Agilent APG/ERI remote - poor triggering precision
Posted: Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:17 am
Hi,
Would anyone have experience with Agilent APG or ERI remote triggering?
I'm triggering a 1290 kit via ERI (an external injection valve sending output - completed turn - signal to trigger the LC) and seeing some unwanted variation in retention times as measured on t0 ranging up to 0.8 s. This may not sound like much but I work with ultra fast methods and that variability is effectively ruining my runs. Interestingly, when the same method is executed on the autosampler the injection is very precise, low RSD on retention times.
I'm suspecting that this is due to some internal software delays, i.e. variable delay between the moment the trigger is registered on the terminal and when the run is actually initiated by the relevant software routine and t0 is marked.
Are there any recommended ways of triggering the Agilent kit with much greater precision similar to the autosampler operations?
Many thanks
Would anyone have experience with Agilent APG or ERI remote triggering?
I'm triggering a 1290 kit via ERI (an external injection valve sending output - completed turn - signal to trigger the LC) and seeing some unwanted variation in retention times as measured on t0 ranging up to 0.8 s. This may not sound like much but I work with ultra fast methods and that variability is effectively ruining my runs. Interestingly, when the same method is executed on the autosampler the injection is very precise, low RSD on retention times.
I'm suspecting that this is due to some internal software delays, i.e. variable delay between the moment the trigger is registered on the terminal and when the run is actually initiated by the relevant software routine and t0 is marked.
Are there any recommended ways of triggering the Agilent kit with much greater precision similar to the autosampler operations?
Many thanks