Use of TRL in the systems engineering toolbox

Abstract

Technology Readiness Level (TRL) is used to evaluate the maturity of the Critical Technology Elements (CTE) in a project or program and indicates an assumed level of the remaining technical risks for each independent technology. This paper presents results of a literature review exploring the diversity of definitions applied to TRL. Survey results explore whether and how TRLs are used. Based on these results the authors assess to what degree TRL evaluations are suitable for organizations without separately trained and skilled readiness assessment personnel.

Engineering Severity Level - A quantitative technology maturity assessment tool

“…19 was selected. Suppliers also commented 3 Physics package and driving devices include all system components other than power generation, such as lasers, optics, acoustic, optical modulators, amplifiers, Etc.…”

“…Its widespread proliferation is a testament to the tool's utility. Yet, the tool was designed to meet the specific needs of NASA and out-of-context use has resulted in programme delivery shortfalls [2][3][4][5][6] and well-documented issues highlight the imperative need for a maturity tool that provides clear evidence for classifying technology maturity. However, the challenges in creating such a robust, standardised method of assessing technology maturity are reflected in the abundance of tools, matrices and indices available in the literature.…”

“…The suppliers were required to use the ESL and SWaP matrices to articulate the progression of the device's physics package and driving devices3 from the current technical prototype to future (five-year) operational environmental capability. The ESL matrix, shown in Fig 3, and colour coding, shown in Fig.…”

Enhancing Technology Readiness Assessment: The Engineering Severity Level Methodology and the Technical Readiness Level+ Classification

“…The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) classification system [1] has gained widespread adoption. 1 However, the TRL system has faced criticism for its criteria subjectivity, resulting in program delivery shortcomings [3]- [6], [28]. This subjectivity is particularly evident in the transition from TRL 4 to 8, commonly referred to as the "Valley of Death," where innovations often struggle to progress successfully.…”