This webinar definitely placed an interesting view on analytical testing from a USP and Ph Eur perspective. Supporting chapters were very useful.
1 Like
Hi there,
Just following up on this post. For anyone doing in house cannabis analysis and using (or interested in using) a SRI GC, our model 310 MM tests marijuana for cannabinoids (THC, CBD, CBN, etc.), terpenes (pinene, myrcene, limonene, etc.), as well as residual solvents (butane, ethanol, etc.)
Please visit the YouTube channel to learn how to get started and to find answers to any questions regarding its use and maintenance. Just search “SRI GC Training” on YouTube or Google.
SRI’s US-based customer service is also happy to answer any questions on the phone (310-214-5092, from 7am-4pm PST) or on here as well.
Happy Friday to all.
-Stephanie
5 Likes
Obrigada!
1 Like
I’m really new and fresh to the testing scene. I know nothing sigh. I have been researching but the prices made me depressed. I was looking into protable, fast result testing and came up with: Gemmacert, sage analytics, my mdx, t check, purple and orange box.
After reading I found the best options to be orange box or gemma for my needs. Is there a better option?
And if I’m doing hplc for canainoids and terpen profiles which is the most affordable system? (Non portable)
HPLC for cannabinoids
GC for teprenes
Neither are all that hard to operate
2 Likes
It’s been awhile. Haven’t tried the Gemma. Might work. Don’t recall any sparkling reviews.
I went with the SRI 420 for portability (luggable), but should have let @srihugh1 talk me out of it. It works, but is too limited to justify the price in most instances. The 310 is a better machine. I’d like to add the back flushing trick to the one I’m currently working with.
As far as hplc? I’d probably go with Agilent. Haven’t touched one in years (about to change), but they were the standard once upon a time (HP) when I did use them.
I’ve been using various models of SRI GC-FID since about 2014.
4 Likes
Thanks for the information ill try and find some reasonable prices for each of the equipment you mentioned
I would be happy to add the backflushing kit at no charge to the 310 you are using in exchange for your feedback on its utility and usefulness.
Hugh
9 Likes
That would be awesome!
I was actually about to contact you to ask if it was possible to interface an Agilent G1888 headspace autosampler with the 310C?
Or perhaps a Tekmar 7000?
New boss picked both up along the way for cheap, and we could really use reliable residual solvent numbers to guide our game.
Seems like an N2 tank and either an H2 tank or an external hydrogen generator would be required.
Haven’t dug into the autosampler manuals yet…
1 Like
Side question about autosamplers, Ive got a 5890 series 2 GC-FID, and I use the peaksimple data logger to read the data (which is great software). I’ll be setting up my autosampler in a week or two and am wondering if I can hook up the autosampler I have to peaksimple? Its a 7673 autosampler which I guess are commonly used on HP5890’s
1 Like
I’m not an expert on this.
It was my impression you could start PeakSimple from the GC start output. The GC starts when the AS makes the injection. So everything starts at once.
Alternatively, I think its possible PeakSimple is the master and tells the AS to inject, then the AS tells the GC to start…
1 Like
Its possible, but we can’t help much.
3 Likes
That’s all the boss needs to hear 
3 Likes
Get the glass and save yourself the trouble of flimsy Al plates with the Si always flaking off.
2 Likes
Any suppliers/varieties in particular you’d suggest?
Whatever is cheapest. More is not always better, they can get ruined trying to store them long term.
1 Like
We have tested the GemmaCert thoroughly.
It gives very inconsistent results compared to GC and HPLC, and only seems to work well for dry plant material). You can forget to get reliable results when testing extracts of any kind. And if the extract melts around 50 C then it will drip down inside the machine, which must be cleaned, as samples are placed vertically.
2 Likes
OP Light lab is similar in use. Worked decent for flower and trim. Extracts would hit right 1/10 times with the setup provided by them. When using an analytic scale, it didn’t help much.
Never heard of the GammaCert though, their extract sensitivity says +/- 6% - looks like it just uses IR.
2 Likes
GemmaCert uses NIR-technology and can only measure CBD (CBD and CBDA) and THC (THC and THCA).
As I understand, the Lightlab uses HPLC-technology and can analyze 7 different cannabinoids, and offers additional models for cannabinoids and terpenes as well, but cost more than what the SRI Model 310 GC system cost, so GemmaCert and LightLab are in different leagues. Anyway, I cannot recommend buying GemmaCert due to its restrictions and false claims of identifying and quantifying the two most common cannabinoids in extracts. It’s only valid for dry plant material.
3 Likes
I’ve used both the OP lightlab 1 and a few SRI GC’s and I’d go with the GC any day for the extra thousand or two I think the difference was back then.
5 Likes