• Journal of the Korean Society of Systems Engineering
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.1-11
• /
• 2015

During the industrial plant system life cycle, required technologies are developed and assessed to analyze their performance, risks and costs. The assessment is called technology readiness assessment (TRA) and the measure of readiness is called technology readiness level (TRL). The TRL consists of 9 levels and through the TRL assessment, the technology to be developed and its components are assigned to their appropriate TRL. TRL assessment should be performed in each life cycle stages to monitor the technology readiness and analyze the potential risks and costs. However, even though the concept of TRL has been largely adopted by numerous organizations and industry, direct and clear assignment of target TRL for each life cycle stage has been overlooked. Direct mapping/assignment of target TRL for each life cycle has benefits as follow: (1) the technical risks condition of each life cycle stage can be better understood, (2) cost incurred if the technology development is failed can be analyzed in each life cycle stage, and (3) more effective decision making because the technology readiness achievement for each life cycle stages is agreed beforehand. In this paper, we propose a steel-making plant system life cycle and TRL assignment to each of the system life cycle stage. By directly assigning target TRL for each life cycle stages, we look forward to a more coordinated (in terms of exit criteria) and highly effective (in terms of technical risks identification and eventually prevent project failure) technology development and assessment processes.

• Korean Management Science Review
• /
• v.26 no.3
• /
• pp.157-167
• /
• 2009

Technology transition from defense technology to weapon system is an important process for defense acquisition program. Many countries such as USA, UK, Australia and Republic of Korea use technology readiness level (TRL) as a tool for technology transition by identifying critical technology elements (CTEs) and assessing the technology maturity. In this paper we review a transition process for the defense acquisition. Then we suggest a method to evaluate system's TRL using each component TRL and integration readiness level (IRL) between each technologies. We apply the method to an ACTD project. A result show that technology maturity is influenced by integration between technologies.

• Journal of The Korean Institute of Defense Technology
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.23-30
• /
• 2023

TRA(Technology Readiness Assessment) quantitatively assesses the current level of domestic technology and is used as a key tool for determining the possibility of domestic R&D and risk management. However, since the current TRA utilizes hardware-oriented TRL(Technology Readiness Level), it is suitable for independent assessment of each technologies, but has limitations in evaluation from a system integration perspective. In addition, the checklist-based assessment is highly likely to involve subjective evaluation. This study proposes an enhanced TRA framework by redefining TRA procedures and criteria from the systems integration perspective of system engineering. We focused on developing a framework that overcomes the limitations of the current TRL/TRA and enables easier and more intuitive assessment. The proposed framework distinguishes between TE(Technology Element) and CTE(Critical Technology Element) in terms of HW, SW and interface and redefines TRL. TRA is performed according to the TRL redefined from the above three points of view, and the lowest evaluation value is used as system maturity level in consideration of risk management. The proposed CTE selection method minimizes the intervention of the evaluator by utilizing the quantitative goal of the key ROC(Required Operational Capability), development difficulty, and application of COTS(Common Off The Shelf) technology. The effectiveness of this framework was confirmed through a case study of the TSS(Target Surveillance System). It is hoped that starting with this study, research at the framework level will be activated and contribute to the improvement of the TRA system.

• Journal of Korean Society for Quality Management
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.395-404
• /
• 2013

Purpose: Technology readiness assessment(TRA) used as a standard readiness assessment tool in the acquisition program of weapon system has some limitations in the comprehensive understanding of the complex system. Therefore, this research is intended to suggest a holistic maturity assessment method for the acquisition of high quality weapon system. Methods: Technology readiness level(TRL), manufacturing readiness level(MRL), integration readiness level(IRL) and system readiness level(SRL) developed to assess system maturities in the various aspects are compared and analyzed to draw an improvement avenue for the current readiness assessment method. Results: TRL, MRL, IRL and SRL have large differences in their maturity targets during the acquisition life cycle: technological performance, manufacturing capability, interface between components and total system, respectively. They complement one another's shortcomings Conclusion: To achieve a successful acquisition of high quality weapon system, multi-dimensional readiness assessment is required. Therefore, comprehensive readiness assessment using TRL, MRL, IRL and SRL will contribute to the acquisition of high quality weapon system through the accurate maturity information of overall system.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.22 no.6
• /
• pp.197-206
• /
• 2021

There is growing interest in the function and role of public research institutes as "entrepreneurial actors" that can contribute to industrial development by commercializing excellent research outputs. On the other hand, their performance in the commercialization phase is insufficient because of the insufficient technological technology readiness level or repeatability. This study conducted probit model analysis to examine the effect of the technology readiness level and commercialization activities on the success of technology commercialization. The results showed that the possibility of success in technology commercialization increased with increasing TRL at the time of acquisition. In addition, the difference between the TRL at the time of acquisition and the current TRL (TRL Gap) does not affect technology commercialization on its own. It generates additional effects in conjunction with the TRL at the time of acquisition. Finally, the results show that technology commercialization is most likely to succeed if technology with a TRL 4-6 level is improved to TRL 9 level through a marginal effect estimation.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2013.01a
• /
• pp.608-615
• /
• 2013

The major countries including Korea extend the national investment on R&D and implement the business performance diffusion policy as the knowledge based competition age arrives recently. The necessity for risk management and systematic management system for R&D achievement have been appeared to prevent the failure as the R&D scale becomes larger as it was said. For this matter, the organization such as NASA and DoD in USA defines the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) as a quantitative accomplishment management index and utilize the Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) system as a criterion. Such tool is evaluated as very effective in the R&D project purposed the practicalization. It is expected that the disadvantage of evaluation system which is oriented to the academic accomplishment in its contents of current research and to contribute greatly to the practicalization of outcomes when such technology readiness level concept is applied to Korean national construction and transportation R&D project. Accordingly, this study analyzed the concept of TRL·TRA, the characteristics and current evaluation management system of Korean national construction and transportation R&D project and suggested the construction and transportation R&D project TRL·TRA performance model to accomplish the practicalization purpose.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences
• /
• v.40 no.3
• /
• pp.264-272
• /
• 2012

TRL has a direct impact on development schedule and cost in the system or technology development projects. If TRL capability of development organization for specified CTEs can be accurately assessed and the impact of TRL on development schedule and cost are analyzed as detailed as possible, the risk of development schedule delay and cost increase can be minimized during the development process. This paper describes analysis results of TRL impact on development schedule and cost in the aerospace project. The development schedule and cost change are quantitatively estimated for the TRL improvement in the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle(UAV) system development program.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Systems Engineering
• /
• v.5 no.2
• /
• pp.43-48
• /
• 2009

This paper aims to develop the framework for evaluating the technology maturity by utilizing TRA(Technology Readiness Assessment) approach. In this context, we will provide the directions through analyzing the domestic acquisition process and re lated regulations, and clarify the scenarios to apply the proposed framework to the defense R&D programs. The paper will conclude with the case study for the evolution of the proposed framework.

• Journal of the Korea Institute of Military Science and Technology
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.60-69
• /
• 2009

Recently, request far application of advanced commercial technology to the defense acquisition process, to reduce the budget and shorten development time, has been increased. To accomplish these goals, the Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration(ACTD) is used for the defense acquisition process in Korea. And User Utility Assessment is tested to make a decision for transition to acquisition process. But this process does not include measurement of technology maturity and impacts of interface and interaction among the technologies. In this research, we propose the needs of measurement of TRL and IRL and application of SRL to reduce the risk during development phase, to understand the relations of technologies, and to fulfill the requirement far transition of the ACTD project to system development and demonstration process.

• Economic and Environmental Geology
• /
• v.48 no.5
• /
• pp.421-429
• /
• 2015

Base researches in geoscience and mineral resources, such as geological and geo-thematic mapping, geological survey and observation, have long-term, continuity and time-leasing characteristics and they are difficult to present the particular research stages or progressions in the research span. The Technology Readiness Levels (TRLs), developed by the U.S. National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), is effective for presenting research maturity levels and progression in the development of new technologies. This study suggests adjusted definitions for the Technology Readiness Levels to fit Geo-technology (Technology in Geoscience and Mineral Resources). Base geological researches, including mapping, surveys and observation, can be also presented in research levels from TRL 1 (R&D planning, literature survey) to TRL 9 (geological information construction and service in all target areas) in terms of the final product's coverage. Moreover, not only development and construction of commercial products, geological disasters and environmental researches can also be presented in field demonstrations through public pilot applications. The modified commercialization or cemonstration TRLs in Geo-technology are TRL 5 (starting pilot field application), TRL 6 (pilot field operation) and TRL 7 (pilot field operation for a larger scale, greater than ten percent of the actual environment).