• Opal Financial Group
  • Technology Networks

Benchtop Automation Trends 2013

Date Published: January 2013
Format: PDF
Pages: 65
Publisher: HTStec
Product Code: HTS201301
Availability: In Stock
Price: $2,500.00
Qty:     - OR -   Add to Wish List
Add to Compare

Benchtop Automation Trends 2013

  •  This market report summarizes the results of HTStec’s industry-wide global web-based benchmarking survey on small-scale or benchtop automation carried out in January 2013.
  •  The survey was initiated as part of HTStec’s tracking of emerging life science marketplaces. The questionnaire was compiled by HTStec to meet the needs, specific requirements and interests of the benchtop automation and lab robotics vendor community. The survey also sought to update and considerably extend HTStec’s previous report on the subject published in June 2011.
  • The main objectives of this global benchmarking study were to gain a better understanding of the current interest in and future deployment of benchtop automated systems. This included requirements for automated pipettors/dispensers, grippers/movers, and scheduling software. Equal emphasis was given to soliciting opinion from all organisations types, with no geographic bias in the distribution of persons contacted.
  •  The survey looked at the following aspects of benchtop automation as practiced today (2013) and in a few cases as predicted for the future (2015): familiarity and current use of automation; main end-users of benchtop automation; types of benchtop automation already deployed and those of most interest for future deployment; what is driving consideration of benchtop automation; preferred access to benchtop automation; key to making benchtop automation fully accessible and useful to the majority of potential end-users; interest in potential applications of a benchtop automation system (i.e. sample prep; PCR & next-gen sequencing (NGS); liquid dispensing; ELISA workflow; aspects of cell maintenance; and cell-based assays); interest in accessing different types of automated liquid handling platforms; level of operational capacity needed from benchtop automation; batches sizes for tubes and microplates used for different applications with benchtop automation; main requirements for automated benchtop pipettors/dispensers; type of vessels used on a benchtop automated pipettor/dispenser; accessories that must be options on a generic benchtop automated pipettor/dispenser; requirements for a gripper/plate mover on an automated benchtop pipettor/dispenser; additional cost respondents would you pay for an off-deck gripper/plate mover; what respondents want to automate with the gripper/stacker/ mover; dimensional restrictions for benchtop automation systems; how respondents prefer to control an automated benchtop device; preferred method of deployment for a benchtop automation solution; training expectations for benchtop automation; flexibility required in the ability to modify vendor-recommended software protocols; if workflow scheduling software is considered during the purchasing process for benchtop automation; important aspects of instrument control and scheduling software; most important factors that impact a purchasing decision; level of awareness of some examples of benchtop automated systems; annual capex budget for benchtop automation and its breakdown amongst different automation categories; most appealing vendors for future benchtop automation purchases; time frame to purchase a benchtop automation system and the reason for purchase; necessity for a demo of a benchtop automation system and at what stage in the purchasing process is a demo most needed; and any unmet needs in benchtop automation today.
  •  The main questionnaire consisted of 44 multi-choice questions and 1 open-ended question. The exact number presented to respondents depended on their interest in the specific applications areas surveyed. In addition, there were 4 questions related solely to the administration of survey.
  •  The survey collected 154 validated responses, of these 56% (87 out of 154) provided comprehensive input.
  •  Survey responses were geographically split: 39% Europe, 28% North America, 21% Asia (excluding Japan), 8% Rest of World and 4% Japan.
  •  Survey respondents were drawn from persons or groups interested in applying benchtop automation to various tasks which they mainly process manually or with limited automation today.
  •  Respondents represented 41 University, Research Institute, Not-for-Profit; 37 Pharmaceutical; 21 Medical School/Hospital/Clinic; 16 Biotech; 12 Diagnostics; 11 Other; 7 CROs; 3 Agrochemical; 2 Government/Military/ Defense; 2 Academic Screening Centers; 1 Animal Health Testing; & 1 Plant Genomics/Seed Company.
  •  Most survey respondents had a senior job role or position which was in descending order: 32 research scientists; 23 senior scientists/researchers; 19 others; 18 professor/assistant professors; 12 principal investigators; 10 section/group leaders; 10 lab managers; 7 directors; 7 department heads; 5 graduate/PhD students; 4 post-docs; 4 lab technicians; 2 automation engineers; and 1 vice president.
  •  All data was presented and analysed as the average response of ALL SURVEY RESPONDENTS. In addition, where appropriate the results were fully reanalysed after segmentation into a further 5 survey groups based on the following criteria. Familiarity and current use of automation: 1) Expert User; 2) Moderately Aware; or 3) Non-Expert User. Organisational Origin: 4) Pharma & Biotech; or 5) Academic Research.
  •  The majority of survey respondents were moderately aware of automation i.e. had some familiarity, occasionally utilize automated tools where advantageous.
  •  Middle-level lab personnel were ranked as the greatest users of benchtop automation in respondent’s lab.
  •  The type of benchtop automation most deployed to date was stand-alone automated pipettors/dispensers fed manually. The type respondents were most interested in deploying in the future was automated workstations made up of multiple processing instruments linked together by a plate mover/gripper and controlled with scheduling software.
  •  To get more reliable/reproducible data, better quality of assay results was ranked the most important driver for implementing benchtop automation.
  •  The preferred access of the majority to benchtop automation was an open generic platform (i.e. modular automated solution that can be easily adapted for future changes of automation and application requirements).
  •  Immediately obvious benefits (i.e. cost, labour savings, better quality data etc.) were ranked as the greatest influence on making benchtop automation fully accessible and useful to the majority of potential end-users.
  •  Of a list of potential application areas for benchtop automation system respondents showed greatest interest in sample prep, liquid dispensing, and qPCR & NGS.
  •  Of the sample prep applications greatest interest was for DNA extraction/purification.
  •  Of some sample prep tasks to be automated greatest interest was in extraction and isolation techniques using magnetic beads.
  •  Of the PCR and NGS applications greatest interest was for PCR assay setup and nucleic acid extraction for PCR.
  •  Of the different types of automated liquid handling platforms available greatest interest was for workstations with robotic sample processors (1-8 channels) and multi-channel dispense heads.
  •  Of the liquid dispensing applications greatest interest was for plate to plate transfers.
  •  Of dilution operations enabled greatest interest was for dilution with low volumes (<50μL).
ExeTable of Contents
Executive Summary . [2]
Table of Contents . [5]
Survey Methodology . [6]
Organisation and Response of Survey Participants . [7]
Respondent’s Geographic Origin . [8]
Respondent’s Company or Organisational Origin . [9]
Respondent’s Job Role . [10]
Respondent’s Familiarity & Current Use of Automation . [11]
Main Users of Benchtop Automation . [12]
Types of Benchtop Automation Already Deployed to Date . [13]
Drivers for Implementing Benchtop Automation . [14]
Types of Benchtop Automation Most Interested in Deploying in the Future . [15]
Preferred Access of Benchtop Automation . [16]
The Key to Making Benchtop Automation Accessible . [17]
Interest in Potential Applications for Benchtop Automation . [18]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to Sample Prep Extraction/ Purification of Analytes . [19]
Interest in Appyling Benchtop Automation to Sample Prep Tasks . [20]
Summary of Survey Findings (1) . [21]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to PCR & Next-Gen Sequencing . [23]
Interest in Different Types of Automated Liquid Handling Platforms . [24]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to Liquid Handling Processes. [25]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to Dilution Operations . [26]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to ELISA Workflow . [27]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to Aspects of Cell Maintenance . [28]
Interest in Applying Benchtop Automation to Cell-Based Assays . [29]
Operational Capacity Needed From Benchtop Automation . [30]
Typical Batch Sizes of Tubes Used in a Benchtop Automation System . [31]
Typical Batch Sizes of Microplates Used in a Benchtop Automation System . [32]
Main Liquid Handling Requirements of a Benchtop Automated Pipettor/ Dispenser (1) . [33]
Main Liquid Handling Requirements of a Benchtop Automated Pipettor/ Dispenser (2) . [34]
Type of Vessels to be Used on a Benchtop Automated Pipettor/Dispenser . [35]
Accessories Wanted on a Benchtop Automated Pipettor/Dispenser . [36]
Type of Gripper Wanted on a Benchtop Automated Pipettor/Dispenser . [37]
Additional Cost Respondents Would Pay for an Off-Deck Gripper . [38]
What Respondents Want to Automate With a Stacker/Mover/Gripper . [39]
Dimensional Restrictions for Benchtop Automation Systems. [40]
Mean Maximum Dimensional Requirements for Benchtop Automation Systems . [41]
Summary of Survey Findings (2) . [42]
How Respondents Prefer to Control an Automated Benchtop Device . [44]
Preferred Method of Deployment of a Benchtop Automation Solution . [45]
Expected Training Requirements of New Benchtop Automation . [46]
Degree of Software Flexibility Required In Modifying Vendor-Recommended Protocols . [47]
Plans to Consider Workflow Scheduling Software When Purchasing Benchtop Automation . [48]
Important Aspects of Instrument Control & Scheduling Software for Benchtop Automation . [49]
What Most Influences the Purchase of a Benchtop Automation System . [50]
Awareness of Examples of Benchtop Automated Systems . [51]
Annual 2013 Capex Budget for Benchtop Automation . [52]
Breakdown of 2013 Capex Budget for Benchtop Automation . [53]
Market Estimate for Benchtop Automation . [54]
Segmentation of Benchtop Automation Market Estimate . [55]
Breakdown of Benchtop Automation Market Estimate into Components . [56]
Most Appealing Providers of Benchtop Automation (1) . [57]
Most Appealing Providers of Benchtop Automation (2) . [58]
Interest in Purchasing a Benchtop Automation System . [59]
Need for a Demo of a Benchtop Automation System . [60]
Unmet Needs in Benchtop Automation . [61]
Summary of Survey Findings (3) . [63]