Was anything unusual observed during batch 51?21 Aug 01:35
Batch 51 (LBN-51, dated 17.12.25, aim "To develop equivalent to 9076") — nothing unusual is explicitly noted in the records. The ELN is brief: product observed as "yellow tincture" with AV-56.7, Mono-40.54, Di-59.1, Free acid-0.837; no remark, deviation, or incident fields are filled. Two minor oddities:
No row for batch 51 appears in the "9076 Expt Table 2025" summary sheet in this drop (it ends at batch 50), and no failed application-test report references 51.
Application trials (17.12.2025) of its splits vs that day's BYK-9076 standard:
No formal pass/fail verdicts are recorded for any of them, and these are only the summary-sheet rows — no failure reports exist for 51.
- Possible transcription slip in step 2: temperature written as "75-8 deg C" in the ELN body, while the step table says 75-80 °C.
- The record's aliases include "Vicaspin LUB 1010", "Epomine SP-018", and "R425110899/3.12.25", which are raw materials, not batch names — an extraction artifact.
No row for batch 51 appears in the "9076 Expt Table 2025" summary sheet in this drop (it ends at batch 50), and no failed application-test report references 51.
Application trials (17.12.2025) of its splits vs that day's BYK-9076 standard:
- 51B is the notable one: Colour Strength "97 - 98.00%", Resolubility 3 (std 4), Transparency "Opaque" (Violet 23) — vs 51A's Resolubility 4 / "Eq. to Std". Gloss also below standard in both (56.9 vs 65.1 on Violet 23; 40.3 vs 41.3 on Black).
- 51A: Gloss 56.8 vs 65.1 (Violet 23), otherwise roughly equal to standard.
- 51C: closest to standard; Violet 27 Gloss 5.6 vs 8.2 (std, that day); Blue Resolubility 5 vs 4; Transparency "Slightly opaque".
No formal pass/fail verdicts are recorded for any of them, and these are only the summary-sheet rows — no failure reports exist for 51.
Sources
[28112025 9076 Expt Table 2025.converted, sheet 9076_Experiments] — no batch 51 row
confidence: medium