research on laboratory equipment

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Next up for House renewal: Eliot

FAS receives gift to bolster arts, humanities, and strengthen financial aid

Dean’s legacy honored

A selection of favorite or essential tools used by Harvard scientists.

Photos by Harvard Staff Photographers

Quick, hand me my worm pick

Juan Siliezar

Harvard Staff Writer

Scientists describe cherished tools of the trade

Scientists use a multitude of tools, from advanced quantum machines to chalk and blackboard, to investigate and solve their inquiries. Their equipment varies depending on their subjects, but also from scientist to scientist. The Gazette asked several Harvard researchers for their most treasured or essential pieces of lab, field, or office equipment. The answers range from highly technical to downright quirky.

Photos courtesy of Munazza Alam

Munazza Alam, A.M. ’18, Ph.D. ’21

Graduate researcher, Department of Astronomy Favorite item: Women of NASA Lego set

An astronomer who studies the atmospheres of exoplanets, Alam writes computer programs to process and analyze observations from instruments on NASA’s Hubble Space Telescope. While she’s waiting on these programs, she toys with a piece of office decor: Women of NASA Legos, which feature famed astronauts Sally Ride and Mae Jemison along with computer scientist Margaret Hamilton and astronomer Nancy Grace Roman. “They’re a reminder of the trailblazing women before me,” said Alam, a National Geographic Young Explorer whose favorite is the figure of Roman, considered the mother of the Hubble telescope. “As I’m analyzing Hubble data, to have a little NASA figure of her nearby is very special.”

Photos by Stephanie Mitchell/Harvard Staff Photographer

Oluwaseun Araromi

Postdoctoral researcher, Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Science Favorite item: Precision laser cutters

When people talk about pinpoint accuracy, Araromi says this is what they are referring to. The laser, which he uses to make soft sensors for wearable robotics, operates at a frequency that can cut through metals with speed and power — and meticulous accuracy. What draws Araromi to the cutter is the seemingly endless possibilities for engineering devices you could make with it.

Photos by Kris Snibbe/Harvard Staff Photographer

Carlos Argüelles-Delgado

Assistant professor, Department of Physics Favorite item: Mechanical keyboard

Argüelles-Delgado’s most cherished tool is his keyboard. Why? For the old-school clicking noise the keys make. “I like the feedback, I like feeling and the sound of typewriters,” he said. “This makes that classic keyboard sound.” It’s not just the clicking; there’s something inherently meta about the act itself as he uses it to develop software for data analysis on neutrino particle events. They are among the fundamental building blocks of nature, observed in the IceCube Neutrino Observatory, near the South Pole in Antarctica: “You’re actually putting science, your knowledge, into the machine, and that is something that I think is neat.”

Photos by Rose Lincoln/Harvard Staff Photographer

Nicole Bush

Graduate researcher, Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology Favorite item: Worm pick

Sometimes it’s the things you make yourself that are the best. That’s the case with Bush, a sixth year Ph.D. student in the molecules, cells and organisms program. She uses a tool called a worm pick to work with C. elegans. “This is a classic tool that every worm lab person needs,” she said. It originated in the 1970s to move worms from plate to plate and has been serving that purpose ever since. Researchers make their own picks and customize them. Bush’s handles are all wrapped in pink, for example. Making the tool involves breaking the end off an old glass Pasteur pipette, inserting a tiny strip of platinum, and melding them. A penny and nickel are then used to hammer the platinum strip, which is also sandpapered so as not to impale the worms. “What I love most about the worm pick is the individuality of each one, and the fact that we make them in our own lab. It’s a huge part of C. elegans lab culture, and is a great way to show your individuality on the bench.”

Postdoctoral fellow, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Favorite item: Modern sequencing machines

Card relies on modern sequencing machines, which help not only to sequence fragments of a genome but to sequence the entire thing. For a geneticist like Card, who studies traits that seem to show up repeatedly in an organism, these machines are key to figuring out why. There are varieties of them but they are usually desktop- or printer-sized pieces of machinery that scientists can pop DNA fragments into. They’re expensive, futuristic looking, and aesthetically pleasing, Card said. “They’re kind of sexy pieces of equipment.”

Assistant professor, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences Favorite item: Scotch tape and super glue

Fu uses a novel instrument called a quantum diamond microscope to measure the magnetic history of rocks and meteorites, but his favorite pieces of equipment can be found almost anywhere: double-sided Scotch tape and a bottle of Krazy super glue. “We use the QDM to look at really minute magnetic signatures in rocks,” Fu said. “So we need our samples to be free of contamination — that is free of any kind of iron or magnetic particle.” That’s where the glue and tape come in, which he uses to hold the samples together and in place while under the microscope. “They are really clean magnetically,” he said of his humble favorites. “They are a very reliably pure substance.”

Juliana García-Mejía

Graduate researcher, Center for Astrophysics | Harvard & Smithsonian Favorite item: Opticentric machine

For García-Mejía ’17, who is leading the design and construction of a new telescope camera in the search for signs of extraterrestrial life, the essential lab equipment on hand is an Opticentric machine. It allows scientists to precisely stack lenses on top of each other with just the thinnest of space separating them — about a third the width of a human hair. “I just didn’t even know that there existed a machine that could allow you to get the positioning of something to that level of precision,” said García-Mejía. The Opticentric can also become the lab equivalent of the legendary office water cooler. “The engineers and I often have conversations sitting around it,” she said. “They mentor me and impart knowledge as we joke about the idiosyncrasies of our lives and jobs and discuss intently how we plan to proceed with the project.”

Peter Girguis

Professor, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Favorite item: Mobile pressure van

Girguis’s favorite piece of equipment is the product of creativity and ingenuity. Dubbed the mobile pressure van, it is a kind of high-pressure aquarium used to keep deep-sea animals alive. The van is believed to be one of two in the world and started as a produce shipping container. “When we bought it, it was specifically hauling lettuce from the Central Valley in California to Massachusetts,” Girguis said. “We’ve taken it and reimagined it as a mobile laboratory, kind of like the International Space Station, but, of course, instead of space, we’re using this to simulate the ice-cold temperatures and high pressures of the deep sea.”

[gz_photo_layout_article_width image=”331095″ credit=”Photos%20by%20Jon%20Chase%2FHarvard%20Staff%20Photographer” /]

Rachel Harris

Postdoctoral researcher, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Favorite item: Stirred pressure vessel

Hydrothermal vents are fissures on the deep seafloor from which geothermally heated water erupts. Harris’s favorite pieces of equipment mimic that in a lab setting. They are known as stirred pressure vessels and the ones Harris has taken a particular liking to are a suite of four titanium reactors retrofitted for this unique purpose. They allow the deep-sea biologist to study the habitable limits of life on Earth and to explore the potential of other ocean worlds such as Jupiter’s moon Europa and Saturn’s moon Enceladus. “They give me a lot of confidence to be able to explore this new frontier of high-pressure microbiology research,” Harris said.

Shraddha Lall

Graduate researcher, Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology Favorite item: MAPLE, the fly-handling robot

For Lall, a third year Ph.D. student, moving a single fly from point A to point B is a repeated everyday task. To do so delicately, efficiently, and without mixing up the flies, she uses a Modular Automated Platform for Large-scale Experiments, or MAPLE. This organism-handling robot can carefully grab one fly at a time, sort flies into different test tube-like wells, and put them back without — it needs to be said — hurting a fly.

Kaitlyn Loftus

Graduate researcher, Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences Favorite item: Textbook

When it comes to her favorite piece of scientific equipment, Loftus is old school. She goes with a textbook. As a theorist who studies how the water cycle works on different planets, the fifth year Ph.D. student says whenever she is working on a project, she almost always keeps a stack of textbooks handy. They can be from the Harvard Library or part of her own collection. “It’s a way to really learn about almost anything that’s been done before,” she said. “[A way of] standing on the shoulders of giants.”

Photos by Kris Snibbe/Harvard file photo; courtesy of Martin Surbeck

Martin Surbeck

Assistant professor, Department of Human Evolutionary Biology Favorite item: Binoculars

For someone who’s always loved observing wild animals, binoculars have been essential. Surbeck remembers as a kid saving all his money to buy binoculars, which can cost around $2,000 for a good pair. “For a long time it was my most expensive possession,” Surbeck said. He’s owned two other pairs since then and they have all come in handy, especially for a primatologist who now spends much of his time observing wild bonobos in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Lerato Takana

Undergraduate researcher, Department of Physics Favorite item: Molecular beam epitaxy tool

In his first year in a physics lab, the College senior has been using this ultra-powerful vacuum to grow thin-film oxides. He’s been quite impressed with the machine in part because it gives the operator the ability to synthesize films as thin as 20 nanometers (reminder: a nanometer is one billionth of a meter). The career potential for mastering the tool is incredible, he said. “As my professor usually says: Can you imagine dealing with singular atoms and then actually holding the atoms you grew? Einstein never got this chance.”

Conor Walsh

Paul A. Maeder Professor of Engineering and Applied Sciences and associate faculty member at the Wyss Institute, Harvard John A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Favorite item: 3D motion capture system

Walsh’s 3D motion capture system helps him and his colleagues understand how people move. Set up in a shared space in the new Science and Engineering Complex, the system allows Walsh to carry out many of the biomechanics and physiology experiments crucial to his work. “Essentially, we put reflective markers on various parts of a person’s body … and we use cameras to track those and then are able to use that data combined with a kinematic model to compute how each different part of the body is moving during a walking, running, lifting cycle, or some other type of motion or activity,” he said.

Share this article

You might like.

Building refresh aims to boost accessibility, preserve historic character

Business leader Joseph Y. Bae ’94 and novelist Janice Y. K. Lee ’94 expand upon three decades of supporting academic excellence, opportunity at Harvard

Hoekstra, Faust, colleagues laud Robin Kelsey, who will step down from his arts and humanities deanship

When should Harvard speak out?

Institutional Voice Working Group provides a roadmap in new report

Day to remember

One journey behind them, grads pause to reflect before starting the next

Had a bad experience meditating? You're not alone.

Altered states of consciousness through yoga, mindfulness more common than thought and mostly beneficial, study finds — though clinicians ill-equipped to help those who struggle

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council (US) Committee on Prudent Practices in the Laboratory. Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Management of Chemical Hazards: Updated Version. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.

Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Management of Chemical Hazards: Updated Version.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

7 Working with Laboratory Equipment

7.a. introduction.

Working safely with hazardous chemicals requires proper use of laboratory equipment. Maintenance and regular inspection of laboratory equipment are essential parts of this activity. Many of the accidents that occur in the laboratory can be attributed to improper use or maintenance of laboratory equipment. This chapter discusses prudent practices for handling equipment used frequently in laboratories.

The most common equipment-related hazards in laboratories come from devices powered by electricity devices for work with compressed gases, and devices for high or low pressures and temperatures. Other physical hazards include electromagnetic radiation from lasers and radio-frequency generating devices. Seemingly ordinary hazards such as floods from water-cooled equipment, accidents with rotating equipment and machines or tools for cutting and drilling, noise extremes, slips, trips, falls, lifting, and poor ergonomics account for the greatest frequency of laboratory accidents and injuries. Understandably, injuries to the hands are very common in the laboratory. Care should be taken to use appropriate gloves when handling laboratory equipment to protect against electrical, thermal, and chemical burns, cuts, and punctures.

7.B. WORKING WITH WATER-COOLED EQUIPMENT

The use of water as a coolant in laboratory condensers and other equipment is common practice. Although tap water is often used for these purposes, this practice should be discouraged. In many localities conserving water is essential and makes tap water inappropriate. In addition, the potential for a flood is greatly increased. Refrigerated recirculators can be expensive, but are preferred for cooling laboratory equipment to conserve water and to minimize the impact of floods. To prevent freezing at the refrigeration coils, using a mixture of water and ethylene glycol as the coolant is prudent. Spills of this mixture are very slippery and must be cleaned thoroughly to prevent slips and falls.

Most flooding occurs when the tubing supplying the water to the condenser disconnects. Hoses can pop off when building water pressure fluctuates, causing irregular flows, or can break when the hose material has deteriorated from long-term or improper use. Floods also result when exit hoses jump out of the sink from a strong flow pulse or sink drains are blocked by an accumulation of extraneous material. Proper use of hose clamps and maintenance of the entire cooling system or alternative use of a portable cooling bath with suction feed can resolve such problems. Plastic locking disconnects can make it easy to unfasten water lines without having to unclamp and reclamp secured lines. Some quick disconnects also incorporate check valves, which do not allow flow into or out of either half of the connection when disconnected. This feature allows for disconnecting and reconnecting with minimal spillage of water. To reduce the possibility of overpressurization of fittings or glassware, consider installing a vented pressure relief device on the water supply. Interlocks are also available that shut off electrical power in the event of loss of coolant flow and are recommended for unattended operations.

7.C. WORKING WITH ELECTRICALLY POWERED LABORATORY EQUIPMENT

Electrically powered equipment is used routinely for laboratory operations requiring heating, cooling, agitation or mixing, and pumping. Electrically powered equipment found in the laboratory includes fluid and vacuum pumps, lasers, power supplies, both electrophoresis and electrochemical apparatus, x-ray equipment, stirrers, hot plates, heating mantles, microwave ovens, and ultrasonicators. Attention must be paid to both the mechanical and the electrical hazards inherent in using these devices. High-voltage and high-power requirements are increasingly prevalent; therefore prudent practices for handling these devices are increasingly necessary.

Electric shock is the major electrical hazard. Although relatively low current of 10 mA poses some danger, 80 to 100 mA can be fatal. In addition, if improperly used, electrical equipment can ignite flammable or explosive vapors. Most of the risks can be minimized by regular proper maintenance and a clear understanding of the correct use of the device. Before beginning any work, all personnel should be shown and trained in the use of all electrical power sources and the location of emergency shutoff switches. Information about emergency procedures can be found in section 7.G .

7.C.1. General Principles

Particular caution must be exercised during installation, modification, and repair, as well as during use of the equipment. To ensure safe operation, all electrical equipment must be installed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of the National Electrical Code (NEC) of the National Fire Protection Association ( NFPA, 2008 ). Trained laboratory personnel should also consult state and local codes and regulations, which may contain special provisions and be more stringent than the NEC rules. All repair and calibration work on electrical equipment must be carried out by properly trained and qualified personnel. Before modification, installation, or even minor repairs of electrical equipment are carried out, the devices must be deenergized and all capacitors discharged safely. Furthermore, this deenergized and/or discharged condition must be verified before proceeding. Note that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Control of Hazardous Energy Standard (29 CFR § 1910.147, Lock out/Tag out) applies.

All new electrical equipment should be inspected on receipt for a certification mark. If the device bears a certification mark from UL (Underwriters Laboratories Inc.), CSA (Canadian Standards Association), ETL (originally a mark of ETL Testing Laboratories, now a mark of Intertek Testing Services), or CE (Conformance European-Communaut Europenne or Conformit Europenne), detailed testing and inspection are not required. If the device does not bear one of these certification marks, the device should be inspected by an electrician before it is put into service.

Each person participating in any experiment involving the use of electrical equipment must be aware of all applicable equipment safety issues and be briefed on any potential problems. Trained laboratory personnel can significantly reduce hazards and dangerous behavior by following some basic principles and techniques: checking and rechecking outlet receptacles ( section 7.C.1.1 ), making certain that wiring complies with national standards and recommendations ( section 7.C.1.2 ), reviewing general precautions ( section 7.C.1.3 ) and personal safety techniques ( section 7.C.1.4 ), and ensuring familiarity with emergency procedures ( section 7.G ).

7.C.1.1. Outlet Receptacles

All 110-V outlet receptacles in laboratories should be of the standard design that accepts a three-prong plug and provides a ground connection. Replace two-prong receptacles as soon as feasible, and add a separate ground wire so that each receptacle is wired as shown in Figure 7.1 . 1 The ground wire is preferably (but not required by code) on top to prevent anything falling onto a plug with exposed prongs, and will contact the ground before contacting the hot or the neutral line.

Representative design for a three-wire grounded outlet. The design shown is for 15-A, 125-V service. The specific design will vary with amperage and voltage.

It is also possible to fit a receptacle with a ground-fault circuit interrupter (GFCI), which disconnects the current if a ground fault is detected. GFCI devices are required by local electrical codes for outdoor receptacles and for selected laboratory receptacles located less than 6 ft (1.83 m) from sinks if maintenance of a good ground connection is essential for safe operation. These devices differ in operation and purpose from fuses and circuit breakers, which are designed primarily to protect equipment and prevent electrical fires due to short circuits or other abnormally high current draw situations. Certain types of GFCIs cause equipment shutdowns at unexpected and inappropriate times; hence, their selection and use need careful planning. Be aware that GFCIs are not fail-safe devices. They significantly reduce the possibility of fatal shock but do not entirely eliminate it.

Locate receptacles that provide electric power for operations in laboratory chemical hoods outside the hood. This location prevents the production of electrical sparks inside the chemical hood when a device is plugged in or disconnected, and it also allows trained laboratory personnel to disconnect electrical devices from outside the hood in case of an accident. Cords should not be routed in such a way that they can accidentally be pulled out of their receptacles or tripped over.

Simple inexpensive plastic retaining strips and ties can be used to route cords safely. For laboratory chemical hoods with airfoils, route the electrical cords under the bottom airfoil so that the sash can be closed completely. Most airfoils are easily removed and replaced with a screwdriver.

7.C.1.2. Wiring

Fit laboratory equipment plugged into a 110-V (or higher) receptacle with a standard three-conductor line cord that provides an independent ground connection to the chassis of the apparatus (see Figure 7.2 ). Ground all electrical equipment unless it is double-insulated. This type of equipment has a two-conductor line cord that meets national codes and standards. The use of two-pronged cheaters to connect equipment with three-prong grounded plugs to old-fashioned two-wire outlets is hazardous and should be prohibited.

Standard wiring convention for 110-V electric power to equipment.

Limit the use of extension cords to temporary (<1 day) setups, if they are permitted at all. Use a standard three-conductor extension cord of sufficient rating for the connected equipment with an independent ground connection. In addition, good practice uses only extension cords equipped with a GFCI. Install electrical cables properly, even if only for temporary use, and keep them out of aisles and other traffic areas. Install overhead racks and floor channel covers if wires must pass over or under walking areas. Do not intermingle signal and power cables in cable trays or panels. Special care is needed when installing and placing water lines (used, for example, to cool equipment such as flash lamps for lasers) so that they do not leak or produce condensation, which can dampen power cables nearby.

Equipment plugged into an electrical receptacle should include a fuse or other overload protection device to disconnect the circuit if the apparatus fails or is overloaded. This overload protection is particularly useful for equipment likely to be left on and unattended for a long time, such as variable autotransformers (e.g., Variacs and powerstats), 2 vacuum pumps, drying ovens, stirring motors, and electronic instruments. If equipment does not contain its own built-in overload protection, modify it to provide such protection or replace it with equipment that does. Overload protection does not protect the trained laboratory personnel from electrocution but does reduce the risk of fire.

7.C.1.3. General Precautions for Working with Electrical Equipment

Laboratory personnel should be certain that all electrical equipment is well maintained, properly located, and safely used. To do this, review the following precautions and make the necessary adjustments prior to working in the laboratory:

• Insulate all electrical equipment properly. Visually inspect all electrical cords monthly, especially in any laboratory where flooding can occur. Keep in mind that rubber-covered cords can be eroded by organic solvents, ozone (produced by ultraviolet lamps), and long-term air oxidation.
• Properly replace all frayed or damaged cords before any further use of the equipment is permitted. Qualified personnel should conduct the replacement.
• Ensure the complete electrical isolation of electrical equipment and power supplies. Enclose all power supplies in a manner that makes accidental contact with power circuits impossible. In every experimental setup, including temporary ones, use suitable barriers or enclosures to protect against accidental contact with electrical circuits.
• Many laboratory locations are classified under fire and electrical codes with a mandate for nonsparking explosion-proof motors and electrical equipment. Areas where large amounts of flammable solvents are in use also require explosion-proof lighting and electrical fixtures. The owners of such facilities are responsible for ensuring that all electrical equipment and fixtures meet these codes and regulations.
• Equip motor-driven electrical equipment used in a laboratory where volatile flammable materials may be present with either nonsparking induction motors that meet Class 1, Division 2, Group C-D electrical standards ( Earley, 2008 ; NFPA, 2008 ) or air motors instead of series-wound motors that use carbon brushes, such as those generally used in vacuum pumps, mechanical shakers, stirring motors, magnetic stirrers, and rotary evaporators. Do not use variable autotransformers to control the speed of an induction motor. The speed of an induction motor is determined by the AC frequency rather than the voltage. Thus, using a variable autotransformer that controls voltage and not frequency could cause the motor to overheat and presents a fire hazard.
• Because series-wound motors cannot be modified to make them spark-free, do not use appliances (e.g., kitchen refrigerators, mixers, and blenders) with such motors in laboratories where flammable materials may be present.
• When bringing ordinary electrical equipment such as vacuum cleaners and portable electric drills having series-wound motors into the laboratory for special purposes, take specific precautions to ensure that no flammable vapors are present before such equipment is used (see Chapter 6 , section 6.G ).
• Locate electrical equipment to minimize the possibility of spills onto the equipment or flammable vapors carried into it. If water or any chemical is spilled on electrical equipment, shut off the power immediately at a main switch or circuit breaker and unplug the apparatus using insulated rubber gloves.
• Minimize condensation that may enter electrical equipment if it is placed in a cold room or a large refrigerator. Cold rooms pose a particular risk in this respect because the atmosphere is frequently at a high relative humidity, and the potential for water condensation is significant.
• If electrical equipment must be placed in such areas, mount the equipment on a wall or vertical panel. This precaution reduces, but does not eliminate, the effects of condensation.
• Condensation can also cause electrical equipment to overheat, smoke, or catch fire. In such a case, shut off the power to the equipment immediately at a main switch or circuit breaker and unplug the apparatus using insulated rubber gloves.
• To minimize the possibility of electrical shock, carefully ground the equipment using a suitable flooring material, and install GFCIs.
• Always unplug equipment before undertaking any adjustments, modifications, or repairs (with the exception of certain instrument adjustments as indicated in section 7.C.7 ). When it is necessary to handle equipment that is plugged in, be certain hands are dry and, if feasible, wear nonconductive gloves and shoes with insulated soles.
• Ensure that all laboratory personnel know the location and operation of power shutoffs (i.e., main switches and circuit breaker boxes) for areas in which they work. Voltages in breaker boxes may present an arc or flash hazard. Only qualified personnel wearing proper personal protective equipment (PPE) are allowed to open these boxes to access the main switches and circuit breakers contained therein. Label high-voltage breaker boxes presenting an arc or flash hazard. Trained laboratory personnel should be familiar with, and have in place, alternative power shutoffs (i.e., properly installed crash buttons, ready access to equipment power cord plugs).
• After making modifications to an electrical system or after a piece of equipment has failed, do not use it again until it has been cleaned and properly inspected.

All laboratories should have access to a qualified technician who can make routine repairs to existing equipment and modifications to new or existing equipment so that it will meet acceptable standards for electrical safety. The NFPA National Electrical Code Handbook ( NFPA, 2008 ) provides guidelines.

7.C.1.4. Personal Safety Techniques for Use with Electrical Equipment

When operating or servicing electrical equipment, be sure to follow basic safety precautions as summarized below.

• Inform each individual working with electrical equipment of basic precautionary steps to take to ensure personal safety.
• Avoid contact with energized electrical circuits. Let only qualified individuals service electrical equipment.
• Before qualified individuals service electrical equipment in any way, disconnect the power source to avoid the danger of electric shock. Ensure that any capacitors are, in fact, discharged.
• Before reconnecting electrical equipment to its power source after servicing, check the equipment with a suitable tester, such as a multimeter, to ensure that it is properly grounded.
• Do not reenergize a circuit breaker until sure that the cause of the short circuit has been corrected.
• Install GCFIs as required by code to protect users from electric shock, particularly if an electrical device is handheld during a laboratory operation.
• If a person is in contact with a live electrical conductor, disconnect the power source before removing the person from the contact and administering first aid.

7.C.1.5. Additional Safety Techniques for Equipment Using High Current or High Voltage

Unless laboratory personnel are specially trained to install or repair high-current or high-voltage equipment, reserve such tasks for trained electrical workers. The following reminders are included for qualified personnel:

• Always assume that a voltage potential exists within a device while servicing it, even if it is deenergized and disconnected from its power source. A device may contain capacitors, for example, and could retain a potentially harmful electrical charge.
• Work with only one hand, if it is not awkward or otherwise unsafe to do so, while keeping the other hand at your side or in a pocket away from all conducting materials. This precaution reduces the likelihood of accidents that result in current passing through the chest cavity.
• Avoid becoming grounded by staying at least 6 in. away from walls, water, and all metal materials including pipes.
• Use voltmeters and test equipment with ratings and leads sufficient to measure the highest potential voltage to be found inside the equipment being serviced.

7.C.2. Vacuum Pumps

The use of water aspirators is discouraged. Their use in filtration or solvent-removal operations involving volatile organic solvents presents a hazard that volatile chemicals will contaminate the wastewater and the sewer, even if traps are in place. Water and sewer contamination may result in violation of local, state, or federal law. These devices also consume large volumes of water, present a flooding hazard, and can compromise local conservation measures.

Distillation or similar operations requiring a vacuum must use a trapping device to protect the vacuum source, personnel, and the environment. This requirement also applies to oil-free Teflon-lined diaphragm pumps. Normally the vacuum source is a cold trap cooled with dry ice or liquid nitrogen. Even with the use of a trap, the oil in a mechanical vacuum trap can become contaminated and the waste oil must be treated as a hazardous waste.

Vent the output of each pump to a proper air exhaust system. This procedure is essential when the pump is being used to evacuate a system containing a volatile toxic or corrosive substance. Failure to observe this precaution results in pumping the untrapped substances into the laboratory atmosphere. Scrubbing or absorbing the gases exiting the pump is also recommended. Even with these precautions, volatile toxic or corrosive substances may accumulate in the pump oil and thus be discharged into the laboratory atmosphere during future pump use. Avoid this hazard by draining and replacing the pump oil when it becomes contaminated. Follow procedures recommended by the institution's environmental health and safety office for the safe disposal of pump oil contaminated with toxic or corrosive substances. General-purpose laboratory vacuum pumps should have a record of use to prevent cross-contamination or reactive chemical incompatibility problems.

Belt-driven mechanical pumps must have protective guards. Such guards are particularly important for pumps installed on portable carts or tops of benches where laboratory personnel might accidentally entangle clothing or fingers in the moving belt or wheels. Glassware under vacuum is at risk for implosion, which could result in flying glass. (For more information about working under vacuum, see Chapter 4 , section 4.E.4 .)

7.C.3. Refrigerators and Freezers

The potential hazards posed by laboratory refrigerators include release of vapors from the contents, the possible presence of incompatible chemicals, and spillage. As general precautions, laboratory refrigerators should be placed against fire-resistant walls, should have heavy-duty power cords, and preferably should be protected by their own circuit breaker. Enclose the contents of a laboratory refrigerator in unbreakable secondary containment. Because there is almost never a satisfactory way to continuously vent the interior atmosphere of a refrigerator, any vapors escaping from vessels placed in one will accumulate in the refrigerated space and gradually be absorbed into the surrounding insulation. Thus, the atmosphere in a refrigerator could contain an explosive mixture of air and the vapor of a flammable substance or a dangerously high concentration of the vapor of a toxic substance or both. The impact of exposure to toxic substances can be aggravated when a person inserts his or her head inside a refrigerator to search for a particular sample. Placing potentially explosive (see Chapter 6 , sections 6.C and 6.G ) or highly toxic substances (see Chapter 6 , sections 6.D and 6.E ) in a laboratory refrigerator is strongly discouraged. As noted in Chapter 6 , section 6.C , laboratory refrigerators are never used to store food or beverages for human consumption. Add permanent labels warning against the storage of food and beverages to all laboratory refrigerators and freezers.

Potential ignition sources, (e.g., electrical sparks) must be eliminated from the inside of laboratory refrigerators used to store flammable chemicals. Use explosion-proof refrigerators for the storage of flammable materials; they are sold for this purpose and are labeled and hardwired. Only refrigerators that have been UL- or FM (Factory Mutual)-approved for flammable storage should be used for this purpose. A labeled hardwired explosion-proof refrigerator is mandatory for a renovated or new laboratory where flammable materials need refrigeration. Because of the expense of an explosion-proof refrigerator, a modified sparkproof refrigerator is sometimes found in older laboratories and laboratories using very small amounts of flammable materials. However, a modified sparkproof refrigerator cannot meet the standards of an explosion-proof refrigerator. Where they exist, a plan to phase them out is recommended.

Sparkproof refrigerators must have had the following modifications:

• Interior light and switch mounted on the door frame, if present, have been removed.
• Contacts of the thermostat controlling the fan and temperature have been moved outside the refrigerated compartment.

Permanently attach a prominent sign warning against the storage of flammable substances to the door of an unmodified refrigerator. Frost-free refrigerators are not suitable for laboratory use, owing to the problems associated with attempts to modify them. Many of these refrigerators have a drain tube or hole that carries water (and any flammable material present) to an area adjacent to the compressor and thus present a spark hazard. The electric heaters used to defrost the freezing coils are also a potential spark hazard (see section 7.C.5 ). To ensure its effective functioning, defrost a freezer manually when ice builds up.

Never place uncapped containers of chemicals in a refrigerator. Caps provide a vapor-tight seal to prevent a spill if the container is tipped over. Aluminum foil, corks, corks wrapped with aluminum foil, and glass stoppers do not meet this criterion, and their use is discouraged. The most satisfactory temporary seals are normally screw caps lined with either a conical polyethylene or a Teflon insert. The best containers for samples that are to be stored for longer periods of time are sealed nitrogen-filled glass ampoules. At a minimum, use catch pans for secondary containment.

Careful labeling of samples placed in refrigerators and freezers with both the contents and the owner's name is essential. Do not use water-soluble ink; labels should be waterproof or covered with transparent tape. Storing samples with due consideration of chemical compatibility is important in these often small crowded spaces.

7.C.4. Stirring and Mixing Devices

The stirring and mixing devices commonly found in laboratories include stirring motors, magnetic stirrers, shakers, small pumps for fluids, and rotary evaporators for solvent removal. These devices are often used in laboratory chemical hoods, and they must be operated such that they do not provide an ignition source for flammable vapors. Consider the use of air-driven stirrers and other spark-free devices. Furthermore, it is important that, in the event of an emergency, such devices can be turned on or off from outside the laboratory chemical hood. Heating baths associated with these devices (e.g., baths for rotary evaporators) should also be spark-free and controllable from outside the hood. (See sections 7.C.1 and 7.C.5 .)

Use only spark-free induction motors in power stirring and mixing devices or any other rotating equipment used for laboratory operations. In some cases these devices may be required by fire and electrical codes. Although the motors in most of the currently marketed stirring and mixing devices meet this criterion, their on/off switches and rheostat-type speed controls can produce an electrical spark any time they are adjusted, because they have exposed contacts. Many of the magnetic stirrers and rotary evaporators currently on the market have this disadvantage. An effective solution is to remove any switch located on the device and insert a switch in the cord near the plug end; because the electrical receptacle for the plug should be outside the chemical hood, this modification ensures that the switch will also be outside. Do not control the speed of an induction motor operating under a load by a variable autotransformer.

Because stirring and mixing devices, especially stirring motors and magnetic stirrers, are often operated for fairly long periods without constant attention, consider the consequences of stirrer failure, electrical overload, or blockage of the motion of the stirring impeller. In good practice a stirring impeller is attached to the shaft of the stirring motor with lightweight rubber tubing. If the motion of the impeller is impeded, the rubber can twist away from the motor shaft, and the motor will not stall. Because this practice does not always prevent binding of the impeller, it is also desirable to fit unattended stirring motors with a suitable fuse or thermal protection device. (Also see section 7.C.1 .) Take care when attaching an impeller shaft to an overhead motor. If the attachment fails, the impeller shaft could fall through the bottom of a glass vessel below, risking flying glass and a spill.

7.C.5. Heating Devices

Perhaps the most common types of electrical equipment found in a laboratory are the devices used to supply the heat needed to effect a reaction or separation. These include ovens, hot plates, heating mantles and tapes, oil baths, salt baths, sand baths, air baths, hot-tube furnaces, hot-air guns, and microwave ovens. The use of steam-heated devices rather than electrically heated devices is generally preferred whenever temperatures of 100 °C or less are required. Because they do not present shock or spark risks, they can be left unattended with assurance that their temperature will never exceed 100 °C. Use steam that is generated by units that are dedicated to laboratory use. Steam generated for general facility use may contain contaminants that could interfere with laboratory work.

Take a number of general precautions when working with heating devices in the laboratory. If using a variable autotransformer (variac), be sure to wire (or rewire) new or existing equipment, as illustrated in Figure 7.3 , before use. However, temperature controllers with built-in safety interlock capability are available from commercial sources and are preferred to variable autotransformers. Enclose the actual heating element in any laboratory heating device in a glass, ceramic, or insulated metal case to prevent a metallic conductor or laboratory personnel from accidentally touching the wire carrying the electric current. This type of construction minimizes the risk of electric shock and of accidentally producing an electrical spark near a flammable liquid or vapor (see Chapter 6 , section 6.G.1 ). It also diminishes the possibility that a flammable liquid or vapor will come into contact with wires at temperatures that might exceed its ignition temperature. Because many household appliances (e.g., hot plates and space heaters) do not meet this criterion, do not use them in a laboratory. Resistance devices used to heat oil baths should not contain bare wires. If any heating device becomes so worn or damaged that its heating element is exposed, either discard the device or repair it before it is used again.

Schematic diagram of a properly wired variable autotransformer.

Use laboratory heating devices with a variable autotransformer to control and limit the input voltage to some fraction of the total line voltage, typically 110 V. If a variable autotransformer is not wired in this manner, the switch on it may or may not disconnect both wires of the output from the 110-V line when it is switched to the off position. Also, if this wiring scheme has not been followed, and especially if the grounded three-prong plug is not used, even when the potential difference between the two output lines is only 10 V, each output line may be at a relatively high voltage (e.g., 110 V and 100 V) with respect to an electrical ground. Because these potential hazards exist, whenever laboratory personnel use a variable autotransformer with an unknown wiring scheme, prudent practice assumes that either of the output lines carries a potential of 110 V and is capable of delivering a lethal electric shock.

The external cases of all variable autotransformers have perforations for cooling and ventilation, and some sparking may occur whenever the voltage adjustment knob is turned. Therefore, locate these devices where water and other chemicals cannot be spilled onto them and where their movable contacts will not be exposed to flammable liquids or vapors. Mount variable autotransformers on walls or vertical panels and outside laboratory chemical hoods; do not simply place them on laboratory benchtops.

Electrical input lines, including lines from variable transformers, to almost all laboratory heating devices have a potential of 110 V with respect to any electrical ground; always view these lines as potential shock and spark hazards. Connections from these lines to a heating device should be both mechanically and electrically secure and completely covered with insulating material. Do not use alligator clips to connect a line cord from a variable autotransformer to a heating device, especially to an oil bath or an air bath, because such connections pose a shock hazard. They also may slip off, creating an electrical spark and, perhaps, contacting other metal parts to create an additional hazard. Make all connections by using, preferably, a plug-and-receptacle combination, or wires with insulated terminals firmly secured to insulated binding posts.

Whenever an electrical heating device is used, either a temperature controller or a temperature-sensing device must be used that will turn off the electric power if the temperature of the heating device exceeds some preset limit. Similar control devices are available that will turn off the electric power if the flow of cooling water through a condenser is stopped owing to the loss of water pressure or loosening of the water supply hose to a condenser. Independent temperature sensors must be used for the temperature controller and shutoff devices. Fail-safe devices, which can be either purchased or fabricated, can prevent the more serious problems of fires or explosions that may arise if the temperature of a reaction increases significantly because of a change in line voltage, the accidental loss of reaction solvent, or loss of cooling. Use fail-safe devices for stills purifying reaction solvents, because such stills are often left unattended for significant periods of time. Temperature-sensing devices absolutely must be securely clamped or firmly fixed in place, maintaining contact with the object or medium being heated at all times. If the temperature sensor for the controller is not properly located or has fallen out of place, the controller will continue to supply power until the sensor reaches the temperature setting, creating an extremely hazardous situation. (See also Vignette 7.1 .)

VIGNETTE 7.1

Oil bath fire as a result of a loose temperature sensor. A researcher walking past a laboratory noticed a flame burning behind the closed sashes of the chemical fume hood. He determined that the oil in an oil bath was burning. There was no other equipment (more...)

Hot plates, oil baths, and heating mantles that can melt and combust plastic materials (e.g., vials, containers, tubing) can cause laboratory fires, and the area around the equipment should be cleared of those hazards prior to use. Be aware that dry and concentrated residues can ignite when overheated in stills, ovens, dryers, and other heating devices.

(See section 7.C.1 for additional information.)

7.C.5.1. Ovens

Electrically heated ovens are commonly used in the laboratory to remove water or other solvents from chemical samples and to dry laboratory glassware. Never use laboratory ovens to prepare food for human consumption.

Purchase or construct laboratory ovens with their heating elements and their temperature controls physically separated from their interior atmospheres. Small household ovens and similar heating devices usually do not meet these requirements and, consequently, should not be used in laboratories. With the exception of vacuum drying ovens, laboratory ovens rarely prevent the discharge of the substances volatilized in them into the laboratory atmosphere. The volatilized substances may also be present in sufficient concentration to form explosive mixtures with the air inside the oven (see Chapter 6 , section 6.G ). This hazard can be reduced by connecting the oven vent directly to an exhaust system. (See Vignette 7.2 .)

VIGNETTE 7.2

Muffle furnace fire. A laboratory specializing in the analysis of paint samples was asked to analyze pigmented polypropylene. The first step of the analytical protocol called for ashing the sample in a muffle furnace. The technician loaded the furnace (more...)

Do not use ovens to dry any chemical sample that has even moderate volatility and might pose a hazard because of acute or chronic toxicity unless special precautions have been taken to ensure continuous venting of the atmosphere inside the oven. (See Vignette 7.2 .) Thus, do not dry most organic compounds in a conventional unvented laboratory oven.

To avoid explosion, do not dry glassware that has been rinsed with an organic solvent in an oven until it has been rinsed again with distilled water. Potentially explosive mixtures can be formed from volatile substances and the air inside an oven.

Bimetallic strip thermometers are preferred for monitoring oven temperatures. Do not mount mercury thermometers through holes in the tops of ovens with the bulb hanging into the oven. If a mercury thermometer is broken in an oven of any type, close the oven and turn it off immediately to avoid mercury exposure. Keep it closed until cool. Remove all mercury from the cold oven with the use of appropriate cleaning equipment and procedures (see Chapter 6 , section 6.C.10.8 ). After removal of all visible mercury, monitor the heated oven in a laboratory chemical hood until the mercury vapor concentration drops below the threshold limit value. (For information about reducing the use of mercury in thermometers, see Chapter 5 , section 5.B.8 .)

7.C.5.2. Hot Plates

Laboratory hot plates are often used when solutions are to be heated to 100 °C or higher and the inherently safer steam baths cannot be used as the source of heat. As previously noted, use only hot plates that have completely enclosed heating elements in laboratories. Although almost all laboratory hot plates currently sold meet this criterion, many older ones pose an electrical spark hazard arising from either the on/off switch located on the hot plate, the bimetallic thermostat used to regulate the temperature, or both. Normally, these two spark sources are located in the lower part of the hot plate in a region where any heavier-than-air and possibly flammable vapors evolving from a boiling liquid on the hot plate would tend to accumulate. In principle, these spark hazards are alleviated by enclosing all mechanical contacts in a sealed container or by using solid-state circuitry for switching and temperature control. However, in practice, such modifications are difficult to incorporate into many of the hot plates now in use. Warn laboratory personnel of the spark hazard associated with these hot plates. Set up any newly purchased hot plates to avoid electrical sparks. In addition to the spark hazard, old and corroded bimetallic thermostats in these devices can eventually fuse shut and deliver full continuous current to a hot plate. This risk can be avoided by wiring a fusible coupling into the line inside the hot plate. If the device does overheat, the coupling will melt and interrupt the current (see section 7.C.1 ).

On many brands of combined stirrer/hot plates, the controls for the stirrer and temperature control are not easily differentiated. Care must be taken to distinguish their functions. A fire or explosion may occur if the temperature rather than the stirrer speed is increased inadvertently.

7.C.5.3. Heating Mantles

Heating mantles are commonly used to heat round-bottom flasks, reaction kettles, and related reaction vessels. These mantles enclose a heating element in layers of fiberglass cloth. As long as the fiberglass coating is not worn or broken and no water or other chemicals are spilled into the mantle (see section 7.C.1 ), heating mantles pose minimal shock hazard. They are normally fitted with a male plug that fits into a female receptacle on an output line from a variable autotransformer. This plug combination provides a mechanically and electrically secure connection.

Always use heating mantles with a variable autotransformer to control the input voltage. Never plug them directly into a 110-V line. Trained laboratory personnel should be careful not to exceed the input voltage recommended by the mantle manufacturer. Higher voltages will cause a mantle to overheat, melting the fiberglass insulation and exposing the bare heating element.

Some heating mantles are constructed by encasing the fiberglass mantle in an outer metal case that provides physical protection against damage to the fiberglass. If such metal-enclosed mantles are used, good practice is to ground the outer metal case either by using a grounded three-conductor cord from the variable autotransformer or by securely affixing one end of a heavy braided conductor to the mantle case and the other end to a known electrical ground. This practice protects the laboratory personnel against an electric shock if the heating element inside the mantle short-circuits against the metal case. Placing the heating mantle on a laboratory jack and holding the flask or container being heated by clamps attached to a separate ring stand or grid work is the recommended procedure. This allows for rapid removal of heat in the case of overheating or exothermicity.

7.C.5.4. Oil, Salt, or Sand Baths

When using oil, salt, or sand baths, take care not to spill water and other volatile substances into the baths. Such an accident can splatter hot material over a wide area and cause serious injuries.

Electrically heated oil baths are often used to heat small or irregularly shaped vessels or to maintain a constant temperature with a stable heat source. For temperatures below 200 °C, a saturated paraffin oil is often used; for temperatures up to 300 °C, a silicone oil should be used. Care must be taken with hot oil baths not to generate smoke or have the oil burst into flames from overheating. Always monitor an oil bath by using a thermometer or other thermal sensing device to ensure that its temperature does not exceed the flash point of the oil being used. For the same reason, fit oil baths left unattended with thermal-sensing devices that turn off the electric power if the bath overheats. Heat these baths by an enclosed heating element, such as a knife heater, a tubular immersion heater such as a calrod, or its equivalent. The input connection for this heating element is a male plug that fits a female receptacle from a variable autotransformer (e.g., Variac) output line. Alternatively, a temperature controller can be used to control the temperature of the bath precisely. Temperature controllers are available that provide a variety of heating and cooling options. Thermocouples used by controlling devices must be clamped securely in place to maintain contact with the medium or object being heated at all times.

Oil baths must be well mixed to ensure that there are no hot spots around the elements that take the surrounding oil to unacceptable temperatures. This problem can be minimized by placing the thermoregulator fairly close to the heater. Contain heated oil in either a metal pan or a heavy-walled porcelain dish; a Pyrex dish or beaker can break and spill hot oil if struck accidentally with a hard object. Mount the oil bath carefully on a stable horizontal support such as a laboratory jack that can be raised or lowered easily without danger of the bath tipping over. Always clamp equipment high enough above a hot plate or oil bath that if the reaction begins to overheat, the heater can be lowered immediately and replaced with a cooling bath without having to readjust the clamps holding the equipment setup. Never support a bath on an iron ring because of the greater likelihood of accidentally tipping the bath over. Provide secondary containment in the event of a spill of hot oil. Wear proper protective gloves when handling a hot bath.

Molten salt baths, like hot oil baths, offer the advantages of good heat transfer, commonly have a higher operating range (e.g., 200 to 425 °C), and may have a high thermal stability (e.g., 540 °C). The reaction container used in a molten salt bath must be able to withstand a very rapid heat rise to a temperature above the melting point of the salt. Care must be taken to keep salt baths dry, because they are hygroscopic, a property that can cause hazardous popping and splattering if the absorbed water vaporizes during heating.

7.C.5.5. Hot Air Baths and Tube Furnaces

Hot air baths can be useful heating devices. Nitrogen is preferred for reactions in which flammable materials are used. Electrically heated air baths are frequently used to heat small or irregularly shaped vessels. Because of their inherently low heat capacity, such baths normally must be heated considerably above the desired temperature (≥100 °C) of the vessel being heated. Purchase or construct these baths so that the heating element is completely enclosed and the connection to the air bath from the variable autotransformer is both mechanically and electrically secure. These baths can be constructed from metal, ceramic, or, less desirably, glass vessels. If a glass vessel is used, wrap it thoroughly with heat-resistant tape so that if the vessel breaks accidentally, the glass will be contained and the bare heating element will not be exposed. Fluidized sand baths are usually preferred over air baths.

Tube furnaces are often used for high-temperature reactions under reduced pressure. The proper choice of glassware or metal tubes and joints is required, and the procedures should conform to safe practice with electrical equipment and evacuated apparatus.

(See also section 7.C.1 and Chapter 6 , section 6.G.2.5 .)

7.C.5.6. Heat Guns

Laboratory heat guns are constructed with a motor-driven fan that blows air over an electrically heated filament. They are frequently used to dry glassware or to heat the upper parts of a distillation apparatus during distillation of high-boiling point materials. The heating element in a heat gun typically becomes red-hot during use and, necessarily cannot be enclosed. Also, the on/off switches and fan motors are not usually spark-free. Furthermore, heat guns are designed to pull lab air into and across the red-hot heating elements, thereby increasing the ignition risk. For these reasons, heat guns almost always pose a serious spark hazard (see Chapter 6 , section 6.G.1 ). Never use them near open containers of flammable liquids, in environments where appreciable concentrations of flammable vapors may be present, or in laboratory chemical hoods used to remove flammable vapors. Household hair dryers may be substituted for laboratory heat guns only if they have three-conductor line cords or are double-insulated. Any handheld heating device of this type that will be used in a laboratory should have GFCI protection to ensure against electric shock.

7.C.5.7. Microwave Ovens

Use microwave ovens specifically designed for laboratory use. Domestic microwave ovens are not appropriate.

Microwave heating presents several potential hazards not commonly encountered with other heating methods: extremely rapid temperature and pressure rise, liquid superheating, arcing, and microwave leakage. Microwave ovens designed for the laboratory have built-in safety features and operation procedures to mitigate or eliminate these hazards. Users of such equipment must be thoroughly knowledgeable of operation procedures and safety devices and protocols before beginning experiments, especially when there is a possibility of fire (flammable solvents), overpressurization, or arcing ( Foster and Cournoyer, 2005 ).

To avoid exposure to microwaves, never operate ovens with the doors open. Do not place wires and other objects between the sealing surface and the door on the oven's front face. Keep the sealing surfaces absolutely clean. To avoid electrical hazards, the oven must be grounded. If use of an extension cord is necessary, use only a three-wire cord with a rating equal to or greater than that for the oven. To reduce the risk of fire in the oven, do not overheat samples. The oven must be closely watched when combustible materials are in it. Do not use metal containers or metal-containing objects (e.g., stir bars) in the microwave, because they can cause arcing.

In general, do not heat sealed containers in a microwave oven, because of the danger of explosion. If sealed containers must be used, select their materials carefully and the containers properly designed. Commercially available microwave acid digestion bombs, for example, incorporate a Teflon sample cup, a self-sealing Teflon O-ring, and a compressible pressure-relief valve. Do not exceed the manufacturer's loading limits. For such applications, properly vent the microwave oven using an exhaust system. Placing a large item, such as a laboratory microwave or an oven, inside a chemical fume hood is not recommended.

Heating a container with a loosened cap or lid poses a significant risk. Microwave ovens can heat material (e.g., solidified agar) so quickly that, even though the container lid is loosened to accommodate expansion, the lid can seat upward against the threads and the container can explode. Screw caps must be removed from containers being microwaved. If the sterility of the contents must be preserved, screw caps may be replaced with cotton or foam plugs.

7.C.6. Distillation

Distillation of flammable and combustible solvents is dangerous due to the presence of heat and flammable vapors. Distillations should be maintained under inert atmosphere. At the completion of vacuum distillations, backfill the apparatus with inert gas. Perform such distillations in a chemical hood. Stills in use should be attended at all times and should have an automatic high-temperature shutoff. Distillation can sometimes be avoided by purchasing smaller quantities and high-purity solvents.

7.C.6.1. Solvent Stills

Solvent stills are used to produce dry, oxygen-free, high-purity solvents. Most high-purity solvents are commercially available in specialized kegs or may be obtained from column purification systems (see section 7.C.6.2 ); thus, thermal distillation processes should be a last resort. There have been numerous fires attributed to solvent stills, some resulting in serious injuries and extensive damage to the labs. [See, e.g., Yarnell (2002) .]

The process involves reflux and distillation of organic solvents (many of which are flammable liquids) over drying materials, under nitrogen or argon gas. The most commonly used drying agents involve potentially pyrophoric metals: sodium metal/benzophenone and magnesium metal/iodine. The stills must be periodically quenched to prepare the still bottoms for disposal. This usually involves adding solvent to consume the scavenging agents. The process itself poses a risk of reactive metal adhering to the bottom of the flask, with the potential for exposure to air, potentially causing a spontaneous fire. Most thermal stills rely on electric heating mantles to heat the flammable solvents upward of 82 °C (180 °F), presenting a fire risk and potential ignition source.

Always set up stills in a chemical hood. Although many procedures suggest allowing the process to run overnight, it is prudent to ensure that it is not left completely unattended. Start the process at the beginning of the day and let it run as long as laboratory workers are present. Place Plexiglas shields around the still to protect workers in the event of a serious accident. Deactivate the stills under argon or nitrogen, never air. Do not add fresh solvent, drying agent, or indicator while the still is hot. Ensure that water cooling lines are in good condition. Do not allow material to accumulate at the bottom of the still; quench the still at the end of every procedure and clean thoroughly. Use caution when collecting the reactive materials as waste.

7.C.6.2. Column Purification Systems or “Push Stills”

Column purification systems offer a safer, more environmentally friendly process for providing dry, oxygen-free, high-purity solvents as compared with thermal distillation. The level of impurity (water, oxygen, peroxides) is comparable to thermal distillation. The system is usually composed of refillable stainless steel “kegs” that hold high-purity solvent and act as a solvent reservoir. Inert gas (nitrogen, argon) is used to maintain an inert atmosphere as well as to force solvent through the packed columns that contain activated alumina (for water scavenging) and copper catalyst (for oxygen scavenging). For those solvents that are incompatible with copper (e.g., tetrahydrofuran, methylene chloride, acetonitrile), a second column of alumnia is used along with a dry nitrogen or argon purge to facilitate oxygen removal. The solvent product is dispensed from the columns into a variety of specialized containers for use in the laboratory (glass, stainless steel, etc.).

Column purification systems ( Figure 7.4 ) present much less of a fire risk compared with thermal distillation, because they do not employ heating devices or reactive metals. Because glass containers are not needed, the potential for injury or spill related to breakage is also eliminated.

Example of a column purification system.

The column purification system significantly reduces utility usage compared with a thermal still. Thermal distillation uses an average of 70,000 gal of water per coolant line, per year; the column purification system uses no water. There is no need for heating mantles when solvent is present, and the intrinsically safe properties of the system allow it to be set up virtually anywhere in the laboratory, thus eliminating the need to place the apparatus in a chemical hood. As a result, there is a significant savings in electricity usage, although heating jackets may be required for installations where the water and oxygen scavengers are activated or regenerated.

When using a column purification system, it is important not to draw down the column completely empty. Bubbling or splattering as the product is drawn from the column is an indication of breakthrough of argon. For the column to be functional again, a lengthy priming operation may be needed.

7.C.7. Ultrasonicators, Centrifuges, and Other Electrical Equipment

7.c.7.1. ultrasonicators.

The use of high-intensity ultrasound in the chemical laboratory has grown substantially during the past decade. Human exposure to ultrasound with frequencies of between 16 and 100 kHz can be divided into three distinct categories: airborne conduction, direct contact through a liquid-coupling medium, and direct contact with a vibrating solid.

Ultrasound through airborne conduction does not appear to pose a significant health hazard to humans. However, exposure to the associated high volumes of audible sound can produce a variety of effects, including fatigue, headaches, nausea, and tinnitus. When ultrasonic equipment is operated in the laboratory, the apparatus must be enclosed in a 2-cm-thick wooden box or in a box lined with acoustically absorbing foam or tiles to substantially reduce acoustic emissions (most of which are inaudible).

Avoid direct contact of the body with liquids or solids subjected to high-intensity ultrasound that promotes chemical reactions. Under some chemical conditions, cavitation is created in liquids that induces high-energy chemistry in liquids and tissues. Cell death from membrane disruption can occur even at relatively low acoustic intensities. Exposure to ultrasonically vibrating solids, such as an acoustic horn, can lead to rapid frictional heating and potentially severe burns.

7.C.7.2. Centrifuges

High-speed centrifuges and ultracentrifuges rely on rotors designed specifically for the particular make and model. These rotors are subject to high mechanical stresses from the forces of the rotation speed. Rotors are rated for a maximum speed and a load of specific weight. Improper loading and balancing can cause the rotors to dislodge while spinning. Failure of the rotors may present a number of hazards: violent movement of the unit itself may cause injury or damage to equipment, electrical lines, gas lines, etc.; flying shrapnel may cause personal injury or facility damage; and some units are susceptible to explosions due to the configuration and materials of construction. (See Vignette 7.3 .)

VIGNETTE 7.3

Centrifuge explosion from use of improper rotor. Lab workers had left samples running unattended in an ultracentrifuge using a large aluminum rotor that previously had been used multiple times without incident. The rotor dislodged while spinning at 20,000 (more...)

The following precautions should be taken when operating and inspecting centrifuge rotors:

• Balance the load each time the centrifuge is used. The disconnect switch should automatically shut off the equipment when the top is opened.
• Do not overfill the centrifuge tubes. Ensure that they are hung properly.
• Ensure that the lid is closed before starting the centrifuge.
• Do not overload a rotor beyond the rotor's maximum mass without reducing the rated rotor speed.
• Follow the manufacturer's instructions for safe operating speeds. Do not run a rotor beyond its maximum rated speed.
• Check O-rings and grease the seals routinely with vacuum grease.
• Do not use harsh detergents to clean the rotors, especially aluminum rotors. Use a mild detergent and rinse with deionized water, if possible.
• Be sure to follow the manufacturer's guidelines for when to retire a rotor.
• For flammable and/or hazardous materials, keep the centrifuge under negative pressure to a suitable exhaust system.
• Keep a usage and maintenance log.
• Always use the rotor specified by the manufacturer.

Look for signs of corrosion of the rotors. Metal fatigue will eventually cause any rotor to fail.

Ensure that the coating on the rotor is not damaged.

Check the cone area for cracks, because this area is highly stressed during rotation.

Look for corrosion or cracks in the tube cavity.

7.C.7.3. Electrical Instruments

Most modern electronic instruments have a cord that contains a separate ground wire for the chassis and are supplied with a suitable fuse or other overload protection. Modify any existing instrument that lacks these features to incorporate them. As is true for any electrical equipment, take special precautions to avoid possibility of water or other chemical spills into these instruments.

Under most circumstances, any repairs to, adjustments to, or alterations of electrical instruments should be made only by a qualified individual. Laboratory personnel should not undertake such adjustments unless they have received certification as well as specific training for the particular instrument to be serviced. If trained laboratory personnel do undertake repairs, always unplug the cord before any disassembly begins. However, certain adjustments require connection to a power source, and appropriate protective measures and due diligence are required when working on energized devices. Extra precautions are particularly important for instruments that incorporate high-voltage circuitry.

Many electrical instruments, such as lasers and X-ray, electron-beam, radioactive, photochemical, and electrophoresis equipment, emit potentially harmful radiation, and, therefore, special precautions must be taken when they are used. Only trained laboratory personnel should use and service this equipment. (See section 7.C.1 and Chapter 6 , section 6.E .)

7.C.8. Electromagnetic Radiation Hazards

Laboratory equipment that can produce hazardous amounts of electromagnetic radiation include ultraviolet lamps, arc lamps, heat lamps, lasers, microwave and radio-frequency sources, and X-ray and electron-beam sources.

7.C.8.1. Visible, Ultraviolet, and Infrared Laser Light Sources

Seal or enclose direct or reflected ultraviolet light, arc lamps, and infrared sources to minimize overexposure whenever possible. Wear appropriately rated safety glasses, chemical splash goggles, and face shields for eye protection. Wear long-sleeved clothing and gloves to protect arms and hands from exposure. When lasers or deep UV light sources are in use, lights or highly visible signage should be posted outside the room.

Control measures for the safe use of lasers have been established by the American National Standards Institute and presented in Safe Use of Lasers (ANSI Z136.1-2007; ANSI, 2007 ), which describes the different types of laser hazards and the appropriate measures to control each type. Operate Class IIIB and IV lasers only in posted laser-controlled areas. No one but the authorized operator of a laser system should ever enter a posted laser-controlled laboratory when the laser is in use. (See Chapter 4 , section 4.E.5 .)

7.C.8.2. Radio-Frequency and Microwave Sources

Section 7.C.5.7 provides guidelines for the safe use of microwave ovens in the laboratory. Other devices in the laboratory can also emit harmful microwave or radio-frequency emissions. Train personnel working with these types of devices in their proper operation as well as in measures to prevent exposure to harmful emissions. Position shields and protective covers properly when the equipment is operating. Post warning signs on or near these devices to protect people wearing heart pacemakers.

7.C.8.3. X-Rays, Electron Beams, and Sealed Sources

X-rays and electron beams (E-beams) are used in a variety of laboratory applications but most often for analytical operations. The equipment is government regulated, and usually registration and licensing are required. Train personnel operating or working in the vicinity of these types of equipment appropriately to minimize the risk of exposing themselves and others in the laboratory to harmful ionizing radiation.

The beam from a low-energy X-ray diffraction machine can cause cell destruction as well as genetic damage. The user must always be alert to the on/off status of the X-ray beam, keep aware of the location of the beam, and know how to work safely around the beam when aligning it in preparation for conducting an experiment. Machine warning lights indicate when the beam shutter is open. Users are required to wear a monitoring badge to measure any accumulated exposure.

7.C.8.4. Miscellaneous Physical Hazards Presented by Electrically Powered Equipment

7.c.8.4.1. magnetic fields.

An object that moves into the attractive field of a strong magnet system, such as a nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) system or any other instrument system requiring a superconducting magnet, can become a projectile that is pulled rapidly toward the magnet. For example, the large attractive force of an NMR requires that objects ranging from keys, scissors, knives, wrenches, other tools, oxygen cylinders, buffing machines, and wheelchairs, and other ferromagnetic objects are excluded from the immediate vicinity of the magnet to protect safety and data quality.

Magnetic fields of ~10 G can adversely affect credit cards, watches, and other magnetic objects (see Table 7.1 ). Computer and television screens in neighboring areas may be affected by shifts in small, peripheral magnetic fields as magnets are brought up to field or decommissioned. Prudent practices require posting warnings, cordoning off the area at the 5-G line, and limiting access to areas with more than 10 to 20 G to knowledgeable staff. Keep people wearing heart pacemakers and other electronic or electromagnetic prosthetic devices or other potentially magnetic surgical implants, such as aneurysm clips, away from strong magnetic sources. Repairs done in the vicinity of a strong magnet should be performed with nonferromagnetic tools.

Summary of Magnetic Field Effects.

Magnetic fields operate in three dimensions, and when considering the impact of an instrument, field strength should be checked on the floors above and below the floor where a superconducting magnet is installed. The 5-G line should be identified in all affected rooms, and appropriate warnings should be posted.

Because superconducting magnets use liquid nitrogen and liquid helium coolants, the precautions associated with the use of cryogenic liquids must be observed as well. (Also see section 7.E.2 .) If the superconducting magnet loses superconductivity because of damage, physical shock, or for any other reason, the coil will heat the cryogenic liquid that surrounds it, the magnet will quench (lose field), and the helium will boil off rapidly into the surrounding space. Low-oxygen alarms are recommended in rooms where instruments with superconducting magnets are located. In the event of a quench, all personnel should leave the area and not return until oxygen levels return to normal. If emergency personnel must enter the area before the oxygen levels have been verified, they should wear a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA).

Rooms containing superconducting magnets should provide enough clearance for coolant fills to be performed safely.

If an object becomes stuck to a superconducting magnet, do not attempt to remove it, but call the vendor of the magnet for guidance. Attempting to remove the object could result in injury to personnel and damage to the magnet. It may also cause the magnet to quench, releasing dangerous quantities of gaseous helium into the area.

7.C.8.4.2. Rotating Equipment and Moving Parts

Injuries can result from bodily contact with rotating or moving objects, including mechanical equipment, parts, and devices. The risk of injury can be reduced through improved engineering, good housekeeping, and safe work practice and personal behavior. Trained laboratory personnel must know how to safely shut down equipment in the event of an emergency; must enclose or shield hazardous parts, such as belts, chains, gears, and pulleys, with appropriate guards; and must not wear loose-fitting clothing, jewelry, or unrestrained long hair around machinery with moving parts.

7.C.8.4.3. Cutting and Puncturing Tools

Hand injuries are the most frequently encountered injuries in laboratories. Many of these injuries can be prevented by keeping all sharp and puncturing devices fully protected, avoiding the use of razor blades as cutting tools, and using utility knives that have a spring-loaded guard that covers the blade. Appropriate cutting techniques and the use of the proper or specialized tools should also be considered. Dispose of razor blades, syringe needles, suture needles, and other sharp objects or instruments carefully in designated receptacles rather than throwing them into the trash bin unprotected. (See Chapter 4 , Section 4.E.9 .)

Minimize glass cuts by use of correct procedures (e.g., the procedure for inserting glass tubing into rubber stoppers and tubing, which is taught in introductory laboratories), through appropriate use of protective equipment, and by careful attention to manipulation. Protective equipment is not fail-safe and should not be relied on to prevent cutting injuries. A variety of adapters are available that render glass tubing and rubber stoppers largely obsolete. Technique is also important. In the case of a slip or a break, the resulting motion should not be in the direction of the person. For example, perform cutting operations with the cutting motion moving away from the body.

7.C.8.4.4. Noise Extremes

Any laboratory operation that exposes trained laboratory personnel to a significant noise source of 85 decibels or greater for an 8-hour average duration should have a hearing conservation program to protect from excessive exposure. Consult an audiologist or industrial hygienist to determine the need for such a program and to provide assistance in developing one.

7.C.8.4.5. Slips, Trips, and Falls

The risks of slips, trips, falls, and collisions between persons and objects are reduced by cleaning up liquid or solid spills immediately, keeping doors and drawers closed and passageways clear of obstructions, providing step stools, ladders, and lifts to reach high areas, and walking along corridors and on stairways at a deliberate pace. Floors that are likely to be wet, for example around ice, dry ice, or liquid nitrogen dispensers, should be slip resistant or have a slip-resistant floor covering. Make paper towel dispensers available for wiping up drops or small puddles as soon as they form. Avoid clutter in the laboratory to reduce the temptation to “make space” on the bench by storing items on the floor, which can create a trip hazard.

7.C.8.4.6. Ergonomics and Lifting

Both standing and sitting in a static posture and making repeated motions have been shown to cause a variety of musculoskeletal problems. Problems due to poor ergonomics include eyestrain, stiff and sore back, leg discomfort, and hand and arm injuries. Each situation needs to be evaluated individually. However, personnel who spend significant time working on video display terminals should use furniture appropriate for these tasks, proper posture, and perhaps special eyeglasses. Also, people who use the same tools and hand motions for extended periods of time should take breaks at appropriate intervals to help prevent injuries.

Lifting injuries are one of the more common types of injuries for trained laboratory personnel. The weight of the item to be lifted is a factor, but it is only one of several. The shape and size of an object as well as the lifting posture and the frequency of lifting are also key factors in determining the risks of lifting. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has developed a guide that should be consulted to help determine lifting safety ( Waters et al., 1994 ). Personnel who are at risk for lifting injuries should receive periodic training.

7.D. WORKING WITH COMPRESSED GASES

7.d.1. compressed gas cylinders.

Precautions are necessary for handling the various types of compressed gases, the cylinders that contain them, the regulators used to control their delivery pressure, the piping used to confine them during flow, and the vessels in which they are ultimately used. Regular inventories of cylinders and checks of their integrity with prompt disposal of those no longer in use are important. (See Chapter 5 , section 5.E.6 for information on storing gas cylinders, and Chapter 6 , section 6.H , for discussion of the chemical hazards of gases.)

A compressed gas is defined as a material in a container with an absolute pressure greater than 276 kPa, or 40 psi at 21 °C or an absolute pressure greater than 717 kPa (104 psi) at 54 °C, or both, or any liquid flammable material having a Reid vapor pressure greater than 276 kPa (40 psi) at 38 °C. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) has established codes that specify the materials to be used for the construction and the capacities, test procedures, and service pressures of the cylinders in which compressed gases are transported. However, regardless of the pressure rating of the cylinder, the physical state of the material within it determines the pressure of the gas. For example, liquefied gases such as propane and ammonia exert their own vapor pressure as long as liquid remains in the cylinder and the critical temperature is not exceeded.

Prudent procedures for the use of compressed gas cylinders in the laboratory include attention to appropriate purchase, especially selecting the smallest cylinder compatible with the need, as well as proper transportation and storage, identification of contents, handling and use, and marking and return of the empty cylinder to the company from which it was purchased. Empty compressed gas cylinders purchased for the laboratory should be returned to the company and should never be refilled by laboratory personnel.

Discourage the practice of purchasing unreturnable lecture bottles to avoid the accumulation of partially filled cylinders and cylinder disposal problems. Encourage trained laboratory personnel to lease the cylinders and, in essence, only purchase the contents.

7.D.1.1. Identification of Contents

Clearly label compressed gas cylinders so they are easily, quickly, and completely identified by trained laboratory personnel. Stencil or stamp identification on the cylinder itself, or provide a durable label that cannot be removed from the cylinder. Do not accept any compressed gas cylinder for use that does not identify its contents legibly by name. Color coding is not a reliable means of identification; cylinder colors vary from supplier to supplier, and labels on caps have no value because many caps are interchangeable. Care in the maintenance of cylinder labels is important because unidentified compressed gas cylinders may pose a high risk and present very high disposal costs. Good practice provides compressed gas cylinders with tags on which the names of users and dates of use can be entered. If the labeling on a cylinder becomes unclear or an attached tag is defaced and the contents cannot be identified, mark the cylinder as contents unknown and contact the manufacturer regarding appropriate procedures.

Clearly label all gas lines leading from a compressed gas supply to identify the gas, the laboratory served, and relevant emergency telephone numbers. The labels, in addition to being dated, should be color-coded to distinguish hazardous gases, such as flammable, toxic, or corrosive substances that are coded with a yellow background and black letters, and inert gases that are coded with a green background and black letters. Post signs conspicuously in areas in which flammable compressed gases are stored, identifying the substances and appropriate precautions, for example,

HYDROGEN—FLAMMABLE GAS NO SMOKING-NO OPEN FLAMES

7.D.2. Equipment Used with Compressed Gases

7.d.2.1. records, inspection, and testing.

Carry out high-pressure operations only with equipment specifically designed and built for this use and only by those personnel trained especially to use this equipment. Never carry out reactions in, or apply heat to, an apparatus that is a closed system unless it has been designed and tested to withstand pressure. To ensure that the equipment has been properly designed, each pressure vessel should have stamped on it, or on an attached plate, its maximum allowable working pressure, the allowable temperature at this pressure, and the material of construction. Similarly, the relief pressure—the pressure at which the safety system (e.g., rupture disk or safety vent) will be triggered—and setting data should be stamped on a metal tag attached to installed pressure-relief devices, and the setting mechanisms should be sealed. Relief devices used on pressure regulators do not require these seals or numbers.

Test or inspect all pressure equipment periodically. The frequency of tests and inspections varies, depending on the type of equipment, how often it is used, and the nature of its usage. Corrosive or otherwise hazardous service requires more frequent tests and inspections. Stamp inspection data on or attach it to the equipment. Testing the entire assembled apparatus with soap solution and air or nitrogen pressure to the maximum operating pressure of the weakest section of the assembled apparatus usually detects leaks at threaded joints, packings, and valves. Alternatively, the apparatus may be pressurized and monitored for pressure drop over time.

Before any pressure equipment is altered, repaired, stored, or shipped, vent it and completely remove all toxic, flammable, or other hazardous material so it can be handled safely. Especially hazardous materials may require special cleaning techniques, which should be solicited from the distributor.

(See section 7.E.1 for further information.)

7.D.2.2. Assembly and Operation

During the assembly of pressure equipment and piping, use only appropriate components, and take care to avoid strains and concealed fractures from the use of improper tools or excessive force. Do not support any significant weight with the tubing in place in a pressure apparatus.

Do not force threads that do not fit smoothly. (See Vignette 7.4 .) Do not overtighten fittings. Thread connections must match; tapered pipe threads cannot be joined with parallel machine threads. Use Teflon tape or a suitable thread lubricant on appropriate fittings, (e.g., Teflon tape on pipe fittings only) when assembling the apparatus (see section 7.D.2.2.8 ). However, never use oil or lubricant on any equipment that will be used with oxygen. Reject parts having damaged or partly stripped threads (see also section 7.D.2.2.3 ).

VIGNETTE 7.4

Hydrogen leak from jammed cylinder cap. A technician tried to remove the cap from a 2,000-psig 42-L hydrogen cylinder. Unable to unscrew the cap by hand, the technician attempted to use a wrench to loosen it. While doing this, the cylinder valve opened (more...)

In assembling copper-tubing installations, avoid sharp bends and allow considerable flexibility. Copper tubing hardens and cracks on repeated bending. Many metals can become brittle in hydrogen or corrosive gas service. In carbon monoxide atmospheres, some alloys containing nickel or iron can generate carbonyls [e.g., Ni(CO) 4 ] which are toxic when absorbed through the skin or inhaled. Inspect all tubing frequently and replace when necessary.

Stuffing boxes and gland joints are a likely source of trouble in pressure installations. Give particular attention to the proper installation and maintenance of these parts, including the proper choice of lubricant and packing material.

Shield all reactions under pressure and carry them out as remotely as possible, for example, with valve extensions and behind a heavy shield or with closed-circuit TV monitoring if needed.

Do not fill autoclaves and other pressure-reaction vessels more than half full to ensure that space remains for expansion of the liquid when it is heated. Do not make leak corrections or adjustments to the apparatus while it is pressurized; rather, depressurize the system before mechanical adjustments are made.

A regulator or step-down pressure valve should be used to pressurize low-pressure equipment from a high-pressure source. After pressurizing equipment with a high-pressure source, the equipment should either be disconnected or the connecting piping/tubing should be vented to atmospheric pressure. This will prevent the accidental buildup of excessive pressure in the low-pressure equipment due to leakage from the high-pressure source. For example, after completing the pressurization of an autoclave with a compressed gas cylinder, the cylinder valve should be closed, the delivery regulator backed off to 0 psig, and the lines between the cylinder and the autoclave vented.

Do not use vessels or equipment made partly or entirely of silver or copper or alloys containing more than 50% copper in contact with acetylene or ammonia. Do not let those vessels or equipment made of metals susceptible to amalgamation (e.g., copper, brass, zinc, tin, silver, lead, and gold) come into contact with mercury. This warning includes equipment that has soldered and brazed joints.

Place prominent warning signs in any area where a pressure reaction is in progress so that personnel entering the area will be aware of the potential risk.

7.D.2.2.1. Pressure-Relief Devices

Protect all pressure or vacuum systems and all vessels that may be subjected to pressure or vacuum by properly designed, installed, and tested pressure-relief devices. Experiments involving highly reactive materials that might explode or undergo rapid decomposition with gas evolution (tetrafluoroethylene and hydrogen cyanide are two examples) may also require the use of special pressure-relief devices and may need to be operated at a fraction of the permissible working pressure of the system.

Examples of pressure-relief devices include the rupture-disk type used with closed-system vessels and the spring-loaded safety valves used with vessels for transferring liquefied gases. The following precautions are advisable in the use of pressure-relief devices:

• In addition to the pressure setting, pressure-relief device and associated fittings (tubing, connectors, etc.) must be properly sized and configured to provide a sufficient rate of pressure relief while preventing overpressurization. The diameter of the relief device and fittings and the presence of bends and angles are important considerations that should be addressed by a qualified and trained person or persons.
• The materials of construction must be considered, taking into account the compatibility of the chemicals being handled with the relief components.
• The temperature rating of the relief device must be sufficient. Heat conduction via tubing and fittings can cause the relief device to reach high temperatures, depending on the apparatus design.
• Orient pressure-relief devices with the vent side of the device directed away from the operator or other personnel. Also vent the relief device into an appropriate trap to catch flammable solvent, reaction solids, etc., avoiding spray into the workspace in the event of a release and minimizing the potential of a fire and aiding clean up. The relief device and trap must be supported so that they are not dislodged or thrown due the thrust resulting from sudden venting.
• The maximum setting of a pressure-relief device is the rated maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) established for the vessel or for the weakest member of the pressure system at the operating temperature. The operating pressure should be less than the system MAWP. In the case of a system protected by a spring-loaded relief device, the maximum operating pressure should be from 5 to 25% lower than the rated working pressure, depending on the type of safety valve and the importance of leak-free operation. In a system protected by a rupture-disk device, the maximum operating pressure should be approximately two-thirds of the rated MAWP; the exact figure is governed by the fatigue life of the disk used, the temperature, and load pulsations.
• Vent pressure-relief devices that may discharge toxic, corrosive, flammable, or otherwise hazardous or noxious materials in a safe and environmentally acceptable manner such as scrubbing or diluting with nonflammable streams.
• Do not install valves or other shutoff devices between pressure-relief devices and the equipment they are to protect. Similarly, do not install shutoff valves downstream of the relief device and take care to ensure that the relief vent is not blocked or restricted. Tubing and piping downstream of such devices must be at least the same diameter as the fitting on the vent side of the relief device.
• Only qualified persons should perform maintenance work on pressure-relief devices.
• Inspect and replace pressure-relief devices periodically.
• Gas manifolds, compressors, and other sources of high-pressure gas used to supply an apparatus, and which can be isolated from the apparatus by valving, should also be protected by a properly designed pressure-relief device.

7.D.2.2.2. Pressure Gauges

The proper choice and use of a pressure gauge involve several factors, including the flammability, compressibility, corrosivity, toxicity, temperature, and pressure range of the fluid with which it is to be used. Generally, select a gauge with a range that is double the working pressure of the system.

A pressure gauge is normally a weak point in any pressure system because its measuring element must operate in the elastic zone of the metal involved. The resulting limited factor of safety makes careful gauge selection and use mandatory and often dictates the use of accessory protective equipment. The primary element of the most commonly used gauges is a Bourdon tube, which is usually made of brass or bronze and has soft-soldered connections. More expensive gauges are available that have Bourdon tubes made of steel, stainless steel, or other special metals and welded or silver-soldered connections. Accuracies vary from ±2% for less expensive pressure gauges to ±0.1% for higher quality gauges. Use a diaphragm gauge with corrosive gases or liquids or with viscous fluids that would destroy a steel or bronze Bourdon tube.

Consider alternative methods of pressure measurement that may provide greater safety than the direct use of pressure gauges. Such methods include the use of seals or other isolating devices in pressure tap lines, indirect observation devices, and remote measurement by strain-gauge transducers with digital readouts.

Mount pressure gauges so that they are easily read during operation.

Pressure gauges often have built-in pressure-relief devices. Care must be taken to ensure that, in the event of failure, this relief device is oriented away from personnel.

7.D.2.2.3. Piping, Tubing, and Fittings

The proper selection and assembly of components in a pressure system are critical safety factors. Considerations include the materials used in manufacturing the components, compatibility with the materials to be under pressure, the tools used for assembly, and the reliability of the finished connections. Use no oil or lubricant of any kind in a tubing system with oxygen because the combination produces an explosion hazard. Use all-brass and stainless steel fittings with copper or brass and steel or stainless steel tubings, respectively. Fitting of this type must be installed correctly. Do not mix different brands of tube fittings in the same apparatus assembly because construction parts are often not interchangeable.

7.D.2.2.4. Glass Equipment

Avoid glassware for work at high pressure whenever possible. Glass is a brittle material, subject to unexpected failures due to factors such as mechanical impact and assembly and tightening stresses. Poor annealing after glassblowing can leave severe strains. Glass equipment, such as rotameters and liquid-level gauges, incorporated in metallic pressure systems should be installed with shutoff valves at both ends to control the discharge of liquid or gaseous materials in the event of breakage. Mass flowmeters are available that can replace rotameters in desired applications.

7.D.2.2.5. Plastic Equipment

Except as noted below, avoid the use of plastic equipment for pressure or vacuum work unless no suitable substitute is available. These materials can fail under pressure or thermal stress. Only use materials that are appropriately rated or recommended for that particular service.

Tygon and similar plastic tubing have quite limited applications in pressure work. These materials can be used for hydrocarbons and most aqueous solutions at room temperature and moderate pressure. Reinforced plastic tubing that can withstand higher pressures is also available. However, loose tubing under pressure can cause physical damage by its own whipping action. Details of permissible operating conditions must be obtained from the manufacturer. Because of their very large coefficients of thermal expansion, some polymers have a tendency to expand greatly on heating and to contract on cooling. This behavior can create a hazard in equipment subjected to very low temperatures or to alternating low and high temperatures. Plastic tubing may also disrupt electrical grounding and thus present a static electricity hazard. The use of plastic tubing with flammable gases or liquids is not recommended if grounding is an issue.

7.D.2.2.6. Valves

Valves come in a wide range of materials of construction, pressure and temperature ratings, and type. The materials of construction (metal, elastomer, and plastic components) must be compatible with the gases and solvents being used. The valves must be rated for the intended pressure and temperature. Ball valves are preferred over needle valves because their status (on/ off) can be determined by quick visual inspection. Use metering or needle valves only when careful flow control is important to the operation. Micrometers can sometimes be used with needle valves to allow quick determination of the status.

7.D.2.2.7. Gas Monitors

Electronic monitors and alarms are available to prevent hazards due to asphyxiant, flammable, and many toxic gases. Consider their use especially if large quantities or large cylinders of these gases are in use. Make sure the monitor is properly rated for the intended purpose as some detectors are subject to interference by other gases.

7.D.2.2.8. Teflon Tape Applications

Use teflon tape on tapered pipe thread where the seal is formed in the thread area. Tapered pipe thread is commonly found in applications where fittings are not routinely taken apart (e.g., general building piping applications).

Do not use Teflon tape on straight thread (e.g., Swagelok) where the seal is formed through gaskets or by other metal-to-metal contacts that are forced together when the fitting is tightened [e.g., Compressed Gas Association (CGA) gas cylinder fittings or compression fittings]. Metal-to-metal seals are machined to tolerances that seal without the need of Teflon tape or other gasketing materials. If used where not needed, as on CGA fittings, Teflon tape only spreads and weakens the threaded connections and can plug up lines that it enters accidentally.

7.D.3. Handling and Use of Gas Cylinders

Gas cylinders must be handled carefully to prevent accidents or damage to the cylinder. Leave the valve protection cap in place until the cylinder is secured and ready for use. Do not drag, roll, slide, or allow gas cylinders to strike each other forcefully. Always transport them on approved wheeled cylinder carts with retaining straps or chains. The plastic mesh sleeves sometimes installed by vendors are intended only to protect the paint on the cylinder and do not serve as a safety device.

Secure compressed gas cylinders firmly at all times. A clamp and belt or chain, holding the cylinder between waist and shoulder to a wall, are generally suitable for this purpose. In areas of seismic activity, secure gas cylinders both toward the top and toward the bottom. Individually secure cylinders; using a single restraint strap or chain around a number of cylinders is often not effective. Locate cylinders in well-ventilated areas. Although inert gases are not exposure hazards, they can produce conditions of oxygen depletion that could lead to asphyxiation. Vent pressure-relief devices protecting equipment that is attached to cylinders of flammable, toxic, or otherwise hazardous gases to a safe place. (See section 7.D.2.2.1 for details.)

Standard cylinder-valve outlet connections have been devised by CGA to prevent the mixing of incompatible gases due to an interchange of connections. Outlet threads used vary in diameter; some are male and some are female, some are right-handed and some are left-handed. In general, right-handed threads are used for nonfuel and water-pumped gases, and left-handed threads are used for fuel and oil-pumped gases. Information on the standard equipment assemblies for use with specific compressed gases is available from the supplier. To minimize undesirable connections that may result in a hazard, use only CGA standard combinations of valves and fittings in compressed gas installations. Avoid the assembly of miscellaneous parts (even of standard approved types). Do not use an adapter or cross-thread a valve fitting. Examine the threads on cylinder valves, regulators, and other fittings to ensure that they correspond to one another and are undamaged.

Place cylinders so that the rotary cylinder valve handle at the top is accessible at all times. Open cylinder valves slowly, and only when a proper regulator is firmly in place and the attachment has been shown to be leakproof by an appropriate test. Close the cylinder valve as soon as the necessary amount of gas has been released. Valves should be either completely open or completely closed. Install flow restrictors on gas cylinders to minimize the chance of excessive flows. Never leave the cylinder valve open when the equipment is not in use. This precaution is necessary not only for safety when the cylinder is under pressure but also to prevent the corrosion and contamination that would result from diffusion of air and moisture into the cylinder when it is emptied.

Most cylinders are equipped with hand-wheel valves. Those that are not should have a spindle key on the valve spindle or stem while the cylinder is in service. Use only wrenches or other tools provided by the cylinder supplier to remove a cylinder cap or to open a valve. Never use a screwdriver to pry off a stuck cap or pliers to open a cylinder valve. If valve fittings require washers or gaskets, check the materials of construction before the regulator is fitted.

If the valve on a cylinder containing an irritating or toxic gas is being opened outside, the worker should stand upwind of the cylinder with the valve pointed downwind, away from personnel, and warn those working nearby in case of a possible leak. If the work is being done inside, open the cylinder only in a laboratory chemical hood or specially designed cylinder cabinet. Install a differential pressure switch with an audible alarm in any chemical hood dedicated for use with toxic gases. In the event of chemical hood failure, the pressure switch should activate an audible alarm warning personnel.

7.D.3.1. Preventing and Controlling Leaks

Check cylinders, connections, and hoses regularly for leaks. Convenient ways to check for leaks include a flammable gas leak detector (for flammable gases only) or looking for bubbles after application of soapy water or a 50% glycerin-water solution. At or below freezing temperatures, use the glycerin solution instead of soapy water. Bubble-forming solutions designed for leak testing are commercially available. When the gas to be used in the procedure is a flammable, oxidizing, or highly toxic gas, check the system first for leaks with an inert gas (helium or nitrogen) before introducing the hazardous gas. Only leak-test solutions specifically designed for oxygen compatibility may be used to test for oxygen leaks; do not use soap solutions because they may contain oils that can react violently with the oxygen.

The general procedures discussed in Chapter 6 , section 6.C , can be used for relatively minor leaks, when the indicated action can be taken without exposing personnel to highly toxic substances. The leaking cylinder can be moved through populated portions of the building, if necessary, by placing a plastic bag, rubber shroud, or similar device over the top and taping it (preferably with duct tape) to the cylinder to confine the leaking gas. If there is any risk of exposure, call the environmental health and safety office and evacuate the area before the tank is moved.

If a leak at the cylinder valve handle cannot be remedied by tightening a valve gland or a packing nut, take emergency action and notify the supplier. Never attempt to repair a leak at the junction of the cylinder valve and the cylinder or at the safety device; consult with the supplier for instructions.

When the nature of the leaking gas or the size of the leak constitutes a more serious hazard, an approved SCBA and protective apparel may be required, and personnel may need to be evacuated (see Chapter 6 , section 6.C.2 ). If toxic gas is leaking from a cylinder, donning of protective equipment and evacuation of personnel are required. Cylinder coffins are also available to encapsulate leaking cylinders. (See Chapter 6 , section 6.H for more information.)

7.D.3.2. Pressure Regulators

Pressure regulators are required to reduce a high-pressure supplied gas to a desirable lower pressure and to maintain a satisfactory delivery pressure and flow level for the required operating conditions. They are available to fit many operating conditions over a range of supply and delivery pressures, flow capacities, and construction materials. All regulators are typically of a diaphragm type and are spring-loaded or gas-loaded, depending on pressure requirements. They can be single-stage or two-stage. Under no circumstances should oil or grease be used on regulator valves or cylinder valves because these substances may react with some gases (e.g., oxygen).

Each regulator is supplied with a specific CGA standard inlet connection to fit the outlet connection on the cylinder valve for the particular gas. Never tamper with or adapt regulators for use with gases for which they are not designed. Likewise, never substitute the fittings that are on either the cylinder side or downstream (low-pressure) side of a vendor-supplied regulator. Instead, purchase a regulator designed for use with the specific cylinder, and use adapters only on the downstream side of the regulator. Unqualified persons must never attempt to repair or modify regulators.

Check regulators before use to verify they are free of foreign objects and to correct for the particular gas. Regulators for use with noncorrosive gases are usually made of brass. Special regulators made of corrosion-resistant materials are available for use with such gases as ammonia, boron trifluoride, chlorine, hydrogen chloride, hydrogen sulfide, and sulfur dioxide. Because of freeze-up and corrosion problems, regulators used with carbon dioxide gas must have special internal design features and be made of special materials. Regulators used with oxidizing agents must be cleaned specially to avoid the possibility of an explosion on contact of the gas with any reducing agent or oil left from the cleaning process.

All pressure regulators should be equipped with spring-loaded pressure-relief valves (see section 7.D.2.2.1 for further information on pressure-relief devices) to protect the low-pressure side. When used on cylinders of flammable, toxic, or otherwise hazardous gases, vent the relief valve to a laboratory chemical hood or other safe location. Avoid the use of internal-bleed-type regulators. When working with hazardous gases, installing flow-limiting devices after the regulator is recommended in order to add a level of control on the system. Remove regulators from corrosive gases immediately after use and flush with dry air or nitrogen. Bubblers of any type (e.g., mercury, oil) are not suitable for use as pressure regulators and should not be used. (For information about reducing the use of mercury in laboratories, see Chapter 5 , section 5.B.8 .)

7.D.3.3. Flammable Gases

Keep all sources of ignition away from cylinders of flammable gases and ensure that these cylinders will not leak. Always keep connections to piping, regulators, and other appliances tight to prevent leakage, and keep the tubing or hoses used in good condition. Perform leak checks periodically. Flash arrestors are recommended for flammable gases. Do not interchange regulators, hoses, and other appliances used with cylinders of flammable gases with similar equipment intended for use with other gases. Ground cylinders properly to prevent static electricity buildup, especially in very cold or dry environments. Separate cylinders containing flammable gases from cylinders of oxidizing gases by at least 20 ft or by a 5-ft-high fire-resistant partition with a minimum 30-minute fire rating. Store all cylinders containing flammable gases in a well-ventilated place. Never store reserve stocks of such cylinders in the vicinity of cylinders containing oxidizing gases including oxygen, fluorine, and chlorine. Never store oxidizing gases near flammable liquids.

7.E. WORKING WITH HIGH OR LOW PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES

Work with hazardous chemicals at high or low pressures and high or low temperatures requires planning and special precautions. For many experiments, extremes of both pressure and temperature, such as reactions at elevated temperatures and pressures and work with cryogenic liquids and high vacuum, must be managed simultaneously. Carry out procedures at high or low pressures with protection against explosion or implosion by appropriate equipment selection and the use of safety shields. Provide appropriate temperature control and interlocks so that heating or cooling baths cannot exceed the desired limits even if the equipment fails. Take care to select and use glass apparatuses that can safely withstand thermal expansion or contraction at the designated pressure and temperature extremes.

7.E.1. Pressure Vessels

Perform high-pressure operations only in special chambers equipped for this purpose. Trained laboratory personnel should ensure that equipment and pressure vessels are appropriately selected, properly labeled and installed, and protected by pressure-relief and necessary control devices. Vessels must be strong enough to withstand the stresses encountered at the intended operating pressures and temperatures. The vessel material must not corrode when it is in contact with its contents. The material should not react with the process being studied, and the vessel must be of the proper size and configuration. Never carry out reactions in, or apply heat to, an apparatus that is a closed system unless it has been designed and tested to withstand the generated pressure.

Pressure-containing systems designed for use at elevated temperatures should have a positive-feedback temperature controller. Manual control using a simple variable autotransformer, such as a variac, is not good practice. The use of a backup temperature controller capable of both recording temperatures and shutting down an unattended system is strongly recommended.

(See section 7.D.2 , above.)

7.E.1.1. Records, Inspection, and Testing

In some localities, adherence to national codes such as the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code ( ASME, 1992 ) is mandatory. Selection of containers, tubing, fittings, and other process equipment, along with the operational techniques and procedures, must conform to the constraints necessary for high-pressure service. The proper selection and assembly of components in a pressure system are critical safety factors. Compatibility of materials, tools used for assembly, and the reliability of connections are all key considerations.

Each pressure vessel in a laboratory should have a stamped number or fixed label plate that uniquely identifies it. Information such as the maximum allowable working pressure, allowable temperature at this pressure, material of construction, and burst diagram should be readily available. Information regarding the vessel's history should include temperature extremes it has experienced, any modifications and repairs made to the original vessel, and all inspections or test actions it has undergone. Similarly, the relieving pressure and setting data should be stamped on a metal tag attached to installed pressure-relief devices. Relief devices used on pressure regulators do not require these seals or numbers.

Test or inspect all pressure equipment periodically. The interval between tests or inspections is determined by the severity of the usage the equipment has received. Corrosive or otherwise hazardous service requires more frequent tests and inspections. Stamp inspection data on or attach it to the equipment. Pressure vessels may be subjected to nondestructive inspections such as visual inspection, penetrant inspection, acoustic emissions recording, and radiography. However, hydrostatic proof tests are necessary for final acceptance. They should be performed as infrequently as possible but before the vessel is placed into initial service, every 10 years thereafter, after a significant repair or modification, and if the vessel experiences overpressure or overtemperature.

Testing the entire apparatus with soap solution and air or nitrogen pressure to the maximum allowable working pressure of the weakest section of the assembled apparatus usually detects leaks at threaded joints, packings, and valves.

Pressure-test and leak-test final assemblies to ensure their integrity. Trained laboratory personnel are strongly advised to consult an expert on high-pressure work as they design, build, and operate a high-pressure process. Finally, exercise extreme care when disassembling pressure equipment for repair, modification, or decommissioning. (See Vignette 7.5 .) Personnel should be familiar with the safe procedures for depressurizing the system, including the order in which to open valves or fittings. Wear protective equipment in case a line or vessel that is opened contains material under pressure. Good practice is to cover the vessel or fitting being opened with a cloth or paper towel to contain any spray should the contents be unknowingly pressurized.

VIGNETTE 7.5

Injury while working on equipment under pressure. A laboratory person connected a fresh helium cylinder to a gas manifold. When the cylinder valve was opened to pressurize the system, a slight hissing sound was heard from a fitting that connected a flexible (more...)

7.E.1.2. Pressure Reactions in Glass Equipment

Run reactions under pressure in metal equipment, not glass, if at all possible. For any reaction run on a large scale (>10 g total weight of reactants) or at a maximum pressure in excess of 690 kPa (100 psi), use only procedures involving a suitable high-pressure autoclave or shaker vessel. If glass is required because of material-of-construction concerns, use a metal reactor with a glass or Teflon liner instead of a glass vessel under pressure. Glass pressure reaction vessels are available from several vendors and are designed for use in the 0- to 200-psig range. However, it is sometimes convenient to run very small scale reactions at low pressures in a small sealed glass tube or in a thick-walled pressure bottle of the type used for catalytic hydrogenation. For any such reaction, laboratory personnel should be fully prepared for the significant possibility that the sealed vessel will burst. Gases must be vented properly and adequate precautions taken for ventilation. When using glass under pressure, assume that the glass will fail. Take every precaution to prevent injury from flying glass or from corrosive or toxic reactants by using suitable shielding. Often a mesh is provided around the glassware to catch pieces should the vessel rupture. Seal centrifuge bottles with rubber stoppers clamped in place, wrapped with friction tape and shielded with a metal screen or wrapped with friction tape and surrounded by multiple layers of loose cloth toweling, and clamped behind a good safety shield. Some bottles are typically equipped with a head-containing inlet and exhaust gas valves, a pressure gauge, and a pressure-relief valve. If a pressure gauge is not used, estimate the maximum internal pressure by calculation prior to beginning the experiment to ensure that the maximum allowable pressure is not exceeded. When corrosive materials are used, use a Teflon pressure-relief valve. The preferred source of heat for such vessels is steam, because an explosion in the vicinity of an electrical heater could start a fire and an explosion in a liquid heating bath would scatter hot liquid around the area. Carry out any reaction of this type in a chemical hood, labeled with signs that indicate the contents of the reaction vessel and the explosion risk.

Fill glass tubes under pressure no more than three-quarters full. Appropriate precautions using the proper shielding must be taken for condensing materials and sealing tubes. Vacuum work can be carried out on a Schlenk line, an apparatus used for work with air-sensitive compounds, as long as proper technique is used. The sealed glass tubes can be placed either inside pieces of brass or iron pipe capped at one end with a pipe cap or in an autoclave containing some of the reaction solvent (to equalize the pressure inside and outside the glass tube). The tubes can be heated with steam or in a specially constructed, electrically heated sealed-tube furnace that is controlled thermostatically and located to direct the force of an explosion into a safe area. When the required heating has been completed, allow the sealed tube or bottle to cool to room temperature. Wrap sealed bottles and tubes of flammable materials with cloth toweling, place behind a safety shield, and cool slowly, first in an ice bath and then in dry ice. After cooling, the clamps and rubber stoppers can be removed from the bottles prior to opening. Use PPE and apparel, including shields, masks, coats, and gloves, during tube-opening operations. Note that NMR tubes are often thin-walled and should only be used for pressure reactions in a special high-pressure probe or in capillary devices.

Examine newly fabricated or repaired glass equipment for flaws and strains under polarized light. Never rely on corks, rubber stoppers, and rubber or plastic tubing as relief devices to protect glassware against excess pressure; use a liquid seal, Bunsen tube, or equivalent positive-relief device. With glass pipe, use only proper metal.

7.E.2. Liquefied Gases and Cryogenic Liquids

Cryogenic liquids are materials with boiling points of less than −73 °C (−100 °F). Liquid nitrogen, helium, argon, and slush mixtures of dry ice with isopropyl alcohol are the materials most commonly used in cold traps to condense volatile vapors from a gas or vapor stream. In addition, oxygen, hydrogen, and helium are often used in the liquid state.

The primary hazards of cryogenic liquids are frostbite, asphyxiation, fire or explosion, pressure buildup (either slowly or due to rapid conversion of the liquid to the gaseous state), and embrittlement of structural materials. The extreme cold of cryogenic liquids requires special care in their use. The vapor that boils off from a liquid can cause the same problems as the liquid itself.

The fire or explosion hazard is obvious when gases such as oxygen, hydrogen, methane, and acetylene are used. Air enriched with oxygen can greatly increase the flammability of ordinary combustible materials and may even cause some noncombustible materials to burn readily (see Chapter 6 , sections 6.G.4 and 6.G.5 ). Oxygen-saturated wood and asphalt have been known to explode when subjected to shock. Because oxygen has a higher boiling point (−183 °C) than nitrogen (−195 °C), helium (−269 °C), or hydrogen (−252.7 °C), it can be condensed out of the atmosphere during the use of these lower boiling-point cryogenic liquids. With the use of liquid hydrogen particularly, explosive conditions may develop. (See Chapter 6 , sections 6.F.3 and 6.G.2 , for further discussion.)

Furnish all cylinders and equipment containing flammable or toxic liquefied gases (not vendor-owned) with a spring-loaded pressure-relief device (not a rupture disk) because of the magnitude of the potential risk that can result from activation of a nonresetting relief device. Commercial cylinders of liquefied gases are normally supplied only with a fusible-plug type of relief device, as permitted by DOT regulations. Protect pressurized containers that contain cryogenic material with multiple pressure-relief devices.

Cryogenic liquids must be stored, shipped, and handled in containers that are designed for the pressures and temperatures to which they may be subjected. Materials that are pliable under normal conditions can become brittle at low temperatures. Dewar flasks, which are used for relatively small amounts of cryogenic material, should have a dust cap over the outlet to prevent atmospheric moisture from condensing and plugging the neck of the tube. Special cylinders that are insulated and vacuum-jacketed with pressure-relief valves and rupture devices to protect the cylinder from pressure buildup are available in capacities of 100 to 200 L.

A special risk to personnel is skin or eye contact with the cryogenic liquid. Because these liquids are prone to splash owing to the large volume expansion ratio when the liquid warms up, wear eye protection, preferably chemical splash goggles and a face shield, when handling liquefied gases and other cryogenic fluids. Do not transfer liquefied gases from one container to another for the first time without the direct supervision and instruction of someone who is experienced in this operation. Transfer very slowly to minimize boiling and splashing.

Do not allow unprotected parts of the body to come in contact with uninsulated vessels or pipes that contain cryogenic liquids because extremely cold material may bond firmly to the skin and tear flesh if separation or withdrawal is attempted. Even very brief skin contact with a cryogenic liquid can cause tissue damage similar to that of frostbite or thermal burns, and prolonged contact may result in blood clots that have potentially very serious consequences. Gloves must be insulated, impervious to the fluid being handled, and loose enough to be tossed off easily in case the cryogenic liquid becomes trapped close to the skin. Never wear tight gloves when working with cryogenic liquids. Trained laboratory personnel are also encouraged to wear long sleeves when handling cryogenic fluids. Handle objects that are in contact with cryogenic liquids with tongs or potholders. Ventilate the work area well. Virtually all liquid gases present the threat of poisoning, explosion, or, at a minimum, asphyxiation in a confined space. Major harmful consequences of the use of cryogenic inert gases, including asphyxiation, are due to boiling off of the liquid and pressure buildup, which can lead to violent rupture of the container or piping.

Take special care when handling liquid hydrogen. In general, do not transfer liquid hydrogen in an air atmosphere because oxygen from the air can condense in the liquid hydrogen, presenting a possible explosion risk. Take all precautions to keep liquid oxygen from organic materials; spills on oxidizable surfaces can be hazardous.

Although nitrogen is inert, its liquefied form can be hazardous because of its cryogenic properties and because displacement of air oxygen in the vicinity can lead to asphyxiation followed by death with little warning. Fit rooms that contain appreciable quantities of liquid nitrogen (N 2 ) with oxygen meters and alarms. Do not store liquid nitrogen in a closed room because the oxygen content of the room can drop to unsafe levels.

Do not fill cylinders and other pressure vessels that are used for the storage and handling of liquefied gases to more than 80% capacity, to protect against possible thermal expansion of the contents and bursting of the vessel by hydrostatic pressure. If the possibility exists that the temperature outside of the cylinder may increase to greater than 30°C, a lower percentage (e.g., 60%) of capacity should be the limit.

7.E.2.1. Cold Traps and Cold Baths

Choose cold traps that are large enough and cold enough to collect the condensable vapors. Check cold traps frequently to make sure they do not become plugged with frozen material. After completion of an operation in which a cold trap has been used, isolate the trap from the source, remove from the coolant, and vent to atmospheric pressure in a safe and environmentally acceptable way. Otherwise, pressure could build up, creating a possible explosion or sucking pump oil into a vacuum system. Cold traps under continuous use, such as those used to protect inert atmosphere dryboxes, should be electrically cooled, and their temperature should be monitored with low-temperature probes.

Use appropriate gloves and a face shield to avoid contact with the skin when using cold baths. Wear dry gloves when handling dry ice. Do not lower the head into a dry ice chest because carbon dioxide is heavier than air and asphyxiation can result. The preferred liquids for dry-ice cooling baths are isopropyl alcohol or glycols; add dry ice slowly to the liquid portion of the cooling bath to avoid foaming. Avoid the common practice of using acetone-dry ice as a coolant; the alternatives are less flammable, less prone to foaming and splattering with dry ice, and less likely to damage some trap components (O-rings, plastic). Dry ice and liquefied gases used in refrigerant baths should always be open to the atmosphere. Never use them in closed systems, where they may develop uncontrolled and dangerously high pressures.

Exercise extreme caution in using liquid nitrogen as a coolant for a cold trap. If such a system is opened while the cooling bath is still in contact with the trap, oxygen may condense from the atmosphere. The oxygen could then combine with any organic material in the trap to create a highly explosive mixture. Therefore, do not open a system that is connected to a liquid nitrogen trap to the atmosphere until the liquid nitrogen Dewar flask or container has been removed. A liquid nitrogen-cooled trap must never be left under static vacuum. Also, if the system is closed after even a brief exposure to the atmosphere, some oxygen may have already condensed. Then, when the liquid nitrogen bath is removed or when it evaporates, the condensed gases will vaporize, producing a pressure buildup and the potential for explosion. The same explosion hazard can be created if liquid nitrogen is used to cool a flammable mixture that is exposed to air. Caution must be applied when using argon, for instance as an inert gas for Schlenk or vacuum lines, because it condenses as a colorless solid at liquid nitrogen temperature. A trap containing frozen argon is indistinguishable from one containing condensed solvent or other volatiles and presents an explosion hazard if allowed to warm without venting.

7.E.2.2. Selection of Low-Temperature Equipment

Select equipment used at low temperatures carefully because temperature can dramatically change characteristics of materials. For example, the impact strength of ordinary carbon steel is greatly reduced at low temperatures, and failure can occur at points of weakness, such as notches or abrupt changes in the material of construction. When combinations of materials are required, consider the temperature dependence of their volumes so that leaks, ruptures, and glass fractures are avoided. For example, O-rings that provide a good seal at room temperature may lose resilience and fail to function on chilled equipment.

Stainless steels containing 18% chromium and 8% nickel retain their impact resistance down to approximately −240 °C; the exact value depends heavily on special design considerations. The impact resistance of aluminum, copper, nickel, and many other nonferrous metals and alloys increases with decreasing temperatures. Use special alloy steels for liquids or gases containing hydrogen at temperatures greater than 200 °C or at pressures greater than 34.5 MPa (500 psi) because of the danger of weakening carbon steel equipment by hydrogen embrittlement.

7.E.2.3. Cryogenic Lines and Supercritical Fluids

Design liquid cryogen transfer lines so that liquid cannot be trapped in any nonvented part of the system. Experiments in supercritical fluids include high pressure and should be carried out with appropriate protective systems.

7.E.3. Vacuum Work and Apparatus

Vacuum work can result in an implosion and the possible hazards of flying glass, spattering chemicals, and fire. Set up and operate all vacuum operations with careful consideration of the potential risks. Although a vacuum distillation apparatus may appear to provide some of its own protection in the form of heating mantles and column insulation, this is not sufficient because an implosion could scatter hot flammable liquid. Use an explosion shield and a full-face shield to protect laboratory personnel, and carry the procedure out in a laboratory chemical hood. Glassware under vacuum should be kept behind a shield or hood sash, taped, or resin (plastic) coated.

Equipment at reduced pressure is especially prone to rapid pressure changes, which can create large pressure differences within the apparatus. Such conditions can push liquids into unwanted locations, sometimes with undesirable consequences.

Do not allow water, solvents, and corrosive gases to be drawn into a building vacuum system. When the potential for such a problem exists, use a cold trap. Water aspirators are not recommended.

Protect mechanical vacuum pumps by cold traps, and vent their exhausts to an exhaust hood or to the outside of the building. If solvents or corrosive substances are inadvertently drawn into the pump, change the oil before any further use. (Oil contaminated with solvents, mercury, and corrosive substances must be handled as hazardous waste.) It may be desirable to maintain a log of pump usage as a guide to length of use and potential contaminants in the pump oil. Cover the belts and pulleys on vacuum pumps with guards.

(See section 7.C.2 for a discussion of vacuum pumps.)

7.E.3.1. Glass Vessels

Although glass vessels are frequently used in low-vacuum operations, evacuated glass vessels may collapse violently, either spontaneously from strain or from an accidental blow. Therefore, conduct pressure and vacuum operations in glass vessels behind adequate shielding. Check for flaws such as star cracks, scratches, and etching marks each time a vacuum apparatus is used. These flaws can often be noticed if the vessel is help up to a light. Use only round-bottom or thick-walled (e.g., Pyrex) evacuated reaction vessels specifically designed for operations at reduced pressure. Do not use glass vessels with angled or squared edges in vacuum applications unless specifically designed for the purpose (e.g., extra thick glass). Repaired glassware must be properly annealed and inspected with a cross-polarizer before vacuum or thermal stress is applied. Never evacuate thin-walled, Erlenmeyer, or round-bottom flasks larger than 1 L.

7.E.3.2. Dewar Flasks

Dewar flasks are under high vacuum and can collapse as a result of thermal shock or a very slight mechanical shock. Shield them, either by a layer of fiber-reinforced friction tape or by enclosure in a wooden or metal container, to reduce the risk of flying glass in case of collapse. Use metal Dewar flasks whenever there is a possibility of breakage.

Styrofoam buckets with lids can be a safer form of short-term storage and conveyance of cryogenic liquids than glass vacuum Dewar flasks. Although they do not insulate as well as Dewar flasks, they eliminate the danger of implosion.

7.E.3.3. Desiccators

If a glass vacuum desiccator is used, it should be made of Pyrex or similar glass, completely enclosed in a shield or wrapped with friction tape in a grid pattern that leaves the contents visible and at the same time guards against flying glass if the vessel implodes. Plastic (e.g., polycarbonate) desiccators reduce the risk of implosion and may be preferable but should also be shielded while evacuated. Solid desiccants are preferred. Never carry or move an evacuated desiccator. Take care opening the valve to avoid spraying the desiccator contents from the sudden inrush of gas.

7.E.3.4. Rotary Evaporators

Glass components of the rotary evaporator should be made of Pyrex or similar glass. Completely enclose in a shield to guard against flying glass should the components implode. Gradually increase rotation speed and application of vacuum to the flask whose solvent is to be evaporated.

7.E.3.5. Assembly of Vacuum Apparatus

Assemble vacuum apparatus to avoid strain. Joints must allow various sections of the apparatus to be moved if necessary without transmitting strain to the necks of the flasks. Support heavy apparatus from below as well as by the neck. Protect vacuum and Schlenk lines from overpressurization with a bubbler. Gas regulators and metal pressure-relief devices must not be relied on to protect vacuum and Schlenk lines from overpressurization. If a slight positive pressure of gas on these lines is desired, the recommended pressure range is not in excess of 1 to 2 psi. This pressure range is easily obtained by proper bubbler design (depth of the exit tubing in the bubbler liquid).

Place vacuum apparatus well back onto the bench or into the laboratory chemical hood where it will not be inadvertently hit. If the back of the vacuum setup faces the open laboratory, protect it with panels of suitably heavy transparent plastic to prevent injury to nearby personnel from flying glass in case of implosion.

7.F. USING PERSONAL PROTECTIVE, SAFETY, AND EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT

As outlined in previous chapters, trained laboratory personnel must be proactive to ensure that the laboratory is a safe working environment. This attitude begins with wearing appropriate apparel and using proper eye, face, hand, and foot protection when working with hazardous materials. The institution is responsible for providing appropriate safety and emergency equipment for laboratory personnel and emergency personnel. (See also section 6.C .)

7.F.1. Personal Protective Equipment and Apparel

7.f.1.1. protective clothing.

Clothing that leaves large areas of skin exposed is inappropriate in laboratories where hazardous chemicals are in use. Personal clothing should fully cover the body. Appropriate laboratory coats should be worn, buttoned, with the sleeves rolled down. Leave lab coats in the laboratory to minimize the possibility of spreading chemicals to public assembly, eating, or office areas, and clean them regularly. [For more information, see the OSHA Personal Protective Equipment Standard (29 CFR § 1910.132) and the OSHA Laboratory Standard (29 CFR § 1910.1450).]

Always wear protective apparel if there is a possibility that personal clothing could become contaminated or damaged with chemically hazardous material. Washable or disposable clothing worn for laboratory work with especially hazardous chemicals includes special laboratory coats and aprons, jumpsuits, special boots, shoe covers, and gauntlets, as well as splash suits. Protection from heat, moisture, cold, and radiation may be required in special situations. Among the factors to be considered in choosing protective apparel, in addition to the specific application, are resistance to physical hazards, flexibility and ease of movement, chemical and thermal resistance, and ease of cleaning or disposal.

(See also Chapter 6 , section 6.C.2.6.2 .)

7.F.1.2. Foot Protection

Not all types of footwear are appropriate in a laboratory where both chemical and mechanical hazards may exist. Wear substantial shoes in areas where hazardous chemicals are in use or mechanical work is being done. Clogs, perforated shoes, sandals, and cloth shoes do not provide protection against spilled chemicals. In many cases, safety shoes are advisable. Steel toes are recommended when working with heavy objects such as gas cylinders. Shoe covers may be required for work with especially hazardous materials. Shoes with conductive soles prevent buildup of static charge, and insulated soles can protect against electrical shock.

7.F.1.3. Eye and Face Protection

Appropriate eye protection is a requirement for working in a chemical laboratory. Requisite eye protection should be provided for laboratory personnel and visitors, and signs should be posted outside the laboratory indicating that eye protection is required where hazardous chemicals are in use. Ordinary prescription glasses with hardened lenses do not serve as eye protection in the laboratory. Appropriate laboratory eye and face protection includes impact goggles with splash protection (chemical splash goggles), full-face shields that also protect the throat, and specialized eye protection (i.e., protection against ultraviolet light or laser light). The following provides basic information regarding eye protection. (For more information, see Chapter 6 , section 6.C.2.2 .)

• Wear impact protection goggles if there is a danger of flying particles, and full-face shields with safety glasses and side shields for complete face and throat protection.
• Although safety glasses can provide satisfactory protection from flying particles, they do not fit tightly against the face and offer little protection against splashes or sprays of chemicals. Chemical splash goggles that conform to ANSI standard Z87.1-2003 are recommended when working in laboratories and, in particular, when working with hazardous chemicals that present a splash hazard, with vapors or particulates, and with corrosives. Chemical splash goggles have splashproof sides to fully protect the eyes.
• When there is a possibility of liquid splashes, wear both a face shield and chemical splash goggles; this is especially important for work with highly corrosive liquids.
• Use full-face shields with throat protection and safety glasses with side shields when handling explosive or highly hazardous chemicals.
• Wear specialized eye protection if work in the laboratory could involve exposure to lasers, ultraviolet light, infrared light, or intense visible light.

7.F.1.4. Hand Protection

Use gloves that are appropriate to the degree and type of hazard. At all times pay special attention to the hands and any skin that is likely to be exposed to hazardous chemicals. Wear proper protective gloves when handling hazardous chemicals, toxic materials, materials of unknown toxicity, corrosive materials, rough or sharp-edged objects, and very hot or very cold objects. (See Chapter 6 , section 6.C.2.6.1 , for more information about selecting and using gloves to prevent chemical exposure.) The following list highlights some basic information regarding protection of hands.

• Before using gloves, inspect them for integrity and check for discoloration, punctures, or tears.
• The thin latex surgical vinyl and nitrile gloves that are popular in many laboratories may not be appropriate for use with highly toxic chemicals or solvents because of their composition and thin construction.
• Cut-resistant gloves, such as Kevlar ® or leather gloves, are appropriate for handling broken glassware, inserting tubing into stoppers, and handling sharp-edged objects if protection from chemicals is not needed.
• Wear insulated gloves when working with very hot or very cold materials. With cryogenic fluids the gloves must be impervious to fluid but loose enough to be tossed off easily. Absorbent gloves could freeze on the hand and intensify any exposure to liquefied gases.
• Wear insulating rubber gloves when working with electrical equipment.
• Wear a double set of gloves when a single glove material does not provide adequate protection for all the hazards encountered in a given operation. For instance, operations involving a chemical hazard and sharp objects may require the combined use of a chemical-resistant glove and a cut-resistant glove.
• Replace gloves immediately if they are contaminated or torn.
• Replace gloves periodically, depending on the frequency of use. Regular inspection of their serviceability is important. If they cannot be cleaned, dispose of contaminated gloves according to institutional procedures.
• Decontaminate or wash gloves appropriately before removing them; leave gloves in the work area, and do not touch any uncontaminated objects in the laboratory or any other area.

7.F.2. Safety and Emergency Equipment

Safety equipment, including spill control kits, safety shields, fire safety equipment, respirators, safety showers and eyewash units, and emergency equipment should be available in well-marked highly visible locations in all chemical laboratories. Fire-alarm pull stations and telephones with emergency contact numbers must be readily accessible. In addition to the standard items, other safety devices may also be needed. The laboratory supervisor is responsible for ensuring proper training and providing supplementary equipment as needed.

7.F.2.1. Spill Control Kits and Cleanup

All personnel who work in a laboratory in which hazardous substances are used should be familiar with their institution's policy regarding spill control. For non-emergency 3 spills, spill control kits may be available. Tailor them to deal with the potential risk associated with the materials being used in the laboratory. These kits are used to confine and limit the spill if such actions can be taken without risk of injury or contamination. If a spill exceeds the on-scene personnel's ability or challenges their safety, they should leave the spill site and call the emergency telephone number for help. Emergency response spill cleanup personnel should be provided with all available information about the spill.

Specific procedures for cleaning up spills vary depending on the location of the accident, the amount and physical properties of the spilled material, the degree and type of toxicity, and the training of the personnel involved. A typical cleanup kit may be a container on wheels that can be moved to the location of the spill and may include such items as instructions; absorbent pads; a spill absorbent mixture for liquid spills; a polyethylene scoop for dispensing spill absorbent, mixing it with the spill, and picking up the mixture; thick polyethylene bags for disposal of the mixture; and tags and ties for labeling the bags. Use any kit in conjunction with the appropriate PPE, and dispose of the material according to institutional requirements.

(Also see Chapter 6 , section 6.C.10.5 .)

7.F.2.2. Safety Shields

Use safety shields for protection against possible explosions or splash hazards. Shield laboratory equipment on all sides to avoid any line-of-sight exposure of personnel. The front sashes of laboratory chemical hoods provide shielding. Use a portable shield also when manipulations are performed, particularly with chemical hoods that have vertical-rising doors rather than horizontal-sliding sashes.

Use portable shields to protect against hazards of limited severity, such as small splashes, heat, and fires. A portable shield, however, provides no protection at the sides or back of the equipment, and if it is not sufficiently weighted for forward protection, the shield may topple toward personnel during a blast. A fixed shield that completely surrounds the experimental apparatus can afford protection against minor blast damage. Polymethyl methacrylate, polycarbonate, poly(vinyl chloride), and laminated safety plate glass are all satisfactory transparent shielding materials. Where combustion is possible, the shielding material should be nonflammable or slow burning; if it can withstand the working blast pressure, laminated safety plate glass may be the best material for such circumstances. When cost, transparency, high-tensile strength, resistance to bending loads, impact strength, shatter resistance, and burning rate are considered, poly(methyl methacrylate) offers an excellent overall combination of shielding characteristics.

Polycarbonate is much stronger and self-extinguishing after ignition but is readily attacked by organic solvents.

7.F.2.3. Fire Safety Equipment

7.f.2.3.1. fire extinguishers.

All chemical laboratories should have carbon dioxide and dry chemical fire extinguishers. Other types of extinguishers should be available if required for the work that will be performed in the laboratory. The four types of most commonly used extinguishers are listed below, classified by the type of fire for which they are suitable. Note that multipurpose class A, B, and C extinguishers are available.

• Water extinguishers are effective against burning paper and trash (Class A fires). Do not use them for electrical, liquid, or metal fires.
• Carbon dioxide extinguishers are effective against burning liquids, such as hydrocarbons or paint, and electrical fires (Class B and C fires). They are recommended for fires involving computer equipment, delicate instruments, and optical systems because they do not damage such equipment. CO 2 extinguishers are less effective against paper and trash fires and must not be used against metal hydride or metal fires. Care must be taken in using these extinguishers, because the force of the compressed gas can spread burning combustibles such as papers and can tip over containers of flammable liquids.
• Dry powder extinguishers, which contain ammonium phosphate or sodium bicarbonate, are effective against burning liquids and electrical fires (Class B and C fires). They are less effective against paper and trash or metal fires and are not recommended for fires involving delicate instruments or optical systems because of the cleanup problem. Computer equipment may need to be replaced if exposed to sufficient amounts of the dry powders. These extinguishers are generally used where large quantities of solvent may be present.
• Met-L-X extinguishers and others that have special granular formulations are effective against burning metal (Class D fires). Included in this category are fires involving magnesium, lithium, sodium, and potassium; alloys of reactive metals; and metal hydrides, metal alkyls, and other organometallics. These extinguishers are less effective against paper and trash, liquid, or electrical fires.

Every extinguisher should carry a label indicating what class or classes of fires it is effective against and the date it was last inspected. A number of other more specialized types of extinguishers are available for unusual fire hazard situations. All trained laboratory personnel are responsible for knowing the location, operation, and limitations of the fire extinguishers in the work area. The laboratory supervisor is responsible for ensuring that all personnel are aware of the locations of fire extinguishers and are trained in their use. After an extinguisher is used, designated personnel promptly recharge or replace it.

7.F.2.3.2. Heat Sensors and Smoke Detectors

Heat sensors and smoke detectors may be part of the building safety equipment. If designed into the fire alarm system, they may automatically sound an alarm and call the fire department, they may trigger an automatic extinguishing system, or they may only serve as a local alarm. Because laboratory operations may generate heat or vapors, the type and location of the detectors must be carefully evaluated to avoid frequent false alarms.

7.F.2.3.3. Fire Hoses

Fire hoses are intended for use by trained firefighters against fires too large to be handled by extinguishers and are included as safety equipment in some structures. Water has a cooling action and is effective against fires involving paper, wood, rags, and trash (Class A fires). Do not use water directly on fires that involve live electrical equipment (Class C fires) or chemicals such as alkali metals, metal hydrides, and metal alkyls that react vigorously with water (Class D fires).

Do not use streams of water against fires that involve oils or other water-insoluble flammable liquids (Class B fires). Water will not readily extinguish such fires; instead, it can cause the fire to spread or float to adjacent areas. These possibilities are minimized by the use of a water fog. Water fogs are used extensively by the petroleum industry because of their fire-controlling and extinguishing properties. A fog can be used safely and effectively against fires that involve oil products, as well as those involving wood, rags, and rubbish.

Because of the potential risks involved in using water around chemicals, laboratory personnel should not use fire hoses except in extreme emergencies. Reserve them for trained firefighters. Extinguish clothing fires by immediately dropping to the floor and rolling; however, if a safety shower is nearby, use it to extinguish a clothing fire (as noted in section 7.F.2.5 ).

7.F.2.3.4. Automatic Fire-Extinguishing Systems

In areas where fire potential and the risk of injury or damage are high, automatic fire-extinguishing systems are often used. These may be of the water sprinkler, foam, carbon dioxide, halon, or dry chemical type. If an automatic fire-extinguishing system is in place, inform laboratory personnel of its presence and advise them of any safety precautions required in connection with its use (e.g., evacuation before a carbon dioxide total-flood system is activated, to avoid asphyxiation).

7.F.2.4. Respiratory Protective Equipment

The primary method for the protection of laboratory personnel from airborne contaminants is to minimize the amount of such materials entering the laboratory air. When effective engineering controls are not possible, use suitable respiratory protection after proper training. Respiratory protection may be needed in carrying out an experimental procedure, in dispensing or handling hazardous chemicals, in responding to a chemical spill or release in cleanup decontamination, or in hazardous waste handling.

Under OSHA regulations, only equipment listed and approved by the Mine Safety and Health Administration and NIOSH may be used for respiratory protection. Also under the regulations, each site on which respiratory protective equipment is used must implement a respirator program (including training and medical certification) in compliance with OSHA's Respiratory Protection Standard (29 CFR § 1910.134); see also ANSI standard Z88.2-1992, Practices for Respiratory Protection.

Respirators must fit snugly on the face to be effective. Conduct tests for a proper fit prior to selection of a respirator and verify before the user enters the area of contamination. Failure to achieve a good face-to-face piece seal (e.g., because of glasses or facial hair) can permit contaminated air to bypass the filter and create a dangerous situation for the user. For individuals with facial hair, do not use respirators requiring a face-to-face piece seal. In such cases, powered, air-purifying, or supplied-air respirators may be appropriate.

7.F.2.4.1. Types of Respirators

Several types of non-emergency respirators are available for protection in atmospheres that are not immediately dangerous to life or health but that could be detrimental after prolonged or repeated exposure. Other types of respirators are available for emergency or rescue work in hazardous atmospheres from which the wearer needs protection. Additional protection may be required if the airborne contaminant could be absorbed through or irritate the skin. For example, the possibility of eye or skin irritation may require the use of a full-body suit and a full-face mask rather than a half-face mask. For some chemicals the dose from skin absorption can exceed the dose from inhalation.

The choice of the appropriate respirator in a given situation depends on the type of contaminant and its estimated or measured concentration, known exposure limits, and hazardous properties. The degree of protection afforded by the respirator varies with the type. Six main types of respirators are currently available:

• Chemical cartridge respirators are only for protection against particular individual (or classes of) vapors or gases as specified by the respirator manufacturer and cannot be used at concentrations of contaminants above that specified on the cartridge. Also, these respirators cannot be used if the oxygen content of the air is less than 19.5%, in atmospheres immediately dangerous to life, or for rescue or emergency work. These respirators function by trapping vapors and gases in a cartridge or canister that contains a sorbent material, with activated charcoal being the most common adsorbent. Because significant breakthrough can occur at a fraction of the canister capacity, knowledge of the potential workplace exposure and length of time the respirator will be worn is important. Replacing the cartridge after each use ensures the maximum available exposure time for each new use. Difficulty in breathing or the detection of odors indicates plugged or exhausted filters or cartridges or concentrations of contaminants higher than the absorbing capacity of the cartridge, and the user should immediately leave the area of contamination. Check and clean chemical cartridge respirators on a regular basis. Do not store new and used cartridges near chemicals because they are constantly filtering the air. Store them in sealed containers to prevent chemical contamination.
• Organic vapor cartridges cannot be used for vapors that are not readily detectable by their odor or other irritating effects or for vapors that will generate substantial heat on reaction with the sorbent materials in the cartridge.
• Dust, fumes, and mist respirators are used only for protection against particular, or certain classes of, dusts, fumes, and mists as specified by the manufacturer. The useful life of the filter depends on the concentration of contaminant encountered. Such particulate-removing respirators usually trap the particles in a filter composed of fibers; they are not 100% efficient. Respirators of this type are generally disposable. Examples are surgical masks and toxic-dust and nuisance-dust masks. Some masks are NIOSH-approved for more specific purposes such as protection against simple or benign dust and fibrogenic dusts and asbestos. Particulate-removing respirators afford no protection against gases or vapors and may give the user a false sense of security. They are also subject to the limitations of fit.
• Supplied-air respirators deliver fresh air to the face piece of the respirator at a pressure high enough to cause a slight buildup relative to atmospheric pressure. As a result, the supplied air flows outward from the mask, and contaminated air from the work environment cannot readily enter the mask. This characteristic renders face-to-face piece fit less important than with other types of respirators. Fit testing is, however, required before selection and use.
• Supplied-air respirators are effective protection against a wide range of air contaminants (gases, vapors, and particulates) and are used in oxygen-deficient atmospheres. Where concentrations of air contaminants could be immediately dangerous to life, such respirators can be used provided (a) the protection factor of the respirator is not exceeded and (b) the provisions of OSHA's Respiratory Protection Standard (which indicates the need for a safety harness and an escape system in case of compressor failure) are not violated. The air supply of this type of respirator must be kept free of contaminants (e.g., by use of oil filters and carbon monoxide absorbers). Most laboratory air is not suitable for use with these units because these units usually require the user to drag lengths of hose connected to the air supply and they have a limited range.
• SCBA is the only type of respiratory protective equipment suitable for emergency or rescue work. Untrained personnel should not attempt to use one.

7.F.2.4.2. Procedures and Training

Each area where respirators are used should have written information available that shows the limitations, fitting methods, and inspection and cleaning procedures for each type of respirator available. Personnel who may have occasion to use respirators in their work must be thoroughly trained before initial use and annually thereafter in the fit testing, use, limitations, and care of such equipment. Training includes demonstrations and practice in wearing, adjusting, and properly fitting the equipment. OSHA regulations require that a worker be medically certified before beginning work in an area where a respirator must be worn [OSHA Respiratory Protection Standard, 29 CFR § 1910.134(b)(10)].

7.F.2.4.3. Inspections

Respirators for routine use should be inspected before each use by the user and periodically by the laboratory supervisor. Self-contained breathing apparatus should be inspected at least once a month and cleaned after each use.

7.F.2.5. Safety Showers and Eyewash Units

7.f.2.5.1. safety showers.

Make safety showers available in areas where chemicals are handled; make sure they meet all installation and maintenance requirements (ANSI Z358.1 Emergency Eyewash and Shower Equipment; ANSI, 2004 ). Use them for immediate first-aid treatment of chemical splashes and for extinguishing clothing fires. All trained laboratory personnel should know where the safety showers are located in the work area and should learn how to use them. Test safety showers routinely to ensure that the valve is operable and to remove any debris in the system.

The shower should drench the subject immediately and be large enough to accommodate more than one person if necessary. It should have a quick-opening valve requiring manual closing; a downward-pull delta bar is satisfactory if long enough. Chain pulls are not advisable because they can hit the user and be difficult to grasp in an emergency. Install drains under safety showers to reduce the slip and fall risks and facility damage that is associated with flooding in a laboratory.

7.F.2.5.2. Eyewash Units

Eyewash units are required in research or instructional laboratories if substances used there present an eye hazard or if unknown hazards may be encountered. An eyewash unit provides a soft stream or spray of aerated water for an extended period (15 minutes). Locate these units close to the safety showers so that, if necessary, the eyes can be washed while the body is showered.

7.F.2.5.3. Automatic External Defibrillators (AED)

AED owners should provide or arrange for training and refresher training. Staff that may be on-site during normal working hours and available to operate AED equipment should be selected for this training. The training should be an American Heart Association cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR)/AED course or a nationally acceptable equivalent. Competency is determined by the certified course instructor. Training records, including a description of the training program and refresher training schedule, should be documented. AED owners should be familiar with local laws concerning training and use of these devices.

7.F.2.6. Storage and Inspection of Emergency Equipment

Establish a central location for storage of emergency equipment. Include the following:

• SCBA (for use by trained personnel only),
• blankets for covering the injured,
• stretchers (generally best to wait for qualified medical help to move a seriously injured person),
• first-aid equipment (for unusual situations such as exposure to hydrofluoric acid or cyanide, where immediate first aid is required), and
• chemical spill cleanup kits and spill control equipment (e.g., spill pillows, booms, shoe covers, and a 55-gal drum in which to collect sorbed material). (Also consult Chapter 6 , sections 6.C.10.5 and 6.C.10.6 .)

Inspect safety equipment regularly (e.g., every 3 to 6 months) to ensure that it will function properly when needed. The laboratory supervisor or safety coordinator is responsible for establishing a routine inspection system and verifying that inspection records are appropriately maintained and archived as required by law.

Perform inspections of emergency equipment as follows:

• Inspect fire extinguishers for broken seals, damage, and low gauge pressure (depending on type of extinguisher). Check for proper mounting of the extinguisher and that it is readily accessible. Some types of extinguishers must be weighed annually, and periodic hydrostatic testing may be required.
• Check SCBA at least once a month and after each use to determine whether proper air pressure is being maintained. Look for signs of deterioration or wear of rubber parts, harness, and hardware and make certain that the apparatus is clean and free of visible contamination. Periodically perform fit tests to ensure that the mask forms a good seal to an individual's face. Masks come in different sizes and cannot be considered universal or one-size-fits-all. Facial hair, especially beards, interferes with the mask seal and is not to permitted for SCBA users.
• Examine safety showers and eyewash units visually and test their mechanical function. Purge them as necessary to remove particulate matter from the water line.
• Inspect an AED periodically following the manufacturer's recommendations and procedures as well as after use and before returning to its storage location.

7.G. EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

The following general emergency procedures are recommended in the event of a fire, explosion, spill, or medical or other laboratory accident. These procedures are intended to limit injuries and minimize damage if an accident should occur. Post numbers to call in emergencies clearly at all telephones in hazard areas. Because emergency response (personnel, contact information, procedures) varies greatly from institution to institution, all laboratory personnel should be properly trained and informed of the protocols for their particular institution.

• Have someone call for emergency help, for instance, 911 or other number as designated by the institution. State clearly where the accident has occurred and its nature.
• Ascertain the safety of the situation. Do not enter or reenter an unsafe area.
• Without endangering yourself, render assistance to the personnel involved and remove them from exposure to further injury.
• Warn personnel in adjacent areas of any potential risks to their safety.
• Render immediate first aid; appropriate measures include washing under a safety shower, administration of CPR by trained personnel if heartbeat or breathing or both have stopped, and special first-aid measures.
• Put out small fires by using a portable extinguisher. Turn off nearby equipment and remove combustible materials from the area. For larger fires, contact the appropriate fire department promptly. Be aware that many organizations limit fire extinguisher use to designated trained personnel only.
• Provide emergency personnel with as much information as possible about the nature of the hazard, including a copy of the material safety data sheet (MSDS).
• In a medical emergency, laboratory personnel should remain calm and do only what is necessary to protect life.
• Summon medical help immediately.
• Do not move an injured person unless he or she is in danger of further harm.
• Keep the injured person warm. If feasible, designate one person to remain with the injured person. The injured person should be within sight, sound, or physical contact of that person at all times.
• If clothing is on fire and a safety shower is immediately available, douse the person with water; otherwise, roll the person on the floor to smother the flames.
• If harmful chemicals have been spilled on the body, remove the chemicals, usually by flooding the exposed area with the safety shower, and immediately remove any contaminated clothing.
• If a chemical has splashed into the eye, immediately wash the eyeball and the inner surface of the eyelid with water for 15 minutes. An eyewash unit should be used if available. Forcibly hold the eye open to wash thoroughly behind the eyelid.
• If possible, determine the identity of the chemical and inform the emergency medical personnel attending the injured person. Provide an MSDS for each chemical that is involved in the incident to the attending physician or emergency responders.

The outlet is always “female”; the plug is always “male.”

Commonly known as “variacs,” variable autotransformers are devices that provide a voltage-adjustable output of AC electricity using a constant voltage input (e.g., the wall outlet).

A non-emergency response is appropriate in the case of an incidental release of hazardous substances where the substance can be absorbed, neutralized, or otherwise controlled at the time of release by personnel in the immediate area or by maintenance personnel.

• Cite this Page National Research Council (US) Committee on Prudent Practices in the Laboratory. Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Management of Chemical Hazards: Updated Version. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. 7, Working with Laboratory Equipment.
• PDF version of this title (9.0M)

In this Page

• INTRODUCTION
• WORKING WITH WATER-COOLED EQUIPMENT
• WORKING WITH ELECTRICALLY POWERED LABORATORY EQUIPMENT
• WORKING WITH COMPRESSED GASES
• WORKING WITH HIGH OR LOW PRESSURES AND TEMPERATURES
• USING PERSONAL PROTECTIVE, SAFETY, AND EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT
• EMERGENCY PROCEDURES

Other titles in this collection

• The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health

Recent Activity

• Working with Laboratory Equipment - Prudent Practices in the Laboratory Working with Laboratory Equipment - Prudent Practices in the Laboratory

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Help & Support Center

Discover your guide to using fishersci.com.

View Our Special Offers

Save on all kinds of products.

See All Special Offers

See All Featured Brands

Search Thermo Fisher Scientific

• Order Status
• Quick Order
• Check Order Status
• Aspire Member Program
• Connect: Lab, Data, Apps
• Custom Products & Projects
• Instrument Management

Laboratory Equipment

Thermo Scientific laboratory equipment is designed with your application in mind. Our broad portfolio is built on technological know-how delivering reliable, high-quality products for sample preparation and processing. We combine outstanding engineering work and application expertise to create high-performance equipment that helps provide exceptional sample protection in a comfortable, ergonomic design. To enable years of service, our equipment includes future-proof technology with connectivity enablement and is supported by a global service network. Our continuous innovation efforts are focused on developing green products with energy efficient operation and sustainable production. We design our products from the bottom up to help you succeed.

Applications

From life science to industry, Thermo Scientific lab equipment is designed with your application in mind. Check out convenient, sustainable, connected solutions for your lab.

Biological safety cabinets and clean benches

Biosafety cabinets (BSC) provide advanced airflow technologies and are essential in protecting samples, lab personnel and the environment. With energy-efficient operation and connectivity enablement.

Centrifuges

Centrifuges are used in to separate or concentrate sample components. From basic benchtop instruments to advanced floor models and innovative carbon fiber rotors, for a wide range of processing needs.

Cold storage

Cold storage sample protection and preparation solutions for all sample types, from vaccines to cryogenically-preserved specimens. Short, medium and long-term storage.

Colorimetry, turbidity & UV-Vis spectrophotometry

Equipment and instruments to meet your needs for regulatory water and wastewater testing

Lab construction

Build and expand your lab with expertise. Work with our experienced lab construction team and benefit from services and 3D tools to easily set up your new lab space.

Hotplates, stirrers & drybaths

A combination of superior performance, advanced safety, and operational simplicity makes it easy to find the perfect hotplate, stirrer or drybath for all your laboratory requirements.

CO₂ incubators

Proven reliability, outstanding contamination control and innovative features to achieve optimal growing conditions and experimental reproducibility for your most demanding cell cultures.

Incubators & environmental chambers

Microbiological incubators and environmental chambers offer proven features, including outstanding temperature uniformity, stability, and reliability.

Lab ovens & furnaces

Our wide portfolio of laboratory ovens and furnaces offers stability and strict temperature control for a full range of needs—from simple glassware drying to the most complex, controlled heating applications.

pH and electrochemistry

Our portfolio of pH meters, electrodes, solutions, and accessories for pH, ion concentration (ISE), conductivity, dissolved oxygen, and temperature analysis enables reliable measurements.

Lab shakers

For fast and slow speeds, large volumes, or high viscosity, our instruments are designed with exceptional innovation for the most demanding environments.

Vacuum concentrators

Our vacuum concentrators and pumps use state-of-the-art centrifugation, vacuum, and heat technologies for removing solvents and concentrating samples while maintaining sample integrity.

Water baths, circulators & chillers

Achieve the precise temperatures for your cooling and heating applications with temperature control products, including water baths, circulators, chillers, immersion coolers, and fog testing systems.

Water purification systems

Our complete line of water purification technologies includes solutions for your most critical and everyday application needs, from electrodeionization to reverse osmosis and distillation.

Remote monitoring systems

Put your mind at ease knowing a state-of-the-art system is watching, safeguarding, and data logging critical equipment parameters, and be notified right away if there is a power or mechanical failure.

Intended use for the products mentioned on this website varies. Please refer to the product label.

Applications — From life science to industry

Lab Construction — Build and expand your lab with expertise

• Reference Manager
• Simple TEXT file

People also looked at

Review article, automation in the life science research laboratory.

• Deanery of Biomedical Science and Synthsys Centre for Synthetic and Systems Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Protocols in the academic life science laboratory are heavily reliant on the manual manipulation of tools, reagents and instruments by a host of research staff and students. In contrast to industrial and clinical laboratory environments, the usage of automation to augment or replace manual tasks is limited. Causes of this ‘automation gap’ are unique to academic research, with rigid short-term funding structures, high levels of protocol variability and a benevolent culture of investment in people over equipment. Automation, however, can bestow multiple benefits through improvements in reproducibility, researcher efficiency, clinical translation, and safety. Less immediately obvious are the accompanying limitations, including obsolescence and an inhibitory effect on the freedom to innovate. Growing the range of automation options suitable for research laboratories will require more flexible, modular and cheaper designs. Academic and commercial developers of automation will increasingly need to design with an environmental awareness and an understanding that large high-tech robotic solutions may not be appropriate for laboratories with constrained financial and spatial resources. To fully exploit the potential of laboratory automation, future generations of scientists will require both engineering and biology skills. Automation in the research laboratory is likely to be an increasingly critical component of future research programs and will continue the trend of combining engineering and science expertise together to answer novel research questions.

Introduction

The progressive integration of automation into work environments has enhanced the production rates, efficiency and quality of an enormous array of industrial processes ( Hitomi, 1994 ; Autor, 2015 ). From generation to generation, mechanised tooling has replaced swathes of manual tasks. More recent advances in robotics and information technology have further automated processes that were once the sole domain of human brawn or brain ( Hasegawa, 2009 ). Life science research conducted within academic institutions has also welcomed the ingress of mechanised equipment designed to automate a range of tasks. However, it is noticeable that a typical university research laboratory, often led by a single principal investigator, maintains a high level of manual manipulation in the form of undergraduate, postgraduate, post-doctoral and technical staff. Many experimental procedures remain heavily reliant upon the individual researcher manually carrying out protocols at the research bench.

This is in contrast to industrial environments, where widespread investment in automation has allowed companies to maximise their outputs and increase profits ( Ravazzi and Villa, 2009 ). Laboratories in a clinical setting have also experienced the benefits of adopting automation ( Hawker et al., 2018 ), increasing the speed and reliability of patient-specific data for use by clinicians ( Sarkozi et al., 2003 ; Lou et al., 2016 ). In this review, written from the perspective of an automation engineer now working in synthetic biology research and a Principal Investigator managing a research laboratory, we classify the current levels of automation in laboratories and highlight the benefits and limitations of its usage in research. We further attempt to summarise why automation has had such a limited impact in our workplace ( Jessop-Fabre and Sonnenschein, 2019 ) and ask whether the solution to including more automation into everyday laboratory tasks may reside in greater communication between scientists and engineers. Further, we suggest that it could be accelerated by beginning with a more low-tech approach rather than striving too soon for fully autonomous systems.

Current Laboratory Automation

Well-meaning predictions of the cybernetic laboratory ( Beugelsdijk, 1991 ) and a robotic revolution ( Boyd, 2002 ) have, at the time of writing, yet to materialise in the majority of life science research laboratories. Evidence from the proportional use of the terms ‘automation’ or ‘automated’ in the titles of PubMed listed articles does, however, exhibit a steady increase over the previous 4 decades. The terms ‘robot’ or ‘robotic’, which are often used interchangeably with automation, received negligible use until the mid 90’s and then showed a more marked elevation ( Figure 1 ). It should be noted however that, ‘robot’ or ‘robotic’ can also be used as an adjective for biological systems or medical devices and the increase in their prevalence may represent changes in language usage rather than an indication of greater automation usage. A more thorough text mining exercise than ours attempted to measure the extent of manual protocols that could potentially be automated through analysis of methods sections in published life science articles. The study concluded that 89% of articles featured a manual protocol that has an automated alternative ( Groth and Cox, 2017 ). Whilst there is a scale of automation, from the simple to the complex, that could be applied to these protocols, such data provides evidence that there remains a large potential for automation in most biology research laboratories. There are also clear claims in the literature that researchers working in academic institutions have been slow to embrace automation ( Sadowski et al., 2016 ; De Almeida and Ferreira, 2017 ; Jessop-Fabre and Sonnenschein, 2019 ).

Figure 1. Prevalence of terms ‘automation’ or ‘automated’ and ‘robot’ or ‘robotic’ within the titles of PubMed articles per year over the period 1970–2019.

In this review we focus on automation where it describes equipment that physically manipulates items and we do not consider solely software-based technologies, such as image analysis and data mining tools. Within our scope there resides a diverse range of equipment that is found in research laboratories, from simple hand tools to entirely autonomous systems. A classification system for laboratory automation equipment has, to our knowledge, yet to be published, although a number of equivalent methods have been developed for classifying industrial automation. Frohm et al. (2008) reviewed these systems before proposing their own 7 levels of automation. These levels and descriptions are displayed in Table 1 , alongside examples typically seen in an academic research laboratory, and an indicative cost.

Table 1. Automation levels ( Frohm et al., 2008 ) with example laboratory automation equipment and an indicative cost range.

It is noticeable from Table 1 that the majority of equipment items that researchers would consider as the most expensive in their laboratory are categorised at level 5. Higher grade 6 and 7 items are a rarity in a biological research laboratory. Whilst mid-range level 5 automation items undoubtably increase the efficiency of laboratory research, they are designed for specific subtasks in a range of protocols. These items also generally require a large amount of manual manipulation both before and after machine usage. Within the research laboratory this category of equipment is commonplace and dominates equipment budgets. A further observation can be made in that the majority of research equipment in this category performs tasks that human operators would otherwise be incapable of carrying out themselves ( McClymont and Freemont, 2017 ). The rotation of samples at high speeds and observing microscale environments are examples of tasks that would be impossible without the use of centrifugation and microscopy equipment. Automation equipment which replaces manual handling tasks is rarer, and it the prevalence of these items where academic bioresearch facilities differ to industrial environments and clinical laboratories.

Access to high level 7 automated equipment can usually only be obtained through a pooled resource shared between across the parent organisation or wider research community; these are often referred to as biofoundries ( Chambers et al., 2016 ; Chao et al., 2017 ; Kitney et al., 2019 ). A new automation variant of the commercial contract research organisation has also arisen recently, the cloud lab. These provide researchers with remote access to heavily automated protocols available as a pay-per-experiment service ( Hayden, 2014 ). Cloud lab executives have made grand predictions regarding the impact these facilities will have on the future of biological research ( Miles and Lee, 2018 ; Segal, 2019 ), although doubts remain regarding experimental flexibility and the resulting inhibitory effect on experimental innovation ( Hayden, 2014 ).

Benefits of Laboratory Automation

Reproducibility.

There are multiple advantages and limitations in including automation into scientific processes and these are summarised in Figure 2 . Most pertinent is its use in improving the reproducibility of laboratory research ( Kitney et al., 2019 ). Reproducibility is a major concern for the research community both now ( Begley and Ioannidis, 2015 ; Baker, 2016 ) and historically (reviewed by Fanelli, 2018 ), with associated economic implications ( Freedman et al., 2015 ) and an undermining of public trust in science ( Saltelli and Funtowicz, 2017 ). Debate continues regarding the definition and scope of the reproducibility issue ( Casadevall and Fang, 2010 ; Goodman et al., 2018 ), alongside proposed improvements in scientific practices ( Peng, 2015 ; Munafò et al., 2017 ) and remedial technologies ( Benchoufi and Ravaud, 2017 ). Increasing the use of automation throughout research laboratories is one such proposition ( Jessop-Fabre and Sonnenschein, 2019 ; Kitney et al., 2019 ). An improvement in reproducibility is cited as a beneficial effect of automation implementation within clinical laboratories ( Hawker et al., 2018 ; Genzen et al., 2018 ).

Figure 2. Benefits and limitations of research laboratory automation.

Automation can assist in improving reproducibility in three ways: a reduction in human-induced variability, an increase in the rate of data generation, and a decrease in contamination. The contribution each of these factors has on increasing reproducibility depends on the individual protocol. Firstly, experimental variability caused by humans is an omnipresent day-to-day reality in research laboratories ( Plebani, 2010 ; Price et al., 2015 ). Variation in protocols can arise from the same person unknowingly performing a task differently each time or between different individuals attempting to carry out the same procedure. Variability that is noticed at the time can be corrected for with repeated protocols or experimental redesign, although with an associated time penalty. However, variation that goes unnoticed will manifest itself in final datasets and published results. Automation can replace many, but not all, of these human-based sources of variability. Mechanised componentry is more suited to repetitive tasks ( Moutsatsou et al., 2019 ) in comparison to humans who are vulnerable to progressive mental fatigue ( Xu et al., 2018 ), physical weariness ( Björklund et al., 2000 ; Iridiastadi and Nussbaum, 2006 ) and also distracting influences ( Varao-Sousa et al., 2018 ). Laboratory protocols where manual operations have been automated demonstrate greater consistency in their results, improving experimental reproducibility ( Klevebring et al., 2009 ; Price et al., 2015 ). Secondly, a greater rate of experimental data capture, with an increased volume of results, can be achieved with automation alongside a wider range of experimental variables tested, including controls. Ultimately this increases the likelihood that others will be able to reproduce and build on their findings ( Maleki et al., 2019 ). Finally, there are those laboratory protocols that are susceptible to contamination that can arise from either from the researchers themselves ( Salter et al., 2014 ) or through increased exposure to environmental contaminants due to ponderous manual handling operations ( Greub et al., 2016 ). Automation can remove contact with human operators ( Wilke et al., 1995 ) or reduce potential contaminant exposure by lowering the required number of manual handling steps ( Mifflin et al., 2000 ; Moutsatsou et al., 2019 ).

Laboratory Efficiency

Efficiency is considered of paramount importance within manufacturing and can be defined as the rate of production, divided by the resources such as labour, input materials needed to accomplish this rate. By investing in automation, a company can increase the rate of production and also reduce the resources needed to achieve this rate. With a market available this can translate to a corresponding increase in profits ( Ceroni, 2009 ). A research laboratory investing in automation can improve the efficiency of its researchers ( Hawker and Schlank, 2000 ; Schneider, 2018 ) with machinery able to achieve a greater rate of experimental output than a manual based alternative ( Tacker et al., 2014 ; Price et al., 2015 ; Choi et al., 2018 ). It should be noted that an automated protocol need not take less time from start-to-finish to result in higher output than the manual alternative, as long as it demands less human intervention ( Reed et al., 2018 ). This is due the to the reward for academia differing from industry, with efficiency considered more as a time input to experimental output ratio. The key benefit derived from laboratory automation driven processes is therefore in the time saved by the researchers; time that can be spent on other parallel experiments. Automation in most cases will induce a transition from manual to cognitive labour ( Kaber et al., 2009 ). Allowing an operator to set a protocol in operation and walk away to think and focus on other tasks is a valuable function for any automation equipment. Researchers frequently have multiple projects, and experimental protocols operating in parallel as well as an array of responsibilities beyond the laboratory. With a greater rate of automation-driven experimental output researchers can also identify which aspects of their experiments don’t work and adjust more quickly ( Baranczak et al., 2017 ). Within industrial pharmaceutical development this methodology is known as fail fast, fail often ( Clark and Pickett, 2000 ; Khanna et al., 2016 ; Besteman and Bont, 2019 ). Efficiency gains can also extend to the use of expensive reagents and materials. Automation can provide a higher level of precision in reagent dispensing, reducing the amount needed per experiment.

Faster Translation

Automation has an important role in those laboratories engaged in applied research who are seeking to develop novel therapeutic interventions such as cell-based therapies, pharmaceutical developments or tissue-engineered constructs for implantation. Transition of these technologies from a purely research domain to final usage in a clinical setting is frequently difficult ( Ochs et al., 2017 ; Hua et al., 2018 ), often referred to as translation from the bench to the bedside ( Goldblatt and Lee, 2010 ). By considering and including automation at an early stage in the research process, crucial elements of the process can be mechanised, increasing product quality and production rates in the laboratory before the jump to manufacturing. The technological leap from laboratory-scale production to higher-volume manufacturing is therefore shortened. Researchers who include automation technologies at an early stage are subsequently better placed to upscale their processes allowing faster commercialisation rates and deployment to the clinic ( Kotin, 2011 ; Heathman et al., 2015 ; Rafiq and Thomas, 2016 ).

A number of protocols carried out in the research laboratory require the handling of dangerous reagents and occasionally of hazardous tooling. The manual manipulation of hazardous items places a burden on laboratories, particularly when contending with a continual turnover of short-term contract staff and students who require safety training and supervision. By assigning dangerous handling tasks to automated machinery, the exposure of humans to hazardous substances can be reduced ( Movsisyan et al., 2016 ; Caragher et al., 2017 ).

Examples of Automation Benefits

Evidence of automation benefits can be observed in recent success stories. In projects where high-throughput, reproducible results are demanded over short time frames automation has significant advantages over manual procedures. Recently a highly automated biofoundary, normally with a focus on research applications, was repurposed towards the development of SARS-CoV-2 assays for clinical diagnostics ( Crone et al., 2020 ). Automated liquid handling equipment was able to perform an extensive array of experimental procedures at a rate in excess of those that a manual based laboratory could carry out. Furthermore, in these time-pressured experiments, automation has an advantage over manual operators who are prone to fatigue and errors, with an associated negative effect on accuracy and reproducibility. Such work also clearly demonstrates the positive impact automation can have on public health challenges. It also an example of considerate design leading to systems that are flexible enough to be rapidly adapted to meet new experimental needs. This design feature is appropriately termed ‘facility agility.’

The use of automation to improve research efficiency is also demonstrated with a system comprising a mobile robotic platform that can autonomously navigate a laboratory performing reagent-dispensing and handling operations at a range of experimental benchtop stations ( Burger et al., 2020 ). In combination with an artificial intelligence search algorithm, the system was able to use initial data to decide on reagent combinations most likely to include an optimal reaction mix. The capacity of the robotic equipment to operate at all hours, with pausing only to charge batteries, allowed it to test five experimental hypotheses in a fraction of the time a manual research team would have required. Although it was used to answer a research question within a chemistry context the concept would be readily applicable to life science experimental laboratories. The system shares similar liquid and solid reagent handling operations to a life science laboratory as well as the common challenge of there being too many variables for researchers to explore manually in a reasonable time. A further crucial advantage of this arrangement resides in the possibility, with appropriate safety controls, of operating as a hybrid manual-automated laboratory. A staffed day shift performing high-skilled tasks requiring on-the-spot decisions could be followed by a robotic night shift carrying out the repetitive aspects of procedures.

Researchers aiming to translate stem cell-derived therapies towards clinical applications have considered automation for a range of projects. Such therapies will ultimately require the expansion of stem cells on a scale that is uneconomical for manual based laboratories, with large numbers also needed for research and clinical trials phases. The need for reliable methods of high-volume, quality-assured cells has led to the development of automated systems such as the StemCellFactory ( Doulgkeroglou et al., 2020 ), StemCellDiscovery ( Jung et al., 2018 ) and AUTOSTEM ( Ochs et al., 2017 ). The objective of these systems is to automate the normally manual stages of stem cell seeding, growth, colony selection, passaging, quality assessment, harvesting and potentially in later applications differentiation. In a similar fashion to the previous mobile robotic platform example, complex control algorithms are also being applied to these systems with the aim of improving cell yields and quality ( Egri et al., 2020 ). These projects are an important link between the domains of basic life science research, clinical application, and commercial cell product manufacturing. By developing these systems researchers have been able to generate high quantities of cells for research and testing purposes, hastening the route to clinical usage.

Limitations of Automation

Incorrect application.

Despite the range of benefits that laboratory automation can bring, there remains a number of limitations. Integrating automation into a research laboratory is not in itself a guarantee of success and, where applied incorrectly can even result in even less efficiency ( Zielinski et al., 2014 ). The nature of automated tasks also allows for rapid propagation of errors. An example would be a machine incorrectly dispensing a reagent repetitively which can then, if undetected, be distributed across many thousands of samples. In addition, the incorrect application and operation of automation may not improve the reproducibility of research between laboratories. Automation machinery carrying out the same experimental protocol in different laboratories may still produce different results. This can be due to variations in input materials, different equipment models or set-up and calibration errors. Even where automation has been carefully integrated into a laboratory and has demonstrated an improvement in reproducibility an inherent machine to machine variability can remain. What is more, this variability can be more hidden than more easily observed manual procedures. Careful maintenance, calibration and quality control measures are therefore essential in implementing any laboratory automation system ( Hawker and Schlank, 2000 ; Xie et al., 2004 ).

Obsolescence

Obsolescence is an inevitability for any technology and even, it can be argued, for scientists themselves. Many facilities will feature a dusty machine in the corner that is unused, because components and materials are no-longer available, the protocol itself has been supplanted or simply newer more effective equipment has taken over ( Croxatto et al., 2016 ). Predicting how and when a machine will become obsolete is an inherently difficult task in rapidly evolving research fields and can be specific to individual laboratories. Some researchers will find equipment is no-longer useful after a few years of operation whilst others may continue to happily use the same machine for decades. It is not only advances in hardware and software design that can render laboratory equipment obsolete. Scientific progress in reagent properties and resulting modifications to protocols can also be responsible. The advent of new thermostable polymerases obsoleted a whole generation of Polymerase Chain Reaction machinery designed upon a more repetitive protocol ( Hawker et al., 2018 ). Despite these difficulties, with considerate design allowing for reconfiguration and modification premature obsolescence can be delayed ( Harrison et al., 2007 ; Crombie et al., 2017 ), referred to in some industries as future-proofing. Understanding and planning for obsolescence is therefore an important part of any automation strategy.

Innovation Inhibition

There is a danger that automation can inhibit creativity in the experimental design process by limiting the opportunities for changing or tinkering with a protocol. A researcher may be less inclined to alter a protocol to optimise it for a new situation where a large number of steps are automated. This can be based upon the assumption that process steps carried out by machinery are already optimised and require no further improvement. They may also feel less able to begin changing things because they lack the confidence or maybe even the authorisation to open the box and begin modifying what is probably an expensive machine. Sharing of the machine with other users for whose purposes it is already optimised is also a brake to experimentation with parameters. Innovation inhibition is also a concern where protocols are outsourced to third party automated laboratories ( Hayden, 2014 ).

Workforce Impact

When integrating new automation into any workplace environment, the impact on workers and how they view new machinery must be carefully considered. Beginning in the rural English midlands with the machine breaking Luddite movement ( Roberts, 2017 ), societal resistance to automated machinery replacing manual labour and the threat it poses to livelihoods understandably continues into the present day ( Jones, 2013 ; Autor, 2015 ). Both positive and negative reactions to the introduction of automation have been observed amongst long-term workers in clinical laboratory settings ( Thomson and McElvania, 2019 ) and it is reasonable to anticipate that similar reactions may arise in research laboratories. The outright replacement of researchers by automation is unlikely as they are currently categorised as being amongst the lowest risk of being replaced ( White et al., 2019 ), due to their breadth of skills, including planning and creativity ( Reeves et al., 2019 ). However, researchers solely employed to perform repetitive manual tasks are more at risk and thus more likely to view automation as a threat. Those researchers with a multitude of other protocols and tasks beyond the laboratory are more likely to view automation assistance in their day to day roles in a positive manner. The short-term contracts that predominate in research will also lessen any hostility to automation. Employees who understand that they will be moving on to another position, will see a machine as more likely to be a replacement for their replacement rather than a replacement for themselves. Although the levels of militancy advocated by the early Luddites may not be repeated, laboratory managers who introduce automation will still, like their industrial and clinical counterparts, need to be sensitive to workforce reactions, particularly the impact on any long-term employees.

Automation Hyperbole

Both vendors of automation equipment and researchers must also be wary of overstating the benefits of automation and elevating expectations regarding the impact its introduction will have on future work practices. Automation hyperbole and the accompanying benefits is however part of a wider trend that is not only restricted to research ( Wajcman, 2017 ). Whilst automation can improve protocol reproducibility and efficiency the individual researcher will, in the majority of cases, still be responsible for correctly operating the equipment, with maintenance, quality of input materials, and calibration. These are tasks than can require a high level of personal discipline and tenacity. With notable exceptions ( King et al., 2009 ; Williams et al., 2015 ), automation will also be unable to undertake the overall experimental design and analysis. Journal publications have a responsibility too, to ensure that articles advocating laboratory automation equipment also highlight the limitations of their technologies, as well as identifying author conflicts of interests ( Miles and Lee, 2018 ). Greater awareness of limitations will allow more effective matching of automation solutions with laboratory problems and increase the trust between commercial vendors and academic institutions.

Laboratory Automation Obstacles

Automation is expensive and difficult to justify.

The most significant hurdle for PIs wishing to integrate automation systems into their laboratories is, unsurprisingly, cost. Commercially available automation equipment is expensive, whilst bespoke equipment for individual protocols costlier still. Cell culture is an example of a common, labor-intensive protocol familiar to generations of researchers. Equipment to automate cell culture is available and can save many hours of researcher effort from the process, but is tantalisingly out of reach for most laboratories. The cost of these items can be in excess of $1 M for a complete process system ( Storrs, 2013 ) placing them far beyond the reach of the majority of academic laboratories. Despite being commercially available for over 18 years ( Kempner and Felder, 2002 ) they remain a rare sight in research environments but are used in high volume cell-banking organisations ( Wrigley et al., 2014 ; Archibald et al., 2016 ; Daniszewski et al., 2018 ).

The development of automation equipment can be a time-consuming and expensive process. Initial rounds of iterative conceptual and prototype design and testing are followed by final design, build, and commissioning phases. Coordination is needed from a variety of disciplines including mechanical, electrical and software engineers alongside close collaboration with the end user. Most important for all automation projects however, is a source of capital investment. Industrial investment in automation is matched to business cases in which increasing confidence in the product and the associated income from projected sales is used to justify upfront capital expenditure. However, an academic principal investigator seeking to invest in automation for their laboratory is confronted by a different set of challenges. When compared to industrial and commercial organisations, a research laboratory’s output or success rate cannot be measured in using the same readily quantifiable metric of profit. Indeed, academic research output has long been a difficult entity to define both for individual researchers ( Klaus and del Alamo, 2018 ) and laboratories ( Kreiman and Maunsell, 2011 ; Abramo and D’Angelo, 2014 ). It is therefore more difficult to construct a ‘business’ case when seeking funding for laboratory automation equipment. A factory manager is able to justify a new item of automation based upon the argument that whilst it may initially cost X units of currency it will increase profits by X + Y units, measured in the same currency ( Ceroni, 2009 ). A clinical laboratory manager can present a similar case based upon both cost ( Archetti et al., 2017 ; Sarkozi et al., 2003 ) and the quantifiable output of turnaround time ( Hawkins, 2007 ; Archetti et al., 2017 ). A research laboratory manager however, in the same position applying for funding, will have greater difficulty in arguing that although the proposed equipment will cost X units of currency it will increase their laboratory’s research output by Y vaguely defined research outputs. The ambiguity of research success hinders laboratories seeking to invest in automation.

Research Funding Structures

The allocation of scientific funding to academic institutions further limits investment in automation. Research programs are most frequently funded through externally sourced grants that are applied for in a competitive environment, with pre-applied constraints on the amounts available and where these funds may be spent. Understandably the majority of funding calls open to scientific laboratories are seeking answers to novel scientific questions and not looking to develop items of equipment that are essentially engineering challenges. Should an applicant wish to include standard or bespoke automation when applying for grants, capital expenditure on large equipment, if even permitted, must be explicitly accounted for before the project starts. Unfortunately, the nature of research means that the details of protocols needed for the project are not always available during the early proposal phase. Estimating the both the timescales and cost of automation at such an early stage is a difficult task for supervisors of biological research laboratories who will have limited experience of budgeting for automation hardware. The time duration of funding grants also limits the development of automation, usually with the maximum being 5 years ( European Commission, 2016 ; Vaesen and Katzav, 2017 ). Automation strategies for industry are generally greater in duration and aligned to the anticipated lifecycle of the product, frequently extending into decades. In the case of commercialising a novel pharmaceutical product or medical device the automation strategy can be aligned to the 20-year exclusivity patent window. Automation expertise acquired over this time can then be exploited to maintain a competitive advantage when the window expires. Academic projects of a comparable length are rare. The Human Genome Project is one exception, and consequently was able to invest and substantially benefit from automation ( Meldrum, 2000 ). However, long-term, project specific funding stability is rarely available to most academic principal investigators, limiting automation investment.

Short-term research funding also places a limit on the individual researcher’s ability to develop automation. Hands-on researchers are best placed to determine which elements of their protocols would benefit from automation. However, these individuals are typically Ph.D. students or early career researchers with a time-limited contract or project. Such temporal limitation leaves little room for developing an idea for protocol automation into a functional system, particularly with specific scientific targets attached to the grant scheme funding their project. Short duration research positions reduce not only the time available to develop novel automated laboratory equipment but also the motivation for doing so. On completion, a researcher is likely to move on to a new laboratory contract or a career beyond academia ( van der Weijden et al., 2016 ). Researchers are therefore unlikely to experience any of the long-term benefits from planning automation. The cumulative effect of short-term, competitive grant allocations and transient researchers creates an environment unsuited to the long-term financial investment required for laboratory automation development.

A limited number of large grant funded projects have been successful in devising automation strategies and equipment, although often with a focus on industrial scale systems for clinical translation rather than research laboratories. One area that seen recent attention is the aforementioned development of high-volume manufacturing solutions for the production of Mesenchymal and Induced Pluripotent Stem Cells to meet anticipated future clinical demand ( Marx et al., 2013 ; Panchalingam et al., 2015 ; Rafiq et al., 2016 ; Ochs et al., 2017 ; Jossen et al., 2018 ). It is hoped that technology developed in these programs will, in the future, trickle down into more affordable systems that can be exploited by smaller research laboratories.

Stifled Commercial Development of New Laboratory Automation

Financial challenges also hinder those commercial organisations seeking to develop laboratory automation equipment. Industrial automation design and development is often a bespoke, collaborative arrangement for a particular challenge. A manufacturer will approach one or more automation developers to design a manufacturing system for their product. In this scenario the manufacturer is usually a much larger organisation with abundant reserves of capital and will also carry the majority of the risk should the product not sell as well as expected. To aid in mitigating this risk they are able to utilise their marketing, sales and distribution expertise within their particular market sector. For development of automated laboratory equipment, the scenario is often different. An automation developer may wish to partner with an academic research laboratory. However, as previously detailed, in such an arrangement the laboratory will be unable to operate as a cash-rich development partner unless a substantial funding grant can be obtained. The automation developer must therefore carry the risk that the equipment will not be commercially successful and assume the role of marketing and selling the product to the wider research community. Biological laboratories are best placed to identify where certain processes would benefit from automation, but don’t have the financial resources or expertise to develop these systems themselves. Automation companies, whilst having the capable expertise to develop automation equipment will be reluctant to pursue such a business strategy requiring up-front investment to develop a product for customers widely acknowledged to have little disposable capital.

Small-to medium-sized automation companies have often been most successful at innovative development of laboratory equipment, funded through grant schemes in cooperation with an academic institution or external venture capital funding. Examples include benchtop pipetting systems from Andrew Alliance and OpenTrons and Labman automation’s formulation engine. Access to joint research grants and funding schemes can encourage the development of novel automation solutions by increasing industrial and academic collaboration whilst also reducing the risk the commercial risk that developers are exposed to.

Laboratory Space

Alongside the financial investment required for automation researchers must also find physical laboratory space for new equipment, incurring a footprint cost ( Wong et al., 2018 ; Moutsatsou et al., 2019 ). The size and mass of many automation items means that it is not always practical or safe to tidy the item away and store it when it is not required. Laboratory space is often at a premium in many research institutions with territorial researchers often coming into conflict over the allocation of it ( Adams, 2004 ). A bench occupied by equipment is also an area that could be otherwise be utilised by productive researchers. The requirement for some laboratories to operate as a dual research and teaching environment further constrains the available space. It may also not be possible for automation to totally replace more manual based equipment and space in laboratories, with room required for both. The need to maintain cell culture hoods for teaching is one example. Developers of laboratory of automation have attempted to minimise the footprint of their machinery through innovative reworkings of traditional laboratory procedures. The use of hollow fibre arrays ( Russell et al., 2018 ) and multi-axis liquid and labware manipulation ( Kato et al., 2010 ) are examples of compact automated adherent cell culture systems. Spatial constraints may push future bench-based laboratory automation towards an architectural style resembling inner city skyscrapers.

Protocol Variation and Usage

The very nature of bioresearch involves the design and implementation of protocols aimed at the determining answers to novel research questions. In pursuit of these targets, researchers will devise new protocols or substantially modify existing ones to suit their needs. Recurring cycles of method generation and evolution within the research laboratory create a high-level of protocol variation that is not always easily automated. Matching commercially available automation equipment to these requirements is often not a feasible option with fixed componentry and locked-in software frequently being the limiting factors. Automated cell culture is an example where the available systems can be insufficiently flexible to accommodate the specific cell culture requirements of an individual laboratory ( Crombie et al., 2017 ), with some requiring a broad range of cell culture types and others having more focussed needs. A high level of experimental process variation is therefore more likely to require a bespoke automation system, the development of which will have an associated time and financial cost. Clinical laboratories, by comparison, have a greater level of consistency across protocols both within individual laboratories and across institutions, contributing to the widespread implementation of automated systems. High process variability is also cited as one of the major challenges for integrating automation into existing industrial environments ( Frohm et al., 2006 ) and is necessary when adapting to changing market conditions ( Froschauer et al., 2008 ). Across laboratory protocols there are process steps that are common, and it these where commercially available systems are more likely to be of assistance to the individual researcher. Liquid handling, through the manipulation of pipettes and receptacles is a one example ubiquitous to a range of molecular biology protocols, with a growing number of competing vendors offering more affordable and adaptable automation options ( Barthels et al., 2020 ).

How frequently a protocol is likely to be used over time is also a key factor when considering automation. A protocol developed for a specific project may only be used in a single laboratory for a short period, negating the long-term benefits that automation could provide. On occasion a researcher may find that their new protocol becomes widely adopted for an extended period in their own laboratory, and possibly throughout other laboratories too. In this scenario automation becomes a more attractive option and is not always driven by the original founding laboratory. Sequencing, is one example where the initial manual protocol developed by Sanger and colleagues ( Sanger et al., 1977 ) was eventually automated by researchers at different institutions ( García-Sancho, 2007 ).

Labware and Consumables

Automation equipment operates most effectively when input materials or consumables are standardised. In the case of standard shaped labware this allows non-adaptive, rigid automation components such as grippers to gain full custody of the device, allowing greater accuracy of placement and potentially faster actuations. Currently there remains a large amount of variation in labware not only between research laboratories but also within the same laboratory. The variant a researcher uses can change frequently based upon cost, availability or personal preference. Disposable plastics are an example where different manufacturers produce products that are, from an experimental, viewpoint functionally identical but with variations in the products dimensions and materials. The justification for these variants maybe a small improvement in handling, or simply to circumvent intellectual property assigned to a competing product. These present a significant challenge to automated handling equipment where even small variations, that are unnoticeable when handled manually, can render an automated system using non-adaptive handling elements useless. Clinical laboratories negate this issue by utilising standardised plastics for sample collections that can then be more readily processed autonomously. The recent advent of soft robotics may provide solutions to these challenges where rigid handling systems are replaced with pliable, adaptive designs sometimes based upon biomimetic examples ( Noel and Hu, 2018 ).

A counterstrategy to labware variation has emerged from commercial developers of automation. Unfortunately, the solution is often combined with a sales strategy aimed at securing a continuous revenue stream following the sale of the initial capital equipment. Commercially available systems are frequently designed in a fashion such that automation systems can only operate with specific consumables, available for purchase from themselves or a licensed distributor ( Huggett et al., 2009 ; Moutsatsou et al., 2019 ). Examples include the pipette tips for the Opentrons and Tecan EVO liquid dispensing systems, array tape for Douglas Scientific’s IntelliQube PCR system, purification cards for Invitrogens benchpro and spin kits for Qiagens Qiacube system. A laboratory binding themselves to a single consumable supplier has little or no guarantee of future price stability or even long-term supply should the commercial vendor cease to exist. Committing to a long-term, single vendor, supply chain is considered a very unwise strategy in a commercial context but is a worryingly frequent arrangement for automation equipment available to research laboratories.

There are two competing forces for labware standardisation; top-down and bottom up pressure, outlined in Figure 3 . Top-down pressure, as described above, is where commercial automation organisations seek to dominate a section of the market by forcing users to purchase specific labware through the sale of inflexible hardware. Bottom-up pressure acts in the opposite direction, when manufacturers of labware and laboratories slowly gravitate towards one standard form that automation developers are then forced to adopt. An example where bottom-up pressure has succeeded is in the largely standardised external dimensions of well plates, the ANSI/SLAS standard ( Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening, 2011 ), that has enabled automation of microscopy and plate reading procedures ( McClymont and Freemont, 2017 ). The range of automation equipment available for standard well plates is correspondingly larger, increasing competition, reducing running costs and making automation more affordable. There is likely to be a reciprocal benefit for labware manufacturers too, with an associated increase in demand for consumables. More instances of labware standardisation would allow a wider range of protocols to be automated.

Figure 3. Top-down and bottom-up consumable adoption pressures. Top-down pressure occurs when an automation developer imposes a consumable on laboratories through tooling specific design. Bottom-up pressure acts in the reverse direction with laboratories and automation suppliers coalescing behind one consumable variant that then determines the design of automation equipment.

Environment Impact

The environmental impact that an item of equipment can have throughout its entire lifespan, from manufacture, to usage, to end-of-life disposal and recycling is an important consideration for many research institutions. A particular concern for laboratories is the rate at which automation consumes disposable plastics. Research institutions produce a large amount of plastic waste, estimated at 5.5 million tonnes annually ( Urbina et al., 2015 ), primarily to avoid contamination between samples. Commitments to minimising their use are part of a growing trend where laboratories aim to switch to recyclable or reusable alternatives ( Bistulfi, 2013 ; Krause et al., 2020 ). Automation designed around the same single-use plastic principle can generate even greater volumes of waste than human operators, due to higher experimental throughputs ( Howes, 2019 ). These designs are incompatible with research organisations who are committed to minimising their environmental impact. The consideration given to environmental concerns is currently very low or non-existent in many commercially available laboratory automation systems. An exception is Grenova’s pipette washing systems ( Safavi and Anderson, 2019 ) that can be integrated into existing automated liquid dispensing units. It is hoped that this type of equipment represents an emerging category of environmentally focused automation that will become ever more important to laboratories in the future.

There exists a fundamental culture difference between an academic research laboratory and the industrial workplace environment, that can inhibit investment in automation. It is hoped that the majority of principal investigators view their laboratory as a platform for staff and students to increase their skills and experience before they move onwards in their careers. This is a crucial ‘people’ output that accompanies the research output of a laboratory usually measured in scientific discoveries and publications. Although many companies also place a high-value on workforce upskilling their focus is primarily on profit and not on being a training institution to allow employee progression elsewhere. Consequently, many will favour investment in equipment over staff if a business case can be made ( Rampell, 2011 ). An academic principal investigator however, is likely to preferentially invest in additional people rather than equipment, with funding schemes frequently weighted this way too. Money spent on a large item of automation equipment could, for example, pay for several post-doctoral researchers or fund multiple Ph.D. projects. In the context of automation this culture could be described as a form of benevolent Luddism.

The availability and culture of undergraduate labour may also be inhibiting investment in laboratory automation. Undergraduates working in laboratories contribute by performing experiments that can generate preliminary data for grant applications or for publications. The benefits to the student reside in the acquisition of experience and skills that can enhance their employability prospects upon completion of their studies ( Seeling and Choudhary, 2016 ). This reciprocal arrangement and the high availability of undergraduates provides a means for carrying out labour intensive laboratory tasks. Not all principal investigators will view this relationship in such a cold manner, and will considerately assign duties that can generate useful data whilst simultaneously teaching students both the basics and realities of research. Unfortunately, there is evidence that some less altruistic supervisors do assign undergraduates to tasks that require a high degree of repetition ( Hayward et al., 2017 ). These are likely to be precisely the type of tasks where automation can be effectively applied.

The Laboratory Automation Interim Technology Gap

It is interesting to compare the relatively recent development of manual labour-saving laboratory automation equipment with other older, more mature automation processes. Here we refer to equipment that replaces manual human manipulation rather than machinery that performs operations operators are physically incapable of executing, such as centrifuging. Taking the millennia-old example of sewing, with just a needle, thread and cloth it is possible, given time, for a skilled human operator to create a garment. Equally the same items can be completely mechanised with expensive, high-level automation equipment and the garment produced with no human input necessary beyond the need to turn the machine on. Comparing with the laboratory process of cell culture which requires, media, pipettes, labware and some starting cells a skilled operator can also, given time, passage cells and create a sub-culture for experimentation. Again, the same output can also be produced using an entirely automated, costly, high-level system, with minimal operator input. However, in the case of needlework there exists a range of lower cost interim labour-saving automation options between these two extremes, such as motor driven stitching machinery, or manually powered mechanisms, exemplified in the Singer sewing machine ( McLoughlin and Mitchell, 2013 ). This is not currently the case for cell culture, there are no examples of commercially available low-cost machinery ( Figure 4 ).

Figure 4. Comparison of available labour-saving automation options for the manual intensive processes of sewing and cell culture. Sewing has a range of interim automation options up to fully autonomous systems. Cell culture by contrast has only high-level automation equipment and no interim low-cost analogues to replace or augment manual labour.

Interim automation can arise in several scenarios. More commonly it occurs incrementally over time, as technological advances permit a shift from simple to complex machinery. Alternatively, on occasion a high-end complex automation system may be simplified due to new demands, such as an economic demand for cheaper equipment. For many laboratory automation processes there has been a rapid leap from simple to complex with, as yet, little or no development of lower cost automation technology. We believe this is due in part to the reasonable desire for academic laboratories and companies to be seen to be developing equipment at the forefront of technology. In simple terms, low-cost interim automation that removes some but not all of the manual labour from a protocol is not fashionable enough. It is unlikely to lead to a prestigious journal publication and, for commercial organisations, will not lead to financial rewards, with likely low sales volumes and low profit margins. There are therefore few incentives for academic and commercial automation developers to design such equipment.

In-House Laboratory Automation

Despite the hurdles facing researchers wishing to automate elements of their experimental procedures, there are many examples where laboratory automation development is carried out ‘in-house,’ without the assistance of a commercial partner or a large automation dedicated funding grant. Research teams are recognising that their protocols could be made more efficient by including automation but find themselves restricted financially and functionally by commercially available options ( Pilizota and Yang, 2018 ). A range of ingenious methods have been developed to build low-cost automation solutions, including the integration of Lego into microscopy automation ( Almada et al., 2019 ), microfluidics for DNA assembly ( Shih et al., 2015 ) and rapid synthesis and testing of small molecule libraries ( Baranczak et al., 2017 ). Laboratories with novel protocols that are nearly but not quite suited to existing automation equipment have been able to successfully upgrade commercially available systems for their specific needs ( McGraw et al., 2014 ; Richter et al., 2015 ; Zhang et al., 2016 ; Crombie et al., 2017 ; Konczal and Gray, 2017 ). Repurposing existing equipment in this fashion either through software or hardware modification is a cost-and time-efficient method of obtaining higher levels of protocol automation without the arduous task of designing and building an entirely novel system. The number of automation development tools, components and virtual training options available to research laboratories continues to broaden, increasing their capability to develop low-cost solutions to labour intensive processes. The advent of affordable 3D printing modalities ( Jones et al., 2011 ; Zluhan et al., 2016 ; Capel et al., 2018 ), off the shelf actuators and readily programable microcontrollers ( Mabbott, 2014 ; Kim et al., 2015 ; Wong et al., 2018 ) has given research laboratories the ability to produce componentry that can then be assembled, controlled and automated all for a relatively low cost ( Courtemanche et al., 2018 ; Needs et al., 2019 ; Barthels et al., 2020 ). Open source designs and software have an important enabling effect for researchers who may not have engineering or programming expertise. Researchers are also able to exploit the growing market for second hand laboratory automation equipment ( Zluhan et al., 2016 ), a case of one lab’s trash is another labs treasure. Developing automation internally, whilst often cheaper, and potentially a more rewarding and enjoyable process ( Pilizota and Yang, 2018 ) can however require a substantial investment in time ( May, 2019 ). That laboratories are frequently forced into developing their own systems is an indication of the paucity of commercially available options. Existing automation developers see an insufficient market for providing their services and expertise to develop bespoke items for individual laboratories and will be justifiably reluctant to provide open source solutions that may compromise their intellectual property.

Increasing the quantity and quality of laboratory automation within the research laboratory will require a concerted effort from funders, research institutions, automation developers and researchers themselves. The desire to automate elements of laboratory protocols exists. Researchers and their governmental funders ( Reeves et al., 2019 ) collectively recognise that mechanisation can improve reproducibility and efficiency. When attempting to develop laboratory automation three interrelated components are needed for success. Connecting researchers with automation needs to automation engineers, financing the resulting collaboration, and ensuring the resulting design meets the needs.

Collaboration

Encouraging academic researchers to engage and collaborate with industrial organisations has been a long-standing objective for their host institutions. Such joint enterprises are hindered by the significant differences in culture and attitudes to one another ( Berman, 2008 ) which are in part due to each partner having different timescales and expectations from projects. Academics build projects slowly through the funding stages and ultimately desire experimental data that can be packaged into publications. Industry often likes to move more quickly and would like intellectual property that can be reconstituted into a commercial opportunity ( Lynch, 2016 ). Contrary to widespread belief these viewpoints are, however, not always the most prominent motivations for collaboration, with altruistic aims also prevalent in both parties ( Berman, 2008 ).

Automation engineers and life science researchers operate in markedly different disciplines and in different work environments, rarely occupying the same space to share problems and ideas. Events where these disparate groups can be brought together would allow new ideas and projects to develop, in a similar fashion to academic conferences encouraging collaboration between different laboratories. Automation engagement events that feature all levels of employees from both sides of the divide would have the greatest effect. Interaction between industrial managers and academic supervisors as well as researchers who are researching and engineers who are engineering could allow the development of solutions to everyday automation challenges in the laboratory.

Collaboration can also be an internal academic arrangement. Life science laboratories often have a source of automation engineering expertise within their own institution in the form of engineering faculties. Both disciplines could benefit from increased interaction and discussion around laboratory automation, with examples of collaborating biomedicine and engineering departments producing innovative automated equipment ( Kato et al., 2010 ; Kane et al., 2019 ). Collaboration at an educational level can be beneficial too. Allowing undergraduate engineering students to undertake projects based upon automating a protocol within a laboratory would provide the host laboratory with designs and automation aids. Interdepartmental, interdisciplinary collaborations can bring benefits for students too, providing real world problems to develop their skills and the opportunity to apply theoretical knowledge ( Wilson and Zamberlan, 2012 ).

More varied career paths that allow employees with experience of industry-based automation to work in research environments can also develop new ideas that lead to mechanised laboratory equipment. Academic and industrial career paths diverge at early career stage and rarely reconnect. The majority of professional individuals progress from an academic institution into an industrial or commercial organisation. Researchers typically remain within a university environment accruing the required qualifications and experience as their career progresses. Reverse flow of employees, where an individual moves from industry to academia is less common ( Bonner, 2006 ). Encouraging a greater level of employees with experience of automation to work within life science laboratories will promote an exchange of ideas that can lead to experimental mechanisation. Such employee exchanges need not be permanent and can be sabbatical-style placements targeted at a specific project. The Knowledge Transfer Partnership is one successful long-running academic-industry exchange scheme in the authors host country that allows an employee to concurrently work on a project at both an academic and industrial organisation ( Howlett(ed.), 2010 ). These types of employee arrangements have a further benefit in deepening the relationships between Universities and industrial organisations. Academic institutions that can successfully foster relationships with industrial partners can reap substantial rewards not only in the form of publications and possible financial licencing agreements but greater reproducibility too ( Edwards, 2016 ). In a notable success story, automated sequencing technology, now the mainstay of genetic research, was successfully developed at Caltech, a research organisation with strong links to industry ( García-Sancho, 2007 ). Ultimately though any collaboration, regardless of the method of inception, is unlikely to succeed or even be embarked upon unless both partners are confident that they have the financial resources to proceed.

Greater implementation of automation can bestow benefits to funding organisations. Devoting financial resources towards automation engineering may seem paradoxical where the long-term objectives are targeted towards developing therapeutic interventions for biological diseases. However, the reproducibility of published research is essential for research financed by these organisations. Automation is a critical component in driving upwards the reproducibility of disseminated research ( Winder, 2019 ). In addition, as research confidence increases in a particular therapy consideration will eventually need to shift towards how the technology can be produced in sufficient quantities and at an affordable price so that it is available to the greatest range of patients. As previously discussed, including automation at earlier stage in the development process can help in attaining these goals, easing the transition from the experimentation phase to clinical usage. Competitive schemes, where funds are specifically are made available for developing laboratory automation would be beneficial in bridging the distance between the lab bench and the bedside.

Automation can provide benefits too for governments funding academic institutions. Increasing the level of automation across workplaces is acknowledged as strategy for economic progress ( Velásquez et al., 2009 ; Reeves et al., 2019 ) with research laboratories being no exception. Access to higher levels of automation increases the output of research laboratories that exist in publicly funded institutions. Any associated automation dividend will also require appropriately skilled technical staff to maintain, operate and enhance laboratory equipment. A greater range of dedicated grant schemes specifically targeted at developing laboratory automation will, in the long-term, increase the effectiveness of all research funding.

Laboratory Automation Design

Improvements can be made in automation design, how it is implemented in laboratories and the range of available automations options. A large amount of laboratory automation is based upon an anthropomorphic design framework that mimics human movement. Expensive laboratory equipment frequently features an over reliance on robotics to manipulate tooling, reagents and labware in a similar manner to how researchers would themselves. These types of designs can present as being visually high-tech and impressive and there is indeed an advantage to machinery that presents as more human-like in that it is more likely to be trusted by human operators ( de Visser et al., 2016 ). Unfortunately for many applications these designs are not always the most efficient means for automating a laboratory protocol. Robotic actuators featuring multiple axes and large operating envelopes also require even larger guarding enclosures and correspondingly complex control systems ( Yachie and Natsume, 2017 ). These design attributes render such equipment spatially and economically unsuitable for the majority of research laboratories. McClymont and Freemont provide an example where an assay requiring liquid handling can be more effectively processed and multiplexed with tooling that is not based upon an anthropomorphic design ( McClymont and Freemont, 2017 ). Hollow fibre cell culture systems are further examples of automation systems that have successfully eschewed more traditional anthropomorphic designs ( Eghbali et al., 2016 ).

Designing for flexibility is also an important factor for laboratories where there is a high level of protocol variation. Laboratory automations systems designs that anticipate future scientific developments and allow for subsequent adaptation will be less likely to become prematurely obsolete and thus more valuable to research laboratories. Machinery based upon modular based design is one approach to a flexible system. Modular automation systems can allow selective matching of automation to the protocol requirements, minimising the purchase of redundant features, and also providing the option for future upgrades should it be needed. There are indications that laboratory automation developers are becoming more aware of the need for flexibility. The ongoing development of technology such as Formulatrix’s rover system is one example where microwell plates are autonomously transferred between processing modules in a novel reworking of the robotic warehouse concept ( Wikholm and Lindblom, 2019 ).

The capability for an automation system to be modified without specialist engineering knowledge is desirable too. Allowing researchers to automate a wider range of process steps without the need for time consuming and expensive tooling redesign or extensive software reprogramming. An interesting extension of the modular design approach is to unify existing automation equipment so that it capable of performing the desired protocol in one continuous process stream. The recent development of software by the company Synthace that is capable of communicating and linking robotics from different manufacturers is one promising system for laboratories requiring highly flexible systems ( Sadowski et al., 2016 ; Jessop-Fabre and Sonnenschein, 2019 ).

To reduce the manual labour burden on laboratory research staff and students there is a need for a broader range of automation equipment. These designs should target the identified gap in labour saving automation with a focus on reducing price and footprint. In this regard employing multi axis robotics may not be the most optimal design solution and developers should be prepared to explore more cost-effective, low-tech routes to protocol automation, even if seems like a less fashionable option.

The Future of Laboratory Automation

It is with a certain degree of trepidation that we follow in the footsteps of others and attempt to predict the future of laboratory automation. The life science research laboratory of the future will undoubtably feature more automation equipment. How quickly automation is adopted will in all probability be slower than many would like and haphazard, with some fields being more suitable than others. Many of the obstacles to laboratory automation ingress we have described are long-standing and hardwired into the working practices of academic research. In particular financial hurdles faced by individual principal investigators are unlikely to be resolved and overcome in the immediate future. Bespoke, high-level automation solutions will remain beyond the reach of all but the most monied laboratories for a considerable time. Greater progress can be anticipated in the design and price of lower-level automation equipment. It is reasonable to assume that like other technologies laboratory automation will continue to mature with falling prices and more user centred designs. Hopefully incorporating more flexibility in response to consumer demand. In part this progression is already underway, with promising releases of low-cost liquid handling platforms and ongoing development of modular systems. The demand from research laboratories for automation that seeks to limit its impact on the environment will grow considerably and it is hoped that developers will create and adapt their designs to meet this need. Life science researchers will also continue to develop their own homemade laboratory automation and repurpose existing equipment, encouraging other laboratories to also take the leap into engineering. We predict that the second hand market will become an important resource for those choosing this route to automation.

Access to pooled resource, high-level, automation in the form of academic biofoundries is increasing and will continue to do so with expansion of existing facilities and the foundation of new ones. The outsourcing of protocols to commercial cloud laboratories has been predicted to become commonplace for a huge range of life science laboratories. From the perspective of the lab bench we are more circumspect in regards to the impact these organisations will have on day to day experimental research, with experimental range and flexibility key issues. Ultimately, the marketplace laws of supply and demand will dictate the success rate of these enterprises.

An appreciation of the limitations of automation both generally and for items of specific equipment is needed from academic, commercial and funding organisations and individuals. Of all the limitations discussed in this review we wish to particularly highlight the danger of innovation inhibition. Innovation in the laboratory is essential and the freedom to tinker and create new protocols needs to be retained if research is to retain a high degree of novelty. Ensuring that automation remains compatible with the curiously minded researcher will be a significant challenge for our field in the future.

In response to automation ingress the skills of life science researchers will need to adapt. The presence of more automation equipment will require more engineering type-skills to ensure correct equipment operation and implementation of protocols, along with a working knowledge of the biology under experimentation. Researchers will therefore need both biology ‘wet’ skills and ‘dry’ automation skills; such people have been imaginatively titled amphibious researchers by Mellingwood (2018) . It is therefore likely that automation will spawn a new generation of researchers with a range of interdisciplinary skills.

In summary, automation in life science laboratories lags behind its industrial and clinical counterparts due to an array of inhibiting factors, including financial, spatial and cultural challenges. Those who are able to surmount these barriers and integrate automation into their everyday protocols can reap significant reproducibility and efficiency benefits. It is essential that future laboratory automation systems are designed for flexibility to permit adaptation for changing laboratory needs and prevent the stifling of protocol innovation. A wider range of affordable bench top and remote automation options will steadily increase the ubiquity of mechanisation in life science research. Such progressive adoption of automation will emphasise the already growing interdisciplinary nature of research further blurring the boundary between science and engineering.

Author Contributions

IH conceived the study and wrote the manuscript with support from JD who critically reviewed it and also contributed content. Both authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

The authors would like to acknowledge support from the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC: grant code BB/M018040/1).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

JD is a member of the Free Software Foundation, which campaigns for free (open-source) software in place of proprietary.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Sara Gómez Arnaiz and Fokion Glykofrydis for their feedback and discussion of the manuscript.

Abramo, G., and D’Angelo, C. (2014). How do you define and measure research productivity? Scientometrics 101, 1129–1144. doi: 10.1007/s11192-014-1269-8

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Adams, J. U. (2004). How to negotiate for academic lab space. Scientist 18, 42–43.

Google Scholar

Almada, P., Pereira, P. M., Culley, S., Caillol, G., Boroni-Rueda, F., Dix, C. L., et al. (2019). Automating multimodal microscopy with NanoJ-Fluidics. Nat. Commun. 10:1223. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09231-9

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Archetti, C., Montanelli, A., Finazzi, D., Caimi, L., and Garrafa, E. (2017). Clinical laboratory automation: a case study. J. Public Health Res. 6:881. doi: 10.4081/jphr.2017.881

Archibald, P. R. T., Chandra, A., Thomas, D., Chose, O., Massouridès, E., Laâbi, Y., et al. (2016). Comparability of automated human induced pluripotent stem cell culture: a pilot study. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 39, 1847–1858. doi: 10.1007/s00449-016-1659-9

Autor, D. H. (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. J. Econ. Perspect. 29, 3–30. doi: 10.1257/jep.29.3.3

Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility. Nature 533, 452–454. doi: 10.1038/533452a

Baranczak, A., Tu, N. P., Marjanovic, J., Searle, P. A., Vasudevan, A., and Djuric, S. W. (2017). Integrated Platform for Expedited Synthesis-Purification-Testing of Small Molecule Libraries. ACS Med. Chem. Lett. 8, 461–465. doi: 10.1021/acsmedchemlett.7b00054

Barthels, F., Barthels, U., Schwickert, M., and Schirmeister, T. (2020). FINDUS: an open-source 3d printable liquid-handling workstation for laboratory automation in life sciences. SLAS Technol. 25, 190–199. doi: 10.1177/2472630319877374

Begley, C. G., and Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2015). Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ. Res. 116, 116–126. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.114.303819

Benchoufi, M., and Ravaud, P. (2017). Blockchain technology for improving clinical research quality. Trials 18:335. doi: 10.1186/s13063-017-2035-z

Berman, J. (2008). Connecting with industry: bridging the divide. J. High. Educ. Policy Manage. 30, 165–174. doi: 10.1080/13600800801938762

Besteman, S. B., and Bont, L. J. (2019). Fail-fast in respiratory syncytial virus vaccine development. Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med. 200, 410–412. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201901-0233ED

Beugelsdijk, T. J. (1991). The future of laboratory automation. Genet. Anal. Biomol. Eng. 8, 217–220. doi: 10.1016/1050-3862(91)90016-K

Bistulfi, G. (2013). Reduce, reuse and recycle lab waste. Nature 502, 170–170. doi: 10.1038/502170a

Björklund, M., Crenshaw, A. G., Djupsjöbacka, M., and Johansson, H. (2000). Position sense acuity is diminished following repetitive low-intensity work to fatigue in a simulated occupational setting. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 81, 361–367. doi: 10.1007/s004210050055

Bonner, J. (2006). Back to Academia: A Mid-Life Crisis? New Scientist, 2006. Available online at: https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19125711-900-back-to-academia-a-mid-life-crisis/ (accessed May 26, 2020).

Boyd, J. (2002). Robotic laboratory automation. Science 295, 517–518. doi: 10.1126/science.295.5554.517

Burger, B., Maffettone, P., Gusev, V., Aitchison, C., Bai, Y., Xiaoyan, W., et al. (2020). A Mobile Robotic chemist. Nature 583, 237–241. doi: 10.1038/s41586-020-2442-2

Capel, A. J., Rimington, R. P., Lewis, M. P., and Christie, S. D. R. (2018). 3D printing for chemical, pharmaceutical and biological applications. Nat. Rev. Chem. 2, 422–436. doi: 10.1038/s41570-018-0058-y

Caragher, T. E., Lifshitz, M. S., and DeCresce, R. (2017). “Analysis: clinical laboratory automation,” in Henry’s Clinical Diagnosis and Management by Laboratory Methods , eds R. A. McPherson and M. Pincus (Amsterdam: Elsevier), 60–65.

Casadevall, A., and Fang, F. C. (2010). Reproducible science. Infect. Immun. 78, 4972–4975. doi: 10.1128/IAI.00908-10

Ceroni, J. A. (2009). “Economic rationalization of automation projects,” in Springer Handbook of Automation , ed. S. Y. Nof (Berlin: Springer), 699–713. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-78831-7_40

Chambers, S., Kitney, R., and Freemont, P. (2016). The foundry: the DNA synthesis and construction foundry at imperial college. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 44, 687–688. doi: 10.1042/BST20160007

Chao, R., Mishra, S., Si, T., and Zhao, H. (2017). Engineering biological systems using automated biofoundries. Metab. Eng. 42, 98–108. doi: 10.1016/j.ymben.2017.06.003

Choi, Q., Kim, H. J., Kim, J. W., Kwon, G. C., and Koo, S. H. (2018). Manual versus automated streaking system in clinical microbiology laboratory: performance evaluation of Previ Isola for Blood culture and body fluid samples. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 32:e22673. doi: 10.1002/jcla.22373

Clark, D. E., and Pickett, S. D. (2000). Computational methods for the prediction of ‘drug-likeness. Drug Discov. Today 5, 49–58. doi: 10.1016/S1359-6446(99)01451-8

Courtemanche, J., King, S., and Bouck, D. (2018). Engineering novel lab devices using 3D printing and microcontrollers. SLAS Technol. 23, 448–455. doi: 10.1177/2472630318766858

Crombie, D. E., Daniszewski, M., Liang, H. H., Kulkarni, T., Li, F., Lidgerwood, G. E., et al. (2017). Development of a modular automated system for maintenance and differentiation of adherent human pluripotent stem cells. SLAS Discov. 22, 1016–1025. doi: 10.1177/2472555217696797

Crone, M. A., Priestman, M., Ciechonska, M., Jensen, K., Sharp, D. J., Anand, A., et al. (2020). A role for biofoundries in rapid development and validation of automated sars-cov-2 clinical diagnostics. Nat. Commun. 11:4464. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-18130-3

Croxatto, A., Prod’hom, G., Faverjon, F., Rochais, Y., and Greub, G. (2016). Laboratory automation in clinical bacteriology: What system to choose? Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 22, 217–235. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.09.030

Daniszewski, M., Crombie, D. E., Henderson, R., Liang, H. H., Wong, R. C. B., Hewitt, A. W., et al. (2018). Automated cell culture systems and their applications to human pluripotent stem cell studies. SLAS Technol. 23, 315–325. doi: 10.1177/2472630317712220

De Almeida, M., and Ferreira, R. (2017). Taking Biotech to the Next Level with Laboratory Automation. Labiotech, 2017. Available online at: https://www.labiotech.eu/features/biotech-laboratory-automation/ (accessed April 1, 2020).

de Visser, E. J., Monfort, S. S., McKendrick, R., Smith, M. A. B., McKnight, P. E., Krueger, F., et al. (2016). Almost human: anthropomorphism increases trust resilience in cognitive agents. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl. 22, 331–349. doi: 10.1037/xap0000092

Doulgkeroglou, M. N., Nubila, A., Niessing, B., König, N., Schmitt, R. H., Damen, J., et al. (2020). Automation, monitoring, and standardization of cell product manufacturing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8:811. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.00811

Edwards, A. (2016). Reproducibility: team up with industry. Nature 531, 299–301. doi: 10.1038/531299a

Eghbali, H., Nava, M. M., Mohebbi-Kalhori, D., and Raimondi, M. T. (2016). Hollow fiber bioreactor technology for tissue engineering applications. Int. J. Artif. Organs 39, 1–15. doi: 10.5301/ijao.5000466

Egri, P., Csáji, B. C., Kis, K. B., Monostori, L., Váncza, J., Ochs, J., et al. (2020). Bio-inspired control of automated stem cell production. Procedia CIRP 88, 600–605. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2020.05.105

European Commission (2016). H2020 Programme Fact Sheets Grants 2 (December). Available online at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/other/gm/h2020-grant-factsheet_en.pdf (accessed May 8, 2020).

Fanelli, D. (2018). Opinion: Is science really facing a reproducibility crisis, and do we need it to? Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, 2628–2631. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1708272114

Freedman, L. P., Cockburn, I. M., and Simcoe, T. S. (2015). The economics of reproducibility in preclinical research. PLoS Biol. 13:e1002165. doi: 10.1371/journal.pbio.1002165

Frohm, J., Lindström, V., Winroth, M., and Stahre, J. (2006). The Industry’s view on automation in manufacturing. IFAC Proc. Vol. 39, 453–458. doi: 10.3182/20060522-3-FR-2904.00073

Frohm, J., Lindström, V., Winroth, M., and Stahre, J. (2008). Levels of Automation in Manufacturing. Int. J. Ergon. Hum. Fact. 30, 71–74.

Froschauer, R., Dhungana, D., and Gruenbacher, P. (2008). “Managing the Life-Cycle of Industrial Automation Systems with Product Line Variability Models,” in Proceedings of the 2008 34th Euromicro Conference Software Engineering and Advanced Applications , Parma, 35–42. doi: 10.1109/SEAA.2008.21

García-Sancho, M. (2007). Sequencing As a Way of Work: A History of Its Emergence and Mechanisation – From Proteins To Dna, 1945-2000. Ph.D. thesis, Imperial College London, London.

Genzen, J. R., Burnham, C. A. D., Felder, R. A., Hawker, C. D., Lippi, G., and Peck Palmer, O. M. (2018). Challenges and opportunities in implementing total laboratory automation. Clin. Chem. 64, 259–264. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2017.274068

Goldblatt, E. M., and Lee, W. H. (2010). From bench to bedside: the growing use of translational research in cancer medicine. Am. J. Transl. Res. 2, 1–18. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03829.x

Goodman, S. N., Fanelli, D., and Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2018). What does research reproducibility mean? Sci. Transl. Med. 8:341ps12. doi: 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf5027

Greub, G., Sahli, R., Brouillet, R., and Jaton, K. (2016). Ten years of R&D and full automation in molecular diagnosis. Future Microbiol. 11, 403–425. doi: 10.2217/fmb.15.152

Groth, P., and Cox, J. (2017). Indicators for the use of robotic labs in basic biomedical research: a literature analysis. PeerJ 5:e3997. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3997

Harrison, R., Colombo, A. W., West, A. A., and Lee, S. M. (2007). Reconfigurable modular automation systems for automotive power-train manufacture. Int. J. Flex. Manuf. Syst. 18, 175–190. doi: 10.1007/s10696-006-9008-y

Hasegawa, Y. (2009). “Advances in robotics and automation: historical perspectives,” in Springer Handbook of Automation , ed. Y. Shimon (Heidelberg: Springer), 3–4. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-78831-7_1

Hawker, C. D., Genzen, J. R., and Wittwer, C. T. (2018). “Automation in the Clinical Laboratory,” in Tietz Textbook of Clinical Chemistry and Molecular Diagnostics , 6th Edn, eds N. Rifai, A. R. Horvath, and C. T. Wittwer (Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Inc), 370.e1–370.e24. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-323-35921-4.00026-0

Hawker, C. D., and Schlank, M. R. (2000). Development of standards for laboratory automation. Clin. Chem. 46, 746–750. doi: 10.1093/clinchem/46.5.746

Hawkins, R. C. (2007). Laboratory turnaround time. Clin. Biochem. Rev. 28, 179–194. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/105.6.676

Hayden, E. C. (2014). The automated lab. Nature 516, 131–132. doi: 10.1038/516131a

Hayward, C. N., Laursen, S. L., and Thiry, H. (2017). Why work with undergraduate researchers? Differences in research advisors’ motivations and outcomes by career stage. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 16:ar13. doi: 10.1187/cbe.16-07-0229

Heathman, T. R. J., Nienow, A. W., McCall, M. J., Coopman, K., Kara, B., and Hewitt, C. J. (2015). The translation of cell-based therapies: clinical landscape and manufacturing challenges. Regen. Med. 10, 49–64. doi: 10.2217/rme.14.73

Hitomi, K. (1994). Automation — Its concept and a short history. Technovation 14, 121–128. doi: 10.1016/0166-4972(94)90101-5

Howes, L. (2019). Can laboratories move away from single-use plastic? ACS Cent. Sci. 5, 1904–1906. doi: 10.1021/acscentsci.9b01249

Howlett, R. J. (ed.) (2010). “Knowledge Transfer between UK Universities and Business,” in Innovation through Knowledge Transfer. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies , Vol. 5, (Berlin: Springer), 1–14. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-14594-0_1

Hua, S., de Matos, M. B. C., Metselaar, J. M., and Storm, G. (2018). Current trends and challenges in the clinical translation of nanoparticulate nanomedicines: pathways for translational development and commercialization. Front. Pharmacol. 9:790. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2018.00790

Huggett, J., Green, C., and Zumla, A. (2009). Nucleic acid detection and quantification in the developing world. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 37, 419–423. doi: 10.1042/BST0370419

Iridiastadi, H., and Nussbaum, M. A. (2006). Muscular fatigue and endurance during intermittent static efforts: effects of contraction level, duty cycle, and cycle time. Hum. Factors 48, 710–720. doi: 10.1518/001872006779166389

Jessop-Fabre, M. M., and Sonnenschein, N. (2019). Improving reproducibility in synthetic biology. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 7:18. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00018

Jones, R., Haufe, P., Sells, E., Iravani, P., Olliver, V., Palmer, C., et al. (2011). Reprap - the replicating rapid prototyper. Robotica 29, 177–191. doi: 10.1017/S026357471000069X

Jones, S. E. (2013). Against Technology: From the Luddites to Neo-Luddism. New York, NY: Routledge.

Jossen, V., van den Bos, C., Eibl, R., and Eibl, D. (2018). Manufacturing human mesenchymal stem cells at clinical scale: process and regulatory challenges. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 102, 3981–3994. doi: 10.1007/s00253-018-8912-x

Jung, S., Ochs, J., Kulik, M., König, N., and Schmitt, R. H. (2018). Highly modular and generic control software for adaptive cell processing on automated production platforms. Procedia CIRP 72, 1245–1250. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2018.03.189

Kaber, D. B., Stoll, N., Thurow, K., Green, R. S., Kim, S. H., and Mosaly, P. (2009). Human-automation interaction strategies and models for life science applications. Hum. Fact. Ergon. Manuf. 19, 601–621. doi: 10.1002/hfm.20156

Kane, K. I. W., Moreno, E. L., Hachi, S., Walter, M., Jarazo, J., Oliveira, M. A. P., et al. (2019). Automated microfluidic cell culture of stem cell derived dopaminergic neurons. Sci. Rep. 9:1796. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-34828-3

Kato, R., Iejima, D., Agata, H., Asahina, I., Okada, K., Ueda, M., et al. (2010). A compact, automated cell culture system for clinical scale cell expansion from primary tissues. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 16, 947–956. doi: 10.1089/ten.tec.2009.0305

Kempner, M. E., and Felder, R. A. (2002). A review of cell culture automation. JALA 7, 56–62. doi: 10.1016/S1535-5535(04)00183-2

Khanna, R., Guler, I., and Nerkar, A. (2016). Fail often, fail big, and fail fast? Learning from small failures and R&D performance in the pharmaceutical industry. Acad. Manage. J. 59, 436–459. doi: 10.5465/amj.2013.1109

Kim, K. W., Lee, M. S., Ryu, M. H., and Kim, J. W. (2015). Arduino-Based Automation of a DNA Extraction System. Edited by Wen-Hsiang Hsieh. Technol. Health Care 24, S105–S112. doi: 10.3233/THC-151048

King, R. D., Rowland, J., Oliver, S. G., Young, M., Aubrey, W., Byrne, E., et al. (2009). The automation of science. Science 324, 85–89. doi: 10.1126/science.1165620

Kitney, R., Adeogun, M., Fujishima, Y., Goñi-Moreno, Á, Johnson, R., Maxon, M., et al. (2019). Enabling the advanced bioeconomy through public policy supporting biofoundries and engineering biology. Trends Biotechnol. 37, 917–920. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.03.017

Klaus, B., and del Alamo, D. (2018). Talent identification at the limits of peer review: an analysis of the EMBO postdoctoral fellowships selection process. bioRxiv [Preprint]. doi: 10.1101/481655

Klevebring, D., Gry, M., Lindberg, J., Eidefors, A., and Lundeberg, J. (2009). Automation of CDNA synthesis and labelling improves reproducibility. J. Biomed. Biotechnol. 2009:396808. doi: 10.1155/2009/396808

Konczal, J., and Gray, C. H. (2017). Streamlining workflow and automation to accelerate laboratory scale protein production. Protein Expr. Purif. 133, 160–169. doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2017.03.016

Kotin, R. M. (2011). Large-scale recombinant adeno-associated virus production. Hum. Mol. Genet. 20, R2–R6. doi: 10.1093/hmg/ddr141

Krause, M., Gautam, K., Małgorzata, A., and Niraula, A. G. (2020). Reducing Plastic Waste in the Lab. Chemistry World, 2020. Available online at: https://www.chemistryworld.com/opinion/reducing-plastic-waste-in-the-lab/4011550 (accessed June 2, 2020).

Kreiman, G., and Maunsell, J. H. R. (2011). Nine criteria for a measure of scientific output. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 5:48. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2011.00048

Lou, A. H., Elnenaei, M. O., Sadek, I., Thompson, S., Crocker, B. D., and Nassar, B. (2016). Evaluation of the impact of a total automation system in a large core laboratory on turnaround time. Clin. Biochem. 49, 1254–1258. doi: 10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2016.08.018

Lynch, K. L. (2016). Collaboration at the heart of innovation. Clin. Chem. 62:1284. doi: 10.1373/clinchem.2016.260687

Mabbott, G. A. (2014). Teaching electronics and laboratory automation using microcontroller boards. J. Chem. Educ. 91, 1458–1463. doi: 10.1021/ed4006216

Maleki, F., Ovens, K., McQuillan, I., and Kusalik, A. J. (2019). Size matters: how sample size affects the reproducibility and specificity of gene set analysis. Hum. Genomics 13(Suppl. 1):42. doi: 10.1186/s40246-019-0226-2

Marx, U., Schenk, F., Behrens, J., Meyr, U., Wanek, P., Zang, W., et al. (2013). Automatic production of induced pluripotent stem cells. Procedia CIRP 5, 2–6. doi: 10.1016/j.procir.2013.01.001

May, M. (2019). A DIY approach to automating your lab. Nature 569, 587–588. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-01590-z

McClymont, D. W., and Freemont, P. S. (2017). With all due respect to Maholo, lab automation isn’t anthropomorphic. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 312–314. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3795

McGraw, J., Tatipelli, V. K., Feyijinmi, O., Traore, M. C., Eangoor, P., Lane, S., et al. (2014). A semi-automated method for purification of milligram quantities of proteins on the QIAcube. Protein Expr. Purif. 96, 48–53. doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2014.01.014

McLoughlin, J., and Mitchell, A. (2013). “Mechanisms of sewing machines,” in Joining Textiles , eds I. Jones, and G. K. Stylios (Amsterdam: Elsevier). doi: 10.1533/9780857093967.1.123

Meldrum, D. (2000). Automation for genomics, part one: preparation for sequencing. Genome Res. 10, 1081–1092. doi: 10.1101/gr.101400

Mellingwood, C. (2018). Amphibious Researchers: Working with Laboratory Automation in Synthetic Biology. Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

Mifflin, T. E., Estey, C. A., and Felder, R. A. (2000). Robotic automation performs a nested RT-PCR analysis for HCV without introducing sample contamination. Clin. Chim. Acta 290, 199–211. doi: 10.1016/S0009-8981(99)00192-8

Miles, B., and Lee, P. L. (2018). Achieving reproducibility and closed-loop automation in biological experimentation with an IoT-enabled lab of the future. SLAS Technol. 23, 432–439. doi: 10.1177/2472630318784506

Moutsatsou, P., Ochs, J., Schmitt, R. H., Hewitt, C. J., and Hanga, M. P. (2019). Automation in cell and gene therapy manufacturing: from past to future. Biotechnol. Lett. 41, 1245–1253. doi: 10.1007/s10529-019-02732-z

Movsisyan, M., Delbeke, E. I. P., Berton, J. K. E. T., Battilocchio, C., Ley, S. V., and Stevens, C. V. (2016). Taming hazardous chemistry by continuous flow technology. Chem. Soc. Rev. 45, 4892–4928. doi: 10.1039/c5cs00902b

Munafò, M. R., Nosek, B. A., Bishop, D. V. M., Button, K. S., Chambers, C. D., Du Sert, N. P., et al. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nat. Hum. Behav. 1:0021. doi: 10.1038/s41562-016-0021

Needs, S. H., Diep, T. T., Bull, S. P., Lindley-Decaire, A., Ray, P., and Edwards, A. D. (2019). Exploiting open source 3D printer architecture for laboratory robotics to automate high-throughput time-lapse imaging for analytical microbiology. PLoS One 14:e0224878. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224878

Noel, A. C., and Hu, D. L. (2018). The Tongue as a Gripper. J. Exp. Biol. 221:jeb176289. doi: 10.1242/jeb.176289

Ochs, J., Barry, F., Schmitt, R., and Murphy, J. M. (2017). Advances in automation for the production of clinical-grade mesenchymal stromal cells: the AUTOSTEM Robotic Platform. Cell Gene Ther. Insights 3, 739–748. doi: 10.18609/cgti.2017.073

Panchalingam, K. M., Jung, S., Rosenberg, L., and Behie, L. A. (2015). Bioprocessing strategies for the large-scale production of human mesenchymal stem cells: a review. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 6:225. doi: 10.1186/s13287-015-0228-5

Peng, R. (2015). The reproducibility crisis in science: a statistical counterattack. Significance 12, 30–32. doi: 10.1111/j.1740-9713.2015.00827.x

Pilizota, T., and Yang, Y. T. (2018). ‘Do it yourself’ microbial cultivation techniques for synthetic and systems biology: cheap, fun, and flexible. Front. Microbiol. 9:1666. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01666

Plebani, M. (2010). The detection and prevention of errors in laboratory medicine. Ann. Clin. Biochem. 47, 101–110. doi: 10.1258/acb.2009.009222

Price, A. P., Godin, L. M., Domek, A., Cotter, T., D’Cunha, J., Taylor, D. A., et al. (2015). Automated decellularization of intact, human-sized lungs for tissue engineering. Tissue Eng. Part C Methods 21, 94–103. doi: 10.1089/ten.tec.2013.0756

Rafiq, Q. A., and Thomas, R. J. (2016). The evolving role of automation in process development & manufacture of cell & gene-based therapies. Cell Gene Ther. Insights 2, 473–479. doi: 10.18609/cgti.2016.058

Rafiq, Q. A., Twomey, K., Kulik, M., Leschke, C., O’Dea, J., Callens, S., et al. (2016). Developing an automated robotic factory for novel stem cell therapy production. Regen. Med. 11, 351–354. doi: 10.2217/rme-2016-0040

Rampell, C. (2011). Companies Spend on Equipment, Not Workers. New York Times. Available online at: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/10/business/10capital.html (accessed June, 2011).

Ravazzi, P., and Villa, A. (2009). “Economic aspects of automation,” in Springer Handbook of Automation , ed. S. Y. Nof (Berlin: Springer), 93–116. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-78831-7_6

Reed, C. E., Fournier, J., Vamvoukas, N., and Koza, S. M. (2018). Automated preparation of MS-sensitive fluorescently labeled N-Glycans with a commercial pipetting robot. SLAS Technol. 23, 550–559. doi: 10.1177/2472630318762384

Reeves, R., Coaker, V., Hendry, D., Kerr, S., Kyle, P., Liddell-Grainger, I., et al. (2019). Automation and the Future of Work House of Commons Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee.

Richter, F., Scheib, U. S., Mehlhorn, J., Schubert, R., Wietek, J., and Gernetzki, O. (2015). Upgrading a microplate reader for photobiology and all-optical experiments. Photochem. Photobiol. Sci. 14, 270–279. doi: 10.1039/C4PP00361F

Roberts, M. (2017). Rural luddism and the makeshift economy of the nottinghamshire framework knitters. Soc. Hist. 42, 365–398. doi: 10.1080/03071022.2017.1327644

Russell, A. L., Lefavor, R. C., and Zubair, A. C. (2018). Characterization and cost–benefit analysis of automated bioreactor-expanded mesenchymal stem cells for clinical applications. Transfusion 58, 2374–2382. doi: 10.1111/trf.14805

Sadowski, M. I., Grant, C., and Fell, T. S. (2016). Harnessing QbD, programming languages, and automation for reproducible biology. Trends Biotechnol. 34, 214–227. doi: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2015.11.006

Safavi, A., and Anderson, T. (2019). Pipette tip Washing Device. U.S. Patent No. US20190216290A1. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Saltelli, A., and Funtowicz, S. (2017). What is science’s crisis really about? Futures 91, 5–11. doi: 10.1016/j.futures.2017.05.010

Salter, S. J., Cox, M. J., Turek, E. M., Calus, S. T., Cookson, W. O., Moffatt, M. F., et al. (2014). Reagent and laboratory contamination can critically impact sequence-based microbiome analyses. BMC Biol. 12:87. doi: 10.1186/s12915-014-0087-z

Sanger, F., Nicklen, S., and Coulson, A. R. (1977). DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 74, 5463–5467. doi: 10.1073/pnas.74.12.5463

Sarkozi, L., Simson, E., and Ramanathan, L. (2003). The effects of total laboratory automation on the management of a clinical chemistry laboratory. Retrospective analysis of 36 years. Clin. Chim. Acta 329, 89–94. doi: 10.1016/S0009-8981(03)00020-2

Schneider, G. (2018). Automating Drug Discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 17, 97–113. doi: 10.1038/nrd.2017.232

Seeling, J. M., and Choudhary, M. (2016). Professional practices in undergraduate research programs. J. Microbiol. Biol. Educ. 17, 246–251. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v17i2.982

Segal, M. (2019). An operating system for the biology lab. Nature 573, S112–S113. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-02875-z

Shih, S. C. C., Goyal, G., Kim, P. W., Koutsoubelis, N., Keasling, J. D., Adams, P. D., et al. (2015). A versatile microfluidic device for automating synthetic biology. ACS Synth. Biol. 4, 1151–1164. doi: 10.1021/acssynbio.5b00062

Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening (2011). ANSI SLAS 1-2004 (R2012) Footprint Dimensions. Chicago, IL: Society for Laboratory Automation and Screening.

Storrs, C. (2013). Set It and Forget It - A Tour of Three Systems for Automating Cell Culture. The Scientist, 2013. Available online at: https://www.the-scientist.com/lab-tools/set-it-and-forget-it-39696 (accessed March 27, 2020).

Tacker, D. H., Topardo, J., Mahaffey, C., and Perrotta, P. L. (2014). Workflow analysis comparing manual and automated specimen processing for mass spectrometry–based vitamin D testing. Lab. Med. 45, 361–367. doi: 10.1309/lmzl47en6kdodmxj

Thomson, R. B., and McElvania, E. (2019). Total laboratory automation: What is gained, what is lost, and who can afford it? Clin. Lab. Med. 39, 371–389. doi: 10.1016/j.cll.2019.05.002

Urbina, M. A., Watts, A. J. R., and Reardon, E. E. (2015). Labs should cut plastic waste too. Nature 528, 479–479. doi: 10.1038/528479c

Vaesen, K., and Katzav, J. (2017). How much would each researcher receive if competitive government research funding were distributed equally among researchers? PLoS One 12:e0183967. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183967

van der Weijden, I., Teelken, C., de Boer, M., and Drost, M. (2016). Career satisfaction of postdoctoral researchers in relation to their expectations for the future. High. Educ. 72, 25–40. doi: 10.1007/s10734-015-9936-0

Varao-Sousa, T. L., Smilek, D., and Kingstone, A. (2018). In the lab and in the wild: how distraction and mind wandering affect attention and memory. Cogn. Res. Princ. Implic. 3:42. doi: 10.1186/s41235-018-0137-0

Velásquez, J. D., Chen, X. W., Yoon, S. W., and Ko, H. S. (2009). “Automation Statistics,” in Springer Handbook of Automation , ed. S. Y. Nof (Heidelberg: Springer), 1673–1701. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-78831-7_94

Wajcman, J. (2017). Automation: Is it really different this time? Br. J. Sociol. 68, 119–127. doi: 10.1111/1468-4446.12239

White, S., Lacey, A., and Ardanaz-Badia, A. (2019). The Probability of Automation in England - Office for National Statistics. Office for National Statistics. Available online at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/theprobabilityofautomationinengland/2011and2017 (accessed April 24, 2020).

Wikholm, D., and Lindblom, R. (2019). Rover-based integrated laboratory system including autonomous mobile robots. U.S. Patent No. WO2019/139930. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Wilke, W. W., Jones, R. N., and Sutton, L. D. (1995). Automation of polymerase chain reaction tests. reduction of human errors leading to contamination. Diagn. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 21, 181–185. doi: 10.1016/0732-8893(95)00041-8

Williams, K., Bilsland, E., Sparkes, A., Aubrey, W., Young, M., Soldatova, L. N., et al. (2015). Cheaper faster drug development validated by the repositioning of drugs against neglected tropical diseases. J. R. Soc. Interface 12:20141289. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2014.1289

Wilson, S., and Zamberlan, L. (2012). Show me yours: developing a faculty-wide interdisciplinary initiative in built environment higher education. Contemp. Issues Educ. Res. 5, 331–342. doi: 10.19030/cier.v5i4.7430

Winder, A. (2019). How Lab Automation Is Helping Drug Research. European Pharmaceutical Manufacturer, 2019. Available online at: https://www.epmmagazine.com/opinion/how-lab-automation-is-helping-drug-research/ (accessed May 19, 2020).

Wong, B. G., Mancuso, C. P., Kiriakov, S., Bashor, C. J., and Khalil, A. S. (2018). Precise, automated control of conditions for high-throughput growth of yeast and bacteria with EVOLVER. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 614–623. doi: 10.1038/nbt.4151

Wrigley, J. D., McCall, E. J., Bannaghan, C. L., Liggins, L., Kendrick, C., Griffen, A., et al. (2014). Cell banking for pharmaceutical research. Drug Discov. Today 19, 1518–1529. doi: 10.1016/j.drudis.2014.05.006

Xie, I. H., Wang, M. H., Carpenter, R., and Wu, H. Y. (2004). Automated calibration of TECAN genesis liquid handling workstation utilizing an online balance and density meter. Assay Drug Dev. Technol. 2, 71–80. doi: 10.1089/154065804322966333

Xu, R., Zhang, C., He, F., Zhao, X., Qi, H., Zhou, P., et al. (2018). How physical activities affect mental fatigue based on EEG energy, connectivity, and complexity. Front. Neurol. 9:915. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2018.00915

Yachie, N., and Natsume, T. (2017). Robotic crowd biology with Maholo labdroids. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 310–312. doi: 10.1038/nbt.3758

Zhang, C., Long, A. M., Swalm, B., Charest, K., Wang, Y., Hu, J., et al. (2016). Development of an automated mid-scale parallel protein purification system for antibody purification and affinity chromatography. Protein Expr. Purif. 128, 29–35. doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2016.08.005

Zielinski, D., Gordon, A., Zaks, B. L., and Erlich, Y. (2014). IPipet: sample handling using a tablet. Nat. Methods 11, 784–785. doi: 10.1038/nmeth.3028

Zluhan, E., Kelly, K., LeClair, N., Wortel, D., and Moody, K. (2016). Automating HESC differentiation with 3D printing and legacy liquid handling solutions. MethodsX 3, 569–576. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2016.10.005

Keywords : laboratory automation, life science research, automation design, research efficiency, reproducibility, innovation inhibition, environmental design

Citation: Holland I and Davies JA (2020) Automation in the Life Science Research Laboratory. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 8:571777. doi: 10.3389/fbioe.2020.571777

Received: 11 June 2020; Accepted: 26 October 2020; Published: 13 November 2020.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2020 Holland and Davies. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Ian Holland, [email protected]

Lab Equipment & Instruments

• Chemical Laws
• Periodic Table
• Projects & Experiments
• Scientific Method
• Biochemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Medical Chemistry
• Chemistry In Everyday Life
• Famous Chemists
• Activities for Kids
• Abbreviations & Acronyms
• Weather & Climate
• Ph.D., Biomedical Sciences, University of Tennessee at Knoxville
• B.A., Physics and Mathematics, Hastings College

Chemistry Lab

This is a collection of lab equipment and scientific instruments.

Glassware Is Important for a Lab

Analytical balance.

 This type of analytical balance is called a Mettler balance. This is a digital balance used for measuring mass with 0.1 mg precision.

Beakers in the Chemistry Lab

A centrifuge is a motorized piece of laboratory equipment which spins liquid samples to separate their components. Centrifuges come in two main sizes, a tabletop version which is often called a microcentrifuge and a larger floor model. 

Laptop Computer

 A computer is a valuable piece of modern laboratory equipment.​

Flask Glassware Used for Medium Volumes

One characteristic that distinguishes flasks is that they present a narrow section called a neck.

Erlenmeyer Flasks

An Erlenmeyer flask is a type of laboratory flask with a conical base and cylindrical neck. The flask is named after its inventor, German chemist Emil Erlenmeyer , who made the first Erlenmeyer flask in 1861.

Florence Flask

 A Florence flask or boiling flask is a round-bottom borosilicate glass  container with thick walls, capable of withstanding temperature changes.

A fume hood or fume cupboard is a piece of laboratory equipment designed to limit exposure to dangerous fumes. The air inside the fume hood is either vented to the outside or else filtered and recirculated.

Microwave Oven

 A microwave can be used to melt or heat many chemicals.

Paper Chromatography

Pipet or pipette for measuring small volumes.

 Pipets (pipettes) are used to measure and transfer small volumes . There are many different types of pipets. Examples of pipet types include disposable, reusable, autoclavable, and manual

Graduated Cylinder

Thermometer, volumetric flask.

Volumetric flasks are used to accurately prepare solutions for chemistry.

Electronic Microscope

Funnel & flasks, micropipette, sample extraction.

 A Petri dish is a shallow cylindrical dish that has a lid. It is named after its inventor, German bacteriologist Julius Petri. Petri dishes are made of glass or plastic.​

Pipette Bulb

A pipette bulb is used to draw liquid up into a pipette.  

Spectrophotometer

 A spectrophotometer is a device capable of measuring light intensity as a function of its wavelength. 

The titration also known as titrimetry or volumetric analysis is a process used for accurately measuring volume.

Example of a Chemistry Lab

Galileo thermometer.

 A Galileo thermometer works using principles of buoyancy.

Bunsen Burner Picture

Chemostat bioreactor.

A chemostat is a type of bioreactor in which the chemical environment is held constant (static) by removing effluent while adding culture medium. Ideally, the volume of the system is unchanged.​

Gold Leaf Electroscope Diagram

The gold leaf electroscope can detect static electricity. ​The charge on the metal cap passes into the stem and gold. The stem and the gold have the same electrical charge, so they repel each other, causing the gold foil to bend outward from the stem.

Photoelectric Effect Diagram

The photoelectric effect occurs when matter emits electrons upon absorbing electromagnetic radiation, such as light.

Gas Chromatograph Diagram

This is a generalized diagram of a gas chromatograph, an instrument used to separate the chemical components of a complex sample.

Bomb Calorimeter

A calorimeter is a device used to measure the heat change or heat capacity of chemical reactions or physical changes.

Goethe Barometer

 A 'Goethe barometer' or storm glass, a type of water-based barometer. The sealed body of the glass barometer  is filled with water, while the narrow spout is open to the atmosphere. 

Weights or Masses

Spring weighing scale.

A spring weighing scale is used to determine the weight of an object from the displacement of the spring.​

Steel Ruler

Thermometer with fahrenheit and celsius scales, desiccator and vacuum desiccator glassware.

A desiccator is sealed container which holds a desiccant to protect items or chemicals from humidity.

• Chemistry Glassware Types, Names and Uses
• Chemistry Laboratory Glassware Gallery
• The 10 Most Important Lab Safety Rules
• What Is a Volumetric Flask?
• Volumetric Flask Definition in Chemistry
• Chemistry Laboratory Safety Rules
• How to Clean Lab Glassware
• How to Extract Caffeine From Tea
• What Is Titration?
• Understanding Quantitative Analysis in Chemistry
• The Most Common Injuries in a Chemistry Lab
• Thames & Kosmos Chem 3000 Chemistry Kit Review
• Calorimeter Definition in Chemistry
• How Does a Thermometer Measure Air Temperature?
• How To Prepare Chemical Solutions
• Coffee Cup and Bomb Calorimetry

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

Lab Equipment

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 159616

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Table of Contents:

• ERLENMEYER FLASK
• VIAL WITH CAP
• VOLUMETRIC FLASK
• GRADUATED CYLINDER
•  RING STAND
• BURET CLAMP
• UTILITY CLAMP
• WATCH GLASS
• CRUCIBLE TONGS
• GLASS STIR BAR
• MAGNETIC STIR BAR
• DISPOSABLE PIPET
• WASH BOTTLE
• SAFETY GOGGLES
• BUNSEN BURNER

​​​​​​​

Glassware- not used for measurement

Glassware- used for measurement

Equipment often used in titrations, miscellaneous.

• Lab Manager Academy
• Subscribe Today!

• Lab Management
• Lab Operations

How to Keep Your Lab Science-Ready

The critical role of a comprehensive lab assessment for streamlining scientific operations.

Think of your lab as a finely tuned orchestra where lab managers play the role of conductors, coordinating lab equipment, logistics, chemicals, and consumables to ensure the lab operates in perfect harmony. This coordination is crucial for day-to-day operations and research endeavors' long-term success. However, without regular assessments to fine-tune these components, the lab’s performance may suffer, leading to delays in research activities, inflated budgets, and the depletion of valuable resources. 

Addressing these inefficiencies can seem daunting, often requiring a substantial amount of time, effort, and expertise—resources that many labs, especially those with limited staff, find challenging to allocate. This is where a lab assessment, backed by a comprehensive lab services provider, can be invaluable. Such assessments evaluate “science-readiness” by examining how a lab manages its equipment, logistics, chemicals, and consumables. This offers critical insights into a lab’s operational state, highlighting areas where improvements can be made to enhance efficiency and safety. Partnering with a comprehensive lab services provider for these assessments also grants labs access to specialized expertise and innovative solutions that go beyond their internal capabilities, allowing scientists to focus on their primary objectives and driving scientific discovery forward. 

Equipment: Ensuring operational efficiency

Proper equipment management is essential for maintaining operational efficiency, encompassing preventive maintenance, calibration, and timely upgrades. Neglecting these best practices can lead to frequent breakdowns, increased repair costs, and derailed research projects. A lab assessment that evaluates science-readiness plays an important role in equipment management, as it evaluates the current condition of lab equipment and recommends necessary improvements to prevent critical failures. 

A common recommendation from lab assessments is for labs to develop a comprehensive equipment database. This database should catalog every service performed on each piece of equipment, along with the associated costs and maintenance frequency. Such a resource enables lab managers to select suitable service agreements and anticipate when equipment is nearing the end of its life cycle. With this knowledge, labs can proactively budget for replacements, drastically reducing the likelihood of unexpected equipment failures. 

In the face of organizational changes, the need for a robust equipment management system becomes critical, a lesson highlighted by one lab’s transition to a brand-new, state-of-the-art facility. Initially, the lab didn’t assess its equipment management protocols, which led to several issues, including bioreactor pressure inconsistencies that threatened to delay crucial research and development efforts. Recognizing the importance of preventive maintenance, the lab established a strategic partnership with a dedicated and responsive lab services provider. By applying an innovative approach to problem-solving, the provider resolved the company’s equipment issues and enhanced its equipment management strategy.

Logistics: Streamlining lab operations

Logistics is the often-unseen yet critical backbone of lab operations. It plays an essential role in ensuring experiment preparedness, adherence to safety protocols, and the coordination of staff and resources. Evaluating these elements becomes especially crucial during significant changes and growth, such as scaling operations, integrating new teams and technologies, or shifting research focuses, which typically strains existing operations. 

A pharmaceutical company facing support and staffing shortages while relocating to a larger facility experienced this operational strain firsthand. To address these challenges, the company enlisted a logistics-focused lab services provider known for its custom relocation assistance. The provider began by conducting a comprehensive lab assessment, which played a pivotal role in enhancing strategic on-site support and optimizing service delivery. This assessment also ensured the new facility was primed for peak productivity and innovation. After the relocation, the provider continued its collaboration with the company’s lab operations teams to ensure the labs remained science-ready.

Chemicals: Safeguarding health and compliance

The journey of a chemical through a lab, from receipt to disposal, requires thorough oversight to ensure the safety of lab personnel. Establishing a chemical safety program within your lab can help mitigate these health and safety risks and lower the environmental impact and operational costs associated with chemical management.  

Creating such a program is a multi-faceted process that requires careful assessment (and re-assessment) of several key components, including handling, labeling, storage, and disposal protocols. This ensures the segregation of incompatible chemicals, mitigating the risk of unintentional reactions. A thorough assessment will also evaluate the availability of safety data sheets and a lab’s chemical management strategy across every stage of a chemical’s lifecycle. These practices equip lab personnel with the necessary information for managing chemicals safely. 

Despite the potential consequences of insufficient chemical management, labs frequently face challenges when evaluating their practices. This often stems from a lack of well-defined processes and understanding of regulatory compliance standards. This is where collaborating with an external lab services provider that specializes in lab assessments becomes invaluable. These partnerships can greatly simplify the chemical management process by identifying potential gaps in safety measures, recommending improvements, and assisting in the adoption of best practices. Such support ultimately facilitates compliance and boosts the efficiency and safety of lab operations.

Consumables: Optimizing resource use

Effective consumable management is fundamental for ensuring uninterrupted research activities. However, the process of ordering and managing consumables is unstructured and uncoordinated in many labs. In some labs, individuals place orders independently when they notice supplies running low, instead of having a designated person or team who follows a well-defined purchasing process. Unfortunately, this can lead to stock hoarding, expired stock, and wasted lab space, which drives up costs and contributes to operational inefficiencies. This lack of organization can also complicate the maintenance of accurate inventory records, creating additional obstacles in financial management and resource allocation. 

Addressing inventory management challenges early on through a comprehensive lab assessment was crucial for one bioscience company. Swamped with deliveries, the company’s scientists, tasked with unpacking and organizing the contents, were inadvertently discarding packing slips and neglecting to update stockroom records. This oversight created hurdles for the finance department when it came time to process payments. The company then turned to an external lab services provider to address these compounding challenges and regain control over its consumables spending and usage. After evaluating the company's consumable management practices, the provider introduced a robust receiving and vendor-managed inventory (VMI) program. This intervention restored order to the stockroom, reduced waste, liberated funds for research and development, and relieved scientists from the burdens of inventory management. 

The Flagship formula: A comprehensive solution for lab support

Partnering with Flagship Lab Services allows lab personnel to concentrate on their research with renewed confidence, thanks to the central role of their Science-Ready Assessment (SRA). This evaluative tool, designed to gauge a lab’s operational efficiency, produces a detailed readiness score comprising a lab’s strengths and weaknesses in equipment, logistics, chemicals, and consumables management. Specifically, it verifies that equipment is properly maintained and calibrated, essential reagents and materials are readily accessible, power supplies are reliable, ventilation and waste management systems are sufficient, and staff are well-trained. The assessment also ensures lab personnel operate safely, supported by appropriate processes, procedures, training, equipment, and materials management practices. Leveraging these comprehensive insights, Flagship crafts a customized support plan carefully aligned with a lab’s unique needs and objectives, ensuring they are truly science-ready. 

Flagship additionally offers a suite of lab services that complement the findings and recommendations found in the SRA. These services include lab support, VMI programs, lab equipment calibration, validation, and repair, janitorial work, and mechanical, electrical, and plumbing work. Moreover, Flagship's adept project management ensures smooth transitions during moves and expansions, while its testing and certification services help labs uphold compliance and quality standards. 

By positioning the SRA at the core of its service offerings, Flagship can easily identify the best way to support a lab’s immediate and future needs. This holistic approach has positioned Flagship as the first nationwide provider of integrated lab and facility maintenance services, keeping labs safe, compliant, and thoroughly prepared to meet the demands of advanced scientific research. 

For more information about Flagship Lab Services, visit www.flagshipinc.com/lab-support-services

• Applications
• Manufacturers
• News & Insights

LabX.com Countdown

Upcoming Auctions

Featured Products View All

TSX Universal Series Ultra-Low Temperature Freezers

News and insights view all.

Driving the Field of Oligonucleotide Therapeutics: eBook

Lab Essentials to Advance Antibody Purification

Automating 3D Biology: Infographic

Infographic: Four Routes to GC Lab Efficiency

Auctions and events view all.

LabXPo Digital Event: Sustainability - Growing A Greener Lab

A Full Year of Groundbreaking Digital Events

Auction Event: Pharmaceutical Packaging Equipment

Online Auction: Late Model Lab Equipment formerly of AVM Biotechnology

Popular categories.

Autoclaves & Sterilizers

View All Microscopes

Centrifuges

Mass Spectrometers

Lab Freezers

Featured manufacturers.

• International Basic Science Programme (IBSP)
• Capacity building
• Remote Access Initiative
• International Year of Basic Sciences for Sustainable Development
• Promoting engineering
• Engineering Report
• Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) projects
• Carlos J. Finlay UNESCO Prize for Microbiology
• UNESCO-Equatorial Guinea International Prize for Research in the Life Sciences
• UNESCO-Russia Mendeleev International Prize in the Basic Sciences
• UNESCO-Al Fozan International Prize for the Promotion of Young Scientists
• International Year of Basic Sciences for Sustainable Development (2022-2023)
• World Engineering Day for Sustainable Development (4 March)
• International Day of Mathematics (14 March)
• International Day of Light (16 May)
• World Metrology Day (20 May)

Remote Access to Laboratory Equipment Initiative

Giving scientists in the global south access to laboratory equipment.

Gaining access to state-of-the-art laboratory equipment remains a difficult for scientists in the Global South. This shortage of resources is holding science back in the countries concerned, creating a knowledge gap between North and South. Many highly skilled scientists feel compelled to seek career opportunities abroad, resulting in brain drain. 

UNESCO’s “Remote Access to Lab Equipment” initiative is addressing this challenge by enabling scientists in the Global South, especially African scientists, to access sophisticated scientific equipment without leaving their home country. The scientists also receive training on how to use this equipment remotely. 

to a wide range of state-of-the-art laboratory equipment

and reliance on outsourcing and donor funding

with scientists from different regions and disciplines

thereby optimizing their time management and productivity

Call for applications for remote access to a Single Crystal X-Ray diffractometer for African Scientists

The call is open to African scientists who need to use a Single Crystal X-Ray diffractometer in their research, and work in institutes where that equipment is not available.

UNESCO is establishing a global support network to facilitate remote access to laboratory equipment globally. This network will bring together:

• contributors , who provide access to their equipment graciously,
• beneficiaries , with specific needs and requirements to achieve their research,
• donors , who’s support catalyzes the success of this initiative.

UNESCO is seeking vital support from the global community to ensure the success of its initiative, including financial support, facilitating remote access to laboratory equipment, supporting researchers' mobility, disseminating the call for assistance, and various other contributions. this support is essential to ensure the human, logistical, and financial resources required to positively impact all regions in need.

More information

Related items

• Natural sciences
• Programme implementation
• UN ＆ International cooperation
• Basic sciences
• Science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM)
• Remote Access to Lab Equipment
• See more add
• Contact: [email protected]

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Mass spectrometry is the gold standard for documenting and quantifying – down to a single cell – the peptides and proteins that inform human health and disease. At the Vincent Coates Foundation Mass Spectrometry Laboratory, students in the Translational Research and Applied Medicine (M-TRAM) program learn about the capabilities of the lab’s brand-new Bruker timsTOF Ultra. The instrument is one of a handful in the country and was part of a multiyear investment by the Office of the Vice Provost and Dean of Research to bring innovative technology to support researchers. The rapid analysis that the Bruker timsTOF Ultra provides is the backbone of modern biomedical research, and students are given this rare opportunity for direct access and training on their operation and capabilities.

This month-long immersive experience propels students to design more impactful research, helps them understand more deeply the causes of disease and effects of treatments, and prepares them for the evolving, science-based workforce they are about to enter. Take a peek inside the program.

Images by Aaron Kehoe

For more information

The Stanford University Mass Spectrometry (SUMS) multidisciplinary research facility is an institution-wide resource of the Office of the Vice Provost and Dean of Research . The laboratory provides faculty, postdocs, and student researchers  in the fields of the physical and life sciences, medicine, and engineering with state-of-the-art, user-friendly training, technology, and services.

Skip to Content

Charge your laptop in a minute or your EV in 10? Supercapacitors can help; new research offers clues

Imagine if your dead laptop or phone could charge in a minute or if an electric car could be fully powered in 10 minutes.

While not possible yet, new research by a team of CU Boulder scientists could potentially lead to such advances. 

Published today in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science , researchers in Ankur Gupta ’s lab discovered how tiny charged particles, called ions, move within a complex network of minuscule pores. The breakthrough could lead to the development of more efficient energy storage devices, such as supercapacitors, said Gupta, an assistant professor of chemical and biological engineering . 

Gupta explained that several chemical engineering techniques are used to study flow in porous materials such as oil reservoirs and water filtration, but they have not been fully utilized in some energy storage systems.

The discovery is significant not only for storing energy in vehicles and electronic devices but also for power grids, where fluctuating energy demand requires efficient storage to avoid waste during periods of low demand and to ensure rapid supply during high demand.  

Supercapacitors, energy storage devices that rely on ion accumulation in their pores, have rapid charging times and longer life spans compared to batteries. 

“The primary appeal of supercapacitors lies in their speed,” Gupta said. “So how can we make their charging and release of energy faster? By the more efficient movement of ions.”

Their findings modify Kirchhoff’s law, which has governed current flow in electrical circuits since 1845 and is a staple in high school students’ science classes. Unlike electrons, ions move due to both electric fields and diffusion, and the researchers determined that their movements at pore intersections are different from what was described in Kirchhoff’s law.

Prior to the study, ion movements were only described in the literature in one straight pore. Through this research, ion movement in a complex network of thousands of interconnected pores can be simulated and predicted in a few minutes.

“That’s the leap of the work,” Gupta said. “We found the missing link.”

This work was funded by National Science Foundation CAREER Award # 2238412.

Apply   Visit

Departments

• Ann and H.J. Smead Aerospace Engineering Sciences
• Chemical & Biological Engineering
• Civil, Environmental & Architectural Engineering
• Computer Science
• Electrical, Computer & Energy Engineering
• Paul M. Rady Mechanical Engineering
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomedical Engineering
• Creative Technology & Design
• Engineering Education
• Engineering Management
• Engineering Physics
• Integrated Design Engineering
• Environmental Engineering
• Materials Science & Engineering

Affiliates & Partners

• ATLAS Institute
• BOLD Center
• Colorado Mesa University
• Colorado Space Grant Consortium
• Discovery Learning
• Engineering Honors
• Engineering Leadership
• Entrepreneurship
• Herbst Program for Engineering, Ethics & Society
• Integrated Teaching and Learning
• Global Engineering
• Mortenson Center for Global Engineering
• National Center for Women & Information Technology
• Western Colorado University

Cookie Acceptance Needed

This website would like to use cookies to collect information to improve your browsing experience. Please review our Privacy Statement for more information. Do you accept?

accept deny

College of Sciences and Mathematics Homepage

• Toggle Search
• Find People

COSAM News Articles 2024 05 Virtual lab meetings improve undergraduate research experience and foster diversity in academia

Virtual lab meetings improve undergraduate research experience and foster diversity in academia

Published: 05/29/2024

By: Maria Gebhardt

Moisés A. Bernal , assistant professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at Auburn University, is collaborating with researchers Kathleen Lotterhos (Northeast University), Megan Phifer-Rixey (Drexel University), and Torrance Hanley , (Sacred Heart University) to evaluate the effectiveness of virtual lab meetings in demystifying the hidden curriculum in academia, incentivize primary research among students without previous experience, and foster participation of underrepresented groups in STEM.

The “Biological Practices” article entitled A virtual lab meeting training program mutually benefits mentees and host labs was recently published in Proceedings B, dives into the specific details that are needed to develop a virtual meetings program from scratch, and reports on the experiences by both mentors and mentees. The first step on the NSF-funded Virtual Lab Meeting Program (LaMP) was to match research mentors (i.e. faculty in research intensive institutions) with students in STEM fields (i.e. at institutions with limited research support), Bernal indicated. 

“The program matched mentors and mentees based on affinity of research topics, and mentees were provided with a $500 stipend if they participated in at least 10 meetings,” Bernal said. “This is important because the students had an incentive to participate at the meetings and actively exchange ideas with a research lab.”

The team collected data that shared insight of the value of the LaMP experience.

“When we analyzed the data, we saw a gap that exists between the current mentors and the mentees,” he said. “The mentees were a much more diverse group then the mentors.”

The data included racial and sexual diversity among mentees participating. However, the faculty did not exhibit as much diversity, which highlights the need for this type of program among undergraduate and graduate students.

"Our results clearly show that this program worked to extend the professional networks of traditionally under-represented groups in the sciences, with little extra time commitment on the part of the participating labs,” said Lotterhos. “We hope these results will stimulate similar efforts across STEM disciplines."

And those efforts can be easily integrated into a lab.

“For faculty, this is a small-time investment, because we are already conducting regular lab meetings and we can simply bring on a new mentee into this experience” Bernal added. The results from the study show that the mentees learned new information on specific techniques and study systems, while developing a broader network of personal connections in academia. Further, the mentees learned how to discuss and present research as well as how to discuss a manuscript and the overall writing process. Meanwhile, mentors indicated it was beneficial to gain novel perspectives on how to discuss peer-reviewed manuscripts, and gain knowledge on other study systems presented by the mentees. Overall, the survey results indicate that the program was useful for staff and students in the mentor’s lab as well as the mentees, and participants strongly recommend this program to future participants.

Bernal spoke about his time with a virtual student in his lab.

“It was a positive experience because I was able to have someone in my lab with a novel perspective on how to discuss manuscripts and to look at research problems from a new angle” he explained. “This program helps to develop and expand professional networks for participants. It also helps them prepare to apply to graduate school and learn how to build their CVs over time.”

Overall, the LaMP initiative represents an effective way of connecting researchers with students in STEM, while fostering the participation of underrepresented groups in academia.

Latest Headlines

• Auburn alumnus bridges Auburn University and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in DOE's Energy Earthshots Initiative 05/28/2024
• Auburn hosts CBMS Conference: Mathematical Methods for Novel Metamaterials 05/28/2024
• Auburn biologists publish first work on avian migration conducted in the AU MitoMobile 05/21/2024
• 2024 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry awards honor faculty, staff and students 04/27/2024
• Department of Geosciences celebrates Earth Day 04/23/2024

Stay Connected