[labnetwork] Imaging/Characterization Cores vs. Fabrication Cores - Cost vs. Income

Fri May 29 17:31:03 EDT 2026

Hi Mac,

At the Berkeley NanoLab (I am the new Bill), we have a modest set of
characterization tools - SEM, EDX, AFM, XRD, but no TEM.

We gave up on service contracts for all but our DUV stepper.

Our fee structure splits equipment across tiers: 0-3. We do not get direct
federal money to support the NanoLab. We also do not get university support
for salaries or equipment but for rare and modest exceptions with
multiple-year time constants. We do get occasional support from PI's to buy
equipment or for staff.

We've been running deficits since COVID. They are smaller now, but are hard
to close the gap when prices rise faster than we can increase rates.

Looking forward to lots of discussions at UGIM - preferably with some
liquid painkiller administered in advance!

Michael

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Helmbrecht, Ph.D.
Executive Director
Berkeley Marvell Nanofabrication Laboratory
520 Sutardja Dai Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720
(510) 809-8620
https://nanolab.berkeley.edu/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Fri, May 29, 2026 at 8:36 AM Gila,Brent P <bgila at ufl.edu> wrote:

> Here at the University of Florida we merged the fabrication and
> characterization facilities 13yrs ago.  Neither side "pulls its own weight"
> and the facility as a whole is subsidized by the college and university.
> The characterization side has a high cost of operation due to all the
> service contracts where as the fabrication side tends to perform a lot of
> repairs in house.  Our characterization side brings in more revenue than
> our fabrication side but has these higher expenses.  So it becomes a wash.
>
> To back up Iulian's comments, each instrument or tool (service line) is
> considered independent in a rate review so surplus revenue from one service
> line cannot be used to offset a cost from another service line.
>
> Good topic for a happy hour at UGIM.  The fiscal side is too painful to
> discuss without a beer/wine. ;)
>
> Best Regards,
> Brent
>
>
> On 5/29/2026 7:29 AM, Iulian Codreanu wrote:
>
> *[External Email]*
> Hi Mac,
>
> Here at UDel the fabrication lab and imaging/characterization lab are
> operated separately so I cannot provide direct input but I have a general
> comment; you are likely aware of this (and it likely does not apply to you)
> so it is mostly for folks who are new to the field.
>
> When these labs are operated as independent service centers, federal rules
> prevent subsidies within and across service centers. A tool is not allowed
> to subsidize another tool within a service center and a service center is
> prohibited from subsidizing another.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Iulian
>
> iulian Codreanu, Ph.D.
> Director, Nanofabrication Facility
> University of Delaware
> Harker ISE Lab, Room 163
> 221 Academy Street
> Newark, DE 19716
> 302-831-2784https://udnf.udel.edu
>
>
> On 5/28/2026 10:58 AM, Hathaway, Malcolm R wrote:
>
> Hey All,
>
> Happy Summer!
>
> A question has come up here about relative expenditures and subsidy levels
> between fabrication labs and imaging/characterization labs, in core centers
> where such functionality is combined.  Here at Harvard we have all three
> under one roof at CNS.
>
> I did a https://nanobot.chat/search around this topic but didn't find
> much.  (nanobot.chat is an AI enabled search of Labnetwork, for those who
> may not have heard about it).
>
> I seem to remember this or a similar topic being addressed at a previous
> UGIM meeting, but my recollection is hazy...
>
> Thus, a few questions:
>
> How many core centers combine Imaging and Characterization and Fabrication
> (cleanroom) under one umbrella?
>
> For those that do combine them, do you generally find that each section is
> able to "pull its own weight" financially?   Does either one ever "break
> even"?
>
> Is income from the nanofab used to subsidize imaging/characterization
> efforts, or vice versa?
>
> Is each unit financially independent and, as such, survives on partial
> subsidies from the university that are not considered collectively?
>
> And lastly, what sort of expense/income breakdown (percentage-wise) have
> you seen between such units, if they are treated collectively as one big
> core center.
>
> Apologies if this delves too deeply into sensitive fiscal areas.
>
> This might be a good topic for some sub-group at the upcoming UGIM, if it
> is not already on the agenda.
>
>
> Mac
>
> Mac Hathaway
> Systems, Process, and Characterization Engineer
> Harvard CNS
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing listlabnetwork at mtl.mit.eduhttps://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing listlabnetwork at mtl.mit.eduhttps://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> labnetwork mailing list
> labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
> https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20260529/b4cfd5c4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: UF email signature 2026.png
Type: image/png
Size: 11618 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20260529/b4cfd5c4/attachment.png>