docs(api): describe new partial tip pickup restrictions #14311
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## edge #14311 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 67.82% 67.82%
=======================================
Files 2472 2472
Lines 68756 68756
Branches 9072 9072
=======================================
Hits 46635 46635
Misses 20020 20020
Partials 2101 2101
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
| @@ -127,7 +127,14 @@ This keeps tip tracking consistent across each type of pickup. And it reduces th | |||
| Tip Pickup and Conflicts | |||
| ======================== | |||
|
|
|||
| The horizontally offset position of the 96-channel pipette during partial tip pickup places restrictions on where you can put other tall labware on the deck. The restrictions vary depending on the layout. For column layouts, Opentrons recommends using column 12. Currently, this is the *only* partial nozzle configuration for which the API will automatically detect labware placed in locations that could cause collisions, and raise errors to prevent them. | |||
| The horizontally offset position of the 96-channel pipette during partial tip pickup places restrictions on where you can put other tall labware on the deck. The restrictions vary depending on the layout. For column layouts, Opentrons recommends using column 12. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For that first sentence, consider moving "during partial tip pickup" to the beginning.
- "During partial tip pickup, the horizontally offset position of the 96-channel pipette ..."
Also, try it without "places restrictions on" in favor of just "restricts" (or even "limits").
- "During partial tip pickup, the horizontally offset position of the 96-channel pipette restricts where you can place other tall labware on the deck."
And, to avoid reusing "restrict," consider a different word in the last sentence:
- "These constraints vary depending on the layout."
- "Limitations vary depending on the layout."
- "These limitations change depending on the layout."
One final thing: In the last sentence, "Opentrons recommends using column 12." It took me a moment to wrap my head around this. My first thought was about a deck slot ("where is deck column 12?"). After a pause, it dawned on me that this refers to the line of pipette nozzles on the instrument, not a deck location. It might help to make it clear that "column 12" refers to the pipette, even if it gives us something awkward like "Opentrons recommends using column 12 of the pipette."
| - Plan your deck layout carefully. Make a diagram and visualize everywhere the pipette will travel. | ||
| - Simulate your protocol and compare the run preview to your expectations of where the pipette will travel. | ||
| - Perform a dry run with only tip racks on the deck. Have the Emergency Stop Pendant handy in case you see an impending crash. | ||
|
|
||
| Finally, you can't access the rightmost columns in labware in column 3, since they are beyond the movement limit of the pipette. The exact number of inaccessible columns varies by labware type. Any well that is within 28 mm of the right edge of the slot is inaccessible in a column 12 configuration. Call ``configure_nozzle_layout()`` again to switch to a column 1 layout if you need to pipette in that area. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know this isn't a change you've made in this PR but thought I should mention- the precise value of the inaccessible distance is 28.23mm from right edge. I'm fine having a rounded value in the docs as long as it's intentional. I might actually prefer it to be rounded up to 29mm rather than to 28.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
EZ fix, thanks for the attention to detail!
Overview
Updates the docs to be in line with the behavior added in #14230.
Addresses RTC-385.
Test Plan
Need to simulate some protocols that push at the edge of the new restrictions.
Changelog
configure_nozzle_layout()error stringReview requests
I'm having trouble getting simulation or analysis work at all on this branch, so hopefully an engineer can verify that the restrictions are as advertised.
Risk assessment
v low, only docs and strings