Methodology for assessing laser-based equipment

Gabriel Pelegrina-Bonilla; Jörg Hermsdorf; Ulrich Thombansen; Peter Abels; Stefan Kaierle; Jörg Neumann

doi:10.1515/aot-2017-0025

Article

Methodology for assessing laser-based equipment

Gabriel Pelegrina-Bonilla , Jörg Hermsdorf , Ulrich Thombansen , Peter Abels , Stefan Kaierle and Jörg Neumann

Published/Copyright: July 28, 2017

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information

From the journal Advanced Optical Technologies Volume 6 Issue 5

Abstract

Methodologies for the assessment of technology’s maturity are widely used in industry and research. Probably the best known are technology readiness levels (TRLs), initially pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). At the beginning, only descriptively defined TRLs existed, but over time, automated assessment techniques in the form of questionnaires emerged in order to determine TRLs. Originally TRLs targeted equipment for space applications, but the demands on industrial relevant equipment are partly different in terms of, for example, overall costs, product quantities, or the presence of competitors. Therefore, we present a commonly valid assessment methodology with the aim of assessing laser-based equipment for industrial use, in general. The assessment is carried out with the help of a questionnaire, which allows for a user-friendly and easy accessible way to monitor the progress from the lab-proven state to the application-ready product throughout the complete development period. The assessment result is presented in a multidimensional metric in order to reveal the current specific strengths and weaknesses of the equipment development process, which can be used to direct the remaining development process of the equipment in the right direction.

Keywords: decision making; laser-based equipment; management software; technology assessment; technology management; technology readiness level (TRL)

Acknowledgments

This work was funded by the European Union within the FP7-FoF (Factories of the Future) program, in the Project ‘LASHARE Assessment Framework’ under grant agreement no 609046. We would like to thank the project partners for performing the individual assessments.

References

[1] A. Tetlay and P. John, in ‘7th Annual Conference on Systems Engineering Research’, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

[2] U.S. Government Accountability Office, ‘Best Practices: Better Management of Technology Development Can Improve Weapon System’, 1999.Search in Google Scholar

[3] J. C. Mankins, in ‘White Paper, Advanced Concepts Office, Office of Space’, 1995.Search in Google Scholar

[4] J. C. Mankins, Acta Astronaut. 65, 1216–1223 (2009).10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.058Search in Google Scholar

[5] B. Sauser, R. Gove, E. Forbes and J. E. Ramirez-Marquez, Inf. Knowl. Syst. Manage. 9, 17–46 (2010).10.3233/IKS-2010-0133Search in Google Scholar

[6] B. Sauser, J. Ramirez-Marquez, D. Verma and R. Gove, in ‘Conference on Systems Engineering Research’, 2006.Search in Google Scholar

[7] J. Ramirez-Marquez and B. Sauser, IEEE Trans. Eng. Manage. 56, 533–548 (2009).10.1109/TEM.2009.2013830Search in Google Scholar

[8] Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) Deskbook V2’, 2011. [Online]. Available: http://www.dodmrl.com/MRL_Deskbook_V2.pdf.Search in Google Scholar

[9] Z. Juan, L. Wei and P. Xiamei, in ‘International Conference on E-Business and E-Government’, 2010.Search in Google Scholar

[10] S. R. Sadin, F. P. Povinelli and R. Rosen, Acta Astronaut. 20, 73–77 (1989).10.1016/0094-5765(89)90054-4Search in Google Scholar

[11] W. Tan, J. Ramirez-Marquez and B. Sauser, Syst. Eng. 14, 279–293 (2011).10.1002/sys.20179Search in Google Scholar

[12] R. Valerdi and R. J. Kohl, in ‘An Approach to Technology Risk Management’, (Engineering Systems Division Symposium, MIT, Cambridge, MA, 2004).Search in Google Scholar

[13] N. Azizian, in ‘Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering and Computer’, 2009.Search in Google Scholar

[14] J. Smith, ‘An Alternative to Technology Readiness Levels for Non-Developmental Item (NDI) Software’, Carnegie Mellon Software Engineering Institute Pittsburgh, Technical Report CMU/SEI-2004-TR-013, 2004.10.21236/ADA443149Search in Google Scholar

[15] S. Cornford and L. Sarsfield, in ‘IEEE Aerospace Conference Proceedings’, 2004.Search in Google Scholar

[16] J. C. Mankins, Acta Astronaut. 51, 3–21 (2002).10.1016/S0094-5765(02)00083-8Search in Google Scholar

[17] J. C. Mankins, Acta Astronaut. 65, 1208–1215 (2009).10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.03.059Search in Google Scholar

[18] E. Kujawski, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst, 43, 979–987 (2013).10.1109/TSMCA.2012.2209868Search in Google Scholar

[19] E. H. Conrow, J. Spacecr. Rockets 48, 146–152 (2011).10.2514/1.46753Search in Google Scholar

[20] W. Nolte, ‘AFRL TRL Calculator V 2.2 Release Notes’. [Online]. Available: http://aries.ucsd.edu/ARIES/MEETINGS/0712/Waganer/.Search in Google Scholar

[21] W. Nolte, in ‘NDIA Systems Engineering Conference’, 2003.Search in Google Scholar

[22] T. Altunok and T. Cakmak, Adv. Eng. Softw. 41, 769–778 (2010).10.1016/j.advengsoft.2009.12.018Search in Google Scholar

[23] LASHARE, 2015. [Online]. Available: http://www.lashare.eu/.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2017-3-31

Accepted: 2017-7-4

Published Online: 2017-7-28

Published in Print: 2017-10-26

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/aot-2017-0025

Keywords for this article

decision making; laser-based equipment; management software; technology assessment; technology management; technology readiness level (TRL)