startup-tips
Sign in
UpcomingR&D programAuto-collected, not reviewed

Cable Connector Enhancement

🇺🇸 United States·U.S. Department of War — DMEA(Government)
Funding
Needs verification
Deadline
2026.09.23
D-34
Official noticeApplyOverseas applicants not eligible ExportPDF

Overview

What you need to judge this in 30 seconds

STTR · Phase: BOTH · Topic DME26TZ05-NP001 · Solicitation 26.TZ

It is widely known that the cable to board connection is a common failure prone interface for electronics systems due to the thermal and mechanical stress they are exposed to. For new designs this connection can be engineered such that risk is lowered as much as reasonably possible but for existing design, there are limited options to overcome the difficulty of maintaining a strong reliable electrical connection in stressful environments. Potting PCBA and electronics assemblies offer great moisture, vibration and shock protection but when potting connectors the potting material is limited to the height of the connector below the electrical contact to prevent potting material from disrupting the connection between each end [3]. This ensures the board side of the connector is secure but not the full connection joint. That connection is still easily severed if it is strained beyond its mechanical limits, which for commercial grade connectors are a relatively low threshold. Commercial connectors could be swapped with more specialized connectors if they exist and the pad footprint on the board is still sufficient but removal of existing connectors from PCBAs still require considerable time for technicians. Reworking existing boards for the purpose of swapping the connector adds additional risk of board fallout from damage or thermal cycling. Repeated use of heat guns for removing and replacing a new connector or cable solution can degrade the heat affected zone and reduce reliability of the board and neighboring components. Especially for densely populated boards with limited distance from a connector to neighboring components which may prevent the use of a heat shield due to limited space. A heat shield can typically be used to avoid thermal and mechanical damage to adjacent components on a PCBA [4] Other options have the connector removed entirely in favor of a direct solder connection, be the board to cable or board to board. Alternative joining methods to replace the connector connection such as Hot Bar Soldering (HBS) can be cumbersome in both time and resources for small production efforts for any singular design. HBS uses pulse heated to reflow the solder material between a PCBA and the wire to form a strong junction [1]. The Hot Bar Solder (HBS) process for any given design requires tooling, fixturing and a compatible Anisotropic Conductive Film (ACF); the space between conductors, minimum pad area, the plating and substrates involved. For an existing connector footprint within a design compatible ACF may not exist and may not be able to be sourced in reasonable quantities as ACF is commonly sold by the case. While recent advancement exists for mitigating use of ACF [2] other challenges remain with design the tooling and the rework required to remove existing connectors. The design of the tool shape is critically important to the temperature distribution across the reflow area and has significant impact on the resultant mechanical and electrical properties achieved [1]. Tooling design and fabrication iterations increase schedule requirements for assembly efforts with increasing difficulty for adequate tooling shape on densely populated boards. These different paths or full board redesign and fabrication are expensive, time consuming and limited solutions because they are assembly specific. To enhance prototyping and system integration efforts a more versatile and efficient solution is needed to address this deficiency.

Category
R&D
Industry
Needs verification
Technology
Needs verification
Target stage
Needs verification
Project duration
Needs verification
Estimated preparation
Needs verification

Funding

Award size and how it is paid

Award range
Needs verification
Currency
USD
Total programme budget
Needs verification
Support type
Needs verification
Co-funding
Needs verification
Matching fund
Needs verification
Disbursement
Needs verification
Note
-

Eligibility

Can we actually apply?

Check whether we can applyEnter where you are incorporated, how old you are and how big — we compare it against this announcement and tell you what would unlock it. No sign-in needed.

SBIR/STTR 은 미국 중소기업만 지원할 수 있습니다(Small Business Act 법정 요건). • 계열사를 포함해 상시 종업원 500명 이하 • 미국 시민 또는 영주권자 1인 이상이 50%를 초과해 직접 소유·지배 • 미국 내 사업장을 두고 주로 미국 내에서 사업을 영위할 것 • 수행책임자(PI)의 주된 근무처가 신청 기업일 것 출처: https://www.sbir.gov/faq/eligibility-requirements

Company age
Needs verification
Employees
0명 ~ 500명
Revenue limits
Needs verification
Consortium
Needs verification

Location Requirements

Geography and legal-entity conditions

Primary country
🇺🇸 United States
Also eligible
None
Foreign companies
No
Local entity
Required
Location condition
미국 내 사업장을 두고 미국 시민·영주권자가 50%를 초과해 소유한 중소기업만 신청할 수 있습니다(법정 요건).

Required Documents

Required/optional · issuer · difficulty · validity · cautions

Document requirements were not captured (needs verification). Check the official announcement.

Application Process

How you apply

Application process not captured.

Evaluation

Review process and criteria

Evaluation process not captured.

Timeline

Announcement → intake → review → agreement → execution

Process steps were not captured.

Equity & Financial Terms

Equity, loans and contract conditions

Equity required
Needs verification
Loan
Non-dilutive grant
Duplicate funding
Needs verification
IP ownership
Needs verification
Deliverable ownership
Needs verification
Exclusivity
Needs verification
Right of first refusal
Needs verification
Audit & settlement
Needs verification

Risk Intelligence

Should we apply at all? — five dimensions plus an overall score (lower is safer)

Overall: Not assessable (insufficient data)
Eligibility risk57

Chance of failing eligibility, location or legal-entity rules

Financial risk36

Co-funding, matching funds, reimbursement and loan exposure

Execution risk22

Paperwork load, timeline pressure, reporting and audit duties

Contract risk27

Exclusivity, right of first refusal, duplicate-funding limits

IP & idea exposure riskNeeds verification

How much technical detail you must hand over, and who owns it

Key risk factors
  • 18
    Local entity required

    You cannot apply without an entity registered in that country.

  • 16
    Overseas applicants not eligible

    Only domestically registered companies may apply.

  • 10
    Own contribution not stated· evidence needs verification

    R&D and pilot programmes commonly require one. Confirm the ratio.

  • 10
    Required documents not collected· evidence needs verification

    The list of required documents was not collected.

  • 8
    Payment timing not stated· evidence needs verification

    Advance versus reimbursement makes a large difference to cash flow.

  • 7
    Exclusivity not stated· evidence needs verification

    Any exclusivity clause has to be checked.

  • 6
    Award size not stated· evidence needs verification

    The announcement does not state how much is available.

  • 6
    Right of first refusal not stated· evidence needs verification

    Any right-of-first-refusal clause has to be checked.

14 item(s) need verification
  • · The list of required documents was not collected — check the announcement for what technical material must be submitted.
  • · Whether an NDA can be signed is not stated (needs verification).
  • · IP ownership terms are not stated (needs verification).
  • · Ownership of the deliverables is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Data-rights terms are not stated (needs verification).
  • · How submitted material may be reused is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether an exclusivity clause applies is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether a right of first refusal applies is not stated (needs verification).
  • · The required own-contribution ratio is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether a matching fund is required is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether payment is in advance or in arrears is not stated (needs verification).
  • · The level of settlement and audit obligation is not stated (needs verification).
  • · The award size is not stated (needs verification).
  • · The duplicate-support rule is not stated (needs verification).

Generated by local:rules-v1 · 4h ago

IP / Idea Protection

How much of your technology and idea you must disclose

Required documents unknown

The announcement does not say what has to be submitted, so the disclosure exposure cannot be judged. the scope of the material requested is not stated. The awarding body is U.S. Department of War — DMEA. 8 fields could not be read and must be checked in the announcement and the grant agreement.

NDA
Needs verification
IP ownership
Needs verification
Deliverable ownership
Needs verification
Data rights
Needs verification
Disclosure depth
Needs verification
File patent first?
Not applicable
Reuse of submissions
Needs verification
Publicity obligation
Needs verification
Exposure score
Needs verification
Safe to disclose
  • · The problem your product solves, and the market definition
  • · Your value proposition and quantified results (improvement rates, throughput)
  • · Anything already public: granted patents, papers, press coverage
  • · Team composition, capabilities and a summary of past delivery
  • · Architecture-level diagrams at module granularity, without internal implementation
Keep to a minimum
  • · Core algorithms: formulae, hyper-parameters and pre-processing rules
  • · Raw training data and the details of your collection pipeline
  • · Full source code and build or deployment scripts
  • · Cost structure and unit-price formulae
  • · Named customers, contract terms and pricing
  • · How an unfiled invention is actually implemented
Recommended actions
  • HIGHPoC/공동개발 IP 귀속 조항 확인

    공동개발 산출물의 지분·개선발명(improvement) 귀속·배경지식(background IP) 분리 조항을 협약서에서 확인하십시오.

  • MEDIUMRequest an NDA

    Ask in writing for a mutual NDA before submitting detailed technical material; if it is refused, keep what you submit at summary level.

4 evidence item(s) from the source
  • UNKNOWN

    No document list was collected, so the exposure of technical material cannot be judged.

    Source link
  • UNKNOWN

    No NDA clause could be found.

    Source link
  • UNKNOWN

    IP ownership terms could not be found.

    Source link
  • UNKNOWN

    Ownership of the deliverables terms could not be found.

    Source link
Needs verification (8)
  • · The list of required documents was not collected — check the announcement for what technical material must be submitted.
  • · Whether an NDA can be signed is not stated (needs verification).
  • · IP ownership terms are not stated (needs verification).
  • · Ownership of the deliverables is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Data-rights terms are not stated (needs verification).
  • · How submitted material may be reused is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether an exclusivity clause applies is not stated (needs verification).
  • · Whether a right of first refusal applies is not stated (needs verification).

This assessment is derived from the stored announcement, document and contract fields. Anything the source does not state is marked "needs verification" — it never asserts that your idea will be taken. Generated by local:rules-v1 · 4h ago

AI Analysis

Pros · cons · difficulty · competition · attractiveness

Preparation difficultyNeeds verification

From paperwork and review stages

Competition (estimate)45

Heuristic from award size and type

Attractiveness46

Amount, terms and IP combined

Overall riskNeeds verification

Weighted average of five dimensions

Pros
  • Needs verification
Cons
  • 현지 법인 설립이 필요합니다.
  • 해외 기업은 지원할 수 없습니다.
Cautions
  • ! IP 귀속 조항이 확인되지 않았습니다 (확인 필요).
  • ! 중복 수혜 제한 규정을 사전에 확인하십시오.

Similar Programs

Comparable by type, country and technology

Source & Provenance

Every value carries its source URL and fetch time

Last fetched
2026.08.20
Human review
Not reviewed — check the official announcement
First seen
2026.08.20
Data status
Auto-collected, not reviewed
AI enrichment
local:rules-v1 · 4h ago
Snapshot history
  • · 4h ago최초 수집 (1b55c994)