CF-SOP-001 | ChromatographyForge Operation: Explanation of Each Function
| SOP Number | CF-SOP-001 |
| Title | ChromatographyForge Operation: Explanation of Each Function |
| Version | 1.1 |
| Effective Date | August 19, 2026 |
| Review Date | August 19, 2027 |
| Supersedes | Version 1.0 |
| Department | Analytical Development / QC |
| System | ChromatographyForge |
| GxP Impact | Yes (Data handling, method-development documentation, report generation) |
Define and explain each major ChromatographyForge function, provide illustrated operational checks, and outline how an analyst establishes a development model from scratch during routine use. The procedure supports consistent operation and data-integrity controls aligned to cGMP expectations.
This SOP applies to all authorized personnel using ChromatographyForge for day-to-day chromatographic model setup, method development, data review, prediction analysis, and report generation in regulated or quality-controlled environments.
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Condition | An independent variable in the method (for example flow, temperature, or pH). |
| Initial Condition | Baseline value used as the reference state for prediction calculations. |
| Target Condition | Desired method value used to project retention time shifts and chromatographic behavior. |
| Development Model | The set of peak-specific condition/retention-time observations and fitted relationships used to predict retention behaviour at trial conditions. |
| Data Point | One experimentally observed condition value and retention time associated with a named peak and condition. |
| Retention Time | Retention time in minutes. |
| Critical Pair | A pair of peaks requiring resolution control for method suitability. |
| Role | Responsibilities |
|---|---|
| Analyst | Enter data accurately, execute workflows per SOP, review outputs, and retain records. |
| Reviewer / Supervisor | Verify data quality, confirm parameter appropriateness, and approve generated reports. |
| System Administrator | Manage user accounts, role permissions, and system-level settings in accordance with access-control procedures. |
| QA | Audit SOP adherence, data integrity controls, and deviation/CAPA documentation. |
cGMP expectation: Ensure correct project name and analyst attribution before data entry.
Function: Bulk entry area for four-field records in this format: Peak Name, Condition Name, Condition Value, Retention Time.
Use: Rapid import of experimental points gathered from lab runs.
Control: Use Process Data and verify status message confirms successful processing.
Function: Baseline selectors per condition.
Use: Sets reference values against which target-driven changes are calculated.
Function: Numeric endpoint inputs per condition.
Use: Predicts retention time and chromatogram behavior for intended method settings.
Use: Evaluate predicted separation and elution behavior.
Initial is enabled. The legend identifies peak colour, predicted retention time, height, and width.Interpretation: Use the numerical results and resolution values for decisions; use the chart as a visual aid.
Function: Table of initial and predicted retention time values, optional detailed contributions, and resolution metrics.
Use: Supports pass/fail assessment against method performance expectations.
Use: Maintain analyte-specific data quality and modeling performance.
Use: Build robust condition-response data for predictive accuracy.
Use: Produce controlled documentation for technical review and archival.
Use: Standardize output, branding, and compliance metadata across users.
MDP-2026-0012.
SOP-ANALYTICAL-014 reference, and quality-system reference before controlled reporting.| Record | Minimum Retention Expectation | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| Project data files (.hplc or session export equivalent) | Per site record-retention policy | Analyst / Department |
| Generated reports (print/PDF) | Per approved study or validation record plan | Analyst / Reviewer |
| Settings snapshots (if used) | Retain with report package when settings affect interpretation | Analyst |
| Deviation/CAPA records | Per quality-system retention requirements | QA |
| Function | Primary Use | Critical Check | Record Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quick Data Input | Bulk source-data entry | Format and numeric validation | Processed status and saved project snapshot |
| Initial/Target Conditions | Baseline vs target comparison | Scientifically justified values | Report conditions table |
| Chromatogram | Visual prediction review | Critical-pair behavior and peak overlap risk | Report chromatogram image |
| Retention Time Results / Resolution | Numeric suitability assessment | Meets pre-defined acceptance criteria | Report tables and reviewer sign-off |
| Peaks/Conditions Editing | Model refinement | Changes justified from source data | Updated project file and notebook entry |
| Report Generation | Controlled output documentation | Correct options and metadata selected | Final report output (PDF/print) |
This outline shows the normal analyst sequence for creating a new model from experimental measurements. It uses the fictional project illustrated in Figures 1–13. Adapt analytes, variables, ranges, and acceptance criteria to the approved development protocol.
| Example item | Value |
|---|---|
| Project | MDP-2026-0012 - Analgesic Separation Optimisation |
| Peaks | Acetaminophen, Caffeine, Ibuprofen |
| Independent variables | Flow Rate, Temperature, Organic Phase |
| Baseline | Flow Rate 1.00; Temperature 35; Organic Phase 40 |
| Trial target | Flow Rate 1.10; Temperature 40; Organic Phase 43 |
| Illustrative checks | At least three justified points per peak/condition fit; preferred R² ≥ 0.95; protocol-defined critical-pair Rs (commonly ≥ 1.5) |
Output: a documented modelling plan specifying peaks, variables, ranges, baseline, and acceptance criteria.
Analgesic Separation Optimisation, and associate it with project ID MDP-2026-0012 in the laboratory record.
Analgesic Separation Optimisation, the saved status, and the signed-in fictional analyst before entering development data.Format every record as Peak Name, Condition Name, Condition Value, Retention Time. The following dataset reproduces the illustrated three-peak, three-variable model.
Acetaminophen,Flow Rate,0.8,4.70 Acetaminophen,Flow Rate,1.0,4.20 Acetaminophen,Flow Rate,1.2,3.72 Acetaminophen,Temperature,25,4.45 Acetaminophen,Temperature,35,4.20 Acetaminophen,Temperature,45,3.96 Acetaminophen,Organic Phase,35,4.80 Acetaminophen,Organic Phase,40,4.20 Acetaminophen,Organic Phase,45,3.62 Caffeine,Flow Rate,0.8,6.82 Caffeine,Flow Rate,1.0,6.20 Caffeine,Flow Rate,1.2,5.61 Caffeine,Temperature,25,6.55 Caffeine,Temperature,35,6.20 Caffeine,Temperature,45,5.87 Caffeine,Organic Phase,35,7.10 Caffeine,Organic Phase,40,6.20 Caffeine,Organic Phase,45,5.32 Ibuprofen,Flow Rate,0.8,10.42 Ibuprofen,Flow Rate,1.0,9.40 Ibuprofen,Flow Rate,1.2,8.41 Ibuprofen,Temperature,25,9.86 Ibuprofen,Temperature,35,9.40 Ibuprofen,Temperature,45,8.95 Ibuprofen,Organic Phase,35,10.92 Ibuprofen,Organic Phase,40,9.40 Ibuprofen,Organic Phase,45,7.91
Use this route when results are being transcribed a point at a time or when the analyst wants to review each peak record as it is assembled.
| Peak card | Condition table | Condition value → retention time entries |
|---|---|---|
| Acetaminophen | Flow Rate | 0.8 → 4.70; 1.0 → 4.20; 1.2 → 3.72 |
| Acetaminophen | Temperature | 25 → 4.45; 35 → 4.20; 45 → 3.96 |
| Acetaminophen | Organic Phase | 35 → 4.80; 40 → 4.20; 45 → 3.62 |
| Caffeine | Flow Rate | 0.8 → 6.82; 1.0 → 6.20; 1.2 → 5.61 |
| Caffeine | Temperature | 25 → 6.55; 35 → 6.20; 45 → 5.87 |
| Caffeine | Organic Phase | 35 → 7.10; 40 → 6.20; 45 → 5.32 |
| Ibuprofen | Flow Rate | 0.8 → 10.42; 1.0 → 9.40; 1.2 → 8.41 |
| Ibuprofen | Temperature | 25 → 9.86; 35 → 9.40; 45 → 8.95 |
| Ibuprofen | Organic Phase | 35 → 10.92; 40 → 9.40; 45 → 7.91 |
Use this route when entering results in experimental order. Work by condition state: set the experimental conditions, then record the observed retention time for every peak at that state before moving to the next condition. This example uses a one-factor-at-a-time study, so each non-baseline state differs from baseline in exactly one variable.
| Condition state | Flow Rate | Temperature | Organic Phase | Acetaminophen RT | Caffeine RT | Ibuprofen RT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Baseline | 1.0 | 35 | 40 | 4.20 | 6.20 | 9.40 |
| Flow Rate - upper | 1.2 | 35 | 40 | 3.72 | 5.61 | 8.41 |
| Flow Rate - lower | 0.8 | 35 | 40 | 4.70 | 6.82 | 10.42 |
| Temperature - upper | 1.0 | 45 | 40 | 3.96 | 5.87 | 8.95 |
| Temperature - lower | 1.0 | 25 | 40 | 4.45 | 6.55 | 9.86 |
| Organic Phase - upper | 1.0 | 35 | 45 | 3.62 | 5.32 | 7.91 |
| Organic Phase - lower | 1.0 | 35 | 35 | 4.80 | 7.10 | 10.92 |
Output: a populated model with three observations for every peak/condition combination.
Output: a defined reference state and a scientifically plausible trial method.
Output: a documented decision to accept the trial target for experimental testing or to continue refinement.
.hplc project, and export the reviewed report according to the site record-retention procedure.
| Observed state | Required action | Record expectation |
|---|---|---|
| Input parsing warning or incorrect count | Stop, reconcile format and source values, then reprocess. | Correction documented in the contemporaneous record. |
| Weak fit, implausible trend, or insufficient points | Check transcription and source integration; add justified experiments if required. | Investigation rationale and added run identifiers. |
| Target outside studied range | Gather bracketing measurements or select an in-range target. | Protocol justification and supporting experiments. |
| Resolution fails the approved criterion | Change a justified target variable or extend the development design. | Decision rationale and next experiment plan. |
| All criteria met | Experimentally verify the proposed condition, then report and archive. | Project export, report, verification data, and review approval. |
Users shall be trained on this SOP before independent use of ChromatographyForge for GMP-relevant activities. Training completion shall be documented in the site training system.
| Version | Effective Date | Summary of Change | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.1 | August 19, 2026 | Added controlled interface figures, expanded function annotations and Display Settings guidance, and added an illustrated routine model-from-scratch use case covering bulk, per-peak, and multi-condition data-entry routes. | ________________ |
| 1.0 | March 1, 2026 | Initial issue. | ________________ |
| Role | Name / Signature | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Prepared By | ||
| Reviewed By | ||
| Approved By (QA) |
Controlled copy becomes effective only after required approvals are completed.