Agilent 1100 Chemstation A10.02 upgrade to B4.03

[toonek]

We are using LC 1100 with Chemstation A.10.02. Funny is that this LC system was bought in 2004 and was laying in boxes for 9 years ...


I was wondering is it safe and possible to update firmware. Current firmware version is 5.11 on all hardware. Is it possible to update to newer version like 6.50 and still using Chemstation A.10.02 ?

I was reading instruction of updating firmware with Agilent LC Firmware Update Tool - and it said that it is possible even to downgrade the firmware. Has anybody experience with it ?

In document G2170-90235_Upgrade-to-B0403_ENG is written and I quote:
ChemStation Rev. A.xx.xx License numbers in general allow the upgrade to ChemStation Rev. B.04.0x. In addition, new installations can be performed using license numbers purchased for ChemStation Rev. A.xx.xx.

Is this mean that if I had DVD copy Chemstation B.04.03 I could update my version ( A.10.02 )?
Do anybody know where I could obtain that DVD. Our local reseller of Agilent said that they only could sell me Open LAb ... for a lot of money.

Hardware set consist of:
G1322A
G1311A
G1313A
G1316A
G1315B
G1321A

[KM-USA]

I've downloaded and installed Agilent firmware, found it somewhat tricky, but I'm not so good on computers.

We updated from A.09 about 1.5 years ago to OpenLab.

If you do update the software to a newer revision, you'll likely have to update the firmware for each module.

I would strongly recommend to stay with the software that you have. After using both A and C versions (but not B), I find the A revisions much more straightforward. And your results will be absolutely no less accurate.

So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02.

If you don't like that response:
So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02. So why make trouble for yourself, stay with A.10.02.

[dhobbs]

I believe firmware A.05.11 is about as new as you can get while maintaining communication with A.10.02 software (or G1323A controllers, for that matter). Yes, downgrading Agilent firmware is the same process as upgrading it using the firmware update utility, as long as you have the older firmware files on your PC. I've never experienced any difference in system performance related to firmware revision, so I'd echo KM's comment that you could stick with the software and firmware you have.

[Consumer Products Guy]

I also think best to stay where you are.

May I ask: what was the push to consider to change?

[toonek]

To: Consumer Products Guy

I read some documents of Agilent, that B version has better auto integrator, and some other tweaks. Moreover I hate 8-chart length of file names. And off-line version ( for data analyse ) often crashes with error " Stack overflow".

I`m still considering. I don`t have DVD of B4.03 version. And it would be nice to have computer with windows 7.

[Consumer Products Guy]

I liked the standard integrator way better than the enhanced integrator (which is now the norm). With A.x revisions, you could keep a Method as standard integration, but once you updated that Method and Saved, you couldn't go back unless you started wagain with a method with standard integration.

Agree about the 8-characters for naming files and data directories though. I wont "say" that you'll be sorry. But I'll be thinkin' it.

[Csaba]

Off topic: I have worked with A-series and hated the 8-char name limitation and how files are organized in folders.
Absolutely depressing to read that you users of the B and C-series are so disappointed!
Well al least I find the E-series has some advantage compared with the D-series for GC-MS.
Reminds me of new Microsoft applications – so depressing that new applications and OS’s are worse. Were is common sense these days? Gone with the wind?

[dhobbs]

I do prefer B-revision Chemstation to A.10.02, but communication problems are a bit more common when running it on Windows 7. In any case, you still wouldn't need to upgrade your firmware even with B.04.03 on Windows 7.

[Consumer Products Guy]

Reminds me of new Microsoft applications – so depressing that new applications and OS’s are worse. Where is common sense these days? Gone with the wind?

We just moved to Windows 7. I hate it. I tried to search for a file yesterday, wanted to Search within a certain 2-week time period (for example), but apparently one can only search using file name (or part of that). I tried to use Help to find if there were options, but couldn't find help off the Start Window either (maybe corporate removed that?). I guess I'll try Google to find out.

[Alfred88]

Chemstation version A has one major problem: It does not generate audit trails. This is one of the requirements of 21 CFR Part 11.
The compliant requirements with Part 11 is big in pharma.

We have two LCs with version A when our firm bought the used Agilent LCs, and our firm has not purchased the software update to run the LCs (too expensive).

Alfred.

[KM-USA]

Chemstation version A has one major problem: It does not generate audit trails. This is one of the requirements of 21 CFR Part 11.
The compliant requirements with Part 11 is big in pharma.

Until about 1.5 years ago we used A.09 and ChemStore, and I fully believe that we were fully compliant with 21CFR11. I believe a big issue for those like you is that even if you bought and installed old ChemStore, Agilent does not support it any longer so you would have a non-validated system? Or something like that.

And don't the regulations allow printing everything and keeping that, like the original 21CFR11 had been relaxed somewhat? Anyway, I'm a lab scientist, not a regulations person.