Study to Increase the TRL of Exoskeleton ERMIS Based on a Methodology to the Identification of Real Performance Parameters

Medina-Valdes, José Luis; Zúñiga-Avilés, Luis Adrián; Cruz-Martínez, Giorgio Mackenzie; Vilchis-González, Adriana H.; Silva-Rivera, Usiel Sandino

doi:10.3390/app11199245

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The methodology proposed by the AFRL was then selected, i.e., the Technology Readiness Calculator, as it seemed comprehensive enough to give a full overview of the attainments and the possible leaks of a general system. Furthermore, the links with NASA gave the confidence that the approach can be potentially shared and discussed among a wide user community, [ 24 , 25 ]. Although this tool is widely considered as a consolidated method to provide a snapshot of technology maturity at a certain time, it should be also considered that the related outcomes may not necessarily fit the macroscopic expectations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Preliminary Technology Readiness Assessment of Morphing Technology Applied to Case Studies

Miceli¹,

Ameduri

Dimino

et al. 2023

Biomimetics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an innovative system, it is essential to keep under control the crucial development phases, which should consider several aspects involving, for instance, the modeling or the assessment of suitable analytical representations. Aiming to pursue a final demonstration to verify the actual capability of an engineering idea, however, some fundamental elements may have been partially considered. Many projects state the initial and final technology readiness level based on the famous scale introduced by the US National and Aeronautics Space Administration (NASA) many years ago and now widespread in many fields of technology innovation. Its nine-step definition provides a high-level indication of the maturity of the observed innovative system. Trivially, the resolution of that macroscopic meter is not made for catching advancement details, but it rather provides comprehensive information on the examined technology. It is, therefore, necessary to refer to more sophisticated analysis tools that can show a more accurate picture of the development stage and helps designers to highlight points that deserve further attention and deeper analysis. The risk is to perform a very good demonstration test that can miss generality and remain confined only to that specific experimental campaign. Moving on to these assumptions, the authors expose three realizations of theirs concerning aeronautic morphing systems, to the analysis of a well-assessed Technology Readiness Level instrument. The aim is to define the aspects to be further assessed, the aspect to be considered fully mature, and even aspects that could miss some elementary point to attain full maturation. Such studies are not so frequent in the literature, and the authors believe to give a valuable, yet preliminary, contribution to the engineering of breakthrough systems. Without losing generality, the paper refers to the 2.2 version of a tool set up by the US Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL), and NASA, with the aim to standardize the evaluation process of the mentioned nine-step TRL.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%