thats a fill problem
[edited]#test-results 2024-11-20
Wednesday32 messages9 participantstimes are UTC
Highlights from this day
- net_peptide — how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance 21:27
- seven_five_sweet — does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier 22:48
- seven_five_sweet — i told CPC about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due 22:56
- seven_five_sweet — if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier, happy to be corrected 23:04
how do you separate batch variance from supplier variance
🧊7
whats the lot
sorry to jump in whats the underfill rate people are actually seeing
update from 7 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
when did you buy it
ok so does anyone log the negative results, the boring ones
sample handling on your end absolutely affects it. draw cleanly, ship fast, do not let it sit warm
[edited]right so weigh the vial before you reconstitute. it costs nothing and catches the common failure
certificate said 98.1 and the independent came back 99.2, is that a problem
what interests me is when the gap goes the same direction every time. once is noise, three times is a pattern
i had a result i am fairly sure was a handling error on my side and i logged it as such, your mileage will differ
do the results in this channel skew because people test when suspicious
anyone tested the same lot twice at different labs
thats not great
💀3
98.6 against a certificate of 99.2 is fine. the same supplier landing low four times in a row is a question
my result contradicts the supplier certificate, do i tell them
posting my PeptideMeter result on lot D-0718, what do people make of it
update from 10 months ago: retested the same supplier, result came back better, logged both
selection bias
underfill is more common than impurity. if you only test purity you are testing the less likely failure, take that with a pinch of salt
a supplier disputing a result is rare here and it has never gone well for the supplier
a result without a lot number and a purchase date is an anecdote with a pdf attached, ill dig out the number
log the lot number
does a bad result on one lot condemn the whole supplier
🤝1📈1👍12
i told CPC about a result they would not have liked and they did not argue. credit where it is due
the widest spread in my data is about 2.6 percentage points across five lots from one supplier
if the vial has been through a bad transit you are testing the transit as much as the supplier, happy to be corrected
🔥7❤️6
has a supplier ever disputed a result posted here
if you are testing to settle an argument you will not settle it with n of 1
i test roughly every tenth vial. it is a sampling strategy, not paranoia
one bad test does not condemn a supplier. one good test does not clear one. both halves get ignored equally
do you test every order or sample it
thats within range
[edited]