ANALYTICAL AND LABORATORY EQUIPMENT
BIO-DECONTAMINATION CYCLE TIME REDUCED BY 20% B
ioquell has created the capability to calibrate low-level hydrogen peroxide vapour instruments accurately at 1 part per million (1ppm), helping to reduce cycle times by approximately 20%. The company is now able to calibrate to a published Occupational Safety & Health Administration (OSHA) method at the critical concentration point, ensuring safety of employees while optimising the cycle. It is important that any low-level
hydrogen peroxide sensor, used to determine the end of a decontamination cycle, is accurate. This is to ensure the safety of the personnel entering the area as well as to optimise the cycle time. The present calibration methods used by sensor manufacturers are often not performed with hydrogen peroxide vapour, and are not conducted at a vapour concentration at the critical value of 1ppm. Testing and experience have shown that inaccuracies can unnecessarily prolong decontamination cycles by up to 20%. Bioquell now has a calibration capability able to expose
these sensors to a 1ppm hydrogen peroxide vapour concentration verified accurately against the published OSHA 1019 method.
When decontaminating
a room or enclosure, entry should be prohibited until the Occupational Exposure Limit (OEL), also known as Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL), has been reached so the area can then be safely released. The level is based on a time weighted average (TWA) over eight hours. The removal of hydrogen peroxide
from an enclosure is a logarithmic process, meaning that it takes a disproportionally long time to reduce from 2 to 1ppm compared to earlier in the cycle, therefore inaccuracy of 0.5ppm can have a significant effect on the cycle length. To resolve this issue, Bioquell has created the capacity to calibrate accurately at 1ppm. The calibration instrument produces a highly accurate
stream of hydrogen peroxide vapour at 1ppm concentration with better than ±0.1ppm accuracy. However, this relates to the accuracy of the calibration system, unrelated to the accuracy or repeatability of the sensor itself. The calibration method is highly
automated to ensure accuracy and repeatability and checked against the OSHA method to ensuring on-going accuracy.
For more information visit
www.bioquell.com
SMART MONITORING TECHNOLOGY FOR BIOPHARMA MARKET P
owder containment and aseptic transfer valve specialist, ChargePoint Technology, has advanced its smart monitoring solution, Verifi, to support the biopharma market. The intelligent monitoring platform
is used to monitor usage data for ChargePoint’s split butterfly valves (SBVs). By recording how many times the
valve has been used and monitoring its temperature, Verifi generates data that allows operators and health & safety teams to manage the maintenance of their containment solution. Ultimately, this helps to improve efficiency and safety within chemical and pharmaceutical manufacturing processes. Malcolm Cunningham at ChargePoint says: “Verifi gives manufacturers an automatic and reliable method of understanding the health status of their valves so that they can take preventative action. This in turn improves operational performance, productivity and helps to manage risk. “The response from
customers in the pharma market so far has been
excellent. Verifi is not only giving the user confidence in the operational performance of SBV technology, but also the safety and quality teams peace of mind.” The software advancements now
available with the Verifi hub mean that it can connect directly onto the ChargePoint AseptiSafe valve unit, which is used to ensure sterility during aseptic processing. The data is then accessed from the device itself or remotely via an online dashboard. Cunningham adds: “We are thrilled to be
able to service the biopharma market. Given the growth in the biotech sector, extending the application of Verifi to this market is a natural next step for us. By adding technologies such as this to our portfolio, we are putting ChargePoint Technology at the forefront of overcoming sterile manufacturing challenges.”
For more information visit
www.thechargepoint.com
www.scientistlive.com 21
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72
