Hi,
does anyone have drylab?
Is it usefull, accurate or is it just wasted money?
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
By Anonymous on Saturday, August 2, 2003 - 12:56 pm:
Drylab does exactly what it it says it does. The better question is to ask yourself what your expectations are of that product. It will be usefull and accurate if you use it for what it was designed to do. It will be a waste of money if you try and use it to do things it was not designed to do. Simple.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
By Anonymous on Friday, August 8, 2003 - 06:31 am:
I strongly encourage using it for method development. I have been using it for several years in a big pharma company and have find it save me a lots of time. Most often, the drylab prediction is right on. This software is particularly useful for inexperience method developers. I strongly encourage using it.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
By Anonymous on Thursday, August 14, 2003 - 01:58 pm:
It is definately not a tool that eliminates the need to perform "wet" experiments. In my experience, it is most powerful when you already have a rough separation and you are trying to optimize and work out critical resolution problems. The ability to create a 3-dimensional resolution map and observe how two different parameters can work together to improve the separation can be a time saver. A word of warning. For accurate predictions, you must acquire data using the suggested ranges provided in the user manual. Many people who try to use DryLab for the first time try to use random data that was not acquired specifically for DryLab modeling. This usually will not work thus leading people to conclude that DryLab is not useful.
In short, DryLab can save you time but it is not a substitute for good old fashioned method development.