Perception of Minimal Value: The Hidden Costs of Overlooking Comprehensive Test Fits in Lab Design

When management views a comprehensive test fit as an unnecessary expense, it’s likely believed that the initial evaluation process involved adds extra cost and time to the project without providing enough valuable information to justify the added step, potentially leading to delays in moving forward with the design and construction phases. 

While the focus is on minimizing upfront costs, management is often viewing the time and resources spent on a test fit as a direct expense that could be better allocated elsewhere in the project, not fully understanding the potential benefits.

Consequently, a comprehensive test fit is often seen as a basic layout check that can be done with less detailed analysis, potentially overlooking its role in identifying major feasibility issues early on. 

Consequences of an improper test fit

The cost of a comprehensive test fit can be inconsequential in comparison to purchase, architectural, mechanical engineering and construction change orders that may be needed to remediate oversights that can include the reordering of lab benches, re-opening walls, running additional power lines, exhaust ducts, upgrading or re-installing electrical panels and other costly fixes required to properly accommodate instrumentation and laboratory workflows.

Relying on staff preferences of instrument placement without a clear understanding of the architectural, mechanical or environmental limitations of the space or a holistic understanding of the building architecture or engineering plans often fail to consider the practical implications of the space, leading to suboptimal designs or costly remediations after plans have been drawn up and construction has been completed.

Considerations such as full footprint requirements including data systems, peripheral equipment and accessories, proper clearances to ensure gas and electrical connections, heat dissipation of rough pumps, accessibility by service engineers to service the equipment, bench weight tolerances, gas pressure decay distances from gas supplies are just some of the considerations that need to be taken into account for design feasibility.

Technical knowledge is critical to proper lab design

Architects more often than not, are depended upon to design laboratories, relying on scientists for their input and the owner’s project manager (OPMs) who, though fluent in new project construction, may not have the required technical understanding of laboratory instrumentation, service and support requirements and other critical considerations that affect proper placement of instrumentation in the laboratory.

Proper laboratory design should be a process of collaboration between the client, their architect and mechanical engineers, and a laboratory instrument specialist with the technical instrumentation and engineering expertise to ensure proper umbilical support for the assets that are in the laboratory. A comprehensive audit of the assets, an understanding of environmental requirements, engineering dependencies, connectivity to the laboratory’s umbilical systems and the laboratory workflow, are required for a proper test fit and essential for proper laboratory design.