# Using IoT for Cistern and Water Tank Level Monitoring
## 4 Experimental Results
### Dashboard and Meters/Gauges
#### 4.2.2 Usability Study  
After displaying the water status outputs through the dashboard, we want to know if any homeowner user can understand the views provided by the dashboard.  
The dashboard on a web page is straightforward: it shows the status of water levels, water quality, and water flow. However, a usability study could identify whether users need help understanding the graphs, interpreting the metrics, or interacting with the system controls. So, we asked a small group of homeowner users what they think about what they look at the dashboard.  
We adapted some usability study models from [19] to test the user-friendliness of the interface that displays the dashboard of this system. Some relevant papers regarding similar studies are [20; 21], which talk about usability as well as UX terms and several tests.  
To review the user-friendliness of our system, we designed a small survey with 18 questions, which was applied to 30 participants. The study aimed to obtain feedback and opinions about the dashboard when it was published on a web page.  
Categories and Questions  
The next aspects or categories were used for the usability study, each containing only two questions.  
_Features and Functionality_  
1. Are the main monitoring functions (water level, flow, and quality) easy to understand and use?
2. Do you consider that all the necessary functionalities are present in the dashboards? Is any crucial information missing?  
_Homepage/Starting Page_  
3. When accessing the page, can you identify the four main metrics (cistern level, tank level, water flow, and water quality)?
4. Is it intuitive to understand the purpose of each dashboard from a first glance?  
_Navigation_  
5. Is it easy to navigate between the different dashboards (if necessary) or understand how to view them together?
6. Can you quickly access the information for each metric without getting confused or lost?  
_Search_  
7. Would you like to be able to filter or search for historical data in the dashboards (e.g., time intervals or critical events)?
8. If you used a search function, was it easy to find the specific data you need?  
_Control and Feedback_  
9. Does the system respond clearly when interacting with graphs or dashboard settings?  
10. Do you receive sufficient visual feedback when you act, such as updating data or changing the display?  
_Errors_  
11. If an error occurs (such as a data connection failure), does the system inform you and tell you how to resolve it?  
12. Have you experienced loading problems or data display failures? If so, does the system respond appropriately?  
_Content and Text_  
13. Are the data presented on each dashboard straightforward and easy to interpret?14. Are the text and labels on the graphs descriptive enough to understand water levels, flow, and quality without additional help?  
Help
15. Can you easily find the help you need if you have questions about interpreting a graph or data?
16. Would you like additional explanations or guidance on how to use the dashboards effectively?  
Performance
17. Does the page load quickly for all four dashboards simultaneously?
18. Are there any delays or performance problems when refreshing data or switching views?  
The survey results are summarized in Table 3. We placed them in percentage values for better understanding.  
Most of the questions received positive responses, with many users rating the experience as \"Excellent\" or \"Good\".  
In features and functionality, over 80% of users found the main functions (water level, flow, and quality monitoring) easy to understand and use. The above indicates that the system achieves its goal of providing clear and accessible information. Questions related to the ease of identifying metrics and navigating the home page also elicited very positive responses. Some 70-80% of users found the interface intuitive and functional.  
In short, these results mean high overall satisfaction with the system, mainly regarding usability and functionality, although opportunities exist to improve error handling and loading speed.