Automated Liquid Handling Optimization via Parameter Segmentation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current automated liquid handling systems face challenges in achieving reproducibility and precision due to variability in experimental conditions and liquid types, leading to errors and reduced efficiency in laboratory protocols, particularly in complex biological processes.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method and device that generate and optimize an array of liquid handling policies using statistical designs and parameter variations to improve process performance, reducing errors and enhancing the capability of automated liquid handling systems to execute complex experimental designs.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If pre-established liquid handling policies are used for automated protocols, then operation simplicity is improved, but liquid handling precision and reliability deteriorate due to insufficient granularity of control

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperation simplicityVSAvoidliquid handling precision
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments liquid handling policies into multiple granular parameters including pipetting speed, dispense speed, acceleration, deceleration, and waiting times. Each parameter can be independently optimized and adjusted based on specific liquid types and experimental requirements, allowing precise control while maintaining ease of operation through automated parameter selection.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts liquid handling parameters based on real-time conditions and liquid characteristics. The automated system selects and modifies parameters such as pipetting speed and dispense timing according to the specific protocol requirements, enabling adaptive optimization without manual intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Productivity

If liquid handling speed is increased to improve productivity, then output increases, but liquid handling precision and error rate worsen

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveoutputVSAvoidliquid handling precision
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent systematically varies and optimizes multiple parameters including pipetting speed, dispense speed, acceleration rates, and waiting times to find the optimal balance between productivity and precision. The system can adjust these parameters dynamically based on the specific liquid type, volume, and protocol requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Solution Approach 2:

Different parameter settings are applied to different stages of the liquid handling process. For example, faster speeds may be used during bulk transfers while slower, more precise parameters are applied during critical dispensing steps. This localized optimization allows high overall productivity while maintaining precision where needed.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If comprehensive optimization of multiple liquid handling parameters is performed, then reliability and precision are improved, but device complexity and computational requirements increase

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovereproducibilityVSAvoidsystem complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs comprehensive parameter optimization in advance through automated experimental design and statistical analysis. By pre-determining the optimal parameter combinations for different liquid types and protocols, the system eliminates the need for complex real-time calculations during actual liquid handling operations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system incorporates feedback mechanisms where experimental results are analyzed and used to refine parameter settings for future operations. This iterative optimization process improves reliability over time while the automated feedback loops manage the complexity of multiple parameters systematically.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Adaptability or versatility

If manual liquid handling is performed to allow flexibility in handling diverse liquid types, then adaptability is improved, but error rate and variability worsen

Engineering Contradiction:
ImproveflexibilityVSAvoidreproducibility
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The automated system is designed with universal applicability to handle diverse liquid types including aqueous solutions, organic solvents, cell suspensions, and viscous materials. Through programmable parameter adjustment, a single automated system can adapt to different liquid characteristics and protocol requirements, eliminating the need for manual intervention while maintaining flexibility.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP4085257B1Systems and methods for improved automation of laboratory processes
Publication Date: 2024.07.10 SYNTHACE
  • EP4085257B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4085257B1 patent drawingFigure 2(A)
  • EP4085257B1 patent drawingFigure 2(B)

AI summary

Methods and devices are provided for computer implemented improvement of process performance of automated laboratory protocols that typically require at least one liquid handling step that is performed by using a liquid handling apparatus under the operative control of a processor. The methods comprise: i. defining at least one liquid handling step in the protocol that comprises a liquid handling operation; ii. selecting at least a first and at least a second process factors for the at least one liquid handling step in the protocol, wherein the first and second process factors are different and are selected from the group consisting of: an equipment process factor; a liquid process factor; and a protocol process factor; iii. assigning parameter variations for the first and second process factors selected for investigation; iv. performing a plurality of test runs on the liquid handling apparatus to determine the effects of the parameter variations for the first and second process factors; v. analysing the results of the plurality of test runs to identify the one or more test runs that show optimal process performance; and vi. amending the automated laboratory protocol to improve process performance of the liquid handling apparatus.