Manufacturing Development for 100-kW Thermonuclear Simulator
No abstract available
Rosmait, Russell L.↗
Engineering topics
Rosmait, Russell L.
Publications and source records attributed to Rosmait, Russell L..
What Drives Spacecraft Cost: A Look Into How Material Characteristics Relate to the Material Complexity Multipliers
Today a variety of engineered materials are used to build the space vehicles and satellites that NASA, DOD and the aerospace community will use in future projects. These materials can be a significant part of the cost when designing and building these systems. Current cost models such as NASCOM, SEER-H and PRICE allow the cost analysis to select materials requirements during the development of the cost model. It should be noted however that some of these models do not always give the most detailed information with respect to material specifications for the given cost model. Instead the materials are defined within broad classification, giving questionable data with regard to specific material cost. It is the objective of this paper to present a summary of basic information on materials to assist the cost analyst in the development of their models. Specifically, this paper will compare materials and their complexity multipliers to some specific material properties.
Rosmait, Russell L.↗
Technology readiness levels and technology status for selected long term/high payoff technologies on the RLV program
The development of a new space transportation system in a climate of constant budget cuts and staff reductions can be and is a difficult task. It is no secret that NASA's current launching system consumes a very large portion of NASA funding and requires a large army of people to operate & maintain the system. The new Reusable Launch Vehicle (RLV) project and it's programs are faced with a monumental task of making the cost of access to space dramatically lower and more efficient than NASA's current system. With pressures from congressional budget cutters and also increased competition and loss of market share from international agencies RLV's first priority is to develop a 'low-cost, reliable transportation to earth orbit.' One of the RLV's major focus in achieving low-cost, reliable transportation to earth orbit is to rely on the maturing of advanced technologies. The technologies for the RLV are numerous and varied. Trying to assess their current status, within the RLV development program is paramount. There are several ways to assess these technologies. One way is through the use of Technology Readiness Levels (TRL's). This project focused on establishing current (summer 95) 'worst case' TRL's for six selected technologies that are under consideration for use within the RLV program. The six technologies evaluated were Concurrent Engineering, Embedded Sensor Technology, Rapid Prototyping, Friction Stir Welding, Thermal Spray Coatings, and VPPA Welding.
Rosmait, Russell L.↗
Industry survey of space system cost benefits from New Ways Of Doing Business
The cost of designing, building and operating space system hardware has always been expensive. Small quantities of specialty parts escalate engineering design, production and operations cost. Funding cutbacks and shrinking revenues dictate aggressive cost saving programs. NASA's highest priority is providing economical transportation to and from space. Over the past three decades NASA has seen technological advances that provide grater efficiencies in designing, building, and operating of space system hardware. As future programs such as NLS, LUTE and SEI begin, these greater efficiencies and cost savings should be reflected in the cost models. There are several New Ways Of Doing Business (NWODB) which, when fully implemented will reduce space system costs. These philosophies and/or culture changes are integrated in five areas: (1) More Extensive Pre-Phase C/D & E, (2) Multi Year Funding Stability, (3) Improved Quality, Management and Procurement Processes, (4) Advanced Design Methods, and (5) Advanced Production Methods. Following is an overview of NWODB and the Cost Quantification Analysis results using an industry survey, one of the four quantification techniques used in the study. The NWODB Cost Quantification Analysis is a study performed at Marshall Space Flight Center by the Engineering Cost Group, Applied Research Incorporated and Pittsburg State University. This study took place over a period of four months in mid 1992. The purpose of the study was to identify potential NWODB which could lead to improved cost effectiveness within NASA and to quantify potential cost benefits that might accrue if these NWODB were implemented.
Rosmait, Russell L.↗
New Ways Of Doing Business (NWODB) cost quantification analysis
The cost of designing, producing, and operating typical aerospace flight hardware is necessarily more expensive than most other human endeavors. Because of the more stringent environment of space, hardware designed to operate there will probably always be more expensive than similar hardware which is designed for less taxing environments. It is the thesis of this study that there are very significant improvements that can be made in the cost of aerospace flight hardware.
Hamaker, Joseph W.↗
Space system production cost benefits from contemporary philosophies in management and manufacturing
The cost of manufacturing space system hardware has always been expensive. The Engineering Cost Group of the Program Planning office at Marshall is attempting to account for cost savings that result from new technologies in manufacturing and management. The objective is to identify and define contemporary philosophies in manufacturing and management. The seven broad categories that make up the areas where technological advances can assist in reducing space system costs are illustrated. Included within these broad categories is a list of the processes or techniques that specifically provide the cost savings within todays design, test, production and operations environments. The processes and techniques listed achieve savings in the following manner: increased productivity; reduced down time; reduced scrap; reduced rework; reduced man hours; and reduced material costs. In addition, it should be noted that cost savings from production and processing improvements effect 20 to 40 pct. of production costs whereas savings from management improvements effects 60 to 80 of production cost. This is important because most efforts in reducing costs are spent trying to reduce cost in the production.
Rosmait, Russell L.↗