Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(api): throw error if no valid nozzle has tip #15721

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Jul 23, 2024

Conversation

aaron-kulkarni
Copy link
Contributor

Provide a check in all LLD functions(called manually or automatically during aspirate) that makes sure that if it's a 96-channel pipette, that at least one of the nozzles with a pressure sensor has a tip on it.

Overview

Test Plan

Changelog

Review requests

Risk assessment

Provide a check in all LLD functions(called manually or automatically during aspirate) that makes
sure that if it's a 96-channel pipette, that at least one of the nozzles with a pressure sensor has
a tip on it.
@aaron-kulkarni aaron-kulkarni requested a review from a team as a code owner July 19, 2024 17:42
Copy link
Member

@sfoster1 sfoster1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tests please

Copy link
Contributor

A PR has been opened to address analyses snapshot changes. Please review the changes here: https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/pull/

1 similar comment
Copy link
Contributor

A PR has been opened to address analyses snapshot changes. Please review the changes here: https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/pull/

Copy link
Contributor

@CaseyBatten CaseyBatten left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some thoughts on this pertaining to partial tip:
Do we intend to allow LLD when handling partial tip configurations? Partial tip layouts of our pipettes can result in situations where the tip sensor is not actually covered by the tips we pick up, which could complicate this kind of check. Theres a handful of approaches to take to that problem, the simplest is probably to raise an error if you are attempting LLD with a partially configured pipette. The second case we could attempt is to only ensure we check for tips on the valid nozzles when we are in Full configuration, otherwise don't bother checking.

Long term, we may want an adaptive approach, where we only check for validation if we are in a pipette configuration that should result in tips overlapping with sensors. This would be the most "accurate" approach, but would introduce a double standard for some configurations, but not others.

Copy link
Contributor

A PR has been opened to address analyses snapshot changes. Please review the changes here: https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/pull/

Copy link
Contributor

A PR has been opened to address analyses snapshot changes. Please review the changes here: https://github.com/Opentrons/opentrons/pull/

@sfoster1
Copy link
Member

Some thoughts on this pertaining to partial tip: Do we intend to allow LLD when handling partial tip configurations? Partial tip layouts of our pipettes can result in situations where the tip sensor is not actually covered by the tips we pick up, which could complicate this kind of check. Theres a handful of approaches to take to that problem, the simplest is probably to raise an error if you are attempting LLD with a partially configured pipette. The second case we could attempt is to only ensure we check for tips on the valid nozzles when we are in Full configuration, otherwise don't bother checking.

Long term, we may want an adaptive approach, where we only check for validation if we are in a pipette configuration that should result in tips overlapping with sensors. This would be the most "accurate" approach, but would introduce a double standard for some configurations, but not others.

The current implementation fixes this I think @CaseyBatten

Copy link
Member

@sfoster1 sfoster1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Great! Thank you!

@aaron-kulkarni aaron-kulkarni merged commit ea31e34 into edge Jul 23, 2024
21 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants