We had a PEAQ and a bit of bad luck. Broken Peltier, which means the instrument can only be replaced by a new one. Happened in a neighbouring University as well. Currently we have a Nano ITC from TA, It works fine. The software is more customizable. The syringe loading is not my favourite procedure. You need to be very careful and on average you need a bit more lingad solution. But apart from that, the results are good and comparable to the PEAQ.
Cheers Christian On Mon, Aug 21, 2023 at 12:44 PM Kelvin Lau < 00005aaf8435dbef-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk> wrote: > The PEAQ even though a bit old is quite robust compared to the 200. I > would definitely go with that. The cleaning system with the pumps is well > built compared to the 200 and over years haven’t had any problems. Also the > new needle adapter is great, not a single broken needle in 5 years compared > to the 200 where I think in my PhD I replaced over 10. > > TA, only used their VP equivalent (2 mL volume) and the way it’s set up > its not my favourite. > > PEAQ for sure. > > > -- > Kelvin Lau > Protein production and structure core facility - PTPSP > EPFL SV PTECH PTPSP > AI 2146 (Bâtiment AI) > Station 19 > CH-1015 Lausanne > Switzerland > Email: kelvin....@epfl.ch > Phone (office) : +41 21 69 30267 > Phone (everywhere else) : +41 21 69 34494 > > > > On 21 Aug 2023, at 12:00, Sebastiano Pasqualato < > sebastiano.pasqual...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hello Sivaraman, > I completely second Matthew’s message, having had the same experience he > had, in two different workplaces and with two different Malvern PEAQ-ITC > instruments. > I have one anecdotal, and not direct, unpleasant feedback from TA > instrument users. > Ciao, > S > > > On 9 Aug 2023, at 18:05, Matthew Whitley < > 0000a8ed4e9d4a1a-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk> wrote: > > Hello Sivaraman, > > We have a Malvern MicroCal PEAQ-ITC system in our lab that is used > regularly. In general, we are pleased with the machine. We have > experienced no major problems with the instrument, the data quality is > good, and replicate measurements yield very similar results. I have never > used the Affinity ITC from TA Instruments, so I cannot comment on that > system. > > Matthew > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > > This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a > mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are > available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ > > > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > > This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a > mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are > available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ > > > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
