Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities (2006) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
3 Instrumentation and Universities
3 Instrumentation and Universities
Pages 41-62
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 41... ...
3 Instrumentation and Universities I nstruments reside in many settings, including universities, industrial labora tories, national laboratories, and independent research institutions. The present committee, in accordance with its charge, is interested primarily in federally funded instrumentation in academic institutions.
|
From page 42... ...
· Operation and maintenance: The costs associated with continual upkeep of the instrument, which may include continuing siting costs, energy costs, service contracts, and repair costs. · PhD-level technical research support staff: The costs associated with the employment of staff to operate the instrument and assist researchers.
|
From page 43... ...
Only when universities have found creative solutions to the problem of user fees have major instrument resources remained available for research.
|
From page 44... ...
Such instruments can be acquired as part of a research grant or with startup funds provided by the institu tion when a researcher sets up a laboratory. Instrumentation with capital cost beyond $50,000 usually requires the involve ment of the university administration.
|
From page 45... ...
Third, as the focus of research, especially in engineering and the life sciences, has shifted to the microscopic level, the demand for sophisticated instrumentation Costs and Requirements Associated with an 800-MHz NMR with Cryoprobe · Part of a facility housing instrumentation with total capital costs of $5 million · Capital cost: $1.9 million · Siting cost: o New construction (not including environmental infrastructure) : $900,000 o Cost of installation: $60,000 · Annual cost of operation (excluding support staff)
|
From page 46... ...
Source: David Vander Velde Director University of Kansas NMR Laboratory Response to Committee Survey on Advanced Research Instrumentation "Unfortunately, public institutions have been seeing a downward trend in funding from the State, and the first place that is cut is funds for instrumentation. It would also be advantageous if NIH comes up with another instrumentation grant to cover bundled instruments (i.e.
|
From page 47... ...
This lack of access to ARIF can severely hamper research and teaching activities. Operation and Maintenance Costs Operation and maintenance of ARIF require commitments for service con tracts, space and utilities, and technical and scientific support staff.
|
From page 48... ...
.3 The facilities had from one to thirty staff; 30% had one to five staff. Figure 3-2 shows how annual operation cost can accumulate each year to be comparable to the initial capital cost of the instrument, with the example of an average field emission transmission electron microscope.4 The costs shown ex clude support staff and refer only to an annual service contract with the instru ment manufacturer.
|
From page 49... ...
Source: National Academies, Board on Physics and Astronomy, Midsize Facilities: The Infrastructure for Materials Research, 2006. Rising Costs of Maintenance $1,400,000 $1,200,000 Capital Cost Cumulative Maintenance Cost $1,000,000 $800,000 Cost $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Year FIGURE 3-2 Accumulation of operating costs for a transmission electron microscope.
|
From page 50... ...
The cost of equipment down time scales roughly with the capital cost, so major research instrumentation requires dedicated technical research support staff for efficient operation. For many types of ARIF, it is essential that a skilled PhD-level researcher be in charge because of the instrumentation's high cost and sophistication.
|
From page 51... ...
Furthermore, the support staff have a more limited role and less engagement with other investigators throughout the institution. It has been suggested that one way to remedy the situation is to create more centralized instrumentation resources by placing them under a centralized office, "The purchase of expensive instrumentation must recognize the long-term commitment that is incurred in staffing the facility with adequately skilled opera tors.
|
From page 52... ...
Possible disadvantages are that the office of research does not control space, does not have adequate budget control, does not have adequate staff to oversee technical staff, does not have the expertise, and does not have the interest. Further more, such centralization might be resisted by the dominant users who would have first-line responsibility and interest in ensuring the success of the facilities (their research success depends on it)
|
From page 53... ...
In some cases, those who use an instrument that is not part of their own laboratory may be required to pay user fees; funds to pay user fees may be part of a federal grant that supports the research being conducted. For example, the federal government might be willing to support the capital cost of an instrument, but not its operation and maintenance costs.
|
From page 54... ...
7Comments of Columbia University to National Science and Technology Council Research Busi ness Models Subcommittee.
|
From page 55... ...
The Research Business Models subcommittee of the Office of Science and Technology Policy's National Science and Technology Council provides a venue for such issues to be discussed by academic institution leaders, researchers and federal research agencies, although policies exclude consideration of financial changes to the current system.
|
From page 56... ...
A full list of the instruments and facilities reported can be found in Appendix C 35 30 25 20 Institutions of 15 10 Number 5 0 0 1 2 3 4 Number of ARIF FIGURE 3-3 Number of ARIF reported by institutional survey respondents.
|
From page 57... ...
If all institutions and ARIF are totaled, host institutions were also the largest contributors of support for the initial capital cost for ARIF. Figure 3-7 shows the distribution of sources of support for ARIF.
|
From page 58... ...
12 10 8 ARIF of 6 4 Number 2 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 Not Specified Number of Reported Funding Sources FIGURE 3-6 Number of funding sources specified. Source: Committee Survey on Advanced Research Instrumentation.
|
From page 59... ...
For example, institu tions contributed to the capital costs of 48% of the ARIF reported. Source: Committee Survey on Advanced Research Instrumentation.
|
From page 60... ...
F3-3: Obtaining full support for ARIF can be challenging, because the costs involved include not only capital cost but costs of construction, development, siting, operation, maintenance, PhD-level technical research support staff, upgrading, and decommissioning. As a result, internal academic institution
|
From page 61... ...
F3-4: Few academic institutions have well-defined policies or systematic provi sions for career paths for PhD-level technical research support staff. A lack of administrative support places a burden on individual faculty members to locate resources for salaries.
|
From page 62... ...
R3-4: Academic institutions should continue to discuss the issue of federal agency support for operation and maintenance costs for instruments with the Research Business Models Subcommittee of the Office of Science and Technology Policy's National Science and Technology Council.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.