|
|
|
|
WORLD OF LIBRARIES
Automated Storage and Retrieval Systems
By Elizabeth Andrews
Imagine, if you will, a library in which books are plucked from the stacks not by patrons or staff, but by robots programmed to find just the right needle in a haystack of hundreds of thousands of volumes. Picture row after row of gleaming metal bins stored in a floor-to-ceiling shelving system, the books tucked away from the human eye and accessible only by a robotic arm. While this sounds like a futuristic fantasy – or a librarian’s worst nightmare – it is actually an increasingly common technology known as an Automated Storage and Retrieval System, or ASRS.
Several libraries around the country have implemented this system in recent years, including Santa Clara University, Valparaiso University, and Chicago State University. Here at Cudahy Library, conversations about a possible renovation have invariably turned towards this and other emerging library technologies. If Cudahy is to be renovated, how might ASRS play a role in reorganizing our collection? How does the system work? What are the pros and cons of such a device, and how would it affect our patrons?
The ASRS works as follows. The computer has a record not only of each book, but the particular bin in which the book is located. When an item is requested by a patron, a staff member can instruct the computer to pull the bin that contains the right material. A robotic arm then delivers the bin – typically on a conveyor belt system – to the circulation desk, where a staff member can pull the correct item out of the bin. Because the computer automatically keeps track of what is in each bin, there is no formal shelving system needed. Books can be randomly placed in any bin as long as they are properly scanned and discharged.
While the ASRS is a large system – several stories tall and containing several thousand square feet of storage – the closed-stack system offers a more efficient use of space than traditional library shelving. The size of the units can be customized to accommodate a particular library’s needs. While most libraries use the ASRS to house older or less popular titles, Santa Clara University in California recently built a three story, 8,000 square foot facility that will eventually hold about 70% of its entire collection, or 800,000 volumes. By comparison, Valparaiso’s system is designed to store 300,000 volumes and contains things like back issues of journals.
If Cudahy Library were to implement this technology, it would be used to house older bound journals, government documents, and other infrequently used materials. This would free up the traditional library shelving to be used for our expanding book collection, newer periodicals, and high-use items. The materials in the ASRS would be stored safely and efficiently. Currently, items of this nature are stored off-site at the Library Storage Facility in the basement of the Sullivan Center. Once a day, a student worker from Cudahy walks over to Storage, manually pages and discharges the books, and walks them back. Reshelving involves a similar procedure. A major advantage of the ASRS, therefore, would be fast access to these materials. Santa Clara reports that an average request takes only three to seven minutes to complete.
But does compact storage and quick access make up for the fact that the patrons can no longer browse the collection? An ASRS completely eliminates the ability to browse, requiring a patron to know exactly which item he needs before an item can be pulled. Hence the logic of keeping bound journals in the system rather than monographs; it is much harder to browse for journal articles than it is to scan a row of books for an appealing or relevant title. While many faculty and staff may balk at this limited access, a commitment to browsability would no doubt influence the selection of materials placed in the ASRS.
While a Cudahy renovation is still in the planning stages, installation of an ASRS does offer an attractive alternative to overcrowded shelves or off-site compact storage. In any case, there is a certain excitement in anticipating the new technologies that might one day be standard in libraries across the country.
Volume 1 Number 1
|
|
|
