Choosing benchtop analysers by the decision each supports: what a blood chemistry analyzer has to demonstrate in calibration and quality control before its numbers can inform anything, where titrators and an autotitrator replace judgement with a recorded endpoint, what a toc analyser and an online toc analyzer measure continuously that a grab sample cannot, how a nano spectrophotometer, a compact spectrophotometer and a benchtop spectrophotometer differ in path length and in sample volume rather than in optics, what the colorimeter vs spectrophotometer question turns on, where a fluorescence spectrometer answers a different question again, and what a liquid scintillation counter price, a tablet counting machine and a universal material testing machine each imply in service and in space

Specifying a benchtop analyser

1. Ask what decision the number supports. A trend indication and a release decision need very different levels of control. Deciding this first determines whether quality control material, traceable calibration and a records requirement apply.
2. Confirm quality control material exists. An analyser without appropriate control material cannot demonstrate it is working. Availability and cost of that material is a running cost and occasionally the reason an instrument is impractical.
3. Match path length and volume to the sample. Micro volume instruments trade path length for sample size and behave differently on turbid or highly absorbing samples. A cuvette instrument is more forgiving and needs more material.
4. Choose absorbance, colour or fluorescence deliberately. A colorimeter reads defined wavelengths for a defined chemistry; a spectrophotometer scans; a fluorimeter reports emission and is far more sensitive for suitable analytes. They are not substitutes.
5. Cost service, space and waste. Counting, tablet handling and materials testing instruments each need space, service and a waste or disposal route. Those costs are frequently larger than the instrument for the smaller units.
6. Keep the method with the result. Instrument, method, calibration date and control result alongside the number. Without them the value cannot be compared to one taken next month.

Quality control is what makes it a measurement

The difference between an instrument that produces numbers and one that produces evidence is a control sample of known value, run regularly and charted. It detects drift before the drift affects a decision.

Choose instruments for which suitable control material exists, and build the control run into the routine rather than into an annual calibration.

Continuous and grab measurements differ

An online analyser sees the process continuously and catches excursions a grab sample misses; a laboratory measurement is more accurate on the sample it received. They are complementary and frequently disagree for good reasons.

Where both exist, define which is the reporting value and use the other as the early warning.

Common questions

Colorimeter or spectrophotometer?

A colorimeter measures at fixed wavelengths for defined chemistries and is cheap and robust. A spectrophotometer scans and suits method development and unknown samples. Choose by whether the wavelengths are fixed.

Are micro volume instruments accurate?

Within their assumptions, yes, and they are sensitive to turbidity, bubbles and surface tension because the path length is formed by the drop. For difficult samples a cuvette instrument is more reliable.

What makes a small analyser usable for decisions?

Traceable calibration, available quality control material run on a schedule, and a record that ties the result to the method and the calibration state. Without those it is an indicator rather than a measurement.

Browse by service class

• Compare Gene synthesis on advertised prices