Posted by
Nuno Moreno on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Re-Using-a-mirror-for-axial-resolution-testing-tp6619710p7581079.html
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy*****
Hi,
we just refurbished the air conditioning in our imaging facility. You should consider:
. Room pressurized to avoid dust to get in
. Air return as close as possible to the floor (to take the dust out)
. Hepa filtering (H13 minimum)
. Have the sensor close to the microscope and not in the pipeline
. Air outlet that spreads as much as possible
. Humidity control
...and very important do not have units inside, just air pipping
I do think that people don't pay attention to it and put millions in a room with poor filtering and other bad environment conditions. This that can degrade optical components faster and make you cleaning filters (and others) more often. Cleaning is always a risk.
Best,
Nuno Moreno, PhD
Instituto Gulbenkian de Ciência
http://lnkd.in/6VXcrMOn Oct 8, 2013, at 8:51 AM, Csúcs Gábor wrote:
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy> *****
>
> Dear All,
>
> Not a very scientific (though who knows) but still an important (in terms
> of comfort) question about the climatization of microscopy rooms. We are
> just in the middle of discussions about the arrangement of our new
> microscopy rooms. Most of the things are clear, however the planning team
> suggested a solution for the climatization that is new to me and I wanted
> to enquire whether anyone of you had experience with similar systems. In
> the "conventional" arrangement the cold air comes in somewhere at the
> ceiling and I think there is a general consensus that it is better if it
> is well distributed and not simply blown in into one direction. Our
> planning team however suggests a new solution, where the cold air would be
> blown in (through some canvas tubes) close to the bottom/floor. The warm
> air (that goes anyway upward) is sucked at the ceiling. According to them,
> although this systems creates a height-dependent temperature gradient
> (cold bottom, stable 22 C at the microscope level and warmer at the
> ceiling) but with this one can avoid the continuous mixing/turbulence
> where both the blowing in and the sucking away happens on the ceiling
> (conventional solution). Now, in theory this sounds good but we are
> somewhat skeptical how well this system works in practice and what the
> users say if their feet has colder (approx. 16-18 C) temperatures then
> their body. In a few weeks we will have the opportunity to check a similar
> installation, but I'd really appreciate if you could share your
> experiences with us. Obviously this is a important decision for us so any
> feedback is welcome.
>
> Thanks Gabor