Stage 0 — Research & Architecture Definition
System boundary, material classes, sensing hypothesis, DAQ architecture and commercial thesis defined. Evidence framework and stage-gate controls established.
Validation Roadmap
Staged, evidence-gated validation pathway
INFORMPULSE progresses through a staged validation pathway from controlled laboratory testing through pilot and field. Lab execution is on NO-GO / HOLD until M1–M4 evidence gates close. Each of the ten homepage commercial theses is matched below to the work package, open research question, milestone and stage that will independently validate it.
Stages
Validation stages
Stage 1 — Controlled Laboratory Validation
Test graphene-family and tyre-derived TG/FG-like conductive-carbon cementitious samples against controls with frozen protocol, material traceability, WHS approval and DAQ dry-run evidence. Gate items M1–M6 must be verified before lab execution is authorised.
Stage 2 — Prototype Sensing & PULSE Analytics
Confirm repeatable signal capture, electrode stability, data ingestion, timestamping, anomaly classification and digital-twin integration under controlled loading.
Stage 3 — Pilot Pour / Field-Relevant Trial
Constructability, curing effects, environmental drift and asset-owner usefulness under realistic batching and loading. Engage infrastructure partners and confirm standards-aligned acceptance criteria.
Stage 4 — Field Monitoring & Adoption Pathway
Long-term data quality, maintenance decision value, standards alignment, procurement requirements and commercial model.
Stage 5 — Commercialisation & Standards Pathway
Standards mapping, procurement-readiness evidence, LCA / TEA, IP / FTO review, pilot-to-market decision. A pilot bridge deployment under Austroads supervision is plausibly the fastest credible path to TRL 7.
Stage 1 milestone gates
Evidence required before lab execution
No lab execution proceeds until M1–M4 are complete.
| ID | Milestone | De-risking question | Evidence required |
|---|---|---|---|
| M1 | Protocol Freeze | Is the test method locked and auditable? | Approved protocol, change log, test matrix |
| M2 | Materials Verified | Do we know exactly what material is being tested? | COA, SDS, batch/lot number, receipt log |
| M3 | DAQ Dry-Run | Can the measurement system capture known signals? | Dummy-load, reference resistor, noise-floor and channel logs |
| M4 | WHS / Lab Approval | Is the work safe and formally authorised? | Risk assessment, JSA/SWMS, SDS review, lab induction/access |
| M5 | Controlled Samples | Can samples be produced reproducibly? | Batch records, controls, replicates, curing records |
| M6 | Signal Validation | Is electrical response repeatable and useful? | Load-response data, drift assessment, electrode stability checks |
| M7 | Pilot Readiness | Can results transfer beyond benchtop conditions? | Pilot design, partner approval, constructability review |
Thesis → Validation handoff matrix
Each homepage commercial thesis matched to its evidence pathway
This matrix mirrors the ten commercial theses on the homepage and binds each to a specific work package (WP), open research question (Q), milestone (M), stage (S) and external-comparator gate. Validation is by independent academic review under the UTS-led research collaboration and the CRC-P consortium.
| Thesis | WP | Question | Milestone | Stage | Independent review |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 · Materials uplift (compressive) | WP2, WP3, WP4 | Q01, Q02 | M5, M6 | S1 → S2 | UTS materials lead · NATA-accredited testing |
| 02 · Piezoresistive gauge factor | WP5, WP7 | Q06 | M6 | S1 → S2 → S3 | L21 SHM benchmarking · independent reviewer |
| 03 · FJH synthesis economics | WP1 | Q08 | M2 | S1 (pre-lab) | CRC-P feedstock partner · audited yield/energy |
| 04 · Dispersion science | WP3 | Q03 | M3, M5 | S1 | Academic chemistry lead · ζ-potential / DLS at independent lab |
| 05 · SHM utility under load | WP6, WP7, WP8 | Q05, Q06, Q07 | M6, M7 | S2 → S3 | L21 reviewer · comparator (FBG, AE, PZT, vibration) |
| 06 · Calibration & drift | WP5, WP6 | Q05 | M6 | S3 (Australian environment) | Independent SHM reviewer · pre-registered statistical acceptance |
| 07 · PULSE / digital twin | WP6 | Q05, Q06 | — | S2 → S3 | SCSHM-DEIMC-style benchmark · external software-quality reviewer |
| 08 · Law-of-Fives economics | WP9 | Q07 | — | S4 → S5 | LCA / TEA peer review · asset-owner pilot data |
| 09 · Standards gap | WP10 | Q07 | — | S5 · L25 | Austroads / state road authority · ABCB CodeMark · RILEM TC |
| 10 · Market & commercialisation | WP9, WP10 | — | — | S5 | Investor data room · third-party valuation / market analyst |
Layer 21 — SHM benchmarking
SHM benchmarking is a separate gate (currently Conditional Proceed — Not Pass)
Before INFORMPULSE can claim utility relative to existing structural-health-monitoring methods, it must be benchmarked against fibre Bragg grating sensors, strain gauges, acoustic emission, digital image correlation, vibration-based SHM and visual inspection under a common test plan, with ground-truth instrumentation, pre-registered acceptance criteria and an independent reviewer.
Pass criteria (summary): common test plan and specimen matrix; ground-truth comparator instrumentation; pre-registered statistical acceptance criteria (sensitivity, specificity, false positives, false negatives, drift, signal-to-noise, localisation, cost, installation time); independent review; bounded-pass language by asset class and damage mode is acceptable.
Connected pages
Where to go next
Research collaboration
WP1–WP10 matrix · Q01–Q08 · STEP 01–06 engagement pathway.
OpenPilot pathway
Stage 3–4 pilot framing for asset owners and infrastructure partners.
OpenLiterature anchors
Material-class glossary and the full literature references behind every thesis.
OpenInvestor data room (restricted)
By application and NDA.
Request access