Many aging labs still “work,” but their infrastructure no longer behaves as originally designed. HVAC systems, plumbing networks, and containment measures that once performed reliably can gradually lose effectiveness, creating subtle but serious safety and compliance risks.
While full-scale renovations may be costly or impractical, there are concrete strategies lab managers can employ to identify, prioritize, and mitigate these risks.
Spotting hidden risks before they become critical
One of the most challenging aspects of managing older labs is detecting issues before they escalate. Liam Brown, principal at mcCallumSather, explains, “In aging labs, the most common HVAC risk is loss of controllability rather than outright failure. Variable air volume (VAV) performance can gradually degrade as duct airflow sensors get dirty or age, pressure sensors lose calibration, actuators develop deadband, and control loops begin hunting, so the room looks acceptable at steady state but destabilizes during sash changes and door openings.”
Mary Georgious, principal and mechanical lead at mcCallumSather, adds that containment and plumbing are equally vulnerable: “Containment risk often shows up when supply air patterns create turbulence at the hood face, and when the lab can’t reliably hold its intended room pressurization,” she says. “On the plumbing side, trap seal loss and slow internal corrosion become risk multipliers.
The earliest signs are subtle: doors that suddenly feel heavy, pressure alarms that come and go, hoods that alarm regularly, repeated nuisance faults at variable frequency drives (VFDs), and building automation system (BAS) trends that look unnaturally flat or ‘perfect.’ Humidification is key as well. Once it falls out of range, that is a sign of aging infrastructure that needs attention.”
By learning to recognize these early warning signs, lab managers can initiate proactive steps before minor deviations evolve into safety hazards or regulatory violations.
Assessing risks within your scope
Before bringing in engineers or designers, lab managers can collect critical observational and data-driven evidence. “A good first step is to build a baseline around how the lab behaves during normal, messy operations rather than ideal conditions,” Georgious says. “Lab managers can often spot valuable patterns simply by observing cause and effect.”
For instance, a door that becomes unusually heavy when a hood sash is opened, or a drafty sensation in a corridor, may indicate unstable pressure cascades or overreactive exhaust controls. Tracking odor complaints or noting patterns during early mornings or shoulder seasons can provide additional clues. If accessible, BAS trend data for room pressure, airflow, fan speed, temperature, humidity, and alarms can be cross-referenced with these observations. Quick interventions like recalibrating sensors, adjusting setpoints, or tweaking relief paths are often possible without major upgrades.
Lab Safety Management Certificate
The Lab Safety Management certificate is more than training—it’s a professional advantage.
Gain critical skills and IACET-approved CEUs that make a measurable difference.
Brown adds, “Formal containment testing and an air audit on existing equipment are very valuable. However, the lab manager will need to understand if the equipment has deteriorated over time, which might require a mechanical engineer to look at.”
Prioritizing upgrades when resources are limited
Budgets and operational constraints often prevent lab managers from tackling every issue at once. “Start by ranking spaces by consequence—where a containment failure would create safety or regulatory exposure, or where downtime would stop critical work,” says Brown. “Then look for likelihood signals such as recurring alarms, repeated faults, unstable room pressure during normal use, or single points of failure in exhaust and controls.”
He continues, “The best early investments are typically the ones that reduce risk without major downtime: stabilizing controls, calibrating sensors, fixing hunting loops, restoring meaningful alarms, and replacing the most failure-prone components that keep driving instability. A simple risk matrix can help make this defensible to leadership by comparing consequence, probability, and how quickly you would detect a failure.”
Interested in lab design?
Is the form not loading? If you use an ad blocker or browser privacy features, try turning them off and refresh the page.
By completing this form, you agree to receive news updates and relevant promotional content from Lab Design News. You may unsubscribe at any time. View our Privacy Policy
“I suggest starting with a master plan that looks across the whole aging system, including infrastructure, controls, and sustainability measures. Then use that work to separate what needs immediate attention from what can wait and build a phasing plan that lines up with the capital planning budget,” Georgious adds.
Lessons from phased approaches
Even without a full building renovation, lab managers can significantly mitigate risk. Brown says, “We have had several smaller projects where a full building renovation was not realistic, but we could materially improve safety by renovating a limited number of rooms to create a safer home for key researchers. The strategy was to decant priority groups into those improved spaces, reuse existing services where possible, and make targeted tweaks to get better pressurization and safer, more predictable airflow.”
Georgious adds a high-pressure example: “During COVID, a research facility needed a testing lab quickly. The team had to move quickly, develop drawings in compressed timelines, and implement a new air handling unit (AHU) with HEPA filtration and revised airflow and pressure requirements. That success was less about any single hero and more about lab management, facilities, and the design team staying tightly aligned, making decisions quickly, and adapting on the go while still protecting containment intent.”
Turning operational insight into targeted infrastructure action
Lab managers have a unique influence over infrastructure projects when they engage early and strategically. “Lab managers are uniquely positioned to translate day-to-day reality into design inputs that teams cannot infer from drawings,” explains Georgious. “Recurring complaints, especially when time-stamped and tied to events like hood use or door behavior, are extremely actionable. Lab managers are also critical in phasing because they understand which groups can move, what equipment can be down temporarily, and what workflows cannot be interrupted.”
Brown underscores the importance of effective advocacy: “Funding is often distributed around programming, new initiatives, and visible space outcomes, not around hidden infrastructure. Lab managers can make the case by tying infrastructure risk directly to program risk, health and safety, and quality of research. A short narrative that names a specific failure scenario, summarizes what it would cost in downtime or compliance exposure, and shows a small set of evidence is much more likely to lead to action instead of delay.”
Targeted upgrades from manufacturers and service vendors can be highly effective. Georgious notes, “In many cases, you do not need to replace an entire air handler or exhaust system to reduce risk. You may only need to replace a coil that is undersized or rusted, a critical actuator that is sticking, a sensor that has drifted, or even a single fan from a row of fans that is driving instability and vibration. Vendors who promise improved safety without explaining how containment and pressure behavior will be validated are not solving the real problem.”
Verification plans, trending points, and thorough documentation are essential to ensure any interventions meaningfully improve performance.
Planning ahead to protect lab performance
Finally, Georgious stresses proactive management. “Acceptable risk has shifted toward evidence and resilience. Organizations increasingly expect stable pressure relationships, credible documentation for certifications and calibration, and alarms that are actionable rather than routinely ignored.”
Brown sums it up with a simple habit every lab manager can adopt: “Maintain a simple, living infrastructure register for the most critical rooms and utilities, including what is known, what is uncertain, and what is showing drift, backed up by trends and recurring issue logs. Use that register to trigger early capacity checks and field verification before new lab programming is finalized. It is far easier to phase a project intelligently when you discover constraints early than when excavation or shutdown becomes unavoidable in the middle of delivery.”
Managing aging lab infrastructure requires vigilance, strategic prioritization, and proactive advocacy. By recognizing subtle warning signs, leveraging operational knowledge, and collaborating early with design and engineering teams, lab managers can reduce safety and compliance risks without relying solely on full-scale renovations. Thoughtful observation, targeted interventions, and early engagement are the keys to keeping older labs safe, functional, and resilient well into the future.
