Advances in Robotics Research: From

Lab to Market: ECHORD++: Robotic

Science Supporting Innovation Antoni
Grau
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-robotics-research-from-lab-to-market-ec
hord-robotic-science-supporting-innovation-antoni-grau/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Coulson and Richardson’s Chemical Engineering, Fourth

Edition: Volume 3A: Chemical and Biochemical Reactors
and Reaction Engineering R. Ravi

https://textbookfull.com/product/coulson-and-richardsons-
chemical-engineering-fourth-edition-volume-3a-chemical-and-
biochemical-reactors-and-reaction-engineering-r-ravi/

Primary Mathematics Textbook 2B Jennifer Hoerst

https://textbookfull.com/product/primary-mathematics-
textbook-2b-jennifer-hoerst/

Handbook of Macroeconomics, Volume 2A-2B SET 1st

Edition John B. Taylor

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-macroeconomics-
volume-2a-2b-set-1st-edition-john-b-taylor/

Natural Fibres Advances in Science and Technology

Towards Industrial Applications From Science to Market
1st Edition Raul Fangueiro

https://textbookfull.com/product/natural-fibres-advances-in-
science-and-technology-towards-industrial-applications-from-
science-to-market-1st-edition-raul-fangueiro/
Out of the lab and on the market : how Sony Computer
Science Labs (Sony CSL) turn research into profits 1st
Edition Tetsu Natsume

https://textbookfull.com/product/out-of-the-lab-and-on-the-
market-how-sony-computer-science-labs-sony-csl-turn-research-
into-profits-1st-edition-tetsu-natsume/

Out of the Lab and On the Market How Sony Computer

Science Labs SonyCSL Turn Research into Profits 1st
Edition Tetsu Natsume (Author)

https://textbookfull.com/product/out-of-the-lab-and-on-the-
market-how-sony-computer-science-labs-sonycsl-turn-research-into-
profits-1st-edition-tetsu-natsume-author/

AI and Big Datas Potential for Disruptive Innovation

Advances in Computational Intelligence and Robotics 1st
Edition Moses Strydom

https://textbookfull.com/product/ai-and-big-datas-potential-for-
disruptive-innovation-advances-in-computational-intelligence-and-
robotics-1st-edition-moses-strydom/

Advances in Management Research Innovation and

Technology 1st Edition Avinash K. Shrivastava (Editor)

https://textbookfull.com/product/advances-in-management-research-
innovation-and-technology-1st-edition-avinash-k-shrivastava-
editor/

Sparks from the Spirit From Science to Innovation

Development and Sustainability First Edition Yathavong

https://textbookfull.com/product/sparks-from-the-spirit-from-
science-to-innovation-development-and-sustainability-first-
edition-yathavong/
Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics 132

Antoni Grau
Yannick Morel
Ana Puig-Pey
Francesca Cecchi Editors

Advances
in Robotics
Research: From
Lab to Market
ECHORD++: Robotic Science
Supporting Innovation
Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics

Volume 132

Series Editors
Bruno Siciliano, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Elettrica e Tecnologie
dell’Informazione, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Napoli, Italy
Oussama Khatib, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, Department of Computer
Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA

Advisory Editors
Nancy Amato, Computer Science & Engineering, Texas A&M University, College
Station, TX, USA
Oliver Brock, Fakultät IV, TU Berlin, Berlin, Germany
Herman Bruyninckx, KU Leuven, Heverlee, Belgium
Wolfram Burgard, Institute of Computer Science, University of Freiburg, Freiburg,
Baden-Württemberg, Germany
Raja Chatila, ISIR, Paris cedex 05, France
Francois Chaumette, IRISA/INRIA, Rennes, Ardennes, France
Wan Kyun Chung, Robotics Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering, POSTECH,
Pohang, Korea (Republic of)
Peter Corke, Science and Engineering Faculty, Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Paolo Dario, LEM, Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy
Alessandro De Luca, DIAGAR, Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
Rüdiger Dillmann, Humanoids and Intelligence Systems Lab, KIT - Karlsruher
Institut für Technologie, Karlsruhe, Germany
Ken Goldberg, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
John Hollerbach, School of Computing, University of Utah, Salt Lake, UT, USA
Lydia E. Kavraki, Department of Computer Science, Rice University, Houston, TX,
USA
Vijay Kumar, School of Engineering and Applied Mechanics, University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, USA
Bradley J. Nelson, Institute of Robotics and Intelligent Systems, ETH Zurich,
Zürich, Switzerland
Frank Chongwoo Park, Mechanical Engineering Department, Seoul National
University, Seoul, Korea (Republic of)
S. E. Salcudean, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
Roland Siegwart, LEE J205, ETH Zürich, Institute of Robotics & Autonomous
Systems Lab, Zürich, Switzerland
Gaurav S. Sukhatme, Department of Computer Science, University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
The Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics (STAR) publish new developments and
advances in the fields of robotics research, rapidly and informally but with a high
quality. The intent is to cover all the technical contents, applications, and
multidisciplinary aspects of robotics, embedded in the fields of Mechanical
Engineering, Computer Science, Electrical Engineering, Mechatronics, Control, and
Life Sciences, as well as the methodologies behind them. Within the scope of the
series are monographs, lecture notes, selected contributions from specialized
conferences and workshops, as well as selected PhD theses.
Special offer: For all clients with a print standing order we offer free access to the
electronic volumes of the Series published in the current year.
Indexed by DBLP, Compendex, EI-Compendex, SCOPUS, Zentralblatt Math,
Ulrich’s, MathSciNet, Current Mathematical Publications, Mathematical Reviews,
MetaPress and Springerlink.

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/5208

Antoni Grau Yannick Morel
• •

Ana Puig-Pey Francesca Cecchi

•

Editors

Advances in Robotics
Research: From Lab
to Market
ECHORD++: Robotic Science Supporting
Innovation

123
Editors
Antoni Grau Yannick Morel
Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Technische Universität München
Barcelona, Spain Garching, Germany

Ana Puig-Pey Francesca Cecchi

Institut de Robòtica i Informàtica Biorobotics Institute
Industrial, CSIC-UPC Schola Superiore Sant’Anna
Barcelona, Spain Pontedera, Italy

ISSN 1610-7438 ISSN 1610-742X (electronic)

Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics
ISBN 978-3-030-22326-7 ISBN 978-3-030-22327-4 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22327-4
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part
of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations,
recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission
or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar
methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this
publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from
the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this
book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the
authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained
herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard
to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Foreword

Robotics is undergoing a major transformation in scope and dimension. From a

largely dominant industrial focus, robotics is rapidly expanding into human envi-
ronments and vigorously engaged in its new challenges. Interacting with, assisting,
serving, and exploring with humans, the emerging robots will increasingly touch
people and their lives.
Beyond its impact on physical robots, the body of knowledge robotics has
produced is revealing a much wider range of applications reaching across diverse
research areas and scientific disciplines, such as biomechanics, haptics, neuro-
sciences, virtual simulation, animation, surgery, and sensor networks among others.
In return, the challenges of the new emerging areas are providing an abundant
source of stimulation and insights for the field of robotics. It is indeed at the
intersection of disciplines that the most striking advances happen.
The Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics (STAR) is devoted to bringing to the
research community the latest advances in the robotics field on the basis of their
significance and quality. Through a wide and timely dissemination of critical
research developments in robotics, our objective with this series is to promote more
exchanges and collaborations among the researchers in the community and con-
tribute to further advancements in this rapidly growing field.
The volume by Antoni Grau, Yannick Morel, Ana Puig-Pey, and Francesca
Cecchi is an edited collection of 14 authoritative contributions on the interaction
between robot manufacturers, researchers, and users within ECHORD++ (The
European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++), a large-scale
integrating project funded by the European Commission within the 7th Framework
Program from 2013 to 2018.
The contents are divided into two parts. The first part presents the structure of the
ECHORD++ project, which is organized around three instruments: Experiments,
Robotics Innovation Facilities, and Public end-user Driven Technological
Innovation (PDTI). The efficacy and relative merits of these different instruments,
and their impact on the European research community in robotics are discussed.
An overview of the funded experiments and PDTIs is presented in the second part,

v
vi Foreword

and then ten selected scientific–technological articles of the experiments and PDTIs
expose the results reached and their contributions to the scientific community.
This volume is the natural follow-up to Volume 94 in the series dedicated to the
previous ECHORD project. An effective testimony of the mission carried by the
project: “from lab to market”, and thus a fine addition to STAR!

Naples, Italy Bruno Siciliano

March 2019 STAR Editor
Preface

This volume includes the three main ECHORD++ instruments and ten selected
contributions of the project achievements, which have been financed by the
European Commission under the 7th Framework Program.
On October 3, 2018, the ECHORD++ core partners presented the final results of
this European Project in the International Conference on Intelligent Robots (IROS
2018). During the past 5 years, more than 100 ECHORD++ partners have devel-
oped robotic technology and giving tailor-made solutions to social, public, and
industrial challenges under the slogan “From Lab to Market”.
Three instruments have been used—Experiments (EXP), Research Innovation
Facilities (RIF), and Public end-users Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI)—
and 35 robotic prototypes have been financed and monitored bringing nowadays
new innovative research solutions and in some cases, pre-commercial products. The
monitoring structure of the research and the technological activities has been the
key to raise the technological level of the involved SMEs and to drive the robotic
solutions to the market.
An intensive and coordinated structured dialogue between all the involved
stakeholders and the core partners has been essential for the success of ECHORD++
project.
The Editors would like to introduce this scientific book through the headlines
presented at the IROS 2018 ECHORD++ Forum:
CECILE HUET. It is actually the beginning of a new wave; because ECHORD++ has been
pioneer in many tools, we are now using and mainstreaming in our program. From RIFs
(Robotics Innovation Facilities) we have created the Digital Innovation Hubs (DIHs), from
Experiments to Financial Support to Third Parties (FSTP) and Cascading Grants; and
from PDTI (Public end users Driven Technological Innovation) to Pre-commercial pro-
curements (PcP).

ALOIS KNOLL. ECHORD and ECHORD++: From 10 years to now. Bringing industry
and academia together with no examples before in an open innovation ecosystem. The
structured dialogue between more than 100 partners and more than 1000 individuals has

vii
viii Preface

been essential for the success of the project. We put a lot of effort to convince researchers to
not only develop good products and systems but also to make them known with a good high
impact.

CHRIS MELHUIS. We want to create the environment for research institutes and robot
manufactures to collaborate in innovation, entrepreneurship and industrial engagement to
robotic technology. Focus on Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs), the Research and
Innovation Facilities (RIF) experience stimulate the economy and new supply chains
helping the SMEs with expertise and reducing their economic risk. ECHORD++ has
launched three RIFs in three European Regions: Bristol, Peccioli and Paris-Saclay. The
lessons learned make possible the future Regional Strategies of Europe.

ALBERTO SANFELIU. Into the Innovative Public Procurement Instruments, ECHORD++

has developed the procedure “Public end-users Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI)”.
Two PDTI have been developed under ECHORD++: one in healthcare and one in urban
scenarios. Two main objectives have been achieved: Public entities have been aligned with
innovative – robotic – solutions to solve their needs improving public services or creating
new ones; and new robotic solutions and products have been developed matching the
functionalities required close to commercial products and boosting European SMEs.

PAOLO DARIO. The Experiments (EXP) is the main instrument used in ECHORD++,
encouraging and supporting robot industry to bring technology foreword, working together
with academia and building excellence. The results are measurable from basic research to
real deployment of products and solutions. The EXP procedure, based in high quality,
consistency and transparency of the calls preparation, evaluation and selection of the
proposals, monitoring and coaching tasks, extraction of results, etc., has been followed in
new European and National proposals with great success.

GEOFF PEGMAN. ECHORD++ has explored different ways in which European funding
could be effectively set out to other organizations. Under the slogan “From Lab to Market
Place” the three boosting instruments have engaged new key players in the innovation
process: robotic manufacturers, end users and public entities have been essential part
of the research and development of new products and solutions.

This scientific book represents a summary of the work done during these 5 years.
Part I introduces the procedures of the three ECHORD++ instruments together with
some use case studies and Part II presents articles explaining some of the scientific
and technological achievements.
We thank Professor Alois Knoll, coordinator of the ECHORD++ consortia and
all the core partners as well as the EU project officer Cecile Huet and the reviewers,
for their excellent guidance through the development of the project. We also want
to thank all the participants and the Springer tracts Editors to make possible this
edition.

Barcelona, Spain Antoni Grau

January 2019 Yannick Morel
Ana Puig-Pey
Francesca Cecchi
Acknowledgements

The Editors would like to acknowledge the researchers that have contributed with
their scientific–technological articles to this book. Their participation in the robotic
consortia for robotic ECHORD++ experiments has brought us the opportunity to
join efforts among researchers, companies, public bodies, and end users.
This book collects the wide vision of the ECHORD++ core partners: “European
Coordination Hub for Open Robotic Development”. The instruments and the pro-
cedures developed under ECHORD++ project have created a robotic ecosystem,
which includes the participation of all the stakeholders involved in innovative
solutions and products life cycle.
Finally, the Editors thank the decision of Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics
to edit this scientific book and disseminate the ECHORD++ results over the sci-
entific and technological community.

ix
Contents

ECHORD++ Instruments
The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++:
An Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Yannick Morel
The Experiment Instrument in ECHORD++: Cascade Funding
for Small-Scale Research Projects for Facilitating the Introduction
of Robotics Technology into Industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Francesca Cecchi and Paolo Dario
Robotics Innovation Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Farid Dailami, Chris Melhuish, Francesca Cecchi and Christophe Leroux
Public End-Users Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI)
in Urban Scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Ana Puig-Pey, Alberto Sanfeliu, Francesc Solé-Parellada, Yolanda Bolea,
Josep Casanovas and Antoni Grau

ECHORD++ Experiments and Contributions

Lessons Learned in Vineyard Monitoring and Protection
from a Ground Autonomous Vehicle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81
Ferran Roure, Luca Bascetta, Marcel Soler, Matteo Matteucci,
Davide Faconti, Jesus-Pablo Gonzalez and Daniel Serrano
Automatized Switchgear Wiring: An Outline of the WIRES
Experiment Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Gianluca Palli, Salvatore Pirozzi, Maurizio Indovini, Daniele De Gregorio,
Riccardo Zanella and Claudio Melchiorri

xi
xii Contents

Optimality Criteria for the Path Planning of Autonomous

Industrial Vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
Marina Raineri, Fabio Ronchini, Simone Perri
and Corrado Guarino Lo Bianco
FASTKIT: A Mobile Cable-Driven Parallel Robot for Logistics . . . . . . 141
Nicolò Pedemonte, Tahir Rasheed, David Marquez-Gamez, Philip Long,
Étienne Hocquard, Francois Babin, Charlotte Fouché, Guy Caverot,
Alexis Girin and Stéphane Caro
Heuristic Planning for Rough Terrain Locomotion in Presence
of External Disturbances and Variable Perception Quality . . . . . . . . . . 165
Michele Focchi, Romeo Orsolino, Marco Camurri, Victor Barasuol,
Carlos Mastalli, Darwin G. Caldwell and Claudio Semini
EXOtrainer Project Clinical Evaluation of Gait Training
with Exoskeleton in Children with Spinal Muscular Atrophy . . . . . . . . 211
Daniel Sanz-Merodio, Gonzalo Puyuelo, Amartya Ganguly, Elena Garces,
Ane Goñi and Elena Garcia
Technology for Assisting During the Comprehensive Geriatric
Assessment Process: The ASSESSTRONIC Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Giuseppe Palestra, Consuelo Granata, Isabelle Hupont
and Mohamed Chetouani
ARSI: An Aerial Robot for Sewer Inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
François Chataigner, Pedro Cavestany, Marcel Soler, Carlos Rizzo,
Jesus-Pablo Gonzalez, Carles Bosch, Jaume Gibert, Antonio Torrente,
Raúl Gomez and Daniel Serrano
SIAR: A Ground Robot Solution for Semi-autonomous Inspection
of Visitable Sewers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275
David Alejo, Gonzalo Mier, Carlos Marques, Fernando Caballero,
Luís Merino and Paulo Alvito
Public Entity Role in Robotic Innovation Barcelona Participation
in ECHORD++ PDTI Project for Urban Challenges . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Javier Varela, Ma José Chesa, Lina Martinez, Silvia Burdons
and Josep Garriga
 ECHORD++ Instruments

Part I presents first an overview of the ECHORD++ project, with its mission and
vision together with a detailed structure of its functionalities and instruments: Exper-
iments, Robotic Innovation Facilities and Public end-user Driven Technology Inno-
vation PDTI.
Chapter “The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++:
An Overview” explains how the project is born, the partners, the different instruments
and the new concept of cascade funding projects. This novelty made ECHORD++ a
special project along the huge number of research groups and consortia involved in
the whole project. So far, it is the European funded project with more research team
and partners involved in the robotic field.
In Chap. “The Experiment Instrument in ECHORD++: Cascade Funding for
Small-Scale Research Projects for Facilitating the Introduction of Robotics Tech-
nology into Industry”, one of the instruments in ECHORD++ is explained in detail:
RIF. Robotic innovation facilities are a set of laboratories across Europe funded with
the project with the goal of hosting consortia involved in any experiment that have
special needs when testing their robotic research. In the chapter the three different
and specific RIFs will be described and analyzed.
Chapter “Robotics Innovation Facilities” explains an important instrument in
ECHORD++: the Experiments. In this part, a big number of research groups have
been involve in short time funded research projects. The chapter explains the man-
agement of such Experiments, from the call for participation, the candidate’s selec-
tion, the monitoring, reviews and funding for each of the 36 experiments funded for
ECHORD.
Chapter “Public End-Users Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI) in Urban
Scenarios” is very special because it presents the innovation of funding public end-
user driven technology, in particular, robotic technology. The robotic challenge is the
key of such an instruments together with the management of the different consortia
that participated competitively in the success of the robotic challenge proposed by a
public entity, selected also with a very special and innovative process.
The European Coordination Hub
for Open Robotics Development++:
An Overview

Yannick Morel

Abstract ECHORD++ is an FP7 project in robotics innovation, and a direct follow-up

to the original ECHORD project. In this Chapter, we provide a rapid overview of the
aims of the project and of the general context within which it is framed, in particular
the manner in which it builds upon achievements of the original project, as well as the
place it occupies in the current European research landscape in robotics. Further, we
outline the structure of the project, which is organized around a number of distinct
Instruments. The goal of the work performed is two-fold, as it is concerned with both
achieving concrete, substantial impact in robotic innovation, but also with exploring
different processes and support mechanisms to pursue and achieve said innovation.
Hereafter, we provide a short overview of the format of the three technical Instruments
implemented within the project: Experiments, Robotics Innovation Facilities, and
Public end-user Driven Technological Innovation. We discuss the efficacy and relative
merits of these different Instruments, and their impact on the European research
community in robotics.

1 Introduction

The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++ (ECHORD++,

Oct. 2013 to Jan. 2018, [1]) is a direct follow-up to the original ECHORD project (Jan.
2009 to Dec. 2013 [2–4]), both funded under the European Commission’s (EC) 7th
Framework Programme (FP7). The original ECHORD manifested itself as somewhat
of an exotic animal in the European robotics research landscape of 2009. The fun-
damental ambition of the project consisted in bringing together robotics academia
and industry or, in more general terms, technology providers and technology users,
in the pursuit of innovation. At the times, within the European research community,
Excellence remained the central focal point, innovation a foreign, if not outright base,
notion [5]. Placing innovation front and center was a bold initiative. This however

Y. Morel (B)
Technische Universität München, Garching, Germany
e-mail: yannick.morel@in.tum.de

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 3

A. Grau et al. (eds.), Advances in Robotics Research: From Lab to Market,
Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics 132,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22327-4_1
4 Y. Morel

was by design, the underlying intent being to promote a shift in the academic cul-
ture. Stranger and more radical yet, none of the core partners (composing the initial
consortium) would perform Research and Technological Development (RTD) work.
Instead, this work would be undertaken by (and the majority of the funding passed on
to) additional, extended partners, integrated within the consortium over the project’s
runtime, using a cascade funding scheme.
The work conducted within ECHORD was structured around two complementary
constructs, the Experiments Instrument, and the Structured Dialogue Instrument [2].
The former is designed around a set of focused (in time and scope) RTD projects,
the Experiments that gave its name to the Instrument. Core partners in ECHORD moti-
vated proposals for Experiments from the robotics research community through the
emission of Calls for Expression of Interest (CEoIs). These calls directly addressed
the central focus of the project, Technology Transfer (TT), typically from an aca-
demic Experiment partner, to an industrial one. The scope of eligible RTD activities
were framed by a number of defined application areas (referred to as Scenarii, e.g.
human-robot collaboration), technological foci, and expected maturity level for the
Experiment’s outcome (from proof of concept to prototypes). Over fifty such Exper-
iments were supported within ECHORD. The second Instrument, referred to as Struc-
tured Dialogue, had the ambition to engage conversation between the various (largely
heterogeneous) stakeholders involved in robotics research in Europe (and beyond),
following a systematic structure to frame exchanges. The concrete objectives being
to develop common grounds between parties typically not engaging each others on a
regular basis (such as academia and industrial robot manufacturers, for instance), in
part to support the Experiments Instrument, but also with the goal of bringing together
all actors composing the community, to chart a common way forward for robotics.
ECHORD proved to be a resounding success. Over fifty Experiments were sup-
ported over the project’s runtime, a significant portion of which brought the devel-
oped innovation to market. Due to the breadth of community engagement involved
in the project’s Instruments, the novelty of the project’s structure and of the specific
Instruments developed, and owing to the magnitude of the RTD work performed, the
project reached a high level of visibility in Europe and worldwide (see for illustra-
tion a discussion of the project’s achievement by Commissioner Oettinger [6]). This
recognition also likely stemmed from more general, contextual factors, extending
beyond robotics. Europe and the world were still in the process of recovering from
the 2008 crisis. The political sphere was exploring different avenues to kick-start
recovery. In 2014, the EC introduced the notion of a Digital Single Market (DSM),
later defining its DSM Strategy (DSMS [7]) in May of 2015. The intent of the DSMS
was to extend the notion of Single Market to digital technologies, and in particular
Information and Communication Technology (ICT). In support of its DSMS, the EC
launched the Digitisation of European Industry (DEI) initiative in 2016. The premise
of this initiative is that supporting and facilitating digital transformation of European
industry, in particular gainfully exploiting ICT to transform processes and develop
new products, will have a positive impact on industry competitiveness, and a nec-
essary step to maximise the benefit to be withdrawn from the developing DSM (as
discussed in [8]). The notion of industry digitisation itself finds its place within the
The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++: An Overview 5

current fourth industrial revolution, commonly referred to as Industry 4.0 (I4.0, [9,
10]).
ECHORD, the vision for which was shaped seven years prior to the DEI initiative,
largely foreshadowed and anticipated this trend, the Instruments developed within
the project finding themselves not only topical, but also very effective in support digi-
tisation of industry. It is very naturally that the follow-up project ECHORD++, received
support to build upon the achievements of the original. The success of ECHORD was
predicated not only upon its achievements in terms of TT and innovation (although
these were substantial), but also and probably more importantly upon the successful
experimentation with a new way to pursue innovation: The Experiments Instrument.
Following its success in ECHORD, format of this Instrument was broadly propagated
through the European research scene, and has been used in a large number of EC
projects. The mechanism has come to be referred to as Funding for Support of Third
Party (FSTP, also called cascade funding), use of which is explicitly described within
the Horizon 2020 Work Programme (see [11]). The follow-up project ECHORD++
built upon the original’s achievements by introducing, in complement to Experi-
ments, two additional technological Instruments, the Robotics Innovation Facilities
(RIFs) and the Public end-user Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI) Instruments.
The object of these was, at a conceptual level, to explore the efficacy of different
setups and formats in pursuing robotics innovation.
Hereafter, we provide a rapid overview of the nature, intent, and first results
of these Instruments following their implementation in ECHORD++. The respective
Instruments are discussed in greater detail in later Chapters of this book. Also offered
is a short discussion of the impact of the work done in ECHORD++ on the European
research landscape, and of its relevance within the frame of the continued digitisation
of industry in Europe, in particular attempting to articulate relations between the new
innovation mechanisms experimented with in the project, and recent development
related to the DEI initiative, such as the upcoming Digital Innovation Hub networks
in robotics.

2 Technical Instruments

As alluded to in the above, the ECHORD++ project is structured around a number of

complementary Instruments. The Structured Dialogue Instrument, introduced in the
original ECHORD, is still present, although it has taken somewhat of a secondary role to
the three technical Instruments: Experiments, the RIFs, and the PDTI Instrument. All
three address the same objective (giving substance to the project’s motto From Lab
to Market), extending support to technology providers and technology users, with
the aim to provide conditions that facilitate the emergence of robotic innovation.
Barriers to successful innovation are numerous and difficult to overcome (see for
instance the discussion on the Valley of Death in [12]), and there exist no pre-made
recipe guaranteeing success. Within that context, achievements of the Experiments
Instrument developed in ECHORD stood out as very positive. That model was extended
6 Y. Morel

within ECHORD++ to include additional support towards productisation. The RIF

model, which can be thought of as a pilot Instrument for the Digital Innovation
Hub model (DIH, [8]), explores a different setup and scope for innovation, directly
providing technical expertise and access to robotics equipment to innovators. The
last technical Instrument discussed, PDTI, explores a novel approach to a notoriously
challenging innovation process, Pre-Commercial Procurement (PCP, [13, 14]).

2.1 Experiments

The format of the Experiments Instrument remains largely comparable to that devel-
oped in ECHORD. Core ECHORD++ project partners framed the scope of the RTD work
to be pursued in the Instrument through the definition of targeted application areas
(referred to as Scenarii, six of which were defined: Cognitive tools and workers for
cognitive factories, general purpose robotic co-workers, cognitive logistics robots,
medical robotics, agricultural and food robotics, and urban robotics), and four distinct
technical areas (or Research Foci: Practical machine cognition, advanced perception
and action capabilities, cooperative mobile manipulators, and system architectures,
systems, software engineering, processes and tools). Two CEoIs were conducted,
with a first set of fifteen Experiments joining the project and beginning RTD work in
early 2015, and a second group of sixteen in mid-2016. The expected duration of each
Experiment is eighteen months, with financial support of the order of e300, 000.
The Experiments Instrument distinguishes itself in a number of key respects. In
particular, the emphasis on innovation is pervasive throughout the process, from
preferred Experiment consortium composition (including both technology provider
and user, with the addition of a system integrator to facilitate TT when relevant, see
the second CEoI’s guide for applicants [15]), to the development of an exploitation
plan by each Experiment consortium (discussed during Experiments’ kickoff events,
followed-up through periodic monitoring over the Experiment’s lifetime, and evalu-
ated in final Experiments reviews), to the encouraged (and facilitated) participation
to relevant professional fairs (raising visibility for the product developed), up to the
implementation of measures for productisation support, post-Experiment runtime (in
the form of the Experiment Booster programme, further discussed in a later Chapter).
Another distinguishing feature is the nature of the support provided by the core
ECHORD++ partners to Experiments partners, in terms of breadth, of frequency of
exchanges, but also in terms of the procedural agility necessary to place Experi-
ments in the best position to succeed. In particular, the aforementioned emphasis
on innovation implies the delivery of support services extending well beyond the
sole provision of financial support. More specifically, services in terms of network-
ing (brokerage days, Instrument-specific and project-wide community events), Pub-
lic Relations (PR, support including coaching of Experiments partner, definition of
PR plan, invitation to high-profile professional fairs, organisation of Instrument- or
project-wide PR events), support for administrative aspects (in the form of a service
The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++: An Overview 7

desk, accessible to all Experiment partners), and support for productisation, business
planning and development.
The structure of the Experiments Instrument, as detailed in the project’s Descrip-
tion of Work, calls for frequent interactions between Experiment partners, perform-
ing RTD work, and core partners, providing support (as discussed above), but also
monitoring progress of the Experiment. The monitoring process is organized around
two-monthly calls, on the occasion of which Experimenters report recent progress,
setbacks encountered and corresponding possible deviations. The content of these
calls is not limited to technical aspects but also includes discussion of PR activi-
ties and refinement of the business plan for the developed product. Exchanges are
supported by a dedicated online infrastructure, centralising relevant documents (in
particular deliverables), and keeping track of deadlines, milestones, status of Key
Performance Indicators (KPIs) and of the general progress of the Experiment. This
frequency of monitoring calls is, relative to usual project progress-tracking proce-
dures, high. In practice however, monitoring procedures, and more generally the
specifics of the support provided, was adjusted for each Experiment, based on par-
ticular needs identified. In other words, we observed tremendous heterogeneity, in
the different Experiments funded, in terms of the nature of the work being conducted,
the maturity of the technologies involved, and the experience (and conversely, needs)
of the Experiment consortium partners in different aspects (technical expertise, PR,
business development). Adjusting the support provided in accordance has proved
a key factor to success, although the implied agility in implementation of project
procedures requires significant efforts from the core consortium partners overseeing
the Instrument.
It is still very early to assess success of the Experiments Instrument in ECHORD++.
The experience from ECHORD has shown that, in many instances, it takes time for the
impact of the work performed to coalesce and take concrete substance. Specifically,
although the ambition of the instrument clearly is to achieve the development of a
product, in most cases the prototype developed requires additional efforts and invest-
ments to achieve the maturity necessary for market introduction. Aspects including
system qualification, certification, and prototype industrialisation, for example, are
all fairly effort- and time-intensive. Few Experiments are able to complete them
within the relatively short project duration (eighteen months). In some cases, it is
only years after the corresponding ECHORD Experiment came to an end that success-
ful businesses were established. Nevertheless, early indicators are very positives;
ECHORD++ Experiments already sold for over e1 million worth of robotic products
in 2017, and a total of six different products, developed in the ECHORD++ Experi-
ments Instrument, are expected to reach market (that is, Technology Readiness Level
9) by the end of 2018.
8 Y. Morel

2.2 Robotic Innovation Facilities

The ECHORD++ Robotic Innovation Facilities (RIFs) form a network of Competence

Centers (CCs) in robotics. They offer support in the form of access to equipment
and expertise in robotics to interested beneficiaries. The network is composed of
three different RIFs, located in Bristol (hosted by the Bristol Robotics Laboratory,
BRL), in Paris-Saclay (at the Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies
Alternatives, CEA), and in Peccioli (at the Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, SSSA). The
particular form of the support extended to beneficiaries differed greatly depending
on the specifics of the considered collaborations, however the prototypical RIF tech-
nical project was conducted over a duration of six weeks, in collaboration between
the external beneficiary and RIF personnel. Relative to technical activities in Exper-
iments, the scope here is narrower, and work is generally performed at lower Tech-
nology Readiness Levels (TRL). In particular, Experiments are expected to lead to
the development of a system beyond laboratory prototype (that is, TRL5 and above).
Conversely, the target at the end of the six week RIF collaboration is a Proof of
Concept (PoC, TRL3).
In contrast to the Experiments Instrument, which built upon the strong founda-
tion laid in the original ECHORD, the RIFs were completely new to ECHORD++. The
implementation of the Instrument and the response of the target audience differed
from expectations in a number of key respects. In particular, procedures regimenting
the work performed in the Instrument were designed to bring the barrier of entry as
low as possible; potential beneficiaries need only identify which of the three RIFs
has the resources (expertise and equipment) to support the desired collaboration,
close to no paperwork is required (no more than a few pages describing the tech-
nical work foreseen and expected impact), the service is provided free of charge,
and Intellectual Property of the foreground developed in the collaboration is left to
the beneficiary. Accordingly, the expectation was that the RIFs would field large
numbers of solicitations from prospective beneficiaries.
Reality proved somewhat different. In particular, if the RIFs did achieve a high
volume of activities over the duration of the project (in excess of a hundred techni-
cal collaborations), the efforts required from the RIFs to motivate participation of
beneficiaries proved significant. Value of the service provided did not appear to be
self-evident, at least initially. Motivating active participation of the Instrument’s core
target audience (Small and Medium-sized Enterprises, SMEs) has demanded time,
efforts, and pedagogy. In addition, the RIFs initially expected to develop collabo-
rations with beneficiaries from across most of Europe. Instead, the overwhelming
majority of successful RIF collaborations were developed with beneficiaries located
in relative proximity to the RIFs’ facilities.
These unexpected developments did not, however, prevent the RIF Instrument
from achieving a significant impact. RIF collaborations have directly led to the cre-
ation of several startups, some of which have secured financial support from venture
capital well in excess of e1 million. In addition, a significant number of the PoCs
developed in collaboration with industry have led to the development of new products
(or improvement to existing ones). Finally, the RIFs proved very successful in exper-
The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++: An Overview 9

imenting with different additional services in complement to the typical six-week

technical collaboration, including: Educational workshops, Intellectual Property (IP)
management support, networking support, connecting innovators with venture capi-
tal and system integrators, as well as due diligence services for investors in robotics,
to name but a few. The insights gathered are of particular relevance to the networks of
robotics Digital Innovation Hubs (DIHs) in the process of being established at time
of writing, and which constitute spiritual successors to the ECHORD++ RIF network.

2.3 Public End-User Driven Technological Innovation

The Public end-user Driven Technological Innovation (PDTI) Instrument explores

the active involvement of a public end-user in the robotics innovation process. In
practice, the Instrument has strong similarities with Pre-Commercial Procurement
(PCP [16]), process widely acknowledged as challenging to enact (see the discus-
sion of barriers to PCP in [17]). The PDTI process, as implemented in ECHORD++,
involved the following steps. Initially, a set of relevant application areas, within which
robotic technology could be expected to provide tools for innovation, were identi-
fied. Core ECHORD++ project members then motivated the definition of innovation
challenges (corresponding to specific technological needs) in these application areas
by European public bodies. A panel of experts ranked the proposed challenges, the
top two being used as a basis for CEoIs solicitating proposals for robotic solutions
by RTD consortia.
The two selected challenges were in the areas of healthcare (specifically, Com-
prehensive Geriatric Assessment, CGA), and urban robotics (monitoring of sewer
networks). For each challenge, three RTD consortia were initially selected. The sub-
sequent steps in the process emulate those involved in a PCP, with three successive
(and competitive) development phases, the first dedicated to solution design, the sec-
ond to prototype development, the third to the implementation of a pre-commercial
solution (see [16]). The significant differentiating factor of PDTI with respect to
typical implementations of PCP consists in the development of involved intermedi-
ation processes, between RTD consortia and public bodies, led by core ECHORD++
project partners. These processes have taken a form comparable to that of the moni-
toring procedures developed for the Experiments Instrument, and present a number
of similarities to methods implemented for Public Procurement of Innovation [18].
The PDTI Instrument is still active at time of writing, it is accordingly difficult
to assess the degree of success of the Instrument. However, early indicators are very
positive. Involved RTD teams, two of which having proceeded to the third phase
in each challenge, have managed to generate interest from a range of possible end-
users for the technology developed. In many cases, this interest was for applications
extending beyond those considered in their respective challenges, showing interesting
potential for the technology to scale to different types of problems.
10 Y. Morel

3 Conclusion

The ECHORD programme, comprising both the original project and its follow-up
ECHORD++, has spanned a decade, starting in 2009 and concluding in January 2019.
While its impact in terms of innovation (generating new products, new services, new
processes) is sizeable, its main contribution to the community likely has been in its
role as a laboratory, experimenting novel innovation procedures. ECHORD introduced
cascade funding ten years ago; FSTP is now seemingly ubiquitous across the robotics
research community (see, among many others, the H2020 projects RoboTT-Net,
HORSE, RobotUnion), and beyond (it is for instance used in the Human Brain Project
to promote community inclusiveness). ECHORD++ implemented the RIFs, a network
of CCs providing technical support (and more) for robotics innovation. The RIFs’
brainchilds, the DIH networks in robotics, will begin operation in 2019. Finally, the
challenge-based innovation procedures implemented in ESMERA (another H2020
project) show shades of PDTI, mixed with the now usual FSTP model.
Another contribution of the ECHORD programme however, which has not hereto-
fore been discussed, is its contribution to the emergence of a close-knit commu-
nity for robotic research in Europe. The ECHORD network, composed of researchers,
engineers, managers and more, having directly participated in the projects as core or
extended partners, or taken part in proposal evaluations, Experiment or PDTI reviews,
counts several thousands of the best experts in the field in Europe (the ECHORD con-
tact list features over four thousand entries). Bringing these people together, lowering
the entry barrier into European research for the growth and benefit of the community,
providing the substrate over which new, successful, lasting collaborations emerge and
grow, arguably constitutes the more significant contribution of ECHORD to robotics
research in Europe.

References

1. http://www.echord.eu. Accessed 11 Oct 2018

2. Röhrbein, F., Veiga, G., Natale, C.: Gearing Up and Accelerating Cross-fertilization Between
Academic and Industrial Robotics Research in Europe: Technology Transfer Experiments from
the ECHORD Project 94. Springer (2013)
3. Knoll, A., Siciliano, B., Pires, N., Lafrenz, R.: Echord- the new face of academia-industry
collaboration in European robotics. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 17(4), 21–22 (2010)
4. http://www.echord.info/. Accessed 11 Oct 2018
5. Boni, A.A., Weingart, L.R., Evenson, S.: Innovation in an academic setting: designing and
leading a business through market-focused, interdisciplinary teams. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ.
8(3), 407–417 (2009)
6. Vom labor auf den markt, Süddeutsche Zeitung (2016)
7. A digital single market strategy for Europe. Communication from the European Commission
(2015)
8. Digitising European industry reaping the full benefits of a digital single market. Communication
from the European Commission (2016)
9. Lasi, H., Fettke, P., Kemper, H.G., Feld, T., Hoffmann, M.: Industry 4.0. Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng.
6(4), 239–242 (2014)
The European Coordination Hub for Open Robotics Development++: An Overview 11

10. Semolic, B., Steyn, P.: Industry 4.0 collaborative Research, Innovation and Development (RID)
projects. Proj. Manag. World J. 7 (2018)
11. Actions involving financial support to third parties, Annex K, Horizon-2020 Work Programme
(2016)
12. Markham, S.K., Ward, S.J., Aiman-Smith, L., Kingon, A.I.: The valley of death as context for
role theory in product innovation. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 27(3), 402–417 (2010)
13. Edquist, C., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M.: Public procurement for innovation as mission-
oriented innovation policy. Res. Policy 41(10), 1757–1769 (2012)
14. Edquist, C., Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J.M.: Pre-commercial procurement: a demand or supply
policy instrument in relation to innovation? R&D Manag. 45(2), 147–160 (2015)
15. Guide for applicants: ECHORD++ Experiments Call 2. http://echord.eu/portal/
ProposalDocuments/download/6. Accessed 11 Oct 2018
16. Bos, L.: Pre-commercial procurement. European Commission: Strategy for ICT research and
Innovation Unit (2008)
17. Turkama, P., Zális̆ová, I., Rolfstam, M., Ikävalko, S., de Oliveira, Á., Nina, M.: Policy recom-
mendations for advancing PCP in Europe, FP7 CSA Enhancing Innovation in Pre-commercial
Public Purchasing Processes, PreCo (2011)
18. Edler, J., Yeow, J.: Connecting demand and supply: the role of intermediation in public pro-
curement of innovation. Res. Policy 45(2), 414–426 (2016)
The Experiment Instrument
in ECHORD++: Cascade Funding
for Small-Scale Research Projects
for Facilitating the Introduction
of Robotics Technology into Industry

Francesca Cecchi and Paolo Dario

Abstract ECHORD++ funds small-scale research projects called experiments with

a maximum duration of 18 months. Cooperative research is done in academia-
industry consortia, based on actual used cases. This article describes the proce-
dure, the phases and the results reached under ECHORD++ Experiments instru-
ment, encouraging and supporting robotic academia and industry in Europe, working
together in tailor made solutions for their technological challenges. As the authors
say, thanks to the effort spent in the first ECHORD and in the current ECHORD++,
the Experiments instrument is now solid and ready to be seen as an example of good
practice in cascade funding.

1 Introduction

As new branches of robot automation emerge, such as small, lot-size production of

variants in SMEs, including such areas as (factory) logistics, recycling, human-care,
security, home appliances, edutainment, personal robot companions, etc., radically
new designs of robot systems are needed. With the competition in robotics ever
increasing, (especially between Japan and Europe), cutting-edge technology will be
the decisive factor which determines success. We believe Europe can achieve the
“cutting-edge” advantage through a very close collaboration of robot manufacturers
and research institutes. Thus, the E++ experiments overall objective is to encourage
and support Europe’s robot industry to bring technology forward and to build up
excellence in well-defined areas. Within the experiments instrument, incentives are
provided to encourage European robot manufacturers and research institutes to work
together on an operational level, with tangible and measurable results to accelerate the
development of technologies and their deployment into new application scenarios.

F. Cecchi (B) · P. Dario

Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy
e-mail: francesca.cecchi@santannapisa.it
P. Dario
e-mail: paolo.dario@santannapisa.it

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020 13

A. Grau et al. (eds.), Advances in Robotics Research: From Lab to Market,
Springer Tracts in Advanced Robotics 132,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22327-4_2
14 F. Cecchi and P. Dario

It is worth saying that the experiments instrument is a well-proven backbone of the

ECHORD project and it has been revised and improved in the ECHORD++ project.
An experiment is a small to medium sized scientific research and/or technology
development project carried out by a team of one or more research institutions and
robot manufacturers, which typically lasts 18 months. They have clearly defined
goals in terms of quantifiable technological advancement in the areas described in the
research focus. Two or more partners collaborate within each experiment. These small
projects are expected to result in both tangible and measurable outcomes in terms of
the accelerated development of technologies, as well as the deployment of robotics
technology into new scenarios for the direct application of the research results. Each
experiment has a funding of 300.000e given by the ECHORD++ Consortium as a
cascade funding structure.

2 Materials and Methods

Different phases have been developed in order to successfully coach, evaluate, select
and monitor the 31 funded experiments. The phases are six and are the following
(see Fig. 1):
• Phase I: Preparatory Activities
• Phase II: Consultation and coaching of experimenting partners
• Phase III: Call Issue
• Phase IV: Evaluation and Selection
• Phase V: Monitoring and Review
• Phase VI: Results Extraction and Exploitation.
In the following paragraph the deepen description of each phase. Two have been
the Calls executed in order to fund 31 experiments. Such phases have been executed
for each call.

2.1 Phase I: Preparatory Activities

The preparatory activities aim at improving and optimizing the application and the
management processes of the experiments.

2.1.1 Templates and Guidelines

Guidelines and the templates for pre-proposal, proposal, evaluation and correct deliv-
ery of the experiment were prepared and delivered (see Fig. 2).
The proposal template was obtained through a more structured division and adding
sub-paragraph such as “Concept, methodology and associated work plan”, “Expected
The Experiment Instrument in ECHORD++ … 15

Fig. 1 Experiment phases

Fig. 2 Templates and guidelines prepared

16 F. Cecchi and P. Dario

results” and “Exploitation plan of experiments results and management of knowledge

and of intellectual property”, with requirements as “Proofs-of-concept, prototypes,
products” and “Dissemination plan of experiment results”.
In addition, the instrument of RIF (Robotics Innovation Facilities) was defined as
one indicator to assess the impact and the feasibility of the experiments.
Videos and any multimedia material were required as mandatory proof of “transfer
output”.
As a consequence, the templates were modified accordingly in order to include a
plan for dissemination and outreach activities and description of impact and bring-
to-market process.

Guide for Applicants

The development of ECHORD++’s guide for applicants has seen different steps:
1. The introduction of a Glossary of Terms at the beginning of the document, to help
applicants to go through the text and to fix the main concepts,
2. A general update of the information (new scenarios and research foci and evalu-
ation criteria) and the addition of the new ECHORD++ instruments (i.e.: RIFs),
3. A shorter background description through the differentiation in different para-
graphs on: General information, Types of Experiment, Scenarios and Research
Foci,
4. The description of Scenarios, Research Foci and RIFs is just briefly reported in the
main contents since wider information are provided in three different Annexes,
5. The addition of the description of the link between Experiments and RIFs to help
the comprehension of the RIFs’ scope in the experiment process.
The final aim was to provide a clear set of instructions in order to receive optimal
proposals.
Three documents were developed to support Phase IV (selection and evaluation):

1. the template for the evaluation of Pre-proposal,

2. the templates for the Evaluation of Proposal,
3. the Guide for Independent Experts.

Pre-proposal Evaluation Template

In order to facilitate a correct and effective evaluation of pre-proposals, the template

to be fulfilled by the evaluators was structured with specific questions that matched
the ones asked to applicants in the pre-proposal form. In order to help evaluators
to give a clear, strict and homogeneous feedback, suggested answers were provided
too.
Once collected the answers, the evaluator is required to submit the feedback
(within 5 business days) following a suggested template form.
The Experiment Instrument in ECHORD++ … 17

Proposal Evaluation Template

The templates for the evaluation of proposals were divided in three: an Individual
Evaluation Report (IER), who was developed by answering to five questions for each
Section (Scientific and/or technological Excellence, Impact and Implementation); a
Draft Consensus Report, which was a document filled by the rapporteur as summary
of the result of the individual evaluations (IER) and it was structured as the summary
of the arguments of each evaluator for each section and the Evaluation Summary
Report (ESR), which was developed by the rapporteur, summarizing the views of
the evaluators.

Guide for Independent Experts

The guide for independent experts was structured as follows:

1. an initial glossary of terms,
2. an introduction on the project and the final aim of the call,
3. description of the evaluation process:
a. evaluation steps,
b. evaluation criteria,
c. How to score,
d. directions for rapporteurs,
e. obtain the final scores,
f. conditions to involve a third evaluator,
g. rules for Conflicts of Interest,
h. evaluation timing.

Evaluation Platform: HOW TO (for Experts)

The experts were provided also of a guide to correctly use the web-based evaluation
platform. The guide describes the web platform functionality in order to implement
the evaluation of proposals. It was structured as follows:
1. an initial summary of the evaluation process and deadlines,
2. instructions on how to access the proposals,
3. description of the independent evaluation:
a. evaluator role,
b. rapporteur role,
4. description on how obtain consensus,
5. description on how accept consensus.
18 F. Cecchi and P. Dario

Guide for Experimenters

The experimenters, once funded, received a Guide for Experimenters to explain the
experiment monitoring and reporting activities required by the project. The guide
also contained the description of the experiments web platform and information on
how to use it correctly.
The guide was structured as follows:

1. description of the scope of the guide,

2. description of the monitoring and reporting activities,
a. technical HOW TO use the web platform (how to log in, how to select the
experiment section, description of the experiment dashboard, how to enter
data for a monitoring period, how to fill in the report).

2.1.2 Database

Three databases were set up to disseminate the opportunity of E++ project: one
for potential applicants (1386 contacts), one for manufacturers (136 contacts) and
one for independent experts (366 contacts). A big effort was due to create a solid
evaluators’ list. Starting from ECHORD’s one, in the first Call 43 industrial and 11
research experts have been contacted while in the second Call other 7 industrial and
3 research experts have been added.

2.1.3 Manufacturer List

As in ECHORD, manufacturers were asked to offer hardware at special prices for

E++ activities. This list was published, but there has not been systematic handling
of hardware purchase. The reasons are the huge amount of issues with depreciation
and the relative high volume of non-list-equipment that ECHORD experienced. But
in order to facilitate the purchase of standardized hardware, the product “catalogue”
has been uploaded and updated in E++’s website just for registered users.
The total number of offers received was 76 in categories such as: robotic arms
with different payload, mobile platforms, parallel kinematics, controller hardware
(if not included in robot), sensor equipment and software.

2.1.4 Evaluators Contract

For each evaluator, a web based expertise profile has been developed in order to
facilitate the matching with the proposals and obtain an appropriate assignment. The
expertise profile has been obtained from keywords provided by each of them when
registering on the evaluator’s portal.
The Experiment Instrument in ECHORD++ … 19

Once the assignment is completed, an email is sent to all evaluators acting as a

contract request with the following attachments:
– guide for Independent Experts: guidelines to be followed in order to develop a
proper evaluation,
– conditions of Appointment: information about Conflict of Interest and Code of
Conduct for Independent Experts,
– reply form of acceptance: form to be signed by each expert in order to be legally
authorized to develop the assigned evaluations,
– appointment Letter: letter signed by the WP leader (Prof. Paolo Dario) at-testing
the request to act as evaluator for the reported proposals assigned to each expert.

Only once received the signed reply form and downloaded both the “Guide for
Experts” and the “How to” guidance to use the website, the expert had the access to
the proposals assigned to him.

2.2 Phase II: Consultation and Coaching of Experimenting

Partners

In the second phase, contacts collected in the database were contacted through emails
in order to first present ECHORD++ and then ask for their participation/contribution.
A team of customer service was developed with the aim to answer potential
applicants’ questions through phone and email.
In addition, in order to help potential applicants, common raised questions were
collected and whose answers published on the web site in the “Frequently Asked
Questions” section.

2.3 Phase III: Call Issue

Phase III concerns the call issue. In E++ the call text provides information about the
opening and the deadline of the call, the definition of experiment, the scope, the list
of scenarios and the website link in which find more information. The Call 1 was
opened on the 3.3.2014 and the deadline was on the 14.4.2014, 17:00 Brussels time
and it was published in the following newspapers:
– Gazeta Wyborcza (Poland), 3rd March 2014
– EXPANSION (Spain), 3rd March 2014
– Les Echos (France), 4th March 2014.
It was also published in the magazine “the Engineer” (UK) on March 10th, 2014.
The Call 2 was opened on the 4.5.2015 and the deadline was on the 23.6.2015, 17:00
Brussels time. The call was published in the following media:
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 ISSOLVE Royal Cherry Gelatin in boiling water; add cold water.

D When it just begins to thicken, pour small amount in large

mould. Allow to set. Arrange pieces of fruit and nuts in desired
position, to form a design. Add more gelatin mixture to cover and
chill until firm. Mix remaining fruit and nuts with rest of thickened
gelatin and pour into mould. Chill until firm. Serves 6.

Prunes in Jelly
⅓ lb. prunes
1 cup boiling water
1 package Royal Cherry Gelatin

W ASH prunes; soak in 1½ to 2 cups water overnight or for

several hours and boil in same water until tender. Cut in
halves; remove pits. Dissolve Royal Cherry Gelatin in boiling water.
Measure prune liquid, and add water to make 1 cup. Add this and
prunes to gelatin mixture. Pour into mould and chill until firm. Stir
occasionally while thickening to prevent prunes from settling. Serves
6.
 Royal
Raspberry
And here is the deservedly popular
raspberry. Your selection is bound to be
Royal Raspberry, if you wish to serve a
rich and distinctive dessert.

Raspberry Concord Parfait

1 package Royal Raspberry Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
½ cup grape juice
½ cup cold water

D ISSOLVE Royal Raspberry Gelatin in boiling water; add grape

juice and cold water. Set in pan of ice or very cold water and
when almost set, whip with rotary egg beater until very light and
thick. Pile into parfait glasses or turn into moulds and chill until ready
to serve. Serves 10.
This gelatin is also attractive if moulded plain, without whipping. If
preferred, mould a layer of plain gelatin and when set add a layer of
whipped gelatin and continue until all is used or mould in parfait
glasses, half plain with top layers of the whipped gelatin.

Spiced Raisins in Jelly

1 package Royal Raspberry Gelatin
2 cups boiling water
1 tablespoon vinegar
1½ cups raisins
¼ teaspoon cinnamon
¼ teaspoon nutmeg
¼ teaspoon mace
1/ teaspoon cloves
16
ISSOLVE Royal Raspberry Gelatin in 1 cup boiling water. Add

D
vinegar. Cook raisins with spices in 1 cup boiling water until soft
and puffed up. Add to gelatin mixture. Pour into moulds and
chill. Stir occasionally while thickening to prevent raisins from
settling. Serve plain as a relish. Serves 8.

Raspberry Bavarian Cream

1 package Royal Raspberry Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
¼ teaspoon salt
2 teaspoons lemon juice
1 cup cold water
½ cup cream, whipped

D ISSOLVE Royal Raspberry Gelatin in boiling water; add salt;

cold water and lemon juice. Set in pan of cracked ice or very
cold water to cool. When it begins to thicken, beat in whipped cream
until well blended. Turn into moulds or glasses and chill until firm.
Serve with or without cream and crushed raspberries. Serves 8.

Raspberry Surprise
(Especially good for children)
1 package Royal Raspberry Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
1 cup cold water
3 sticks cinnamon candy (4-inch sticks)

D ISSOLVE the candy in the boiling water and add to Royal

Raspberry Gelatin. Stir until dissolved; add the cold water and
cool. Line a mould with macaroons or arrowroot crackers and pour in
gelatin as soon as it begins to thicken. Chill until firm. Serve with
plain or whipped cream. Serves 6.

Raspberry Cinnamon “Oranges”

1 package Royal Raspberry Gelatin
4 sticks cinnamon candy (4-inch sticks)
1 cup boiling water
1 cup cold water
6 orange-peel cups

C UT oranges in half and with a teaspoon scoop out the pulp,

being careful not to break the peel. Keep the cups in cold water
until ready to use. Dissolve the candy in the boiling water and pour
over the Royal Raspberry Gelatin. When gelatin has dissolved add
the cold water. Pour into the orange cups which have been drained
well and chill until firm. Cinnamon “Oranges” may also be moulded in
small plain moulds if preferred. Serves 6.

Raspberry Bavarian Cream

R OYAL Fruit Flavored Gelatins are so adaptable that in nearly

every case the flavor available at the time can be substituted in
any of the foregoing recipes, for the flavor specified. However,
selection of the flavor in each case has been made with an idea of its
appropriateness to that combination of fruits or vegetables.
 Perhaps the Royal Lemon is more suited to the making of salads
than any of the other flavors. For this reason, some especially good
salads and other recipes are added here for your selection.

Superior Salad
1 package Royal Lemon Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
1 cup cold water or canned pear juice
1 tablespoon vinegar or lemon juice
¼ teaspoon salt
3 to 4 halves canned pears cut in cubes
1 pimiento cut in small pieces
1 cream cheese

D ISSOLVE Royal Lemon Gelatin in boiling water; add pear juice,

salt and vinegar or lemon juice and cool. When mixture begins
to thicken, add pears and pimiento. Soften cheese with a little milk or
cream; season with salt and paprika. Fold into Gelatin mixture small
pieces of cheese (about ½ teaspoon each). Turn into moulds and
chill until firm. Serve on crisp lettuce with mayonnaise or French
dressing. Pineapple used instead of pears, also makes a delicious
salad. Serves 8.

Royal Ginger Fruit Salad

1 package Royal Lemon Gelatin
½ cup boiling water
1⅓ cup ginger ale
⅓ cup diced apples
⅓ cup chopped celery
3 slices canned pineapple cut in small pieces
⅓ cup chopped nut meats
¼ cup chopped crystallized ginger

A DD boiling water to Royal Lemon Gelatin. Stir until entirely

dissolved. Add ginger ale; chill until mixture begins to thicken.
Then add other ingredients. Turn into a large or individual moulds;
chill until firm. Serve on crisp lettuce leaves with mayonnaise. Serves
6. (The ginger and nuts may be omitted if preferred.)
 Frozen Tomato Salad
1 package Royal Lemon Gelatin
4 cups tomato juice
2 tablespoons lemon juice
1½ teaspoons salt
⅛ teaspoon paprika
1 teaspoon onion juice
⅛ teaspoon cloves

H EAT 1 cup tomato juice to boiling with salt and seasonings.

Dissolve Royal Lemon Gelatin in hot tomato juice. Add
remainder of juice and chill. Place in freezer. Turn crank about 8-10
minutes. Place in moulds and pack in ice and salt about ½ hour.
Serve sliced on lettuce or water cress. Serves 8-10.

Blackberry Spread
1 package Royal Lemon Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
1¼ cups blackberry juice

S TEW 2 cups blackberries with ½ cup cold water and ⅓ cup

sugar until juice runs readily (8 to 10 minutes). Put through
strainer to extract juice. Measure and add cold water, if necessary, to
make 1¼ cups juice. Dissolve Royal Lemon Gelatin in boiling water;
add blackberry juice. Pour into moulds or jelly glasses and chill until
firm. Keep in cold place until ready to use. Serves 6.

Crème Orient
1 package Royal Lemon Gelatin
1 cup boiling water
1 cup canned pineapple juice
1 cup cream, whipped
¾ cup pineapple, diced
¼ cup preserved ginger chopped fine
ISSOLVE Royal Lemon Gelatin in boiling water; add pineapple juice
and chill until thick but not set. Whip with egg beater until frothy.
D Add cream and fruit. Pile into sherbet glasses or large mould.
Serve very cold. Serves 10.

Royal Plum Pudding

1 package Royal Lemon or Orange Gelatin
¼ teaspoon salt
1 cup boiling water
1⅓ cups cold water
¾ cup spice cake crumbs
¾ cup chopped walnuts
½ cup raisins
½ cup chopped prunes
¼ cup finely shredded citron
1 teaspoon grated orange peel

D ISSOLVE Royal Gelatin and salt in boiling water. Add cake

crumbs and cold water; mix thoroughly. Add remainder of
ingredients and pour into pudding or fancy jelly moulds. Chill until
firm. Serve with sweetened whipped cream, a marshmallow sauce or
a soft custard, flavored with grated orange rind. This makes an
excellent Christmas pudding. Serves 12.
Plain Raspberry Gelatin
 ENTERTAINMENTS

B ELINDA is that lovely lucky creature, the young matron of to-day,

setting up housekeeping, not as a daily task, but as a comradely
affair. Gone are the walls that used to separate the generations.
Belinda is firm friends with her grandmother, and her mother is her
clever contemporary. Together they face the world with a friendly
affectionate dignity, a reasonable freedom and a healthy ease, that
banishes boredom,—lengthens life.
Gone, too, are the cumbrous clumsy methods of housekeeping—
basement kitchens, hods of coal, oil lamps and 24-hour bread....
Vanished with the high bicycles and Waspwaists of the “Gay
Nineties.”
But the spirit of home-making, the desire to build a pleasant place,
and welcome those you love within its walls—remains the same to-
day as it has been forever.
That welcoming hearth-warming spirit of unflustered hospitality!
Beginning with the dolls’ tea-party, and flowering to graceful
perfection in the charming hostess. Belinda knows that no
entertainment can be a success, unless the hostess enjoys it herself.
So with the deft adjustment made possible by modern methods,
she combines Martha-Service with Mary-Serenity, in a manner
 entirely her own.

When Belinda
Bridges
or plays Mahjong, she arranges her tea-party to the taste of her
guests. If she is a maidless mistress, she excels in those little
intimate parties—“just one or two tables,” where tea is an interlude
rather than an interval.
Bright and early Belinda makes her most successful cake and a
delectable dish of Turkish delight. Sandwiches filled with some clever
paste and rolls of wafer bread and butter are trimmed with their
attendant sprigs of parsley, celery, or radish roses. Covered lightly
with an inverted bowl, and set in the ice-box till the tea hour, they will
be crisp, fresh and dainty at 5 o’clock. The tea table, gay with
Belinda’s most attractive tea cups, is set by the fireside, or the open
window, to suit the season; and tea can be made in a minute.

For a More Formal Occasion

Belinda sets her table in the dining room, with a non-playing friend
or two to pour the tea and coffee. Bright with flowers and attractive
with delicious dainties, it has an allure that is never gainsaid. The
menu may be—
Tea ... at one end of the table with coffee, chocolate or fruit cup as an
alternative at the other end
 Toasted cheese rolls
Sandwiches
Hot biscuits
Cakes big and little
Compote of fruits
Cherry Cream Parfait Whip or Lemon Snow Pudding in individual glasses
Candies and salted nuts

Such a lovely note of color gleams in these delicate gelatins. The

rich glowing raspberry, just the color of the ripe fruit ... strawberry, a
ruby in sunlight ... the delicate iridescence of the pure lemon.
Moulded fruits gleam through that delicate sparkle. Whipped and
piled high in individual glasses, served in any one of a dozen
different ways, they give a fairy flavor to Belinda’s party.
Eight for Luncheon
may mean an afternoon party to follow, or merely a pleasant hour of
friendly intercourse. It taxes Belinda’s talents as a hostess more,
perhaps, than any other entertainment. She is so entirely the builder
of the surroundings, the mainspring of the welcome she provides. It
is her individual occasion!
The luncheon table demands special attention. The doilies and
lunch cloths must be laundered to especial perfection, the silver
spotless, the glass and china shining. The decorations of the table
should harmonize with the dining room. There must be a distinction
about it that can face the daylight.
Belinda Chooses the Menu
with equal care. No two-hour lunches with drawn blinds and lighted
candles for the slim smart maids and matrons of to-day! Any of the
following menus can be prepared and served with an ease that
leaves the hostess free to enjoy the occasion with her guests.

1. Royal Fruit Frozen Cup

Clear Soup in cups
Lamb Chops—Peas—Chip Potatoes
Pineapple Salad and Cheese Straws
Coffee

2. Tomato Soup with whipped cream and paprika

Jellied Chicken—Vegetable Salad and Mayonnaise
Finger Sandwiches of Minced Ham
Ice Cream and Wafers
Coffee

3. Creamed Fish in shells

Fried Chicken—Bacon—Potatoes baked
in their skins with cheese
Compote of winter fruits
Coffee
 Belinda loves these gelatin desserts, because they always arrive
at her table cool, interesting, tender, gleaming with color and
distinguished in taste, with an endless variety to add to their
charm.... Doesn’t that sound like a description of Favorite Friends?
Belinda looks on them as F.F’s ... and loves them also for their
priceless power of satisfying her taste for sweets, without adding an
inch to her figure. Because—blessed thought—they are not fattening
at all!

The Little Dinners

that delight the hearts of men and make the perfect setting for a
charming woman ... these are the acid test for the clever hostess.
Belinda has a flair for these intimate occasions. She gives them an
atmosphere.
 Belinda chooses guests that harmonize, with the same care that
she gives to choosing flowers that blend with the gown she wears.
Decorative touches on the dinner table perhaps ... gay little place
cards or favors, a scented leaf or blossom floating in each finger
bowl, tall glasses on twisted stems that give a touch of dignity ...
candle light ... comfort.
Whether Belinda cooks and serves the dinner single handed, or
has a staff of servants, she follows the rule of good breeding that
serves only what can be perfectly cooked and served, without
confusion.
The hot things hot—the cold things cold—sounds an obvious rule.
But more meals than can be counted have been wrecked by neglect
of it.
Belinda has carefully chosen menus for a little dinner that can be
served to perfection by a single maid, whose mistress helps with the
preparation.

I
Hors d’oeuvres
Cream Soup in cups with whipped cream on top
Individual moulds of jellied fish with
 mayonnaise and cucumbers
Broiled filets of beef—peas—
French fried potatoes
Salad—Green peppers stuffed with cream cheese
Crème Orient—Wafers
Fruit—Coffee

II
Clear Tomato Bouillon
Ramekins of Lobster or Salmon
Crown of Lamb—Potato Croquettes
Gravy—Mint Sauce
String Beans
Compote of Fruits
with whipped cream
Cheese cream on pastry biscuits
Coffee

completed by a table for cards, and a conversational circle by the

open fire!
Belinda thinks that gelatin, with its countless combinations and
variations, makes the perfect dessert. Delicious, delicate ... an aid to
the digestion rather than a tax upon it. Perfectly prepared, dished,
garnished, before the last minute cookery begins.

The Children’s Hour

Gelatin seems to have been invented by some Fairy Godmother
who studied children’s tastes and parents’ dietetic duties. And
merged them into the delicate fruity crystals that bring protein and
growth-promoting elements, to the active little bodies, while actually
helping the digestive process.
How the children love them too, these desserts that look like
jewels ... fairy bubbles that melt in the mouth ... delectable as the
fresh fruit from which their flavors are made!
They “make a party” of the simplest meal ... whipped or plain, with
custard or with cream. Raspberry, Strawberry, Orange, Lemon, or
Cherry ripe—their very names carry the fragrance of a sunlit garden.
 99½% emphasize
its
“fruity flavor and
fragrance”——
Here are some comments from
enthusiastic users
From Pennsylvania—“Royal Fruit Gelatin
has the good fruit taste that other gelatins
lack. I think it is much better for the children.”
From Connecticut—“After trying Royal
Fruit Gelatin I am convinced.... Here is a
gelatin that has the exact fruit flavor! I liked
the orange particularly well. The children
thought I had added fresh orange juice to it.
And it jellied far quicker than any gelatin I
have ever used.”
New York State women write with
enthusiasm—“It has a pure fruit flavor that is
unsurpassed.”
“I am delighted with Royal Fruit Gelatin.
The fruity fragrance is delicious. The flavor
like fresh fruit itself.”
From Pennsylvania again—“My family
enjoyed the fresh fruit flavor—more pure
than other prepared gelatins.”
 A Maryland woman writes—“Fresh fruit
taste, fruity fragrance—it’s the best I ever
had!”
From Massachusetts—“As I always use
Royal Baking Powder, I knew that the Royal
Fruit Gelatin would surely be perfect. It is all
and more than I expected it to be.”
5 Delicious
Fruit Flavors

NET WT. 3¼ OZS.

ROYAL
 Fruit Flavored
GELATIN
FLAVORED WITH PURE FRUIT JUICE
NATURAL FRUIT ACID AND ADDED COLOR
ROYAL BAKING POWDER CO. NEW YORK
STRAWBERRY

PRINTED IN U.S.A.

Absolutely
Pure

made·by·the·makers·of·ROYAL·BAKING·POWDER·new·york