From: "Kevin Olsen" Subject: Automatic Optical Character Recognition Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 11:58:20 -0400 Dear Colleagues, Dave Allen wrote: there's a device on the market called I.R.I.S. Datapen. it scans text one line at a time, performs OCR, and outputs data through a keyboard wedge. I'd like to use this in an application to read printed labels. the problem with the model I looked at was that it required manual actuation of a switch to start scanning. I could add a pneumatic cylinder with a finger on it (or hack the switch with a TTL line), but I'd prefer a more elegant solution. does anyone know of an OCR hand scanner that can be remotely controlled? I checked my list of scanners and found that not all scanners meet all three of Dave's requirements, optical character recognition, hands-off activation, and input via a keyboard wedge.* However, Welch Allyn's 4400 OCR Series scanners can operate in a "hands-free" mode. When it "sees" a label. it reads automatically. Data can be fed through a keyboard wedge. The label's alphanumeric characters must be in a font that is designed for optical character recognition, (OCR-A, OCR-B, or, True-type Ariel, True-type Courier, and True-Type Times, and MICRE-13B). Welch Allyn can be reached 315-685-8945 or call Jim Galloway in their sales department at 888-274-9654. Hope this helps, Kevin Olsen Robotics & Automation Group Wyeth Ayerst Research Pearl River, NY, 10965 914-732-3392 * For those list subscribers not familiar with automatic data collection, a Keyboard wedge is a "Y" type cable adopter for your computer. The keyboard plugs into one branch, the bar code scanner into another, and both then feed into the computer. In the past, keyboard wedges had an independent electrical supply to power the scanner and decoder. The current generation of scanners takes its power directly from the keyboard. You can hook one up in about a minute and enter bar code data directly from your samples without using specialized data collection software. Try a Symbol Technologies model LS2106-1000 hand-held rastering laser scanner. From: "david allen" Subject: RE: Reader Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 12:32:02 -0400 > > Welch Allyn's 4400 OCR Series scanners can operate in a > "hands-free" mode. When it "sees" a label. it reads > automatically. Data can be fed through a keyboard wedge. If the > label alphanumeric characters are in a font that is designed for > optical character recognition, (OCR-A, OCR-B, or, True-type > Ariel, True-type Courier, and True-Type Times, and MICRE-13B). > Welch Allyn can be reached 315-685-8945 or call Jim Galloway in > their sales department at 888-274-9654. > > Hope this helps, > > Kevin Olsen thanks for the lead. one of the applications is reading data from reagent bottle labels. a CCD or camera type scanner probably won't scan around the bottle easily. that's why a datapen type wand was interesting. another disadvantage to the W.A. scanner is price. the datapen is $300, the OCR scanner is $2300. of course if it works, it may be justifiable. but at that price, I can't buy to try. da From: "Motley, Joe" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Automatic Optical Character Recognition Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 09:44:02 -0400 Dave, We are experts in machine vision and robotics. We have lots of experience with OCR and OCV. I would like to talk to you to see if we can be of assistance. Pleas give me a call at (336) 664-0531 ext. 302 To help you I must know more about you application before I can offer advice. Thanks Joe Motley Microdyne Systems, Inc. > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Olsen [SMTP:OLSENKK@SPAMFOIL.war.wyeth.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 11:58 AM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Automatic Optical Character > Recognition > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > Dear Colleagues, > > Dave Allen wrote: > > there's a device on the market called I.R.I.S. Datapen. it scans text > one > line at a time, performs OCR, and outputs data through a keyboard > wedge. > I'd like to use this in an application to read printed labels. the > problem > with the model I looked at was that it required manual actuation of a > switch > to start scanning. I could add a pneumatic cylinder with a finger on > it (or > hack the switch with a TTL line), but I'd prefer a more elegant > solution. > does anyone know of an OCR hand scanner that can be remotely > controlled? > > I checked my list of scanners and found that not all scanners meet all > three of Dave's requirements, optical character recognition, hands-off > activation, and input via a keyboard wedge.* > > However, Welch Allyn's 4400 OCR Series scanners can operate in a > "hands-free" mode. When it "sees" a label. it reads automatically. > Data can be fed through a keyboard wedge. The label's alphanumeric > characters must be in a font that is designed for optical character > recognition, (OCR-A, OCR-B, or, True-type Ariel, True-type Courier, > and True-Type Times, and MICRE-13B). Welch Allyn can be reached > 315-685-8945 or call Jim Galloway in their sales department at > 888-274-9654. > > Hope this helps, > > Kevin Olsen > Robotics & Automation Group > Wyeth Ayerst Research > Pearl River, NY, 10965 > > 914-732-3392 > > > > > > > > > > > > > * For those list subscribers not familiar with automatic data > collection, a Keyboard wedge is a "Y" type cable adopter for your > computer. The keyboard plugs into one branch, the bar code scanner > into another, and both then feed into the computer. In the past, > keyboard wedges had an independent electrical supply to power the > scanner and decoder. The current generation of scanners takes its > power directly from the keyboard. You can hook one up in about a > minute and enter bar code data directly from your samples without > using specialized data collection software. Try a Symbol Technologies > model LS2106-1000 hand-held rastering laser scanner. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Juan_Antonio_Mostacero@SPAMFOIL.sbphrd.com Subject: Workstations vs Robotics Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 18:38:57 +0200 I would like to star a discussion forum about these topic. Wich parametres must be taken into consideration? Advantages and disadvantages? Regards Mosta From: Laboratory Robotics Interest Group Subject: Re: Posting Etiquette Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 13:08:40 -0400 Hi all, I received this feedback from a vendor subscriber to the Discussion Mailing List. It says it all. **************************************** " I appreciate your attempt to get the mail back into the technical detail and out of the general advertising vein. I have been intentionally resisting joining the advertising "fray" that has been prevalent lately, yet frustrated at the level of commercialism. By the way, another recommendation, which I have used successfully, is for the vendors to reply DIRECTLY to the person originating the request for information, rather than reply via the discussion group. That gets the product information and company contact to the person without blanket advertising. (and it works!)" **************************************** Thanks. Andy From: Andy Zaayenga Subject: Pipetting plasma Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 19:12:24 -0400 Has anyone had experience in pipetting plasma in 96 channel mode? Our concern is reliability in aliquotting sample, and realizing when clogs occur so that we can take proper action. Are conductive pipet tips able to liquid sense levels in the tip after pipetting (not just the level in the source container)? Any feedback on your techniques in working with plasma will be appreciated. Thank you. Andy Zaayenga TekCel Corporation Mailto:andy.zaayenga@SPAMFOIL.tekcel.com Web Site: http://tekcel.com From: "Stein Roaldset" Subject: Re: Plasma pipetting Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 15:57:23 -0400 Andy, My experience with the plasma pipetting has been limited to testing multiple pipetting speeds and pipette tips with larger orifices. If the solids are so large that the complete opening is closed there is little that can be done. If a partial closure exists the pipetting must be slowed down (halted) to enable the system to reach equilibrium before going on. When the operation calls for high speed in the pipetting you may find that the column breaks and you are faced with a lot of bubbles. As for conductive pipette tips I believe they are only good for testing liquid levels in the wells (and not for 96 well operation). As all 96 well pipettors that I know do not have individually movable pistons you would have to decide which tip to follow. Be glad to discuss this further by e-mail or phone. Regards Stein stein_roaldset@SPAMFOIL.msn.com From: Marc Eichmann Subject: High Throughput screening research project Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 23:47:54 -0500 My name is Marc Eichmann and I am presently at the Darden School of Business (University of Virginia). Together with my colleague Ilene Goldstein I am doing a research project focused towards unveiling the best businesses practices in the High Throughput Screening industry. We believe our findings will be a useful base for the setting strategic direction at industry related companies As part of our study, we are interviewing around sixty companies, some of them in the client side (pharmas, biotech companies) and some of them in the supply side (reagent, microplate suppliers, equipment manufacturers, contract screeners,etc.). We are interested in scheduling a 15-20 minutes phone interview with you at your convenience. We are obviously willing to send a copy of our final report to the interviewees. Please let us know by email if you would be interested in participating in our study. Thanks in advance for your help. Marc Eichmann (804)9702062 eichmannm99@SPAMFOIL.yahoo.com From: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion) Subject: Thank you for subscribing to Lab-Robotics Discussion Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 22:18:17 -0500 Thank you for subscribing to the Lab-Robotics Discussion mailing list. This message is sent once every 30 days to remind you of the commands which Arrow (our mailing list software) understands. To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. To change to digest mode and receive messages once a day send a message with DIGEST-1 as the subject. To receive a digest once a week, send a message with a subject of DIGEST-7. To change from digest mode back to individual messages, send a message with DIGEST-OFF as the subject. For help with these and other Arrow commands, send a message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just HELP as the subject. Note: All Arrow commands are a single word (with no spaces) and are sent in the subject of the message to the list. Andy Zaayenga Moderator, The Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List mailto:andy.zaayenga@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org web site: https://www.lab-robotics.org --- Age of List in Days 291 Number of Subscribers 740 Total Number of Messages Posted to List 716 Average Number of Messages Posted Per Day 2 From: "Nygaard, John" Subject: Compound Pooling Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 14:06:07 -0700 I'm in the midst of assembling information related to compound pooling strategies and techniques for screening purposes. I'd like it be as comprehensive as possible and have searched most of the available science databases (eg, PubMed) and screening/automation sites. However, the availability of such information is under-whelming to say the least, though I have uncovered a few good papers. If you've been through this process before and are willing to share your experience, or know of some good leads I'd greatly appreciate hearing from you. Thank you. John Nygaard Manager, Assay Automation Services COR Therapeutics, Inc. W(650)244-6810 From: Alicia Gayle Subject: 96-well Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 17:19:49 -0400 hi everyone, does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. From: "David Allen" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:06:53 -0400 there are several on the market. Whatman comes to mind immediately, but there are others. if you're going to use all of the sample, the plastic and aluminum sheets can be pierced once. da > does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or > slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. > From: "David Allen" Subject: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same mistake. da =============================================================== Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, ?27, any and all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes acceptance of these terms. =============================================================== From: kato_akira@SPAMFOIL.yoshitomi.co.jp Subject: Re:Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 12:13:11 +0900 Please refer to the following site: URL: http://www.spike.cc/#ELAS Manufacturer: Spike International, Ltd. Product: ELAS Pierceable Septum sheets Ken >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >hi everyone, > >does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or >slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To view statistics on this list, send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just STATS as the subject. You will receive >statistics for the mailing list showing number of subscribers, domain types and >messages. > > From: ntyrefor@SPAMFOIL.qupp.quintiles.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 08:54:24 +0100 Chromacol advertised such a thing a couple of weeks back, but they did not have it on their homepage last week. Guess you have to ask then. Sincerely Niklas Tyrefors, PhD Senior Scientist, Mass Spectrometry Quintiles AB _______________________________ "It is not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change." Charles Darwin Alicia Gayle on 99-07-19 23:19:49 Please respond to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List) cc: (bcc: Niklas Tyrefors/QUPP/Quintiles) Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- hi everyone, does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: "Raymond Reilly" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 08:04:36 -0400 I believe that Tomtec has an adhesive backed plate cover that has slits to allow small tips or needles to penetrate into the wells Regards, Ray Reilly CRS Automation Solutions ----- Original Message ----- From: Alicia Gayle To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 5:19 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > hi everyone, > > does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or > slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > > From: "Stein Roaldset" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 07:31:39 -0700 Hello, There are a few lids with slits on the market. Some are quite heavy duty and are supplied by most plate manufacturers. A lighter lid is called "Thinlids" and are supplied by my employer Tomtec Inc. Regards Stein A. Roaldset VP Technical Sales Tomtec Inc. -----Original Message----- From: Alicia Gayle To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Date: Monday, July 19, 1999 6:51 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >hi everyone, > >does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or >slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > > From: Michael Sabatino Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 10:27:32 -0400 Call Microliter they have pre cut cover for 96 well plates. There number is 888 232 7840. From: gledson@SPAMFOIL.whatman.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 16:34:14 -0400 Whatman Polyfiltronics can help 1 800 434 7659 X 214 Alicia Gayle on 07/19/99 05:19:49 PM Please respond to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List) cc: (bcc: Grahame Ledson/Whatman) Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- hi everyone, does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: "John Petracca" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 23:03:18 -0400 Dave, All vendors should be open to critique by the constabulary. Not to say that I am in favor of random vendor bashing but I am sure that you and your colleagues have solid foundations for complaints and we all should be privy to them. One man's (vendor type) opinion. JohnP jpi_inc@SPAMFOIL.yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: David Allen To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 10:14 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point > where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with > advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but > there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same > mistake. > > da > > > > =============================================================== > Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, ?27, any and > all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a > download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes > acceptance of these terms. > =============================================================== > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > From: "Donacki, Nanci" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 06:55:27 -0400 Hi Dave, As a new member to this group, I would be interested in hearing what you have to say. I am currently in the process of deciding between robotics systems, and all the input I've gotten from current users has been positive. I don't know if the vendor you mentioned is one that we are looking at, but that information would be helpful for me. In general, I think there should be some compilation of this kind of information - good and bad. Nanci E Donacki donackin@SPAMFOIL.medimmune.com -----Original Message----- From: John Petracca [mailto:jpetracca@SPAMFOIL.email.msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 11:03 PM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Dave, All vendors should be open to critique by the constabulary. Not to say that I am in favor of random vendor bashing but I am sure that you and your colleagues have solid foundations for complaints and we all should be privy to them. One man's (vendor type) opinion. JohnP jpi_inc@SPAMFOIL.yahoo.com ----- Original Message ----- From: David Allen To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 10:14 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point > where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with > advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but > there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same > mistake. > > da > > > > =============================================================== > Pursuant to US Code, Title 47, Chapter 5, Subchapter II, ?27, any and > all nonsolicited commercial E-mail sent to this address is subject to a > download and archival fee in the amount of $500 US. E-mailing denotes > acceptance of these terms. > =============================================================== > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To temporarily suspend messages from this list, send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just SUSPEND-xx (xx is a number) as the subject. This will suspend your account for xx days or until you send a RESUME command. From: "Tom McCloud " Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 08:59:20 -0400 I would certainly consider it useful information to know in selecting a piece of equipment, whether a vendor has delivered something which has failed to perform as advertised, or has been unable to repair something they sold you. Tastefully worded, and civil, stating facts, not simply 'bashing', of course. But the vendor may have a different opinion of the situation, and it is also legitimate for them to post a response. In other groups I have seen a dozen satisfied customers jump on one who has been dissatisfied with a particular product. Tom McCloud From: "David Allen" > --------------------- > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor From: Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Digest -1999/07/14 - 1999/07/20 (12) Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 09:43:37 -0400 David, I think that most users know how you feel. The goal of the LRIG is to foster the relations between users and vendors to promote the advancement of automation. This will not be achieved by attacking vendors in an open forum. It is biting the hand that feeds you. It has been my observation that off-line discussions at LRIG meetings seem to gather momentum very rapidly if there is consensus. Feel free to respond to any discussion topic that requests information about your experience with the vendors equipment. You can also put the equipment up for sale on the LRIG Swap Shop page! Despite the fact that you may never buy another piece of equipment from that vendor, there are other users out there that love that stuff and are dying to get a good deal on it. If you are right, you will put yourself in a better competitive position by selling it to them! Don't worry about your conscience. The prospective buyers are bound to ask you why you are selling. Tell them. I doubt that it will change their minds unless the equipment is defective. Either way you gain some satisfaction. Steve From: "David Allen" Subject: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same mistake. da From: Amy Page Subject: re: David Allen's ? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 15:38:29 -0400 Factually presented reviews (positive or negative) are welcome here as long as they do not include personal attacks and are based in actual experience. Amy Myers Page Genomics Projects Coordinator Paradigm Genetics From: Steve Turner Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 12:31:19 -0700 I must vote with what seems like the majority here and support the (tasteful, civil) discussions of experiences with vendors, both good and bad. If the "hand that is feeding you" is feeding you poison, you better damn well bite it! Shame on you if, in addition to your silence, you put the poison up for sale in the swap shop! Any vendor afraid of negativity in this forum has ample opportunity to respond, and if unable to keep up with the number of complaints probably shouldn't be in business in the first place. I, myself, appeal to the company directly FIRST, as do most people I'm sure. Steve -----Original Message----- From: Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com [mailto:Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:44 AM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Digest -1999/07/14 - 1999/07/20 (12) --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- David, I think that most users know how you feel. The goal of the LRIG is to foster the relations between users and vendors to promote the advancement of automation. This will not be achieved by attacking vendors in an open forum. It is biting the hand that feeds you. It has been my observation that off-line discussions at LRIG meetings seem to gather momentum very rapidly if there is consensus. Feel free to respond to any discussion topic that requests information about your experience with the vendors equipment. You can also put the equipment up for sale on the LRIG Swap Shop page! Despite the fact that you may never buy another piece of equipment from that vendor, there are other users out there that love that stuff and are dying to get a good deal on it. If you are right, you will put yourself in a better competitive position by selling it to them! Don't worry about your conscience. The prospective buyers are bound to ask you why you are selling. Tell them. I doubt that it will change their minds unless the equipment is defective. Either way you gain some satisfaction. Steve From: "David Allen" Subject: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same mistake. da --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: "Napolitano, Christopher" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 16:33:20 -0400 I feel that one of the goals of this discussion group is to be able to get a real life sense of what is out there in the "automation" world. We sit at our computers and send our "feelers" (so to speak) out into the waters and try to learn others experiences. The nature of our business is to buy expensive equipment to be able to do our jobs. Before we make those decisions, I feel that we should have as much input as we possibly can. Some of this information should (I feel) be drawn from others experiences, both good and bad. So my feelings are that we should let this e-mail thing be exactly what it is advertised as: a discussion group. In the spirit of good discussions, topics discussed should be brought up in a reasonable manner. If a vendor hasn't lived up to your expectations, then bring it up. Give specific examples as to how they didn't do the job that you expected them to. On the flip side of that, if you see people griping about a vendor, and you have had good experiences with said vendor, then I feel that you should bring that to the table. The overall accomplishment to all of this discussion is to have all of the information you like so that you can make an informed and educated decision. Chris Napolitano Merck Research Laboratories > ---------- > From: Tom McCloud[SMTP:tom@SPAMFOIL.NPSG.ncifcrf.gov] > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 8:59 AM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > I would certainly consider it useful information to know > in selecting a piece of equipment, whether a vendor has > delivered something which has failed to perform as > advertised, or has been unable to repair something they > sold you. Tastefully worded, and civil, stating facts, > not simply 'bashing', of course. But the vendor may have a > different opinion of the situation, and it is also > legitimate for them to post a response. In other groups I > have seen a dozen satisfied customers jump on one who has > been dissatisfied with a particular product. Tom McCloud > > > From: "David Allen" > > --------------------- > > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > From: "Ashton, Mark" Subject: Software & purification Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 09:35:44 +0100 Dear All I don't know if this is the correct forum to ask for the following information, but here goes; 1. Does anyone know of, or supply any software that calculates LogP and pKa (or pKb), and such values of numbers of rotatable bonds and number of hydrogen donors or acceptors for an sdfile of compounds. Ideally the data calculated should be added to the sdfile or and excel spreadsheet in order that average values, highs and lows can be calculated. 2. What, in peoples opinion is the most effective piece of equipment for the parallel purification of compound libraries in quantities ranging from 5mgs to 50mgs. Who are the suppliers and what are peoples experiences with respect to throughput, recovery quantity and purity gains? Does anyone have any experiences of the Biotage Parallex system? Thanks you for your help and I look forward to your comments Regards Mark Ashton ------------------------------------------- Dr. Mark R. Ashton Department Manager Oxford Asymmetry International 111 Milton Park Abingdon, Oxon OX14 UK Tel: ++ 44 (0)1235 441236/441200 Fax: ++ 44 (0)1235 441509 E-mail: mashton@SPAMFOIL.oai.co.uk internet: http://www.oai.co.uk/ The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential and is to be read only by the intended recipient named above. If this e-mail message fails to reach the intended recipient it cannot be copied nor its contents be disclosed to any third party whether within or outside the receiving organisation. If this message does not reach the named recipient please contact us by telephone and return the original e-mail to the above address by post. Re Question 1: MSI's Cerius QSAR module can import an sdfile and calculate logP, rotatable bonds and H bond donors and acceptors. One of our programmers wrote scripts to run this kind calculation in batch mode rather than interactively and I've run sdfiles of 50,000 structures without any problem. The output is a tab delimited text file. I don't think it can do pKa. There is a program called Pallas on the market that claims to calculate pKa but I have not used it. Similar functionality can probably be implemented in the Sybyl Molecular spreadsheet if you can write the SPL code or in Oxford Molecular's TSAR. Colin Tice Rohm and Haas Company ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Software & purification Author: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org at Internet Date: 07/23/1999 9:35 AM --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Dear All I don't know if this is the correct forum to ask for the following information, but here goes; 1. Does anyone know of, or supply any software that calculates LogP and pKa (or pKb), and such values of numbers of rotatable bonds and number of hydrogen donors or acceptors for an sdfile of compounds. Ideally the data calculated should be added to the sdfile or and excel spreadsheet in order that average values, highs and lows can be calculated. 2. What, in peoples opinion is the most effective piece of equipment for the parallel purification of compound libraries in quantities ranging from 5mgs to 50mgs. Who are the suppliers and what are peoples experiences with respect to throughput, recovery quantity and purity gains? Does anyone have any experiences of the Biotage Parallex system? Thanks you for your help and I look forward to your comments Regards Mark Ashton ------------------------------------------- Dr. Mark R. Ashton Department Manager Oxford Asymmetry International 111 Milton Park Abingdon, Oxon OX14 UK Tel: ++ 44 (0)1235 441236/441200 Fax: ++ 44 (0)1235 441509 E-mail: mashton@SPAMFOIL.oai.co.uk internet: http://www.oai.co.uk/ The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential and is to be read only by the intended recipient named above. If this e-mail message fails to reach the intended recipient it cannot be copied nor its contents be disclosed to any third party whether within or outside the receiving organisation. If this message does not reach the named recipient please contact us by telephone and return the original e-mail to the above address by post. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. Received: from nmho08u.rohmhaas.com ([136.141.252.14]) by ima2.rohmhaas.com with SMTP (IMA Internet Exchange 3.11) id 00362302; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:12:30 -0400 Received: by nmho08u.rohmhaas.com; id OAA22462; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 14:12:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com(206.214.98.3) by nmho08u.rohmhaas.com via smap (3.2) id xma022453; Fri, 23 Jul 99 14:12:29 -0400 Received: (from smap@SPAMFOIL.localhost) by dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) id NAA07908; Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:00:12 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199907231800.NAA07908@SPAMFOIL.dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com> Received: from nwf-nj28-11.ix.netcom.com(198.211.22.203) by dfw-ix3.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3) id rma006542; Fri Jul 23 12:59:48 1999 From: "Ashton, Mark" To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List) Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Software & purification Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 09:35:44 +0100 Importance: high X-Priority: 1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; Reply-To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Sender: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.orgFrom: roger@SPAMFOIL.mcintosh.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Software & purification Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:17:49 +0100 Take a look at SciLogP from SciVision (http://www.scivision.com/). At 09:35 AM 7/23/99 +0100, you wrote: >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >Dear All > >I don't know if this is the correct forum to ask for the following >information, but here goes; > >1. Does anyone know of, or supply any software that calculates LogP and pKa >(or pKb), and such values of numbers of rotatable bonds and number of >hydrogen donors or acceptors for an sdfile of compounds. Ideally the data >calculated should be added to the sdfile or and excel spreadsheet in order >that average values, highs and lows can be calculated. > >2. What, in peoples opinion is the most effective piece of equipment for >the parallel purification of compound libraries in quantities ranging from >5mgs to 50mgs. Who are the suppliers and what are peoples experiences with >respect to throughput, recovery quantity and purity gains? Does anyone have >any experiences of the Biotage Parallex system? > >Thanks you for your help and I look forward to your comments > >Regards > >Mark Ashton > >------------------------------------------- >Dr. Mark R. Ashton >Department Manager >Oxford Asymmetry International >111 Milton Park >Abingdon, Oxon >OX14 >UK >Tel: ++ 44 (0)1235 441236/441200 >Fax: ++ 44 (0)1235 441509 >E-mail: mashton@SPAMFOIL.oai.co.uk >internet: http://www.oai.co.uk/ > >The information contained in this e-mail message is confidential and is to >be read only by the intended recipient named above. If this e-mail message >fails to reach the intended recipient it cannot be copied nor its contents >be disclosed to any third party whether within or outside the receiving >organisation. If this message does not reach the named recipient please >contact us by telephone and return the original e-mail to the above address >by post. > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > From: David Meyer Subject: 384 plate washer Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 16:22:53 -0500 Does anyone know of a 384 plate washer where the speed of dispensing can be controlled. ________________________________________ David F. Meyer, Ph.D. Scientist Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. 270 Albany St. Cambridge, MA 02139 Tel: (617) 679 7475 Fax: (617) 551 7972 email: dmeyer@SPAMFOIL.mpi.com www.mlnm.com _______________________________________ From: "david allen" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Software & purification Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 17:31:02 -0400 > > > 1. Does anyone know of, or supply any software that calculates > LogP and pKa > (or pKb), and such values of numbers of rotatable bonds and number of > hydrogen donors or acceptors for an sdfile of compounds. ChemSoftware (www.chemsw.com ??)has several programs that will calculate LogP and pKa values. I don't know about the rotatable bonds or donor/acceptor numbers though. da From: David Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 23:02:39 +0100 David Allen wrote: > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point > where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with > advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but > there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same > mistake. As a vendor I've been thinking about this from a different angle. If it were us I would hope that we had discussed the problem before we were branded. However, as this is a discussion group I think it's valid to share information about automation experiences good or bad. Automation is one of those disciplines where failure is probable unless proper steps are taken to avoid it. Quite often the blame lies with the customer for failing to specify the task properly. I often find people are unable to specify the task because they are not familiar enough with what robots and automation can do. Buyers of robots are not sophisticated consumers compared to, say, buyers of motor cars who are quite familiar with the products; able to judge on space, speed, comfort etc etc. However with robots I find as many people have too high expectations as those who don't realize exactly how much a robot can do for them. Quite often people have expectations that they don't communicate to the supplier. I have had one or two experiences where, half way through an automation project the customer says for example "don't forget this plate sealer" -- never mentioned when the job was quoted. It's a problem of communication and a proper specification is vital. I believe it is encumbent upon any automation engineer worth his salt to educate the customer and draw up a specification for the system that is both do-able and as accurately as possible represents what the customer actually wants. Without that misunderstandings then disagreements are bound to happen. David Sands -- ________________________________________________________ David N. Sands, ST Robotics International Website: http://www.strobotics.com SOFTWARE: The difficult bit which still retains an aura of intangibility in spite of being 'engineered' and being sold as a 'product'. From: Jackbonham@SPAMFOIL.aol.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999 20:49:41 EDT Titertek Instruments manufactures the MAP-C which washes and dispenses to both 384 or 96 well plates through software control. Both dispense speed and aspirate rate are controllable. You can also control the position of the dispense and aspirate manifolds in relation to the plate to provide a gentler dispense/aspirate. Thanks, Jack Bonham Titertek Instruments 888-848-3783 (888-TITERTEK) From: "Sanjaya N. Joshi" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Software & purification (pKa, logP) Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 17:28:07 -0700 > > 1. Does anyone know of, or supply any software that calculates > > LogP and pKa > > (or pKb), and such values of numbers of rotatable bonds and number of > > hydrogen donors or acceptors for an sdfile of compounds. Try: http://www.acdlabs.com/products/phys_chem_lab/pka/ http://www.acdlabs.com/products/phys_chem_lab/logp/ This product set has been used extensively. Sanjay. > > ChemSoftware (www.chemsw.com ??)has several programs that will calculate > LogP and pKa values. I don't know about the rotatable bonds or > donor/acceptor numbers though. > > da > From: Christian R Strom Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 09:06:37 -0400 I have to agree with Steve Fillers. I do not necessarily see this as a forum for open general reviews for vendors. I see it as a place to answer specific questions about about automation needs. If you polled any group of people about any one vendor you are more than likely to get vastly differing opinions depending on the individual's particular success. I don't disagree with talking about failures, we can obviously learn more from those than successes at times. If a request was made for information concerning a project in which you had a bad experience with a particular vendor then maybe it should be answered vaguely with an offer of specifics if desired. Such as, "I attempted that with vendor X and it failed, contact me for specifics". That way you can give your opinion to everyone interested, which may be different than the vendors without making this site a political one. This is a very small community, if you have had problems that have frustrated you to the point of "wearing a sandwich board at Pitt Con", word will get around. Chris Steve Turner wrote: > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > I must vote with what seems like the majority here and support the > (tasteful, civil) discussions of experiences with vendors, both good and > bad. If the "hand that is feeding you" is feeding you poison, you better > damn well bite it! Shame on you if, in addition to your silence, you put > the poison up for sale in the swap shop! > > Any vendor afraid of negativity in this forum has ample opportunity to > respond, and if unable to keep up with the number of complaints probably > shouldn't be in business in the first place. I, myself, appeal to the > company directly FIRST, as do most people I'm sure. > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com [mailto:Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:44 AM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Digest -1999/07/14 - 1999/07/20 (12) > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > > David, > > I think that most users know how you feel. The goal of the LRIG is to > foster > the relations between users and vendors to promote the advancement of > automation. This will not be achieved by attacking vendors in an open > forum. > It is biting the hand that feeds you. > > It has been my observation that off-line discussions at LRIG meetings seem > to > gather momentum very rapidly if there is consensus. Feel free to respond to > any > discussion topic that requests information about your experience with the > vendors equipment. > > You can also put the equipment up for sale on the LRIG Swap Shop page! > Despite > the fact that you may never buy another piece of equipment from that vendor, > there are other users out there that love that stuff and are dying to get a > good > deal on it. If you are right, you will put yourself in a better competitive > position by selling it to them! Don't worry about your conscience. The > prospective buyers are bound to ask you why you are selling. Tell them. I > doubt that it will change their minds unless the equipment is defective. > Either > way you gain some satisfaction. > > Steve > > From: "David Allen" > Subject: appropriate topics? > Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 > > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point > where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with > advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but > there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same > mistake. > > da > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: CES1Tom@SPAMFOIL.aol.com Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:03:31 EDT Dr. Meyer, I can supply you with a 384 washer where the flow can be controlled. Please contact me at (301)596-1840 Tom Hill Cutting Edge Scientific From: "SMICKER, Matthew" Subject: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 10:37:14 -0400 David- I think you are dead on with your comments. With certain technical areas like automation the vendor is pretty much also a consultant. Most problems seem to be related to the customer and dealer not communicating. There seems to be a very similar problem in large software projects...no communication. Since the vendor is getting paid it should be his/her responsibility to educate (as I think you mentioned). The only other common problem I have seen with automation vendors is not meeting delivery dates. I guess this lies in the need to be "ahead" of the competition, but I think it is a terrible practice. Matt Smicker HTS RPR Hello Everyone, I am looking for a C++ programmer (preferably a consultant in the New England area) with some laboratory automation experience. This individual would be working for a couple of months (possibly more) with a team of people to aid in the development of an exciting automation application. Feel free to contact me at the number below. Greg Paneitz SymbioSystems Inc. Phone 206.465.0048 Fax: 707.276.2579 www.symbiosystems.com [] Greg Paneitz6.vcf From: Petersen James Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:54:24 -0400 Greetings, I've been listening really closely to the entire stream of thought following this question of "airing laundry" to the general public. This is a very difficult and sensitive thing to do because of the delicacy of unfolding a story line. These sort of things are akin to taking a dance partner and getting to know one enough well enough to pull off an automation project. Basically, we are all trying to leverage outside and inside automation or engineering expertise to meet a dead line. A major component of this dance is obviously picking the correct dancing partners. Next, is the becoming familiar with one another as dancing partners. And finally hitting the dance floor and enjoying the rewards of the collaborative effort. Often in the process of striking these kinds of allainces there are tremendous opportuinites for difficulties. And each time these have to be seriously addressed and resolved. That is what makes collaborations so difficult and hard to nuture. The general spirit of these open discussions are to provide us all with the very best of insight into challenges that we are all facing. Therefore to be successful to this end all discussion need to be honest, factual, and evenly spirited. In the long run we all know each other and are in communication with one another on a regular basis. So if there are situations where groups are difficult to work with you'd better believe we'll all know about it soon fast enough via the grape vine and envolved parties will be known. Hence, it is in the best interests of us all to feel obligated to talk freely, honestly, and diplomatically concerning the various experiences that we all are encountering. Jim -----Original Message----- From: SMICKER, Matthew [mailto:Matthew.Smicker@SPAMFOIL.rp-rorer.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 10:37 AM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- David- I think you are dead on with your comments. With certain technical areas like automation the vendor is pretty much also a consultant. Most problems seem to be related to the customer and dealer not communicating. There seems to be a very similar problem in large software projects...no communication. Since the vendor is getting paid it should be his/her responsibility to educate (as I think you mentioned). The only other common problem I have seen with automation vendors is not meeting delivery dates. I guess this lies in the need to be "ahead" of the competition, but I think it is a terrible practice. Matt Smicker HTS RPR --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Kerry Armour Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 14:42:47 -0400 I think that Mr. Petersen's are the definitive words on the subject. He is quite correct in saying, that while it is valuable to share experiences both good and bad with your colleagues, it is also true that no one side of any issue is wholly at fault. If you have something to share, be it positive or negative, share it. Communication and product needs assessment is the most valuable commodity that an end user brings to the product development equasion. As vendors we value the learning we get from hearing that a product meets or doesn't meet your expectations. But we gain even more from a clear understanding of what your expectations were in the first place. If your product needs are understood at the start, then we avoid problems downstream. Kerry Armour Zymark Corp. -----Original Message----- From: Petersen James [mailto:jpetersen@SPAMFOIL.orchidbio.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 1:54 PM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Greetings, I've been listening really closely to the entire stream of thought following this question of "airing laundry" to the general public. This is a very difficult and sensitive thing to do because of the delicacy of unfolding a story line. These sort of things are akin to taking a dance partner and getting to know one enough well enough to pull off an automation project. Basically, we are all trying to leverage outside and inside automation or engineering expertise to meet a dead line. A major component of this dance is obviously picking the correct dancing partners. Next, is the becoming familiar with one another as dancing partners. And finally hitting the dance floor and enjoying the rewards of the collaborative effort. Often in the process of striking these kinds of allainces there are tremendous opportuinites for difficulties. And each time these have to be seriously addressed and resolved. That is what makes collaborations so difficult and hard to nuture. The general spirit of these open discussions are to provide us all with the very best of insight into challenges that we are all facing. Therefore to be successful to this end all discussion need to be honest, factual, and evenly spirited. In the long run we all know each other and are in communication with one another on a regular basis. So if there are situations where groups are difficult to work with you'd better believe we'll all know about it soon fast enough via the grape vine and envolved parties will be known. Hence, it is in the best interests of us all to feel obligated to talk freely, honestly, and diplomatically concerning the various experiences that we all are encountering. Jim -----Original Message----- From: SMICKER, Matthew [mailto:Matthew.Smicker@SPAMFOIL.rp-rorer.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 10:37 AM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- David- I think you are dead on with your comments. With certain technical areas like automation the vendor is pretty much also a consultant. Most problems seem to be related to the customer and dealer not communicating. There seems to be a very similar problem in large software projects...no communication. Since the vendor is getting paid it should be his/her responsibility to educate (as I think you mentioned). The only other common problem I have seen with automation vendors is not meeting delivery dates. I guess this lies in the need to be "ahead" of the competition, but I think it is a terrible practice. Matt Smicker HTS RPR --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Steve Turner Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 13:33:10 -0700 The only things I disagree with, from the messages posted so far, is the implication that customers are at the mercy of vendors, so we'd better be "nice". That was the feeling I got from Mr. Fillers (correct me if I'm wrong...that's how it read to me). I also find it troubling to see it suggested that, rather than airing your concerns, you should try to deceive your peers by putting defective or useless equipment up for swap. Sure, if I buy a piece of equipment that doesn't fit my needs I have only myself to blame. I do not deny that, but if this forum gets used by some as a method of gaining a competetive advantage by pushing bad equipment towards others (or worse yet, by spreading misinformation or misleading information), we should all unsubscribe. -----Original Message----- From: Christian R Strom [mailto:christian.strom@SPAMFOIL.bms.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 6:07 AM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- I have to agree with Steve Fillers. I do not necessarily see this as a forum for open general reviews for vendors. I see it as a place to answer specific questions about about automation needs. If you polled any group of people about any one vendor you are more than likely to get vastly differing opinions depending on the individual's particular success. I don't disagree with talking about failures, we can obviously learn more from those than successes at times. If a request was made for information concerning a project in which you had a bad experience with a particular vendor then maybe it should be answered vaguely with an offer of specifics if desired. Such as, "I attempted that with vendor X and it failed, contact me for specifics". That way you can give your opinion to everyone interested, which may be different than the vendors without making this site a political one. This is a very small community, if you have had problems that have frustrated you to the point of "wearing a sandwich board at Pitt Con", word will get around. Chris Steve Turner wrote: > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > I must vote with what seems like the majority here and support the > (tasteful, civil) discussions of experiences with vendors, both good and > bad. If the "hand that is feeding you" is feeding you poison, you better > damn well bite it! Shame on you if, in addition to your silence, you put > the poison up for sale in the swap shop! > > Any vendor afraid of negativity in this forum has ample opportunity to > respond, and if unable to keep up with the number of complaints probably > shouldn't be in business in the first place. I, myself, appeal to the > company directly FIRST, as do most people I'm sure. > > Steve > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com [mailto:Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:44 AM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Digest -1999/07/14 - 1999/07/20 (12) > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > > David, > > I think that most users know how you feel. The goal of the LRIG is to > foster > the relations between users and vendors to promote the advancement of > automation. This will not be achieved by attacking vendors in an open > forum. > It is biting the hand that feeds you. > > It has been my observation that off-line discussions at LRIG meetings seem > to > gather momentum very rapidly if there is consensus. Feel free to respond to > any > discussion topic that requests information about your experience with the > vendors equipment. > > You can also put the equipment up for sale on the LRIG Swap Shop page! > Despite > the fact that you may never buy another piece of equipment from that vendor, > there are other users out there that love that stuff and are dying to get a > good > deal on it. If you are right, you will put yourself in a better competitive > position by selling it to them! Don't worry about your conscience. The > prospective buyers are bound to ask you why you are selling. Tell them. I > doubt that it will change their minds unless the equipment is defective. > Either > way you gain some satisfaction. > > Steve > > From: "David Allen" > Subject: appropriate topics? > Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 > > is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation > companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point > where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with > advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but > there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same > mistake. > > da > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To review archived messages from this list, send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just RESEND-xx (xx is a number) as the subject. You will get a single digest message for the last xx days of messages. From: Martha Bowden Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 14:07:07 -0700 Skatron has a 384 cell washer where the speed of dispensing can be adjusted so as not to disrupt the cells. The model is the Embla 384 Cell Washer which also uses angled probes to dispense to the side of the well, reducing any disruption even further. Skatron was recently purchased by Molecular Devices. Contact Molecular Devices for more information on this product (1-800-635-5577). Martha Bowden Molecular Devices -----Original Message----- From: David Meyer [SMTP:dmeyer@SPAMFOIL.mpi.com] Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 2:23 PM To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Does anyone know of a 384 plate washer where the speed of dispensing can be controlled. ________________________________________ David F. Meyer, Ph.D. Scientist Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. 270 Albany St. Cambridge, MA 02139 Tel: (617) 679 7475 Fax: (617) 551 7972 email: dmeyer@SPAMFOIL.mpi.com www.mlnm.com _______________________________________ --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Laboratory Robotics Interest Group Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: C++ Programmer in New England Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 17:47:02 -0400 How much interest is there for a separate mailing list devoted to job and CV postings dedicated to laboratory automation? This list would be similar to the Swap Shop list which is dedicated to the sale of used automation equipment. Please reply directly to my email so we don't use up bandwidth here. Andy Zaayenga Moderator, The Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List mailto:andy.zaayenga@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org web site: https://www.lab-robotics.org At 08:31 AM 7/26/99 -0700, Greg Paneitz wrote to Andy: > > Hello Everyone, > > I am looking for a C++ programmer (preferably a consultant in the New England > area) with some laboratory automation experience. This individual would be > working for a couple of months (possibly more) with a team of people to aid > in the development of an exciting automation application. Feel free to > contact me at the number below. > > Greg Paneitz > SymbioSystems Inc. > Phone 206.465.0048 > Fax: 707.276.2579 > www.symbiosystems.com From: "Charlie d'Estries" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 18:21:59 -0700 Let's stop beating around the bush by trying not to hurt each other's feelings! Vendors are in this game to sell product, increase the value of their company, and turn a profit. Period. That means they have to try to keep the customer happy. Scientists in this forum are employed by commercial entities with goals to crank out information on how to make the next blockbuster drug (.....to sell product, increase the value of their company, and turn a profit). The stuff they buy from vendors had better work and it has to work yesterday. If a vendor doesn't do the job, and the customer isn't happy, guess what, the customer is going to tell a bunch of people about it anyway! In the past we didn't have a forum as easy to use as this. To tell 20 people we weren't happy meant we had to make twenty telephone calls, so the customer had to really be pissed! (I'm old enough to remember dialing the number from a customer's lab!) In my 20+ years of selling to the scientific instrument market, vendors have and will always get whacked on the head because you can't please all of the people all of the time! Vendors make mistakes, but for the most part take care of the customer. If a scientist feels so violated that there is nothing else they can do but advertise their displeasure, then so be it! The vendor will hopefully attempt to make it right...if it's worth it (most of the time it is)! At the same time, there are more than a few salespeople out there who oversell and promise when they can't deliver, setting up the problems you are all discussing. I don't blame the customer out there who wants to get their project on schedule, but like I teach salespeople and executives, use common sense, be polite, and do the right thing. Customers can use the clout they have without getting nasty, but you need to know you have more clout than you think! Both vendors and customers are under tremendous pressure to perform today. By the time a vendor's instrument is introduced, they already need something ready to hatch 6-12 months later. In the meantime they've got to sell, sell, sell. Scientists are being pushed like crazy with fewer hands and more dependence on automation to crank the numbers. There is very little time for hand holding from either side! That's why cooperation is essential. So if you have to vent, vent! The vendor will probably survive, and you'll feel better. But I seriously doubt the situation should ever get that far. Enjoy your day, Charlie d'Estries SciBiz International 716-662-4121 PS.... once upon a time when there was a problem to resolve, an old fashioned thing that worked great in the past and really got a sales manager's or CEO's attention was something called a 'letter'. -----Original Message----- From: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org [mailto:discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org]On Behalf Of Petersen James Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 10:54 AM To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Greetings, I've been listening really closely to the entire stream of thought following this question of "airing laundry" to the general public. This is a very difficult and sensitive thing to do because of the delicacy of unfolding a story line. These sort of things are akin to taking a dance partner and getting to know one enough well enough to pull off an automation project. Basically, we are all trying to leverage outside and inside automation or engineering expertise to meet a dead line. A major component of this dance is obviously picking the correct dancing partners. Next, is the becoming familiar with one another as dancing partners. And finally hitting the dance floor and enjoying the rewards of the collaborative effort. Often in the process of striking these kinds of allainces there are tremendous opportuinites for difficulties. And each time these have to be seriously addressed and resolved. That is what makes collaborations so difficult and hard to nuture. The general spirit of these open discussions are to provide us all with the very best of insight into challenges that we are all facing. Therefore to be successful to this end all discussion need to be honest, factual, and evenly spirited. In the long run we all know each other and are in communication with one another on a regular basis. So if there are situations where groups are difficult to work with you'd better believe we'll all know about it soon fast enough via the grape vine and envolved parties will be known. Hence, it is in the best interests of us all to feel obligated to talk freely, honestly, and diplomatically concerning the various experiences that we all are encountering. Jim -----Original Message----- From: SMICKER, Matthew [mailto:Matthew.Smicker@SPAMFOIL.rp-rorer.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 10:37 AM To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- David- I think you are dead on with your comments. With certain technical areas like automation the vendor is pretty much also a consultant. Most problems seem to be related to the customer and dealer not communicating. There seems to be a very similar problem in large software projects...no communication. Since the vendor is getting paid it should be his/her responsibility to educate (as I think you mentioned). The only other common problem I have seen with automation vendors is not meeting delivery dates. I guess this lies in the need to be "ahead" of the competition, but I think it is a terrible practice. Matt Smicker HTS RPR --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Julie Monagle Subject: 384 FLIPR Date: 26 Jul 99 18:40:04 -0500 I would be interested in hearing non vendor comments on experience with the 384 well version of the FLIPR and the automated form of the FLIPR. Pros and Cons please. Some questions: Did you start with a 96 or 384 well version? Was it easy to transition to 384 from 96? What % of your assays do you run in 384? Has the automation been friendly? Were things delivered on schedule? Any other comments? Thanks in advance for your help. Julie Monagle From: Biotecinfo@SPAMFOIL.aol.com Subject: Questions on variability and consistancy in cell-based assays Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 19:19:38 EDT We are hoping that this forum can provide some insight as to the value of a current project. Our group is working on an incubator design for a client with the intent of reducing the variability of cell-based assays and increasing consistency between assay plates (e.g., microtiter plates). One of our responsibilities is to explore the commercialization of this product. Our current prototype serves as a stand alone incubator, but based on the response from scientists using automation, we may attempt to modify the unit for the automation market. Our aim was to 1) eliminate the edge effect in microwell plates, 2) decrease the CVs of cell-based assays using the incubator, and 3) increase the consistency between microwell plates (i.e., improve the results of analysis of variances). We have tried several assays to standardize our tests and have settled on the MTS assay as it is simple and reliable. >From our work we have met our goals by eliminating evaporation in outer wells of a plate and reducing CVs significantly (from 20 to 50%). This is reproducible and works on assays where cells are seeded at low densities and incubated for up to five days. We are still working on building consistency, but we believe this is improving as well. My question is relatively simple. Are variability and consistency significant issues in automated cell-based assays? If yes, does the world need a device which will help to minimize environmental parameters so that assays are under better control? Thanks for your input in advance. Dave Burden BT&C, Inc. From: Peter Niggemann Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 22:00:23 -0400 Steve, I think Steve Fillers is suggesting that David take a more professional approach to his dealings with a particular vendor then slamming him in a public forum. The fact is that a public slamming of a vendor may possibly backfire on the one doing the slamming. Other people are likely to have had success stories of their experiences with the particular vendor which would lead one to wonder if the particular problem were more of Dave's making than the vendors. Also if you are seen as a person who is quick to slam a vendor you are not likely to get a whole lot of cooperation on projects that you may wish to have a vendor extend his own resources on. You will get only product that they are completely confident in (legacy products) and will not get the advantage you need to keep pace with your competition. This would be a CLM (career limiting move) for anyone interested in making a career out of robotics. A more tactful approach for David would have been an open ended question about other peoples experience with a possible problem with the vendors equipment or services. This gives the vendor and opportunity to rectify the problems and gives David and us other users on the list a consensus view of a given vendors deficiencies. As for selling used equipment that may not be appropriate to the task David envisioned for it, I believe this comes from the experience of making robotic systems work that had been cast off as dead and unusable. It happens all the time. Selling the equipment would be a way for David to profit from it. If he sits on the equipment and gets no benefit he loses. If someone else grabs ahold of the system and makes it work he loses big. Take Care. At 04:33 PM 7/26/99 , Steve Turner wrote: >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >The only things I disagree with, from the messages posted so far, is the >implication that customers are at the mercy of vendors, so we'd better be >"nice". That was the feeling I got from Mr. Fillers (correct me if I'm >wrong...that's how it read to me). I also find it troubling to see it >suggested that, rather than airing your concerns, you should try to deceive >your peers by putting defective or useless equipment up for swap. Sure, if >I buy a piece of equipment that doesn't fit my needs I have only myself to >blame. I do not deny that, but if this forum gets used by some as a method >of gaining a competetive advantage by pushing bad equipment towards others >(or worse yet, by spreading misinformation or misleading information), we >should all unsubscribe. > >-----Original Message----- >From: Christian R Strom [mailto:christian.strom@SPAMFOIL.bms.com] >Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 6:07 AM >To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org >Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? > > >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >I have to agree with Steve Fillers. I do not necessarily see this as a >forum >for open general reviews for vendors. I see it as a place to answer >specific >questions about about automation needs. If you polled any group of people >about >any one vendor you are more than likely to get vastly differing opinions >depending on the individual's particular success. I don't disagree with >talking >about failures, we can obviously learn more from those than successes at >times. >If a request was made for information concerning a project in which you had >a >bad experience with a particular vendor then maybe it should be answered >vaguely >with an offer of specifics if desired. Such as, "I attempted that with >vendor X >and it failed, contact me for specifics". That way you can give your >opinion to >everyone interested, which may be different than the vendors without making >this >site a political one. This is a very small community, if you have had >problems >that have frustrated you to the point of "wearing a sandwich board at Pitt >Con", >word will get around. >Chris > >Steve Turner wrote: > >> --------------------- >> Lab-Robotics Discussion >> --------------------- >> I must vote with what seems like the majority here and support the >> (tasteful, civil) discussions of experiences with vendors, both good and >> bad. If the "hand that is feeding you" is feeding you poison, you better >> damn well bite it! Shame on you if, in addition to your silence, you put >> the poison up for sale in the swap shop! >> >> Any vendor afraid of negativity in this forum has ample opportunity to >> respond, and if unable to keep up with the number of complaints probably >> shouldn't be in business in the first place. I, myself, appeal to the >> company directly FIRST, as do most people I'm sure. >> >> Steve >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com [mailto:Steve_Fillers@SPAMFOIL.biogen.com] >> Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:44 AM >> To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org >> Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Digest -1999/07/14 - 1999/07/20 (12) >> >> --------------------- >> Lab-Robotics Discussion >> --------------------- >> >> David, >> >> I think that most users know how you feel. The goal of the LRIG is to >> foster >> the relations between users and vendors to promote the advancement of >> automation. This will not be achieved by attacking vendors in an open >> forum. >> It is biting the hand that feeds you. >> >> It has been my observation that off-line discussions at LRIG meetings >seem >> to >> gather momentum very rapidly if there is consensus. Feel free to respond >to >> any >> discussion topic that requests information about your experience with the >> vendors equipment. >> >> You can also put the equipment up for sale on the LRIG Swap Shop page! >> Despite >> the fact that you may never buy another piece of equipment from that >vendor, >> there are other users out there that love that stuff and are dying to get >a >> good >> deal on it. If you are right, you will put yourself in a better >competitive >> position by selling it to them! Don't worry about your conscience. The >> prospective buyers are bound to ask you why you are selling. Tell them. >I >> doubt that it will change their minds unless the equipment is defective. >> Either >> way you gain some satisfaction. >> >> Steve >> >> From: "David Allen" >> Subject: appropriate topics? >> Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999 22:14:33 -0400 >> >> is this group open to the reporting of problems with automation >> companies? we're having a problem with a vendor and I'm at the point >> where I'll be wearing a sandwich board sign at the next PittCon with >> advertising against them. I don't want to get into company bashing but >> there needs to be a place for bad reviews so others won't make the same >> mistake. >> >> da >> >> --- Lab-Robotics Discussion >> To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to >> discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. >> >> --- Lab-Robotics Discussion >> To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to >> discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To review archived messages from this list, send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just RESEND-xx (xx is a number) as the >subject. You will get a single digest message for the last xx days of >messages. > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To review archived messages from this list, send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just RESEND-xx (xx is a number) as the >subject. You will get a single digest message for the last xx days of >messages. > > From: Peter Niggemann Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: appropriate topics? Date: Mon, 26 Jul 1999 22:08:45 -0400 At 09:21 PM 7/26/99 , Charlie d'Estries wrote: >PS.... once upon a time when there was a problem to resolve, an old >fashioned thing that worked great in the past and really got a sales >manager's or CEO's attention was something called a 'letter'. > That weapon still works wonders. From: "BODE, Donald C." Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Questions on variability and consistancy in cell-based assays Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 09:48:55 -0400 Dave: Of course variability and consistency are important issues with cell-based assays, as with any assay. For us, minimizing intraplate variability is more important than interplate variability because we include standards and controls on every plate. In this regard, edge effects (which we often see and are very difficult to eliminate) and other types of well-to-well bias are major headaches. We don't care as much about differences in absolute signal strength or magnitude of response from one plate to the next, but we do care that each plate meets our predetermined QC criteria (e.g., S/N>10 or EC50 between 0.5 and 1.5 micromolar for a standard). If the incubator can eliminate plates that have to be repeated, it would be a big help. Then we would have to consider what that is worth (i.e., price). Chris Bode > ---------- > From: Biotecinfo@SPAMFOIL.aol.com[SMTP:Biotecinfo@SPAMFOIL.aol.com] > Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 7:19 PM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Questions on variability and > consistancy in cell-based assays > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > We are hoping that this forum can provide some insight as to the value of > a > current project. > > Our group is working on an incubator design for a client with the intent > of > reducing the variability of cell-based assays and increasing consistency > between assay plates (e.g., microtiter plates). One of our > responsibilities > is to explore the commercialization of this product. Our current > prototype > serves as a stand alone incubator, but based on the response from > scientists > using automation, we may attempt to modify the unit for the automation > market. > > Our aim was to 1) eliminate the edge effect in microwell plates, 2) > decrease > the CVs of cell-based assays using the incubator, and 3) increase the > consistency between microwell plates (i.e., improve the results of > analysis > of variances). We have tried several assays to standardize our tests and > have settled on the MTS assay as it is simple and reliable. > > From our work we have met our goals by eliminating evaporation in outer > wells > of a plate and reducing CVs significantly (from 20 to 50%). This is > reproducible and works on assays where cells are seeded at low densities > and > incubated for up to five days. We are still working on building > consistency, > but we believe this is improving as well. > > My question is relatively simple. Are variability and consistency > significant issues in automated cell-based assays? If yes, does the world > > need a device which will help to minimize environmental parameters so that > > assays are under better control? > > Thanks for your input in advance. > > Dave Burden > BT&C, Inc. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > From: "Sanghvi, Purvi" Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Baker's Scientific Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 08:22:45 -0700 Hello everyone, I am interested in the laminar hoods which can accommodate Beckman's Biomek 2000. I would also like to get the information about Baker's Scientific. Thanks in advance! From: "Susan T Ballard" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Baker's Scientific Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 14:11:07 -0800 Purvi, Hi. The Baker Company manufactures a hood specifically to house the Biomek 2000. It is a Class II - Type A Biological Safety Cabinet. The Baker Company is located in Maine. Telephone number 800-992-2537. Hope this helps! Susan Ballard BeckmanCoulter Automated Solutions Consultant SouthEast "Sanghvi, Purvi" on 07/27/99 07:22:45 AM Please respond to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List) cc: (bcc: Susan T Ballard/SALES/BII) Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Baker's Scientific --------------------- Lab-Robotics Discussion --------------------- Hello everyone, I am interested in the laminar hoods which can accommodate Beckman's Biomek 2000. I would also like to get the information about Baker's Scientific. Thanks in advance! --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. hi everyone, Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit that size plate. [] gaylea1.vcf From: "Tom Glenn" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 23:56:26 -0400 Check out Denville Scientific. They have a shakers and shaker/incubators for standard and deep well plates. They are in NJ. 800 453-0385. From: "Ashton, Mark" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Baker's Scientific Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:35:14 +0100 -Hello everyone, I am interested in the laminar hoods which can accommodate Beckman's Biomek 2000. I would also like to get the information about Baker's Scientific. Thanks in advance! ---- We have successfully housed our Biomek 2000 in a hood built by Bigneat. The hood has 2 doors on the front that allow comfortable and safe access to all parts of the Biomek and provides a safe enclosed area. Mark --- Lab-Robotics Discussion To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: Christian R Strom Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:00:34 -0400 Alicia, I believe a company called HyperTask has a shaker that may meet your needs. I have dealt with HyperTask myself and found it to be a great experience. They have a web site with contact information the address is: http://HyperTask.com Hope this helps, Chris Alicia Gayle wrote: > hi everyone, > Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well > plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would > like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. > I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in > height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit > that size plate. From: Richard A Dalterio Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 08:50:44 -0400 Just some additional info on that particular Glas-Col 99ALC1012 plate shaker: The top of the unit which clamps down to hold the plate in place is actually fastened to the base of the shaker; so it does not move with the shaking stage. What happens then is that the moving plate rubs against the stationary top and the friction of that contact abrades the plate cover. So we're not happy with that design. Rich Dalterio BMS, Wallingford CT Alicia Gayle wrote: > hi everyone, > Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well > plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would > like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. > I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in > height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit > that size plate. We offer such a mixer. It will be on display at Drug Discovery Technology '99 in Boston at the booth of Zinsser Analytic or Spike International. Regards, Fred Fred Spike, President Spike International, Ltd PO Box 15410 Wilmington, NC 28408 USA Fred@SPAMFOIL.spike.cc www.spike.cc Phone: (800) 734-9408 Toll-free Fax: (877) 561-6015 >From outside the US: Phone: (910) 790-3380 Fax: (910) 790-2023 Reply-To: From: "Alicia Gayle" Sender: To: "Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List" Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999 17:39:20 -0400 Organization: Bristol-Myers Squibb Message-ID: <199907272252.RAA04644@SPAMFOIL.dfw-ix15.ix.netcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0003_01BED8D7.9E39A9E0" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Importance: Normal X-Accept-Language: en hi everyone, Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit that size plate. [] gaylea2.vcf From: "Rodney Stockton - SLR Systems" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 11:11:00 -0700 Alicia, SLR Systems modifies commercial shakers with a custom "head" to fit a client's requirements. For example, we are currently modifying a shaker to hold 12 deep well plates in place as well as be robot accessible. Rodney Stockton SLR Systems 2600D N.E. Stapleton Road Vancouver, WA 98661 (360) 693-3312 (360) 693-3323 fax (360) 281-7977 (cell) rodney@SPAMFOIL.slrsystems.com www.slrsystems.com ----- Original Message ----- From: Alicia Gayle To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 2:39 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker > hi everyone, > Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well > plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would > like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. > I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in > height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit > that size plate. > From: "Gan, Qing-Fen {HIGH~Palo Alto}" Subject: 96/384 well plate washer Date: Wed, 28 Jul 1999 14:20:00 -0700 Hi Everyone, I am planning to buy a good quality 96/384 well plate washer. Any information is appreciated. Qing-Fen Gan Ph.D. Roche Bioscience 3401 Hillview ave. S3-1 Palo Alto, CA 94304 650-354-2479 (o) From: "Ashton, Mark" Subject: Parallel purification Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 08:43:40 +0100 Dear All - We are currently seeking equipment for the parallel purification of large libraries of 5-50mgs. Does anyone have any information? I would appreciate any experiences/advice. Does anyone have any experience of the Biotage Parallex system? Many thanks Mark ------------------------------------------- Dr. Mark R. Ashton Department Manager Oxford Asymmetry International 111 Milton Park Abingdon, Oxon OX14 UK Tel: ++ 44 (0)1235 441236/441200 Fax: ++ 44 (0)1235 441509 E-mail: mashton@SPAMFOIL.oai.co.uk internet: http://www.oai.co.uk/ From: Chad Jenkins Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 06:04:50 -0700 Alicia, E&K Scientific has just released a new piercable silicone mat lid for repeated injection. The mat lid was originally designed for capillary electrophoresis and would also be useful for HPLC. Please contact me for samples and info. Chad Jenkins E&K Scientific Products, Inc. (800) 934-8114 cjenkins@SPAMFOIL.eandk.com Alicia Gayle wrote: > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > hi everyone, > > does anyone know of 96-well plate covers that have septums ( or > slits) that could be used for HPLC to reduce evaporation. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: "Fletcher, Paul" Subject: Database Consultant Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 09:41:42 -0400 Hi Everyone, I am looking for help in finding a person who could serve as a database consultant. At DGI we use a database called ActivityBase to manage data generated from high-throughput screening. ActivityBase is provided by a company called ID Business Solutions, Inc.( http://www.idbs.co.uk/ ) . The software is Oracle based so we need someone familiar with Oracle, Visual Basic, and Excel. If you know of anyone who may be able to help us I would appreciate any information. Regards, Paul @SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL.@SPAMFOIL. Paul W. Fletcher, Ph.D. DGI BioTechnologies 40 Talmadge Road Edison, NJ 08818 Phone: 732-287-2034, ext. 2725 Fax: 732-287-1486 E-mail: pwfletcher@SPAMFOIL.dgibt.com Web: http://www.dgibt.com From: "OBPW" Subject: Re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999 18:09:16 -0400 Dear David Meyer, 96 & 384 well plate washers with controllable dispense speed are available from Oyster Bay Pump Works,Inc. Oyster Bay Pump Works 78 Midland Avenue, PO Box 725 Hicksville, NY 11802-0725 516-933-4500 (tel) 516-933-4501 (fax) prodinfo@SPAMFOIL.obpw.com www.obpw.com Contact: Patrick Gaillard -----Original Message----- From: David Meyer To: Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List Date: Friday, July 23, 1999 4:57 PM Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 384 plate washer >--------------------- >Lab-Robotics Discussion >--------------------- >Does anyone know of a 384 plate washer where the speed of dispensing >can be controlled. >________________________________________ > >David F. Meyer, Ph.D. >Scientist >Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. >270 Albany St. >Cambridge, MA 02139 > >Tel: (617) 679 7475 >Fax: (617) 551 7972 >email: dmeyer@SPAMFOIL.mpi.com >www.mlnm.com > >_______________________________________ > >--- Lab-Robotics Discussion >To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to >discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. From: "Zocher, Frank, AVENTIS/DE" Subject: microtiter plate able to lyse cells Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 09:45:06 +0200 Hi Everyone, I am looking for a microtiter plate which is able to lyse cells, like E. coli, by filtration through a porous membrane using a vacuum manifold. The cells would be lysed by the difference in the pressure in the membrane and by mechanic interactions with the small pores. Millipore annouced such a plate one year ago on the SBS in Baltimore, but it is still not on the market. The proteins should then be in the flow through. Does anybody know anyone who may be able to help us I would appreciate any information. Regards, Frank Frank Zocher Aventis Research & Technologies GmbH & Co KG (former/frer Hoechst Research & Technology Deutschland) Operative Research - Synthetische Methoden ?Industriepark H鐼hst ?Geb酳de G 830 D-65926 Frankfurt am Main Telefon ++49.+69.305.23121 ?Telefax:++49.+69.305.81535 Mobil 0171.8307128 E-mail: zocher@SPAMFOIL.aventis.com ?Internet: http://www.aventis.com From: "Wetzel" Subject: Robbins filtration Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 12:42:28 +0000 Does anyone know where I can buy a vacuum filtration apparatus that allows collection of the post-cleavage filtrate from Robbins 48-well or 96-well solid-phase reaction blocks into 16 x100 mm glass test tubes? The devices that Robbins sells are designed for collection into plates, not test tubes. If no company sells a stock item for this purpose, I would like to know who can design and fabricate such a device for me. John M. Wetzel, Ph.D. Group Leader Chemistry Synaptic Pharmaceutical Corporation From: "Sheldon, Adrian" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 11:54:07 -0400 I have dealt with HyperTask (Justin Webster) on several ocassions, and have been very pleased with his work. He does great engineering, but also truly understands the detailed needs of an HTS scientist. Adrian Sheldon, ArQule HTS > ---------- > From: Christian R Strom[SMTP:christian.strom@SPAMFOIL.bms.com] > Reply To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 8:00 AM > To: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org > Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker > > --------------------- > Lab-Robotics Discussion > --------------------- > Alicia, > > I believe a company called HyperTask has a shaker that may meet your > needs. I have dealt with HyperTask myself and found it to be a > great experience. They have a web site with contact information the > address is: > http://HyperTask.com > > Hope this helps, > Chris > > Alicia Gayle wrote: > > > hi everyone, > > Does anybody know of a shaker/ rotating device for 96-well > > plate. I am currently using glas-col 99ALC1012 shaker and would > > like to find a modified version or an alternate to this shaker. > > I use the deep well plates that are approximately 4.5cm in > > height so I would need a shaker/ rotator customized to fit > > that size plate. > > --- Lab-Robotics Discussion > To be removed from this list, please send an e-mail message to > discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org with just UNSUBSCRIBE as the subject. > From: "David Allen" Subject: RE: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 09:44:26 -0400 I second the recommendation. I've worked with Justin for many years, he's always provided competent and useful advice. da > I have dealt with HyperTask (Justin Webster) on several > ocassions, and have > been very pleased with his work. He does great engineering, > but also truly > understands the detailed needs of an HTS scientist. > > Adrian Sheldon, ArQule HTS > From: discussion@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org (Lab-Robotics Discussion) Subject: Lab-Robotics Discussion: Posting Etiquette Date: Sun, 01 Aug 1999 22:46:33 -0500 Just a word to our vendor members of Lab-Robotics Discussion: Our vision here at LRIG for this mailing list is that it will become a dynamic forum for users and vendors to freely exchange ideas and solve problems regarding laboratory automation. We want to be sure that the demeanor of the mailing list reflects the desires of the subscribers. The majority of the subscribers have indicated that they do not want to receive unsolicited sales or promotional messages in this forum. To this end, we request that when a subscriber asks a question about specific equipment or functionality, your reply remain in the same vein of specificity and not merely become an opportunity to advertise your company. If someone asks about a certain functionality, please do not reply with a "we can do anything, call me". In this case you could reply with examples of work you have done. If someone brings up an issue with a manufacturer's equipment, please don't reply with "well mine is better because...". Use your judgement on the appropriateness of your response. We do not want to get into the censorship business. If you have new product related information to disseminate, it may be posted on our Announcement Board at: https://www.lab-robotics.org/announce.htm Links to your company showing your products and services may be displayed at: https://www.lab-robotics.org/vendors1.htm This is a periodic message and not targeted at any particular posts. Andy Zaayenga Moderator, The Lab-Robotics Discussion Mailing List mailto:andy.zaayenga@SPAMFOIL.lab-robotics.org web site: https://www.lab-robotics.org From: Patrick Cleveland Subject: re: Lab-Robotics Discussion: 96-well plate shaker Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1999 10:40:14 -0700 Alica, V&P Scientific makes two magnetic devices that stir the contents of deep well microplates. One tumbles a magnetic stirrer in the bottom of the wells at 500 RPM http://www.vp-scientific.com/stirrerphot&descrip.htm and the other Levitates magnetic balls up and down in the wells http:/www.vp-scientific.com/magneticlevitation.htm Patrick Patrick Cleveland, Ph.D. President V&P Scientific, Inc. 9853 Pacific Heights Blvd., Suite N San Diego, CA 92121 Phone (619) 455-0643, toll free (800) 455-0644 FAX (619) 455-0703 e-mail Check out our catalog and web site at http://www.vp-scientific.com/