How much does a DAQ cost?

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Results
• 3. Usage scenarios
• 4. Conclusion
• 5. Assumptions and calculations
•  

1. Introduction

How do you make an informed choice between several data acquisition solution options? The easiest to use? The easiest to implement? The most robust? The one offering the best customer support? The cheapest do-it-yourself purchase? There are so many critical criteria to consider, all of which seem, a priori, incomparable to each other. Which of them is most important, or perhaps the most valuable?

The good news is that it's possible to relate all these criteria to one and the same scale: their value in money.

Determining the monetary value of "simplicity" is not a natural exercise. However, completing this exercise has the power to generate a major paradigm shift, not least in terms of the value of your time and that of your team.

Following the fundamental principles of return on investment (ROI) calculation, we decided to determine the monetary value of five critical criteria to consider when choosing a measurement and DAQ solution based on all the customer exchanges we've carried out over the last 10 years. The calculations were made for a 5-year project involving 5 test stations. All other assumptions used in the calculations can be found here.

2. Results

To determine the value (net benefit) of a feature/offer, you must determine how much the consequences of not being able to benefit from it cost. This calculation is what we do for you, in detail, with no steps skipped, in the appendix.

Here are the five selection criteria for a DAQ, their annualized value (average value per year) and their cumulative value over the entire project duration, which in this case is 5 years.

Selection criteria	Annualized value (USD/year)	Total value (USD)
1. Data reliability	12,215	61,075
2. All-in-one, ready-to-use products	4,070	20,350
3. Simple, well-documented, cross-platform data integration tools	4,884	24,420
4. Solution portability	3,520	17,600
5. User-accessible calibration mechanism	1,400	7,000

The annualized value should be read as the amount of money it will cost the company per year to compensate if the criterion is not met. It is the real monetary value of a benefit (criterion) offered by the solution. The cumulative value is the total accumulated value over the life of the project.

For example, according to this table, we can expect to spend USD 61,075 on an unreliable solution over the project's lifetime. Another way of looking at this figure is, conversely, that a reliable solution saves you $61,075. Are you surprised by the magnitude of these figures? If so, you're not alone: we were too!

3. Usage scenarios

Below, we will use the results of the analysis in the context of Dracal being one of the solutions being evaluated for a project. However, the exercise can be carried out with any other solution.

Dracal's offering satisfies all 5 of the above criteria. But, like any other solution, it requires a basic investment and maintenance costs over the project's five-year life (justification of amounts here).

 

	Annualized value (in USD/année)	Total cost (over 5 years)
Purchase cost	500	2,500
Integration	74	370
Maintenance	440	2,200
TOTAL	1,014 USD/year	5,070 USD/year

 

Here are four concrete scenarios in which Dracal's offer is considered on the basis of some of the five selection criteria, depending on the context.

Scenario #1

Situation: The data in my existing solution is unreliable. What would be my annual gain by switching to a Dracal installation?

Criteria at stake: Data reliability

Annualized value: 12,215 USD/year

Annual cost of Dracal solution: 1,014 USD/year

Gain from choosing Dracal: 12,215 - 1,014 = 11,201 USD/year

Interpretation: Data that is not 100% reliable is expensive, i.e. costs 12,215 USD/year. On the other hand, it costs 1,014 USD/year to implement the Dracal solution and solve this problem. Ultimately, choosing Dracal would save the company 11,201 USD/year for years to come.

Scenario #2

Situation: I need to implement an acquisition solution. Since my budget is limited and my skills allow it, I'm considering assembling a solution using open-source "do-it-yourself" resources. Does this make financial sense?

Criteria at stake: Ready-to-use all-in-one products

Annualized value: 4,070 USD/year

Annualized Dracal cost: 1,014 USD/year

Gain from choosing Dracal: 4,070 - 1,014 = 3,056 USD/year

Interpretation: Despite appearances, a do-it-yourself solution can be up to 4X more expensive than an off-the-shelf solution like the one offered by Dracal. More often than not, choosing to assemble a solution from scratch means neglecting the value of your time, a precious and limited commodity.

Scenario #3

Situation: I'm currently evaluating a number of reliable, off-the-shelf solutions. One of them is very well known among calibration laboratories, giving me a feeling of security regarding its data quality. However, I'm not quick to find out whether it's possible to integrate the data into my system, let alone whether all operating systems are supported. I have a feeling it's going to be an arduous process... For the same reliability, what will be the benefit of choosing Dracal over this popular solution?

Benefit at stake: Simple, free, cross-platform data integration tools

Annualized value: 4,884 USD/year

Annualized Dracal cost: 1,014 USD/year

Gain from choosing Dracal: 4,884 - 1,014 = 3,870 USD/year

Interpretation: It's neither necessary nor financially worthwhile to go through the arduous process of finding documentation to integrate data into your measurement and automation project. Unless you're enjoying a game of search-and-find, the time spent searching for information on how to integrate your data is an expense that, in retrospect, is often hard to justify.

Scenario #4

Situation: Our data acquisition project does not require constant measurement throughout the year. Instead, we carry out sporadic tests in line with new product developments. We find it unnecessary to incur the cost of additional permanent floor space for sporadic testing. Some popular solutions recommended to us are bulky, and their calibration requires dealing with specialists accredited by the manufacturer. Is it worth considering implementing the Dracal solution in this context?

Situation: Solution portability + Free user calibration

Annualized value: 3,520+1,400 = 4,920 USD/year

Annualized Dracal cost: 1,014 USD/year

Gain from choosing Dracal: 4,920 - 1,014 = 3,906 USD/year

Interpretation: Choosing a fixed solution and imposing constraints on the choice of calibration laboratory will cost you 4,920 USD in annual recurring costs. In this context, opting for a portable solution that uses your existing facilities and allows you to choose your own calibration partner will save your company 3,906 USD/year.

4. Conclusion

Whether it's the acquisition solution you currently have in place or solutions under evaluation, calculating the real value of a selection criterion (profit) is a highly informative exercise that helps to shed light on the hidden costs associated with adopting a complex system. While we are aware that the assumptions and cost calculations made in this article may not apply exactly to your situation, we still hope that we have succeeded in demystifying the various stages involved in the cost/benefit analysis of a solution and have given you some insight into assessing the value of your time, and that of your entire team.

Because at Dracal, we know the value of your time, we offer you a solution that stands out for its simplicity of implementation and maintenance, armed with its free, multi-platform software solutions. While each of the five criteria analyzed individually offers a positive return on investment in a Dracal infrastructure, their combination makes it an extremely high-performance, high-return solution, and therefore, worth considering by any company wishing to implement solutions that are not only sustainable (quality) but also profitable (value).

Whether it's Dracal or an alternative solution, this exercise will have certainly highlighted the danger of neglecting the value of your time and the impact of a complicated solution on your ability to move forward quickly.

If you have any questions about the assumptions used in this article, please don't hesitate to contact us at info@dracal.com.

5. Assumptions and calculations

All figures and evidence in this article are based on our knowledge of the market and customer discussions. All assumptions are made explicit, and the logic of the costs is discussed. At any time, you may decide that a cost does not apply to your situation or that the estimate does not reflect your reality. This final decision is entirely up to you.

The calculation will be annualized over a 5-year period to allow costs and benefits to be spread over a realistic project duration under the assumption that we aim for a sustainable installation over time.

5.1 Assumptions

Calculations require numbers. Here are our assumptions based on our calculations, which you are free to adjust to suit your needs.

• 1. The calculations are based on a work schedule of 30 effective hours per week (5 days of 6 hours per week) and a company/institution operating time equal to 52 weeks.

• 2. Amounts are quoted in US dollars (USD).

• 3. The total hourly cost of an experienced engineer/developer (salary, charges and amortization of infrastructure*) is estimated at 185 USD/h.

• 4. The total hourly cost of a non-senior technician or engineer* is estimated at 110 USD/h.

• * A classic mistake made by employees attempting to calculate costs in relation to their working time is to take into account only their salary and neglect infrastructure depreciation. This is a very real cost for the company and must be taken into account.

• 5. Consider a project to set up and automate 5 test stations, for which 5 VCP-PTH450-CAL all-in-one instruments would provide the required data (temperature, relative humidity, atmospheric pressure).

  6. The cost of each Dracal instrument is estimated at upwards of 500 USD.

• 7. Implementation costs are annualized over 5 years.

5.2. Calculation of the value of each criterion

To determine the value (net benefit) of a criterion such as "data reliability" for example, we need to determine how much the consequences of not being able to benefit from it cost. This is what we'll do for each of the 5 selection criteria.

• 1. Data reliability

• 2. Access to ready-to-use all-in-one products

• 3. Access to simple, well-documented, cross-platform data integration tools

• 4. Solution portability

• 5. User-accessible calibration mechanism

5.2.1 How much is data reliability worth?

This case study illustrates the importance of data reliability and allows us to grasp its implications. Let's put a cost on the consequences of not having a reliable solution:

1. A technical resource or junior engineer must be assigned to check data quality sporadically. At 30 minutes per week, at a rate of 110 USD/hour, that costs 2,860 USD/year.

2. Erroneous data has caused equipment failure, either test equipment or the products being tested. Assume 475 USD/year.

3. As illustrated in the case study above, the time required for regular debugging inflates the bill. At 2 hours/month of experienced engineer/developer time, this adds up to 4,440 USD/year.

4. If we evaluate the time wasted in tests that must be redone, either because they failed or could not be completed, at a block of 4 hours every two months, another 4,440 USD/year makes the bill explode.

So, the reliability of your data is worth 12,215 USD/year. In other words, choosing a solution whose returned data is not 100% reliable could cost you up to 12,215 USD/year.

5.2.2 How much does an all-in-one, ready-to-use product worth?

Sometimes, it can be tempting to opt for a do-it-yourself solution, which, on the face of it, seems less expensive. But is it? Let's see how much your time is really worth.

1. To create a functional instrument from scratch, you must include time for shopping for components, assembly, and checking and correction. In the case of the present project, since the measurements required are temperature, relative humidity and atmospheric pressure (the equivalent of the PTH450 hypothesized), we can estimate 4 hours of engineering time per instrument, i.e. a total of 3,700 USD for the 5 instruments. If we annualize these costs over 5 years (excluding hardware, and assuming that this solution really does last that long!), the total cost of this solution is 740 USD/year.

2. Once the instruments have been assembled, don't forget about the software development needed to integrate the data into your own systems. Will your in-house instruments have a unique serial number, enabling them to be interrogated clearly and without error? In a quality assurance context, will they support a robust calibration mechanism enabling an accredited laboratory to adjust them? If the software architecture development to support your instruments with these necessary features is estimated at 1 week, the development cost amounts to 5,550 USD, or 1,110 USD/year when annualized.

3. Now that the in-house solution (instruments and software) has been built, a recurring task of basic maintenance is in order. Without access to specialized support such as that offered free of charge by a manufacturer, we can easily estimate conservatively at 1h/month the time spent on maintenance and online research to answer questions, correct programming errors and so on. That's another 2,220 USD/year added to the bill.

4. Finally, how good is the data quality offered by this in-house solution? Let's just recall the calculation made in the previous point, which illustrates how expensive (very expensive!) a solution that generates data you can't trust can be.

So the "do-it-yourself" solution you're considering may seem less expensive initially in terms of the part, but when your time is taken into account, it's actually worth more than it looks: 4,070 USD/year, excluding the costs associated with the risk of data reliability issues calculated in the previous section.

5.2.3 What is the value of integration tools in your existing systems, which are cross-platform, readily available and documented?

Once the instruments have been installed, you'll want to integrate their data in a centralized location. Let's look at how much an alternative solution might cost if it didn't offer simplified tools for integrating data into your own systems, simple and clear documentation, or access to a whole bank of code examples, all free of charge.

1. Do you operate on several different platforms? Do some of your machines run on Linux and others on Windows? If the solution you choose isn't cross-platform from the outset, you'll have to build your own tool to support all your machines. Estimating one week's time for an experienced developer to build a flawless tool, this solution costs USD 5,550, or USD 1,110/year annualized. And software tool development means maintenance. Assuming a block of 1 day/year reserved for the maintenance of a home-grown system, that's an additional cost of 1,110 USD/year. So, if the solution you've chosen doesn't offer the multi-platform operability you need, that's an additional cost of 2,220 USD/year.

2. Now, you must figure out how to integrate the data. How much is clear documentation and ready-to-use code examples worth? The time spent searching the web, Stack overflow, trial and error, and debugging can be conservatively estimated at 2 working days of implementation. That's 2,220 USD, which, when annualized, comes to 444 USD/year.

3. What if on-site facilities aren't enough? You need an industrial DAQ system with acquisition cards for many solutions. These systems easily cost USD 3,700 per unit once all components have been purchased. Assuming 2 units are needed to cover the test stations we are trying to build in this exercise, your installation will cost you 1,480 USD/year.

4. What about licensing, maintenance and support costs? These vary from manufacturer to manufacturer. However, a competing industrial manufacturer can easily charge 740 USD/year in license fees to use their tools and annual support to cover 5 test stations.

A simplified multi-platform software integration solution into your existing systems is, therefore, worth 4,884 USD/year. Or rather, the lack of it will cost you up to 4,884 USD/year.

5.2.4. What's the value of a portable solution that's easy to move around, reuse for new projects and store away when needed?

While it's more difficult to estimate how much it might cost to reserve permanent space in your factory, it's very easy to estimate how much it might cost to set up and dismantle a test installation.

Based on our customer discussions, it can take up to 4 hours to assemble and 4 hours to disassemble a test station that has not been designed for easy reallocation. At a rate of once per quarter, we're talking about 32 hours of technician time per year or a cost of 3,520 USD/year in time.

5.2.5 How much is a simplified calibration solution worth to the user?

The costs associated with an instrumentation solution that does not offer users the freedom to calibrate their own instruments if the infrastructure allows or to choose the ISO17025 accredited laboratory of their choice are as follows:

1. If calibration and certification of an instrument cannot be done freely, the manufacturer retains a monopoly on this recurring task. Instruments must, therefore, be calibrated and adjusted in a laboratory imposed by the manufacturer at a cost that is generally higher than in another laboratory whose prices must be determined according to the free market rules, i.e., supply and demand. If we estimate at $100 the additional cost per type of measurement for a calibration task to be carried out by a proprietary laboratory for 5 instruments that measure temperature, relative humidity and atmospheric pressure like the PTH450 (i.e. 3 types of measurement), we, therefore, estimate at an additional 1,500 USD/year the cost of not being able to choose your calibration laboratory freely.

2. If you have the facilities to calibrate your own instruments from traceable references, the costs of not being able to benefit from your facilities will arise. If we estimate the cost of a 3-point calibration task for 3 types of measurement at 500 USD per instrument (based on the prices offered by Dracal), for 5 instruments, this task will cost you 2,500 USD per year. Assuming that, with your facilities, a technician could have calibrated your instruments at a rate of 2 hours per instrument, the cost of being unable to calibrate your instruments yourself is USD 1,400 per year.

So, whether you're in one of the 2 situations above, free access to calibration software for your precision instruments can save you at least 1,400 USD a year.

Summary

 

Selection criteria	Annualized value (USD/year)	Total value (USD)
1. Data reliability	12,215	61,075
2. All-in-one, ready-to-use products	4,070	20,350
3. Simple, well-documented, cross-platform data integration tools	4,884	24,420
4. Solution portability	3,520	17,600
5. User-accessible calibration mechanism	1,400	7,000

 

5.3. Evaluation of the Dracal solution

5.3.1 Criteria met

 

	Met by Dracal?
1. Data reliability	Yes
2. All-in-one, ready-to-use products	Yes
3. Simple, well-documented, cross-platform data integration tools	Yes
4. Solution portability	Yes
5. User-accessible calibration mechanism	Yes

 

Demonstration

1. This case study illustrates the impact of choosing Dracal regarding reliability.

2. Dracal's Plug & Log solution works instantly.

3. Dracal offers simplified tools for integrating data into your own systems and provides complete, simple, clear documentation, as well as a whole bank of code examples, all free of charge.

4. Connecting and disconnecting small USB-capable instruments takes just a few minutes.

5. The measuring instruments offered by Dracal can be purchased with the option of a user calibration in 3 points. The cost of obtaining this option for your products is a fixed cost of about 50 USD per instrument at the time of purchase. It has been included in the choice of our reference instrument for calculations, which is a VCP-PTH450-CAL (-CAL for CALibratable). Although this option offers several advantages, the goal here is to calculate the value of the free and open-source calibration software that comes with this option, namely the 3-point user calibration mechanism. Indeed, while Dracal offers the calibration service through partner laboratories, all users are free to deal with the laboratory of their choice.

5.3.2 Costs

To evaluate a solution, comparing the costs with the benefits is necessary. The cost of implementing the Dracal solution in the present context is shown below.

Product purchase costs

In our assumptions, we have determined that the project requires 5 X VCP-PTH450-CAL, i.e. around 2,500 USD, which, once annualized, makes 500 USD.

Software integration time

The simplicity, documentation and code examples available mean that the Dracal solution can be integrated in as little as twenty minutes, as was the case here. However, for the sake of argument, let's assume an implementation time of 2 hours, i.e. 370 USD in developer time, which annualized comes to 74 USD/year.

Maintenance

One of Dracal's promises is "What works today will still work tomorrow", precisely in order to reduce maintenance tasks to zero. Even so, your team may want to change their code base for one reason or another. Assuming 1 hour of minor modifications per quarter by a technician or even a trainee, the cost of maintaining your Dracal installation is a maximum of 440 USD/year.

 

	Annualized value (in USD/année)	Total cost (over 5 years)
Purchase cost	500	2,500
Integration	74	370
Maintenance	440	2,200
TOTAL	1,014 USD/year	5,070 USD/year