Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “cost estimating tools”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Technology Estimating 2: A Process to Determine the Cost and Schedule of Space Technology Research and Development

As a leader in space technology research and development, NASA is continuing in the development of the Technology Estimating process, initiated in 2012, for estimating the cost and schedule of low maturity technology research and development, where the Technology Readiness Level is less than TRL 6. NASA' s Technology Roadmap areas consist of 14 technology areas. The focus of this continuing Technology Estimating effort included four Technology Areas (TA): TA3 Space Power and Energy Storage, TA4 Robotics, TA8 Instruments, and TA12 Materials, to confine the research to the most abundant data pool. This research report continues the development of technology estimating efforts completed during 2013-2014, and addresses the refinement of parameters selected and recommended for use in the estimating process, where the parameters developed are applicable to Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs) used in the parametric cost estimating analysis. This research addresses the architecture for administration of the Technology Cost and Scheduling Estimating tool, the parameters suggested for computer software adjunct to any technology area, and the identification of gaps in the Technology Estimating process.

Cole, Stuart K.↗
NASA NTRS2021

The Evolution of Team-X: 25 Years of Concurrent Engineering Design Experience

Established in 1995 in response to NASA’s “Faster, Better, Cheaper” era, Team-X was born from a need to perform rapid space mission design for principal investigator-led competed proposals. The success and sustainability of Team-X over the 25 years that have followed is directly attributable to the Team-X business model and its evolution over time. While dozens of organizations and institutions have emulated the Team-X design process, there are nuances to the Team-X business model that are unique to JPL, and explain why it is different than other concurrent design teams. One of the key components of a business model is the customer segments that are served. Team-X was founded to conduct the Pre-Phase A work necessary to formulate a portfolio of multiple planetary mission concepts, but has since expanded to include the capability to conduct studies for Earth science, astrophysics, and heliophysics missions as well as Human Exploration and Operations missions and space technology development. Team-X delivers value to its clients both in terms of speed and cost. Team-X has also added value by creating teams to enable the development of Instrument and SmallSat Concepts. Value has further been enhanced through a revision of its process for reviews and the addition of pre-design architecting capabilities. Other aspects of the Team-X infrastructure, in addition to study process, have enabled it to succeed for over a quarter century. From our most important resource, the people, our tools, especially for cost estimating, as well as our increasing capable IT infrastructure have contributed to our capability to meet the demands of our clients. The Team-X business model and its evolution over time, position it well for success in the decades to come.

Murphy, Jonathan↗
NASA NTRS2022

COMPACT KNN V2: Analogy-Based Cost Estimation Model for CubeSats

The CubeSat Or Microsat Probabilistic and AnalogiesCost Tool, or COMPACT, is a NASA Headquarters fundedeffort to fill the gap in cost estimating capabilities for CubeSats,as well as other microsat spacecraft. The COMPACT team hasfocused mainly on CubeSats to date, and has collected technical,programmatic and cost data on dozens of flown CubeSatsmissions led by NASA, research labs, and universities. In late2019, the team released the first tool prototype which uses a nonparametricregression technique, k-Nearest Neighbors (KNN),on actual data from historical CubeSat missions to produceearly ballpark analogy-based cost estimates for new CubeSatconcepts. Since the KNN prototype was first released, theCOMPACT team has normalized 17 new missions to be addedto the model in COMPACT V2. COMPACT V2 also featureschanges to the KNN tool algorithm including the introduction ofPrincipal Component Analysis (PCA) to the model developmentprocess and changes to the input parameters which have madethe analogy results more intuitive and have improved modelperformance. This paper describes the current COMPACTKNN dataset, improvements made to the model in COMPACTV2, an assessment of current model performance, and a forwardlook at COMPACT’s planned future enhancements.

Hooke, Melissa↗
NASA NTRS1990

Mars Rover/Sample Return - Phase A cost estimation

This paper presents a preliminary cost estimate for the design and development of the Mars Rover/Sample Return (MRSR) mission. The estimate was generated using a modeling tool specifically built to provide useful cost estimates from design parameters of the type and fidelity usually available during early phases of mission design. The model approach and its application to MRSR are described.

Stancati, Michael L.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Design of an expert system for estimating the cost of new knowledge in high energy astrophysics

The High Energy Astrophysics Costing Tool (HEACT) is a combined Expert System/Numerical Simulation to evaluate sensors and experiments proposed for space platforms in order to determine their expected performance and to assess the amount and quality of scientific information likely to be gathered by such experiments. The end product of this tool will be both a cost estimate for the experiment package as deployed and also an estimate of the amount of new scientific knowledge (both new data and reductions in the uncertainties of previous measurements) which would result from the actual deployment and operation of that experiment package. The numerical simulation part of HEACT will contain components to: (1) calculate the high energy signatures of both actual and proposed classes of astrophysical objects, and (2) model the response and resolution of the candidate sensors for observing those objects. The rule based part of the HEACT will be based on knowledge in the areas of experiment design, instrument selection, and system integration developed from experience with existing high energy astrophysics observatories, both orbiting and lofted by rockets or balloons. This paper presents mainly results from the design of the rule-based part of HEACT. It focuses on the structure of the rules and the structures used to represent the knowledge related to the design and integration of such experiments. Methods for integrating the results from numerical simulations into the expert system will also be discussed.

Bosworth, Edward L., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1977

Parametric study of transport aircraft systems cost and weight

The results of a NASA study to develop production cost estimating relationships (CERs) and weight estimating relationships (WERs) for commercial and military transport aircraft at the system level are presented. The systems considered correspond to the standard weight groups defined in Military Standard 1374 and are listed. These systems make up a complete aircraft exclusive of engines. The CER for each system (or CERs in several cases) utilize weight as the key parameter. Weights may be determined from detailed weight statements, if available, or by using the WERs developed, which are based on technical and performance characteristics generally available during preliminary design. The CERs that were developed provide a very useful tool for making preliminary estimates of the production cost of an aircraft. Likewise, the WERs provide a very useful tool for making preliminary estimates of the weight of aircraft based on conceptual design information.

Beltramo, M. N.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Cost Analysis of an Air Brayton Receiver for a Solar Thermal Electric Power System in Selected Annual Production Volumes

Pioneer Engineering and Manufacturing Company estimated the cost of manufacturing and Air Brayton Receiver for a Solar Thermal Electric Power System as designed by the AiResearch Division of the Garrett Corporation. Production costs were estimated at annual volumes of 100; 1,000; 5,000; 10,000; 50,000; 100,000 and 1,000,000 units. These costs included direct labor, direct material and manufacturing burden. A make or buy analysis was made of each part of each volume. At high volumes special fabrication concepts were used to reduce operation cycle times. All costs were estimated at an assumed 100% plant capacity. Economic feasibility determined the level of production at which special concepts were to be introduced. Estimated costs were based on the economics of the last half of 1980. Tooling and capital equipment costs were estimated for ach volume. Infrastructure and personnel requirements were also estimated.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2008

Rapid Turnaround of Costing/Designing of Space Missions Operations

The Ground Segment Team (GST), at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, California, provides high-level mission operations concepts and cost estimates for projects that are in the formulation phase. GST has developed a tool to track costs, assumptions, and mission requirements, and to rapidly turnaround estimates for mission operations, ground data systems, and tracking for deep space and near Earth missions. Estimates that would often take several weeks to generate are now generated in minutes through the use of an integrated suite of cost models. The models were developed through interviews with domain experts in areas of Mission Operations, including but not limited to: systems engineering, payload operations, tracking resources, mission planning, navigation, telemetry and command, and ground network infrastructure. Data collected during interviews were converted into parametric cost models and integrated into one tool suite. The tool has been used on a wide range of missions from small Earth orbiters, to flagship missions like Cassini. The tool is an aid to project managers and mission planners as they consider different scenarios during the proposal and early development stages of their missions. The tool is also used for gathering cost related requirements and assumptions and for conducting integrated analysis of multiple missions.

Cost estimation↗
NASA NTRS2003

Orbital Space Plane Cost Credibility

NASA's largest new start development program is the Orbital Space Plane (OSP) Program. The program is currently in the formulation stage. One of the critical issues to be resolved, prior to initiating full-scale development, is establishing cost credibility of NASA s budget estimates for development, production, and operations of the OSP. This paper will discuss the processes, tools, and methodologies that NASA, along with its industry partners, are implementing to assure cost credibility for the OSP program. Results of benchmarking of current tools and the development of new cost estimating capabilities and approaches will be discussed.

Creech, Steve↗
NASA NTRS1976

The levels of edit

The editorial process is analyzed, and five levels of edit are identified. These levels represent cumulative combinations of nine types of edit: (1) coordination, (2) policy, (3) integrity, (4) screening, (5) copy clarification, (6) Mechanical Style, (7) Language, and (9) substantive. The levels and types of edit, although developed for specific use with external reports at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, cover the general range of technical editing, especially as it applies to an in-house technical publications organization. Each type of edit is set forth in terms of groups of actions to be performed by the editor. The edit-level concept has enhanced understanding and communication among editors, authors, and publications managers concerning the specific editorial work to be done on each manuscript. It has also proved useful as a management tool for estimating and monitoring cost.

Vanburen, R.↗
NASA NTRS1980

The levels of edit, second edition

The editorial process is analyzed, and five levels of edit are identified. These levels represent cumulative combinations of nine types of edit: Coordination, Policy, Integrity, Screening, Copy Clarification, Format, Mechanical Style, Language, and Substantive. The levels and types of edit, although developed for specific use with external reports at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, cover the general range of technical editing, especially as it applies to an in-house technical publications organization. Each type of edit is set forth in terms of groups of actions to be performed by editor. The edit-level concept has enhanced understanding and communication among editors, authors, and publications managers concerning the specific editorial work to be done on each manuscript. It has also proved useful as a management tool for estimating and monitoring cost.

Vanburen, R.↗
NASA NTRS2000

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g., manufacturing and systems operation). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost, risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographical distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aerospace Systems Design in NASA's Collaborative Engineering Environment

Past designs of complex aerospace systems involved an environment consisting of collocated design teams with project managers, technical discipline experts, and other experts (e.g. manufacturing and systems operations). These experts were generally qualified only on the basis of past design experience and typically had access to a limited set of integrated analysis tools. These environments provided less than desirable design fidelity, often lead to the inability of assessing critical programmatic and technical issues (e.g., cost risk, technical impacts), and generally derived a design that was not necessarily optimized across the entire system. The continually changing, modern aerospace industry demands systems design processes that involve the best talent available (no matter where it resides) and access to the best design and analysis tools. A solution to these demands involves a design environment referred to as collaborative engineering. The collaborative engineering environment evolving within the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is a capability that enables the Agency's engineering infrastructure to interact and use the best state-of-the-art tools and data across organizational boundaries. Using collaborative engineering, the collocated team is replaced with an interactive team structure where the team members are geographically distributed and the best engineering talent can be applied to the design effort regardless of physical location. In addition, a more efficient, higher quality design product is delivered by bringing together the best engineering talent with more up-to-date design and analysis tools. These tools are focused on interactive, multidisciplinary design and analysis with emphasis on the complete life cycle of the system, and they include nontraditional, integrated tools for life cycle cost estimation and risk assessment. NASA has made substantial progress during the last two years in developing a collaborative engineering environment. NASA is planning to use this collaborative engineering infrastructure to provide better aerospace systems life cycle design and analysis, which includes analytical assessment of the technical and programmatic aspects of a system from "cradle to grave." This paper describes the recent NASA developments in the area of collaborative engineering, the benefits (realized and anticipated) of using the developed capability, and the long-term plans for implementing this capability across the Agency.

Monell, Donald W.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Constellation Program Life-cycle Cost Analysis Model (LCAM)

The Constellation Program (CxP) is NASA's effort to replace the Space Shuttle, return humans to the moon, and prepare for a human mission to Mars. The major elements of the Constellation Lunar sortie design reference mission architecture are shown. Unlike the Apollo Program of the 1960's, affordability is a major concern of United States policy makers and NASA management. To measure Constellation affordability, a total ownership cost life-cycle parametric cost estimating capability is required. This capability is being developed by the Constellation Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) Directorate, and is called the Lifecycle Cost Analysis Model (LCAM). The requirements for LCAM are based on the need to have a parametric estimating capability in order to do top-level program analysis, evaluate design alternatives, and explore options for future systems. By estimating the total cost of ownership within the context of the planned Constellation budget, LCAM can provide Program and NASA management with the cost data necessary to identify the most affordable alternatives. LCAM is also a key component of the Integrated Program Model (IPM), an SE&I developed capability that combines parametric sizing tools with cost, schedule, and risk models to perform program analysis. LCAM is used in the generation of cost estimates for system level trades and analyses. It draws upon the legacy of previous architecture level cost models, such as the Exploration Systems Mission Directorate (ESMD) Architecture Cost Model (ARCOM) developed for Simulation Based Acquisition (SBA), and ATLAS. LCAM is used to support requirements and design trade studies by calculating changes in cost relative to a baseline option cost. Estimated costs are generally low fidelity to accommodate available input data and available cost estimating relationships (CERs). LCAM is capable of interfacing with the Integrated Program Model to provide the cost estimating capability for that suite of tools.

Prince, Andy↗
NASA NTRS2007

A Project Management Approach to Using Simulation for Cost Estimation on Large, Complex Software Development Projects

It is very difficult for project managers to develop accurate cost and schedule estimates for large, complex software development projects. None of the approaches or tools available today can estimate the true cost of software with any high degree of accuracy early in a project. This paper provides an approach that utilizes a software development process simulation model that considers and conveys the level of uncertainty that exists when developing an initial estimate. A NASA project will be analyzed using simulation and data from the Software Engineering Laboratory to show the benefits of such an approach.

Mizell, Carolyn↗
NASA NTRS2004

CMC Property Variability and Life Prediction Methods for Turbine Engine Component Application

The ever increasing need for lower density and higher temperature-capable materials for aircraft engines has led to the development of Ceramic Matrix Composites (CMCs). Today's aircraft engines operate with >3000"F gas temperatures at the entrance to the turbine section, but unless heavily cooled, metallic components cannot operate above approx.2000 F. CMCs attempt to push component capability to nearly 2700 F with much less cooling, which can help improve engine efficiency and performance in terms of better fuel efficiency, higher thrust, and reduced emissions. The NASA Glenn Research Center has been researching the benefits of the SiC/SiC CMC for engine applications. A CMC is made up of a matrix material, fibers, and an interphase, which is a protective coating over the fibers. There are several methods or architectures in which the orientation of the fibers can be manipulated to achieve a particular material property objective as well as a particular component geometric shape and size. The required shape manipulation can be a limiting factor in the design and performance of the component if there is a lack of bending capability of the fiber as making the fiber more flexible typically sacrifices strength and other fiber properties. Various analysis codes are available (pcGINA, CEMCAN) that can predict the effective Young's Moduli, thermal conductivities, coefficients of thermal expansion (CTE), and various other properties of a CMC. There are also various analysis codes (NASAlife) that can be used to predict the life of CMCs under expected engine service conditions. The objective of this summer study is to utilize and optimize these codes for examining the tradeoffs between CMC properties and the complex fiber architectures that will be needed for several different component designs. For example, for the pcGINA code, there are six variations of architecture available. Depending on which architecture is analyzed, the user is able to specify the fiber tow size, tow spacing, weave parameter, and angle of orientation of fibers. By holding the volume fraction of the fibers constant, variations in tow spacing can be explored for different architectures. The CMC material properties are usually calculated assuming the component is manufactured perfectly. However, this is typically not the case so that a quantification of the material property variability is needed to account for processing and/or manufacturing imperfections. The overall inputs and outputs are presented using a regression software to rapidly investigate the tradeoffs associated with fiber architecture, material properties, and ultimately cost. This information is then propagated through lifing models and Larson-Miller data to assess timehemperature-dependent CMC strength. In addition, a first order cost estimation will be quantified from a current qualitative perspective. This cost estimation includes the manufacturing challenges, such as tooling, as well as the component cost for a particular application. Ultimately, a cost to performance ratio should be established that compares the effectiveness of CMCs to their current rival, nickel superalloys.

Cheplak, Matthew L.↗