Differences
This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
| report:prm [2026/04/12 01:18] – [3.7.3. Risk Analysis, Handling, and Monitoring Table] team5 | report:prm [2026/04/30 17:44] (current) – [3.10. Sprint Outcomes] team5 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 111: | Line 111: | ||
| The EPS teams have to complete a list of milestones to ensure project succes. The following Table {{ref> | The EPS teams have to complete a list of milestones to ensure project succes. The following Table {{ref> | ||
| - | |||
| - | |||
| - | <WRAP center round box 900px> | ||
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 900px> | ||
| ^ Date ^ Description ^ | ^ Date ^ Description ^ | ||
| | 2026/02/28 | Choose and share the team's top 3 preferred project proposals | | | 2026/02/28 | Choose and share the team's top 3 preferred project proposals | | ||
| Line 134: | Line 132: | ||
| | 2026/06/23 | Update the wiki, report, paper with all suggested corrections. Hand in to the EPS coordinator a printed copy of the poster, brochure and leaflet | | | 2026/06/23 | Update the wiki, report, paper with all suggested corrections. Hand in to the EPS coordinator a printed copy of the poster, brochure and leaflet | | ||
| | 2026/06/25 | Demonstration of the operation of the prototype and hand in the prototype and user manual to the client | | | 2026/06/25 | Demonstration of the operation of the prototype and hand in the prototype and user manual to the client | | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| The timeline reveals a strong concentration of deliverables in April and May, particularly around the interim report and prototype development phases. This required careful sprint planning to balance documentation and technical implementation tasks. | The timeline reveals a strong concentration of deliverables in April and May, particularly around the interim report and prototype development phases. This required careful sprint planning to balance documentation and technical implementation tasks. | ||
| Line 145: | Line 143: | ||
| and demonstrate fiscal responsibility within the constraints set by the project brief. | and demonstrate fiscal responsibility within the constraints set by the project brief. | ||
| + | === 3.3.1. Ideal Product Cost === | ||
| + | |||
| + | This section outlines the projected costs for a full-scale, production-ready deployment | ||
| + | of Connect across a single metro carriage: 11 handrail nodes, 7 power supply units, and | ||
| + | 3 ceiling LED strip runs. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Table {{ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | <table tlabelIdealHardware> | ||
| + | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 700px> | ||
| + | ^ Component ^ Type / Model ^ Qty ^ Unit Price (€) ^ Total (€) ^ | ||
| + | | Microcontroller | Wemos C3 mini (ESP32-C3) | 11 | 6.20 | 68.20 | | ||
| + | | Enclosure | PA Rail (fire-resistant, | ||
| + | | Copper tape | Conductive adhesive, 20 mm × 20 m | 15 | 8.86 | 132.90 | | ||
| + | | Velostat | Piezoresistive sheet (pressure sensor) | 15 | 7.90 | 118.50 | | ||
| + | | CAN Transceiver | MCP2551-I/P | 10 | 1.99 | 19.90 | | ||
| + | | LED strip (addressable RGB) | WS2813 IP65, 60 LEDs/m, 1 m | 3 | 30.49 | 91.47 | | ||
| + | | Power supply | DC Step-Down 36–72 V to 12 V, 10 A, 120 W | 6 | 24.67 | 148.02 | | ||
| + | | Wiring, resistors | Miscellaneous passive components | 1 | 10.00 | 10.00 | | ||
| + | | Power supply | (5 V) | 1 | 37.15 | 37.15 | | ||
| + | | Delivery | — | — | — | TBC | | ||
| + | | **Total** | | | | **764.74** | | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hardware costs per carriage total 727.59 €, with the Polyamide (PA) Rail enclosure being the single most expensive line item at 138.60 € for two units, specified due to its fire-resistance properties required for compliance with metro safety standards. No equivalent Portuguese-based supplier was identified at the time of writing, with the current source located in France. At scale, per-unit hardware costs could be reduced through bulk procurement across multiple carriage deployments. | ||
| === 3.3.2. Prototype Cost === | === 3.3.2. Prototype Cost === | ||
| Line 153: | Line 178: | ||
| with no associated purchase cost. Table {{ref> | with no associated purchase cost. Table {{ref> | ||
| - | <WRAP center round box 600px> | ||
| <table tlabelPlannedCosts> | <table tlabelPlannedCosts> | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 800px> | ||
| ^ Component ^ Type / Model ^ Qty ^ Unit Price (€) ^ Total (€) ^ | ^ Component ^ Type / Model ^ Qty ^ Unit Price (€) ^ Total (€) ^ | ||
| - | | Microcontroller | Wemos C3 mini (ESP32-C3) | 2 | 6.20 | 12.40 | | + | | Microcontroller | Wemos C3 mini (ESP32-C3) | 2 | 6.20 | 12.40 | |
| - | | Enclosure | PLA biodegradable (3D printed) | 1 | 13.99 | 13.99 | | + | | Enclosure | PLA biodegradable (3D printed) | 1 | 13.99 | 13.99 | |
| - | | Copper tape | Conductive adhesive, | + | | CAN bus cable | 2×1.0mm CCA speaker wire, 10m | 1 | 2.20 | 2.20 | |
| - | | Velostat | Piezoresistive sheet (pressure sensor) | | + | | LED strip diffuser | Opaque sliding diffuser for aluminium profile, 2m | 1 | 3.27 | 3.27 | |
| - | | CAN Transceiver | MCP2551-I/P | 2 | 1.99 | 3.98 | | + | | Potentiometer | 10 kΩ linear mono | 1 | 0.49 | 0.49 | |
| - | | LED strip (addressable RGB) | WS2813 IP65, 60 LEDs/m, 1m | 1 | 11.27 | 11.27 | | + | | Copper tape | Conductive adhesive, |
| - | | Barrel jack converter | + | | Velostat | Piezoresistive sheet (pressure sensor) | 2 | 7.90 | 15.80 | |
| - | | Power supply | Universal regulated 3–12 V DC, 5 A | 1 | 26.49 | 26.49 | | + | | CAN Transceiver | MCP2551-I/P | 2 | 1.99 | 3.98 | |
| - | | Buck Converter | + | | LED strip (addressable RGB) | WS2813 IP65, 60 LEDs/m, 1m | 1 | 11.27 | 11.27 | |
| - | | Wiring, resistors | + | | Barrel jack adapter |
| - | | **Total** | | | | **96.45** | | + | | Power supply | 5 VDC 4 A 20 W, 5.5×2.1mm |
| - | </ | + | | Jumper cables |
| + | | Resistors | ||
| + | | **Total** | | | | **97.37** | | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| ==== 3.4. Quality ==== | ==== 3.4. Quality ==== | ||
| - | Quality management is needed to ensure that every deliverable meets the technical requirements and the expectations of our primary stakeholders: | + | Quality management is needed to ensure that every deliverable meets the technical requirements and the expectations of our primary stakeholders: |
| === 3.4.1 Quality Requirements and Metrics === | === 3.4.1 Quality Requirements and Metrics === | ||
| Line 180: | Line 208: | ||
| To quantify the success of our work, we have established specific metrics and acceptance thresholds. As seen in Table {{ref> | To quantify the success of our work, we have established specific metrics and acceptance thresholds. As seen in Table {{ref> | ||
| The selected quality metrics focus on three dimensions: technical functionality, | The selected quality metrics focus on three dimensions: technical functionality, | ||
| - | <WRAP center round 100%> | ||
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 1200px> | ||
| ^ WP ^ Deliverable (WBS) ^ Requirement ^ Quality Metric ^ Threshold (Acceptance) ^ | ^ WP ^ Deliverable (WBS) ^ Requirement ^ Quality Metric ^ Threshold (Acceptance) ^ | ||
| - | | **1. Management** | 1.1 WBS | Organize tasks | Complete list of deliverables | 100% of the WBS included | | + | | **1. Management** | 1.1 WBS | Organize tasks | Complete list of deliverables | All mandatory deliverables |
| | | 1.2 Gantt Chart | Control deadlines | Approved schedule | Finalized timeline | | | | 1.2 Gantt Chart | Control deadlines | Approved schedule | Finalized timeline | | ||
| | | 1.3 Global Sprint Plan | Plan sprints | Sprint dates | Approved sprint plan | | | | 1.3 Global Sprint Plan | Plan sprints | Sprint dates | Approved sprint plan | | ||
| | | 1.4 Weekly Sprint Plan | Weekly tracking | Weekly version | Updated weekly plan | | | | 1.4 Weekly Sprint Plan | Weekly tracking | Weekly version | Updated weekly plan | | ||
| - | | | 1.5 Product Backlog | Distribute workload | Jira | 100% of tasks assigned | | + | | | 1.5 Product Backlog | Distribute workload | Jira | All active sprint |
| | | 1.6 Stakeholder Management | Identify key people | Stakeholder map | Closed list of stakeholders | | | | 1.6 Stakeholder Management | Identify key people | Stakeholder map | Closed list of stakeholders | | ||
| | | 1.7 Risk Managemet Plan | Prevent issues | Response plan | Critical risks under control | | | | 1.7 Risk Managemet Plan | Prevent issues | Response plan | Critical risks under control | | ||
| Line 198: | Line 226: | ||
| | | 3.3 Detailed Schematics | Circuit design | Electronic schematic | Finished and reviewed drawing | | | | 3.3 Detailed Schematics | Circuit design | Electronic schematic | Finished and reviewed drawing | | ||
| | | 3.4 Prototype (CAD) | 3D Design | Final digital model | Components fit correctly | | | | 3.4 Prototype (CAD) | 3D Design | Final digital model | Components fit correctly | | ||
| - | | | 3.5 Packaging | Casing protection | Casing material | 100% recyclable material | | + | | | 3.5 Packaging | Casing protection | Casing material | > 95% recyclable material | |
| | | 3.6 Cardboard Model | Physical 3D " | | | 3.6 Cardboard Model | Physical 3D " | ||
| | **4. Development** | 4.1 List of Materials | Control spending | Final budget | Max. 100 € total cost | | | **4. Development** | 4.1 List of Materials | Control spending | Final budget | Max. 100 € total cost | | ||
| Line 215: | Line 243: | ||
| | **7. Reporting** | 7.1 Interim Report | Mid-term report | Wiki chapters | Approved draft | | | **7. Reporting** | 7.1 Interim Report | Mid-term report | Wiki chapters | Approved draft | | ||
| | | 7.2 Interim Pres. | Present progress | PowerPoint presentation | Presentation performed | | | | 7.2 Interim Pres. | Present progress | PowerPoint presentation | Presentation performed | | ||
| - | | | 7.3 Final Report | Final report | Final Wiki document | 100% of chapters | + | | | 7.3 Final Report | Final report | Final Wiki document | All required |
| | | 7.4 Final Pres. | Final defense | Project defense | Final presentation performed | | | | 7.4 Final Pres. | Final defense | Project defense | Final presentation performed | | ||
| | | 7.5 Paper | Write article | Paper format | Finished article | | | | 7.5 Paper | Write article | Paper format | Finished article | | ||
| | | 7.6 Manual | User guide | Instructions for use | Easy-to-follow guide | | | | 7.6 Manual | User guide | Instructions for use | Easy-to-follow guide | | ||
| + | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| - | |||
| === 3.4.2 Verification Sheets === | === 3.4.2 Verification Sheets === | ||
| While metrics define " | While metrics define " | ||
| - | |||
| - | <WRAP center round 100%> | ||
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 1200px> | ||
| ^ WP ^ Deliverable (WBS) ^ Necessary Steps (Checklist) ^ | ^ WP ^ Deliverable (WBS) ^ Necessary Steps (Checklist) ^ | ||
| | **1. Management** | 1.1 WBS | Are all 35 deliverables included in the structure? | | | **1. Management** | 1.1 WBS | Are all 35 deliverables included in the structure? | | ||
| Line 244: | Line 270: | ||
| | | 3.3 Schematics | Has the circuit schematic been verified to avoid short circuits? | | | | 3.3 Schematics | Has the circuit schematic been verified to avoid short circuits? | | ||
| | | 3.4 Prototype (CAD) | Has it been verified that all parts fit correctly in the 3D model? | | | | 3.4 Prototype (CAD) | Has it been verified that all parts fit correctly in the 3D model? | | ||
| - | | | 3.5 Packaging | Is the material | + | | | 3.5 Packaging | Is the material |
| | | 3.6 Cardboard | Is the real-scale model finished and approved by the team? | | | | 3.6 Cardboard | Is the real-scale model finished and approved by the team? | | ||
| | **4. Development** | 4.1 List Materials | Is the total budget under 100 €? | | | **4. Development** | 4.1 List Materials | Is the total budget under 100 €? | | ||
| Line 265: | Line 291: | ||
| | | 7.5 Paper | Does the article comply with the scientific paper format? | | | | 7.5 Paper | Does the article comply with the scientific paper format? | | ||
| | | 7.6 Manual | Are the instructions easy to follow for any user? | | | | 7.6 Manual | Are the instructions easy to follow for any user? | | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| ==== 3.5. People & Stakeholder Management ==== | ==== 3.5. People & Stakeholder Management ==== | ||
| - | //Enumerate all people relevant to your project, including the project team and key stakeholders. Document their roles and responsibilities. Document your stakeholder management plan and strategy.// | + | /* //Enumerate all people relevant to your project, including the project team and key stakeholders. Document their roles and responsibilities. Document your stakeholder management plan and strategy.// */ |
| To make CONNECT a success, it is necessary to strategically manage all parties affected by the project. Following the PMBOK standards, this section identifies the key individuals and groups, defines their roles and outlines the management strategy. | To make CONNECT a success, it is necessary to strategically manage all parties affected by the project. Following the PMBOK standards, this section identifies the key individuals and groups, defines their roles and outlines the management strategy. | ||
| Line 283: | Line 309: | ||
| Apart from the main teams, several external entities are involved in the project. In the Table {{ref> | Apart from the main teams, several external entities are involved in the project. In the Table {{ref> | ||
| - | <WRAP center round 100%> | ||
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 1200px> | ||
| ^ Entity / Name ^ Project Role ^ Primary Responsibility ^ | ^ Entity / Name ^ Project Role ^ Primary Responsibility ^ | ||
| | **Team Members** | Project owners | Responsible for the full development cycle and all mandatory deliverables. | | | **Team Members** | Project owners | Responsible for the full development cycle and all mandatory deliverables. | | ||
| Line 298: | Line 324: | ||
| | **Maintenance Team (Metro)** | Operational stakeholder | Evaluates ease of installation, | | **Maintenance Team (Metro)** | Operational stakeholder | Evaluates ease of installation, | ||
| | **Cleaning Staff (Metro)** | Operational support | Provides hygiene, accessibility, | | **Cleaning Staff (Metro)** | Operational support | Provides hygiene, accessibility, | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| Among all stakeholders, | Among all stakeholders, | ||
| Line 322: | Line 348: | ||
| While the matrix identifies the " | While the matrix identifies the " | ||
| - | <WRAP center round box 100%> | + | <WRAP center round box 900px> |
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| Line 363: | Line 389: | ||
| === 3.6.2. Communication Matrix === | === 3.6.2. Communication Matrix === | ||
| - | + | Table {{ref>tab: | |
| - | <WRAP center round 100%> | + | |
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 800px> | ||
| |**Activity**|**Objective**|**Frequency**|**Medium**|**Participants**| | |**Activity**|**Objective**|**Frequency**|**Medium**|**Participants**| | ||
| |Daily Stand-up|Daily tasks and identify blockers.|Daily|WhatsApp / Face-to-Face|Team Members| | |Daily Stand-up|Daily tasks and identify blockers.|Daily|WhatsApp / Face-to-Face|Team Members| | ||
| Line 373: | Line 399: | ||
| |Retrospective|Evaluate team performance and workflow.|Weekly|Face-to-Face|Team Members| | |Retrospective|Evaluate team performance and workflow.|Weekly|Face-to-Face|Team Members| | ||
| |Interim Demo|Present project status to coordinators.|Milestone-based|Presentation|Team & Supervisors| | |Interim Demo|Present project status to coordinators.|Milestone-based|Presentation|Team & Supervisors| | ||
| + | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| === 3.6.3. Stakeholder Management === | === 3.6.3. Stakeholder Management === | ||
| Line 383: | Line 409: | ||
| * **Target Users:** Feedback gathered through surveys and testing sessions. | * **Target Users:** Feedback gathered through surveys and testing sessions. | ||
| - | ===== 3.7. Risk ===== | + | ==== 3.7. Risk ==== |
| /*Identify key risks (product and project level), evaluate them and define how they should be handled (responses) and monitored. Perform quantitative and qualitative risk analysis and use the results to define the appropriate risk responses.*/ | /*Identify key risks (product and project level), evaluate them and define how they should be handled (responses) and monitored. Perform quantitative and qualitative risk analysis and use the results to define the appropriate risk responses.*/ | ||
| Line 418: | Line 444: | ||
| <figure fig: | <figure fig: | ||
| {{ : | {{ : | ||
| - | < | + | < |
| </ | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| Line 431: | Line 457: | ||
| The risk analysis highlights that logistical and physical risks (delivery and vandalism) pose the greatest threat to project success, like it is shown in Figure {{ref> | The risk analysis highlights that logistical and physical risks (delivery and vandalism) pose the greatest threat to project success, like it is shown in Figure {{ref> | ||
| - | |||
| - | <WRAP center round 100%> | ||
| <table risk_analysis_final> | <table risk_analysis_final> | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 1200px> | ||
| ^ ID ^ Risk Description ^ Probability ^ Impact ^ Score ^ Response ^ Management (Action) ^ Follow-up ^ | ^ ID ^ Risk Description ^ Probability ^ Impact ^ Score ^ Response ^ Management (Action) ^ Follow-up ^ | ||
| | R1 | Delivery (Component delays) | 4 | 4 | 16 | Avoid | Purchase from local suppliers as soon as possible. | Weekly tracking of shipment ID. | | | R1 | Delivery (Component delays) | 4 | 4 | 16 | Avoid | Purchase from local suppliers as soon as possible. | Weekly tracking of shipment ID. | | ||
| Line 447: | Line 472: | ||
| | R9 | Ergonomic Strain | 2 | 3 | 6 | Reduce | Create several 3D-printed prototypes for testing. | User feedback surveys. | | | R9 | Ergonomic Strain | 2 | 3 | 6 | Reduce | Create several 3D-printed prototypes for testing. | User feedback surveys. | | ||
| | R10 | Privacy Breach | 1 | 5 | 5 | Avoid | No personal data is collected via the application. | Legal checklist verification. | | | R10 | Privacy Breach | 1 | 5 | 5 | Avoid | No personal data is collected via the application. | Legal checklist verification. | | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| === 3.7.3. Definition of Appropriate Risk Responses === | === 3.7.3. Definition of Appropriate Risk Responses === | ||
| Line 458: | Line 483: | ||
| All secondary risks are monitored through iterative testing to detect any score escalation. | All secondary risks are monitored through iterative testing to detect any score escalation. | ||
| - | ===== 3.8. Procurement | + | ==== 3.8. Procurement ==== |
| Line 475: | Line 500: | ||
| The following Table {{ref> | The following Table {{ref> | ||
| - | <WRAP center round box 100%> | ||
| <table tab: | <table tab: | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 600px> | ||
| ^ Item ^ Decision ^ Rationale ^ | ^ Item ^ Decision ^ Rationale ^ | ||
| | Electronic Nodes | Buy | Wemos C3 Mini boards offer greater reliability and lower cost than custom PCBs at prototype stage. | | | Electronic Nodes | Buy | Wemos C3 Mini boards offer greater reliability and lower cost than custom PCBs at prototype stage. | | ||
| Line 483: | Line 508: | ||
| | Sensing Material | Buy | Velostat is a specialized piezoresistive material with no viable in-house alternative. | | | Sensing Material | Buy | Velostat is a specialized piezoresistive material with no viable in-house alternative. | | ||
| | Web Platform | Make | Custom React/ | | Web Platform | Make | Custom React/ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| === 3.8.3. Cost and Schedule Control === | === 3.8.3. Cost and Schedule Control === | ||
| Line 490: | Line 515: | ||
| Expenditure is tracked against a detailed bill of materials within program budget constraints. Component procurement is milestone-gated to ensure availability before prototype assembly. Miscellaneous parts are sourced locally where possible to reduce lead times. | Expenditure is tracked against a detailed bill of materials within program budget constraints. Component procurement is milestone-gated to ensure availability before prototype assembly. Miscellaneous parts are sourced locally where possible to reduce lead times. | ||
| - | ===== 3.9. Project Plan ===== | + | ==== 3.9. Project Plan ==== |
| - | As detailed in the Global Sprint Plan (see [[# | + | As detailed in the Global Sprint Plan (see {{ref> |
| - | <WRAP center round box 600px> | + | |
| <table sprint_plan> | <table sprint_plan> | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 600px> | ||
| ^ Sprint | ^ Sprint | ||
| | 1 | 5 march | 12 march | 4 days of availability | | 1 | 5 march | 12 march | 4 days of availability | ||
| Line 500: | Line 525: | ||
| | 3 | 19 march | 26 march | 5 days of availability | | 3 | 19 march | 26 march | 5 days of availability | ||
| | 4 | 26 march | 2 april | 5 days of availability | | 4 | 26 march | 2 april | 5 days of availability | ||
| - | | 5 | 2 april | | + | | 5 | 2 april | |
| - | | 6 | + | | 6 | 16 april | 23 april | 5 days of availability |
| - | | 7 | + | | |
| - | | | + | | |
| - | | | + | | |
| - | | | + | | |
| - | | 11 | + | | |
| - | | | + | | |
| - | | | + | | |
| - | | | + | </ |
| - | | | + | |
| </ | </ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| - | The high-level distribution of Epic responsibilities across the timeline is summarized in the Initial Sprint Plan (see [[# | + | The specific tasks and deliverables assigned to these periods |
| + | <table project_backlog> | ||
| + | < | ||
| <WRAP center round box 900px> | <WRAP center round box 900px> | ||
| - | <table sprint_plan> | ||
| - | < | ||
| ^ Timeline ^ Epic ^ Ticket code ^ Ticket title ^ Status ^ | ^ Timeline ^ Epic ^ Ticket code ^ Ticket title ^ Status ^ | ||
| | Sprint 1 (5 Mar - 12 Mar) | General / No Epic | SCRUM-3 | Communication presentation | Done | | | Sprint 1 (5 Mar - 12 Mar) | General / No Epic | SCRUM-3 | Communication presentation | Done | | ||
| Line 572: | Line 595: | ||
| | Backlog | TESTING | SCRUM-67 | Non-functional testing | To Do | | | Backlog | TESTING | SCRUM-67 | Non-functional testing | To Do | | ||
| | Backlog | TESTING | SCRUM-68 | User-acceptance testing | To Do | | | Backlog | TESTING | SCRUM-68 | User-acceptance testing | To Do | | ||
| + | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| - | <color # | ||
| - | <color #ed1c24>Table {{ref>tab: | + | The high-level distribution of Epic responsibilities across the timeline is summarized in the Initial Sprint Plan (see Table{{ref> |
| - | <WRAP center round box 900px> | + | |
| - | < | + | < |
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 900px> | ||
| ^ Sprint ^ Start ^ Finish ^ Epics ^ Responsible ^ | ^ Sprint ^ Start ^ Finish ^ Epics ^ Responsible ^ | ||
| | 1 | 5 march | 12 march | INITIATION & PLANNING | All | | | 1 | 5 march | 12 march | INITIATION & PLANNING | All | | ||
| - | | 2 | 12 march | 19 march | INITIATION & PLANNING ; SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 2 | 12 march | 19 march | INITIATION & PLANNING; SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | |
| - | | 3 | 19 march | 26 march | INITIATION & PLANNING ; SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS | All | | + | | 3 | 19 march | 26 march | INITIATION & PLANNING; SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS | All | |
| - | | 4 | 26 march | 2 april | SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS ; INTERIM REPORT & PRESENTATION | All | | + | | 4 | 26 march | 2 april | SYSTEM DESIGN & DRAWINGS; INTERIM REPORT & PRESENTATION | All | |
| | 5 | 2 april | 9 april | INTERIM REPORT & PRESENTATION | All | | | 5 | 2 april | 9 april | INTERIM REPORT & PRESENTATION | All | | ||
| - | | 6 | 9 april | 16 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 6 | 9 april | 16 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 7 | 16 april | 23 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 7 | 16 april | 23 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 8 | 23 april | 30 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 8 | 23 april | 30 april | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 9 | 30 april | 7 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 9 | 30 april | 7 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 10 | 7 may | 14 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 10 | 7 may | 14 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 11 | 14 may | 21 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 11 | 14 may | 21 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| - | | 12 | 21 may | 28 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | + | | 12 | 21 may | 28 may | PROTOTYPE CONSTRUCTION; |
| | 13 | 28 may | 4 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO | All | | | 13 | 28 may | 4 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO | All | | ||
| | 14 | 4 june | 11 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO | All | | | 14 | 4 june | 11 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO | All | | ||
| | 15 | 11 june | 18 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | | 15 | 11 june | 18 june | FINAL REPORT, PRESENTATION & VIDEO ; FINAL DELIVERABLES | All | | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | Lastly, the visual dependencies and duration of these tasks are illustrated in the Gantt Chart (see Figure {{ref> | ||
| - | <color # | ||
| <WRAP centeralign> | <WRAP centeralign> | ||
| - | < | + | < |
| {{ : | {{ : | ||
| < | < | ||
| Line 610: | Line 634: | ||
| ==== 3.10. Sprint Outcomes ==== | ==== 3.10. Sprint Outcomes ==== | ||
| - | Sprints 1 & 2 were not managed in Jira and there were no specific tasks to be done. Idea of the project had been forming before Sprint 3. Table {{ref> | + | Sprints 1 & 2 were not managed in Jira and there were no specific tasks to be done. However, the idea of the project had been forming before Sprint 3 and some outcomes were achieved such as: |
| + | * **Black Box Diagram V1** | ||
| + | * **Structural Drawings V1** | ||
| + | * **Selection of materials and components V1** | ||
| + | * **Inicial sketches of our project idea** | ||
| + | |||
| + | Bellow, we can see Table {{ref> | ||
| - | <WRAP center round box 600px> | ||
| <table sprint_reports> | <table sprint_reports> | ||
| < | < | ||
| + | <WRAP center round box 600px> | ||
| ^ Sprint ^ Report Link ^ | ^ Sprint ^ Report Link ^ | ||
| | Sprint 3 | {{ : | | Sprint 3 | {{ : | ||
| | Sprint 4 | {{ : | | Sprint 4 | {{ : | ||
| - | </ | ||
| </ | </ | ||
| + | </ | ||
| + | |||
| + | === 3.10.1 Sprint 3 Outcome === | ||
| + | In Sprint 3 we consolidated both the technical foundation of the project and the supporting documentation. The team completed all planned issues in Jira, with no carry‑over work. Key outcomes included updated structural drawings and schematics (V2), the cardboard model, and a refined selection of materials and components. We also advanced the digital side with Figma designs for the message application and progressed written deliverables such as the background/ | ||
| + | |||
| + | === 3.10.2 Sprint 4 Outcome === | ||
| + | In Sprint 4 we advanced both the written deliverables and the technical foundations of the CONNECT system. The team completed the core report chapters (Introduction, | ||
| + | |||
| ==== 3.11. Sprint Evaluations ==== | ==== 3.11. Sprint Evaluations ==== | ||
| + | Sprint evaluations and retrospectives are fundamental to the team’s Agile workflow, allowing for continuous process improvement. Starting from Sprint 3, the team implemented formal retrospective sessions to identify bottlenecks and refine internal methodologies. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === 3.11.1. Sprint 3 Retrospective === | ||
| + | In this sprint, the focus was on establishing the technical foundation. The retrospective revealed significant gaps in task granularity and time management. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Retrospective Summary: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Positive (+): Effective feedback loops with professors and proactive note-taking during presentations. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Negative (-): Vague backlog items, inconsistent Jira updates, and poor workload distribution. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Action Plan: The team committed to breaking down tasks into sub-tasks (max 4h each) and ensuring Jira is updated daily. | ||
| + | |||
| + | === 3.11.2. Sprint 4 Retrospective === | ||
| + | Following the action plan from the previous sprint, Sprint 4 showed a marked improvement in organization and team morale. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Retrospective Summary: | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Positive (+): High motivation, excellent mutual support, and a much more balanced task distribution. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Negative (-): No major process blockers identified; the workflow reached a stable state. | ||
| + | |||
| + | *Action Plan: Focus on maintaining the current communication frequency and standardizing the documentation style for the upcoming deliverables. | ||
| - | Table {{ref> | ||
| - | <WRAP center round box 1200px> | ||
| - | <table sprint_retros> | ||
| - | < | ||
| - | ^ Sprint ^ Positive (+) ^ Negative (-) ^ Start Doing ^ Stop Doing ^ | ||
| - | | **Sprint 3** | * Meeting with Luis\\ * Feedback from Thursday meeting with professors \\ * Taking notes from all presentations | * Backlog not specific enough \\ * Daily Jira updates lacking \\ * Tasks not divided per member \\ * Poor meeting prep (context/ | ||
| - | | **Sprint 4** | * Organization regarding splitting tasks and time management \\ * High team motivation \\ * Mutual support and active listening \\ * Note: Found good balance on task distribution | *None listed* | *None listed* | *None listed* | | ||
| - | </ | ||
| - | </ | ||
| ==== 3.12. Summary ==== | ==== 3.12. Summary ==== | ||
| - | //Provide here the conclusions | + | This chapter detailed |
| + | |||
| + | These management pillars are put into practice through a cycle of continuous planning | ||