Overslaan en naar de inhoud gaan
Menu
Zoeken
Zoeken
Hoofdnavigatie
Company Website
Projects
Articles
Surveys
Videos
Presentations
Contact
Zoeken
Zoeken
Gebruikersmenu
Inloggen
Primaire tabs
Weergeven
Resultaten
(actieve tabblad)
Secundaire tabs
Inzendingen
Analyse
(actieve tabblad)
Downloaden
Kruimelpad
Home
3. Pilot Feedback - Long [WATERVERSE Project Pilots]
Affiliated Organisation
compatibility_average
I have read the above statements and I hereby provided my explicit consent.
[Optional] I agree that my personal data can be used for contacting me in the context of inviting me in future events of interest, related to the WATERVERSE.
Date of consent:
Email [optional]:
functional_suitability_average
maintainability_average
Full name:
I participate in this pilot exercise with the role:
performance_efficiency_average
Pilot site/country
portability_average
Low degree of appearance of failures/faults during the testing/evaluation period.
When a failure occurred, no much time was required before gradual start-up of the component/tool.
Sufficient capability of the involved functionality in restoring itself after an abnormal event or at request.
I am able to recognise whether the component/tool is appropriate for fulfilling my requirements.
Within a reasonable time of training, I felt confident in using the tool with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in the specified context of use.
The component/tool offers features that make it easy to operate and control.
I am able to control the tool and its operation is within my expectations.
The component/tool has sufficient attractiveness of the user interface.
A sufficiently high proportion of the user interface elements could be customised to my satisfaction.
The functionality of the tool with regards to the user requirements is complete.
The component/tool offered sufficient support in avoiding errors when using its functionality.
Satisfactory response time of the functionality.
Throughput of the operations close to the specified requirements.
Proper utilisation of memory resources (did you, for example, encounter “low memory” problems?).
Ability for the system to remain operational when pushed to its limits in terms of number of users, frequency of requests, etc.
Sufficiently easy to analyse a failure occurrence.
Sufficiently easy to find the cause of a failure.
Sufficient ability of recording individual activities during operation of the involved services/functions.
Sufficient ability to monitoring the execution status.
Sufficient readiness of services to accept parameterisation.
The implementation of data and information transfers through the interface functions is correct.
Sufficient availability of the appropriate mechanisms to be ready for changes at any time.
Sufficient ability to decompose the service/functionality into smaller pieces, without affecting the operation of the others.
Sufficient ability to keeping the effect of the modification of the involved tool/functionality local.
Sufficient availability of information on the tool/component functionality, in order to perform the testing.
Acceptable time needed for testing after a failure resolution.
Sufficient ability to take pieces of the tool/component and use it in another context.
Good adaptability of the tool/component to several hardware and software operation environments and network facilities.
Good adaptability of the tool/component to other infrastructures of water organisations.
Low level of effort required for the tool/component to be adapted to a specific operational environment.
Sufficient documentation for the installation process.
Low frequency of failures to exchange data between the component and other involved components/tools.
Sufficnent ease and flexibility of installation process.
Sufficient ease of performing subsequent installations.
Sufficient ease of maintaining the tool/component when replacements of other parts of the system happen.
Sufficient ease of maintaining the continuation of the data flows at replacement requests.
Sufficient ability to operate within a shared integration environment, together with other tools/components.
Low degree of customisation required when the tool/component needs to co-exist in a specific integration environment.
Sufficient use of standard application programming interfaces.
Sufficient openness and ease of use of the interfaces.
The software ensures that only authorised individuals have access to sensitive data.
The software prevents unauthorised access or modification of data, ensuring data accuracy and consistency.
No deviation between the actual and reasonably expected results.
The software provides evidence of actions or events, making it difficult for involved parties to deny their involvement.
The software traces actions and activities to specific entities, ensuring clear accountability.
The software verifies and ensures the true identity of subjects or resources within the system.
Low frequency of encountering inaccurate results/behaviour.
The component/tool was operational and available when required for use.
The component/tool satisfied user needs for using it under normal operation.
Low frequency of breaks of the component/tool.
reliability_average
security_average
Telephone [optional]:
Type of affiliated organisation:
usability_average
Analyse-componenten toevoegen
I have read the above statements and I hereby provided my explicit consent.
[Optional] I agree that my personal data can be used for contacting me in the context of inviting me in future events of interest, related to the WATERVERSE.
Full name:
Date of consent:
Pilot site/country
I participate in this pilot exercise with the role:
Affiliated Organisation
Type of affiliated organisation:
Email [optional]:
Telephone [optional]:
The functionality of the tool with regards to the user requirements is complete.
The implementation of data and information transfers through the interface functions is correct.
Low frequency of failures to exchange data between the component and other involved components/tools.
No deviation between the actual and reasonably expected results.
Low frequency of encountering inaccurate results/behaviour.
functional_suitability_average
The component/tool was operational and available when required for use.
The component/tool satisfied user needs for using it under normal operation.
I felt that the component/tool’s functionality was giving expected results and at expected time.
Low frequency of breaks of the component/tool.
Low degree of appearance of failures/faults during the testing/evaluation period.
When a failure occurred, no much time was required before gradual start-up of the component/tool.
Sufficient capability of the involved functionality in restoring itself after an abnormal event or at request.
reliability_average
I am able to recognise whether the component/tool is appropriate for fulfilling my requirements.
Within a reasonable time of training, I felt confident in using the tool with effectiveness, efficiency, freedom from risk and satisfaction in the specified context of use.
The component/tool offers features that make it easy to operate and control.
I am able to control the tool and its operation is within my expectations.
The component/tool has sufficient attractiveness of the user interface.
A sufficiently high proportion of the user interface elements could be customised to my satisfaction.
The component/tool offered sufficient support in avoiding errors when using its functionality.
usability_average
Satisfactory response time of the functionality.
Throughput of the operations close to the specified requirements.
Proper utilisation of memory resources (did you, for example, encounter “low memory” problems?).
Ability for the system to remain operational when pushed to its limits in terms of number of users, frequency of requests, etc.
performance_efficiency_average
Sufficiently easy to analyse a failure occurrence.
Sufficiently easy to find the cause of a failure.
Sufficient ability of recording individual activities during operation of the involved services/functions.
Sufficient ability to monitoring the execution status.
Sufficient readiness of services to accept parameterisation.
Sufficient availability of the appropriate mechanisms to be ready for changes at any time.
Sufficient ability to decompose the service/functionality into smaller pieces, without affecting the operation of the others.
Sufficient ability to keeping the effect of the modification of the involved tool/functionality local.
Sufficient availability of information on the tool/component functionality, in order to perform the testing.
Acceptable time needed for testing after a failure resolution.
Sufficient ability to take pieces of the tool/component and use it in another context.
maintainability_average
Good adaptability of the tool/component to several hardware and software operation environments and network facilities.
Good adaptability of the tool/component to other infrastructures of water organisations.
Low level of effort required for the tool/component to be adapted to a specific operational environment.
Sufficient documentation for the installation process.
Sufficnent ease and flexibility of installation process.
Sufficient ease of performing subsequent installations.
Sufficient ease of maintaining the tool/component when replacements of other parts of the system happen.
Sufficient ease of maintaining the continuation of the data flows at replacement requests.
portability_average
Sufficient ability to operate within a shared integration environment, together with other tools/components.
Low degree of customisation required when the tool/component needs to co-exist in a specific integration environment.
Sufficient use of standard application programming interfaces.
Sufficient openness and ease of use of the interfaces.
compatibility_average
The software ensures that only authorised individuals have access to sensitive data.
The software prevents unauthorised access or modification of data, ensuring data accuracy and consistency.
The software provides evidence of actions or events, making it difficult for involved parties to deny their involvement.
The software traces actions and activities to specific entities, ensuring clear accountability.
The software verifies and ensures the true identity of subjects or resources within the system.
security_average
Charts type
Tabel
Pie Chart
Column Chart
Funding Support Agencies
PHOEBE Research and Innovation Ltd
