Hello everybody:

Please help me out by telling me what is the importance of column log and should I create one log for each column (we have about 500 columns which will be a lot of logs). If anyone has a better idea please explain.

Thanks a lot

Sean:

Depending on waht do you want to do or you should do.
If you work ina pharmaceutical or related company the answer is YES. Every column has to have its own log in which you should write every analysis that you do with this column. Also the column test that you do to prove the column performance..

It's easy if you do when you receive the column (from the begining)

Sean,

I keep column logs for my assays currently under development. That way, I can track how many injections I am able to get out of a column, under a particular set of conditions, before performance drops off. This is usually quite beneficial to the QC lab to which the final method is transferred - it helps give them an idea of how often they will need to replace columns.

As someone not that long out of the QC lab, I agree with David. Keeping logs enables you to see how your columns are performing, though performance is always affected by numerous other factors such as MP, column temperature and HPLC system (or oven temperature/GC system). You can also use it (if your methods permit and/or you can show equivalence) to evaluate cheaper "unbranded" columns.
Provided it does not affect your method and the cost:lifetime ratio is good, you can start to use the cheaper columns instead and get extra Brownie points with your management! The small amount of extra work that analysts/chemists have to do in the documentation is also offset.

if u have a CDS that allows you to create custom fields, you can keep a column database online, that is automatically updated with all the relevant column performance parameters. This is very useful if people are a bit lazy wqith filling in system/column logs. If it is teamed with a heavy duty database and the use of e-sig, you can make life very easy.

Our group does pesticide analyses, and we keep simple paper usage logs on all our columns which consist of installation date and system, number and type of analyses, removal date, and comments. We copy a representative chromatogram from the last batch before removal. At any time, we can look at any column, and see how it was, or is, performing.

This has been very helpful in judging current column performance compared to when it was new, predicting column lifetimes, choosing an appropriate column for experimental work (especially if the column isn't expected to survive), simple vs. complex separations, etc.

We have tended over the years to dedicate columns, until they need replacement, to particular types of analyses. It saves time in the long run because changing a column takes a few minutes, but re-developing LC conditions for a 'similar' column may take hours if it isn't 'similar'.

There are no computers involved. We see the big picture almost instantly after opening the column box and shuffling a few papers instead of being overwhelmed with database details and worrying about how to make the software work. It is simple, does the job without getting in the way, and chemists use and maintain it without complaint, problems, or training. These records go back many, many years, to a time before Microsoft and PC's. (I'm a little sensitive about relying on computers these days. My work desktop, LC/MS system, and home computer all had major hardware crashes last week. Not fun, or productive, to say nothing of the expense!!!)

Scott,

Thanks, great post, simple and effective.