Dear Bernard,
I do not have long experience using Phoenix. I tried the machine during a couple of demonstrations I had chance to participate and also learned about other people experience who used the robot (various MPIs and universities in Germany and a couple of users from industry in Europe), I hope they can comment further.
The crash of Phoenix needles that dissolved a myth on non-breakable Phoenix needles we witnessed during Art Robbins instruments presentation in PSDI meeting, 28th - 30th October 2007 Autrans, France. The needles were bended by rep during demonstration in the first day of the conference so that the robot head was moving without needles for the rest of the conference, it was funny.
For the maintenance, all labs I know those using Phoenix have someone looking after the machine. In some lab setups the situation exaggerated even further: lab members do not have direct access to the delicate machine and all the crystallization by Phoenix is carried out by person who is trained as the User and dedicated to. As being quite experienced user of Cartesian nano dispenser (1 year), I can understand the problems of cleanness for the robots with not dispensable and therefore requiring washing steps needles/tips. As I know, the situation is significantly improved in Innovadyne screenmaker, for those who prefer flexibilities of 96 channel system over speed, simplicity, no cross contamination, accuracy of pipetting high PEGs Mosquito system (4 years experience).
The electrostatic effect I mentioned was observed on the plates performed by Phoenix, while setting the same plates (Greiner triple, Corning 3550) by Mosquito did not cause similar problems (same drops volumes, same screening solutions), I hope colleagues may detail further. I would also suggest experienced Phoenix users to let us know what drops volume is routinely set in their labs.
Bernhard Rupp 100+100 nl
Others ???
Others..
All the best,
Alexey.
-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Bernhard Rupp
Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2008 1:53 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] crystallisation robot
Dear Alexey,
being involved in the development of the 'fixed needles + a few'
robots and 96-well plates early on, I wonder about your bad experiences.
You seem to say that the Phoenix requires more maintenance than the Mosquito - how long have you had that Phoenix or what model is giving you the trouble?
For the electrostatics issue: it’s the plates that are electrostatic not the robot. This is a common lament for plastic plate users, and the Intelliplate designed to go with the Phoenix comes in anti-static bags as used in electronic component packaging. Other plates have anti-static coating, and there may be other tricks as well to avoid electrostatic charge
(comments anyone?)
Also, the limitation of the 200+200 you claim for the Phoenix seems extreme, users have set up 200+200 already with the old hydra+1 contraptions, and 100+100 seems to work reliable with the Phoenix (maybe some users can comment?). Could it be that yours is not set up correctly? I am sure ARI will be happy to send a European rep by to check.
Best regards, BR
-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Alexey Rak
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 9:36 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] crystallisation robot
we have recently tried the new lid mentioned below. It works very well, Mosquito makes 3 hanging drops 96 well plate in 3-4 minutes! The film is very easy to handle and it is very transparent. The price for the lid is significantly reduced: from 13€ before to 4€ now.
Comparing to Cartesian and Phoenix robots the Mosquito is REALLY maintenance free machine, especially the third generation insect where many 1st and 2nd Mosquito generation users advices have been implicated.
Alexey Rak
Structural Biology, Chemical Sciences
Sanofi-Aventis
Centre de Recherche Paris
|