap is not easily accessible. Use Q-tips or convoluted tissue. I’m not sure if it is really necessary to reboot the modules to clear the alarm. I cannot really remember since this was not happening so often.

9) CAN is not outdated. It is robust and reliable. Therefore CAN and there derivatives are still used especially in automotive and other critical environments. Nevertheless I’m not aware what exact protocol is used by Agilent. Do you have detailed information?
The instrument LAN card can be installed in several modules not only in the detectors.
Older instruments can also be controlled via IEE-488 (HP-IB) when you install this card instead of the LAN card. I think in some older modules this interface was included by factory. But I don’t believe that this will have advantages for usual installations.

10) As HPLCaddict mentioned before, the Chemstation was designed years before Part11. I agree totally that Agilent have neglected there software for many years. I was complaining about this in every customer survey.

[Consumer Products Guy]

Personally:
1. I liked the keyboard and displays on the 1050 Series, found those very helpful and useful, even with Chemstation control.

2. I also found the A series Chemstation software MUCH more straightforward than the C series we now use, maybe because we went from A to C, so confusing; stuff like "Save Master Method" and "Save Sequence "Method" - because sometimes the prompt is for "Save Method", why can't it just state whether Master or Sequence type???

3. The OpenLab systems periodically fails to "launch" the HPLC or GC System, so we have to run to a System Administrator to try to get us going. Help us all if both Administrators are both out of office! But it's only 3 years, maybe this will stop.

[Alfred88]

Hi all.
I am writing some more on this topic, with the hope that Agilent will deliver a better product. Please think about bench-marking, or kaizen.
In response to Tomasz Kubowicz, I would like to say that I have done many things related to HPLCs: maintenance, IQ-OQ-PQ, verification, method development/validation, routine analyses, troubleshooting, system administration. I have kept all our existing systems running for > 10 years.
In response to scottythree: our firm bought 2 used Agilent HPLCs in 2013. The previous owners got spills and accidents with the autosamplers, so there were dirt, dried solids, hair, and rust inside and on the trays. So far, we have got one broken flow cell ($1K) when the pressure was approx. 160bar, and one broken pump box when the pump was running overnight. For comparison, other brands have UVDs that can withstand pressure up to 300 bar (4200 psi). I may write about other brands/MFGs in the future.
In response to Klaus I, here are additional details.
1/ The game boy (G1323B-Handheld control Module, discontinued) would cost $3K. The newer equivalent, G4208A-Instant Pilot will cost $4K.
Why Agilent could not make a pump that can display flow rate, and pressure on the front face (similar to other brands)? Or an oven that can show current temperature?
2/ This is not critical. Honestly, remembering these names is easier than O-chem. My observation is only a comparison with other brands.
3/ Agilent could improve the noise issue.
4/ Other brands have a purge valve, a purge button, and a frit filter near the purge valve. Agilent pump has only the first item. Also, why not have the back seal washing as standard? Think about seat belts, and air bags in cars: they are all standard.
5/ The estimated delay of 4 minutes is correct. I could not extract the video from my phone. However, I provide the audit trails of two consecutive injections during performance verification using codes generated by Chromeleon. Run time in Chromeleon is 4.5 min, but the actual total time is ~ 10min (see the bottom).
6/ We manufacture viscous products, so flow cell rated at 120 bar is inadequate.
7/ For non-Agilent RIDs, I have changed W-lamp for them many times.
It is not possible for Agilent RID. By the Agilent’s design, the whole optical unit ($4.5K for part) must be changed at the factory. Right below is the quote from Agilent for servicing one (1) RID. For comparison, the cost for a new Agilent RID is approx. $10K.
Item
#
Item Description Charge Type Qty / Hour Unit Price Total Price
(USD)
10 REPAIR Repair Trail Charge 1.00 920.00 920.00
10 Labor Charge 1.00 310.00 310.00
10 Service Subtotal 1,230.00
20 G1362-
69001
EXCH-Optical Unit
RID
Part Charge 1.00 6,606.01 6,606.01
20 Item Tax Amount 594.54
Total Price
before Tax 7,836.01
Sales Tax
9.000% 594.54
Total Price 8,430.55
8/ We got leaks inside the oven many times. Why not make the trap easier to clean like in other brands?
9/ Why not adopt a better/faster technology? BTW, the cost for one LAN card is approx. $1,300 ( not $3,300).
10/ The chromatographic software is not as powerful as other brands. It is deficient.
//Here is the audit trails, just to show that I did not exaggerate.
[Message] 2:12:26 PM Start of sample 10 "Injector and flow reproducibility_9", using program "INJECTOR_REPRODUCIBILITY".
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpModule", Value = "Pump"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump", Value = "Pump"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure", Value = "$Pump_Pressure"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpLeft", Value = "$PumpLeft"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure_LeftBlock", Value = "$Pump_Pressure_LeftBlock"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpRight", Value = "$PumpRight"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure_RightBlock", Value = "$Pump_Pressure_RightBlock"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Sampler", Value = "Sampler"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ColumnOven", Value = "ColumnOven"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ColumnOven_Temp", Value = "$ColumnOven_Temp"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV", Value = "UV"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_1", Value = "UV_VIS_1"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_2", Value = "UV_VIS_2"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_3", Value = "UV_VIS_3"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "FLD", Value = "$FLD"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_1", Value = "$Emission_1"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_2", Value = "$Emission_2"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_3", Value = "$Emission_3"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_4", Value = "$Emission_4"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission", Value = "$Emission"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "RI", Value = "RI"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "RI_1", Value = "RI_1"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ELSD", Value = "$ELSD"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ELS_1", Value = "$ELS_1"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "HPLC_System", Value = "$HPLC_System"
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Valve", Value = "$Valve"
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.Pressure.LowerLimit = 2.0
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.Pressure.UpperLimit = 300.0
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.%A.Equate = "Water"
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.%B = 0.0
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.%C = 0.0
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.%D = 0.0
[] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.Compressibility = 47
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Pump.Flow = 0.300
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Wavelength = 272
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Step = 0.20
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Average = On
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 3DFIELD.Step = 0.200
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Bandwidth = 2
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.RefWavelength = 600
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.RefBandwidth = 2
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV.PeakWidth = 0.05
[Protocol] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Sampler.WashVial = None
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 UV.Autozero
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait Pump.Ready
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait Sampler.Ready
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait ColumnOven.Ready
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait UV.Ready
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 Sampler.Inject
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Injecting from vial position 4.
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Injection Volume is 5.0 µl.
[Message] 2:12:26 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Waiting for inject response on Ag1200InjectState.
[Message] 2:12:32 PM 0.000 {UV} Device notification ( Prepare )
[Message] 2:12:33 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Purge )
[Message] 2:15:33 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Prepare )
[Message] 2:17:20 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Got inject response.
[Command] 2:17:20 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.AcqOn
[Command] 2:21:50 PM 4.500 UV_VIS_1.AcqOff
[Message] 2:22:13 PM End of sample "Injector and flow reproducibility_9". [Message] 2:22:14 PM Start of sample 11 "Injector and flow reproducibility_10", using program "INJECTOR_REPRODUCIBILITY".
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpModule", Value = "Pump"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump", Value = "Pump"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure", Value = "$Pump_Pressure"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpLeft", Value = "$PumpLeft"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure_LeftBlock", Value = "$Pump_Pressure_LeftBlock"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "PumpRight", Value = "$PumpRight"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Pump_Pressure_RightBlock", Value = "$Pump_Pressure_RightBlock"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Sampler", Value = "Sampler"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ColumnOven", Value = "ColumnOven"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ColumnOven_Temp", Value = "$ColumnOven_Temp"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV", Value = "UV"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_1", Value = "UV_VIS_1"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_2", Value = "UV_VIS_2"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "UV_VIS_3", Value = "UV_VIS_3"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "FLD", Value = "$FLD"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_1", Value = "$Emission_1"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_2", Value = "$Emission_2"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_3", Value = "$Emission_3"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission_4", Value = "$Emission_4"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Emission", Value = "$Emission"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "RI", Value = "RI"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "RI_1", Value = "RI_1"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ELSD", Value = "$ELSD"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "ELS_1", Value = "$ELS_1"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "HPLC_System", Value = "$HPLC_System"
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 WriteReportMacro Name = "Valve", Value = "$Valve"
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.Pressure.LowerLimit = 2.0
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.Pressure.UpperLimit = 300.0
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.%A.Equate = "Water"
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.%B = 0.0
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.%C = 0.0
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.%D = 0.0
[] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.Compressibility = 47
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Pump.Flow = 0.300
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Wavelength = 272
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Step = 0.20
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Average = On
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 3DFIELD.Step = 0.200
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.Bandwidth = 2
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.RefWavelength = 600
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.RefBandwidth = 2
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV.PeakWidth = 0.05
[Protocol] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Sampler.WashVial = None
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 UV.Autozero
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait Pump.Ready
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait Sampler.Ready
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait ColumnOven.Ready
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait UV.Ready
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Wait finished
[Command] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 Sampler.Inject
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Injecting from vial position 4.
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Injection Volume is 5.0 µl.
[Message] 2:22:14 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Waiting for inject response on Ag1200InjectState.
[Message] 2:22:19 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Purge )
[Message] 2:22:20 PM 0.000 {UV} Device notification ( Prepare )
[Message] 2:25:21 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Prepare )
[Message] 2:27:08 PM 0.000 {Sampler} Got inject response.
[Command] 2:27:08 PM 0.000 UV_VIS_1.AcqOn
[Command] 2:31:38 PM 4.500 UV_VIS_1.AcqOff
[Message] 2:32:02 PM End of sample "Injector and flow reproducibility_10". //This is the end of audit trails.

Thank you for reading!
Alfred

[lmh]

HPLCAddict put it rather well. I've used Shimadzu, Agilent, Waters, Thermo and a very little bit of Dionex equipment, and find all to have their strengths and weaknesses. I don't have any great problem with the Agilent 1100 range. Of course it lacks features that were only invented/became widespread after the 1100s were introduced. That's why Agilent brought out all their subsequent ranges. If you don't buy a seal wash, don't complain that you don't have one! If Agilent provided all the bells and whistles as standard on their equipment, it would cost more, and other customers would be paying for features they didn't want.

If you look at other systems of the same era, even highly reputable ones, you could make an equally angry mail about how inadequate they are. Waters autosamplers (Alliance), so far as I remember, couldn't do any pipetting robotics, while Agilent 1100's could do a lot (albeit rather slowly) and were very easy to program. Agilent autosamplers could handle a wide range of injection volumes, and injected what they said they did, without wasting sample. Thermo's Surveyor systems, by comparison, were limited in range of injection by their sample loop, and either injected the wrong volume (reproducibly so!) if you used "minimal waste" injections, or took substantially more sample than they needed, if you used "partial loop" (which was accurate).

[DR]

G1369C LAN card - <$1000 anywhere you look (but look carefully if all you want is the board and not the kit, which costs more).

[Himar]

If it takes 4 minutes to inject then you are doing something wrong. Openlab chemstation for one LC is close to $5,000 not $50,000!

[Klaus I.]

1-3) Your issues are purely a matter of taste in my opinion. If you don’t like how Agilent solved the problems don’t buy Agilent systems. I have personal experience with several systems from Agilent, Dionex, Merck-Hitachi, Thermo and Waters. I had never received the impression that Agilent solutions have noteworthy disadvantages.

4) As I mentioned before, I have never seen an 1100 pump without inline filter. Most probably your pumps have also an inline filter included. The purge valve frit is a small white cylinder which is replaced every three month by you or your colleges ;o)

5) If I remember correctly the injection cycle of standard sampler is about 1 minute when wash-vial is used. Your individual system/configuration has a problem.

6) I do not understand how viscosity of your products will affect the backpressure in an HPLC system. The 120 bar rating is sufficient for common configurations. If you have e.g. additional detectors after the UV detector installed you may have to estimate if the optional high-pressure flow-cell is necessary or not. Also this flow-cell is a fragile part and should be handled with care.

7) Thanks for the additional information.

I’m not sure if other manufactures have a clearly better design. Just do it like the other users and avoid leaks ;o)

9) And what exactly is a better/faster technology?

10) Yes, as I mentioned before Agilent took not care about their software for a long time.

[bunnahabhain]

[Message] 2:12:33 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Purge )
[Message] 2:15:33 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Prepare )
...
[Message] 2:22:19 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Purge )
[Message] 2:25:21 PM 0.000 {RI} Device notification ( Prepare )

This is where you lose three minutes each cycle: The RI flow cell is purged. Not the autosampler's fault.

Jörg