A clean machine -Reply

jphillip@mednet.med.miami.edu jphillip at mednet.med.miami.edu
Thu Feb 13 09:29:39 EST 1997

     What concentration of NaOH do you use?  Is there any problem with 
     etching of the flow cell by this method?  Does any one at BD know 
     this?  Thanks
     Jim Phillips
     University of Miami
     (Suntan University)

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: A clean machine -Reply
Author:  "Florence Harrod" <fharrod at Pharmingen.com> at smtpmed
Date:    2/12/97 6:48 PM

        Reply to:   RE>>A clean machine -Reply
We've been using a dilute sodium hydroxide solution to clean the tubing in our 
FACscans for several years now.  We used to use bleach, as recommended by the 
manufacturer, and sometimes we would have clogs which never seemed to clear up 
completely.  Our protein chemist recommended NaOH to me late one afternoon when 
I was particularly frustrated with a stubborn clog.  The NaOH cleared it right 
out, and from then on we've used it regularly to keep the lines clear with few 
problems.  I've always wondered if anyone else has tried it and how it has 
worked for them.
Date: 2/11/97 4:21 PM
To: cyto-inbox
From: Jim Zanghi
>Small beads staying in the instrument can be a problem.  Triton X-100 at 
>0.1% (the same concentration used to permeabilize cells) in water will 
>remove most of them.
>Betsy Robertson
>> Running ethanol
>> after the beads seems to help push them through more quickly. 
>> Tony Bakke
I was wondering about what types of solutions can be run through a flow 
cytometer without causing damage or corrosion.   Is pure ethanol okay?   On 
the advise of others, I  have run 50% hot bleach to clear up clogs, but I 
was very weary about doing this since bleach corrodes stainless steel.
I've always followed with a 5 minute water rinse, but this concentration of 
bleach seems a bit extreme (we routinely use 10% bleach at room temp).
If 0.1% triton or 70% ethanol is as effective as 50% hot bleach, than this 
seems to be the way to go.   Any thoughts about this?  What do 
manufacturers recommend?
James A. Zanghi
Dept. of Chemical Engineering
Northwestern University
Evanston, IL
------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------
>From flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu!owner-cyto-sendout Tue Feb 11 14:08:37 1997 remote 
from donews
Received: from flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu by donews.cts.com with smtp
 (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0vuQNO-00005zC; Tue, 11 Feb 97 14:08 PST
Received: by flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu (940816.SGI.8.6.9/930416.SGI.AUTO)
 for cyto-sendout id MAA10161; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 12:30:01 -0500
Received: from merle.acns.nwu.edu by flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu via ESMTP 
 for <cytometry at flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu> id LAA09604; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 11:18:55
Received: from [] (barney.chem-eng.nwu.edu) by merle.acns.nwu.edu
with SMTP
 ( id AA138027530; Tue, 11 Feb 1997 10:12:11 -0600
Message-Id: <v01510103af264a551654@[]> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 10:19:08 -0600
To: cyto-inbox
From: zanghi at merle.acns.nwu.edu (Jim Zanghi) 
Subject: Re: A clean machine -Reply

More information about the Cytometry mailing list