First and foremost, the basic meters and monitors used in labs by researchers are required to be accurate. Accuracy builds the reliability they need to have confidence in their experimental results. The following results were verified by a reader study performed by the editors of in September 2010.
These devices are important parts of the researchers’ work. Nearly 90% of the researchers surveyed indicated that they use their meters and monitors continuously, daily or at least several times a week. The products they’ve purchased and use are basically reliable—the researchers feel confident in their capabilities. Only 1% of the survey respondents indicated that they were dissatisfied with their existing equipment.
When experiencing problems with these devices, they found the undesirable devices to be unreliable (29% of the respondents), having high maintenance costs (18%), or inaccurate (15%). When purchasing new meters and monitors, the majority of the respondents (71%) plan to purchase products that are replacements for their existing products. A smaller number (41%) will purchase new meters and monitors that add measurement capacity to their existing devices.
Of those purchasing new products, they plan to purchase them, on average, within the next 14 months, according to survey respondents.
Devices within the meters and monitor category include one of the broadest range of instruments in the research lab, from thermometers—the largest category with nearly 80% of survey respondents indicating they use these devices in their research—to various types of analyzers: moisture (24%), oxidative stability (3%), particle (16%), process (5%), total organic carbon (11%), and trace metal analyzers (8%).
Outside of the strong accuracy characteristic noted, other major characteristics include ease of use (72% of the survey respondents), purchase cost (64%), operating cost (48%), measurement range (61%) and durability (50%). Characteristics that were found to be of minor importance include the number of channels or input (11% of the respondents), data processing capabilities and software (14% each), flexibility, portability and size (all tied for 17%), and power requirements (18%).
