by Jessica Drinnon
Whether the instrument has been in service for many years or you just managed to purchase a gently used or refurbished instrument, considerable complications arise when you are notified that the manufacturer or calibration provider no longer offers calibration service for your instrument. What is even more distressing is reaching out to numerous additional calibration providers and receiving a similar response. Either these providers never had the capability or they have also phased out calibration service for your instrument. The decision to replace the instrument with the newest model is not an easy one to make. Where does the lab go from here? The financial impact is only one of the many challenges that arise in this situation. This presentation will discuss the pros and cons of replacing the instrument with the latest and greatest model, additional options for replacement, explore the various directions a lab may take to extend the life of the existing “oldie but goodie” instrument, and best practices for obsolescence planning.
The interest in this topic is driven by a recent experience in which my team and I began to explore other options when the lead time for an instrument we purchased new from the manufacturer continued to extend out from 8 to 15 months. The older version of the instrument was almost identical to the current model and the lead time was only about 3-4 weeks compared to waiting another year. In that moment the risk seemed worth the reward and also, we had an approved subcontractor who could provide the calibration. The PO that was issued to the manufacturer for the new instrument was cancelled and we proceeded to purchase the older model from a reputable vendor of refurbished instruments. A few months later I was informed that the manufacturer and service provider which performed the initial calibration was ending all service for that particular model, including both maintenance and calibration.
A key lesson learned from our experience is that performing research on the service life of the new (or used) instrument is a critical question at the time of purchase. Ask how long the model has been in production and if the manufacturer has plans to phase it out. What is the expected service life for the old models that the manufacturer supports? Ensure that the manufacturer or calibration provider has the capability to provide the level of calibration service that is required. If it is an option, subscribe to updates from the manufacturer or calibration provider to be notified about plans to end repair or calibration services.
Replacing the Instrument
New Replacement
Arguably the most straight forward solution is to purchase the new model and retire the obsolete model. Along the same lines of purchasing the exact replacement model, you may also consider comparable models from other manufacturers. The obvious down side to purchasing a brand new instrument is the cost, but if the organization is able to afford to go this route there will still be significant impacts on the organization. Lead time from the manufacturer and implementing the new instrument in to the lab once it is received may result in down time. Personnel will require training and it will be necessary to update and review procedures, work instructions, and measurement uncertainties (just to name a few). The positives of purchasing a new model is warranty coverage for a period of time and the opportunity to purchase an extended warranty or service plan. Additionally, the manufacturer or vendor may offer training for personnel and should be able to provide dependable technical support. The most significant pro for purchasing the new model is receiving calibration and maintenance services from the manufacturer or calibration provider for many years to come which is conducive to a long and healthy instrument life.
To help offset the cost impact, ask the manufacturer about trade-in options and look in to the market for selling the retired model.
Used Replacement
Purchasing another older instrument model may seem counterproductive on its face but is worth consideration for operating within a budget. A used instrument that has been well-maintained, and includes detailed documentation of the service records is hard to find in the used market. If one is able to be found, and the service history shows that the instrument is well maintained and taken care of, this option can be just as good as, if not better than purchasing a new instrument.
There may be similar models from different manufacturers which have been phased out but are still eligible for calibration services and perhaps even maintenance and repair (for the time being) from the manufacturer or calibration provider. Also, there may be used and refurbished options available for the new replacement model if it has been on the market for a reasonable amount of time.
When searching for this type of replacement, Ebay (or a similar marketplace listing) is tempting but purchasing from a trusted vendor of used and refurbished instruments provides the most security. It is common for reputable resale vendors to include a limited warranty and they will accept returns if there are any problems.
Often, the case is that service records are not available on used instrumentation, regardless of the source. Effective lead times and total cost consideration should include the time and cost for obtaining a trusted calibration on the used replacement instrument. As is the case with used instrumentation, the history and care condition will be unknown, and the first step is to establish trust in that device. Should the device not pass an inspection and initial calibration, an evaluation must be performed and a quick decision made whether a maintenance / warranty fix is justified, or if the instrument should simply be returned and another item / vendor sought out. The time of this calibration should be considered when evaluating the vendors warranty and return period. The down sides of purchasing another older unit are similar to purchasing a new unit where impacts to production are concerned but lead time to receive the instrument is likely to be much less than a brand new instrument from the manufacturer. Time will still need to be allotted for implementing the instrument in to the lab once received. In addition, planning for obsolescence will be very critical and it is very important to find out if there are plans to phase services out in the near future before making the purchase. The up side is most definitely the cost savings and this may make up for any of the down sides, depending on the size and budget of your organization.
Rental Replacement
Renting the new model rather than purchasing a replacement is only viable in circumstances where the instrument use is very limited, the required make and model is available for rent, and the organization can forecast well in advance for when it will be needed. The benefit of this solution is the cost savings and little to no down time. A few things to consider, though, is ensuring a rental instrument will not fall outside of any requirements which the lab must adhere to. If the instrument in question is not used frequently or is only used at particular times of the year, renting the new model could be a solution that is cost effective and limits down time. Also, it is important to ensure that a rental instrument will not conflict with any organizational or regulatory requirements.
Assuming that the business case for renting an instrument makes more sense than a purchase – either for short term or infrequent use, you must be able to validate the quality of the instrument so that you can stand behind the results. Note that the level of detail required for this rental instrument may depend on the quality of the instrument, the use case of the instrument, as well as the quality and reputation of the vendor.
Seek additional information from the vendor to obtain confidence in the rental instrument. For example, what is the accuracy of the instrument as compared to the intended use? If the rental instrument is 10x more accurate than the use case, and/or the use case is for informational (non-critical) measurement this may be all the confidence that is necessary. If the instrument is going to be of high importance (i.e. used to calibrate other instrumentation, or a critical measurement), then additional information may be warranted. Is the instrument calibrated? What is the quality of the calibration (accredited or NIST traceable)? What is the standard that the rental instrument is calibrated against? How recent was the instrument calibrated, and was it rented by another customer between that calibration and now? If so, was a validation check-out performed?
Due to the quality requirements on the rental instrument, there can be a high risk of availability of a rental unit that meets the accuracy and pedigree requirements. This risk must be balanced with the other options for purchase and availability when deciding the path forward.
Maintaining the Legacy Instrument
Maintaining the legacy instrument and keeping it in service has many benefits. This may also be the lowest cost option for the lab to consider. However, this can also be the most difficult path forward, as the risk of instrument failure must be mitigated, and the instrument condition monitored closely.
Service Providers
The optimal solution for maintaining a legacy instrument is to find a reputable service provider who specializes in the repair, refurbishment, or calibration of older instruments. Do not hesitate to reach out to the manufacturer and your existing subcontractors for leads. Research companies who sell used and refurbished equipment. Often, these companies are excellent resources for repair services. They may offer calibration services as well but if they do not, it is very likely that they may have recommendations for service providers who can. While keeping the legacy instrument calibrated may be the primary concern in the present, being aware of who can repair the instrument is critical for keeping the instrument in service.
In House Capability
While far from the least complicated or expensive, the option to add in house calibration capability for the legacy instrument has potential for long term viability. Initially, setting your lab up to calibrate the instrument in house will require significant monetary and personnel resources. Researching how to perform the calibration, what new instruments are required, training of personnel, creating new procedures and work instructions, and the cost of purchasing the instruments and accessories can feel like an overwhelming amount of work to take on. If considering to go this direction, one could look at purchasing used or refurbished instruments as previously discussed, rather than purchasing new instruments from the manufacturer. One of the glaring problems with taking this approach, aside from the financial investment, is the time it will take to acquire the necessary equipment and train personnel. Once the time and money has been invested, calibrating the instrument internally will greatly reduce down time because you are not having to send it out to another provider for service. This eliminates time in transit, the risk of damage during transit or while in the care of the service provider, and finding yourself at the mercy of the service provider’s lead time. Also, growing internal capability has the potential for new business and increased revenue.
The down side to this option is that the new/used instrumentation that is necessary to add to the lab and the lab capability must also be maintained, calibrated, and validated. Essentially, the full replacement option check list discussed herein must be considered in order to have an overall process and maintenance program for each of the additional instrumentation necessary to perform the in-house capability. Additionally, just adding in house calibration capability for the older equipment may be a short term solution if repair and maintenance of the older equipment cannot also be performed in-house, or a reputable vendor cannot be found for this component.
Interlab Collaboration
For many laboratories, developing and maintaining in-house capability is not achievable due to limited finances, expertise, and equipment. A way to overcome this is to pool resources with other laboratories to help each other achieve their goals, and find mutual benefit with each maintaining their respective instrumentation.
This approach provides access to a broader range of calibration standards and technicians and experts working in different labs. Not only is this beneficial financially by reducing or eliminating the cost of purchasing new equipment, but it is also an excellent opportunity to diversify the skills and knowledge of lab personnel.
For this solution to be effective, objectives and roles need to be clearly defined. Specific roles and responsibilities for each participating lab should also be defined to ensure accountability and efficiency. A formal agreement with terms, conditions, and expectations should be agreed upon by all parties involved. Implementing this type of program will require excellent communication, regular reviews, schedule coordination, and well maintained records between all participating labs.
The Interim
Regardless of which solution is the best fit for your organization, there will be a period of time in which the solution is being implemented and this could have an impact production. A decision must be made on how best to manage this gap.
Extending the calibration interval of the existing instrument is a relatively simple way to keep production moving during implementation as long as the instrument is not in need of repair in addition to calibration. Contact your service provider, industry peers, and accrediting body for guidance and refer to your accrediting body concerning any forms or notifications that are required to ensure the lab is not operating outside compliance. When extending the calibration of an instrument it is extremely beneficial to perform cross calibrations with other instruments or perform test with artifacts. Ensure all instruments or artifacts used for these calibrations and tests are calibrated on a regular basis by an ISO/IEC 17025 Accredited service provider.
If your organization is implementing a solution that involved the purchase of new or used instruments, ask the vendor about the availability of a regularly calibrated loaner or demo instrument to cover the lead time. If this is not an option, research availability of a rental instrument.
Depending on the solution to be implemented and condition of the existing instrument, outsourcing any work that is to be performed could be the best route to take to avoid negatively impacting production.
Obsolescence Planning
Implementing an obsolescence plan for managing the lifecycle of instruments and taking a preventative approach is much more preferable to being caught off guard. There is no one size fits all approach to managing the lifecycle of instruments. The plan will need to be tailored to fit the specific lab’s need and budget.
Conduct regular lifecycle assessments by reviewing the date of purchase, how often the instrument is used, and associated calibration, maintenance, and monitoring records. This will help identify instruments that have been in service for a long period of time, instruments with increased repair or adjustment needs, and instruments that are subject to more wear and tear.
Risk management is critical to creating a solid obsolescence plan. Evaluating the risks associated with continued use of unsupported instruments, including potential downtime impacts, enables organizations to prioritize their obsolescence management efforts.
Again, relationships with service providers will be key in planning for obsolescence. Stay informed about product lifecycle changes and new product releases. Engaging with suppliers early can provide insights into their end-of-life plans for specific instruments, enabling organizations to plan accordingly.
A continuous monitoring system allows organizations to track the performance and support status of all instruments. This data-driven approach enables informed decision-making about maintenance, upgrades, and replacements, ensuring the continued reliability of legacy instruments.
Conclusion
Owning and maintaining instruments that are no longer serviced by the manufacturer or trusted calibration provider presents significant challenges. However, by implementing a strategic approach that includes engaging service providers and industry peers, developing in-house expertise, and implementing comprehensive obsolescence planning, organizations can overcome these challenges. These strategies ensure the continued functionality and reliability of legacy instruments, allowing organizations to maximize their investments and maintain operational efficiency. With proactive planning and resource management, the obstacles posed by unsupported instruments can be transformed into opportunities for innovation and resilience.