"Happiness is
like a cloud, if you stare at it long enough, it evaporates” --
Sarah McLachlan (Canadian Singer and Songwriter, b.1968)
While Google® makes it easy to search for virtually anything you need to know
about laboratory design, the one thing you won’t find is the importance of good
library support. From
the Library to the Laboratory: A New Future for the Science Librarian
(https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/PUB7202r.pdf)
is a notable exception.
It is one chapter in a larger work:
The Tower and the Cloud: Higher Education in the Age
of Cloud
Computing
Richard N. Katz, Editor
2008 EDUCAUSE
ISBN 978-0-9672853-9-9
Free Full Text Source: http://www.educause.edu/research-and-publications/books/tower-and-cloud
Mary Marlino and Tamara Sumner, the authors of From the Library to the Laboratory: A New Future for the Science
Librarian? describe the challenges facing researchers and the librarians
who support them.
Here is an excerpt from From the Library
to the Laboratory.
///////
From the Library to the Laboratory: A New
Future for the Science Librarian?
Mary Marlino and Tamara Sumner
The mission of academic libraries is to support research, education, and scholarship.
Historically, libraries have supported this mission by organizing and providing
access to information, curating and preserving special collections, and
creating physical spaces for collaboration and scholarship. While the broad
mission of academic libraries is largely unchanged, transformations in
technology, media, and culture are driving fundamental changes in the
production and consumption of information and the practice of scholarship. As a
result, academic libraries are rethinking their strategies and services to meet
the challenges of the digital world and the demands of the “born digital”
generation.
Science libraries, in particular, are confronting these challenges as the
nature of scientific practice is being dramatically transformed by information
technologies. These technologies enable scientific data to be collected,
distributed, and archived on an unprecedented scale. The challenge of
collecting, managing, and providing access to information not traditionally
curated by libraries is compounded by the sheer volume of data, issues of
interoperability, documentation, acknowledgment, and authentication.
The term e-science is often used to describe new forms of data-driven science
enabled by information technologies. Data-driven science is characterized by
the analyses of increasingly large quantities of data from distributed sources.
E-science methodologies include the identification and visualization of
patterns, anomalies, and trends from the mining and analysis of data, coupled
with the ability to share the results of analysis processes through the
immediacy of the Internet. Within the United States, the term
cyberinfrastructure is often used interchangeably with e-science.
Currently, e-science is often associated with “big science,” that is, large
national or international projects such as the Terragrid, the Biomedical
Informatics Research Network (BIRN), or the Linked Environments for Atmospheric
Discovery (LEAD) project. These projects are developing sophisticated,
distributed technical infrastructures, often based on “grid” technologies,
which support domain-specific tools and services facilitating data acquisition,
data analysis, and data management. This infrastructure is often housed at
major research facilities or national laboratories, and user access to these
advanced research services is managed by these groups and made available to
individual researchers through the project portal.
Data-driven science, however, is not confined exclusively to these large
disciplinary efforts. A closer look at what is happening on university campuses
and in small research labs today reveals that e-science practices are
increasingly common and being applied to a wide range of scholarly endeavors in
the sciences, social sciences, and humanities.2 For instance, a master’s thesis
in urban planning examining the correlation between indigenous plants, property
prices, and neighborhood activism may draw on diverse data sources—such as the
university’s special herbarium collection, the county property tax records and
land use data, and records of local voting behaviors—to create an innovative
geographic information visualization that can be used by policy makers debating
future planning scenarios. In this case, the student is not using custom, discipline-specific
e-science tools but is leveraging increasingly available Web 2.0 capabilities;
that is, many organizations are now routinely exposing data through public APIs
and web services. Tim O’Reilly highlights this “innovation by assembly”
phenomenon as a key Web 2.0 principle, commenting that “… when commodity
components are abundant, you can create value simply by assembling them in
novel or effective ways.”
Promises and Challenges for Science
Libraries
The examples above illustrate both the promises and the challenges facing
e-science and libraries. The promises include the following: the potential for
new scientific discoveries that are possible only through large-scale,
computational analyses; a new era of transparency and replicability in scientific
methods and results; and the potential for widespread democratization of
scientific research, given the increasing ubiquity of open access data sources
and protocols. However, hidden in these examples are several challenges for
universities and their libraries.
The first challenge concerns the sheer volume of scientific data. In the LEAD
example, how does our scientist locate the required data from the various
ground stations and radars? In the master’s thesis example, how does the
student locate the multiple data sets distributed across local government and
university servers?
The second challenge concerns data interoperability. In the LEAD example,
merging data from different sources into a uniform data collection requires
significant, specialized expertise in all the different data formats and a
small army of graduate students. The thesis example, on the other hand,
illustrates a new form of scholarly literacy: namely, students need
“lightweight” programming skills to combine and remix data from multiple
sources.
The third challenge relates to preserving and documenting the intermediate
products. Whose task is it to save these intermediate products for posterity
and to document them so that others can find and reuse them? In the LEAD
example, what is the university library’s role in selecting and preserving
original and derivative data sets for future reanalysis? In the thesis example,
the student has created a richly annotated version of the library’s special
herbarium collection, adding new information about the geographic locations of
particular species. How does the library incorporate this user-generated
content back into its carefully managed special collection?
Finally, the demands of digital scholarship are requiring new levels of
documentation, acknowledgement, and authentication that are often beyond the
immediate capabilities or interests of faculty or students. In the LEAD
example, when the researcher’s final report and associated data and artifacts
are put into the university’s institutional repository, who will be responsible
for ensuring that the university has the appropriate intellectual property
rights to post and disseminate this information? In the thesis example, the
student’s thesis consists of written documentation, software codes for the
visualization, and several public data sets. Many campus libraries are tasked
with preserving and archiving student theses and dissertations. Again, as in
the LEAD case, the library will be challenged to develop stewardship policies
and procedures to support the archival and preservation demands of multimedia
forms of scholarship.
New Roles for University Libraries
As a first step, libraries should prioritize making the collections that
they manage available to library users through open and documented web service
protocols supporting programmatic access to both primary content and metadata.
Currently, most libraries support individual users to access collections only
through manual, query-driven interfaces. For instance, access to the herbarium
collection used in the master’s thesis is probably available only through a
special web interface enabling users to search the metadata records using
keywords and other criteria to generate a fairly traditional list of search
results. However, for data-driven science, students and faculty need to be able
to run computations over the entire collection and not just access individual
records. The visualization created as part of the master’s thesis is a
relatively simple, yet still challenging, example. In this case, the student
wants to construct a visualization that enables users to select a geographic
area and view all of the different kinds of plant species located in that area;
that is, the visualization needs to dynamically query the library’s collection
and repackage this information as appropriate for this special application.
Today, many of the systems that libraries have put in place to enable access to
collections are simply not architected to support programmatic access of any
kind, thus severely limiting the usefulness of library collections for these
new forms of scholarship.
Libraries are increasingly being asked to play a leadership role in helping
universities capture and organize their intellectual assets, such as faculty
publications, student dissertations, project reports, and scientific data sets.
As illustrated in our examples, the library is often called on at the end of
the scholarly process: the researcher needs to include the final report in the
institutional repository, or the student has graduated and the dissertation
needs to be archived. At this point in the cycle, it takes a significant amount
of time, effort, and expense to examine each multimedia scholarly artifact,
parse out the constituent components, and decide which of these should be
preserved. Too often, libraries are called upon to make these decisions on a
case-by-case basis.
E-science and Web 2.0 technologies are promoting and enabling scholars to
create new works that build on data from multiple sources. As described in our
examples, viewing these works and archiving these works can potentially infringe
on the intellectual property rights of the creators of the original data sets.
As libraries take on responsibilities for hosting and/or archiving these new
works, they will also need to take on new responsibilities for rights
management. Specifically, library staff must develop expertise in tracing
intellectual property rights, negotiating clearances as appropriate, and
communicating the rights and terms of use of digital artifacts to library
users. Traditionally, these activities have been the purview of legal
departments. However, as new forms of scholarship proliferate, relying on the
university’s legal counsel will not scale and will be very expensive.
Conclusion
The discussions above illustrate many of the major challenges on the horizon
for academic libraries in the years ahead. Libraries have an opportunity to
build on their significant collections and content, their expertise in
information management, and their historical role in supporting scholarship to
become essential players in e-science in the academic enterprise. Barriers
along the way include lack of leadership and vision, the more pedestrian issues
of lack of technical expertise and money, the strategic pitfalls of inadequate
long-term planning, and the all-too-human tendency to keep doing what you know
how to do and not acknowledge that the world has changed.
///////
TIP #1: When designing your lab,
consult with a librarian to help create an environment in which your
researchers have access to the services only a library can provide.
TIP #2: Google using the search string: librarian research laboratory. Then
browse through the results to explore how academic and government research
libraries support their research talent.
This is the final post of the TIPSTARTALAB series. Visit http://www.jeansteinhardtconsulting.com/
for more tips on how to maximize the effectiveness of your online research.
Showing posts with label TIPSTARTALAB. Show all posts
Showing posts with label TIPSTARTALAB. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Thursday, July 23, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 13 of a series of posts
“Take nothing but
pictures. Leave nothing but footprints. Kill nothing but time.” ~Motto of the Baltimore Grotto (caving society)
National Academies Press offers “Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product” as a free PDF download. While somewhat old – it was published in 2000 – it remains relevant. An excerpt appears below.
TIP: Take time to explore the bibliography of any item you find helpful. It can lead to additional resources you might not have found otherwise.
The bibliography of the National Academies Press report appears below the excerpt.
///////
Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product
National Academies Press, 2000
From the Executive Summary
This study does not duplicate the numerous other publications on laboratory construction (see the bibliography). It is the committee’s hope that scientist users, institutional administrators, and institutional managers will use this report to become informed users of design services and that the professional design community will use this report to enhance its ability to interact with its clients.
Laboratory facilities are complex, technically sophisticated, and mechanically intensive structures that are expensive to build and to maintain, and therefore the design, construction, and renovation of such facilities is a major challenge for all involved. Hundreds of decisions must be made before and during renovation or new construction. These decisions will determine how successfully the facility will function when completed and how successfully it can be maintained once put into service. Yet many of these decisions must be made by users and administrators whose knowledge of both basic and more laboratory specific design, construction, and renovation is minimal at the start of the project and must be rapidly increased.
This report is addressed to the scientist-user and administrator, and therefore focuses on how to have a successful laboratory facility built rather than on the detailed specifications for a successfully constructed laboratory. In this context, a successful laboratory facility is defined as one that provides effective and flexible laboratories, is safe for laboratory workers, is compatible with the surrounding environment, has the support of the neighboring community and governmental agencies, and can be constructed in a cost-effective manner. This report covers many basic aspects of design, renovation, and construction projects in general as well as specific laboratory-oriented issues. In its discussion of the latter, the committee considered primarily chemistry and biochemistry laboratories; it did not deal specifically with specialized buildings such as animal facilities, nor did it address multiple-use buildings such as teaching and research facilities. (Narum, 1995, deals with teaching laboratories.)
Overall, the general principles elucidated by the committee make its recommendations applicable to the construction or renovation of almost any laboratory building. Through its investigations the committee found that although individual projects differ, there are certain commonalities in successful laboratory construction and renovation projects. These include the right participants and a continuity of personnel; a thorough, well-defined, and thoughtful process; and a broad knowledge of the relevant issues. These common themes are discussed in Chapters 1 through 3: “Human Issues,” “Process Issues,” and “Technical Issues.” Many of these elements, especially those discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, may appear to be common sense, but they were found to have been overlooked in some of the projects described to the committee. Other themes are more specific to laboratory facilities.
Transcending specific issues and recommendations are four critical factors identified by the committee as characterizing successful laboratory construction or renovation projects:
1. A “champion” who is strongly committed to the success of the project, who has the confidence of the entire client group, and who stays with the project from beginning to end;
2. A design professional, often an architect, who has experience and dem- onstrated success in laboratory design and construction;
3. A well-defined and well-articulated process for carrying out the project from predesign through postconstruction; and
4. Clear lines of communication and authority for all participants through- out the process.
Free full text source: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309066336 (Excellent … find appropriate excerpts from Executive Summary)
///////
Bibliography
American Chemical Society (ACS). 1993. Less Is Better: Laboratory Chemical Waste Management for Waste Reduction, 2nd Ed. Task Force on Laboratory Waste Management, Department of Government Relations and Science Policy. Washington, D.C.: ACS.
American Institute of Architects (AIA). 1993. The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Vol. 2, 12th Ed. Washington, D.C.: AIA.
American Institute of Architects (AIA). 1999. Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities, Washington, D.C.: AIA.
Ashbrook, Peter C., and Malcolm M. Renfrew 1991. Safe Laboratories. New York: Lewis Publishers.
Baum, Janet S. 1995. “Renovate Your Lab.” Chemical Health and Safety, May/June, 2:7-13.
Baum, Janet S. 1997. “Designing Chemical Laboratories.” Chemical Health and Safety, March/ April, 4:21-25
Baum, Janet S. 1998. “Building Safety From the Ground Up.” Chemical Health and Safety, May/ June, 5:11-14.
Bender, R. 1996. “Benchmarking Costs for Pharmaceutical Facilities.” Pharmaceutical Engineering. Vol. 16, No. 6:28-34.
Braybrook, Susan, ed. 1986. Design for Research: Principles of Laboratory Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Cooper, Crawley. 1994. Laboratory Design Handbook. Boston: CRC Press.
DiBerardinus, Louis, Janet Baum, Melvin W. First, Gari T. Gatwood, Edward Groden, and Anand K. Seth. 1993. Guidelines for Laboratory Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. EPA Facilities Manual, Vols. 1-4. Office of Administration and Resources Management. Washington, D.C.: EPA.
Griffin, Brian B. 1998. Laboratory Design Guide. Boston: Architectural Press.
Mayer, Leonard. 1995. Design and Planning of Research and Clinical Laboratory Facilities. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Muskat, Carl. 1993. “Estimating Lab Construction Costs.” R&D Magazine, February, p. 99.
Narum, Jeanne. 1995. Structures for Science, Vol. 3. Washington, D.C.: Project Kaleidoscope.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). 1998. Research Laboratory: NIH Design Policies and Guidelines. Bethesda, Md.: Division of Engineering Services, National Institutes of Health. Available online at.
National Research Council (NRC). 1930. Laboratory Construction and Equipment. New York: Chemical Foundation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1951. Laboratory Design. H.S. Coleman, ed., New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1962. Laboratory Planning for Chemistry and Chemical Engineering. Harry F. Lewis, ed. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1987. Post-Occupancy Evaluation Practices in the Building Process. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1990. Committing to the Cost of Ownership—Maintenance and Repair of Public Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1991. Pay Now or Pay Later: Controlling Costs of Ownership from Design Throughout the Service Life of Public Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1993. The Fourth Dimension in Building: Strategies for Minimizing Obsolescence. Donald G. Iselin and Andrew K.C. Lemer, eds. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1995. Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Disposal of Chemicals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1996. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Science Foundation (NSF). 1992. Planning Academic Research Facilities: A Guidebook. Washington, D.C.: NSF.
New York Times. 1999. Pfizer Abandons Plan to Build Lab at UConn. August 8, p. 33.
Piller, Charles. 1991. The Fail-Safe Society: Community Defiance and the End of Technological Optimism, especially “Biomedical Research and the Nightmare in Laurel Heights,” pp. 118- 157. New York: Basic Books.
Popper, Frank. 1991. “LULUs and Their Blockage: The Nature of the Problem, The Outline of the Solutions.” pp. 13-30 in Confronting Regional Challenges: Approaches to LULUs, Growth, and Other Vexing Governance Problems. Joseph DiMento and LeRoy Graymer, eds. Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Richmond, J.Y., and R.W. McKinney. 1993. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. 3rd Edition. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC/NIH. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Roseland, Sigurd J. 1987. The Chemical Laboratory: Its Design and Operations. Park Ridge, N.J.: Noyes Publications.
Ruys, Theodorus, ed. 1990. Handbook of Facilities Planning, Vol. 1, Laboratory Facilities. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Siegel, L.H., and D. Roth. 1995. Research Laboratory VA Design Guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Available online at.
Stark, Stanley, ed. 1994. Research Facilities of the Future. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. (Out of print.)
Studt, Tim, ed. 1996. “Laboratory Design.” Special Supplement to R&D Magazine (May). Des Plaines, Illinois: Cahners.
National Academies Press offers “Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product” as a free PDF download. While somewhat old – it was published in 2000 – it remains relevant. An excerpt appears below.
TIP: Take time to explore the bibliography of any item you find helpful. It can lead to additional resources you might not have found otherwise.
The bibliography of the National Academies Press report appears below the excerpt.
///////
Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product
National Academies Press, 2000
From the Executive Summary
This study does not duplicate the numerous other publications on laboratory construction (see the bibliography). It is the committee’s hope that scientist users, institutional administrators, and institutional managers will use this report to become informed users of design services and that the professional design community will use this report to enhance its ability to interact with its clients.
Laboratory facilities are complex, technically sophisticated, and mechanically intensive structures that are expensive to build and to maintain, and therefore the design, construction, and renovation of such facilities is a major challenge for all involved. Hundreds of decisions must be made before and during renovation or new construction. These decisions will determine how successfully the facility will function when completed and how successfully it can be maintained once put into service. Yet many of these decisions must be made by users and administrators whose knowledge of both basic and more laboratory specific design, construction, and renovation is minimal at the start of the project and must be rapidly increased.
This report is addressed to the scientist-user and administrator, and therefore focuses on how to have a successful laboratory facility built rather than on the detailed specifications for a successfully constructed laboratory. In this context, a successful laboratory facility is defined as one that provides effective and flexible laboratories, is safe for laboratory workers, is compatible with the surrounding environment, has the support of the neighboring community and governmental agencies, and can be constructed in a cost-effective manner. This report covers many basic aspects of design, renovation, and construction projects in general as well as specific laboratory-oriented issues. In its discussion of the latter, the committee considered primarily chemistry and biochemistry laboratories; it did not deal specifically with specialized buildings such as animal facilities, nor did it address multiple-use buildings such as teaching and research facilities. (Narum, 1995, deals with teaching laboratories.)
Overall, the general principles elucidated by the committee make its recommendations applicable to the construction or renovation of almost any laboratory building. Through its investigations the committee found that although individual projects differ, there are certain commonalities in successful laboratory construction and renovation projects. These include the right participants and a continuity of personnel; a thorough, well-defined, and thoughtful process; and a broad knowledge of the relevant issues. These common themes are discussed in Chapters 1 through 3: “Human Issues,” “Process Issues,” and “Technical Issues.” Many of these elements, especially those discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, may appear to be common sense, but they were found to have been overlooked in some of the projects described to the committee. Other themes are more specific to laboratory facilities.
Transcending specific issues and recommendations are four critical factors identified by the committee as characterizing successful laboratory construction or renovation projects:
1. A “champion” who is strongly committed to the success of the project, who has the confidence of the entire client group, and who stays with the project from beginning to end;
2. A design professional, often an architect, who has experience and dem- onstrated success in laboratory design and construction;
3. A well-defined and well-articulated process for carrying out the project from predesign through postconstruction; and
4. Clear lines of communication and authority for all participants through- out the process.
Free full text source: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309066336 (Excellent … find appropriate excerpts from Executive Summary)
///////
Bibliography
American Chemical Society (ACS). 1993. Less Is Better: Laboratory Chemical Waste Management for Waste Reduction, 2nd Ed. Task Force on Laboratory Waste Management, Department of Government Relations and Science Policy. Washington, D.C.: ACS.
American Institute of Architects (AIA). 1993. The Architect’s Handbook of Professional Practice, Vol. 2, 12th Ed. Washington, D.C.: AIA.
American Institute of Architects (AIA). 1999. Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities, Washington, D.C.: AIA.
Ashbrook, Peter C., and Malcolm M. Renfrew 1991. Safe Laboratories. New York: Lewis Publishers.
Baum, Janet S. 1995. “Renovate Your Lab.” Chemical Health and Safety, May/June, 2:7-13.
Baum, Janet S. 1997. “Designing Chemical Laboratories.” Chemical Health and Safety, March/ April, 4:21-25
Baum, Janet S. 1998. “Building Safety From the Ground Up.” Chemical Health and Safety, May/ June, 5:11-14.
Bender, R. 1996. “Benchmarking Costs for Pharmaceutical Facilities.” Pharmaceutical Engineering. Vol. 16, No. 6:28-34.
Braybrook, Susan, ed. 1986. Design for Research: Principles of Laboratory Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Cooper, Crawley. 1994. Laboratory Design Handbook. Boston: CRC Press.
DiBerardinus, Louis, Janet Baum, Melvin W. First, Gari T. Gatwood, Edward Groden, and Anand K. Seth. 1993. Guidelines for Laboratory Design. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1998. EPA Facilities Manual, Vols. 1-4. Office of Administration and Resources Management. Washington, D.C.: EPA.
Griffin, Brian B. 1998. Laboratory Design Guide. Boston: Architectural Press.
Mayer, Leonard. 1995. Design and Planning of Research and Clinical Laboratory Facilities. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Muskat, Carl. 1993. “Estimating Lab Construction Costs.” R&D Magazine, February, p. 99.
Narum, Jeanne. 1995. Structures for Science, Vol. 3. Washington, D.C.: Project Kaleidoscope.
National Institutes of Health (NIH). 1998. Research Laboratory: NIH Design Policies and Guidelines. Bethesda, Md.: Division of Engineering Services, National Institutes of Health. Available online at
National Research Council (NRC). 1930. Laboratory Construction and Equipment. New York: Chemical Foundation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1951. Laboratory Design. H.S. Coleman, ed., New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1962. Laboratory Planning for Chemistry and Chemical Engineering. Harry F. Lewis, ed. New York: Reinhold Publishing Corporation.
National Research Council (NRC). 1987. Post-Occupancy Evaluation Practices in the Building Process. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1990. Committing to the Cost of Ownership—Maintenance and Repair of Public Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1991. Pay Now or Pay Later: Controlling Costs of Ownership from Design Throughout the Service Life of Public Buildings. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1993. The Fourth Dimension in Building: Strategies for Minimizing Obsolescence. Donald G. Iselin and Andrew K.C. Lemer, eds. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1995. Prudent Practices in the Laboratory: Handling and Disposal of Chemicals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 1996. Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
National Science Foundation (NSF). 1992. Planning Academic Research Facilities: A Guidebook. Washington, D.C.: NSF.
New York Times. 1999. Pfizer Abandons Plan to Build Lab at UConn. August 8, p. 33.
Piller, Charles. 1991. The Fail-Safe Society: Community Defiance and the End of Technological Optimism, especially “Biomedical Research and the Nightmare in Laurel Heights,” pp. 118- 157. New York: Basic Books.
Popper, Frank. 1991. “LULUs and Their Blockage: The Nature of the Problem, The Outline of the Solutions.” pp. 13-30 in Confronting Regional Challenges: Approaches to LULUs, Growth, and Other Vexing Governance Problems. Joseph DiMento and LeRoy Graymer, eds. Cambridge: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy.
Richmond, J.Y., and R.W. McKinney. 1993. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. 3rd Edition. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, CDC/NIH. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Roseland, Sigurd J. 1987. The Chemical Laboratory: Its Design and Operations. Park Ridge, N.J.: Noyes Publications.
Ruys, Theodorus, ed. 1990. Handbook of Facilities Planning, Vol. 1, Laboratory Facilities. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Siegel, L.H., and D. Roth. 1995. Research Laboratory VA Design Guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Available online at
Stark, Stanley, ed. 1994. Research Facilities of the Future. New York: New York Academy of Sciences. (Out of print.)
Studt, Tim, ed. 1996. “Laboratory Design.” Special Supplement to R&D Magazine (May). Des Plaines, Illinois: Cahners.
Wednesday, July 15, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 12 of a series of posts
“Politics is the
gizzard of society, full of grit and gravel, and the
two political parties are its opposite halves - sometimes split into quarters -
which grind on each other. Not only individuals but states have thus a
confirmed dyspepsia.” -- Henry David Thoreau (American Essayist, Poet
and Philosopher, 1817-1862)
Getting down to the nit and the grit … Lab Manager Magazine (http://www.labmanager.com) offers a good way to stay abreast of developments at ground level.
Here is an excerpt of one of the items that have appeared in the publication …
///////
Secrets of a Successful Start-Up Lab
Lab Manager
Many labs start out as entrepreneurial ventures to develop new technology. As such, a start-up lab has entrepreneurial requirements that must be met in order for it to successfully develop into a full-fledged business.
By Lina Genovesi | May 01, 2015
A big idea wrapped in many small, but critical, details
Below are some of the entrepreneurial requirements of a start-up lab.
Starting The Lab
Creating the business plan
Starting your lab begins with a business plan that includes, in this order, an executive summary, a company description, a market analysis, an organization and management section, a service or product line section, and a funding request section.
The executive summary is the most important section of a business plan, as it spells out your experience and background as well as the decisions that led you to want to start your business. The executive summary also spells out why your business idea will be successful. If you are seeking financing, the executive summary is also your first opportunity to grab a potential investor’s interest.
The executive summary should highlight the strengths of your overall business plan and demonstrate that you have done thorough market analysis. It should include information about a need or gap in your target market and how your particular technology solutions can fill it. The executive summary should convince the reader that you can succeed in your target market. Although the executive summary appears first in the business plan, it is the last section of the business plan that you write.
The company description section provides a high-level review of the different elements of your business. This is similar to an extended elevator pitch and can help readers and potential investors quickly understand the goal of your business and its unique proposition. The company description section includes a description of the nature of your business and explains the competitive advantages that you believe will make your business a success.
The market analysis section should highlight your industry and market knowledge as well as any of your research findings and conclusions. It should include a description of your industry, including its current size and historic growth rate as well as other trends and characteristics, such as life-cycle stage and projected growth rate. It should also include information about the target market, its distinguishing characteristics, size of the primary target market and your projected share of it, a competitive analysis, and any regulatory or governmental regulatory requirements that will affect your business.
The organization and management section should include your company’s legal and organizational structure, management profile, and the qualifications of your board of directors. The service or product line section includes a description of your product or service, details about your product’s life cycle, status of your intellectual property protection, and current or future R&D activities.
The marketing and sales management section includes your overall marketing and sales strategy—namely your strategies for market penetration, growth, channels of distribution, and communication.
The funding request section of the business plan should include your current funding requirements and any future funding requirements over the next five years, supported by historical and prospective financial information. The funding request section should also include an analysis of the prospective use of the requested funds.
Read the full text at: http://www.labmanager.com/business-management/2015/04/secrets-of-a-successful-start-up-lab#.VXjUmOlREcA
///////
Getting down to the nit and the grit … Lab Manager Magazine (http://www.labmanager.com) offers a good way to stay abreast of developments at ground level.
Here is an excerpt of one of the items that have appeared in the publication …
///////
Secrets of a Successful Start-Up Lab
Lab Manager
Many labs start out as entrepreneurial ventures to develop new technology. As such, a start-up lab has entrepreneurial requirements that must be met in order for it to successfully develop into a full-fledged business.
By Lina Genovesi | May 01, 2015
A big idea wrapped in many small, but critical, details
Below are some of the entrepreneurial requirements of a start-up lab.
Starting The Lab
Creating the business plan
Starting your lab begins with a business plan that includes, in this order, an executive summary, a company description, a market analysis, an organization and management section, a service or product line section, and a funding request section.
The executive summary is the most important section of a business plan, as it spells out your experience and background as well as the decisions that led you to want to start your business. The executive summary also spells out why your business idea will be successful. If you are seeking financing, the executive summary is also your first opportunity to grab a potential investor’s interest.
The executive summary should highlight the strengths of your overall business plan and demonstrate that you have done thorough market analysis. It should include information about a need or gap in your target market and how your particular technology solutions can fill it. The executive summary should convince the reader that you can succeed in your target market. Although the executive summary appears first in the business plan, it is the last section of the business plan that you write.
The company description section provides a high-level review of the different elements of your business. This is similar to an extended elevator pitch and can help readers and potential investors quickly understand the goal of your business and its unique proposition. The company description section includes a description of the nature of your business and explains the competitive advantages that you believe will make your business a success.
The market analysis section should highlight your industry and market knowledge as well as any of your research findings and conclusions. It should include a description of your industry, including its current size and historic growth rate as well as other trends and characteristics, such as life-cycle stage and projected growth rate. It should also include information about the target market, its distinguishing characteristics, size of the primary target market and your projected share of it, a competitive analysis, and any regulatory or governmental regulatory requirements that will affect your business.
The organization and management section should include your company’s legal and organizational structure, management profile, and the qualifications of your board of directors. The service or product line section includes a description of your product or service, details about your product’s life cycle, status of your intellectual property protection, and current or future R&D activities.
The marketing and sales management section includes your overall marketing and sales strategy—namely your strategies for market penetration, growth, channels of distribution, and communication.
The funding request section of the business plan should include your current funding requirements and any future funding requirements over the next five years, supported by historical and prospective financial information. The funding request section should also include an analysis of the prospective use of the requested funds.
Read the full text at: http://www.labmanager.com/business-management/2015/04/secrets-of-a-successful-start-up-lab#.VXjUmOlREcA
///////
Thursday, July 9, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 11 of a series of posts
“I was recently
on a tour of Latin America, and the only regret I have was that I
didn't study Latin harder in school so I could converse with those people”
-- Dan Quayle (American 44th US Vice President under George Bush (1989-93).
b.1947)
Laboratories are complex organisms. Each is unique. Consequently, when visualizing your new lab, nothing beats eyes on the prize. Towards that end, the annual Laboratory Design Conference (http://www.labdesignconference.com/) is worthy of serious consideration. Because, in addition to the typical conference networking opportunities, this conference includes optional tours of working laboratories. For example, the 2015 Conference, held in Atlanta, included the following tours …
///////
Laboratory Design Conference
April 27-29, 2015
Hyatt Regency Atlanta Hotel
Since 2002, the Laboratory Design Conference has provided a dynamic educational and networking event for those involved in planning, designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Meeting sessions feature recognized experts delivering unique presentations on trends in creating the most efficient, state-of-the-art facilities.
Held each spring, the conference also marks the official “reveal” of the Laboratory of the Year winners, with in-depth discussions by the winning project teams.
Tours of exemplary lab facilities, including those to which attendees would not otherwise have access, are an integral part of the overall Lab Design Conference experience.
Credits for presentations are available through the American Institute of Architects as well as the Green Building Certification Institute, and are also offered as general CEUs for non-AIA/GBCI members.
Scheduled simultaneously with the conference, the Laboratory Design expo allows attendees to learn about companies offering relevant products and services to the laboratory design industry. Social gatherings provide plenty of opportunity for relaxation and networking.
Optional Lab Tours
Each year, the Laboratory Design Conference features tours of key local labs of various types.
Each tour goes inside facilities with a facility manager and a member of the design team as tour guides.
The line up of the 2015 Atlanta area tours are listed below: Tour A, Tour B, Tour C, Tour D and E.
2015 Tour A:
Georgia Tech, Engineered Biosystems Building
Georgia Tech’s Engineered Biosystems Building will provide 218,880 gross square feet of flexible interdisciplinary laboratory space for researchers collaborating in the fields of Chemical Biology, Cell Therapies and Systems Biology. The project will create a unique environment that connects people from multiple disciplines and departments to focus on specific societal problems in a holistic manner. A principle goal of the design is to foster interaction between chemists, engineers, biologists and computational scientists from two separate Colleges, the College of Engineering and the College of Science. The project will also generate significant economic impact through new research awards and commercialization of technologies developed within. The project is seeking LEED
Georgia Tech, Carbon Neutral Energy Solutions Lab
2013 Laboratory of the Year High Honors Winner
Georgia Tech has a clear mission for its new Carbon-Neutral Energy Solutions Laboratory: carbon neutral "net-zero site energy use." The facility sets a new standard for sustainable design for buildings of its type by optimizing passive energy technologies, reducing electricity loads, and maximizing the use of renewable energy. It houses a variety of energy research programs requiring large scale (high-bay) and intermediate scale (mid-bay) capabilities, and the design is intended to express its mission simply, directly and honestly; a "no frills" design. The laboratory has achieved LEED-NC Platinum certification.
2015 Tour B:
Emory University, Atwood Hall
Cooper Carry began multi-phased renovations and additions to the Chemistry Center in 1996. This latest phase of this project, a 70,000 square foot addition and 40,000 square foot renovation, is designed to create a new “front door” for Emory’s multidisciplinary chemistry based research programs. Teaching and research space will be integrated with a shared focus on the building’s common space. Labs feature open plans, significant day lighting and “plug and play” laboratory furniture.
Emory University, Health Sciences Research Building
Designed by ZGF Architects, this 212,000 SF facility enhances translational research and provides connections to Emory's core campus. The program includes pediatric, cancer, immunology, and drug discovery research and is comprised of three components: a wet laboratory building; a dry research tower over public spaces; and a dry research bridge connecting to the main campus.
2015 Tour C:
Kennesaw State University, Science Laboratory Building
When booking your return trip home please note that the trip back to the hotel will take approximately 40 minutes.
The new 73,000 building addition enables the university to expand its masters’ degree offerings for integrative biology and chemical sciences. The addition houses undergraduate teaching labs on the ground floor with three floors of upper level research. Linking the addition to the existing science building, a multi-story atrium serves as a central commons for the college. This space brings people together for informal learning, productive impromptu conversations and formal events.
The project is tracking LEED Gold certification with a significant focus on energy reduction. The main energy recovery unit in the penthouse includes an enthalpy wheel for recovering energy from the lab general exhaust airstream and a heat pipe for recovering energy from the fume hood exhaust airstream. Non fume hood intensive labs were designed to have a constant 6 air changes per hour while utilizing active chilled beams to handle the balance of the cooling load. This reduction in outside air requirements from an industry norm of 10-12 air changes per hour decreases the building heating and cooling load significantly. A welcome by-product of the chilled beams is that the labs are as quiet as a conference room. Condensing boilers were provided to allow the hot water system to operate at 120°F, a 60°F reduction from typical systems. This lower hot water temperature means that not only will less energy be lost from heat transfer through the piping, but allows the heat recovery chiller to efficiently transfer waste energy from the chilled water system to the heating hot water system.
2015 Tour D:
Georgia Institute of Technology, Marcus Nanotechnology Building
The Nanotechnology Research Center (NRC), formerly the The Microelectronics Research Center (MIRC), has been expanded into The Institute for Electronics and Nanotechnology (IEN). IEN is one of several new thematic Interdisciplinary Research Institutes (IRIs) at Georgia Tech that represent individual faculty members, PIs, Centers, and Programs that are engaged in the areas of electronics and nanotechnologies research at Georgia Tech.
IEN is led by Executive Director, Professor Oliver Brand, with Professor Emeritus James D. Meindl acting in an advisory capacity. Professor Brand is supported with a senior staff leadership team of: Mr. Dean A. Sutter, Associate Director for Operations and Industry Engagements; Mr. Gary Spinner, Sr. Assistant Director for Laboratory Operations; Ms. Traci Walden-Monroe Assistant Director Administration, Accounting and Finance; and Mr. Robert Rose, Assistant Director for Buildings and Support Systems.
2015 Tour E:
Georgia Gwinnett College, Allied Health Building
The Georgia Gwinnett College Allied Health Building is a multi-storied building consisting of approximately 87,000 gross square feet. The new building includes a technology center, computer labs, biology, physics and chemistry labs, lab preparation facilities, storage facilities, office space, break rooms and support space. It is envisioned the design of the facility will incorporate materials that blend with and complement existing campus structures as specified in the Campus Master Plan, and will be integrated physically and functionally, as well as connected in some manner, with the recently completed Instructional Lab Facility on the campus quad.
source: http://www.labdesignconference.com/
///////
Speaking of tours, why not tour the JeanSteinhardt.com Web at: www.jeansteinhardtconsulting.com? It offers tips on a variety of online research topics, all of which are designed to save you valuable time.
Laboratories are complex organisms. Each is unique. Consequently, when visualizing your new lab, nothing beats eyes on the prize. Towards that end, the annual Laboratory Design Conference (http://www.labdesignconference.com/) is worthy of serious consideration. Because, in addition to the typical conference networking opportunities, this conference includes optional tours of working laboratories. For example, the 2015 Conference, held in Atlanta, included the following tours …
///////
Laboratory Design Conference
April 27-29, 2015
Hyatt Regency Atlanta Hotel
Since 2002, the Laboratory Design Conference has provided a dynamic educational and networking event for those involved in planning, designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Meeting sessions feature recognized experts delivering unique presentations on trends in creating the most efficient, state-of-the-art facilities.
Held each spring, the conference also marks the official “reveal” of the Laboratory of the Year winners, with in-depth discussions by the winning project teams.
Tours of exemplary lab facilities, including those to which attendees would not otherwise have access, are an integral part of the overall Lab Design Conference experience.
Credits for presentations are available through the American Institute of Architects as well as the Green Building Certification Institute, and are also offered as general CEUs for non-AIA/GBCI members.
Scheduled simultaneously with the conference, the Laboratory Design expo allows attendees to learn about companies offering relevant products and services to the laboratory design industry. Social gatherings provide plenty of opportunity for relaxation and networking.
Optional Lab Tours
Each year, the Laboratory Design Conference features tours of key local labs of various types.
Each tour goes inside facilities with a facility manager and a member of the design team as tour guides.
The line up of the 2015 Atlanta area tours are listed below: Tour A, Tour B, Tour C, Tour D and E.
2015 Tour A:
Georgia Tech, Engineered Biosystems Building
Georgia Tech’s Engineered Biosystems Building will provide 218,880 gross square feet of flexible interdisciplinary laboratory space for researchers collaborating in the fields of Chemical Biology, Cell Therapies and Systems Biology. The project will create a unique environment that connects people from multiple disciplines and departments to focus on specific societal problems in a holistic manner. A principle goal of the design is to foster interaction between chemists, engineers, biologists and computational scientists from two separate Colleges, the College of Engineering and the College of Science. The project will also generate significant economic impact through new research awards and commercialization of technologies developed within. The project is seeking LEED
Georgia Tech, Carbon Neutral Energy Solutions Lab
2013 Laboratory of the Year High Honors Winner
Georgia Tech has a clear mission for its new Carbon-Neutral Energy Solutions Laboratory: carbon neutral "net-zero site energy use." The facility sets a new standard for sustainable design for buildings of its type by optimizing passive energy technologies, reducing electricity loads, and maximizing the use of renewable energy. It houses a variety of energy research programs requiring large scale (high-bay) and intermediate scale (mid-bay) capabilities, and the design is intended to express its mission simply, directly and honestly; a "no frills" design. The laboratory has achieved LEED-NC Platinum certification.
2015 Tour B:
Emory University, Atwood Hall
Cooper Carry began multi-phased renovations and additions to the Chemistry Center in 1996. This latest phase of this project, a 70,000 square foot addition and 40,000 square foot renovation, is designed to create a new “front door” for Emory’s multidisciplinary chemistry based research programs. Teaching and research space will be integrated with a shared focus on the building’s common space. Labs feature open plans, significant day lighting and “plug and play” laboratory furniture.
Emory University, Health Sciences Research Building
Designed by ZGF Architects, this 212,000 SF facility enhances translational research and provides connections to Emory's core campus. The program includes pediatric, cancer, immunology, and drug discovery research and is comprised of three components: a wet laboratory building; a dry research tower over public spaces; and a dry research bridge connecting to the main campus.
2015 Tour C:
Kennesaw State University, Science Laboratory Building
When booking your return trip home please note that the trip back to the hotel will take approximately 40 minutes.
The new 73,000 building addition enables the university to expand its masters’ degree offerings for integrative biology and chemical sciences. The addition houses undergraduate teaching labs on the ground floor with three floors of upper level research. Linking the addition to the existing science building, a multi-story atrium serves as a central commons for the college. This space brings people together for informal learning, productive impromptu conversations and formal events.
The project is tracking LEED Gold certification with a significant focus on energy reduction. The main energy recovery unit in the penthouse includes an enthalpy wheel for recovering energy from the lab general exhaust airstream and a heat pipe for recovering energy from the fume hood exhaust airstream. Non fume hood intensive labs were designed to have a constant 6 air changes per hour while utilizing active chilled beams to handle the balance of the cooling load. This reduction in outside air requirements from an industry norm of 10-12 air changes per hour decreases the building heating and cooling load significantly. A welcome by-product of the chilled beams is that the labs are as quiet as a conference room. Condensing boilers were provided to allow the hot water system to operate at 120°F, a 60°F reduction from typical systems. This lower hot water temperature means that not only will less energy be lost from heat transfer through the piping, but allows the heat recovery chiller to efficiently transfer waste energy from the chilled water system to the heating hot water system.
2015 Tour D:
Georgia Institute of Technology, Marcus Nanotechnology Building
The Nanotechnology Research Center (NRC), formerly the The Microelectronics Research Center (MIRC), has been expanded into The Institute for Electronics and Nanotechnology (IEN). IEN is one of several new thematic Interdisciplinary Research Institutes (IRIs) at Georgia Tech that represent individual faculty members, PIs, Centers, and Programs that are engaged in the areas of electronics and nanotechnologies research at Georgia Tech.
IEN is led by Executive Director, Professor Oliver Brand, with Professor Emeritus James D. Meindl acting in an advisory capacity. Professor Brand is supported with a senior staff leadership team of: Mr. Dean A. Sutter, Associate Director for Operations and Industry Engagements; Mr. Gary Spinner, Sr. Assistant Director for Laboratory Operations; Ms. Traci Walden-Monroe Assistant Director Administration, Accounting and Finance; and Mr. Robert Rose, Assistant Director for Buildings and Support Systems.
2015 Tour E:
Georgia Gwinnett College, Allied Health Building
The Georgia Gwinnett College Allied Health Building is a multi-storied building consisting of approximately 87,000 gross square feet. The new building includes a technology center, computer labs, biology, physics and chemistry labs, lab preparation facilities, storage facilities, office space, break rooms and support space. It is envisioned the design of the facility will incorporate materials that blend with and complement existing campus structures as specified in the Campus Master Plan, and will be integrated physically and functionally, as well as connected in some manner, with the recently completed Instructional Lab Facility on the campus quad.
source: http://www.labdesignconference.com/
///////
Speaking of tours, why not tour the JeanSteinhardt.com Web at: www.jeansteinhardtconsulting.com? It offers tips on a variety of online research topics, all of which are designed to save you valuable time.
Friday, July 3, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 10 of a series of posts
“The Guide is definitive. Reality is frequently inaccurate.” --
Douglas Adams (British comic Writer, 1952-2001)
Energy efficiency in the laboratory has emerged as a significant consideration in lab design. A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories (http://ateam.lbl.gov/Design-Guide/) provides valuable insight into this area of lab design. Following, excerpts from this online guide …
///////
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories--provides a detailed and holistic framework to assist designers and energy managers in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments. The Guide fills an important void in the general literature and compliments existing in-depth technical manuals. Considerable information is available pertaining to overall laboratory design issues, but no single document focuses comprehensively on energy issues in these highly specialized environments. Furthermore, practitioners may utilize many antiquated rules of thumb, which often inadvertently cause energy inefficiency. The Guide helps its user to: introduce energy decision-making into the earliest phases of the design process, access the literature of pertinent issues, and become aware of debates and issues on related topics. The Guide does focus on individual technologies, as well as control systems, and important operational factors such as building commissioning. However most importantly, the Guide is intended to foster a systems perspective (e.g. "right sizing") and to present current leading-edge, energy-efficient design practices and principles.
Foreword
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories -- is intended to assist facility owners, architects, engineers, designers, facility managers, and utility energy-management specialists in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments. This Guide focuses comprehensively on laboratory energy design issues with a "systems" design approach. Although a laboratory-type facility includes many sub-system designs, e.g., the heating system, a comprehensive design approach should view the entire building as the essential "system." This means the larger, macro energy-efficiency considerations during architectural programming come before the smaller, micro component selection such as an energy-efficient fan. We encourage readers to consider the following points when utilizing the Guide.
1. Since the Guide 's focus is energy efficiency, it is best used in conjunction with other design resources, manuals, handbooks, and guides. This Guide is not meant to supplant these resources but rather to augment them by facilitating the integration of energy-efficiency considerations into the overall design process.
2. Though the Guide may seem to push the envelope of traditional engineering design practice, its recommendations are widely used in actual installations in the United States and abroad. We believe that successful design teams build from the members' combined experience and feedback from previous work. Each team should incorporate energy efficiency improvements, as appropriate, by considering their interactions and life-cycle costs. We also recognize that there is no single design solution for all situations; thus, the Guide focuses on conceptual approaches rather than prescriptive measures.
Special Environments
Research laboratories are sophisticated and complex environments that are designed to meet the special demands of experimental study, testing, and analysis and to provide safe environments for workers. This double mission means that laboratories must provide levels of safety, space conditioning, and indoor air quality not usually maintained in conventional office buildings. To this end, designs of research laboratories typically have minimal regard for energy use.
A research laboratory environmental conditioning system must also provide protection and comfort for occupants of the laboratory building, including those in associated non-research spaces. The integration of dissimilar types of spaces increases the potential for energy waste.
Example of an integrated energy concept
The example below illustrates some of the energy-efficient design process and its incorporation into an overall facility design. The example describes the energy-efficient design of a research institute specializing in the development of special-purpose microelectronic components.
A central plant with constant airflow rate was chosen for the air conditioning of the multi-story building. At the entrance of each story, the HEPA filters are grouped centrally in easily accessible compact filter boxes according to zones, so that monitoring and maintenance work can be carried out, without need to enter the research rooms. An air distribution system, which is designed so that later modifications can be made without difficulty, conveys the supply air to custom-designed clean air distribution elements. The size and arrangement of the distribution elements, the direction of airflow and the airflow velocity are exactly tailored to the individual requirements of each workstation. In some cases the apparatus is protected by the use of horizontal unidirectional flow, in others by vertical unidirectional flow.
The workstations are thus isolated from the surroundings by the use of the principle of spot protection. The remaining room areas of the laboratory are air conditioned merely by spill-over flow from the clean zones, and additional supply air devices have not been necessary. This allows both the desired room air conditions to be maintained and an air cleanliness corresponding to cleanliness Class 10,000 according to US Federal Standard 209D, to be ensured—at no additional cost as far as air engineering is concerned.
The velocity of the air emerging from the clean air distributing elements was set individually within the range 0.25 to 0.4 m/s (~50 to 80 feet per minute) and is subsequently kept constant by means of automatic air volume control devices.
Minimization both of the spatial extent of the area protected by unidirectional flow and of the flow velocity are (sic) therefore used to keep down the airflow rate to the very minimum possible. [Schicht, 1991]
///////
Energy efficiency in the laboratory has emerged as a significant consideration in lab design. A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories (http://ateam.lbl.gov/Design-Guide/) provides valuable insight into this area of lab design. Following, excerpts from this online guide …
///////
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories--provides a detailed and holistic framework to assist designers and energy managers in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments. The Guide fills an important void in the general literature and compliments existing in-depth technical manuals. Considerable information is available pertaining to overall laboratory design issues, but no single document focuses comprehensively on energy issues in these highly specialized environments. Furthermore, practitioners may utilize many antiquated rules of thumb, which often inadvertently cause energy inefficiency. The Guide helps its user to: introduce energy decision-making into the earliest phases of the design process, access the literature of pertinent issues, and become aware of debates and issues on related topics. The Guide does focus on individual technologies, as well as control systems, and important operational factors such as building commissioning. However most importantly, the Guide is intended to foster a systems perspective (e.g. "right sizing") and to present current leading-edge, energy-efficient design practices and principles.
Foreword
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories -- is intended to assist facility owners, architects, engineers, designers, facility managers, and utility energy-management specialists in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments. This Guide focuses comprehensively on laboratory energy design issues with a "systems" design approach. Although a laboratory-type facility includes many sub-system designs, e.g., the heating system, a comprehensive design approach should view the entire building as the essential "system." This means the larger, macro energy-efficiency considerations during architectural programming come before the smaller, micro component selection such as an energy-efficient fan. We encourage readers to consider the following points when utilizing the Guide.
1. Since the Guide 's focus is energy efficiency, it is best used in conjunction with other design resources, manuals, handbooks, and guides. This Guide is not meant to supplant these resources but rather to augment them by facilitating the integration of energy-efficiency considerations into the overall design process.
2. Though the Guide may seem to push the envelope of traditional engineering design practice, its recommendations are widely used in actual installations in the United States and abroad. We believe that successful design teams build from the members' combined experience and feedback from previous work. Each team should incorporate energy efficiency improvements, as appropriate, by considering their interactions and life-cycle costs. We also recognize that there is no single design solution for all situations; thus, the Guide focuses on conceptual approaches rather than prescriptive measures.
Special Environments
Research laboratories are sophisticated and complex environments that are designed to meet the special demands of experimental study, testing, and analysis and to provide safe environments for workers. This double mission means that laboratories must provide levels of safety, space conditioning, and indoor air quality not usually maintained in conventional office buildings. To this end, designs of research laboratories typically have minimal regard for energy use.
A research laboratory environmental conditioning system must also provide protection and comfort for occupants of the laboratory building, including those in associated non-research spaces. The integration of dissimilar types of spaces increases the potential for energy waste.
Example of an integrated energy concept
The example below illustrates some of the energy-efficient design process and its incorporation into an overall facility design. The example describes the energy-efficient design of a research institute specializing in the development of special-purpose microelectronic components.
A central plant with constant airflow rate was chosen for the air conditioning of the multi-story building. At the entrance of each story, the HEPA filters are grouped centrally in easily accessible compact filter boxes according to zones, so that monitoring and maintenance work can be carried out, without need to enter the research rooms. An air distribution system, which is designed so that later modifications can be made without difficulty, conveys the supply air to custom-designed clean air distribution elements. The size and arrangement of the distribution elements, the direction of airflow and the airflow velocity are exactly tailored to the individual requirements of each workstation. In some cases the apparatus is protected by the use of horizontal unidirectional flow, in others by vertical unidirectional flow.
The workstations are thus isolated from the surroundings by the use of the principle of spot protection. The remaining room areas of the laboratory are air conditioned merely by spill-over flow from the clean zones, and additional supply air devices have not been necessary. This allows both the desired room air conditions to be maintained and an air cleanliness corresponding to cleanliness Class 10,000 according to US Federal Standard 209D, to be ensured—at no additional cost as far as air engineering is concerned.
The velocity of the air emerging from the clean air distributing elements was set individually within the range 0.25 to 0.4 m/s (~50 to 80 feet per minute) and is subsequently kept constant by means of automatic air volume control devices.
Minimization both of the spatial extent of the area protected by unidirectional flow and of the flow velocity are (sic) therefore used to keep down the airflow rate to the very minimum possible. [Schicht, 1991]
///////
Thursday, June 25, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 9 of a series of posts
“Here is the test
to find whether your mission on earth is
finished. If you're alive, it isn't.” -- Richard Bach (American Writer,
author of 'Jonathan Livingston Seagull', b.1936)
Laboratory Design (http://www.labdesignnews.com/) is worth following for up to date information on trends in lab design. As described in its Web …
Laboratory Design's editorial mission is to provide cutting-edge information on trends and techniques that make these mission-critical buildings more efficient, cost-effective, and functional. Our diverse content, created by experts in the industry, is delivered effectively through Laboratory Design: A concise bi-monthly newsletter covering breaking news, trends, technical articles, new projects, new products, case studies, coming events and more.
Here are excerpts from a couple of recent Laboratory Design articles …
///////
Modern trends in lab design
Thu, 06/04/2015 - 3:49pm
by Lindsay Hock, Editor
[EXCERPTS]
Each year, many entries are entered into R&D Magazine’s Laboratory of the Year competition; but only a select few win. However, each entry exhibits trends in modern lab design. From flexibility to sustainability to collaboration, these trends showcase the best design options for lab facilities today and the future.
The state of lab design
In the academic environment, the lack of increased funding from federal resources, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF), and state resources has changed the types of environments needed for research. With this change, there’s a greater focus on computational rather than experimental approaches to research, which requires a different type of lab than wet bench science spaces. “While domestically we see the physical research environment changing to cope with the ‘flat-funded’ situation, we have also seen a significant amount of off-shoring of research to countries such as Japan, Ireland and England where investment in experimental research has significantly increased,” says Jeffrey Zynda, Science Practice Leader, Payette. These shifts not only change how, but where research is conducted.
As today’s science is moving at a rapid pace, clients must plan ahead for change from day one. Adapting spaces quickly and easily is a must in the scientific process, and that capacity must be designed into all aspects of a lab. Design features, such as removeable partitions and lab furniture and interchangeable plug-and-play ceiling utility systems, make adapting space easier.
Many research disciplines are seeking a new synergy, where collaboration and interaction between different research groups is promoted to foster technology transfer and knowledge and idea exchange. “This has a bearing on the design of the facility to seek openness within lab settings and provides zones for sharing equipment and spaces that can foster interaction both inside and outside the lab,” says Jones.
With the evolution of science, labs are no longer designed as discrete spaces, but are thought of in terms of the entire process both at the facility level and within each lab itself. “Labs are designed to be flexible enough to support business model changes over time,” says Bryon Sutherly, AIA, Senior Project Architect, Hixson Architecture, Engineering Interiors. “And lab configurations are more standardized and supplemented with lab-specific equipment.” This allows for repurposing and conversion of labs with more ease than in the past.
One of the most prevalent trends in lab design is related to energy consumption within labs. Rather than an “it is what it is” attitude toward energy consumption, there’s a greater awareness about it and an active approach to energy reduction by design leaders in the industry. Interest in planning approaches and equipment that reduce energy use, particularly related to the conditioning and use of outside air, has become widespread among facility owners and end-users.
Collaboration is the key to today’s science. And in today’s labs, research collaboration has expanded from interdisciplinary scientific collaboration between departments to cross-disciplinary research. This encompasses traditional scientific departments, as well as broader research communities involving computer research, public/health policy, business and economics and private industry, according to Cabo.
Research labs are designed to accommodate different types of work within the same lab, as evidenced by fields like biochemistry, biophysics and geochemistry. Academic labs are now interdisciplinary and are rarely designed solely for one discipline. To some extent, the degree that collaborative environments are designed into labs is culturally driven—determined by the specific company culture and the types of work done. But overall, the trend is toward more collaborative and less private space.
Free full text source: http://www.labdesignnews.com/articles/2015/06/modern-trends-lab-design
///////
Lab of the future trends
Thu, 06/04/2015 - 1:54pm
by Lindsay Hock, Editor
[EXCERPTS]
According to many of the architects surveyed for this trends article, water is a major area of concern and opportunity for labs. Water conservation in labs is rising in importance in light of droughts and water scarcity issues throughout the world. This is especially true in the western and southwestern U.S.
“Labs of the future will be incentivized, or required, to incorporate ‘living machines’ which treat water (black and grey) on site, due to their intensity of water use/dwindling potable reserves,” says Blake Jackson, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Associate, Tsoi/Kobus & Associates. Living machines have been successfully tested and are a resilient solution to issues of water supply and are a means to educate the public through putting science on display.
Other solutions architects surveyed wanted to see more of regarding water conservation are piping RO/DI water from neighboring facilities to flush toilets and urinals and extracting waste heat from utility tunnels below lab sites to generate hot water for labs.
Flexibility was something architects believe will improve in future lab environments. Many claimed they wanted to see more features in labs that allow for adaptability rather than flexibility. And, according to Jeffrey Zynda, Associate Principal, Science Practice Leader, Payette, this is a reaction to the effort and cost to owners that have built-in features intended to provide flexibility, but rarely used.
What does this boil down to? Lab owners and designers should embrace modular features that allow end-users to customize lab furniture, casework and even fixed specialized lab equipment so it can be adapted to user needs in the future.
This isn’t to say the flexibility of systems that support reconfiguration aren’t important. As research needs change, lab infrastructure must be supportive. This option to reconfigure in the future also opens opportunities to collaborate across more disciplines and further multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research.
Flexible design in future labs, and even current labs, can also allow labs to be truly sustainable by minimizing construction required for modification and incorporation of new technologies. “It will be interesting to find the right balance between fixed and flexible, so labs are functional for the science conducted within them,” says Sara Eastman, EwingCole.
In labs of the future the need for natural light and views will live on, as these features help create inspiring places for researchers and students. The more connections researchers have to the outside world, the happier they tend to be in their work environment. While the right amount of natural light is a thin balance between building siting and technology, architects are looking for better and more suitable technologies to assist with allowing natural light into labs.
Free full text source: http://www.labdesignnews.com/articles/2015/06/lab-future-trends
///////
Laboratory Design (http://www.labdesignnews.com/) is worth following for up to date information on trends in lab design. As described in its Web …
Laboratory Design's editorial mission is to provide cutting-edge information on trends and techniques that make these mission-critical buildings more efficient, cost-effective, and functional. Our diverse content, created by experts in the industry, is delivered effectively through Laboratory Design: A concise bi-monthly newsletter covering breaking news, trends, technical articles, new projects, new products, case studies, coming events and more.
Here are excerpts from a couple of recent Laboratory Design articles …
///////
Modern trends in lab design
Thu, 06/04/2015 - 3:49pm
by Lindsay Hock, Editor
[EXCERPTS]
Each year, many entries are entered into R&D Magazine’s Laboratory of the Year competition; but only a select few win. However, each entry exhibits trends in modern lab design. From flexibility to sustainability to collaboration, these trends showcase the best design options for lab facilities today and the future.
The state of lab design
In the academic environment, the lack of increased funding from federal resources, such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF), and state resources has changed the types of environments needed for research. With this change, there’s a greater focus on computational rather than experimental approaches to research, which requires a different type of lab than wet bench science spaces. “While domestically we see the physical research environment changing to cope with the ‘flat-funded’ situation, we have also seen a significant amount of off-shoring of research to countries such as Japan, Ireland and England where investment in experimental research has significantly increased,” says Jeffrey Zynda, Science Practice Leader, Payette. These shifts not only change how, but where research is conducted.
As today’s science is moving at a rapid pace, clients must plan ahead for change from day one. Adapting spaces quickly and easily is a must in the scientific process, and that capacity must be designed into all aspects of a lab. Design features, such as removeable partitions and lab furniture and interchangeable plug-and-play ceiling utility systems, make adapting space easier.
Many research disciplines are seeking a new synergy, where collaboration and interaction between different research groups is promoted to foster technology transfer and knowledge and idea exchange. “This has a bearing on the design of the facility to seek openness within lab settings and provides zones for sharing equipment and spaces that can foster interaction both inside and outside the lab,” says Jones.
With the evolution of science, labs are no longer designed as discrete spaces, but are thought of in terms of the entire process both at the facility level and within each lab itself. “Labs are designed to be flexible enough to support business model changes over time,” says Bryon Sutherly, AIA, Senior Project Architect, Hixson Architecture, Engineering Interiors. “And lab configurations are more standardized and supplemented with lab-specific equipment.” This allows for repurposing and conversion of labs with more ease than in the past.
One of the most prevalent trends in lab design is related to energy consumption within labs. Rather than an “it is what it is” attitude toward energy consumption, there’s a greater awareness about it and an active approach to energy reduction by design leaders in the industry. Interest in planning approaches and equipment that reduce energy use, particularly related to the conditioning and use of outside air, has become widespread among facility owners and end-users.
Collaboration is the key to today’s science. And in today’s labs, research collaboration has expanded from interdisciplinary scientific collaboration between departments to cross-disciplinary research. This encompasses traditional scientific departments, as well as broader research communities involving computer research, public/health policy, business and economics and private industry, according to Cabo.
Research labs are designed to accommodate different types of work within the same lab, as evidenced by fields like biochemistry, biophysics and geochemistry. Academic labs are now interdisciplinary and are rarely designed solely for one discipline. To some extent, the degree that collaborative environments are designed into labs is culturally driven—determined by the specific company culture and the types of work done. But overall, the trend is toward more collaborative and less private space.
Free full text source: http://www.labdesignnews.com/articles/2015/06/modern-trends-lab-design
///////
Lab of the future trends
Thu, 06/04/2015 - 1:54pm
by Lindsay Hock, Editor
[EXCERPTS]
According to many of the architects surveyed for this trends article, water is a major area of concern and opportunity for labs. Water conservation in labs is rising in importance in light of droughts and water scarcity issues throughout the world. This is especially true in the western and southwestern U.S.
“Labs of the future will be incentivized, or required, to incorporate ‘living machines’ which treat water (black and grey) on site, due to their intensity of water use/dwindling potable reserves,” says Blake Jackson, AIA, LEED AP BD+C, Associate, Tsoi/Kobus & Associates. Living machines have been successfully tested and are a resilient solution to issues of water supply and are a means to educate the public through putting science on display.
Other solutions architects surveyed wanted to see more of regarding water conservation are piping RO/DI water from neighboring facilities to flush toilets and urinals and extracting waste heat from utility tunnels below lab sites to generate hot water for labs.
Flexibility was something architects believe will improve in future lab environments. Many claimed they wanted to see more features in labs that allow for adaptability rather than flexibility. And, according to Jeffrey Zynda, Associate Principal, Science Practice Leader, Payette, this is a reaction to the effort and cost to owners that have built-in features intended to provide flexibility, but rarely used.
What does this boil down to? Lab owners and designers should embrace modular features that allow end-users to customize lab furniture, casework and even fixed specialized lab equipment so it can be adapted to user needs in the future.
This isn’t to say the flexibility of systems that support reconfiguration aren’t important. As research needs change, lab infrastructure must be supportive. This option to reconfigure in the future also opens opportunities to collaborate across more disciplines and further multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary research.
Flexible design in future labs, and even current labs, can also allow labs to be truly sustainable by minimizing construction required for modification and incorporation of new technologies. “It will be interesting to find the right balance between fixed and flexible, so labs are functional for the science conducted within them,” says Sara Eastman, EwingCole.
In labs of the future the need for natural light and views will live on, as these features help create inspiring places for researchers and students. The more connections researchers have to the outside world, the happier they tend to be in their work environment. While the right amount of natural light is a thin balance between building siting and technology, architects are looking for better and more suitable technologies to assist with allowing natural light into labs.
Free full text source: http://www.labdesignnews.com/articles/2015/06/lab-future-trends
///////
Wednesday, June 17, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 8 of a series of posts
“Kind words do
not cost much. Yet they accomplish
much.” -- Blaise Pascal (French Mathematician, Philosopher and
Physicist, 1623-1662)
The Stanford Laboratory Standard & Design Guide, as described on its Web (http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html), “is a resource document for use by faculty, staff, and design professionals during the planning and early design phases of a project. This Guide is to be used in conjunction with Stanford's Facilities Design Guidelines and applies to construction projects for all Stanford University facilities, including leased properties.”
The Stanford Guide focuses on health and safety. Beyond the obvious need to protect researchers and other personnel, designing health and safety into the construction reduces costs associated with retrofitting a facility to accommodate EH&S requirements.
Excerpts from the Stanford Guide appear below.
///////
Stanford Laboratory Standard & Design Guide
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Stanford University has a continuing need to modernize and upgrade its facilities. The resulting construction projects often have significant health and safety requirements due to regulatory oversight. Since these requirements can impact the design of a project, Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S) prepared this EH&S Laboratory Design Guide to aid the campus community with planning and design issues. EH&S believes that the Guide, in conjunction with EH&S’s plan review and consultation, improves design efficiency and minimizes changes.
Format of Guide
The Guide is formatted to address laboratory design issues pertinent to General Laboratories (e.g., chemical laboratories) in Section 1, with additional requirements for Radioactive Materials Laboratories and Biosafety Level 2 Laboratories presented in Sections 2 and 3 respectively. Within the sections, specific design criteria are provided. Comments are included under the specific design criterion to give the user the rational behind the design feature.
Section 1.0: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STANFORD UNIVERSITY LABORATORIES
Scope
The primary objective in laboratory design is to provide a safe environment for laboratory personnel to conduct their work. A secondary objective is to allow for the maximum flexibility for safe research use. Undergraduate teaching laboratories require other specific design considerations. Therefore, all health and safety hazards must be anticipated and carefully evaluated so that protective measures can be incorporated into the design. No matter how well designed a laboratory is, improper usage of its facilities will always defeat the engineered safety features. Proper education of the facility users is essential. The General Requirements listed in this section illustrate some of the basic health and safety elements to include in all new and remodeled laboratories at Stanford. Variations from these guidelines need approval from SU Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S). The subsections of Section 1.0 provide specific guidance on additional critical features of a general laboratory (e.g., fume hoods, hazardous materials storage, and compressed gases.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 Ventilation
1.2 Emergency Eyewash and Safety Shower Equipment
1.3 Pressure Vessel Components and Systems and Compressed Gas Cylinders
1.4 Flammable Liquid Storage Cabinets
1.5 Hazardous Materials Storage
2.0 Additional Requirements for Laboratories Using Radioactive Materials, Radiation Producing Machines, or Lasers
3.0 Biosafety Level 2 Laboratories
Free full text source: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html
///////
The Stanford Laboratory Standard & Design Guide, as described on its Web (http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html), “is a resource document for use by faculty, staff, and design professionals during the planning and early design phases of a project. This Guide is to be used in conjunction with Stanford's Facilities Design Guidelines and applies to construction projects for all Stanford University facilities, including leased properties.”
The Stanford Guide focuses on health and safety. Beyond the obvious need to protect researchers and other personnel, designing health and safety into the construction reduces costs associated with retrofitting a facility to accommodate EH&S requirements.
Excerpts from the Stanford Guide appear below.
///////
Stanford Laboratory Standard & Design Guide
INTRODUCTION
Purpose
Stanford University has a continuing need to modernize and upgrade its facilities. The resulting construction projects often have significant health and safety requirements due to regulatory oversight. Since these requirements can impact the design of a project, Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S) prepared this EH&S Laboratory Design Guide to aid the campus community with planning and design issues. EH&S believes that the Guide, in conjunction with EH&S’s plan review and consultation, improves design efficiency and minimizes changes.
Format of Guide
The Guide is formatted to address laboratory design issues pertinent to General Laboratories (e.g., chemical laboratories) in Section 1, with additional requirements for Radioactive Materials Laboratories and Biosafety Level 2 Laboratories presented in Sections 2 and 3 respectively. Within the sections, specific design criteria are provided. Comments are included under the specific design criterion to give the user the rational behind the design feature.
Section 1.0: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR STANFORD UNIVERSITY LABORATORIES
Scope
The primary objective in laboratory design is to provide a safe environment for laboratory personnel to conduct their work. A secondary objective is to allow for the maximum flexibility for safe research use. Undergraduate teaching laboratories require other specific design considerations. Therefore, all health and safety hazards must be anticipated and carefully evaluated so that protective measures can be incorporated into the design. No matter how well designed a laboratory is, improper usage of its facilities will always defeat the engineered safety features. Proper education of the facility users is essential. The General Requirements listed in this section illustrate some of the basic health and safety elements to include in all new and remodeled laboratories at Stanford. Variations from these guidelines need approval from SU Environmental Health and Safety (EH&S). The subsections of Section 1.0 provide specific guidance on additional critical features of a general laboratory (e.g., fume hoods, hazardous materials storage, and compressed gases.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1 Ventilation
1.2 Emergency Eyewash and Safety Shower Equipment
1.3 Pressure Vessel Components and Systems and Compressed Gas Cylinders
1.4 Flammable Liquid Storage Cabinets
1.5 Hazardous Materials Storage
2.0 Additional Requirements for Laboratories Using Radioactive Materials, Radiation Producing Machines, or Lasers
3.0 Biosafety Level 2 Laboratories
Free full text source: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html
///////
Tuesday, June 9, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 7 of a series of posts
“A building has integrity just like a man. And just as seldom.” -- Ayn Rand (Russian born American
Writer and Novelist, 1905-1982)
One item you will want to add to your collection is …
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
While the focus is on biomedical research facilities, much of the content applies to any research laboratory, no matter what the focus. An excerpt from the introduction appears below. Bonus … You can read the full text of the Guidelines at no charge online.
Free full text source: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/ek_members/documents/pdf/aiap014820.pdf
You will also want to read about the update to the Guidelines, which will broaden the scope from biomedical to advanced research laboratories in general. Browse to the end of this post to read excerpts from an article describing the work on the update.
TIP: When, as in this case, you run across a useful source which is relatively old, Google® the title to see if there may be a more recent version available.
///////
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
The American Institute of Architects, Center for Advanced Technology Facilities Design
110 pages
FROM THE INTRODUCTION
Designing a state-of-the-art biomedical research laboratory can be a daunting task for any design professional. Understanding the special requirements of the researcher in the facility is just the first step. You need to also be knowledgeable in materials handling, isolation units, special equipment stabilization, hazardous waste disposal, biocontainment areas, positive air flows, security issues, multilevel governmental regulations, and hightech support systems.The list goes on and on. Where do you start?
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities provides the introductory starting point you need to understand the special design needs and requirements of biomedical research laboratories. The information presented here is an easy way to grasp the basic elements, relationships, and special considerations of this complicated and technically challenging design area.
The initial basis for Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities was a set of design guidelines for biomedical research facilities originally developed by the National Institutes of Health. This material has been revised and augmented with a wide array of knowledge pulled together by a multidisciplinary task group of experts. The result is a comprehensive set of design guidelines that are not specific to any one type of public or private sector biomedical research. Instead, you will find the material applicable to most biomedical research facilities in any setting.
General
The purpose of this document is to provide information to the design and research communities on the planning and design of biomedical research laboratories. These guidelines reflect the judgment of a multidisciplinary group of experts in research laboratory design and operation. They encompass the majority of current best practices today, but they are neither universal solutions nor detailed enough to answer every question that may arise in the course of a specific planning and design project.
It is not the intent of this document to specify construction techniques, to prescribe facilities quality or cost criteria, or to serve as code requirements. The intent instead is to identify issues and approaches that deserve careful thought when undertaking biomedical research facilities projects. Such facilities are complex and require these special and specific design considerations.
As highly changeable environments, biomedical research laboratories and their support spaces must be flexible and able to readily accommodate a wide range of current and future requirements and hazards. To achieve satisfactory results from the planning and design, it is important that the project owner supply for each project a functional program for the facility that describes the purpose of the project, the projected demand or utilization, staffing patterns, departmental relationships, space requirements, and other basic information relating to fulfillment of the organization's objectives. This program may include a description of each function or service; the operational space required for each function; the number of staff or other occupants of the various spaces; the equipment required in each space; the numbers, types, and areas (in net square meters) of all spaces; the special design features; the systems of operation; and the interrelationships of various functions and spaces.
The functional program should also include a description of those services necessary for the complete operation of the facility, and it should address future expansion of essential services that may be needed to accommodate increased demand for technological change. The approved functional program shall be made available for use by all members of the design team in the development of project design and construction documents.
A total "environmental approach," including attention to site, structure, massing, circulation, visual harmony, open areas, existing conditions, and construction logistics, as well as operational sustainability, is the most effective strategy when planning biomedical research facilities. A design approach that responds to these specific issues will serve to create a product that is functional, aesthetic, flexible, and reliable. Design professionals must consider all these criteria to meet the needs that are identified by users, dictated by functional relationships, and imposed by specific existing conditions.
It is extremely important to recognize that the end users (researchers, facility managers, administrators, etc.) are integral parts of this process, and their involvement is essential to the project success from the outset. The most effective method by which to integrate scientific, administrative, and facility requirements is through a "partnership" interaction whereby design professionals and end users share a clearly defined goal. Accomplishing such a shared vision through the entire design, construction, and operations process ensures the operational functionality, sustainability, and reliability of these sophisticated facilities.
A hazard assessment must be conducted for each investigative and research function. The assessment becomes a critical determining factor in design and throughout the full life cycle of the facility. A main purpose of these guidelines is to assist in the design of "safe space" to support research.
In response to this purpose, all laboratories are assumed in design to contain chemical, radiological, and biological hazards, since all of these scientific activities may occur within the space during its life cycle. Containment devices and researcher procedures are used in concert with the facility to manage these hazards. Architectural and engineering features are also essential to maintain proper safety for workers and visitors. Every research facility shall provide and maintain a safe environment for personnel and the public. When chemical fume hoods are required, even to handle small quantities of hazardous material, then the laboratory space must have air pressure negative in relation to adjacent egress and circulation corridors. In addition, the exhaust system requires redundancy to establish reliable containment. Radioisotopes, usually used only in trace amounts, must be secured and shielded. Biohazards are assumed to be at Biosafety Level
///////
UPDATE
Building Design & Construction (March 03, 2009)
AIA, I2SL to develop laboratory facility design and planning guidelines
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the International Institute for Sustainable Laboratories (I2SL) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding allowing both organizations to leverage their unique resources and expertise toward the creation of a comprehensive laboratory facilities guideline for planning and design. These new guidelines will build on the 1999 AIA Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratories.
AIA and I2SL agree that laboratories must be a major focal point in enhancing human health and the built and natural environment. The organizations believe that comprehensive guidelines for laboratories are necessary as these unique facility types form a large part of the research infrastructure and are the foundation supporting successful societies throughout academia, industry, and government, worldwide. The long-term investments required to build laboratories and their costly operation costs provide more reason for the organizations to work together to develop a set of guidelines on how to properly plan for and build these facilities.
The guidelines will define integrated building strategies that will offer a sustainable approach to global building challenges. While the 1999 AIA guideline did provide guidance on biomedical research laboratories, there currently is no document that provides a comprehensive planning and design guidelines for various types of research facilities. Without a comprehensive guideline document, laboratory designers, engineers, owners, operators, and other professionals do not have a comprehensive guide to refer to in their efforts to deliver these specialized facilities. While all laboratories and their support space are unique, they must be safe and secure, effective and flexible, engaging and modern, environmentally sustainable and energy efficient, life-cycle cost effective, and meet the appropriate controlling building codes. The guidelines will aim to be a comprehensive resource for this information.
source: http://www.bdcnetwork.com/aia-i2sl-develop-laboratory-facility-design-and-planning-guidelines
///////
One item you will want to add to your collection is …
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
While the focus is on biomedical research facilities, much of the content applies to any research laboratory, no matter what the focus. An excerpt from the introduction appears below. Bonus … You can read the full text of the Guidelines at no charge online.
Free full text source: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/ek_members/documents/pdf/aiap014820.pdf
You will also want to read about the update to the Guidelines, which will broaden the scope from biomedical to advanced research laboratories in general. Browse to the end of this post to read excerpts from an article describing the work on the update.
TIP: When, as in this case, you run across a useful source which is relatively old, Google® the title to see if there may be a more recent version available.
///////
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
The American Institute of Architects, Center for Advanced Technology Facilities Design
110 pages
FROM THE INTRODUCTION
Designing a state-of-the-art biomedical research laboratory can be a daunting task for any design professional. Understanding the special requirements of the researcher in the facility is just the first step. You need to also be knowledgeable in materials handling, isolation units, special equipment stabilization, hazardous waste disposal, biocontainment areas, positive air flows, security issues, multilevel governmental regulations, and hightech support systems.The list goes on and on. Where do you start?
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities provides the introductory starting point you need to understand the special design needs and requirements of biomedical research laboratories. The information presented here is an easy way to grasp the basic elements, relationships, and special considerations of this complicated and technically challenging design area.
The initial basis for Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities was a set of design guidelines for biomedical research facilities originally developed by the National Institutes of Health. This material has been revised and augmented with a wide array of knowledge pulled together by a multidisciplinary task group of experts. The result is a comprehensive set of design guidelines that are not specific to any one type of public or private sector biomedical research. Instead, you will find the material applicable to most biomedical research facilities in any setting.
General
The purpose of this document is to provide information to the design and research communities on the planning and design of biomedical research laboratories. These guidelines reflect the judgment of a multidisciplinary group of experts in research laboratory design and operation. They encompass the majority of current best practices today, but they are neither universal solutions nor detailed enough to answer every question that may arise in the course of a specific planning and design project.
It is not the intent of this document to specify construction techniques, to prescribe facilities quality or cost criteria, or to serve as code requirements. The intent instead is to identify issues and approaches that deserve careful thought when undertaking biomedical research facilities projects. Such facilities are complex and require these special and specific design considerations.
As highly changeable environments, biomedical research laboratories and their support spaces must be flexible and able to readily accommodate a wide range of current and future requirements and hazards. To achieve satisfactory results from the planning and design, it is important that the project owner supply for each project a functional program for the facility that describes the purpose of the project, the projected demand or utilization, staffing patterns, departmental relationships, space requirements, and other basic information relating to fulfillment of the organization's objectives. This program may include a description of each function or service; the operational space required for each function; the number of staff or other occupants of the various spaces; the equipment required in each space; the numbers, types, and areas (in net square meters) of all spaces; the special design features; the systems of operation; and the interrelationships of various functions and spaces.
The functional program should also include a description of those services necessary for the complete operation of the facility, and it should address future expansion of essential services that may be needed to accommodate increased demand for technological change. The approved functional program shall be made available for use by all members of the design team in the development of project design and construction documents.
A total "environmental approach," including attention to site, structure, massing, circulation, visual harmony, open areas, existing conditions, and construction logistics, as well as operational sustainability, is the most effective strategy when planning biomedical research facilities. A design approach that responds to these specific issues will serve to create a product that is functional, aesthetic, flexible, and reliable. Design professionals must consider all these criteria to meet the needs that are identified by users, dictated by functional relationships, and imposed by specific existing conditions.
It is extremely important to recognize that the end users (researchers, facility managers, administrators, etc.) are integral parts of this process, and their involvement is essential to the project success from the outset. The most effective method by which to integrate scientific, administrative, and facility requirements is through a "partnership" interaction whereby design professionals and end users share a clearly defined goal. Accomplishing such a shared vision through the entire design, construction, and operations process ensures the operational functionality, sustainability, and reliability of these sophisticated facilities.
A hazard assessment must be conducted for each investigative and research function. The assessment becomes a critical determining factor in design and throughout the full life cycle of the facility. A main purpose of these guidelines is to assist in the design of "safe space" to support research.
In response to this purpose, all laboratories are assumed in design to contain chemical, radiological, and biological hazards, since all of these scientific activities may occur within the space during its life cycle. Containment devices and researcher procedures are used in concert with the facility to manage these hazards. Architectural and engineering features are also essential to maintain proper safety for workers and visitors. Every research facility shall provide and maintain a safe environment for personnel and the public. When chemical fume hoods are required, even to handle small quantities of hazardous material, then the laboratory space must have air pressure negative in relation to adjacent egress and circulation corridors. In addition, the exhaust system requires redundancy to establish reliable containment. Radioisotopes, usually used only in trace amounts, must be secured and shielded. Biohazards are assumed to be at Biosafety Level
///////
UPDATE
Building Design & Construction (March 03, 2009)
AIA, I2SL to develop laboratory facility design and planning guidelines
The American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the International Institute for Sustainable Laboratories (I2SL) have signed a Memorandum of Understanding allowing both organizations to leverage their unique resources and expertise toward the creation of a comprehensive laboratory facilities guideline for planning and design. These new guidelines will build on the 1999 AIA Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratories.
AIA and I2SL agree that laboratories must be a major focal point in enhancing human health and the built and natural environment. The organizations believe that comprehensive guidelines for laboratories are necessary as these unique facility types form a large part of the research infrastructure and are the foundation supporting successful societies throughout academia, industry, and government, worldwide. The long-term investments required to build laboratories and their costly operation costs provide more reason for the organizations to work together to develop a set of guidelines on how to properly plan for and build these facilities.
The guidelines will define integrated building strategies that will offer a sustainable approach to global building challenges. While the 1999 AIA guideline did provide guidance on biomedical research laboratories, there currently is no document that provides a comprehensive planning and design guidelines for various types of research facilities. Without a comprehensive guideline document, laboratory designers, engineers, owners, operators, and other professionals do not have a comprehensive guide to refer to in their efforts to deliver these specialized facilities. While all laboratories and their support space are unique, they must be safe and secure, effective and flexible, engaging and modern, environmentally sustainable and energy efficient, life-cycle cost effective, and meet the appropriate controlling building codes. The guidelines will aim to be a comprehensive resource for this information.
source: http://www.bdcnetwork.com/aia-i2sl-develop-laboratory-facility-design-and-planning-guidelines
///////
Thursday, May 28, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 6 of a series of posts
“It is not easy to find happiness in ourselves, and it is not possible to
find it elsewhere.” -- Agnes Repplier (American Essayist and Writer,
known for her collections of scholarly essays in Compromises (1904). 1858-1950)
Moving on from books, let’s explore other useful sources of information on lab design.
TIP: Google® Search String: how to design a research lab
Google makes it easy to search for virtually anything you need to know. But, you still have to take the time to slog through all the sites you are directed to. Here are a few we have found, annotated for your convenience.
///////
LABORATORY DESIGN INFORMATION RESOURCES (Annotated)
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
The American Institute of Architects, Center for Advanced Technology Facilities Design
110 pages
While the focus is on biomedical research facilities, much of the content applies to any research laboratory, no matter what the focus.
Free full text source: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/ek_members/documents/pdf/aiap014820.pdf
Stanford University Laboratory Standard & Design Guidelines
An excellent source for the design of laboratory facilities in general.
Free full text source: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html
Laboratory Design
Founded in 1996 by the editors of R&D Magazine, Laboratory Design newsletter is a bi-monthly publication delivering the freshest must-read information for people involved in designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Editorial coverage focuses on the latest news and trends, providing detailed information about exemplary buildings, reports on exciting new facilities and new products, and additional need-to-know data that has a strong positive impact on readers’ organizations. Subscribers are involved in buildings owned by government, academia, and the private sector, devoted to research; teaching; clinical, environmental and forensic analysis; and QC/QA.
The bi-weekly Laboratory Design Update e-newsletter, offers additional coverage of breaking news relevant to the readers of Laboratory Design newsletter. http://www.labdesignnews.com/
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories - Version 4.0- is intended to assist facility owners, architects, engineers, designers, facility managers, and utility demand-side management specialists in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments.
http://ateam.lbl.gov/Design-Guide/
Laboratory Design Conference
Since 2002, the Laboratory Design Conference has provided a dynamic educational and networking event for those involved in planning, designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Meeting sessions feature recognized experts delivering unique presentations on trends in creating the most efficient, state-of-the-art facilities.
Held each spring, the conference also marks the official “reveal” of the Laboratory of the Year winners, with in-depth discussions by the winning project teams.
Tours of exemplary lab facilities, including those to which attendees would not otherwise have access, are an integral part of the overall Lab Design Conference experience.
Credits for presentations are available through the American Institute of Architects as well as the Green Building Certification Institute, and are also offered as general CEUs for non-AIA/GBCI members.
Scheduled simultaneously with the conference, the Laboratory Design expo allows attendees to learn about companies offering relevant products and services to the laboratory design industry. Social gatherings provide plenty of opportunity for relaxation and networking.
http://www.labdesignconference.com/
Lab Manager
More and more lab professionals are turning to Lab Manager for the latest trends, innovations and insights. Today in print and online, Lab Manager continues to grow as the lab professional’s most important publication.
Lab Manager analyzes the strong link between business strategy, technological innovation and implementation. It is focused on the lab professional in a leadership role who is responsible for setting the lab’s direction and identifying, recommending and purchasing technology. It also offers a wide breadth of knowledge to the researchers in the field using lab equipment and seeking to learn about the latest in new technologies for their labs.
www.labmanager.com/
Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product
Committee on Design, Construction, and Renovation of Laboratory Facilities, Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications
National Research Council (2000)
This report is addressed to the scientist-user and administrator, and therefore focuses on how to have a successful laboratory facility built rather than on the detailed specifications for a successfully constructed laboratory. In this context, a successful laboratory facility is defined as one that provides effective and flexible laboratories, is safe for laboratory workers, is compatible with the surrounding environment, has the support of the neighboring community and governmental agencies, and can be constructed in a cost-effective manner. This report covers many basic aspects of design, renovation, and construction projects in general as well as specific laboratory-oriented issues. In its discussion of the latter, the committee considered primarily chemistry and biochemistry laboratories; it did not deal specifically with specialized buildings such as animal facilities, nor did it address multiple-use buildings such as teaching and research facilities. (Narum, 1995, deals with teaching laboratories.)
Overall, the general principles elucidated by the committee make its recommendations applicable to the construction or renovation of almost any laboratory building. Through its investigations the committee found that although individual projects differ, there are certain commonalities in successful laboratory construction and renovation projects. These include the right participants and a continuity of personnel; a thorough, well-defined, and thoughtful process; and a broad knowledge of the relevant issues. These common themes are discussed in Chapters 1 through 3: ''Human Issues," "Process Issues," and "Technical Issues." Many of these elements, especially those discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, may appear to be common sense, but they were found to have been overlooked in some of the projects described to the committee. Other themes are more specific to laboratory facilities.
Free full text source: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309066336
///////
Future posts will explore each of these sources in more detail.
Moving on from books, let’s explore other useful sources of information on lab design.
TIP: Google® Search String: how to design a research lab
Google makes it easy to search for virtually anything you need to know. But, you still have to take the time to slog through all the sites you are directed to. Here are a few we have found, annotated for your convenience.
///////
LABORATORY DESIGN INFORMATION RESOURCES (Annotated)
Guidelines for Planning and Design of Biomedical Research Laboratory Facilities (1999)
The American Institute of Architects, Center for Advanced Technology Facilities Design
110 pages
While the focus is on biomedical research facilities, much of the content applies to any research laboratory, no matter what the focus.
Free full text source: http://www.aia.org/aiaucmp/groups/ek_members/documents/pdf/aiap014820.pdf
Stanford University Laboratory Standard & Design Guidelines
An excellent source for the design of laboratory facilities in general.
Free full text source: http://web.stanford.edu/dept/EHS/prod/mainrencon/Labdesign.html
Laboratory Design
Founded in 1996 by the editors of R&D Magazine, Laboratory Design newsletter is a bi-monthly publication delivering the freshest must-read information for people involved in designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Editorial coverage focuses on the latest news and trends, providing detailed information about exemplary buildings, reports on exciting new facilities and new products, and additional need-to-know data that has a strong positive impact on readers’ organizations. Subscribers are involved in buildings owned by government, academia, and the private sector, devoted to research; teaching; clinical, environmental and forensic analysis; and QC/QA.
The bi-weekly Laboratory Design Update e-newsletter, offers additional coverage of breaking news relevant to the readers of Laboratory Design newsletter. http://www.labdesignnews.com/
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories
A Design Guide for Energy-Efficient Research Laboratories - Version 4.0- is intended to assist facility owners, architects, engineers, designers, facility managers, and utility demand-side management specialists in identifying and applying advanced energy-efficiency features in laboratory-type environments.
http://ateam.lbl.gov/Design-Guide/
Laboratory Design Conference
Since 2002, the Laboratory Design Conference has provided a dynamic educational and networking event for those involved in planning, designing, engineering, constructing and operating laboratory facilities. Meeting sessions feature recognized experts delivering unique presentations on trends in creating the most efficient, state-of-the-art facilities.
Held each spring, the conference also marks the official “reveal” of the Laboratory of the Year winners, with in-depth discussions by the winning project teams.
Tours of exemplary lab facilities, including those to which attendees would not otherwise have access, are an integral part of the overall Lab Design Conference experience.
Credits for presentations are available through the American Institute of Architects as well as the Green Building Certification Institute, and are also offered as general CEUs for non-AIA/GBCI members.
Scheduled simultaneously with the conference, the Laboratory Design expo allows attendees to learn about companies offering relevant products and services to the laboratory design industry. Social gatherings provide plenty of opportunity for relaxation and networking.
http://www.labdesignconference.com/
Lab Manager
More and more lab professionals are turning to Lab Manager for the latest trends, innovations and insights. Today in print and online, Lab Manager continues to grow as the lab professional’s most important publication.
Lab Manager analyzes the strong link between business strategy, technological innovation and implementation. It is focused on the lab professional in a leadership role who is responsible for setting the lab’s direction and identifying, recommending and purchasing technology. It also offers a wide breadth of knowledge to the researchers in the field using lab equipment and seeking to learn about the latest in new technologies for their labs.
www.labmanager.com/
Laboratory Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product
Committee on Design, Construction, and Renovation of Laboratory Facilities, Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology, Commission on Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and Applications
National Research Council (2000)
This report is addressed to the scientist-user and administrator, and therefore focuses on how to have a successful laboratory facility built rather than on the detailed specifications for a successfully constructed laboratory. In this context, a successful laboratory facility is defined as one that provides effective and flexible laboratories, is safe for laboratory workers, is compatible with the surrounding environment, has the support of the neighboring community and governmental agencies, and can be constructed in a cost-effective manner. This report covers many basic aspects of design, renovation, and construction projects in general as well as specific laboratory-oriented issues. In its discussion of the latter, the committee considered primarily chemistry and biochemistry laboratories; it did not deal specifically with specialized buildings such as animal facilities, nor did it address multiple-use buildings such as teaching and research facilities. (Narum, 1995, deals with teaching laboratories.)
Overall, the general principles elucidated by the committee make its recommendations applicable to the construction or renovation of almost any laboratory building. Through its investigations the committee found that although individual projects differ, there are certain commonalities in successful laboratory construction and renovation projects. These include the right participants and a continuity of personnel; a thorough, well-defined, and thoughtful process; and a broad knowledge of the relevant issues. These common themes are discussed in Chapters 1 through 3: ''Human Issues," "Process Issues," and "Technical Issues." Many of these elements, especially those discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, may appear to be common sense, but they were found to have been overlooked in some of the projects described to the committee. Other themes are more specific to laboratory facilities.
Free full text source: http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?isbn=0309066336
///////
Future posts will explore each of these sources in more detail.
Thursday, May 21, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 5 of a series of posts
"As a child,
my number one best friend was the librarian in my grade
school. I actually believed all those
books belonged to her." -- Erma Bombeck, American humorist and
columnist, 1927-1996
A final step you might consider before committing cash money to buy a book is to borrow it from a library that owns it, and then reading it to see whether a purchase makes sense for your organization.
There are several steps to the process of borrowing a book …
Find out which libraries own the title
Borrow the book, if you have borrowing privileges with the identified library, OR, failing this …
Submit an ILL-Interlibrary Loan request to borrow the book via a library with which you do have borrowing privileges
TIP #1: Search the title of interest on WorldCat to identify libraries that own the book. You can search WorldCat directly (www.worldcat.org ) or you can Google® as in the following example …
Google Search String: worldcat Laboratory Design Handbook crawley cooper
On the resulting WorldCat screen, click on the title’s hyperlink. Then click on the hyperlink labeled Borrow/Obtain a copy, located in the bottom right corner. This will bring up a list of libraries that own the book, beginning with those located nearest to you. For example, since I am Houston based, one of the libraries on the list is the University of St. Thomas. Another is Rice University.
Since I do not have borrowing privileges at either library, my next move is to contact Houston Public Library (HPL), where I do have borrowing privileges. While HPL does not own the book, I can initiate an Interlibrary Loan request, whereby HPL requests the book on my behalf. Once HPL identifies a library willing to lend the book, HPL will contact me. I will then have, typically, two weeks to examine the book, enough time to determine whether to purchase it.
TIP #2: Contact your friendly librarian to initiate an Interlibrary Loan request.
The librarian may be at your public library, or, if you are affiliated with an academic institution, you can contact the librarian at that institution.
A final step you might consider before committing cash money to buy a book is to borrow it from a library that owns it, and then reading it to see whether a purchase makes sense for your organization.
There are several steps to the process of borrowing a book …
Find out which libraries own the title
Borrow the book, if you have borrowing privileges with the identified library, OR, failing this …
Submit an ILL-Interlibrary Loan request to borrow the book via a library with which you do have borrowing privileges
TIP #1: Search the title of interest on WorldCat to identify libraries that own the book. You can search WorldCat directly (www.worldcat.org ) or you can Google® as in the following example …
Google Search String: worldcat Laboratory Design Handbook crawley cooper
On the resulting WorldCat screen, click on the title’s hyperlink. Then click on the hyperlink labeled Borrow/Obtain a copy, located in the bottom right corner. This will bring up a list of libraries that own the book, beginning with those located nearest to you. For example, since I am Houston based, one of the libraries on the list is the University of St. Thomas. Another is Rice University.
Since I do not have borrowing privileges at either library, my next move is to contact Houston Public Library (HPL), where I do have borrowing privileges. While HPL does not own the book, I can initiate an Interlibrary Loan request, whereby HPL requests the book on my behalf. Once HPL identifies a library willing to lend the book, HPL will contact me. I will then have, typically, two weeks to examine the book, enough time to determine whether to purchase it.
TIP #2: Contact your friendly librarian to initiate an Interlibrary Loan request.
The librarian may be at your public library, or, if you are affiliated with an academic institution, you can contact the librarian at that institution.
Thursday, May 14, 2015
How to design a lab: Part 4 of a series of posts
“One cannot review a bad book without showing off.” -- W. H. Auden
(English born American Poet, Dramatist and Editor, 1907-1973)
Nothing beats a good review when it comes to deciding whether to buy a book. Unfortunately, finding a review of any kind is rare. We found a review of only one of the books on our list.
TIP #1: Google each title for reviews
For example, Googling for REVIEW OF Guidelines for Laboratory Design: Health, Safety, and Environmental Considerations, 4th Edition (2013) results in the following …
///////
REVIEW OF Guidelines for Laboratory Design: Health, Safety, and Environmental Considerations, 4th Edition (2013)
Louis J. DiBerardinis, Janet S. Baum, Melvin W. First, Gari T. Gatwood, Anand K. Seth
“In summary, this edition of the book addresses a broad spectrum of end users including administrators, researchers, instructors, engineers, and environment health officers. The book is a useful comprehensive reference for academic institutions, but perhaps not for individual instructors.” (Journal of Chemical Education, 1 January 2014)
Read the full review at: http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tarig_Higazi/publication/261323273_Review_of_Guidelines_for_Laboratory_Design_Health_Safety_and_Environmental_Considerations_4th_Edition/links/0f317533dc39c61718000000.pdf
///////
Once you have gathered as much information as you can for each title, it can be helpful to tabulate the data.
TIP #2: Create a table showing which titles have reviews and full text selections, as well as the number of times each title has been cited. For example …
TIP #3: Follow the Desulfurization Blog (www.desulf.blogspot.com) for a continuing stream of tips and tricks on how to maximize your online research effectiveness.
Nothing beats a good review when it comes to deciding whether to buy a book. Unfortunately, finding a review of any kind is rare. We found a review of only one of the books on our list.
TIP #1: Google each title for reviews
For example, Googling for REVIEW OF Guidelines for Laboratory Design: Health, Safety, and Environmental Considerations, 4th Edition (2013) results in the following …
///////
REVIEW OF Guidelines for Laboratory Design: Health, Safety, and Environmental Considerations, 4th Edition (2013)
Louis J. DiBerardinis, Janet S. Baum, Melvin W. First, Gari T. Gatwood, Anand K. Seth
“In summary, this edition of the book addresses a broad spectrum of end users including administrators, researchers, instructors, engineers, and environment health officers. The book is a useful comprehensive reference for academic institutions, but perhaps not for individual instructors.” (Journal of Chemical Education, 1 January 2014)
Read the full review at: http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Tarig_Higazi/publication/261323273_Review_of_Guidelines_for_Laboratory_Design_Health_Safety_and_Environmental_Considerations_4th_Edition/links/0f317533dc39c61718000000.pdf
///////
Once you have gathered as much information as you can for each title, it can be helpful to tabulate the data.
TIP #2: Create a table showing which titles have reviews and full text selections, as well as the number of times each title has been cited. For example …
|
BOOK
TITLE
|
No.
of Cites (Google Scholar)
|
Review?
|
Full
Text Selections?
(Google Books) |
Year
|
Author(s)
|
|
Laboratory
Design Guide
|
15
|
Y
|
Y
|
2004
|
Brian
Griffin
|
|
Laboratories:
A Guide to Master Planning, Programming, Procurement, and Design
|
5
|
N
|
Y
|
2001
|
Fernand
Dahan
|
|
Guidelines
for Laboratory Design: Health, Safety, and Environmental Considerations
|
0
|
Y
|
Y
|
2013
|
Louis
J. DiBerardinis, Janet S. Baum, Melvin W. First, Gari T. Gatwood, and Anand
K. Seth
|
|
The
Sustainable Laboratory Handbook: Design, Equipment, Operation
|
0
|
N
|
Y
|
2015
|
Egbert
Dittrich
|
|
Sustainable
Design of Research Laboratories: Planning, Design, and Operation
|
2
|
N
|
Y
|
2010
|
Kling
Stubbins
|
|
Laboratory
Design, Construction, and Renovation: Participants, Process, and Product
|
2
|
N
|
Y
|
2000
|
Comm.
on Design, Construction and Renov. and Board on Chemical Sciences and
Technology
|
|
Building
Type Basics for Research Laboratories
|
9
|
N
|
Y
|
2008
|
Daniel
D. Watch and Stephen A. Kliment
|
|
Laboratory
Design Handbook
|
13
|
N
|
Y
|
1994
|
E.
Crawley Cooper
|
|
Laboratory
Design: Establishing the Facility and Management Structure
|
0
|
N
|
N
|
2010
|
Scott
V. W. Sutton
|
TIP #3: Follow the Desulfurization Blog (www.desulf.blogspot.com) for a continuing stream of tips and tricks on how to maximize your online research effectiveness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)