Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “COST ESTIMATE”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1982

Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, Volume 1

The design, performance, and programmatic definition of shuttle derived launch vehicles (SDLV) established by two different contractors were assessed and the relative life cycle costs of space transportation systems using the shuttle alone were compared with costs for a mix of shuttles and SDLV's. The ground rules and assumptions used in the evaluation are summarized and the work breakdown structure is included. Approaches used in deriving SDLV costs, including calibration factors and historical data are described. Both SDLV cost estimates and SDLV/STS cost comparisons are summarized. Standard formats are used to report comprehensive SDLV life cycle estimates. Hardware cost estimates (below subsystem level) obtained using the RCA PRICE 84 cost model are included along with other supporting data.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1973

Cost analysis of atmosphere monitoring systems

A methodology was developed to predict realistic relative cost of life support systems and to define areas of major cost impacts in the development cycle. Emphasis was given to tailoring the cost data for usage by program planners and designers. Cost estimates can be completed using the developed equations for varying degrees of equipment refinement, as well as comparative costs between different functional methods. Cost analysis of two leading atmosphere monitoring systems, namely the mass spectrometer and the gas chromatograph, is discussed. A summary of the approach used in developing the cost estimating techniques is presented. Included are the cost estimating techniques, the development of cost estimating relationships, and the atmosphere monitoring system cost estimates.

Yakut, M. M.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Cost analysis of life sciences experiments and subsystems

Cost estimates for experiments and subsystems flown in the Spacelab were established. Ten experiments were cost analyzed. Estimated cost varied from $650,000 for the hardware development of the SPE water electrolysis experiment to $78,500,000 for the development and operation of a representative life sciences laboratory program. The cost of subsystems for thermal, atmospheric and trace contaminants control of the Spacelab internal atmosphere was also estimated. Subsystem cost estimates were based on the utilization of existing components developed in previous space programs whenever necessary.

Yakut, M. M.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Standard cost elements for technology programs

The suitable structure for an effective and accurate cost estimate for general purposes is discussed in the context of a NASA technology program. Cost elements are defined for research, management, and facility-construction portions of technology programs. Attention is given to the mechanisms for insuring the viability of spending programs, and the need for program managers is established for effecting timely fund disbursement. Formal, structures, and intuitive techniques are discussed for cost-estimate development, and cost-estimate defensibility can be improved with increased documentation. NASA policies for cash management are examined to demonstrate the importance of the ability to obligate funds and the ability to cost contracted funds. The NASA approach to consistent cost justification is set forth with a list of standard cost-element definitions. The cost elements reflect the three primary concerns of cost estimates: the identification of major assumptions, the specification of secondary analytic assumptions, and the status of program factors.

Christensen, Carisa B.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Preliminary estimates of operating costs for lighter than air transports

Presented is a preliminary set of operating cost relationships for airship transports. The starting point for the development of the relationships is the direct operating cost formulae and the indirect operating cost categories commonly used for estimating costs of heavier than air commercial transports. Modifications are made to the relationships to account for the unique features of airships. To illustrate the cost estimating method, the operating costs of selected airship cargo transports are computed. Conventional fully buoyant and hybrid semi-buoyant systems are investigated for a variety of speeds, payloads, ranges, and altitudes. Comparisons are made with aircraft transports for a range of cargo densities.

Smith, C. L.↗
NASA NTRS1975

Preliminary estimates of operating costs for lighter than air transports

A preliminary set of operating cost relationships are presented for airship transports. The starting point for the development of the relationships is the direct operating cost formulae and the indirect operating cost categories commonly used for estimating costs of heavier than air commercial transports. Modifications are made to the relationships to account for the unique features of airships. To illustrate the cost estimating method, the operating costs of selected airship cargo transports are computed. Conventional fully buoyant and hybrid semi-buoyant systems are investigated for a variety of speeds, payloads, ranges, and altitudes. Comparisons are made with aircraft transports for a range of cargo densities.

Smith, C. L.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Estimating the Deep Space Network modification costs to prepare for future space missions by using major cost drivers

This paper develops a cost model to do long range planning cost estimates for Deep Space Network (DSN) support of future space missions. The paper focuses on the costs required to modify and/or enhance the DSN to prepare for future space missions. The model is a function of eight major mission cost drivers and estimates both the total cost and the annual costs of a similar future space mission. The model is derived from actual cost data from three space missions: Voyager (Uranus), Voyager (Neptune), and Magellan. Estimates derived from the model are tested against actual cost data for two independent missions, Viking and Mariner Jupiter/Saturn (MJS).

Remer, Donald S.↗
NASA NTRS2023

NASA Standing Review Board Handbook

This handbook provides guidance based on best practices for the planning, preparation, review, reporting, and closeout of Standing Review Board (SRB) activities. Revision C updates the Revision B version of the SRB Handbook published in 2016 to incorporate updates to NASA Procedural Requirements (NPR) 7120.5F, NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Requirements. These updates include: - Changing the Dissenting Opinion process to the Formal Dissent process, which retains the current process augmented with an expedited escalation path. - Updates to requirements for establishing an Agency Baseline Commitment (ABC) and for performing Joint Cost and Schedule Confidence Level (JCL) analyses for tightly coupled programs. - Additional requirements for performing a JCL analysis for single-project programs and projects over $1B Life-Cycle Cost (LCC). - Use of initial capability cost estimates instead of LCC estimates in specific, identified instances for single-project programs and projects that plan continuing operations and production, including integration of capability upgrades, with an unspecified Phase E end point. These single-project programs and projects define an initial capability during Phase A and develop an initial capability cost that establishes the ABC at Key Decision Point (KDP) C. Initial capability is the first operational mission flight (or as defined in the KDP B Review Plan) and is documented in the KDP B Decision Memorandum. Initial capability cost includes operations cost for the initial capability. The Phase E cost estimate for continuing operations and production is established separately as part of the Operational Readiness Review (ORR) and KDP E for the 5 years after initial capability and subsequently updated and documented annually for the next 5-year period. Upgrades during Phase E that meet the Agency criteria for a major project for external reporting are treated as projects for the purposes of establishing their own development ABC outside the Phase E cost estimate. The Phase E cost estimate is updated to include production and operations costs associated with these upgrades. Development, production, and operations costs of other (i.e., non-major) upgrades are included in the Phase E cost estimate. (See NPR 7120.5, Sections 2.4.1.5 and 2.4.1.6 and the NASA Space Flight Program and Project Management Handbook (PM Handbook), Section 5.5.4 for additional information.) The scope of the SRB’s assessment with respect to initial capability, Phase E cost estimate, and major upgrades for these single-project programs and projects is defined in the Terms of Reference (ToR).

Kevin Michael Gilligan↗
NASA NTRS1992

The MERMAID project

The tendency for software development projects to be completed over schedule and over budget was documented extensively. Additionally many projects are completed within budgetary and schedule target only as a result of the customer agreeing to accept reduced functionality. In his classic book, The Mythical Man Month, Fred Brooks exposes the fallacy that effort and schedule are freely interchangeable. All current cost models are produced on the assumption that there is very limited scope for schedule compression unless there is a corresponding reduction in delivered functionality. The Metrication and Resources Modeling Aid (MERMAID) project, partially financed by the Commission of the European Communities (CEC) as Project 2046 began in Oct. 1988 and its goal were as follows: (1) improvement of understanding of the relationships between software development productivity and product and process metrics; (2) to facilitate the widespread technology transfer from the Consortium to the European Software Industry; and (3) to facilitate the widespread uptake of cost estimation techniques by the provision of prototype cost estimation tools. MERMAID developed a family of methods for cost estimation, many of which have had tools implemented in prototypes. These prototypes are best considered as toolkits or workbenches.

Cowderoy, A. J. C.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Orbit transfer vehicle engine study. Volume 3: Program costs

Budgetary and planning cost estimates are presented that were prepared for the development, production and operation and flight support phases for each of the engines proposed for OTV propulsion. The major features of each category engine are described. The development program estimates were structured to the preliminary program Work Breakdown Structures (WBS). Program costs are provided within the applicable WBS elements to Level 4 for each category engine. The production program cost estimates assume a first production lot of 50 units produced at a rate of two units per month. Cumulative average unit costs assume a 90% learning capability. The operations and flight support cost estimates are based on 15, 30 and 45 missions per year for the period 1988 through 1999. Estimated funding requirements were developed for each category and program phase. All cost estimates and funding data are presented in 1979 dollars. The assumptions and ground rules for these estimates are summarized.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

An activity-based methodology for operations cost analysis

This report describes an activity-based cost estimation method, proposed for the Space Exploration Initiative (SEI), as an alternative to NASA's traditional mass-based cost estimation method. A case study demonstrates how the activity-based cost estimation technique can be used to identify the operations that have a significant impact on costs over the life cycle of the SEI. The case study yielded an operations cost of $101 billion for the 20-year span of the lunar surface operations for the Option 5a program architecture. In addition, the results indicated that the support and training costs for the missions were the greatest contributors to the annual cost estimates. A cost-sensitivity analysis of the cultural and architectural drivers determined that the length of training and the amount of support associated with the ground support personnel for mission activities are the most significant cost contributors.

Korsmeyer, David↗
NASA NTRS1979

SAMICS Validation. SAMICS Support Study, Phase 3

SAMICS provides a consistent basis for estimating array costs and compares production technology costs. A review and a validation of the SAMICS model are reported. The review had the following purposes: (1) to test the computational validity of the computer model by comparison with preliminary hand calculations based on conventional cost estimating techniques; (2) to review and improve the accuracy of the cost relationships being used by the model: and (3) to provide an independent verification to users of the model's value in decision making for allocation of research and developement funds and for investment in manufacturing capacity. It is concluded that the SAMICS model is a flexible, accurate, and useful tool for managerial decision making.

Source record↗
DOE OSTI2024

Model-free stabilization via Extremum Seeking using a cost neural estimator

In this paper, a fully model-free architecture for vertical stabilization of thermonuclear plasmas in tokamak experimental reactors is presented. For the first time, an Extremum Seeking control algorithm is combined with neural networks to estimate the Lyapunov function to be minimized, resulting in a fully data-driven control architecture. The performance of different neural networks are compared. Specifically, Multilayer Perceptrons and Extreme Learning Machines are considered. The proposed architecture is tested in simulation to show that it can counteract relevant plasma disturbances, resulting in a significant improvement in terms of the achievable operative space compared to the Extremum Seeking algorithm, which still relies on model-based cost estimator.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2013

Modeling Operations Costs for Human Exploration Architectures

Operations and support (O&S) costs for human spaceflight have not received the same attention in the cost estimating community as have development costs. This is unfortunate as O&S costs typically comprise a majority of life-cycle costs (LCC) in such programs as the International Space Station (ISS) and the now-cancelled Constellation Program. Recognizing this, the Constellation Program and NASA HQs supported the development of an O&S cost model specifically for human spaceflight. This model, known as the Exploration Architectures Operations Cost Model (ExAOCM), provided the operations cost estimates for a variety of alternative human missions to the moon, Mars, and Near-Earth Objects (NEOs) in architectural studies. ExAOCM is philosophically based on the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF) concepts of operational nodes, systems, operational functions, and milestones. This paper presents some of the historical background surrounding the development of the model, and discusses the underlying structure, its unusual user interface, and lastly, previous examples of its use in the aforementioned architectural studies.

cost estimating↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

The System Complexity Metric (SCM) Explains Systems Design and is Correlated with Cost and Failure Rate

The human short term memory span and working capacity is limited to three to five items, especially if they are organized complex “chunks” of information. The impression of complexity occurs when a system is simply difficult to understand, where there is no apparent pattern to predict its behavior. Hierarchical systems design can reduce perceived complexity and increase the amount of information that can be managed. The SCM was developed to measure complexity and help compare proposed overall system architectures before detailed design information is available. The SCM is defined as the sum of the number of major nodes, N, in the system block diagram plus the number of one-way interactions, I, between the nodes. SCM = N + I. SCM’s are easily determined by direct inspection of high-level block diagrams of life support systems. Axiomatic design develops a hierarchy of subsystem requirements and designs together in a top-down, back-and-forth process. A coupling matrix is used to control the relationships between the subsystem functions and design concepts. Axiomatic design can improve system design by decoupling requirements and designs. Axiomatic design was applied to the planning of a closed life support system, similar to that used on the International Space Station. A materially open as opposed to a closed system design was created by removing the interconnections required to close the system. The open system had the same number of designed subsystems as the closed system, but it had many fewer interconnections and its SCM was lower by about half. The costs were estimated and the MTBF (Mean Time Before Failure) tabulated for open and closed space life support systems. The estimated costs were linearly proportional to SCM for the wide variations of SCM in life support, but small differences may not be significant. The flight and preflight MTBF’s both declined exponentially with increasing MTBF, faster than MTBF-2, even though the preflight estimated MTBF’s were about ten times higher than the flight MTBF’s.

System Complexity Metric (SCM)↗
NASA NTRS2011

Cost Validation Using PRICE H

PRICE H was introduced into the JPL cost estimation tool set circa 2003. It became more available at JPL when IPAO funded the NASA-wide site license for all NASA centers. PRICE H was mainly used as one of the cost tools to validate proposal grassroots cost estimates. Program offices at JPL view PRICE H as an additional crosscheck to Team X (JPL Concurrent Engineering Design Center) estimates. PRICE H became widely accepted ca, 2007 at JPL when the program offices moved away from grassroots cost estimation for Step 1 proposals. PRICE H is now one of the key cost tools used for cost validation, cost trades, and independent cost estimates.

cost estimation↗
DOE OSTI2026

Generator Interconnection Costs to the Transmission System in non-ISO Balancing Authorities [Slides]

Electric transmission system operators—including Independent System Operators (ISOs), Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs), and utilities—require proposed power plants to undergo a series of interconnection studies before connecting to the grid. These studies assess what transmission upgrades or new infrastructure may be necessary and assign the associated costs to the project. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory has compiled, aggregated, and cleaned interconnection cost data, originally for ISOs/RTOs, and now for five non-ISO Balancing Authorities: PacifiCorp, Bonneville Power Authority, Duke Energy Progress, Duke Energy Carolinas and Duke Energy Florida. Insufficient transparency in interconnection cost data may contribute to rapidly expanding interconnection queues, with active queue capacities tripling between 2020 and 2024 in the studied BAs. Most projects withdraw after receiving high interconnection cost estimates. Interconnection costs have increased since the early 2000s, with average costs for "complete" projects reaching $194/kW between 2018 and 2024. Active queue projects and withdrawn projects incur substantially higher costs, primarily due to rising network upgrade costs. Recent interconnection costs in non-ISO balancing authorities are higher than in ISO regions, potentially due to a greater willingness to pay among developers. Utility-scale solar, wind, and storage projects have interconnection costs that exceed those for natural gas. However, when focusing on projects that do not withdraw from the queue, the interconnection costs for these technologies are more similar to natural gas projects. Other key findings include: (1) Larger generation projects benefit from lower proportional interconnection costs, (2) capacity transmission service (NRIS) often requires additional network investments, and (3) projects with high network upgrade costs are often clustered geographically. The dataset includes results from 2,104 interconnection studies conducted between 2000 and 2024, covering projects that are operational, withdrawn, or still progressing through the study process. The Excel file contains (a) the complete project-level interconnection cost dataset, and (b) seven additional tabs summarizing cost metrics across dimensions such as time, market structure, cost category (point of interconnection vs. broader network upgrades), fuel type, service type (ERIS vs. NRIS), generator size, and geography.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗