2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2022.462884
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Control strategy for multi-column continuous periodic counter current chromatography subject to fluctuating inlet stream concentration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
1
1

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As can be seen the concentration of the inlet stream obtained from the surge vessel after Capto™ Q flow‐through chromatography fluctuates slightly, caused by the cyclic nature of the prior flow‐through unit operation. The control strategy developed for unsteady inlet feed concentrations, reliably triggered column switching (Gerstweiler et al, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As can be seen the concentration of the inlet stream obtained from the surge vessel after Capto™ Q flow‐through chromatography fluctuates slightly, caused by the cyclic nature of the prior flow‐through unit operation. The control strategy developed for unsteady inlet feed concentrations, reliably triggered column switching (Gerstweiler et al, 2022).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the actual continuous processing, the switching times of the PCC process were controlled based on the dynamic UV control method developed by Cytiva (Bangtsson & Lacki, 2012) using column inlet UV absorbance and the column outlet UV absorbance of the first column in a connected set‐up to calculate the column breakthrough. However, we found that the proposed method with ΔUV as a controlling signal is error prone if the inlet feed concentration is not constant, which is a result of the integrated process; therefore, loading to approximately 70% breakthrough was controlled with a new approach developed by our group (Gerstweiler et al, 2022). A cycle of the PCC process consists of the following phases: Loading at a flowrate between 0.4 and 0.8 ml min −1 til breakthrough level triggered; Post loading wash of 2 CV at 1 ml min −1 ; Washing with 5 CV at 1 ml min −1 with equilibration buffer containing no DTT (lysis buffer pH 8.9 containing 0.35 M NaCl); Elution with 20 CV of elution buffer (40 mM di sodium hydrogen phosphate (SA026, ChemSupply), 1 M NaCl, 5% w w −1 glycerol, 1 mM EDTA) at 1 ml min −1 ; Cleaning with 1 M sodium hydroxide (SA178, ChemSupply) for 15 CV at 1 ml min −1 ; Washing with water for 5 CV at 1 ml min −1 , and; Re‐equilibration for with equilibration buffer for 5 CV at 1 ml min −1 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This resulted in a PCC process using four columns during six cycles. Additionally, due to the high UV signal found in the sample detector and no visible breakthrough of AAV found in the frontal experiments, the dynamic control capabilities of the ÄKTA pcc (as reported elsewhere [ 19 , 27 , 28 ]) were not used. In this sense, a time-based loading was performed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…First a breakthrough of the impurities is observed and when the column is close saturation a second breakthrough is caused by the product. This signal can be used as a control algorithm for switching columns (Chmielowski et al, 2017;Gerstweiler et al, 2022;Godawat et al, 2012). This will only work when rather pure feedstock such as an antibody produced in chemical defined media is purified.…”
Section: Impact Of Different Sensorsmentioning
confidence: 99%