Autorin: Armita Arvani
Titel: Gefahrenpotentiale von Ladestationen im Öffentlichen Raum
Erscheinungsjahr: Wien, 11.Sep 2022
Hochschule: FH Technikum Wien
Master: Master of Science in Engineering
I chose this master thesis because it helps me understand the problems with public EV charging stations. The work explains what dangers people face, like bad weather or mistakes when charging. It also shows what can happen if the technology is not safe, for example computer attacks. I am interested in how first-time users can learn about safe and easy charging.
For my own research, I want to know how user experience can make charging simple and comfortable. This thesis gives me ideas about what people need to feel safe and what city planners should think about when designing stations.
Gestaltungshöhe
The has a clear and logical structure. The first part gives a good overview of the topic and explains the background with careful research and useful literature. After that, the thesis moves on to interviews and qualitative research, which makes the work practical and realistic. I noticed several writing mistakes and incomplete sentences, for example on page 46 where a sentence about expert interviews is not finished. Still, the author connects the theory with practice in a good way and always explains the reasons for each research step. Even though there are some language problems, the thesis is strong in showing new ideas and gives good insight on how EV charging stations can get better for everyone in the future.
Innovationsgrad
The thesis brings several new ideas to the field of public EV charging stations. It focuses on the risks and dangers of charging stations in cities—this is a topic that is not often covered in other research, as most studies look more at technical charging details or grid integration. By analyzing not only technical risks but also including cyber attacks, vandalism, and user safety, the thesis gives a full and modern view on current and future problems.
The thesiss is valuable for the field because it asks important questions about safety and public acceptance and helps others understand what needs to be improved for EV charging in cities.
Selbstständigkeit
The thesis shows clear signs of independent work by the author. The approach is original because the author combines existing research with own interviews and qualitative analysis, giving a fresh view on the topic. The thinking is logical and focused, with the author consistently explaining why each part is important for understanding the risks of public EV charging stations. Even though some language mistakes appear, the work reflects the author’s own understanding and perspective rather than just repeating others. Overall, the thesis demonstrates good self-reliance and a clear, structured way of thinking.
Gliederung und Struktur
The structure of the thesis generally follows a logical order, which fits the topic and research questions well. It starts with a literature review and background information, which sets the stage for the later parts. Then it moves to interviews and qualitative research to collect original data. However some transitions between chapters could be smoother and a clearer summary at the end of each section would improve readability and help the reader connect the parts better. Also, occasional language mistakes and unfinished sentences disrupt the flow and make some sections harder to follow. Overall, the structure suits the research but could benefit from better coherence and polishing for full clarity.
Kommunikationsgrad
The Author communicates the topic most clearly, but there are some small problems with expression and flow that affect overall understanding. The language is generally precise and uses appropriate technical terms and also some informationsgraphics but occasional grammatical errors and unfinished sentences reduce the reading flow.
Umfang der Arbeit
The length of the thesis is mostly appropriate for the topic and provides a balanced view of different aspects. However, it could focus more specifically on answering the research question in detail, as some points are only listed without full exploration or conclusion. Overall, it fits well but would benefit from deeper analysis on key questions
Orthographie, Sorgfalt und Genauigkeit
The thesis contains some spelling and grammatical errors, which show that the language was not always carefully checked. The writing is not always precise or formal enough for a scientific work, and this reduces the overall professionalism and accuracy. However, these mistakes do not completely block understanding.
Literatur
The thesis uses a good mix of sources, including relevant books, scientific articles, and industry reports, not only internet websites. The literature is mostly current and covers important topics to support the research. However, some newer publications could be added to strengthen the up-to-date nature of the work. Overall, the sources seem sufficient and well chosen for the research focus, showing a solid and comprehensive bibliographic foundation.
Final thoughts
It provides important insights into the risks and safety challenges of public EV charging stations which is very usful for my own research on user experience and onboarding. The combination of theoretical background and practical interviews creates a solid basis, even though the work could be improved in language and deeper focus on the research question. From this thesis I take the understanding that safety and clear communication are the key to designing better charging station that are easy and safe.
Personal Rating
Armita Arvani did a good amount of work for the thesis but worked a bit superficially. I really liked her choice of experts for the interviews and she made an effort to find people very relevant to the field. She connected theory well with empirical research to find solutions, but I think the answers to the research questions could have been deeper. Also, the thesis lacked pictures/illustrations/graphics that could help understand the topics and the answer to the forschungsfrage better. I would have liked to see some data or numbers, so a bit of quantitative approach would have been good too. The language could be better. Overall, I would rate this work as a minus 2.
