NetNotes
molecules in the samples, and not labile, then you should be OK. But check this with a positive control! Low vacuum may help with beam heating, but even at really low
vacuum, like 500 Pa or higher, it’s still a vacuum. So, I doubt it will help much. You can do EDS analysis in low vacuum, just not map- ping. Tere’s a more-or-less big beam skirt (Dale Newbury has writ- ten good articles on this). Phil Oshel
oshel1pe@cmich.edu
Confocal Microscope Lifetime Confocal Microscopy Listserver I am worried that high use of over 4000hrs/year that started two
years ago, and likely will continue, will shorten the useful lifetime of our confocal microscope (in terms of service years or hours). I expect a properly maintained confocal to last about 10 years or 20,000 hrs. Please share your experience indicating how many hours or years of usage a core facility can expect from a heavily used confocal micro- scope and when they should start planning to replace an instrument. Arvydas Matiukas
matiukaa@upstate.edu
We have one microscope, which aſter 11 years and about 14,000
hours had a lot of repairs. It is still going strong now aſter 13 years and a higher workload. With 4000 hours/year, a maintenance contract would make sense, as you will go through a lot of lasers which otherwise will be costly to replace. Other movable parts like the scanner and even electronics like AOTF controllers or power supplies also seem to fail aſter some years. But when replacing all these parts (with considerable downtime) it should be possible to run a system with high workload for 15 years or longer. You might want to get a new set of objectives though. Te question is, if you really want to wait so long to replace it, as technology constantly improves. Especially detectors and electronics will be better for a new microscope and the users will miss out on these improvements. One point to consider is that aſter a microscope model has gone out of production, there will be only a limited time when spare parts and maintenance contracts will be available, maybe 6–10 years. With product cycles becoming shorter, we might not even be able to run a microscope for 10 years, especially when it was bought at the end of its cycle. Andreas Bruckbauer
a.bruckbauer@
imperial.ac.uk
We’ve judged the lifetime of our confocals by how long the
manufacturer is willing to repair it. Our old confocal (purchased in 2000) kept going for 14 years, but eventually could no longer be repaired. In the interim, our new confocal (purchased in 2012) had way more features and of course people switched to it. We managed to convince the powers that be that a maintenance contract was essential, and this has been very worthwhile with a couple of lasers already replaced, and we can call the engineers any time for repairs or to realign components, etc. We can expect this instrument to be serviced by the manufacturer up to about 2024. However, the writ- ing is on the wall so we have to start lobbying for a new instrument now because it takes 2–3 years for powers that be to fund instru- ments, then at least a further year before the tenders are complete and an instrument is purchased. I know of one facility that kept at least one quite ancient and highly used confocal going for 20 years before mothballing it. Tat’s how we operate. I hope this helps a bit. Tose rules of thumb about confocal lifetime are very rubbery, some confocals are great and go a long time without needing much attention, but some are not so great. Rosemary White rosemary.
white@anu.edu.au
Your question is always a very good one for many core facilities and institutes with point scanning confocals. It seems on occasion
2020 March •
www.microscopy-today.com
the readiness, capability or possibilities for vendors to maintain a cer- tain older generation system in good functional state conflicts with the motivation to promote the sales of new ones with more goodies. Based on my information and/or experience there is a significant pro- portion of users who will use a confocal even when they would be well off with a good wide-field and/or deconvolution system. Te reasons for this are too many fold to get into details (availability, ignorance, unawareness, politics), but surely cutting the proportion of samples that would not need a confocal to minimum would save a lot of work- ing hours for your lasers. Te politics of this are in itself pretty inter- esting as in particular in high ranking prestige institutes the users are urged to use the best possible equipment instead of the most suitable. It is surely more lucrative for a PI in a meeting to mention the data was recorded with a million dollar confocal of latest design than on a 20 year old widefield microscope. Tis is part of the corporate profile where no institute wants to be poorer than the other one. So, de facto, one reason for this waste of resources can be an egotistical one. Mika Ruonala
mika@icit.bio
Hardware concerns have already been addressed by others, so
I’ll bring up the soſtware side of 10-year-old confocals in a core facil- ity. With Windows 7 losing support in January 2020, our IT depart- ment is planning on isolating any computers from the {intra, inter} net. While our FV1000s still function, the following will be disrupted 1. Stratocore, our usage tracking soſtware for cost recovery, needs internet access and 2. Images acquired on our scopes get robocopied to network attached storage for ease of access and to discourage flash drive usage. We also inquired how much it would be to get our Nikon A1R to a Windows 10 system. Te giga channel board was ∼$6,000 by itself. Will Giang
william.giang@
emory.edu
I would like to reiterate “computers” because it is the single big-
gest problem. As individual parts wear out, they may be replaced. We have shutters and filter wheels and lenses dating back to circa 2000 that still work with serial control (even aſter the wires have got- ten sticky), but we have a few cameras (Cooke PCO, Photometrics, Hamamatsu) that are great, but collecting dust because when the computers die, that’s it, no slots or drivers for new computers. I’ve seen high end confocals decommissioned because of computer hard- ware and operating system obsolescence. Yes, the newer ones are bet- ter, but as workhorse instruments, it would be great if we could keep the older ones running. (If I’m not mistaken, the real time controller for the Zeiss 710 and 880 are old technology that Zeiss wisely keeps alive.) To confirm other replies: the lifetime of high end confocals is defined by the manufacturer’s willingness to provide service and by the human interface, a.k.a. computer. Michael Cammer Michael.
Cammer@med.nyu.edu
I agree with what has been said thus far. Te “brass and glass”
components don’t really wear much in my experience. Te lifetime of a confocal system is more importantly related to the computer technology. A 7-year-old confocal system will run as new if prop- erly maintained but the hardware/soſtware of the computer will be outdated. If you want to keep your core on the cutting edge you should stay abreast of the computer technology and not just the microscope itself. Of course the lasers do have a specific lifetime range and may need to be replaced. Moreover the glass, such as main-beam-splitter etc., will take abuse from constant laser bom- bardment. Te other pertinent measure of age, as already stated, is the willingness of the selling company to support and repair the instrument. Tere are third-party companies that will maintain old systems, but that indicates that the instrument is getting to an
65
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76
