LOYOLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, PALANCHUR, CHENNAI – 600123.

Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering

Academic Year: 2023-2024 EE6811 - Project Work Review No.: 0 / 1 / 2 / 3 / Model
Batch No. : 2 Review Date:
S. Register No. Name of the Whatsapp Email ID
No. Student Number
1 210920105002 Augustine S 8300983135 joelnew170@gmail.com
2 210920105004 Damodaran B 7358235893 damodaranb11092002@gmail.com
3 210920105009 Sruthi M 9025084230 sruthimythily06@gmail.com
4 210920105010 Surya S 9344770896 suryarock5934@gmail.com
Title of the Project: Automated Solar Panel Cleaning System with predictive maintanence.

Details of the Project Supervisor(s):

Faculty Name: Dr.Balamurugan P Designation: Associate Professor
Mobile Number: 8122551432 Email ID: erbalap@gmail.com
If the project is carried out in Industry,
Industry Name and Address:
Name of the Joint-Supervisor: Designation:
Mobile Number: Email ID:

Review 0 Marks Review 1 Marks Review 2 Marks

One page Abstract /10 Updated Abstract /5 Final Abstract /5
Existing System /5 Objective(s) /5 Objective(s) /5
Block Diagram /10 Literature Survey /5 Literature Survey -
HW/SW Required /5 Block Diagram /10 Block Diagram /5
Expected Outcome /5 Methodology/Algorithm /10 Methodology/Algorithm /10
Timeline Chart /5 HW/SW Availability - Results Obtained /10
References /5 Timeline Chart & Ref. /5 Conclusion & References /5
Viva-voce /5 Viva-voce /10 Viva-voce /10

Review 3 Marks Review 4- Model Review Marks

Objective(s) /5 Abs., Obj., Lit. Survey /15
Block Diagram /5 Block Diagram, Method /10
Methodology/Algorithm Analysis & Results /15
Analysis & Results /10 Conclusion & Future Work /5
Conclusion & Future Work /5 Applications, References /5
Demonstration /10 Demonstration, Report, CD /30
Conf. / Journal Publication /5 Conf. / Journal Publication /10
Viva-voce /10 Viva-voce 10
Supervisor: Industry Supervisor / Department Expert:

Project Coordinator: Average marks scored by the student: /50

 RUBRICS FOR
EE6811 PROJECT WORK EVALUATION

Assessments Marks Assessment Overall

Assigned Weightage (%) Weightage
(Marks)
Review 0 50 10
Review 1 50 15
Review 2 50 20
40
Review 3 50 25
Review 4 - Model 100 30
Review
End Semester Report 20
Examination Evaluation
60
Viva-Voce 40
Examination
Total 100
 Rubrics for Zeroth Review Evaluation
Name of the student: Reg. No.: Date:
Max.
Need to Improve
Metrics Mark Good (100%) Average (50%) Score
(25%)
s
One page Abstract 10 Containing a suitable
Non-availability
with Keywords title, motivation, Non-availability of
of some of the
purpose, more than 50 % of
requirements, 3
methodology, work, the requirements,
to 4 keywords or
expected outcome and Absence or irrelevant
irrelevant
citing the applications keywords
keywords
with 5 to 6 keywords
Comparison with 5 Comparison of Comparison of
No or minimal
Existing System specifications and specifications or
Comparison with
limitations of existing limitations of
existing system(s)
system(s) existing system
Proposed Block / 10 Informative and
Schematic compact diagram (or) Missing / error More details missing
Diagram (or) algorithm without information or in error
Algorithm errors
HW/SW Required 5 Listing all the Not provided or
Missing HW /
necessary HW and / or missing /irrelevant
SW details
SW required in a slide details
Expected Outcome 5 Detailing expected
outcome of the project Missing or over
Brief expected
with qualitative and / exaggerated expected
outcome
or quantitative outcome
measures with units
Timeline Chart 5 Chart showing weekly
/ monthly progress on Chart with Chart not provided or
various macro or unclear or with wrong or
micro level activities missing details irrelevant details
of the project.
References 5 At least 6 to 8 Lesser number
Lesser number of
reference papers from of references or
references and not in
Conference / Journal not in IEEE
IEEE format
in IEEE format format
Viva-voce 5 Answering at
Answering at least
least 50% of
80% of questions Answering less than
questions during
during and after 30% questions
and after
presentation
presentation
 Rubrics for First Review Evaluation
Name of the student: Reg. No.: Date:
Max.
Need to Improve
Metrics Mark Good (100%) Average (50%) Score
(25%)
s
Updated Abstract Containing a suitable
(including the title, motivation,
corrections purpose, Non-availability of Non-availability of
suggested in zeroth 5 methodology, some of the more than 50 % of
review) expected outcome, requirements the requirements
applications,
keywords
Objective(s) One or more Ambiguous / Absence or
unambiguous, inappropriate / Ambiguous /
5
appropriate and discursive inappropriate /
concise objective(s) objective(s) discursive keywords
Literature Survey in At least 2 to 3 base
Table Format papers with title, Partly missing Majority information
5
authors, journal / conf. information missing
name, inferences
Block / Schematic Informative, compact
Diagram (or) Missing / error More details missing
10 and Error-free
Algorithm information or in error
diagram (or) algorithm
Methodology / Incomplete Incomplete or
Algorithm Complete information information on the absence of
on the method / method / information on the
10 procedure / algorithm procedure / method / procedure /
adopted with relevant algorithm adopted algorithm adopted
additional diagrams or lack of relevant and lack of relevant
diagrams additional diagrams
HW/SW Listing and making all Missing or
Missing and physical
Availability the necessary HW and physical non-
- non-availability of
/ or SW required ready availability of HW
HW / SW details
for use / SW details
Timeline Chart Chart showing weekly
/ monthly progress on Chart not provided or
Chart with unclear
3 various macro or with wrong or
or missing details
micro level activities irrelevant details
of the project.
References At least 6 to 8 reference Lesser number of Lesser number of
2 papers from Conf./ references or not references and not in
Journal in IEEE format in IEEE format IEEE format
Viva-voce Answering at least Answering at least Answering less than
10
80% of questions 50% of questions 30% questions
 during and after during and after
presentation presentation

Rubrics for Second Review Evaluation

Name of the student: Reg. No.: Date:
Max.
Need to Improve
Metrics Mark Good (100%) Average (50%) Score
(25%)
s
Final Abstract 5 Containing a suitable
(including the title, motivation,
corrections purpose, Non-availability of Non-availability of
suggested in methodology, some of the more than 50 % of
previous reviews) expected outcome, requirements the requirements
applications,
keywords
Objective(s) 5 One or more Ambiguous / Absence or
unambiguous, inappropriate / Ambiguous /
appropriate and discursive inappropriate /
concise objective(s) objective(s) discursive keywords
Literature Survey in - At least 2 to 3 base
Table Format papers with title, Partly missing Majority information
authors, journal / conf. information missing
name, inferences
Block Diagram / 5 Informative and
Algorithm compact diagram (or) Missing / error More details missing
algorithm without information or in error
errors
Methodology / 10 Incomplete Incomplete or
Algorithm Complete information information on the absence of
on the method / method / information on the
procedure / algorithm procedure / method / procedure /
adopted with relevant algorithm adopted algorithm adopted
additional diagrams or lack of relevant and lack of relevant
diagrams additional diagrams
Results Obtained 10 Part of final output Non-availability of
Presentation of output
/ results in terms final output / results
/ results in terms of
of numerical in terms of numerical
numerical values in
values in tables, values in tables,
tables, graphs / charts
graphs / charts graphs / charts
Conclusion 3 Part of results and Results and
Brief statements on the
conclusions conclusions arrived
results and conclusions
arrived out of out of project are less
arrived out of project
project or not presented
 References 2 Lesser number of
At least 6 to 8 reference Lesser number of
papers from references or not
Conf./ references and not in
Journal in IEEE format in IEEE format IEEE format
Viva-Voce 10 Answering at least Answering at least
80% of questions 50% of questions Answering less than
during and after during and after 30% questions
presentation presentation
Rubrics for Third Review Evaluation
Name of the student: Reg. No.: Date:
Max.
Need to Improve
Metrics Mark Good (100%) Average (50%) Score
(25%)
s
Objective(s) 5 One or more Ambiguous / Absence or
unambiguous, inappropriate / Ambiguous /
appropriate and discursive inappropriate /
concise objective(s) objective(s) discursive keywords
Block Diagram 2 Informative and
compact diagram (or) Missing / error More details missing
algorithm without information or in error
errors
Methodology 3 Complete information Incomplete Incomplete or absence of
/Algorithm on the method / information on the information on the
method / procedure / method / procedure /
procedure / algorithm algorithm adopted or algorithm adopted and
adopted with relevant lack of relevant lack of relevant additional
additional diagrams diagrams diagrams
Analysis & Results 10 Citing assumptions,
Part presentation No presentation of
Details on deducing
of items, items or tabulating
expressions, tabulating
Obtaining graphs / the output, Obtaining
the output, Obtaining
charts graphs / charts
graphs / charts
Conclusion 3 Part of results and Results and
Brief statements on the
conclusions conclusions arrived
results and conclusions
arrived out of out of project are not
arrived out of project
project or less presented
Future Work 2 At least 2 to 3 Unclear / less Future scope of work
suggested future work number of future is not presented or
can be proposed here scope of work are ambiguously
clearly. presented. presented.
Demonstration 10 No demo or
Physical demo of the Physical demo is
presenting HW / SW
work carried out partly presented.
components only
 Conference / 5 Applied International
Journal Publication conf. or Scopus / UGC
Paper not submitted
journal, Review Paper submitted
to conference /
received, Explanation details
journal
submitted, Acceptance
intimation
Viva-Voce 10 Answering at least Answering at least
80% of questions 50% of questions Answering less than
during and after during and after 30% questions
presentation presentation

Rubrics for Model Review

Name of the student: Reg. No.: Date:

Max.
Need to Improve
Metrics Mark Good (100%) Average (50%) Score
(0 %)
s
Containing a suitable
title, motivation,
purpose, Non-availability of Non-availability of
Abstract 5
methodology, some of the more than 50 % of
expected outcome, requirements the requirements
applications,
keywords
One or more Ambiguous / Absence or
Objective(s) unambiguous, inappropriate / Ambiguous /
5
appropriate and discursive inappropriate /
concise objective(s) objective(s) discursive keywords
At least 2 to 3 base
Literature Survey papers with title, Partly missing Majority information
5
authors, journal / conf. information missing
name, inferences
Block Diagram 5 Informative and
compact diagram (or) Missing / error More details missing
algorithm without information or in error
errors
Methodology / 10 Incomplete or
Incomplete
Algorithm Complete information absence of
information on the
on the method / information on the
method /
procedure / algorithm method / procedure /
procedure /
adopted with relevant algorithm adopted
algorithm adopted
additional diagrams and lack of relevant
or lack of relevant
additional diagrams
 additional
diagrams
Analysis & Results 10 Citing assumptions,
Part presentation No presentation of
Details on deducing
of items, items or tabulating
expressions, tabulating
Obtaining graphs / the output, Obtaining
the output, Obtaining
charts graphs / charts
graphs / charts
Conclusion 3 Part of results and Results and
Brief statements on the
conclusions conclusions arrived
results and conclusions
arrived out of out of project are not
arrived out of project
project or less presented
Future Scope 2 At least 2 to 3 Unclear / less Future scope of work
suggested future work number of future is not presented or
can be proposed here scope of work are ambiguously
clearly. presented. presented.
Applications 2 Stating and explaining
Stating
various applications Not stated any
applications in
(Industrial / Social / relevant applications
various domains
Personal )
References 3 At least 6 to 8 reference Lesser number of Lesser number of
papers from Conf./ references or not references and not in
Journal in IEEE format in IEEE format IEEE format
Demonstration of 10 No demo or
Physical demo of the Physical demo is
Project presenting HW / SW
work carried out partly presented.
components only
Project Report 10 Hard copy of
Hard copy of project
Guide verified Hard project report
report without guide
copy of project report without guide
verification in bound
in bound form is verification in
/ unbound form is not
available bound / unbound
available
form is available
Report in CD & 10 Report stored in a CD Report stored in a Report stored in a CD
Soft Copy to Email is presented and the CD is presented or is neither presented
same is sent to PC the same is sent to nor the same is sent
email PC email to PC email
Conference / 10 The International
Journal Publication conference or Scopus /
UGC journal to which
Paper not submitted
applied, Review Paper submitted /
to conference /
received, Explanation acceptance details
journal
submitted ,
Acceptance, Paper
Hard copy
Viva-voce 10 Answering at least Answering at least Answering less than
80% of questions 50% of questions 30% questions
during and after during and after
presentation presentation