Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Costs”

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 NTRS1983

Parametric study of potential early commercial power plants Task 3-A MHD cost analysis

The development of costs for an MHD Power Plant and the comparison of these costs to a conventional coal fired power plant are reported. The program is divided into three activities: (1) code of accounts review; (2) MHD pulverized coal power plant cost comparison; (3) operating and maintenance cost estimates. The scope of each NASA code of account item was defined to assure that the recently completed Task 3 capital cost estimates are consistent with the code of account scope. Improvement confidence in MHD plant capital cost estimates by identifying comparability with conventional pulverized coal fired (PCF) power plant systems is undertaken. The basis for estimating the MHD plant operating and maintenance costs of electricity is verified.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

How much redundancy: Some cost considerations, including examples for spacecraft systems

How much redundancy should be built into a subsystem such as a space power subsystem. How does a reliability or design engineer choose between a power subsystem with 0.990 reliability and a more costly subsystem with 0.995 reliability. How does the engineer designing a power subsystem for a satellite decide between one power subsystem and a more reliable but heavier power subsystem. High reliability is not necessarily an end in itself. High reliability may be desirable in order to reduce the statistically expected loss due to a subsystem failure. However, this may not be the wisest use of funds since the expected loss due to subsystem failure is not the only cost involved. The subsystem itself may be very costly. The cost of the subsystem or the expected loss due to subsystem failure may not be considered separately. Therefore, the total of the two costs is minimized, i.e., the total of the cost of the subsystem plus the expected loss due to subsystem failure. A specific type of redundant system is considered, called a k-out-of-n: G subsystem. Such a subsystem has n modules, of which k are required to be good for the subsystem to be good. Five models are discussed which can be applied in the design of a power subsystem to select the unique redundancy method which will minimize the total of the cost of the power subsystem plus the expected loss due to the power subsystem failure. A BASIC computer program is available.

Suich, Ronald C.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Network of dedicated processors for finding lowest-cost map path

A method and associated apparatus are disclosed for finding the lowest cost path of several variable paths. The paths are comprised of a plurality of linked cost-incurring areas existing between an origin point and a destination point. The method comprises the steps of connecting a purality of nodes together in the manner of the cost-incurring areas; programming each node to have a cost associated therewith corresponding to one of the cost-incurring areas; injecting a signal into one of the nodes representing the origin point; propagating the signal through the plurality of nodes from inputs to outputs; reducing the signal in magnitude at each node as a function of the respective cost of the node; and, starting at one of the nodes representing the destination point and following a path having the least reduction in magnitude of the signal from node to node back to one of the nodes representing the origin point whereby the lowest cost path from the origin point to the destination point is found.

Eberhardt, Silvio P.↗
NASA NTRS1991

COSTMODL: An automated software development cost estimation tool

The cost of developing computer software continues to consume an increasing portion of many organizations' total budgets, both in the public and private sector. As this trend develops, the capability to produce reliable estimates of the effort and schedule required to develop a candidate software product takes on increasing importance. The COSTMODL program was developed to provide an in-house capability to perform development cost estimates for NASA software projects. COSTMODL is an automated software development cost estimation tool which incorporates five cost estimation algorithms including the latest models for the Ada language and incrementally developed products. The principal characteristic which sets COSTMODL apart from other software cost estimation programs is its capacity to be completely customized to a particular environment. The estimation equations can be recalibrated to reflect the programmer productivity characteristics demonstrated by the user's organization, and the set of significant factors which effect software development costs can be customized to reflect any unique properties of the user's development environment. Careful use of a capability such as COSTMODL can significantly reduce the risk of cost overruns and failed projects.

Roush, George B.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Elements of designing for cost

During recent history in the United States, government systems development has been performance driven. As a result, systems within a class have experienced exponentially increasing cost over time in fixed year dollars. Moreover, little emphasis has been placed on reducing cost. This paper defines designing for cost and presents several tools which, if used in the engineering process, offer the promise of reducing cost. Although other potential tools exist for designing for cost, this paper focuses on rules of thumb, quality function deployment, Taguchi methods, concurrent engineering, and activity-based costing. Each of these tools has been demonstrated to reduce cost if used within the engineering process.

Dean, Edwin B.↗
NASA NTRS1992

The costs of introducing new technologies into space systems

A review is conducted of cost-research studies intended to provide guidelines for cost estimates of integrating new technologies into existing satellite systems. Quantitative methods are described for determining the technological state-of-the-art so that proposed programs can be evaluated accurately in terms of their contribution to technological development. The R&D costs associated with the proposed programs are then assessed with attention given to the technological advances. Also incorporated quantifiably are any reductions in the costs of production, operations, and support afforded by the advanced technologies. The proposed model is employed in relation to a satellite sizing and cost study in which a tradeoff between increased R&D costs and reduced production costs is examined. The technology/cost model provides a consistent yardstick for assessing the true relative economic impact of introducing novel techniques and technologies.

Dodson, E. N.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Process and assembly plans for low cost commercial fuselage structure

Cost and weight reduction for a composite structure is a result of selecting design concepts that can be built using efficient low cost manufacturing and assembly processes. Since design and manufacturing are inherently cost dependent, concurrent engineering in the form of a Design-Build Team (DBT) is essential for low cost designs. Detailed cost analysis from DBT designs and hardware verification must be performed to identify the cost drivers and relationships between design and manufacturing processes. Results from the global evaluation are used to quantitatively rank design, identify cost centers for higher ranking design concepts, define and prioritize a list of technical/economic issues and barriers, and identify parameters that control concept response. These results are then used for final design optimization.

Willden, Kurtis↗
NASA NTRS1992

Shared visions: Partnership of Rockwell International and NASA Cost Effectiveness Enhancements (CEE) for the space shuttle system integration program

As a result of limited resources and tight fiscal constraints over the past several years, the defense and aerospace industries have experienced a downturn in business activity. The impact of fewer contracts being awarded has placed a greater emphasis for effectiveness and efficiency on industry contractors. It is clear that a reallocation of resources is required for America to continue to lead the world in space and technology. The key to technological and economic survival is the transforming of existing programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program, into more cost efficient programs so as to divert the savings to other NASA programs. The partnership between Rockwell International and NASA and their joint improvement efforts that resulted in significant streamlining and cost reduction measures to Rockwell International Space System Division's work on the Space Shuttle System Integration Contract is described. This work was a result of an established Cost Effectiveness Enhancement (CEE) Team formed initially in Fiscal Year 1991, and more recently expanded to a larger scale CEE Initiative in 1992. By working closely with the customer in agreeing to contract content, obtaining management endorsement and commitment, and involving the employees in total quality management (TQM) and continuous improvement 'teams,' the initial annual cost reduction target was exceeded significantly. The CEE Initiative helped reduce the cost of the Shuttle Systems Integration contract while establishing a stronger program based upon customer needs, teamwork, quality enhancements, and cost effectiveness. This was accomplished by systematically analyzing, challenging, and changing the established processes, practices, and systems. This examination, in nature, was work intensive due to the depth and breadth of the activity. The CEE Initiative has provided opportunities to make a difference in the way Rockwell and NASA work together - to update the methods and processes of the organizations. The future success of NASA space programs and Rockwell hinges upon the ability to adopt new, more efficient and effective work processes. Efficiency, proficiency, cost effectiveness, and teamwork are a necessity for economic survival. Continuous improvement initiatives like the CEE are, and will continue to be, vehicles by which the road can be traveled with a vision to the future.

Bejmuk, Bohdan I.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Applying Costs, Risks and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) methodology to Engineering Support Request (ESR) prioritization

Given limited budget, the problem of prioritization among Engineering Support Requests (ESR's) with varied sizes, shapes, and colors is a difficult one. At the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), the recently developed 4-Matrix (4-M) method represents a step in the right direction as it attempts to combine the traditional criteria of technical merits only with the new concern for cost-effectiveness. However, the 4-M method was not adequately successful in the actual prioritization of ESRs for the fiscal year 1995 (FY95). This research identifies a number of design issues that should help us to develop better methods. It emphasizes that given the variety and diversity of ESR's one should not expect that a single method could help in the assessment of all ESR's. One conclusion is that a methodology such as Costs, Risks, and Values Evaluation (CRAVE) should be adopted. It also is clear that the development of methods such as 4-M requires input not only from engineers with technical expertise in ESR's but also from personnel with adequate background in the theory and practice of cost-effectiveness analysis. At KSC, ESR prioritization is one part of the Ground Support Working Teams (GSWT) Integration Process. It was discovered that the more important barriers to the incorporation of cost-effectiveness considerations in ESR prioritization lie in this process. The culture of integration, and the corresponding structure of review by a committee of peers, is not conducive to the analysis and confrontation necessary in the assessment and prioritization of ESR's. Without assistance from appropriately trained analysts charged with the responsibility to analyze and be confrontational about each ESR, the GSWT steering committee will continue to make its decisions based on incomplete understanding, inconsistent numbers, and at times, colored facts. The current organizational separation of the prioritization and the funding processes is also identified as an important barrier to the pursuit of cost-effectiveness. Perhaps the greatest barrier is that, at the working level, KSC's culture is so preoccupied with technical concerns that it seems almost oblivious to any cost concerns, let alone cost-effectiveness concerns. It is recommended that we must urgently begin to change that culture and seek a better balance between these two concerns.

Joglekar, Prafulla N.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Major weapon system environmental life-cycle cost estimating for Conservation, Cleanup, Compliance and Pollution Prevention (C3P2)

The Titan 4 Space Launch Vehicle Program is one of many major weapon system programs that have modified acquisition plans and operational procedures to meet new, stringent environmental rules and regulations. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Defense (DOD) mandate to reduce the use of ozone depleting chemicals (ODC's) is just one of the regulatory changes that has affected the program. In the last few years, public environmental awareness, coupled with stricter environmental regulations, has created the need for DOD to produce environmental life-cycle cost estimates (ELCCE) for every major weapon system acquisition program. The environmental impact of the weapon system must be assessed and budgeted, considering all costs, from cradle to grave. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) has proposed that organizations consider Conservation, Cleanup, Compliance and Pollution Prevention (C(sup 3)P(sup 2)) issues associated with each acquisition program to assess life-cycle impacts and costs. The Air Force selected the Titan 4 system as the pilot program for estimating life-cycle environmental costs. The estimating task required participants to develop an ELCCE methodology, collect data to test the methodology and produce a credible cost estimate within the DOD C(sup 3)P(sup 2) definition. The estimating methodology included using the Program Office weapon system description and work breakdown structure together with operational site and manufacturing plant visits to identify environmental cost drivers. The results of the Titan IV ELCCE process are discussed and expanded to demonstrate how they can be applied to satisfy any life-cycle environmental cost estimating requirement.

Hammond, Wesley↗
NASA NTRS1996

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.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Design of a Low Cost Avionics System for Launch Vehicles

Marshall Space Flight Center has long been one of the leaders in development of propulsion systems. Due to current launch vehicle costs, Marshall Space Flight Centers (MSFC) Advanced Space Transportation Program (ASTP) office has emphasized the development of low cost launch vehicles. The Bantam launch vehicle is one of the primary programs that has low cost as a requirement. One of the driving factors for a low cost launch vehicle is a low cost avionics system. This paper will summarize MSFC's Astrionics Laboratories efforts in designing a low cost avionics system. MSFC has done Phase A avionics system design and has been working with various contractors on a Phase B preliminary avionics design. Deriving the major requirements, trade studies and cost drivers are some of the topics to be discussed.

Crawford, Kevin↗
NASA NTRS2000

Low-Cost Approaches to Deep Space Missions

The past decade has brought about a radical transformation in NASA's planetary exploration program. At the beginning of this decade, NASA was focused on the Cassini mission to Saturn. Following on the heels of the successful Voyager and Galileo missions, Cassini represents the culmination of an evolution towards successively larger, more complex, and more expensive spacecraft. The Cassini spacecraft weighs in at over 5 metric tons, and carries an entry probe and a sophisticated suite of sensors supporting 27 different science investigations enabling a comprehensive scientific investigation of Saturn with a single spacecraft. The cost of this spacecraft exceeded $2B, including the cost of the large Titan IV launch vehicle. During Cassini development, NASA realized that it could no longer afford these "flagship" missions, and the agency moved aggressively towards a "faster, better, cheaper" design philosophy of focused science goals and simpler, rapidly-developed spacecraft, allowing much more frequent launches of smaller, lower-cost missions. The Mars Global Surveyor, launched in November 1996, is an example of this new paradigm. Developed in less than 3-years, MGS is only one-fifth the mass of Cassini, and only cost on the order of $220M. The reduced spacecraft mass allows use of the smaller, lower cost Delta launch vehicle. Currently in orbit about Mars, MGS carries a focused suite of six science instruments that are currently returning high-resolution remote sensing of the Martian surface. The future calls for continued even more aggressive mass and cost targets. Examples of these next-generation goals are embodied in the Mars Micromission spacecraft concept, targeted for launch in 2003. With a mass of only 200kg, this lightweight bus can be tailored to carry a variety of payloads to Mars or other inner-planet destinations. The design of the Micromission spacecraft enable them to be launched at extremely low cost as a secondary "piggyback" payload.

Squibb, G. F.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Parametric Cost Modeling of Space Missions Using the Develop New Projects (DMP) Implementation Process

This paper presents an overview of a parametric cost model that has been built at JPL to estimate costs of future, deep space, robotic science missions. Due to the recent dramatic changes in JPL business practices brought about by an internal reengineering effort known as develop new products (DNP), high-level historic cost data is no longer considered analogous to future missions. Therefore, the historic data is of little value in forecasting costs for projects developed using the DNP process. This has lead to the development of an approach for obtaining expert opinion and also for combining actual data with expert opinion to provide a cost database for future missions. In addition, the DNP cost model has a maximum of objective cost drivers which reduces the likelihood of model input error. Version 2 is now under development which expands the model capabilities, links it more tightly with key design technical parameters, and is grounded in more rigorous statistical techniques. The challenges faced in building this model will be discussed, as well as it's background, development approach, status, validation, and future plans.

Rosenberg, Leigh↗
NASA NTRS2002

A Method for Estimating Costs and Benefits of Space Assembly and Servicing By Astronauts and Robots

One aspect of designing future space missions is to determine whether Space Assembly and Servicing (SAS) is useful and, if so, what combination of robots and astronauts provides the most effective means of accomplishing it. Certain aspects of these choices, such as the societal value of developing the means for humans to live in space, do not lend themselves to quantification. However, other SAS costs and benefits can be quantified in a manner that can help select the most cost-effective SAS approach. Any space facility, whether it is assembled and serviced or not, entails an eventual replacement cost due to wear and obsolescence. Servicing can reduce this cost by limiting replacement to only failed or obsolete components. However, servicing systems, such as space robots, have their own logistics cost, and astronauts can have even greater logistics requirements. On the other hand, humans can be more capable than robots at performing dexterous and unstructured tasks, which can reduce logistics costs by allowing a reduction in mass of replacement components. Overall, the cost-effectiveness of astronaut SAS depends on its efficiency; and, if astronauts have to be wholly justified by their servicing usefulness, then the serviced space facility has to be large enough to fully occupy them.

Purves, Lloyd R.↗
NASA NTRS2003

The Effect of Mission Location on Mission Costs and Equivalent System Mass

Equivalent System Mass (ESM) is used by the Advanced Life Support (ALS) community to quantify mission costs of technologies for space applications (Drysdale et al, 1999, Levri et al, 2000). Mass is used as a cost measure because the mass of an object determines propulsion (acceleration) cost (i.e. amount of fuel needed), and costs relating to propulsion dominate mission cost. Mission location drives mission cost because acceleration is typically required to initiate and complete a change in location. Total mission costs may be reduced by minimizing the mass of materials that must be propelled to each distinct location. In order to minimize fuel requirements for missions beyond low-Earth orbit (LEO), the hardware and astronauts may not all go to the same location. For example, on a Lunar or Mars mission, some of the hardware or astronauts may stay in orbit while the rest of the hardware and astronauts descend to the planetary surface. In addition, there may be disposal of waste or used hardware at various mission locations to avoid propulsion of mass that is no longer needed in the mission. This paper demonstrates how using location factors in the calculation of ESM can account for the effects of various acceleration events and can improve the accuracy and value of the ESM metric to mission planners. Even a mission with one location can benefit from location factor analysis if the alternative technologies under consideration consume resources at different rates. For example, a mission that regenerates resources will have a relatively constant mass compared to one that uses consumables and vents/discards mass along the way. This paper shows examples of how location factors can affect ESM calculations and how the inclusion of location factors can change the relative value of technologies being considered for development.

Fisher, John W.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Parametric Cost Deployment

Parametric cost analysis is a mathematical approach to estimating cost. Parametric cost analysis uses non-cost parameters, such as quality characteristics, to estimate the cost to bring forth, sustain, and retire a product. This paper reviews parametric cost analysis and shows how it can be used within the cost deployment process.

Dean, Edwin B.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Elements of Designing for Cost

During recent history in the United States, government systems development has been performance driven. As a result, systems within a class have experienced exponentially increasing cost over time in fixed year dollars. Moreover, little emphasis has been placed on reducing cost. This paper defines designing for cost and presents several tools which, if used in the engineering process, offer the promise of reducing cost. Although other potential tools exist for designing for cost, this paper focuses on rules of thumb, quality function deployment, Taguchi methods, concurrent engineering, and activity based costing. Each of these tools has been demonstrated to reduce cost if used within the engineering process.

Dean, Edwin B.↗