Jump to content

Public:Traction

From Wiki Furtherium

{{#info-tooltip: More info}} →redirect Further information: Public:ARHUDFM Manifesto, Public:Graphical User Interface, Public:Applications, Public:DoD Pains, Public:ARHUDFM Features Summary, Public:Dataroom, Deck "Tactical Situational Awareness Mobility Platform (Headset)", Deck "Unmanned Airship Drone Platform" (aerospace & wildfire expert edition), Deck "24/7 Airborne C-UAS Long-Range AI-driven Defense Platform" (military edition)

Traction

Milestones

Annotation

Technology Readiness Level (TRL)
TRL NASA usage DoD usage[1][2][3] European Union Description
1 Basic principles observed and reported Scientific research begins to be translated into applied R&D Basic principles observed Lowest level of technology readiness. Scientific research begins to be translated into applied research & development (R&D). Examples might include paper studies of a technology’s basic properties.
2 Technology concept and/or application formulated Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical applications can be invented Technology concept formulated Invention begins. Once basic principles are observed, practical applications can be invented. Applications are speculative, & there may be no proof or detailed analysis to support the assumptions. Examples are limited to analytic studies.
3 Analytical and experimental critical function and/or characteristic proof-of concept Active R&D is initiated. This includes analytical studies to produce code and laboratory studies to physically validate analytical predictions of separate technology HW/SW elements Experimental proof of concept Active R&D is initiated. This includes analytical studies & laboratory studies to physically validate the analytical predictions of separate elements of the technology. Examples include components that are not yet integrated or representative.
4 Component and/or breadboard validation in laboratory environment Basic technological components are integrated to establish that they will work together. System SW architecture development initiated to include interoperability, reliability, maintainability, extensibility, scalability and security issues Technology validated in lab Basic technological components are integrated to establish that they will work together. System concepts have been considered and results gathered from testing laboratory scale breadboards.This is relatively “low fidelity” compared with the eventual system. Examples include integration of “ad hoc” hardware in the laboratory.
5 Component and/or breadboard validation in relevant environment The basic technological HW/SW components are integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements so that they can be tested in a simulated environment Technology validated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) Fidelity of breadboard technology increases significantly. The basic technological components are integrated with reasonably realistic supporting elements so they can be tested in a simulated environment representative of specific stressing conditions or the relevant environment. Examples include “high-fidelity” laboratory integration of components.
6 System/subsystem model or prototype demonstration in a relevant environment (ground or space) Examples include testing a prototype in a high-fidelity lab environment or a live/virtual experiment or in a simulated operational environment Technology demonstrated in relevant environment (industrially relevant environment in the case of key enabling technologies) Representative model or prototype system, which is well beyond that of TRL 5, is tested in a relevant environment. Represents a major step up in a technology’s demonstrated readiness. Examples include testing a prototype in a high-fidelity laboratory environment or in a simulated operational environment.
7 System prototype demonstration in a space environment Prototype near, or at, planned operational system. Algorithms run on processor of the operational environment integrated with actual external entities. SW support structure in place. SW releases are in distinct versions. Frequency and severity of SW deficiency reports do not significantly degrade functionality or performance. Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV&A) completed System prototype demonstration in operational environment Prototype near or at planned operational system. Represents a major step up from TRL 6 by requiring demonstration of an actual system prototype in an operational environment (e.g., in an air-craft, in a vehicle, or in space).System definition, operational environment definition, test plan, test data, design analysis and evaluationTest plan, test reports, test data.Testing setup in surrogate vehicle, test plan, test data, test results, M&S results, model vs. actual component or environmental differences, key modeling characteristics.
8 Actual system completed and "flight qualified" through test and demonstration (ground or space) Technology and SW has been proven and demonstrated to work in its final form and under expected conditions. In almost all cases, TRL represents the end of true system development. Examples include developmental test and evaluation (T&E) of the system in its intended weapon system to determine if it meets design specifications System complete and qualified Technology has been proven to work in its final form & under expected conditions. In almost all cases, this TRL represents the end of true system development. Examples include developmental test & evaluation (DT&E) of the system in its intended weapon system to determine if it meets design specifications.Final assembly first article inspection results.Key functions and design characteristics, test plan, test data, test results.System qualification results, test data, test results.
9 Actual system "flight proven" through successful mission operations In almost all cases, this is the end of the last “bugfixing” aspects of system development. Examples include using the system under operational mission conditions. SW releases are production versions and configuration controlled. Frequency and severity of SW deficiencies are at a minimum Actual system proven in operational environment (competitive manufacturing in the case of key enabling technologies; or in space) Actual application of the technology in its final form & under mission conditions, such as those encountered in operational test & evaluation (OT&E). Examples include using the system under operational mission conditions.Operational evaluation report.System level test results.OT&E report.

© 2025 U.S. DoD. AFRL TRL Calculator v2.2; James W. Bilbro, NASA, Marshall SFC.

Integration Readness Level (IRL)
IRL Definition Description Questions to Consider Suggested Evidence / Activities
1 Primary interfaces identified. High-level functions and interfaces with potential integration items (systems, subsystems, components) defined and understood. Are interfaces with potential integration items (systems, subsystems, components) and their functions defined/understood? A list and/or diagram of primary interfacing integration items (systems, subsystems, components) and their functions, Functional/physical architecture diagram
2 Basic characterization of primary interfaces performed. Interfaces qualitatively characterized with sufficient detail (inputs/outputs) to assess the feasibility of the proposed integration based on a high level CONOPs. Interface requirements and/or specifications defined/drafted. Are inputs/outputs of primary interfaces characterized and documented? Documented summary of inputs and outputs of primary interfaces or P-diagrams
Are primary interface requirements defined/drafted? Interface requirements document (e.g., Interoperability Profile [IOP], SAE J1939)
Is the high level CONOPS known/understood? High-level CONOPS
Have interface constraints (functional, physical, environmental, regulations, etc.) been defined? Defined constraints referencing ESOH, regulatory documentation, etc.
3 Interface details modeled. Interface design details modeled (using 2D/3D CAD, CAE, simulation, FEA, etc.) and documented as part of a quantitative analysis to verify compatibility. Interface diagrams completed. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem and interfacing subsystems have matured to at least TRL 3. Have interface design details been modeled and documented? 2D/3D CAD, CAE, simulation, FEA, etc. models and interface diagrams.
Have interface requirements been updated based on modeling details? Updated interface requirements document.
Has interface compatibility been verified through analysis? Modeling results to verify compatibility
4 Interfaces demonstrated to prove functionality in a low-fidelity environment. Functionality of integration items successfully demonstrated in a low-fidelity lab or synthetic environment.  Form, fit, and function constraints identified. Initial interface/integration performance evaluated. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem and interfacing subsystems have matured to at least TRL4. Has integration functionality (modules/functions/assemblies) been successfully demonstrated in a low-fidelity lab or synthetic environment? Lab report of demonstrated functionality
Have data transport method(s) and specifications been defined? Interface Control Document (ICD)
Have interface requirements been updated based on the functionality demonstration? Updated interface requirements document
Are overall system requirements for interaction with end users known/baselined? System requirements document
Have interface requirement evaluation/test methods and acceptance criteria been established? Listing of performance metrics and evaluation method, compliance matrix template, etc.
Have assembly instructions been developed? Have assembly instructions been developed?
5 Interfaces demonstrated to prove functionality in a high-fidelity environment. Functionality of integration items successfully demonstrated in a high-fidelity environment. Interface models validated. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem and interfacing subsystems have matured to at least TRL 5. Has integration functionality (modules/functions/assemblies) been successfully demonstrated in a high fidelity environment? Lab report of demonstrated functionality
Have interface models been validated through testing/analysis in a high fidelity environment? Model correlation based on test results
Have interface requirements/specifications been updated based on the functionality demonstration? Updated interface requirements document
Has an Interface Control Document (ICD) been developed? Interface Control Document (ICD)
6 Interfaces demonstrated to prove functionality in a relevant environment. Functionality and compatibility of integration items successfully demonstrated under the most stressing aspects of the operational environment. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem has matured to at least TRL 6.

Typical Milestone Alignment: Successful completion of system-level vendor testing.

Has integration functionality and compatibility (modules/functions/assemblies) been successfully demonstrated in a relevant environment (to at least threshold requirements)? Interface test plan with test acceptance criteria, Integrated system demonstration test results
Have all interface requirements been verified through testing and/or analysis in a relevant environment? Interface requirements compliance matrix
Have corrective actions for non-compliant test results been developed? Non-compliant interface requirements and corrective actions, Failure Mode & Effects Analysis (FMEA)
7 Interfaces demonstrated to prove functionality in an actual or simulated operational environment. Fully integrated prototype subsystem successfully demonstrated in an actual or simulated operational environment (full spectrum of operational conditions) in a representative system or the actual system.  Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem has matured to at least TRL 7.

Typical Milestone Alignment: Successful completion of developmental test & evaluation (DT&E).

Has the fully integrated prototype subsystem been successfully demonstrated in a representative system or the actual system in an actual or simulated operational environment? Interface test plan with test acceptance criteria, Fully integrated system demonstration/ developmental test results
Have all interface requirements been verified through testing and/or analysis in an actual or simulated operational environment? Interface requirements compliance matrix
Have corrective actions for non-compliant test results been developed? Non-compliant interface requirements and corrective actions
8 Subsystem integration qualified in an actual operational environment. Early production level system (to include all subsystems and interfaces) successfully demonstrated and qualified in an actual operational environment. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem has matured to at least TRL 8.

Typical Milestone Alignment: Successful completion of at least DT&E or operational test & evaluation (OT&E). Low Rate Initial Production (LRIP) systems available.

Has the early production level system (to include all subsystems and interfaces) been successfully demonstrated and qualified in an actual operational environment? Interface test plan with test acceptance criteria, Early production level system demonstration test results
Have test results, anomalies, deficiencies, and corrective actions been documented? Interface requirements compliance matrix, Non-compliant interface requirements and corrective actions
9 Subsystem integration with the actual system completed and ready for Full Rate Production (FRP). Fully integrated system fielded with all interfaces demonstrating operational effectiveness, suitability, and safety in the operational environment. System proven to be operational in actual or simulated mission conditions (during OT&E event). Written concurrence of system integration performance provided by the user. Typical TRL Mapping: Subsystem has matured to TRL 9.

Typical Milestone Alignment: Initial Operating Capability (IOC) or Post FRP decision.

Has a fully integrated LRIP system demonstrated operational effectiveness and suitability in the operational environment? Operational effectiveness and suitability test results
Do interface failure rates meet system reliability requirements? Reliability testing results
Has the user provided written concurrence/acceptance of system performance? Concurrence memo (informal), Materiel Release (formal), etc.

© 2024 U.S. DoD. DAC/GVSC IRL Working Group; supersedes 2011 DAC/GVSC IRLs.

Commercial Customer Readiness Level (CCRL)
CCRL Definition Description Example
1 Initial assumptions about general market needs The startup is forming initial assumptions about general market needs, beginning to conceptualize where its product or service could fit within a broader market. This stage involves high-level market analysis, often leading to a preliminary business model. Imaginary Co. is assessing the demand for eco-friendly packaging materials across various industries, intending to identify market gaps and customer preferences.
2 Identification of specific market requirements At this stage, the startup identifies specific requirements of the market, structuring its product development to meet these needs. Tailoring the offering to meet market demands becomes a priority. TechWidget Inc. has conducted a survey to understand specific health monitoring needs and features that consumers desire in a wearable device, and is analyzing these insights to inform its product development plans.
3 Initial feedback from the market obtained The startup is gathering initial feedback from the market, engaging in early conversations with potential customers to refine its product offering. This feedback loop helps to adjust the product development to better suit market demands. BioExplore LLC is presenting its disease detection prototype at trade shows and medical conferences, collecting feedback from practitioners to enhance its relevance and usability.
4 Validation of the market opportunity by multiple customers The startup secures validation from multiple potential customers, establishing that there is a market opportunity for its product. This validation is often critical for moving towards the development of a marketable product or service. GreenDwell Homes is showcasing its eco-home concepts at sustainable living expos and has received positive feedback from multiple real estate developers interested in green construction.
5 Confirmed interest from a beachhead market and established connections to potential customers Confirmed interest from a beachhead market has been established, with the startup making significant connections with potential customers. This level signifies a more focused and deliberate approach to entering the market. EduTech Solutions has received endorsements from several school districts for its educational software after successful pilot programs demonstrating improved student engagement.
6 Product's value verified through partnerships or initial customer trials The startup's product value has been verified through partnerships or initial customer trials, confirming that the offering has genuine traction in the market. This stage often leads to fine-tuning product-market fit and preparing for a broader roll-out. VirtualEvents Platform has partnered with two major conference organizers for virtual event hosting, validating its platform's capabilities and user experience.
7 Customers engaging in comprehensive product trials or initial purchase tests The startup's product is being adopted by early customers through comprehensive trials or initial purchase tests. These engagements are critical for understanding product performance in real-world scenarios and can lead to iterative product enhancements. Cloud Secure Inc.'s cybersecurity solutions are undergoing extensive trial by a Fortune 500 company, providing crucial insights into enterprise-level security needs and product refinements.
8 First products purchased with escalating business development and sales The startup has achieved initial sales and is escalating its business development efforts, which often includes ramping up production and sales teams. This level demonstrates a proof-of-revenue and a foundation for scalable growth. DataAI is experiencing its first wave of product purchases by healthcare providers and is now expanding its sales force to capitalize on its growing reputation in the big data analytics sector.
9 Extensive and scalable product sales At this level, the startup enjoys extensive and scalable product sales, indicating a successful market penetration and the establishment of a robust customer base. This is often the phase where processes and supply chains are optimized for wide-scale distribution. GreenMobility has widespread adoption of its electric vehicle sharing platform, with scalable sales across major cities, and is implementing enhancements to its app to support global user demand.

© 2024 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). All Rights Reserved. Authored by: Keselman and Murray

Mission Customer Readiness Level (MCRL)
MCRL Definition Description Example
1 Initial awareness of mission stakeholders; potential for dual-use identified The startup is just beginning to gain awareness among mission stakeholders, understanding the potential dual-use of its product or technology in mission applications alongside commercial use. Initiating outreach to potential mission-focused clients is key at this level. Imaginary Co. is seeking to engage with environmental agencies to see if their eco-friendly packaging solutions can be used in mission-critical applications, such as disaster relief efforts where sustainable materials are valued.
2 Preliminary assessments of utility determined; business development resources applied to mission context The startup has carried out preliminary assessments of how their product or service could be beneficial in a mission context, getting ready to apply business development resources towards these opportunities. TechWidget Inc. is exploring how its wearable health devices could be adapted for military use, conducting initial assessments to understand the specific needs of soldiers in field operations.
3 Formal meetings and engagements with end users and sponsors; focusing in on capability use cases Formal meetings and engagements with potential end-users and sponsors help the startup refine its understanding of mission-specific use cases, evolving their product design and features to address unique mission requirements. BioExplore LLC is engaging in formal meetings with government health agencies to refine its disease detection technology based on specific use cases and operational requirements of national health missions.
4 Alignment of capability with specific mission needs; identification of potential modifications needed The startup's product or technology has been recognized for alignment with specific mission needs but may require modifications. Attention is now focusing on how to adapt their solution for the mission environment. GreenDwell Homes is working with non-governmental organizations in disaster zones to determine how their sustainable housing can meet the unique demands of rapid- deployment shelters.
5 Collaboration on refining the capability; mission input on design, features, and operational integration Collaboration with mission users has intensified to refine the capability of the product, incorporating mission input into design, features, and operation. This usually entails collaborative development with input from the mission side to ensure suitability. EduTech Solutions is collaborating with international educational missions to ensure their software meets the diverse needs of global classrooms, especially in regions with limited resources.
6 Commitment from mission stakeholders; letters of intent or preliminary agreements indicating serious interest Commitment from mission stakeholders has been obtained, with letters of intent or preliminary agreements indicating serious interest. The startup's product is progressing towards an integrated solution for the mission organization. VirtualEvents Platform has received letters of intent from several emergency response organizations interested in utilizing its platform for training and simulation purposes.
7 Evaluations and validation of the capability fit within mission Evaluations and validations of the startup's product within various missions have been successful, showing the capability fits well within the mission aims. This level of readiness escalates the potential for formal adoption as the product or service is considered for integration into mission systems or operations. CloudSecure Inc. is in the final stages of product validation with a national security agency, proving that their cybersecurity tools meet the rigorous standards required for mission-critical systems.
8 Formal adoption of the capability; integration into mission systems, training, or doctrine The startup's technology or service has formally been adopted; it's now being integrated into mission systems, training, or doctrine. This stage represents a significant milestone as the product becomes an official part of the mission's operational toolkit. DataAI's analytics platform has been integrated into a defense intelligence system, contributing to data-driven mission planning and operation after formal adoption by the defense department.
9 Standard issue or widespread deployment across multiple units or platforms The product has become standard issue or is seeing widespread deployment across multiple units or platforms, becoming a common tool within the mission's operational environment. It signifies full-scale acceptance and integration of the product in the mission context. GreenMobility has achieved a major success with its electric vehicles being adopted as the standard transportation option at numerous military installations, enhancing operational efficiency and supporting the mission's sustainability objectives.

© 2024 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). All Rights Reserved. Authored by: Keselman and Murray

Manufacturing Readness Level (MRL)
MRL A - Technology and Industrial Base B - Design C - Cost & Funding D - Materials (Raw Materials, Components, Subassemblies and Subsystems) E - Process Capability & Control
1 Global trends in emerging industrial base capabilities identified. Hypotheses developed for cause-effect relationships between technology variables and producibility. Hypotheses developed regarding technology impact on affordability. New material properties and characteristics surveyed and identified for research (e.g., manufacturability, quality). Modeling and simulation approaches/tools identified to support manufacturing and quality activities.
Global trends in manufacturing science and technology identified (i.e., concepts, capabilities). Current capability deficiencies and gaps identified. Initial manufacturing and quality costs identified. Global trends for material availability, obsolescence, and DMSMS surveyed and identified for research. Hypotheses developed regarding cause-effect relationships between process variables and process stability and repeatability.
2 Potential industrial base capability gaps identified. Studies performed to test hypotheses regarding cause-effect relationships between technology variables and producibility. Elements identified which have a potential impact to producibility (i.e., materials, processes, capabilities, limitations). Cost model approach defined. Potential effects of new material properties on design application manufacturability and quality predicted based on research. Modeling and simulation in development initiated.
Potential manufacturing science and technology gaps identified. Analyses performed to evaluate the feasibility of potential solutions to address capability gaps. Potential manufacturing and quality cost drivers and system affordability gaps identified. Material availability, obsolescence, and DMSMS gaps identified. Studies performed to test hypotheses regarding cause-effect relationships. Initial process approaches identified.
3 Industrial base capabilities for potential sources identified for system concepts. System concept elements evaluated for manufacturability and producibility using experiments, modeling, and simulation. Manufacturing cost estimates for system concepts developed. Initial cost models developed which include high-level process steps and materials. Effects of new material properties on design concept manufacturability and quality validated using experiments and models. Manufacturing and quality gaps for system concepts identified using modeling and simulation.
Manufacturing technology requirements identified to address potential capability gaps for system concepts. High level performance, lifecycle, and technical requirements defined and evaluated for system concepts. Trade-offs in design options based on experiments and initial MOEs. Analyses conducted to refine manufacturing and quality cost drivers, risks, and development strategy (e.g., lab to pilot to factory). Potential cost reduction and system affordability gap closure strategies identified. Material availability, obsolescence, and DMSMS gap closure strategy defined. Cause-effect relationships between process control variables and process stability and repeatability validated through laboratory experiments. Critical process control variables identified.
4 Industrial base including capacities and capabilities surveyed for preferred materiel solution, key technologies, components, and/or key processes. Industrial base considerations included in AoA with capability risks and issues documented in the AS. Initial producibility and manufacturability assessments in selection of preferred materiel solution completed. Results considered in AoA documented in AS key components/technologies. Cost estimates refined based on anticipated production volumes associated with preferred materiel solution. Cost model updated with identified cost drivers (i.e., process variables, manufacturing, materials, and special requirements). Cost driver uncertainty quantified. Cost model supports AoA and ASR. New materials and components for preferred materiel solution demonstrated in a laboratory environment. Production modeling and simulation tools utilized to define manufacturing and quality requirements for preferred materiel solution. Modeling and simulation results considered in the AoA.
Manufacturing technology development initiatives defined for preferred materiel solution. Manufacturing technology development requirements considered in the AoA. Form, fit, and function constraints, and manufacturing capabilities identified for preferred systems concept. SEP and T&E Strategy recognize the need for the establishment/validation of manufacturing capability and management of manufacturing risk for the product lifecycle. Initial KPPs identified for preferred systems concept. System characteristics and measures to support required capabilities identified. Producibility and lifecycle cost risks and issues assessed for preferred materiel solution. Initial cost analysis supports AoA and ASR. Projected lead times identified for all difficult to obtain, difficult to process, or hazardous materials. Quantities and lead times estimated. Material availability risks and issues including DMSMS for preferred materiel solution considered in AoA. Mitigation plans incorporated in SEP for the preferred system concept. Maturity of critical processes for preferred materiel solution assessed.Process capability requirements and improvement plans developed and documented in the SEP.
5 Industrial base analysis initiated to identify potential manufacturing sources. Sole/single/FOCI sources identified and planning initiated to minimize risks. Producibility and manufacturability assessments of key technologies and components initiated. Ongoing design trades consider manufacturing processes and industrial base capability constraints. Manufacturing processes assessed for capability to be tested and verified in production. Manufacturing processes assessed for influence on O&S. Prototype components produced in a production relevant environment, or simulations drive end-to-end cost models. Cost model includes materials, labor, equipment, tooling/STE/SIE, setup, yield/scrap/rework, WIP, and capability/capacity constraints. Materials manufactured or produced in a prototype environment (may be in a similar application/program). Maturation efforts in place to address new material production risks for technology demonstration. Initial modeling & simulations (product or process) developed at the component level and used to determine constraints.
Required manufacturing technology development efforts initiated. Lower level performance requirements sufficient to proceed to preliminary design. All enabling/critical technologies and components identified and the product lifecycle considered. Evaluation of the design for KCs initiated. Product data required for prototype component manufacturing released. Costs analyzed using prototype component actuals to ensure target costs are achievable. Decisions regarding design choices, make/buy, capacity, process capability, sources, quality, KCs, yield/rate, and variability influenced by cost models. Availability risks and issues addressed for prototype build. Significant material risks including DMSMS identified for all materials. Planning initiated to address scale-up issues. Process Maturity assessed on similar processes in production. Process capability requirements identified for pilot line, LRIP and FRP.
6 Industrial base (IB) analysis including capacity and capability for MS B completed. Industrial capability in place to support manufacturing of development articles. Plans to avoid or justification of sole/single/FOCI IB sources complete. Producibility assessments and producibility trade studies (performance vs. producibility) of key technologies/components completed. Results used to shape AS, SEP, manufacturing and producibility plans, and planning for EMD or technology insertion programs. Preliminary design choices assessed against manufacturing processes and industrial base capability constraints. Producibility enhancement efforts (i.e., DFM, DFA, etc.) initiated. Cost model updated with design requirements, material specifications, tolerances, IMS, results of system/subsystem simulations and production relevant prototype demonstrations. Material maturity verified through technology demonstration articles. Preliminary material specifications in place. Material properties adequately characterized. Initial modeling & simulations developed at the sub-system or system level, and used to determine system constraints.
Manufacturing technology efforts continuing. Required manufacturing technology development solutions demonstrated in a production relevant environment. System allocated baseline established. Product requirements and features are well enough defined to support PDR. Product data essential for subsystem/ system prototyping has been released, and all enabling/critical components have been prototyped. Preliminary KCs for the design identified and mitigation plans initiated. Costs analyzed using prototype system/sub-system actuals to ensure target costs are achievable. Cost targets allocated to subsystems. Cost reduction and avoidance strategies developed. Manufacturing cost drivers for "Should-Cost" model provided. Availability risks and issues addressed to meet EMD build. Long-lead items identified. Components assessed for future DMSMS risk. Manufacturing processes demonstrated in production relevant environment. Collection or estimation of process capability data from prototype build and refinement of process capability requirements initiated.
7 Industrial base capacity and capability to support production analyzed. Justified Sole/single/FOCI industrial base sources assessed and monitored. Detailed producibility trade studies using knowledge of key design characteristics and related manufacturing process capability completed. Producibility enhancement efforts (i.e., DFM, DFA, etc.) ongoing. Manufacturing processes re-assessed as needed for capability to be tested and verified. Manufacturing processes re-assessed as needed for potential influence on O&S. Cost model updated with the results of systems/sub-systems produced in a production representative environment, production plant layout and design, and obsolescence solutions. Material maturity sufficient for pilot line build. Material specifications approved. Modeling & simulations used to determine system constraints and to identify improvement opportunities.
Manufacturing technology efforts continuing. Required manufacturing technology development solutions demonstrated in a production representative environment. Product design and features are well enough defined to support CDR, even though design change traffic may be significant. All product data essential for component manufacturing released. Potential KC risks and issues identified with mitigation plans in place. Manufacturing costs rolled up to system/sub-system level and tracked against targets. Detailed trade studies and engineering change requests supported by cost estimates. Cost reduction and avoidance strategies underway. Manufacturing cost drivers for "Should-Cost" model updated. Availability risks and issues addressed to meet LRIP builds. Long lead procurements identified and mitigated. DMSMS mitigation strategies for components in place. Manufacturing processes demonstrated in a production representative environment. Collection and/or estimation of process capability data and refinement of process capability requirements ongoing and used to shape process improvement plans.
8 Industrial base capacity and capability analysis for MS C completed. Industrial capability is in place to support LRIP. Producibility improvements implemented on system. Known producibility risks and issues managed for LRIP. Cost model updated with results of pilot line build. Materials proven and validated during EMD as adequate to support LRIP. Material specifications stable. Modeling & simulations verified by pilot line build. Results used to improve process and demonstrate that LRIP requirements can be met.
Primary manufacturing technology efforts concluding. Improvement efforts continuing. Required manufacturing technology solutions validated on a pilot line. Detailed design of product features and interfaces completed. All product data essential for system manufacturing released. Design change traffic does not significantly impact LRIP. Costs analyzed using pilot line actuals to ensure target costs are achievable. Manufacturing cost analysis supports proposed changes to requirements or configuration. Cost reduction initiatives ongoing. Manufacturing cost drivers for "Should-Cost" model updated. Availability risks and issues managed for LRIP. Long lead procurement initiated for LRIP. Availability issues addressed to meet FRP builds. DMSMS mitigation ongoing. Manufacturing processes for LRIP verified on a pilot line. Process Capability data from pilot line meets target. Process capability requirements for LRIP and FRP refined based upon pilot line data.
9 Industrial base capacity and capability analysis for FRP has been completed and capability is in place to support start of FRP. Prior producibility improvements analyzed for effectiveness during LRIP. Producibility risks and issues discovered in LRIP managed for FRP. FRP cost model updated with result of LRIP build. Materials controlled to specifications in LRIP. Materials proven and validated as adequate to support FRP. Modeling & simulations verified by LRIP build, assist in management of LRIP, and demonstrate that FRP requirements can be met.
Manufacturing technology process improvements efforts initiated for FRP. Major product design features and configuration are stable. System design has been validated through operational testing of LRIP items. PCA or equivalent complete as necessary. Design change traffic is limited. LRIP cost goals met and learning curves analyzed with actual data. Cost reduction initiatives ongoing. Touch labor efficiency analyzed to meet production rates and elements of inefficiency are identified with plans in place for reduction. Long lead procurement initiated for FRP. Availability risks and issues managed for FRP. DMSMS mitigation ongoing. Manufacturing processes are stable, adequately controlled, capable, and have achieved program LRIP objectives. Variability experiments conducted to show FRP impact and potential for continuous improvement.
10 Industrial base analysis capacity and capability supports FRP and includes support for modifications, upgrades, surge and other potential manufacturing requirements. Design producibility improvements demonstrated in FRP. Process producibility improvements ongoing. All modifications, upgrades, DMSMS and other changes assessed for producibility. Cost model validated against actual FRP cost. Materials controlled to specifications in FRP. Modeling & simulations verified by FRP build. Production simulation models used as tools to assist in management of FRP.
Manufacturing technology continuous process improvements ongoing. Product design is stable. Design changes are few and generally limited to those required for continuous improvement or in reaction to obsolescence. FRP cost goals met. Cost reduction initiatives ongoing. All material availability risks and issues managed. DMSMS mitigation ongoing. Manufacturing processes are stable, adequately controlled, capable, and have achieved program FRP objectives.

MRL1, MRL2, MRL3 - Pre-Materiel Development Decision (Pre-MDD).

MRL4 - Materiel Solution Analysis (MSA). Alternative System Review (ASR).

MRL5, MRL6 - Technology Maturation and Risk Reduction (TMRR). System Requirements Review / System Functional Review (SRR/SFR). Production Readiness Review (PDR).

MRL7, MRL8 - Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD). Critical Design Review (CDR). Production Readiness Review / System Verification Review (PRR/SVR).

MRL9 - Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP). Production Configuration Audit (PCA).

MRL10 - Full-Rate Production (FRP).


© 2025 U.S. DoD. DoD Manufacturing Readiness Levels (MRLs). MRL Criteria Matrix v2025 R1. Effective as of 8 July 2025.

Commercial Funding Readiness Level (CFRL)
CFRL Definition Description Example
1 Exploring potential funding avenues, including bootstrapping and pre-seed funding. The startup is identifying potential avenues for funding, exploring whether to bootstrap or pursue pre-seed investment to take the initial steps in its business journey. At this level, the focus is on market research and developing the business concept. Imaginary Co. is developing a concept for an eco-friendly packaging solution and is researching local angel investors and making a list of “family and friends” for initial funding while refining its business plan.
2 Actively seeking pre-seed or angel investors for initial milestones The startup is actively seeking early financial backers such as pre-seed or angel investors to support achieving key early milestones such as minimal viable prototype (MVP) development. This level shows a move from concept to initial action and actual fundraising. TechWidget Inc. has a prototype for a wearable health monitor and is pitching to angel investor networks to fund its market validation study.
3 Pre-seed or angel funding secured to continue market exploration With pre-seed or angel funding secured, the startup is actively engaged in market exploration and beginning product development. This early injection of funds is used to validate assumptions and prepare for further financial rounds. BioExplore LLC has secured angel funding to develop its first laboratory-based prototype for rapid disease detection and is conducting initial market assessments.
4 Seed funding being pursued for initial product development and market validation The startup is in the process of pursuing seed funding, which is essential for product development and initial market validation efforts. At this point, the company aims to demonstrate the viability of its product to attract further investment. GreenDwell Homes is seeking seed investment to build sustainable tiny home models and validate the market through a pilot project in three cities.
5 Seed funding round completed; positioning for future funding with defined milestones and growth objectives Having completed a seed funding round, the startup is working on achieving predefined milestones and growth objectives to pave the way for larger investments. There is an operational product and initial market traction at this level. EduTech Solutions has completed its seed funding round and is focused on increasing its user base and proving its educational software’s efficacy to attract Series A funding.
6 Series A funding being actively targeted to scale operations and market presence The startup targets Series A funding to scale its operations and expand its market presence. Successful reaching of Series A would reflect market validation and investor confidence in the business model. VirtualEvents Platform is targeting Series A funding to expand its online event hosting capabilities and grow its customer base internationally.
7 Series A funding secured; planning for Series B to further scale and possibly enter new markets The startup plans for Series B funding after securing Series A, which means it's preparing to scale up further, improve existing products, and possibly explore new markets. This reflects a level of success and stability where the business has proven its model and is ready for aggressive growth. CloudSecure Inc. has leveraged its Series A to gain a foothold in the cybersecurity market and is preparing a Series B round to finance expansion into new regions and develop additional security services.
8 Series B (or later stages) funding secured; continuous assessment of future funding needs With Series B funding secured, the startup enters a phase of accelerated growth, focusing on scaling its business operations and assessing ongoing funding requirements. It represents a mature startup with a significant customer base, driving towards becoming a market leader. DataAI, a machine learning analytics firm, after closing its Series B, is scaling its operations and enhancing its technology stack to meet the growing demand for big data solutions in the healthcare sector.
9 Scaling, market expansion and strategic investment with a focus on exit The startup is in an advanced growth phase with potential market leadership, possibly exploring strategic investments, mergers, and acquisitions, or even preparing for public listing. At this stage, the startup is a well-established player with a sustainable, scalable business. GreenMobility, an electric vehicle sharing service, is expanding globally and exploring strategic partnerships or an IPO as it becomes a dominant player in the urban mobility sector.

© 2024 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). All Rights Reserved. Authored by: Keselman and Murray

Mission Funding Readiness Level (MFRL)
MFRL Definition Description Example
1 Exploring a dual-use funding strategy The startup is exploring a dual-use strategy, where it considers opportunities for its technology in both commercial and mission-driven applications. This phase involves researching possible mission partnerships and funding sources like government grants or contracts. Imaginary Co., while focusing on eco-friendly packaging solutions for commercial use, is also investigating defense applications for lightweight, durable materials and potential government funding for R&D.
2 Identification of first phase funding sources, such as innovation grants or R&D programs Identification of funding sources for initial phase projects is underway, such as innovation grants or R&D programs, to support the startup's mission-related product or technology development. TechWidget Inc. is identifying government and private grant programs that could finance further development of its health monitoring wearable for use in remote patient monitoring for military personnel.
3 Application(s) submitted to secure first phase funding and mission partnership opportunities The startup has applied to secure first-phase funding and is actively seeking partnerships with mission-focused organizations to support and guide its product development for mission use. BioExplore LLC has submitted proposals for government grants to further its rapid disease detection technology for bio-surveillance missions and is seeking partnerships with public health agencies.
4 Award(s) of first phase non-dilutive funding from mission-driven organizations The startup has been awarded its first phase of non-dilutive funding from mission-driven organizations, marking a transition from the planning to execution phase in its mission strategy. GreenDwell Homes has received an innovation grant for the development of sustainable living modules that can be used for rapid deployment in disaster relief missions.
5 Continued dual-use strategy while securing procurement relationships with funded mission partners The startup continues its dual-use strategy, securing procurement relationships with funded mission partners. This level involves more in-depth collaboration to align the product with mission requirements. EduTech Solutions is working closely with education-focused NGOs to deploy its software in underserved regions, aligning with both commercial objectives and educational missions.
6 Application(s) submitted for follow-on grant or award phases; at least one deep partnership with mission user After submitting applications for follow-on grant or award phases, the startup has at least one deep partnership with a mission user. This stage confirms the potential fit of the startup's product within mission-driven programs. VirtualEvents Platform is applying for additional funding to enhance its platform for training simulations for emergency response teams after establishing a key partnership with a national disaster response organization.
7 Award(s) of follow-on phases of funding and progress in securing enduring pathways into mission production The startup has secured follow-on phases of funding, demonstrating progress in establishing enduring pathways into mission production, which can lead to a viable long-term contract or integration into mission programs. CloudSecure Inc. has advanced to the next phase of funding for its cybersecurity solutions after proving its value in pilot programs with a government agency, moving towards becoming a regular part of the agency's security infrastructure.
8 Substantial investment from late-phase mission procurement partner for continued development The startup has received significant investment from late-phase mission procurement partners for continued development. This investment helps in fine-tuning the product for mission-specific needs and paves the way for formal adoption. DataAI has secured a substantial contract from a defense contractor for its analytics platform, to be tailored for intelligence gathering and analysis, marking a critical step towards integration into national defense systems.
9 Long-term funding secured through production contracts or integration into the mission budget With long-term funding secured through production contracts or integration into the mission budget, the startup's product becomes part of the standard issue or sees widespread deployment across multiple units or platforms within the mission context. GreenMobility's electric vehicle sharing technology has been adapted and integrated into military bases around the country for efficient, on-demand transportation, backed by a multi-year contract with the Department of Defense.

© 2024 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). All Rights Reserved. Authored by: Keselman and Murray

Product-Market Fit

More Details in the Community

If you’d like to see not only aggregated data but also in-depth content, including detailed discussions on a wide range of topics related to user cases and technologies, join the discussion by clicking the link below. Invitation for new users

Research & Development

Roadmap

{{#info-tooltip: Please see main article}} →redirect Main Article: Public:Dataroom

Investment Rounds Goals

Time Period Round Amount Goals (Project A + Project B)
Q2 2026 Seed $4,000,000
  • [TRL 6] MVPα
  • [TRL 7] MVPβ
Q4 2026 Series A $16,000,000
  • [TRL 8] MMPδ
  • Low-Rate Initial Production (LRIP)
Q2 2027 Series B $32,000,000
  • [TRL 9] MMPγ
  • Proving ground testing
  • Pilots, V&V product, PMF
  • Full-Rate Production (FRP)
Q2 2028 Series C $85,000,000
  • [MRL 10] MMPγ
  • FRP scaling (full robotic assembly)

Development Teams (Project A)

Design Development & Architecture [A]: Ada Lovelace[4] Team

Device design, GUI, VUI, Apps algorithms, Demos, Videos, Animations

  • Prio #1: Research and description of the principle of operation, description of the technology application, computer-added design, event-driven software architecture[5]
  • Prio #2: Technology functionality demo, specific functionality description, GUI demo, lab experimental setup

Mechanical Engineering [M]: Stephanie Kwolek[6] Team

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: based on 3D print, vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ: manufacturing process automation, robotic assembly, add-ons (auto tourniquets, Care Under Fire set, SCBA integration, external aramid cover, continuous wind сapture impellers, software defined antenna, handheld metal re-radiation radar, optional battery, digital sight)
  • Prio #5: MMPγ: manufacturing & assembly & logistic process upgrade

Optical Engineering [O]: Katharine Blodgett[7] Team

Light guide, Beam splitting prisms, Dichroic mirror, Optical coatings, Fading pads

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: optical scheme, light guide, dichroic mirror, fading pads
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: beam splitting prisms for 3 cam sensors, optical coatings
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ:
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ:
  • Prio #5: MMPγ:

Electronics Engineering [E]: Ida Hyde[8] Team

Schematics and PCBs for motherboard, projector, IFF Transponder, SDR, SDRS, PCSR, Digital sight

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: based on Raspberry Pi 5B, Texas Instruments DLPDLCR2000EVM
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: motherboard chipset Intel 700, Z790[9] or HM770[10], CPU Intel Core i7-14700HX[11][12], DLP PCB, SDRS PCB, IFF PCB
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ: SDR2 PCB, add-on (software defined antenna, optional battery, continuous wind capture impellers)
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ: add-on (auto tourniquets, Care Under Fire set, handheld metal re-radiation radar)
  • Prio #5: MMPγ: add-on (digital sight)

Software Development [R]: Hedy Lamarr[13] Team

SDR, SDR Scan, RDF, Radar Detection, IFF, Networks, Remote control

Software Development [S]: Grace Hopper[14] Team

System Integration, DevOps, Maps, VBS, Sensors

Software Development [T]: Evelyn Berezin[15] Team

IMS, Chat, Workgroups, Tasks, Mission planning

Software Development [I]: Barbara Askins[16] Team

Computer Vision, Computer Audition, AI/ML, AI/DL, AI/NLP, AI/ANN

Networking [N]: Margaret Hamilton[17] Team

Mentor Relations, Pitches, Updates

  • Prio #1: Mentor Relations, Updates
  • Prio #2: Business angels (pre-seed round)
  • Prio #3: Business angels & Venture capital (seed round)
  • Prio #4: Venture capital (round A)
  • Prio #5:

Customer & Business Development [C]: Barbara Liskov[18] Team

Requests, eMails, PR, Meetings

  • Prio #1: Innovation programs research, requests, eMails, meetings
  • Prio #2: Collaboration research, PR
  • Prio #3: Proving ground testing
  • Prio #4: Pilot programms

Development Teams (Project B)

Design Development & Architecture [A]: Ada Lovelace Team

Device design, GUI, VUI, Apps algorithms, Demos, Videos, Animations

  • Prio #1: Research and description of the principle of operation, description of the technology application, computer-added design, event-driven software architecture[5]
  • Prio #2: Technology functionality demo, specific functionality description, GUI demo, lab experimental setup

Mechanical Engineering [M]: Stephanie Kwolek Team

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: based on 3D print, vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ: manufacturing process automation, robotic assembly, add-ons (auto tourniquets, Care Under Fire set, SCBA integration, external aramid cover, continuous wind сapture impellers, software defined antenna, handheld metal re-radiation radar, optional battery, digital sight)
  • Prio #5: MMPγ: manufacturing & assembly & logistic process upgrade

Aerospace Engineering [F]: Amelia Earhart Team

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: based on 3D print, vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ: vacuum casting, vacuum unfusion, injection moulding, manual assembly
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ: manufacturing process automation, robotic assembly, add-ons (auto tourniquets, Care Under Fire set, SCBA integration, external aramid cover, continuous wind сapture impellers, software defined antenna, handheld metal re-radiation radar, optional battery, digital sight)
  • Prio #5: MMPγ: manufacturing & assembly & logistic process upgrade

Optical Engineering [O]: Katharine Blodgett Team

Light guide, Beam splitting prisms, Dichroic mirror, Optical coatings, Fading pads

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: optical scheme, light guide, dichroic mirror, fading pads
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: beam splitting prisms for 3 cam sensors, optical coatings
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ:
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ:
  • Prio #5: MMPγ:

Electronics Engineering [E]: Ida Hyde Team

Schematics and PCBs for motherboard, projector, IFF Transponder, SDR, SDRS, PCSR, Digital sight

  • Prio #1: [TRL 5-6] Prototype: based on Raspberry Pi 5B, Texas Instruments DLPDLCR2000EVM
  • Prio #2: [TRL 7] MVPα: motherboard chipset Intel 700, Z790[9] or HM770[10], CPU Intel Core i7-14700HX[11][12], DLP PCB, SDRS PCB, IFF PCB
  • Prio #3: [TRL 8] MVPβ: SDR2 PCB, add-on (software defined antenna, optional battery, continuous wind capture impellers)
  • Prio #4: [TRL 9] MMPδ: add-on (auto tourniquets, Care Under Fire set, handheld metal re-radiation radar)
  • Prio #5: MMPγ: add-on (digital sight)

Software Development [R]: Hedy Lamarr Team

SDR, SDR Scan, RDF, Radar Detection, IFF, Networks, Remote control

Software Development [S]: Grace Hopper Team

System Integration, DevOps, Maps, VBS, Sensors

Software Development [T]: Evelyn Berezin Team

IMS, Chat, Workgroups, Tasks, Mission planning

Software Development [I]: Barbara Askins Team

Computer Vision, Computer Audition, AI/ML, AI/DL, AI/NLP, AI/ANN

Networking [N]: Margaret Hamilton Team

Mentor Relations, Pitches, Updates

  • Prio #1: Mentor Relations, Updates
  • Prio #2: Business angels (pre-seed round)
  • Prio #3: Business angels & Venture capital (seed round)
  • Prio #4: Venture capital (round A)
  • Prio #5:

Customer & Business Development [C]: Barbara Liskov Team

Requests, eMails, PR, Meetings

  • Prio #1: Innovation programs research, requests, eMails, meetings
  • Prio #2: Collaboration research, PR
  • Prio #3: Proving ground testing
  • Prio #4: Pilot programms

Future ideas

Further reading

FAQ

See also

Public External Sections: Public Wiki Sections: Public Wiki Sections: Not-Public Wiki Sections:

Note: Unless otherwise stated, whenever the masculine gender is used, both men and women are included.

See also product details

Hardware Details: Functional Apps Details: Executive Apps Details: Service Apps Details:


References

  1. ↑ Dr. John Niemela and Dr. Matthew Fisher, The Use of Technology Readiness Levels for Software Development
  2. ↑ TRL-IRL-SRL Definitions
  3. ↑ OUSD(R&E), Technology Readiness Assessment Guidebook, 2023
  4. ↑ Wikipedia, Ada Lovelace
  5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Wikipedia, Event-driven software architecture (EDA)
  6. ↑ Wikipedia, Stephanie Kwolek
  7. ↑ Wikipedia, Katharine Burr Blodgett
  8. ↑ Wikipedia, Ida Henrietta Hyde
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 Intel Z790 Chipset
  10. ↑ 10.0 10.1 Intel HM770 Chipset
  11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Intel, 14th Gen Core i7
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Intel Core i7 13th Gen HX (for mobile devices) Series, i7-13850HX Processor
  13. ↑ Wikipedia, Hedy Lamarr
  14. ↑ Wikipedia, Grace Hopper
  15. ↑ Wikipedia, Evelyn Berezin
  16. ↑ Wikipedia, Barbara Askins
  17. ↑ Wikipedia, Margaret Hamilton
  18. ↑ Wikipedia, Barbara Liskov
Retrieved from "https://wiki.furtherium.com/w/index.php?title=Public:Traction&oldid=7877"