1

CHE 594 Lecture 18The Work Plan

2

Solid

Rese

arch

Pla

n

Qu

alifi

ed

Investig

ato

r

Good Research Idea

Describe The Work Well

Review: Keys To Building A Successful Proposal

Lect 1-6,12

Lect 18

Lect 16-18

Lect 20

3

My Typical Outline

Introduction One page giving an overview of the work, describe how it

advances the literature and make a case for funding Figure that gives a picture of the work I am proposing

Literature review (NSF, DOE, NIH not DARPA, DHS) 1-2 pages giving the main themes in the literature

Proposed work Specific Objectives

Paragraph outlining the entire scope of work & its major challenges

Experimental design Work Plan

Variables I will vary Techniques I will use Sometimes data analysis if that is significant Description of preliminary data

Summary Highlight the significance -

Lect 13-16

Lect 18

Lect 17

Lect 6,7 12

Today The Experimental Plan

Needs to answer: who, what, when, where, why and how about the proposed research

Work plan needs to be 8+ pages of a 15 page NSF proposal, 13+ pages of a 20 page NIH proposal

Important to have a clear connection between the questions you raised and the experiments you will do

4

Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

5

Experimental design (Part Of Specific Objectives) 2 page overview of what types of experiments

will you do, how do they fit together, how will you analyze

The experimental methods Procedures – detailed statements of exact

procedures

Two Parts To The Work Plan

6

The Experimental Design

I find it helpful to organize the Experimental design around a task table Program managers love task tables NSF reviewers hate them Write the proposal around a task table Be sure to be explicit

What variables will you consider Exactly how will you do the

measurements Appendix D in Ogden and Goldberg Has

Many examples of experimental designs

7

General Structure Of The Task Table

TechnicalObjective

Sub issue Variables studied,techniques used

Key challenges &plans to overcome

them

Descriptionof objective

1

Paper 1 title

Paper 2 title

Paper 3 title

Descriptionof objective

2

Paper 4 title

Paper 5 title

Paper 6 title

8

A Task Table For a MURI project

Table 1 Task Summary, Roadmap

  Current Status Issues Proposed Approaches

Microburners as heat sources

Masel and Shannon already demonstrated that flames can propagate in 100-1000 micron spaces

Need equations for flame stability as a function of geometry, wall composition, wall temperature, fuel, oxidizer, stoichiometric ratio

Measure combustion limits in micron to millimeter scale burners

Develop model of combustion process

Analyze results to produce design correlations, scaling rules

Need equations for heat output as a function of geometry, wall composition, wall temperature, fuel, oxidizer, stoichiometric ratio

Measure conversion, heat output in micron scale burners

Use model to calculate conversion, heat output

Analyze results to produce design correlations, scaling rules

Key properties that determine flame stability have not yet been measured for many candidate wall materials

Measure key wall properties: accommodation coefficients, radical reflectivities of key species

Program managers love this; NSF reviewers hate it, NIH OK

$1

,00

0,0

00

/yr

for

5 y

r eff

ort

9

Key Issues In The Experimental Design

The experimental design is 2-3 pages Spell out your approach, methodology,

options, reasons for choices, priorities and sequence of work in detail

You must clearly discuss both what you intend to do and how you will go about each task

Include a discussion of possible problems which might emerge how you intend to overcome those problems

Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

Example Experimental Design

Specific question 1: How does the flow of water in a gas diffusion layer(GDL) vary with the properties of the GDL

Rationale: People choose GDL’s by trial and error. …

Experimental plan1. Pick samples of 7 commercially available

GDL’s varying …2. Build model Fuel cells with the different GDLs3. Use microCT to measure key properties: the

shape of the water channel through the GDL ….

10

11

Key Issues in Experimental Design

Generally about 2-3 pages You must convince the reviewers that

your proposed experiments will answer the questions you raise, that the experiments can be done within the time period

Good to include a gaant chart showing the timeline and a diagram of how things fit together

12

Key Issues in Techniques

5 pages in NSF, 9 pages in NIH You must convince the reviewers that your

proposed experiments will answer the questions you raise, and that you have the expertise and facilities to do the work

Reviewers usually put themselves in your place – they ask could they do the experiment given the facilities at your university– if so they believe you if not they do not

They also need to be convinced that you can do it

13

Key Features Of The Work Plan

Elaborate on the techniques you will use to accomplish the objectives

Indicate why these techniques are appropriate

Demonstrate your expertise by highlighting any techniques which are state-of-the-art or which you have developed yourself

Indicate any past experience that you have in using these techniques

Refer to other studies that support the appropriateness of your methodology to accomplish the objectives

Adapted from http://www.sba.gov/gopher/Innovation-And-Research/SBIR-Pro-Prep/

14

Hints For The Work Plan

First give an overview of the experimental design , then give the details of the methods

Relate the design and methods back to each specific aim Use diagrams or flow charts to explain complex protocols Give enough detail to demonstrate that you know what

you are talking about, without crowding page limits (This is an art form; get help if needed.)

Make good use of space by referring to standard methods papers or protocol books where appropriate

Make good use of space by referring to the preliminary data section when methods were described there

Give examples of the results you expect and how you will interpret them

Anticipate pitfalls you might face and explain how to deal with them

Provide a time line that shows you have not designed an overly ambitious project

Source http://www.washington.edu/research/guide/content.html

15

Preliminary Data Critical For An NIH, NSF Proposal

You must demonstrate that you can actually do the work New molecules: show that you have

made one and it has interesting properties

Devices: show that you have made a similar device and it works

Key experimental techniques: demonstrate on at least one example or include a supporting letter from an expert that has agreed to help you

16

NIH, DARPA, ARO Ask For Risk Mitigation

Table 1.          Risk Mitigation Strategy

Risk Likelihood Mitigation Strategy

Pumps, valves cannot be scaled

Negligible – the pumps and valves already have been demonstrated in more demanding applications

Design of experiments varying fabrication technology to meet device goals.

Pre-concentrator gives insufficient gain

Low – Tenax already gives sufficient gain. We just need to

find ways to put enough in

Design of experiments on nanograss fabrication procedures to obtain higher surface areaTry porous silicon posts

GC column does not meet resolution goal

Very low – the columns already work on the macroscale; and our

simulations indicate that the resolution is enhanced on the

microscale

Design of experiments to optimize column and heating profile to meet resolution goal

17

Four Most Common Mistakes

Writing too ambitious a proposal Proposing too much

Unfocused technical objectives Talking about the large problem instead of a

narrower idea that you can really do Proposal hard for reviewers to navigate

No clear sections (i.e. introduction, literature review, technical objectives) that the reviewers can jump to

Hoping that the reviewers will get the idea instead of telling them directly

Unclear/unfocused writing

18

Other Common Errors In The Work Plan

Proposing things that are insufficiently novel Proposals that propose to use a well established

technique on a small variation of a problem that has already been solved

Exception if the variation is of great importance

Failure to consider important variables Makes reviewer doubt your qualifications OK to say that we will control these variables

and only consider variations in these variables Unfounded claims

Important new conclusions from preliminary data without strong evidence

19

Items To Improve Your Odds Of Success

Pretty pictures showing your expected molecules, devices

Table outlining your research plan Diagram outlining and complex procedures Table outlining your risk mitigation strategy

Remember that most reviewers will not read every word in your proposal so it is important to make it easy for them.

The saying “A Picture is worth 1000 words” is doubly true in proposals

20

Other Important Points On Writing

Read the instructions NSF requires you to discuss the broad impacts

of your work http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2007/nsf07046/nsf07046.jsp

NIH requires risk mitigation Be sure to give the review panel what

they want to hear NSF – 50+ references, some theory NIH – Lots of preliminary data, real application

to human health, all details of procedures, supporting letters

21

Good Communication Is Important

Need to explain your proposal in a way that someone outside your field gets it Most reviewers will be outside your field

Proposals need to be easy to understand with no leap of faith or detective work by the reviewer Reviewers are busy people. If he cannot get

your ideas quickly, he will not recommend your proposal.

The review panel has more fundable proposal than can be funded. If yours is hard to understand, he will recommend someone else’s proposal for funding

22

Questions?