Best connection between Acquity UPLC and Kinetex column?

[Mattias]

Hi,

I am using a Kinetex column on a Waters Acquity UPLC, and so far I have used the stainless steel tubings from Waters to connect from the injector to the column.

I have a feeling that they do not really match? Sometimes I get very high pressure just from the connection, usually it helps just to unscrew and tighten again. Peaks can also get distorted (sometimes).

What would you choose as a connection? The method runs at 8000 psi, and I doubt that there is PEEK that can handle this. Do you know if there is a difference between Waters and Phenomenex fittings?

Thanks
Mattias

[bisnettrj2]

According to this video on the Phenomenex site, it seems pretty straight forward.

http://www.phenomenex.com/home/video/kinetexacquity.mp4

If this is what you're doing, and you still have problems, maybe you can try the Optimize Technologies EXP fittings. I've used those with an Agilent 1290 before, and they should be compatible with either Waters or Phenomenex columns. Or you can swap out the entire fitting for one of the Dionex (oops, Thermo) Viper fingertight fittings. They should also work with both port geometries.

[Mattias]

Thanks!

Unfortunately they were not on our "supplier list", but I have ordered UPLC fittings from SIELC now and also UPLC PEEK capillary from Phenomenex.

I hope this will make things better!

[bisnettrj2]

Optimize makes some good stuff, I'd lobby to get them on your supplier list. And Thermo/Dionex wasn't on your supplier list? How/why?

[Mattias]

Oops, they are indeed on our supplier list! I think I am too stressed now, not reading everything to the last line.

I called TF today and they will send me some Viper connections. They look very easy to use, let's see if they can handle 8000 psi.

[bisnettrj2]

If I recall correctly, I used them routinely at around 700-900 bar (9-12000 psi) without issue. The specs on the fittings say they can handle 1200 bar (17,400 psi).

http://www.dionex.com/en-us/products/ac ... 81335.html

[Klaus I.]

I am also prefering the Viper capillaries. Recently I have noticed the first issue: The screw thread of HALO columns and Agilent Poroshell columns are too short, it is impossible to get the Viper capillaries to these columns connected. But this is for sure, the Viper capillaries can easily replaced with traditional ones

[wulffniedner]

Hi Klaus,
I am sorry to hear about the issues with Viper, Poroshell, and Halo.
May I ask how old the Viper capillary you used was? Is the nut freely movable or fixed at the capillary end?
Also, it would be great to get exact information about the columns that did not work. Part numbers would be ideal.
We want to make sure that Viper works with all counterparts out there, so this information would be highly appreciated.

Best regards,
Wulff

--
Wulff Niedner
Manager, LC Products
Chromatography and Mass Spectrometry Division
Thermo Fisher Scientific

[Klaus I.]

Hi Klaus,
I am sorry to hear about the issues with Viper, Poroshell, and Halo.
May I ask how old the Viper capillary you used was? Is the nut freely movable or fixed at the capillary end?
Also, it would be great to get exact information about the columns that did not work. Part numbers would be ideal.
We want to make sure that Viper works with all counterparts out there, so this information would be highly appreciated.

Best regards,
Wulff

--
Wulff Niedner
Manager, LC Products
Chromatography and Mass Spectrometry Division
Thermo Fisher Scientific

Edit: My Thermo/Dionex representative have forwarded you the information:
The used VIPER-Capillaries are from the lates generation (fixed nut).
Partnumber of HALO column: 92813-602
Partnumber of Agilent Poroshell 120column: 695975-302

Best regards Klaus

[Klaus I.]

Update:
Recently I have ordered a Dionex mixed-mode column the first time and the column hardware looks like the above discussed ones. Apparently also Dionex use this problematic column-hardware for some columns.
I have informed my Dionex- representative about this observation, and after a short time the engineers in Germering (Germany) have provided their ideas.
Problem was not a too short screw-thread, but when Viper-capillaries are used with column-hardware with greater diameters (outer diameter of the capillary), the PEEK-Disc on the Viper-capillaries may be too much deformed.
My sales-representative from Dionex makes today some try-outs with a new ‘Viper-recalibration-Tool’ in my lab and with my capillaries. All previously used capillaries works now easily with the above described column hardware, after we have ‘recalibrated’ the Peek-Disc.
Really new and unused Viper Capillaries works with all of my present columns out of the box. Only for one of my six present column inlets the connection is only possible by using slight force. Since I have only three columns and therefore only six column-inlets for the testing with new Viper-Capillaries I am not able to derive a correct statistical conclusion.
Now I am able to use the described column-hardware with my used Viper-Capillaries, but the described column-hardware seems not to be very ideal for using Viper-Capillaries:
The Screw-Thread is very short; it needs only two thread pitches (?, sorry , please keep in mind that I’m not a natural speaker) for connecting the Viper-Capillary.
The diameter on the column inlet for the capillary is smaller than usual. With tolerance of production variation, it needs sometimes slight force to make a connection with Viper-Capillaries.
Also often used capillaries (about two times a day for six month – and sometimes overtighten) can be repaired with this ‘Viper-recalibration-Tool’. We were able to make a good connection, but also this needs slight force.
I’m really happy with this solution, since I can work now with all column-hardware familiar to me. And I think the column-inlet capillary will have a longer lifetime than six month now.

[Victor]

Matthias,

On the end of the solvent preheater tube there is a gold colored screw with a circular head followed by a silver colored split metal fitting. If you use a PEEK ferrule (Waters part number 415000786) on the end of this, instead of a stainless steel ferrule, you should be able to fit any column to this without too much problem. As the ferrule is not fixed, you can move it to the required position for different columns. We did not have problems with leaks up to the pressure limit of the system.

Of course, you probably have a stainless steel ferrule stuck to the end of this assembly at the moment, so you may have to buy a new preheater tube first.

[Vlad Orlovsky]

Hello Mattias,

What is ID of the tubing you are using? We have different fittings as you know and about to introduce a new one. I can send you one to try with your next order. Who are you buying through when you order SIELC columns?

[Klaus I.]

[Hfranz]

Update:
I’m really happy with this solution, since I can work now with all column-hardware familiar to me. And I think the column-inlet capillary will have a longer lifetime than six month now.

It is great to hear that you are happy with our support and solutions. Keep sharing your experiences with the community and help us making our products even better.

Regards,

Holger
____________________
Thermo Fisher Scientific