Simplifying the Complexity of Pump Selection

Barry Cowen is the president and founder of New Era Pump Systems, Inc., established in 1996. With over 30 years of experience developing liquid handling equipment, Cowen has made lasting contributions to the field. Drawing on his computer science degree from Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, he developed the software for the industry’s first programmable syringe pump—an innovation that helped shape modern liquid automation. Through decades of collaborating with end-users to understand their needs, he recognized a persistent gap in the market for advanced, cost-effective laboratory solutions. Motivated by this insight, he founded his own company to introduce a “New Era” of service: delivering affordable, high-quality laboratory equipment.

Q: Could you share how you first got involved with syringe and peristaltic pumps, and how that experience influences your work today?

A: The short version is that I started out working for a competitor, where I invented the technology that became the programmable syringe pump, before breaking off on my own to focus on advancing it further.

What drew me to this work was the opportunity to take a simple, existing technology and upgrade it. Early on, small electronic devices were always designed by electrical engineers, not software people. Think of the old joke about VCRs blinking “12:00” because end-user interface design was an afterthought, or not thought of at all—that’s what these devices were like.

Coming from a computer science background, I saw a chance to bring high-level software concepts to laboratory devices, upgrading their interfaces and functionality. That’s how I realized I could make a meaningful difference for labs.

Q: What advice would you give to a lab evaluating pumps?

A: This touches on a major theme I find myself repeating often: Don’t get lost in the forest of your application; focus on what you’re trying to accomplish.

A lot of times, people come to us with complex questions about their application. When I dig deeper and ask them what they’re trying to achieve, there’s usually a much simpler way to get there. They don’t need all the extra hardware or complicated processes.

Researchers often start with “Rube Goldberg machines.” For instance, we’ve had customers purchase a syringe pump, along with an analog interface, software, and all sorts of additional components. When they call us for help setting everything up, I’ll take a step back and ask, “What are you really trying to accomplish?” Sometimes the answer is simply, “We need the pump to turn on when we have a five-volt signal and turn off when we have zero volts.” In that case, all they need is our transistor-transistor logic (TTL) interface. They can plug their signal directly into the back of it and skip all the extra equipment.

It’s easy to get lost in the process, but often there’s a simpler, cheaper way to do it. That’s why I always encourage people to start with their goal and then work backwards to figure out what they actually need.

Q: What are the key takeaways from comparing syringe and peristaltic pumps, and how does this determine which is best suited for a given application?

A: Researchers often default to the equipment they’re most familiar with. When they call us, we commonly ask, “Have you considered a syringe pump?” if we think it would be better for their application, or we’ll ask syringe pump users if they’ve considered a peristaltic pump. Many researchers don’t initially think about the trade-offs between the two.

If you’re working at very low flow rates, down to nanoliters or microliters, that’s really the realm of syringe pumps. Peristaltic pumps are better suited for higher flow rates, like 50 mL/min, 100 mL/min, or even 500 mL/min. When people try using a syringe pump at those higher flow rates, that’s when I suggest switching to a peristaltic.

Volume is another factor. If you’re dispensing 25 to 50 mL, that can generally be handled with a single syringe. For larger volumes, you can use a two-syringe pump infusion/refill system, which is a much more complicated setup. Such complexity may not be necessary or justified, in which case we will suggest a simple, low-cost peristaltic pump. A key factor in this decision is precision. My rule of thumb is that if you need one to two percent, or better, precision, and/or pulse-free dispensing, you need a syringe pump. If you can tolerate higher variability and pulsations, a peristaltic pump can do the job and save you money.

Pressure is another consideration. Peristaltic pumps are generally limited to lower-pressure applications, about 50 to 75 psi at the high end. If you need hundreds of psi, you’re going to need a syringe pump.

A nice feature of all our pumps is that they can be networked together, so you don’t always have to choose one or the other. For example, you could have a syringe pump handle precise dispensing while a peristaltic pump delivers bulk buffer, and automate the system from a single computer port.

Q: How can labs simplify experimentation iterations?

A: One thing we offer that’s fairly unique is an Excel spreadsheet interface for our pumps. We’ve customized Excel with pull-down menus to assist in entering pumping programs. Once you build your pumping programs, it’s one click to upload them to the pump.

Many researchers already have their equations and formulations in Excel, so they can link their data directly to our spreadsheet and send it straight to the pump, without anyone retyping numbers or transposing data into a pump’s user interface. This is a huge help in the R&D process. If one formulation doesn’t work, they can tweak the numbers in their spreadsheet, upload them, and try it out immediately.

Each version of the spreadsheet can be saved as a separate file, so their work is documented as they go. We’ve had customers call us after a pump failure, saying, “We don’t know what flow rate we were running—we didn’t write it down.” Doing the experimentation in the spreadsheet prevents this issue, as it keeps a record of every run.

Overall, it simplifies documentation and makes iterations faster and easier.

Q: When working with a limited budget, what’s the best way to approach pump selection?

A: The most important thing is to be realistic about what you need. Start with what you’re trying to accomplish, and then look for the features that will meet your application’s needs.

You don’t need the most expensive device out there. Try not to get swayed by slick salesmen trying to convince you to buy a Mercedes when you just need to go around the corner at 15 miles an hour.

Very often, you can even use something you already have on the shelf. We get calls from people with 20-year-old equipment that we’ll still support. We still have parts for that 20-year-old pump, and they are often still being manufactured. We don’t care if they bought the pump on eBay, as long as they’re using our pumps, we’ll support it.

The bottom line is, be realistic about your requirements, use what you have when possible, and you can almost always find a solution that works within your budget.

Q: What’s the one piece of advice you’d like to leave our audience with?

A: I’d say it comes back to the theme we’ve been talking about: Be realistic and focus on the result. Don’t get lost in building an overly complicated “mouse trap.”

If the system you’re designing feels too complex, step back and look at it with fresh eyes. Often, you’ll find there’s a simpler way to accomplish what you want. Don’t just assume the solution has to be complicated. Very often, the simplest approach is the best one.

Click here to learn more.