Comparison

Temperature mapping comparisons

Use these tables to quickly compare common choices in temperature mapping.

Self-measurement vs outsourcing

AspectSelf-measurementFull outsourcing
Physical executionYour team places and reads loggersWe place, manage and read out
Best forKnown room, internal capacityAudit pressure, complex room, limited capacity
Evidence levelDepends on dossier choiceFull project with reporting

Renting vs buying loggers

AspectRentBuy
InvestmentLow entry, project-basedHigher purchase plus maintenance
Calibration managementTemporary use with certificatesOwn management and recalibration needed
Best forOne-off or periodic studiesFrequent studies with internal expertise

Mapping vs monitoring

AspectTemperature mappingContinuous monitoring
PurposeIdentify hot and cold spots and sensor positionRoutine monitoring of chosen positions
TimingInitial, periodic or after changeContinuous after qualification
OutputMapping dossier and adviceAlarms, trend records and follow-up

2-8 °C vs 15-25 °C vs ULT

Aspect2-8 °C15-25 °CULT -80 °C
Main riskFreezing, door impact, evaporatorSeason, HVAC, dispatch, solar loadRecovery after opening, gradients, alarm response
Typical duration24 hours to 7 daysOften at least 7 days24 to 72 hours depending on risk
ExamplesCold room, medicine fridgeGDP warehouse, API storageBiobank, lab freezer
Audit / QA

QA-led temperature mapping: from self-measurement with calibrated loggers to an audit-ready dossier, without unnecessary complexity.