I liked the fact that they could be run from the front panel or via serial
control from my mass spec without a reboot. The 1090 requires that you
reboot the mass spec and hplc if you want to get to the super-set of the
control functions available only from the HPLC front panel. They were
always graceful in accepting commands alternately from either.
The ordering of them is complicated as you have to order from a menu of
about 100 options to get what you want (which is good I guess). The manuals
that come with them are not useful for things like seal changes and many
trouble shooting problems. You have to get the service manuals which are
about $350 more for two little loose leaf German translations (it seems).
It can be hard to find what you need even in those things. I often had to
piece together what I needed from several sections.
All in all though I find them easy to use and maintain. They are nice
units. HP always had all the parts I needed. I have even made the low
pressure system perform 75ul/min gradients with by replacing much of the
post purge valve plumbing with 0.005-0.007 ID peek tubing. I think the
stainless fittings on it make repair and maintenance difficult inside the
cramped cabinet.
I hope this is not taken as a "dis" of these, I like them. Everything has
minuses(?).
Matt Sweeney
mattsweeney@earthlink.net
Mass Spec Consulting
Training/Operations/Consulting/Method Development
LC/MS Pharmacokinetics, Peptides, Proteins, Metabolism,
Maintenance Classes, Specialist in Finnigan Equipment and Software
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael A Imbalzano <imbalzan@SAS.UPENN.edu>
To: Recipients of ABRF List <abrf@aecom.yu.edu>
Date: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 3:50 PM
Subject: HPLC systems
>I plan to buy a new HPLC system to be used primarily for
>synthetic oligo purification. I've been looking at systems from
>Beckman, Waters, and HP. I was wondering if anyone had any comments
>(good or bad) about the equipment they are currently using.
>
>I am particularly interested in feedback on the HP1100.
>I was recently told that they are not reliable.
>
>Thanks so much,
>
>Mike
>
>