The journey of transforming a technological innovation from a laboratory concept to a market-ready product can be daunting. For researchers and entrepreneurs in the quantum sensing field, this path involves not only advancing the technology itself but also navigating business-related complexities of intellectual property, regulatory compliance, market validation, and ultimately, commercialization. However, the first step is still to validate the technological feasibility. In this article I will outline how to move from a proof of concept (Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 3) to a lab-validated technology (TRL 4)
To illustrate this journey more concretely, I consider the example of developing a cold atom quantum gyroscope. This specific case sheds light on the general steps involved in maturing a quantum technology.
TRL 3 – Experimental Proof of Concept
At TRL 3 you have demonstrated a cold atom gyroscope proof of concept.
You had done some fundamental modelling showing that a cold atom based gyroscope could in principle surpass existing gyroscope performance. With this result, and some nice graphics, you applied for a grant to do a proof of concept and you received it. Your master students then designed, integrated and characterized a laser system, which still works most of the times but is a bit too sensitive to the air conditioning. Your in-house mechanical workshop first complained about the complex design of the vacuum system, but finally manufactured it. Your PhD student had been there for 4 years already and was hoping to finally produce some measurements of Earth’s rotation rate and move on in his career. The day came and the amalgam of custom and off-the-shelf components functioned as intended for longer than a day. Atoms were cooled, launched and interfered, enabling the detection of rotation rates via atom-interferometry and producing enough data for an impactful research paper.
While a major accomplishment, a proof of concept is lacking behind in multiple aspects to be considered a mature technology:
- Integration,
- Reliability,
- Robustness,
- and Relevant Performance (Earth’s rotation rate can be measured with a sundial).
TRL 4 – Technology Validated in Laboratory Environment
For TRL 4 your proof of concept needs to become a technology and you have to demonstrate it in a laboratory environment. This is a big step for every technology. For quantum sensors it is a particularly big one as physicists need to become engineers.
Your To-Do’s are the following:
- Performance Modelling: Develop and maintain a performance model that captures the main contributions to your sensor performance metrics.
- Consult Users: Engage with users to validate your hypothesis that the performance your gyroscope might offer is actually relevant for them.
- Requirements: Formulate performance goals and requirements for the gyroscope, then break these down into specific requirements for each subsystem.
- Subcontract: Identify critical components that require specialized expertise for development. Research and engage with potential suppliers who have the necessary capabilities.
- Integrate and Test: Integrate the system and verify that the requirements are met in the lab.
This step is not merely an extension of your research group’s existing efforts. Funding agencies expect more engineering rigor in grant applications for such a purpose. Performance Engineering, Requirements Engineering, Subcontractor Management, Manufacturing, Integration and Testing are all activities that can be executed well or poorly. Rapid Prototyping is no loophole. Instead, with this approach your team needs to interact even more with users while still managing requirements. Also, let’s face it, your quantum sensor will be bulky and expensive. Your future users will most likely be conservative industries, such as aerospace or defence, who favor the waterfall model.
Strategies
There are multiple options for you to address these challenges. I’ll elaborate on three of them:
Consulting and Modelling Focus
Form partnerships with engineering organizations and focus on consulting and performance modelling activities. This way you leverage external expertise, minimize the investment in equipment and personell and stay focused on your core competency while still supporting the advancement of the technology. The downsides of this approach is limited control over quality and direction of the developments and complexities regarding intellectual property rights.
Dedicated In-House Team
Identify team members who are motivated to engage in engineering activities, separate them from the research-focused team, add engineers, and provide cross-disciplinary training. You maintain control over objectives and quality. In addition, you build up capacities that will benefit other projects. You will, however, need to commit resources with the risk of diverting attention from your research activities. Additionally, your new team will need some time to learn and become fully productive.
Spin-off Creation
Establish a spin-off company focused exclusively on advancing and bringing the technology to market. There is the potential for significant financial benefits depending on your shares and the spin-off’s success. You separate the commercial risks from your research activities while your influence on quality and development directions will vary based on your engagement level. A downside is that the spin-off requires a diverse array of talents beyond engineering, including expertise in marketing, sales, customer service, and business operations. Furthermore, at this early stage of the technology the market viability is hard to assess and your spin-off might need a long time to be bought or become profitable.
Conclusion
Navigating the journey from a proof of concept (TRL 3) to a commercial quantum sensor (TRL 9) is daunting. However, even moving from TRL 3 to TRL 4 is a signficant step. A shift from pure research to embracing engineering challenges is required.
I outlined three strategies: external consulting for expertise leverage, forming a dedicated in-house team for control and skill development, and creating a spin-off for focused commercialization. Each has its merits and downsides. The choice will depend on your personal objectives, the funding and market landscape for your quantum sensor and the people you have at hand.
No responses yet