Having to teach waste on new chassis STARS (STAR23)

Hi all,

Was wondering if anyone has a “new” STAR, aka new chassis same STAR, and had to teach the waste position?

We have been assured by Hamilton that teaching the waste position is “normal” but on every STAR I have worked on we could just use the standard snap definition for waste. It seems weird to have to teach an in house component with such large tolerances. In real life, the head comes down too close to the left and the back of the chute. Additionally, the bracket around the 96H that comes down on eject is clearly hitting the rim of the waste chute each time (But not enough to cause a z-drive error), which tells us the Z-height is not accurate.

We also noticed that in Venus6 that “Core96ExternalWasteOnExtensionDeck.tml” does not exist, what we use on our Venus4 old STAR’s. There is “Core96ExternalWaste.tml” but this is even further off! Was wondering if other people have run into this issue?

A common error I’ve seen is that the waste chute is installed upside down and the z height becomes totally off because of it.

Hi Colin,

Sorry to hear about the issues, but I wanted to confirm that the default MPH96 waste definition “Core96ExternalWaste.tml” should work without modification on the new STAR with VENUS 6. This file is located in the following directory:

C:\Program Files (x86)\HAMILTON\LabWare\ML_STAR\96COREHEAD\

It does eject close to the right side of the chute so we will look into any further optimization.

What we have observed and what @bowlineknot mentions, is that the waste chute can be installed incorrectly resulting in some of the behavior you’re reporting. I have followed up internally to address this, but see below for some images of correct and incorrect setups:

Correct installation:
image

Incorrect:
image

Incorrect:
image

I hope this helps! If you’re still seeing issues, let me know and we can figure out what is going on with your specific setups.

-Eric

3 Likes

Hi Eric,

Sorry to get back to you so late!

It turns out our waste was installed upside down (picture2)!

Now we just have the ejection with the right hand side of the chute, which seems odd but something we can live with!

Thanks,
Colin

2 Likes

Hey Eric,

Do you have measurements for those positions? I believe we are now in position 1 but still clipping on eject of the 96Head tips.

It’s really hard to tell the difference in 1 & 2.

Thanks,
Colin

Hi Colin,

I recommend reaching out to your local support so they can investigate and correct. Let me know if you need any help getting in contact with them.

If I can procure any measurements in the meantime, I’ll relay them here, but it seems like something else may be going on.

Thanks,

-Eric

It should be 82mm tall if installed properly:

image

1 Like

Amazing, yes ours is at 105mm,thanks for the measurement!! So we must be in position 2 now :sweat_smile:

For anyone else:
We flipped the chute but not the bracket connecting the chute. The connecting bracket almost looks symmetric so it’s easy to miss, but it is not symmetric, one side is shorter!

Excellent. Also, we found the waste definition can be adjusted in the x to center it and come forward by about 10mm. We provided these edits to the development teams for modification to the waste definition that’s included in the base software.

Final coordinates were:

x: -241.2 mm
y:107.2 mm
z: 162.5 mm

image

2 Likes