Question: How much does a "low cost" system cost?
Answer: Under $50,000 per engine
Question: The topic states that it is desired that the proposer "develop a system that could be retrofit into existing aircraft". Retrofitted into what?
Answer: It is preferred that a stand alone monitoring system be proposed that could be used with any engine, with FADEC or not. The certification costs should not be included in the cost per unit but should be estimated separately.
Question: We are developing and demonstrating an analytical process with unique capabilities in detection of bad sensors and machine health assessment and prediction. This technology also automatically extracts rules for troubleshooting and specification of repair procedures. We believe that this software technology is well suited to the solicitation topic and we would like to submit a proposal. From the solicitation, we were not clear if the scope of the solution needs to also include a hardware platfrom, and to be responsive we would need to identify a partner or subcontractor with hardware expertise. Please advise.
Answer: The FAA Tech Center does not currently have an operational turbine engine test cell. I would suggest teaming with an engine manufacturer or DOD if a test stand is needed. As far as aircraft, the FAA Tech Center has several aircraft including a Boeing 727, turboprop airplanes, and a helicopter on site which possibly could be used to demonstrate a system. I have attached a fact sheet on this department (ACT 370) that is also available in our web site at http://www.tc.faa.gov
Question: We would appreciate receiving information as to whether the FAA possesses a test stand and what type of jet engines and airplanes are available to successfully research our system under Phase 1.
Answer: The FAA was not planning on providing a test engine for this Phase 1 SBIR. The proposer will have to partner with someone (engine manufacturer, DOD, etc.) if a test engine and test facility are needed. It is possible that if the proposal is accepted that the FAA could help in locating a suitable partner. We do have aircraft at the FAA tech center that could be used on this SBIR. There is a fact sheet that describes the aircraft (in ACT 370) that is available in our web site at: http://www.tc.faa.gov
Question: Is the emphasis on developing real-time algorithms for detecting engine failure/malfuction only or developing software and hardware interface that can predict malfunctions. [Pathway builds COTS hardware-in-the-loop simulation testbed for monitoring, diagnostics, and control for real-time simulation as well as hardware in the loop diagnostics.]
Answer: Both.
Question: In the evaluation criteria, it is listed that in addition to technical merits of the proposal, one should have demonstrated SBIR commercialization, Scientific and technical merit and the feasibility of the proposal's commercial potential, as evidenced by:
- Past record of successful commercialization of SBIR or other research;
- Existence of second phase funding commitments from private sector or non-SBIR funding sources;
- Existence of third phase, follow-on commitments; and
- Presence of other indicators of the commercial potential of the idea.
We are working on SBIR Phase II from NIST for developing intelligent real-time systems and we are also commericially involved in real-time systems for automotive and manufacturing applications using sensory feedback, actuation, and distributed monitoring and control. We work with automotive engines and other power generation devices, but have not worked with aircraft engines. But, we are fully aware of the mathematical modeling and issues related to the work based on the PI's work at NASA. Will the fact that the PI has not worked with aircraft engines adversely affect our technical score since we are commercially involved only with automotive and manufacturing segment of the industry.
Answer: Turbine engine monitoring is our objective. Experience and how it relates to our problem should be explained
Question: We envision the cost sharing portion of the work for phase II work will come from corporate funds only at this time. Is that adequate since we only anticipate working with larger firms only in phase III.
Answer: Partnerships and industry buy in to the technology are beneficial to the FAA, not required.
Question: Based on our knowledge this work will have commercial potential
not only in aerospace, but also in other derivative areas. Is the emphasis
for commercialization only in aircraft industry.
Answer: Certainly the FAA focus is aviation. Power generation and shipboard turbines have different design requirements and rarely fail in ways that can result in loss of life. FAA focus is aircraft safety R&D.
SOLICITATIONS