Cost model · BeamCell® extractive vs process GC

What a slower measurement actually costs

A process gas chromatograph reports on a cycle. A TDLAS analyzer reports continuously. This model prices that difference alongside the capital and running costs, so you can see which of the three is actually carrying the argument for your process.

Process gas chromatograph

EUR
EUR
EUR per year
EUR per year
minutes between results

BeamCell® extractive analyzer

EUR
EUR
EUR per year
EUR per year
seconds, confirm for your configuration

Process economics

This is where the detection-speed argument is won or lost, so the assumptions are yours to set rather than ours. An excursion is equally likely to begin at any point in a GC cycle, so on average it goes unseen for half a cycle plus the analysis itself. Worst case it begins just after a cycle starts and goes unseen for a full one.

count
EUR per hour
percent, not all off-spec is waste
half cycle or full cycle
Shared assumptions and financing
count, applied to both
years
percent per year
display only, no conversion

Enter your figures above

The model runs as soon as the fields are filled.

From capital and installation

-

-

From running cost

-

-

From faster detection

-

-

Cumulative cost of ownership, present value

Process GC BeamCell Crossover

Cost breakdown, present value over the horizon
Cost line Process GC BeamCell Difference
Request a quote for your process Send us the stream composition, the species you need and your control response time and we will tell you what a continuous measurement is worth on your process.

Method. Capital and installation fall in month zero. Running costs and yield exposure accrue evenly across the year. Everything is discounted to present value at the rate you set. Detection delay for the GC is half the cycle time on the average basis and a full cycle on the worst-case basis. Detection delay for the BeamCell is the reporting interval. Yield exposure is that delay multiplied by the events per year, the value of product at risk per hour, and the share actually scrapped.

What the model leaves out on purpose. After an excursion is detected, the control system still has to act and the process still has to settle. That reaction time is the same whichever analyzer found the excursion, so it does not change the difference between the two columns. It does mean the detection improvement is only part of the total loss window, and on a process with a long settling time it may be a small part. Nothing here prices measurement range, detection limit, species coverage or certification scope, all of which vary by application.

The starting values are illustrative placeholders, not published prices for any product and not a quotation for any competing instrument. Replace them with the quotations and the excursion history you hold. Currency is a display label only and no conversion is applied, so enter every figure in the same currency.