Final Report Summary - AF3 (Advanced Forest Fire Fighting)
AF3 project has been subjected to some changes in the coordination (and the coordinating organization, now named LEONARDO, passed itself through many changes in this period) during the whole life of the program, so what is important is to highlight the progress for the different tasks individuated at the beginning, and partially re-modulated when needed: this could be done presenting, as a summary, the main results for each of the WPs the project was divided in. A brief but hopefully exhaustive overview in this sense will be done here below.
The program management activity has been carried out by LEONARDO-FINMECCANICA along the whole duration of the project. Three different coordinators have had the responsibility of AF3 project, more or less each one for each of the program years. For its specific nature, PM activity is a sort of merging of the different aspects of the project, so further in this chapter manly the other WPs will be presented, while WP1 activities will be described more in detail in the following parts of the document, with a specific focus on the third year of AF3, and on the period of extension.
Activities within WP2 had the main aim of defining the AF3 system architecture on the basis of the end-user requirements as well as verifying the compliance of the same requirements by the system. The collection and analysis of users’ requirements needed to evaluate suitability and effectiveness of the AF3 system have been performed in WP2.1. In particular, in WP2.1.1 the missions have been defined and in WP2.1.2 the requirements have been defined.
In order to have an End User oriented perspective, the work based on a strong collaboration with experts and users, in order to access their knowledge and identify currents gaps and future needed benefits to be generated by tailored innovative solutions for specific fire scenarios. A strong focus was put on the method used to collect and process such knowledge, distinguishing the contribution coming from secondary research and primary research (interviews, workshops, questionnaires) activities. These requirements have been periodically updated, through analysis of the deliverables issued by the consortium and, on the other side, targeted interviews with experts. Requirements have been divided into quantitative and qualitative requirements. Quantitative requirements have been checked through evaluation of quantitative performance and comparison with an acceptance value. Qualitative requirements have been checked through evaluation from experts. An overall evaluation has been also obtained through questionnaires which have been filled in by the advisory board and experts participating to the various trials. In WP2.3 the traceability matrix and the compliance table have been prepared for the requirements that apply to the AF3 system. An overall evaluation of the system performed through analysis of the questionnaires has been also performed.
In WP 2.2 the technology requested for matching the various fire scenarios has been identified and the AF3 system architecture has been defined. The architecture is based on the REST protocol. The various modules interact through a web service where information is exchanged through JSON messages. The ICD, containing the list of the various messages interchanged by the modules and the data structures, has been issued and updated during the project.
Overall, the activities have been performed according with the DOW, with no relevant deviations.
The program management activity has been carried out by LEONARDO-FINMECCANICA along the whole duration of the project. Three different coordinators have had the responsibility of AF3 project, more or less each one for each of the program years. For its specific nature, PM activity is a sort of merging of the different aspects of the project, so further in this chapter manly the other WPs will be presented, while WP1 activities will be described more in detail in the following parts of the document, with a specific focus on the third year of AF3, and on the period of extension.
Activities within WP2 had the main aim of defining the AF3 system architecture on the basis of the end-user requirements as well as verifying the compliance of the same requirements by the system. The collection and analysis of users’ requirements needed to evaluate suitability and effectiveness of the AF3 system have been performed in WP2.1. In particular, in WP2.1.1 the missions have been defined and in WP2.1.2 the requirements have been defined.
In order to have an End User oriented perspective, the work based on a strong collaboration with experts and users, in order to access their knowledge and identify currents gaps and future needed benefits to be generated by tailored innovative solutions for specific fire scenarios. A strong focus was put on the method used to collect and process such knowledge, distinguishing the contribution coming from secondary research and primary research (interviews, workshops, questionnaires) activities. These requirements have been periodically updated, through analysis of the deliverables issued by the consortium and, on the other side, targeted interviews with experts. Requirements have been divided into quantitative and qualitative requirements. Quantitative requirements have been checked through evaluation of quantitative performance and comparison with an acceptance value. Qualitative requirements have been checked through evaluation from experts. An overall evaluation has been also obtained through questionnaires which have been filled in by the advisory board and experts participating to the various trials. In WP2.3 the traceability matrix and the compliance table have been prepared for the requirements that apply to the AF3 system. An overall evaluation of the system performed through analysis of the questionnaires has been also performed.
In WP 2.2 the technology requested for matching the various fire scenarios has been identified and the AF3 system architecture has been defined. The architecture is based on the REST protocol. The various modules interact through a web service where information is exchanged through JSON messages. The ICD, containing the list of the various messages interchanged by the modules and the data structures, has been issued and updated during the project.
Overall, the activities have been performed according with the DOW, with no relevant deviations.
