ments is still the best approach, and the effort and expense incurred in setting up an automated workstation will pay dividends.
In the case of process optimization and validation, the number of experiments drops to <20, but these experiments require huge data collections and highly accurate processing. The adaptation to different chemistry in independently controlled vessels is easier and faster than in the high-throughput workstations since these vessels are designed to enable multiple dosing, to have heat ramps over a wide temperature range or reflux, and to have joints for special equipment, making their use worthwhile even for chemists with rapidly changing projects en route to the pilot plant.
A question arising in this context is the percentage of chemistry covered by the systems: a 100% ''perfect'' solution compared with a 70% ''standard'' solution. Systems covering the total range of possible parameters (temperature range, pressure range, materials, special safety requirements) are much more expensive and more difficult to construct. Therefore, we recommend an approximate 70% coverage, which can be achieved with a number of commercial systems. A broadly applicable ''workhorse'' is better than one sophisticated wonder machine. Supplementary to these ''workhorses,'' we have set up dedicated special equipment for our core technologies, such as high-pressure reactions and phosgenations.
Was this article helpful?