Document Sample
ANNEX-… Powered By Docstoc
					                              TECHNICAL PART OF INTERIM REPORT
Contract reference n°.: ASE/B7-301/1997/0178/01

Project Title: Joint development of teaching materials to improve EMC skills of
academic staff and post-graduate electronic designers

Name of Beneficiary: Politecnico di Torino - Italy

Period covered by this Interim Report: November 28, 2003 – November 27, 2004

Due date of this Interim Report: November 28, 2004

Executive Summary
       This report covers the first year of the project implementation, that was above all dedicated to the
       preparation of the material for the core activity of the project: the creation of an innovative EMC
       course and demonstrator.
       Structure of the report
            Introduction: the main activities carried out during the covered period are presented,
               highlighting achievements and applied strategy
            Description of Implementation of Activities: activities are described into detail, and
               especially the salient events occurred (kick-off meeting, interviews to manufacturers,
               preparation of the course material).
            Partnership: the interaction between partners is described, highlighting strenght and
               weakness of the partnership.
            Assessment of the project: the status of the project respect to the Logical Framework is
            Annexes: all the deliverables prepared during the covered period are annexed.

I.     Introduction

       The period covered by this report corresponds to the first year of the project implementation.
       Activities carried on during this period were addressed to the preparation of the core of the project
       results: the theorical part of the course material (the demonstrator is foreseen at the beginning of the
       second project year).
       The first six months have been spent to create the substrate on which the course would have been
       built: the manufacturers needs have been investigated, the partners know-how has been shared, the
       main project milestones and activities have been scheduled into details.
       Then, during month 7, the project team started with the course material preparation.

       As foreseen in the project proposal, the main constraint has been to gear all the project team efforts
       towards the creation of a course really based on the “actual world” needs, and not only on theory.
       To reach this aim, the “Manufacturers interview” task has been really important to tune the course
       The adopted strategy consisted in joining together on one side the experience and know-how of
       each partner and on the other side the manufacturer needs.
       In this way the course topics have been chosen in order to fulfil real needs and to be deeply afforded
       by one or more partners.

       The main achieved objective is the creation of the course material itself.

II.    Description of Implementation of Activities

       Details on the activities carried out follow:

              Kick-off meeting: the meeting took place in Turin, on December 19th 2003. All the partners
               were represented by the Management Board. During the first part of the meeting, the
               partners discussed about administrative and financial issues. The budget was reviewed and
               some modifications were decided. During the second part, technical matters were afforded.

    The project workplan was reviewed and detailed, on the basis of the discussion and of
    partners’ proposal. The Applicant was the Team Leader for this task, and prepared the
    report     of   the     meeting,     that     was distributed    to    all   partners.
    The members of the Internal Evaluation Committee were elected, as foreseen in the
    workplan. They are:
        - Prof. Ivan Maio – Politecnico di Torino
        - Assoc. Prof. Dr. Chaiwut Chat-uthai, KMITL
        - Dr. Faiez Ktata (Hannover University)
        - Dr Bah Hwee GWEE (Nanyang Technological University)

   Visit to EMC Laboratories in Europe: the two Asian partners were invited to visit some
    EMC laboratories in the UK and in Italy. The aim of this task was to give them an idea of the
    available technology and of the current state-of-the-art of EMC in Europe. Partner P4
    (Thailand) was the Team Leader for this task, and prepared a detailed report on the visit.
    This task was planned as Activity 2 – Task 2 in the Plan of Action. The project team decided
    to anticipate it as Activity 1 - Task 2 because on one hand it was better to give Asian
    partners this know-how at the very beginning of the project, and on the other hand in order to
    have only one flight Asia-to-Europe for both the kick-off meeting and the visit to laboratories.

   Sharing of material: the project team exchanged their know-how and experience making
    available to the other partners their main publications, courses material, seminars
    presentations and so on. This was useful for everybody to be informed about the others
    activities and know-how, in order to better address the following project tasks. Partner P2
    (University of Nottingham) was the Team Leader for this activity, and collected and merged
    together all the material received by the other partners.

   Manufacturers Interview: The Team Leader (P3 – Singapore) prepared a shortlist of
    questions that each partner should ask to at least 3 manufacturer companies. The Team
    Leader collected 47 filled questionnaires from the other partners, and prepared a report
    summarizing the results of the interviews. The questionnaire was submitted to both
    European and Asian companies. As a result of the interviews survey, the Project Team can
    conclude that the need of EMC design training in the electronic industry is real and the
    project has addressed one of the major design challenges faced by the electronic designers.
    The idea of supporting EMC education and training with a practical demonstrator has been
    well received by the electronic engineers to be effective for gaining EMC design knowledge
    and concept.

   Meeting to plan the course: The project team exchanged opinions and proposals about the
    outline of the course, starting from the discussion had during the kick-off meeting. A final
    version of the course program and of the identification of the activities of each partners has
    been prepared by the Project Coordinator, that was the Team Leader for this task.

   Course material preparation: Each partner started working on the activities identified
    during the previous task. The Consortium prepared a document containing the course
    outline and showing the activities of each partner. All partners agreed with this outline, and
    so the core activity of the project, i.e. the course material preparation, started.
    Each partner is preparing slides, text and whatever he needs to fulfil the course outline
    document. No deliverables were due in the period covered by this report.
    The course outline document is available on the project web site.

   Project Web site: the Project Coordinator set up the project website. It is available at the
    address: . In the web site the activities of the project are
    listed and described and all the deiverables and main documents are collected. The
    “Documents” section is divided into “Public” and “Restricted” parts. The Public section
    contains all the deliverables and reports of public domain, whereas the Restricted section
    can be accessed only by the project team and is used to exchange confidential
    documentation. This task was indicated in the Plan of Action as Activity6 – Task 1: the
    Project team decided to anticipate the web site preparation because it was useful for them to
    have always available the status of the project, the deliverables and the deadlines, and to
    exchange documents.

              Internal Evaluation Reports: as foreseen in the Project proposal, an Internal Evaluation
               Committee had been envisaged to carry on an internal evaluation activity. The first Internal
               Evaluation Report was due for the end of May 2004 (first six months of activity). For
               convenience, Prof. Ivan Maio (Politecnico di Torino) has been recognized as the responsible
               of the Committee. He is in charge to collect information from the partners and to coordinate
               the activity of the Committee. The second report deadline is November 27, 2004.

       Results of the project in relation with the original Action Plan
       In the Action Plan each activity or task had a deliverable showing its results. All the deliverables
       foreseen in the period covered by this report have been released and are annexed to this document.
       There have not been any meaningful delays in the deliverables release.

       Results of the project in relation with the Logical Framework
       The main part of the objectively verifiable indicators of achievement listed in the Logical Framework
       refer to the second year of the project, when the course will be applied and tested “on the field”.
       The ones that can be related to the first year are:
                     - (Project           Purpose        section)        Availability  of     course      material:
                        the course outline has been prepared and each partner is working on a different
                        section of the course. A meaningful part of the course material is ready.
                     - (Expected results section) Level of interaction among the partners:
                        the partners collaborated during this first year to achieve foreseen results. Each
                        team leader, recognized in the Consortium Agreement, carried out the activitied
                        assigned to him and collected the material from the other partners to prepare the
                        technical reports annexed to this Interim Report.
                     - (Expected results section) Interest of other universities in the obtained results or in
                        the                                      applied                              methodology:
                        it’s a little bit early to see if this indicator has been successful or not, but during the
                        “Manufacturers Interviews” task we noticed that many of                   the interviewed
                        manufacturers showed interest in the project and asked to be informed about future
                        applications of the course.
                     - (Activities section) Minutes of meetings – Milestones achievements:
                        the milestones foreseen in the project workplan has been achieved, as shown by the
                        technical report annexed. Minutes of meetings are also annexed.

III.   Partnership

       As foreseen in the Handbook of project management, each task of the project has a Team Leader, in
       charge of collecting the information from the other partners and sending them to the project
       coordinator. This choice has shown to be good to make the communication between project
       coordinator and partners easier.
       In addition to this, the workload has been equally distributed between partners. Thus, this has been a
       strength of the partnership.
       Concerning the course preparation, each partner carried his experience deepening a couple of
       Nevertheless, some troubles arose at the moment of collecting expenses evidences. The distance
       between partner countries and the difference in affording some issues caused a delay in
       sending/receiving correct and acceptable evidences.
       For this reason, the choice made in the Consortium Agreement to collect documentary evidence on a
       six months basis has been fundamental in order to have time for recycles and adjusting of the
       documents. We can conclude that, at the end of the first year of the project, all the most important
       needed evidences of expenses and supporting documents have been received by the project

IV.    Links with other projects/programmes (if any)
       Not applicable

V.     Assessment of the project
       At the current stage of the project, its results have not been disseminated yet, because the core of
       the course material is not completed, and the dissemination activity will be carried on during the
       second year. What we can observe up to now is the interest shown by manufacturers interviewed
       during the “Manufacturers Interview” task. All of them shown their interest into an EMC innovative

      course, and all of them appreciated the practical characteristic of the course object of this project.
      This can lead to imagine that the final impact of the project will be satisfactory, due to the addressing
      of actual needs.

      The results expected during this first phase have been achieved in the planned time. The foreseen
      reports have been delivered in time.

      No new events have arisen to show that assumptions made in the project Logical Framework were
      wrong or not complete. Noone of the factors not under the direct control of the project that could lead
      not to achieve its objectives happened, and no factors had to be added to the assumptions list.

      The potential areas for the project success are the ones envisaged in the project proposal: on one
      side university area, since teachers and students will be able to benefit from teaching/attending the
      on the other side electronic manufacturing area, since they will benefit from the participation of young
      designers to the course.

VI.   Annexes

      Annex I          – Project website address:
      Annex II         – Kick-off meeting report
      Annex III        – Report on the visit of Asian Partners in Europe
      Annex IV         – Report on manufacturers needs
      Annex V          – Report on course characteristics
      Annex VI        – During the period under review two budget reallocation have been made, both
                      following the 15% rule. The table annexed summarizes the reallocation made. A
                      justification document is also annexed.


Shared By:
Tags: ANNEX-…
Description: ANNEX-…