HPLC-MS, HPLC-UV, DLS, or ORYL F1? Compare techniques head-to-head across cost, time, and sustainability using published per-plate consumption data — adjusted to your lab’s economics.
HPLC-MS bills hide behind filter plates, vials, and column life — but the real driver is compound burn. At 1000 CHF/mg, dispensing 50 μL per well into HPLC vials destroys budgets before the assay even runs.
Hands-on time on HPLC-MS, HPLC-UV and DLS is modest — ~90 min per 384-well plate to prep, calibrate and load. The real cost is elapsed time: column runs stretch into days before results reach a decision-maker. ORYL F1 finishes the same plate in ~15 minutes — weeks of feedback time recovered across a campaign.
Even a modest 100 HPLC-MS plates at 384-well format already burn ~600 L of acetonitrile and ~3.8 MWh of electricity. Add the embodied CO₂ of every compound destroyed in the assay, and the campaign carries a measurable ~3-tonne CO₂e footprint — for a line item nobody usually counts.
Set your volume and economics — the four techniques compare instantly.
Per-plate defaults target 384-well operation — the dominant high-throughput format in modern screening. HPLC techniques: 1.3 mL/min × 5 min × 3 gradient reagents × 384 wells ≈ 7.5 L solvent/plate. Measurement (unattended column run) ≈ 1,920 min (32 h) per plate; hands-on operator time ≈ 90 min. HPLC vial consumption scales linearly (≈ 1,100 EUR vs ≈ 292 EUR per plate at 96-well). Plate readers (ORYL F1, DLS) keep solvent and electricity roughly constant per plate but compound consumption scales with wells. Switch the plate-format toggle to 96-well and scale time/consumable sliders down ~4× to approach Table 4 reference points.
HPLC-MS solvent is derived from the run, not entered directly. Per plate = flow rate × runtime × number of solvent reservoirs × wells/plate. Defaults (1.3 mL/min × 5 min × 3 reagents × 96 wells) yield ≈ 1.87 L/plate, matching Table 3's reported 1.95 L. Switch to 384-well and solvent scales 4× automatically.
HPLC-UV is full column HPLC with a UV detector — only the detection step differs from HPLC-MS. Solvent consumption is identical for matched gradient & flow. UV detection is ~10–100× less sensitive than MS, so compound mass per injection must be higher (default 100 μL/well vs HPLC-MS's 50 μL). UV instruments are substantially cheaper than MS (≈80K EUR vs 400K) and draw less power.
Compound mass per well = volume × stock × MW. At defaults (10 mM × 500 g/mol) ORYL F1's 2 μL/well uses 10 μg; HPLC-MS's 50 μL uses 250 μg; UV-Plate's 5 μL uses 25 μg. The 1000 CHF/mg figure from the spec sheet refers to late-stage compounds — typical screening libraries are 10–100 EUR/mg (default: 100).
Time is modelled as two independent inputs per technique: operator time is hands-on only (prep, calibration, loading, review) and drives FTE cost (260 days × 8 h = 2,080 hr/yr per scientist). Measurement time is the elapsed instrument run — unattended column work or plate scans — and drives the headline "Time saved" metric, displayed in instrument-days at a 24-hour convention. The two are not added: a 90 min operator window can overlap a 1,920 min HPLC run, so total elapsed campaign time is bounded by measurement, not operator.
Sustainability factors are literature-validated. Defaults: electricity 0.30 kg CO₂/kWh (between EU avg 0.25 and global 0.45, Our World in Data); ACN 1.7 kg CO₂/L (= 2.2 kg/kg × 0.786 g/mL density, ACS Sustainable Chem & Eng 2024); compound 100 kg CO₂/g — the discovery / medicinal-chem mid-range. Compound CO₂ scales sharply with synthesis complexity: commercial optimized API 0.05–1 kg/g, discovery med-chem screening 10–100 kg/g, complex molecules / natural products / peptides 100–500 kg/g, total synthesis 500+ kg/g. The compound number is upstream — it encapsulates the solvents, reagents, catalysts and synthesis energy used to make the molecule, and is independent of the assay's direct solvent and electricity consumption (no double-counting).
Capital and maintenance are amortized straight-line over the chosen instrument lifetime. Maintenance is 10% of capital/year for plate readers and 12% for HPLC-MS. Both costs amortize across the year's plate volume.
Plate format scales compound and HPLC solvent. Compound mass scales linearly with wells (96 → 384 = 4× more compound). HPLC-MS solvent also scales linearly with wells via the derived formula. Plate-reader techniques (UV-Plate, DLS, ORYL F1) hold solvent constant per plate.
Currency conversion (May 2026 approximations): 1 EUR = 0.96 CHF = 1.08 USD. All currency-denominated sliders are in the selected currency; internal math runs in EUR.
| HPLC-MS | HPLC-UV | DLS | ORYL F1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total cost | — | — | — | — |
| Total time | — | — | — | — |
| Compound used | — | — | — | — |
| Solvent used | — | — | — | — |
| Electricity | — | — | — | — |
| CO₂e footprint | — | — | — | — |
| HPLC-MS | HPLC-UV | DLS | ORYL F1 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Compound | — | — | — | — |
| Consumables | — | — | — | — |
| Solvent | — | — | — | — |
| Electricity | — | — | — | — |
| FTE time | — | — | — | — |
| Capital + maintenance | — | — | — | — |
| Annual total | — | — | — | — |
Every annualized output is a per-plate parameter multiplied by your plates-per-year input. The model is fully transparent — here are the nine formulas behind the four-technique comparison.
Multiplied by wells/plate × plates/year gives the annual compound mass consumed. At 384-well × 100 plates: 0.25 × 384 × 100 = 9.6 g/year.
Table 3 footnote reference (5 min × 96 wells) gives 1,872 mL/plate, within 4% of the published 1,950 mL. Default runtime is 4 min/injection here; raise to 5 to match the Table 3 baseline.
Per-injection energy (HPLC pump + column oven + MS detector) scales linearly with well count. UV detector draws ~3× less than MS.
24-hour day convention — instruments run unattended and aren’t constrained to operator shift hours. This is the number that feeds the “Time saved” headline: how long the campaign occupies an instrument before results arrive.
Operator time is hands-on only (prep, calibration, loading, review). It excludes unattended column runs and plate reads. FTE = fraction of one scientist working 260 days × 8 hours = 2,080 hr/yr. This drives the FTE-time cost line.
Straight-line depreciation. Default lifetime 7 yr (IRS lab-equipment class 36). Maintenance 10% (plate readers) or 12% (HPLC-MS).
Every line item amortized across the year’s plate count. Currency conversion is applied to the final display only — internal math runs in EUR.
Solvent = ACN cradle-to-grave LCA; electricity = grid carbon intensity; compound = upstream synthesis embodied CO₂. No double counting — compound figure encapsulates synthesis solvents/energy separately.
Computed independently per metric (cost, time, solvent, electricity, CO₂, compound). The headline percentages show fractional reduction vs the comparator at current input settings.
Every per-plate baseline traces back to a published number — either ORYL Photonics’ internal whitepaper (Tables 3 & 4), the platform comparison sheet, or peer-reviewed and vendor literature for HPLC solubility workflows.
Send us your typical plate volume and compound budget. Our team can walk you through how ORYL F1 fits into your workflow and where the breakeven lies for your portfolio.