126 pages, 7MB, PDF - Australian Research Council

Transcription

The ARC and HCA Research
9 February 2016
Presented by
Scientia Professor Dennis Del Favero
Executive Director, Australian Research Council
Humanities and Creative Arts
Overview
• Context—the ARC’s role
• NCGP schemes
- Funding and updates
- Grant writing
- Science and research priority areas
- Medical research policy
• Assessment process
• FoR outcomes
• NCGP details
Web: arc.gov.au I Email: [email protected]
Context—The ARC’s Role
2015–16 Federal Budget—$429 billion
2015–16 Federal Budget—R&D $9.7 billion
Commonwealth Investment in R&D
2015–16 ($m)
Selected research agencies
2003–2016 funding ($m)
ARC NCGP % funding by institution 2008–2015
Overview (2)
• NCGP schemes
- Grant writing
• Case studies
• FoR outcomes
• NCGP details
NCGP schemes
National Competitive Grants Programme
Area of box represents funding awarded over the period 2009–2014.
N.B. - Centres of Excellence, SRIs, not awarded in every year.
- ITRP and DECRA only funding since 2012
ARC NCGP funding by scheme 2008–2015
ARC NCGP funding by Fields of Research
2002–2014
ARC NCGP Funding—HCA
Number of proposals received and funded
by 2-digit FoR code
Success Rates HCA
By four digit FoR codes all schemes 2011–2015
12xx - Built environment and design
1601 - Anthropology
18xx - Law and Legal Studies
19xx - Studies in Creative Arts and Writing
20xx - Language, Communication and Culture
21xx - History and Archaeology
22xx - Philosophy and Religious Studies
NB: Codes with 0% success not shown
Histogram of Rank Linkage 2010–2014
HCA Linkage fraction vs Discovery fraction
Updates: Interdisciplinary Research
FoR Network Mapping
Source data owned by the ARC
FoR Network Mapping
Interdisciplinary assignment between CoE
Panels
DP 2015
Assessing
Interdisciplinary
Research
BSB
EMI
HCA
PCE
SBE
Interdisciplinary Research
FOR ID Network Mapping 1
ID links in
creative arts
and writing
FoR 19 codes
FOR ID Network Mapping 2
ID links in creative arts
and writing
FoR 19 codes
ID Case Study 1—Information visualisation
ID Case Study 2—Creative wellbeing
Interdisciplinary Research
• Definitions—three basic types
• Grant application approaches: two digit and four digit
• Proposed assessment process: IR experts
• Database survey: current IR patterns and trends
• Programme developments: SRN scheme
Updates: Linkage
Updates: Linkage (2)
• Continuous application
• Resubmission
• Partnership requirements
Grant writing
Grant writing: highly ranked proposals
• significant theoretical and/or experimental problem identified
• framework for solution outlined
• aims articulated to problem and solution
• in-depth and well argued background
• significance to field explained in specifics
• robust methodology and clearly explained design
• cross referenced role of personnel in design
• concrete national benefits outlining outcomes/benefits
• project dynamically positioned in research environment
• effective dissemination of outcomes
• value for money investment
• track record demonstrating history of relevant contributions
Grant writing: approach
• establish/expand research programme through proposal
• articulate program topic and research question
• select appropriate scheme and FoR code(s) for topic
• prioritise scheme rules, objectives, selection criteria
• research and model successful applications
• identify mentor and reviewer(s)—project team
• brain storm and workshop summary proposal
• timeline draft writing and submission—3 months
• iterative drafts for testing and feedback
• write for a jury of peers whom you have to convince
• succinct title, summary and impact statement
Grant writing: scheme differences
• Discovery: innovation
• Linkage: partnership
• DECRA: early programme leadership
• FF: established programme leadership
• LF: leadership mentoring and legacy
Research Impact Pathway
Research Impact Pathway*
Inputs



Research
income
Staff
Background
IP

Infrastructure

Collections
Activities





Research Work and
Training
Workshop/Conference
Organising
Outputs


Facility Use
Membership of
Learned Societies and
Academies
Community and
Stakeholder
Engagement

Publications
including EPublications
Additions to
National
Collections
Outcomes


New IP: Patents
and Inventions


Policy Briefings


Media


Commercial
Products, Licences
and Revenue
New Companies –
Spin offs, Start
Ups or Joint
Ventures
Benefits


Job Creation
Implementation of
Programs and
Policy


Economic, Health,
Social, Cultural,
Environmental,
National Security,
Quality of Life,
Public Policy or
Services
Higher Quality
Workforce
Job Creation
Risk Reduction in
Decision Making
Citations
Integration into
Policy
*Items listed above are high level examples that may assist with the development of a Research Plan and in
understanding your Research Impact Pathway
Grant writing: content
• employ accessible style with explanation of terms
• cross reference project proposal with all other sections
• demonstrate thorough understanding of the context
• identify and explain research network
• ensure structure is seamless and easy to follow
• interlink track record with proposal
• draft by cycling through critical mentoring/reviewing
• use ROPE to explain career/output interruptions
ROPE
“Research Opportunity is designed to provide assessors with
an accurate appreciation of career history against a timeline of
years since graduation from highest educational qualification.
Assessors will recognise research opportunities and
experience in the context of employment situations including
those outside academia and the research component of
employment conditions. Periods of unemployment, or any
career interruptions for child birth, carers’ responsibilities,
misadventure, or debilitating illness will be taken into account.
Access to research mentoring and other research support
facilities and any other relevant aspects of career experience or
opportunities for research will complete the considerations”.
Grant writing: rejoinder
•
•
•
•
•
use as opportunity to clarify application
read the assessments against the application
affirm, moderate, retort and/or refute
relate response to proposal specifics
be professional and respectful
Science and Research Priorities
Focusing Government Investment
Research Priorities
-
DP funding rules: Research Priorities (2017)
• Not mandatory
• Not exclusive
Government Investment
Research Priorities
• The Australian Government has developed a set of
Science and Research Priorities:
-
soil and water
transport
cybersecurity
energy
resources
advanced manufacturing
environmental change
health
• More information at www.science.gov.au
Medical Research Policy
ARC Medical Research Policy
The ARC does not consider ‘hypotheticals’ or provide pre-eligibility rulings as
per ARC policy: http://www.arc.gov.au/applicants/md_research.htm
“If a proposal is deemed to be potentially ineligible, the proposal is sent for
consideration by the ARC eligibility committee. The relevant administering
organisation is advised when a proposal is identified as potentially ineligible.
The administering organisation may provide further information if required. All
proposals, regardless of their eligibility status, undergo the same peer review
process.” (http://www.arc.gov.au/general/assessment_process.htm)
ARC Medical Research Policy (2)
‘Human health conditions—Pertaining to diseases (as defined above),
syndromes, pathological conditions, injuries, signs, symptoms, problems
and/or conditions that generally lead to contact with, or utilisation of,
health services.
Intervention/al—Includes interventions designed to understand and/or
change human health conditions, such as:
•
clinical or pre-clinical trials in human participants
•
the collection and/or use of body organs, tissues or fluids e.g. skin,
blood, urine, saliva, hair, bones, tumour and other biopsy specimens or
exhaled breath
•
behavioural interventions; or
•
dietary interventions.’
Ineligible Medical Research
•
‘research with human health and/or medical goals, including research on the
understanding, aetiology, diagnosis, monitoring, management or treatment of
physical or mental disease or other health conditions in humans; OR,
•
research involving the use or development of animal models of human health
conditions, or the use of animals for the development or testing of therapeutic
goods (including devices) or procedures, for the purpose of better
understanding human health or developing treatments for human health
conditions; OR,
•
interventional research in humans, particularly clinical or pre-clinical trials of
therapeutic goods (including devices), or research aiming to modify the health
of the human participants; OR,
•
the use or development of equipment, facilities, tools, games, devices, smart
phone applications or other items to understand, diagnose, monitor, manage
or treat human health conditions.’
Ineligible Medical Research (2)
‘If the ARC determines that a proposal is at risk of not being considered
by either agency (ARC or NHMRC), the ARC reserves the right to deem
such a proposal eligible for assessment.
Recognising that an integrated research project or programme may
sometimes include a small element of research not supported under this
policy, the ARC may, but is not obliged to, deem such a proposal
eligible for assessment provided the proposal predominantly comprises
eligible research as set out in this policy.
Proposals deemed ineligible cannot be recommended or approved for
funding under the Australian Research Council Act 2001.’
Humanities and Creative Arts (HCA)
Medical Research
Example 7
This project will explore the history of influenza in Australia, investigating how the memory of
the 1918-9 epidemic has shaped public memory and concern about influenza as well as
popular remedies and prevention approaches. Using an analysis of all available print media
and literature from 1918 to the present, this project aims to understand how language,
reporting and dramatization in literature may influence public understanding or opinion.
Lessons are likely to be able to be drawn from this research to inform contemporary and
future public health campaigns.
Eligibility Comment: This example is eligible for ARC support as it aims to understand how
historical literature and other media can influence public memory and concern, using a
human health condition as an example. This proposal would not fit the criteria specifically
listed under the “eligible” section of the Policy, noting that it is significantly not within the
scope of the policy, as referenced in Policy footnote 1, i.e. that “other research not covered
by this policy may also be eligible for ARC support.”
Humanities and Creative Arts (HCA)
Medical Research (2)
Example 8
Music has long been seen as beneficial for health, both in preventing disease by improving
well-being and in relieving the symptoms of health conditions. This research will examine
the effect of learning to play the violin on the health of a cohort of people who have had a
cancer diagnosis in the last two years and are either currently undergoing or have recently
completed treatment.
Eligibility Comment: This example is not eligible for ARC support as it aims to modify a
human health condition (2a) by using learning the violin as an intervention (2c).
Overview (3)
• NCGP schemes
- Grant writing
•
FoR outcomes
• NCGP details
Assessment Process
Disciplinary Panels
Assessment Process: Overview
•
ARC staff and Executive Directors (EDs) assess eligibility etc., but do
not decide which proposals should be funded
•
Proposals are generally assigned by EDs to two College of Experts
(CoE) members on each Disciplinary Panel who act as General
Assessors and at least two External Assessors by the College of
Experts
•
All proposals are assessed against the selection criteria
•
CoE Disciplinary Panels meet to moderate assessments and to make
final recommendations about fundable projects
•
Under the ARC Act all recommendations must be approved by the
Minister
Assessment Process:
ARC College of Experts
• ARC CoE play a key role in identifying research excellence, moderating
external assessments and recommending fundable proposals
• CoE assist the ARC in recruiting and assigning External Assessors and in
implementing peer review reforms in established and emerging disciplines as
well as interdisciplinary areas
• CoE comprises experts of international standing drawn from: the Australian
research community : higher education, industry and public sector research
organisations
• CoE nominations are approved by the ARC CEO for appointments of one to
three years
• Since 2012 the CoE has been enlarged, the number of schemes it assessed
increased and the membership rotated between meetings
• Previously the entire CoE sat at the April and August meetings, and separate
Selection Advisory Committees met for specific schemes, e.g. Future
Fellowships
Assessment Process: General Assessors
•
General Assessors are members of the CoE or a scheme specific
Selection Advisory Committee (SAC) comprising expert members
•
General Assessors take into consideration
a) the ratings and comments provided by Detailed
Assessors
b) the applicant’s rejoinder
c) the wide range of their other assessments
d) assign their own ratings
•
Once all assessments have been finalised and submitted to the
ARC, General and Detailed Assessments and Rejoinders are
considered by the CoE at the Disciplinary Panel meeting
Assessment Process: Peer Review
• External Assessors evaluate small range of proposals within
their field of research expertise
• CoEs assess proposals within the context of
(a) a very wide range of proposals
(b) the External Assessments
(c) the Rejoinder
(d) broad range of disciplinary expertise
• Final assessment made at CoE Panel meeting
• Robust conflicts of interest processes to ensure conflicts are
managed and transparent
• Provision of a right of reply to assessments (in most ARC
schemes)
Assessment Process:
Assignment Information 1
• The ARC has completely redesigned the way that CoE and External
Assessors are matched to a proposal for assessment purposes
• Multiple areas of the proposal are mined for a set of keywords and
presented to the person completing the assignments as a word cloud
Assessment Process:
Assignment Information 2
• This information is then matched to information stored
against a potential assessor’s profile and presented in a
similar word cloud
• The most appropriate person is then selected and assigned
to the proposal to assess
Assessment Process: Rejoinder
•
Where the ARC seeks External Assessments, applicants are
given the opportunity to submit a Rejoinder
•
The Rejoinder process allows applicants to respond to
assessment comments made by External Assessors
•
Rejoinders are not viewed by External Assessors but are
considered by an CoE Discplinary Panel or SAC when deciding
on the final recommendation for a Proposal
•
Timeframes for rejoinders are typically up to ten working days
Assessment Process:
CoE Selection Meeting
•
The CoE Disciplinary Panel Meeting is the final face-to-face
meeting of the CoE and is the conclusion of the peer review
process
•
The CoE Panels meet to consider which proposals to recommend
to the ARC for funding, and recommended budgets for those
proposals
•
All recommendations are given to the ARC CEO, who then makes
recommendations to the Minister
•
All funding decisions are made by the Minister under the ARC Act
ARC CoE Disciplinary Panel Meeting Process
Overview (4)
• NCGP schemes
-
Funding and updates
Grant writing
Science and research priority areas
Medical research policy
• FoR outcomes
• NCGP details
FoR outcomes
FoR 12—Built Environment and Design
FoR 12—Built Environment and Design:
Success rate by scheme 2011–2015
1201—Architecture funding awarded
by year and scheme
n.b. Not yet announced: 2015 & 2016 Future Fellowships; 2016 LP, 2016 Laureates
1202—Building: funding awarded
by year and scheme
1203—Design Practice and Management:
funding awarded by year and scheme
1299—Other Built Environment and Design:
Architecture 1201
by 6-digit level FoR
code (all schemes,
regardless of primary
classification code,
years 2011 to
2015/16)
Size of bubble
indicates the total
percentage of a 6digit level code in
all projects funded
FoR 19—Studies in Creative Arts and
Writing
Success Rates
19 FoR codes all schemes 2011–2015
1901 Art theory and criticism
1902 Film, television and digital media
1903 Journalism and professional writing
1904 Performing arts and creative writing
1905 Visual arts and crafts
1999 Other studies in creative arts and writing
Discovery Projects—Number of proposals
received and funded, and success rate
(shadow) 2011 to 2016 funded in all schemes
Percentage totals of 6-digit level FoR codes in
all 19 code projects funded in all schemes
2011–2015
FoR 19—Studies in Creative Arts and Writing:
Success rate by scheme 2011–2015
FoR 19—Studies in Creative Arts and Writing:
1901—Art Theory and Criticism
1902—Film, Television and Digital Media
1903—Journalism and Professional Writing
1904—Performing Arts and Creative Writing
Performing Arts and Creative Writing (1904)
by 6-digit level FoR code in all schemes, regardless of
primary classification code, years 2011 to 2015
Size of bubble indicates
the total percentage of
a 6-digit level code in
all projects funded
1905—Visual Arts and Crafts funding awarded
by year and scheme
Case Studies in HCA 19
Ionat Zurr—DECRA
Bio art
This interdisciplinary project
will be examining shifting
perceptions of what is living
through case study of a
vital-machine; tissue
engineered muscle
actuators in custom made
bioreactors. It will further
discourses about
posthumanist perceptions of
movement as an indicator
for life with agency;
suggesting new knowledge
and modes of inquiry of
material life.
FoR 1902
Dr Rachel Swain—DECRA
Listening to Country is an
intercultural performance
research project to
investigate Indigenous
dance and dramaturgy as
practices of ‘listening to
country’ at a time of global
environmental change.
Outcomes have included
dance laboratories
developed with Indigenous
cultural custodians at sites
across the Kimberley, a
dramaturgy symposium in
Broome and a major
creative work titled Cut the
Sky which has toured to
remote Kimberley
communities, Australian
festivals and international
dance venues.
FoR 1904
Dr Maria Miranda—DECRA
The Cultural Economy of
Australian Artist-Run
Initiatives
This project investigates the
expanding and changing
significance of contemporary
Australian artist-run initiatives
(ARIs) in the context of
network culture and shifting
values around the creative
arts. The project aims to
understand the complexity,
diversity and heterogeneity of
the role of ARIs in Australia’s
arts landscape by focusing on
artists’ experiences, practices
and processes.
FoR 1905
A/Professor Anne Pender—Future Fellow
The Lives and Work of
the Actors Who Created
the National Theatre of
Australia
This project explores the
transformation of
Australian theatre through
the lives and work of some
80 actors working in
Australia since the 1950s.
FoR 1904
Overview (5)
• NCGP schemes
- Grant writing
• FoR outcomes
• NCGP details
NCGP details
Discovery Projects Scheme
Discovery Projects Scheme: Aims
• Support excellent basic and applied research by
individuals and teams
• Encourage research and research training in high
quality research environments
• Enhance international collaboration in research
• Expand Australia’s knowledge base and research
capability
• Enhance the scale and focus of research in the
Science and Research priorities
Discovery Projects Scheme: Details
•
•
•
•
•
DP is the largest scheme, supporting excellent basic
research by individuals and teams
Success rate typically 18–20% in recent years
Selection criteria:
-
Investigator (40%)
-
Project Quality and Innovation (25%)
-
Feasibility and Benefit (20%)
-
Research Environment (15%)
Funding up to $500,000 per year for five years
No salaries or PhD stipends for CIs/PIs
Discovery Scheme: Updates
• Broader Emeritus definition, to incorporate ‘honouraries’,
not employed elsewhere
• ‘Project’ Research Environment, not just general research
environment
• Teaching relief raised to $50K per year per project
• Restriction on travel costs removed limited to CIs, PIs and
research support personnel
• New requirement for Australia Council Indigenous
Protocols
DECRA Scheme
DECRA
•
•
•
•
•
Changes to selection criteria
Eligibility exemption
ROPE factors
Teaching/administration commitments
Data
• Gender
• Success rates
• Age profile
• ‘First time’ awardees
DECRA: Changes to align statement with
selection criteria:
• The Administering Organisation must provide a statement
in relation to the Research Environment within the Proposal
which:
a. indicates that this area is a core or emerging research strength
and describes the level of resources to be provided to support
the successful DECRA candidate (for example, project costs,
PhD students, or salary top-up);
b. details opportunities for the DECRA Candidate to demonstrate
the level of independence required to be competitive for
research and/or research and teaching pathways at the
Administering Organisation during and after the Project; and
c. is signed by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research) or
equivalent. (D.5.1)
DECRA: Eligibility Exemption Request
A DECRA candidate may submit an Eligibility Exemption
Request if for example they are outside the timing
requirements for the award of their PhD.
The ARC will determine whether an Eligibility Exemption
is to be granted. (D7.3 and D7.4)
Eligibility Exemption Requests closed on 27 January
2016.
Web: arc.gov.au
arc.gov.au II Email:
Email: [email protected]
[email protected]
Web:
Research Opportunity
• The ARC is committed to ensuring all eligible
researchers have fair access to competitive funding
through the National Competitive Grants Programme.
• The ARC considers that Research Opportunity
comprises two separate elements:
• Career experiences (relative to opportunity)
• Career interruptions
• The ROPE Statement is online at:
• http://www.arc.gov.au/arc-research-opportunity-andperformance-evidence-rope-statement
Carer’s responsibility
“Carer's responsibility for a child and maternity or
partner/parental leave can have an effect on a person's
research opportunity and performance evidence above
and beyond any actual time taken as leave. In recognition
of this, under subsection D7.4.4 of the Funding Rules, the
ARC will allow a DECRA Candidate in the DE17 round to
claim an Eligibility Exemption of two years per dependent
child (inclusive of carer's responsibility and any maternity
or partner/parental leave). (Without providing justification)
Carer’s responsibility
“A person who has taken more than two years off to care
for a dependent child, or who otherwise believes they are
entitled to a greater than two year extension, would need
to justify their claim when submitting an eligibility
exemption request. FAQ 1.25 above does not cap career
interruptions for carers of dependent children to two years
per child. It does however allow carers of dependent
children to claim up to a two year career interruption
without justification”.
DECRA commitments
•
The DECRA Recipient is expected to spend a minimum of 20 per
cent of her/his time on activities at the Administering Organisation,
and 80 per cent of her/his time on research activities related to the
proposed DECRA.(D7.2.2 and D7.2.3)
•
The DECRA Recipient may not engage in other professional
employment for the duration of the DECRA without prior approval
from the ARC under subsection D7.2.6. (D7.2.4)
•
The DECRA Recipient may spend up to 0.2 (20 per cent of Full
Time Equivalent (FTE)) of her/his time annually on teaching
activities. The DECRA will not be extended to accommodate any
periods of teaching. Supervision of honours or postgraduate
students is not included in this limit. (D7.2.9)
Number of ECR* researchers on
proposals received (DP and DECRA)
Proportion of ECR researchers on
proposals received (DP and DECRA)
Gender—DE2015
Panel
BSB
EMI
HCA
PCE
SBE
Total
Number
of female
candidates
Number of
approved
female
candidates
149
54
92
64
136
495
18
9
16
10
20
73
Female
success
rate
12%
17%
17%
16%
15%
15%
Number
of male
candidates
Number of
approved
male
candidates
168
333
83
175
133
892
27
46
9
24
18
124
Male
success
rate
16%
14%
11%
14%
14%
14%
*(BSB—Biological Sciences and Biotechnology; EMI—Engineering, Mathematics and Informatics; PCE—Physics, Chemistry and Earth
Sciences; SBE—Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences; HCA—Humanities and Creative Arts)
Gender—DE2016
Panel*
BSB
EIC
HCA
MPCE
SBE
Total
Number of
female
candidates
Number of
approved
female
candidates
93
34
92
75
108
402
16
7
18
12
18
71
Female
success
rate
17.2%
20.6%
19.6%
16.0%
16.7%
17.7%
Number of
male
candidates
Number of
approved
male
candidates
158
240
84
205
126
813
26
38
11
34
20
129
Male
success
rate
16.5%
15.8%
13.1%
16.6%
15.9%
15.9%
*(BSB—Biological Sciences and Biotechnology; EIC—Engineering, Information and Computing Sciences; MPCE—Mathematics,
Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences; SBE—Social, Behavioural and Economic Sciences; HCA—Humanities and Creative Arts)
Participation and success of Chief Investigators
(CIs) in DP15 by gender and career age
Participation and success of Chief Investigators
(CIs) in DP16 by gender and career age*
Citizenship and residency—DE2015
Proposals
considered
% of
proposals
considered
Foreign Nationals
466
33.4%
83
17.8%
Resident Australians
863
61.9%
106
12.3%
Returning Australians
65
4.7%
11
16.9%
1394
100.0%
200
14.3%
Citizenship/
residency status
Total
Proposals Success
approved
rate
DECRA—all rounds—success rates
DE2015—Success—years since awarded PhD
DE2016—Success—years since awarded PhD
Average age of lead CIs in DP grants
(+DECRA 2012–2014)
Indigenous Discovery
Indigenous Discovery: Updates
• IN up to five years
• DAATSIA up to five years
• New requirement for Australia Council Indigenous
Protocols
• Restrictions on travel costs removed limited to CIs PIs
and research support staff
First-time awardees by scheme 2008–15
Linkage Projects Scheme
Linkage Projects Scheme: Aims
• ARC’s Linkage supports the growth of research partnerships between
university-based researchers and other sector researchers that
generate new knowledge, technologies, innovations
• Main objectives are to deliver outcomes of benefit to Australia,
building Australia’s research and innovation capacity through:
• (a) collaborative research between university-based researchers and
in other sector researchers
• (b) research training and career opportunities that enable Australian
and international researchers and research students to work with
industry and other end users
• (c) research in priority areas
• Main Linkage schemes are: Linkage Projects; Linkage Infrastructure,
Equipment and Facilities (LIEF); ARC Centres of Excellence; and
Special Research Initiatives.
Linkage Projects Scheme: Changes
• Continuous application
• Industry partner eligibility
Linkage with cultural institutions:
GLAM networks
Collaboration between universities (Green)
and GLAM organisations (Blue) by location
Collaboration between universities (green)
and GLAM organisations (blue), by location
Number of projects (all schemes) involving
GLAM, by 2-digit FoR code (2008 to 2015/16)
Most GLAM organisations are involved
under Linkage Projects
ARC-funded projects involving GLAM
Major areas of research
Networking between GLAM on funded
ARC projects (2008–15)
Networking of GLAM through ARC
projects (2008–15)
Questions
Thank you
Scientia Professor Dennis Del Favero
Executive Director, Australian Research Council
Humanities and Creative Arts

126 pages, 7MB, PDF - Australian Research Council

Transcription

Similar documents

45 pages, 6MB, PDF - Australian Research Council

PDF version of Pro Purchase Program Catalogue

Impact of the Internet of Things and Services on Industrial

3rd Edition Upper Intermediate - W

Section 4 - Communications

pcm-875 plasma arc cutting package

Powercut 875

Model PC-100 Power Supply Control Module Operator`s Manual

preparing for takeoff: air travel outlook for 2016

PCM-875A Plasmarc Mechanized Cutting System

The best light source is supported by the best electrode technology.

FLEXIBLE HOUSING: THE MEANS TO THE END