3. Pilot Feedback - Long [WATERVERSE Project Pilots]: Inzending #12

Inzendingsnummer: 12
ID inzending: 380
Inzending UUID: 6955135e-23f2-41ad-9c16-10e0caf21eb0

Aangemaakt: vr, 03/01/2024 - 12:46
Voltooid: vr, 03/01/2024 - 12:49
Gewijzigd: ma, 04/15/2024 - 20:47

Extern IP-adres: 185.188.251.153
Ingediend door: Anoniem
Taal: English

Concept: Nee
Huidige pagina: Voltooid
I have read the above statements and I hereby provided my explicit consent. Ja
[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. Nee
Full name: Joris Ebbelaar
Date of consent: wo, 02/28/2024 - 00:00
Pilot site/country Netherlands
I participate in this pilot exercise with the role: Operator (user of WATERVERSE WDME) at the water organisation
Affiliated Organisation PWN
Type of affiliated organisation: Water utility
Email [optional]:
Telephone [optional]:
The functionality of the tool with regards to the user requirements is complete. 3
The implementation of data and information transfers through the interface functions is correct. 3
Low frequency of failures to exchange data between the component and other involved components/tools. 2
No deviation between the actual and reasonably expected results. 3
Low frequency of encountering inaccurate results/behaviour. 3
functional_suitability_average 3
The component/tool was operational and available when required for use. 2
The component/tool satisfied user needs for using it under normal operation. 2
I felt that the component/tool’s functionality was giving expected results and at expected time. 3
Low frequency of breaks of the component/tool. 2
Low degree of appearance of failures/faults during the testing/evaluation period. 2
When a failure occurred, no much time was required before gradual start-up of the component/tool. 2
Sufficient capability of the involved functionality in restoring itself after an abnormal event or at request. 2
reliability_average 2
I am able to recognise whether the component/tool is appropriate for fulfilling my requirements. 2
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. 2
The component/tool offers features that make it easy to operate and control. 2
I am able to control the tool and its operation is within my expectations. 3
The component/tool has sufficient attractiveness of the user interface. 2
A sufficiently high proportion of the user interface elements could be customised to my satisfaction. 2
The component/tool offered sufficient support in avoiding errors when using its functionality. 2
usability_average 2
Satisfactory response time of the functionality. 3
Throughput of the operations close to the specified requirements. 3
performance_efficiency_average 3
maintainability_average 0
portability_average 0
Sufficient use of standard application programming interfaces. 3
Sufficient openness and ease of use of the interfaces. 3
compatibility_average 3
security_average 0

Funding Support Agencies

EU funding support flag
EU structural funds flag
flag of Republic of Cyprus
CY structural funds
CY Research and Innovation Foundation