Avoiding OEM Lock-In in Structural Testing Lab Retrofits
Explore how university civil engineering labs reduce capital expenditure and maintenance downtime by shifting from proprietary OEM testing rigs to open-architecture COTS servo-hydraulic components.
Structural testing laboratories can avoid OEM lock-in by choosing flexible control architectures, compatible replacement components, and upgrade strategies that do not depend entirely on one equipment manufacturer. A carefully planned retrofit can preserve functional hydraulic equipment, modernise outdated controls, and give laboratories more freedom when purchasing future components.
For universities and engineering research facilities, this matters. A testing machine may remain mechanically sound for 15 or 20 years, but its controller, software, sensors, or electrical components might become outdated much sooner. When replacement parts are available only through the original manufacturer, even a small upgrade can become expensive.
The challenge is not simply finding a replacement part. It is finding a way to keep the entire testing system working accurately without rebuilding equipment that is still useful.
Why OEM Lock-In Creates Long-Term Challenges for Testing Laboratories
OEM lock-in occurs when a laboratory becomes heavily dependent on one original equipment manufacturer for replacement parts, software, technical support, or system upgrades.
This dependency can become noticeable when older testing equipment needs modernisation. Consider a university that operates a hydraulic testing machine with functional actuators and a reliable hydraulic power unit. Its original controller, however, is no longer supported.
If the control software and hardware are proprietary, the university might have limited options for upgrading the system. Replacing the controller could require additional hardware, software modifications, and manufacturer-specific integration work.
The consequences can include:
- Higher equipment upgrade and maintenance expenses.
- Longer waiting periods for specialised replacement components.
- Limited flexibility when selecting control hardware.
- Dependence on one supplier for technical assistance.
- Difficulty integrating modern measurement and automation systems.
This does not mean proprietary equipment is always a poor investment. Some applications require specialised, manufacturer-designed configurations. The concern arises when laboratories cannot maintain or improve their existing equipment without returning to the same supplier.
For facilities operating shake tables, fatigue testing machines, and other dynamic testing equipment, this dependency deserves attention during the original purchase and future retrofit planning.
How Open Architecture Servo Hydraulics Help Reduce OEM Dependency
Open Architecture Servo Hydraulics provide a more flexible approach to designing and modernising hydraulic testing systems. The idea is to let compatible controllers, sensors, actuators, software, and other components communicate through documented interfaces rather than relying unnecessarily on a single proprietary platform.
For example, an existing servo-hydraulic machine might have a functional hydraulic power supply and actuator assembly but outdated control electronics. Instead of replacing the complete installation, engineers can assess whether a compatible modern controller and updated data acquisition system can be integrated.
This approach can provide several advantages:
- Greater choice when sourcing replacement components.
- Easier integration of compatible third-party hardware.
- Better opportunities for future system expansion.
- Reduced dependence on proprietary control platforms.
- More manageable equipment modernisation.
However, Open Architecture Servo Hydraulics do not mean that every manufacturer’s component will automatically work with every other system. Engineers must check signal compatibility, control-loop performance, hydraulic response, safety interlocks, and communication requirements.
Why Interoperability Matters
Interoperability is the ability of different components to exchange information and operate together correctly.
In a structural testing laboratory, a controller may receive feedback from load cells, displacement sensors, and pressure transducers while controlling hydraulic actuators. If one component becomes obsolete, the remaining equipment should not automatically become unusable.
Open interfaces and properly documented configurations make future replacements easier to evaluate.
Open Architecture Servo Hydraulics are particularly useful when laboratories want to preserve existing equipment while gradually introducing newer technology.
The Role of COTS Structural Testing Equipment in Laboratory Modernisation
Commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) equipment offers another way to reduce unnecessary dependence on a single manufacturer.
COTS Structural Testing Equipment includes commercially available components such as industrial controllers, sensors, electrical hardware, data acquisition devices, and communication modules that can be selected for suitable testing applications.
Imagine a research laboratory that needs to replace an outdated data acquisition unit. Its hydraulic equipment and mechanical test frame are still functioning correctly. If the existing architecture supports compatible third-party measurement hardware, the laboratory may be able to upgrade data collection without replacing the entire testing machine.
This is where COTS Structural Testing Equipment can make a practical difference.
Common applications include:
- Control hardware: Industrial controllers and compatible automation devices.
- Measurement systems: Load cells, accelerometers, and displacement sensors.
- Data acquisition: Hardware for recording pressure, force, acceleration, and movement.
- Electrical components: Relays, power supplies, circuit protection, and control panels.
- Communication hardware: Supported interfaces for connecting different system components.
Still, commercial availability should never be the only selection criterion. COTS Structural Testing Equipment must meet the application’s accuracy, sampling, environmental, response-time, and safety requirements.
For example, a controller suitable for ordinary industrial automation may not provide the deterministic response needed for a demanding dynamic testing application.
Therefore, select COTS structural testing equipment after reviewing the complete system requirements, not simply because a component is less expensive or easier to purchase.
Developing a Practical Servo Hydraulic Retrofit Strategy
A successful Servo Hydraulic Retrofit Strategy begins with an assessment of existing equipment. Replacing everything without understanding its condition can waste money and create unnecessary installation work.
A laboratory should first identify which components are performing well, which require maintenance, and which have become difficult to support.
1. Evaluate the Existing Hydraulic Infrastructure
Start by inspecting the hydraulic power unit, actuators, servo valves, manifolds, filters, and associated piping.
Check operating pressure, available flow, leakage, fluid condition, cooling performance, and actuator movement. These factors help determine whether the existing hydraulic infrastructure can support the intended upgraded system.
A Servo Hydraulic Retrofit Strategy should preserve functional components wherever technically and economically reasonable.
2. Identify Outdated Controls and Components
Next, review the control hardware, software, sensors, electrical enclosures, and data acquisition equipment.
A machine may have perfectly serviceable hydraulic actuators but an obsolete controller. In such cases, you may not need to replace the entire hydraulic system.
A carefully designed Servo Hydraulic Retrofit Strategy can focus on the components that genuinely limit performance, reliability, or maintainability.
3. Verify Component Compatibility
Before purchasing replacement equipment, compare the specifications of existing and proposed components.
| Component | Important considerations |
| Hydraulic actuators | Force, stroke, speed, and pressure |
| Servo valves | Flow capacity and response |
| Controllers | Real-time performance and interfaces |
| Sensors | Accuracy, range, and calibration |
| Data acquisition | Sampling rate and synchronization |
| Hydraulic power units | Flow, pressure, cooling, and filtration |
A Servo Hydraulic Retrofit Strategy must also consider control stability. New hardware should not introduce unwanted oscillations, delays, or inaccurate feedback.
4. Test and Document the Upgraded System
After installation, the laboratory should carry out appropriate calibration, functional checks, safety verification, and performance validation.
Testing should confirm that the updated system meets its intended operating requirements.
Documentation should include updated wiring diagrams, software versions, controller configurations, calibration records, and component specifications. This information will make future maintenance easier and reduce dependency on individual technicians or suppliers.
