Budget
£15–28k
Duration
6 weeks
Closes
18 Sept 2026
Background
Quantum magnetometers perform remarkably in a shielded laboratory and considerably less remarkably inside a large steel-framed building surrounded by vehicles, cabling and buried services. We would like to characterise that gap properly, at several real sites, and publish a method that others can use.
What we need from a host is access, a sketch of buried services, and the ability to isolate a bay for two days. What we bring is the instrumentation, the traceable reference characterisation and the analysis.
The finding may well be that the building dominates the measurement entirely and that a quantum device cannot usefully operate there. That is a legitimate and useful result, and we would like host sites to understand that this is a genuine possible outcome rather than a failure of the campaign.
Scope
- Provide hangar access and a sketch of buried services.
- Support a two-day survey with NPL / Manchester kit.
- Help interpret what is the building and what is the instrument.
- Establish a repeatable survey method transferable to other sites.
- Record the operational constraints that a working site imposes on such a survey.
Constraints
The awkward facts, stated now rather than in week six.
- The survey must not interrupt operations beyond an isolated bay for two days
- Buried service records are frequently incomplete, and this must be worked around rather than solved
- Instrument availability is fixed by an existing characterisation schedule
- Six weeks covers planning, two survey days and reporting
Deliverables
- Survey plan and risk assessment
- Mapped magnetic environment
- Note on whether a quantum device can work there
- A transferable survey method suitable for use at other sites
- Traceable reference data for the instrument as deployed
Milestones
- Week 1Site walk-round, access and safety arrangements agreed
- Week 2Survey plan and risk assessment issued
- Week 4Two-day survey conducted
- Week 6Mapped environment, method note and feasibility opinion delivered
Who should apply
- Airport, MRO, or university hangar host
- Ability to isolate a bay for two days
- A site contact with authority over access and safety arrangements
- Acceptance that the result may be unfavourable to the technology
How applications will be judged
In roughly this order.
- Representativeness of the site — an ordinary working hangar is more useful than an ideal one
- Practicality of the proposed access and isolation arrangements
- Quality of available records on buried services and structure
- Willingness to be named, or a clear statement that anonymity is required
Terms
- The survey method is published openly; site identity is withheld unless the host consents
- Measurement data is shared with the host in full
- Instrument characterisation data belongs to the instrument's owner
- The host is not liable for an unfavourable technical result
Apply
Tell the publisher who you are and what you would do. We pass it on. The rest is between grown-ups.
An unremarkable working hangar is of more use to us than an exemplary one. Please do not tidy up on our account.