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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
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 NTRS2019

Blind Validation Study of Parametric Cost Estimation Tool SEER-H for NASA Space Missions

One of the primary parametric cost modeling tools used by NASA and the aerospace industry to estimate the development and production cost of future spacecraft hardware is SEER-H by Galorath. To date, no independent validation of this tool for cost estimation of space missions has been reported in the literature. In the present validation study, cost estimators used SEER-H to estimate the cost of twelve different past NASA science missions. The estimators were prevented from knowing the actual cost of the missions in an effort to minimize cognitive biases. The point estimates of SEER-H had an average error of 23%, median error of -0.3%, and a standard deviation of 43%. Nine of the twelve mission's actual costs fell within the 80% confidence interval of SEER's probabilistic estimates. Several factors independent of SEER that may have affected the accuracy of the results have been identified and are discussed; these include: uncertainty in the technical data used for the estimates, the methods used to estimate uncertainty in spacecraft component mass and numbers of prototypes, and the experience of the estimators.

SEER-H↗
NASA NTRS2011

Data Service Provider Cost Estimation Tool

The Data Service Provider Cost Estimation Tool (CET) and Comparables Database (CDB) package provides to NASA s Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) the ability to estimate the full range of year-by-year lifecycle cost estimates for the implementation and operation of data service providers required by ESE to support its science and applications programs. The CET can make estimates dealing with staffing costs, supplies, facility costs, network services, hardware and maintenance, commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software licenses, software development and sustaining engineering, and the changes in costs that result from changes in workload. Data Service Providers may be stand-alone or embedded in flight projects, field campaigns, research or applications projects, or other activities. The CET and CDB package employs a cost-estimation-by-analogy approach. It is based on a new, general data service provider reference model that provides a framework for construction of a database by describing existing data service providers that are analogs (or comparables) to planned, new ESE data service providers. The CET implements the staff effort and cost estimation algorithms that access the CDB and generates the lifecycle cost estimate for a new data services provider. This data creates a common basis for an ESE proposal evaluator for considering projected data service provider costs.

Fontaine, Kathy↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Instrument Cost/Schedule Model

NASA's Office of Independent Program and Cost Evaluation (IPCE) has established a number of initiatives to improve its cost and schedule estimating capabilities. 12One of these initiatives has resulted in the JPL developed NASA Instrument Cost Model. NICM is a cost and schedule estimator that contains: A system level cost estimation tool; a subsystem level cost estimation tool; a database of cost and technical parameters of over 140 previously flown remote sensing and in-situ instruments; a schedule estimator; a set of rules to estimate cost and schedule by life cycle phases (B/C/D); and a novel tool for developing joint probability distributions for cost and schedule risk (Joint Confidence Level (JCL)). This paper describes the development and use of NICM, including the data normalization processes, data mining methods (cluster analysis, principal components analysis, regression analysis and bootstrap cross validation), the estimating equations themselves and a demonstration of the NICM tool suite.

JCL↗
NASA NTRS2021

Online NASA Software Estimating Tools (ONSET): A Suite of Web-Based Cost Analysis Tools

This paper provides an overview of ONSET theOnline NASA Software Estimating Tools suite of web-basedcosts analysis tools. ONSET is comprised of the AnalogySoftware Cost Tool (ASCoT) [1], and the CubeSat Or MicrosatProbabilistic and Analogies Cost Tool (COMPACT) [2]. TheOnline NASA Space Estimation Tool (ONSET) has beendeveloped to provide a standardized platform for hosting webbasedNASA cost estimation tools on NASA ONCE (OneNASA Cost Engineering). It evolved from the BETA version ofASCoT (The NASA Analogy Software Cost Tool) which wasreleased in 2017 and was presented at the 2017 IEEEAerospace Conference. This first release of ONSET contains anew version of ASCoT as well as the first official release ofCOMPACT (CubeSat Or Microsat Probabilistic + AnalogiesCost Tool). In this paper we will provide an overview ofONSET, all its features and a high-level summary of bothASCoT and COMPACT. The heart of both tools arealgorithms for analogy-based estimation based on system levelinputs.

Johnson, James↗
NASA NTRS2018

Blind Study Validating Parametric Costing Tools PRICE TruePlanning and SEER-H for NASA Science Missions

Two of the primary parametric costing tools used to estimate the development and production cost of future spacecraft hardware are PRICE TruePlanning - Space Missions Catalog by PRICE Systems, and SEER-H by Galorath. These are standard tools used by NASA and industry to estimate the cost of new aerospace hardware. However, no independent verification of the accuracy of these tools is publicly available. Both PRICE Systems and Galorath have completed internal validation studies of their parametric cost estimating tools; however, they only provided the results of the studies and did not detail the exact methods used to perform the validation. In the present study, cost estimators used PRICE TruePlanning and SEER-H to estimate the cost of twelve different past NASA science missions. The estimators were prevented from knowing the actual cost of the missions in an effort to minimize cognitive biases. In the present study, SEER had an average error of 23%, median error of -0.3%, with a standard deviation of 43%. PRICE had an average error of 52%, median error of 50%, and standard deviation of 45%. There were several factors independent of PRICE and SEER which may have affected the accuracy of the results in the present study including: uncertainty in the technical data used for the estimates, the methods used to estimate uncertainty in spacecraft component mass and numbers of prototypes, and the experience of the estimators.

Paul D Friz↗
NASA NTRS2019

Blind Study Validating Parametric Costing Tools PRICE True Planning and SEER-H for NASA Science Missions

Two of the primary parametric costing tools used to estimate the development and production cost of future spacecraft hardware are PRICE True Planning - Space Missions Catalog by PRICE Systems, and SEER-H by Galorath. These are standard tools used by NASA and industry to estimate the cost of new aerospace hardware. However, no independent verification of the accuracy of these tools is publicly available. Both PRICE Systems and Galorath have completed internal validation studies of their parametric cost estimating tools; however, they only provided the results of the studies and did not detail the exact methods used to perform the validation. In the present study, cost estimators used PRICE True Planning and SEER-H to estimate the cost of twelve different past NASA science missions. The estimators were prevented from knowing the actual cost of the missions in an effort to minimize cognitive biases. In the present study, SEER had an average error of 23%, median error of -0.3%, with a standard deviation of 43%. PRICE had an average error of 52%, median error of 50%, and standard deviation of 45%. There were several factors independent of PRICE and SEER which may have affected the accuracy of the results in the present study including: uncertainty in the technical data used for the estimates, the methods used to estimate uncertainty in spacecraft component mass and numbers of prototypes, and the experience of the estimators.

Friz, Paul D.↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Survey of Cost Estimating Methodologies for Distributed Spacecraft Missions

Satellite constellations present unique capabilities and opportunities to Earth orbiting and near-Earth scientific and communications missions, but also present new challenges to cost estimators. An effective and adaptive cost model is essential to successful mission design and implementation, and as Distributed Spacecraft Missions (DSM) become more common, cost estimating tools must become more representative of these types of designs. Existing cost models often focus on a single spacecraft and require extensive design knowledge to produce high fidelity estimates. Previous research has examined the shortcomings of existing cost practices as they pertain to the early stages of mission formulation, for both individual satellites and small satellite constellations. Recommendations have been made for how to improve the cost models for individual satellites one-at-a-time, but much of the complexity in constellation and DSM cost modeling arises from constellation systems level considerations that have not yet been examined. This paper constitutes a survey of the current state-of-the-art in cost estimating techniques with recommendations for improvements to increase the fidelity of future constellation cost estimates. To enable our investigation, we have developed a cost estimating tool for constellation missions. The development of this tool has revealed three high-priority weaknesses within existing parametric cost estimating capabilities as they pertain to DSM architectures: design iteration, integration and test, and mission operations. Within this paper we offer illustrative examples of these discrepancies and make preliminary recommendations for addressing them. DSM and satellite constellation missions are shifting the paradigm of space-based remote sensing, showing promise in the realms of Earth science, planetary observation, and various heliophysical applications. To fully reap the benefits of DSM technology, accurate and relevant cost estimating capabilities must exist; this paper offers insights critical to the future development and implementation of DSM cost estimating tools.

0↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Survey of Cost Estimating Methodologies for Distributed Spacecraft Missions

Satellite constellations present unique capabilities and opportunities to Earth orbiting and near-Earth scientific and communications missions, but also present new challenges to cost estimators. An effective and adaptive cost model is essential to successful mission design and implementation, and as Distributed Spacecraft Missions (DSM) become more common, cost estimating tools must become more representative of these types of designs. Existing cost models often focus on a single spacecraft and require extensive design knowledge to produce high fidelity estimates. Previous research has examined the limitations of existing cost practices as they pertain to the early stages of mission formulation, for both individual satellites and small satellite constellations. Recommendations have been made for how to improve the cost models for individual satellites one-at-a-time, but much of the complexity in constellation and DSM cost modeling arises from constellation systems level considerations that have not yet been examined. This paper constitutes a survey of the current state-of-theart in cost estimating techniques with recommendations for improvements to increase the fidelity of future constellation cost estimates. To enable our investigation, we have developed a cost estimating tool for constellation missions. The development of this tool has revealed three high-priority shortcomings within existing parametric cost estimating capabilities as they pertain to DSM architectures: design iteration, integration and test, and mission operations. Within this paper we offer illustrative examples of these discrepancies and make preliminary recommendations for addressing them. DSM and satellite constellation missions are shifting the paradigm of space-based remote sensing, showing promise in the realms of Earth science, planetary observation, and various heliophysical applications. To fully reap the benefits of DSM technology, accurate and relevant cost estimating capabilities must exist; this paper offers insights critical to the future development and implementation of DSM cost estimating tools.

Foreman, Veronica L.↗
NASA NTRS2006

NASA Software Estimating Tool (N-SET)

The goals of this project are to: Develop an early lifecycle software cost estimation tool leveraging existing data and capabilities Collect additional software data from: a) Jet Propulsion Laboratory; b) Goddard Space Flight Center; and c) Marshall Space Flight Center. Analyze, normalize, evaluate, stratify, and validate data. Create a calibrated, validated, and documented tool initially using available data and subsequently using newly collected data.

cost estimating tools↗
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↗
NASA NTRS2007

N-Set: A NASA Research Project

This slide presentation reviews the research project named N-Set. The goal of this project is to create a user friendly tool for estimating the cost and size of software development. Using the historical experience which NASA has desire is to create a tool that will give an early Rough Order Magnitude (ROM) estimate of the cost and size of a software development task without using the lines of code as a primary input value.

software cost estimating tool↗
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 NTRS2005

The Effect of Infrastructure Sharing in Estimating Operations Cost of Future Space Transportation Systems

NASA and the aerospace industry are extremely serious about reducing the cost and improving the performance of launch vehicles both manned or unmanned. In the aerospace industry, sharing infrastructure for manufacturing more than one type spacecraft is becoming a trend to achieve economy of scale. An example is the Boeing Decatur facility where both Delta II and Delta IV launch vehicles are made. The author is not sure how Boeing estimates the costs of each spacecraft made in the same facility. Regardless of how a contractor estimates the cost, NASA in its popular cost estimating tool, NASA Air force Cost Modeling (NAFCOM) has to have a method built in to account for the effect of infrastructure sharing. Since there is no provision in the most recent version of NAFCOM2002 to take care of this, it has been found by the Engineering Cost Community at MSFC that the tool overestimates the manufacturing cost by as much as 30%. Therefore, the objective of this study is to develop a methodology to assess the impact of infrastructure sharing so that better operations cost estimates may be made.

Sundaram, Meenakshi↗
NASA NTRS2011

Pros, Cons, and Alternatives to Weight Based Cost Estimating

Many cost estimating tools use weight as a major parameter in projecting the cost. This is often combined with modifying factors such as complexity, technical maturity of design, environment of operation, etc. to increase the fidelity of the estimate. For a set of conceptual designs, all meeting the same requirements, increased weight can be a major driver in increased cost. However, once a design is fixed, increased weight generally decreases cost, while decreased weight generally increases cost - and the relationship is not linear. Alternative approaches to estimating cost without using weight (except perhaps for materials costs) have been attempted to try to produce a tool usable throughout the design process - from concept studies through development. This paper will address the pros and cons of using weight based models for cost estimating, using liquid rocket engines as the example. It will then examine approaches that minimize the imp~ct of weight based cost estimating. The Rocket Engine- Cost Model (RECM) is an attribute based model developed internally by Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne for NASA. RECM will be presented primarily to show a successful method to use design and programmatic parameters instead of weight to estimate both design and development costs and production costs. An operations model developed by KSC, the Launch and Landing Effects Ground Operations model (LLEGO), will also be discussed.

Joyner, Claude R.↗
NASA NTRS1995

Advanced transportation system studies technical area 2 (TA-2): Heavy lift launch vehicle development: Program Cost estimates - volume 3

The purpose of the TA-2 contract was to provide advanced launch vehicle concept definition and analysis to assist NASA in the identification of future launch vehicle requirements. Contracted analysis activities included vehicle sizing and performance analysis, subsystem concept definition, propulsion subsystem definition (foreign and domestic), ground operations and facilities analysis, and life cycle cost estimation. The basic period of performance of the TA-2 contract was from May 1992 through May 1993. No-cost extensions were exercised on the contract from June 1993 through July 1995. This document is part of the final report for the TA-2 contract. The final report consists of three volumes: Volume 1 is the Executive Summary, Volume 2 is Technical Results, and Volume 3 is Program Cost Estimates. The document-at-hand, Volume 3, provides a work breakdown structure dictionary, user's guide for the parametric life cycle cost estimation tool, and final report developed by ECON, Inc., under subcontract to Lockheed Martin on TA-2 for the analysis of heavy lift launch vehicle concepts.

McCurry, J. B.↗
NASA NTRS2011

NASA Tech Briefs, September 2011

Topics covered include: Fused Reality for Enhanced Flight Test Capabilities; Thermography to Inspect Insulation of Large Cryogenic Tanks; Crush Test Abuse Stand; Test Generator for MATLAB Simulations; Dynamic Monitoring of Cleanroom Fallout Using an Air Particle Counter; Enhancement to Non-Contacting Stress Measurement of Blade Vibration Frequency; Positively Verifying Mating of Previously Unverifiable Flight Connectors; Radiation-Tolerant Intelligent Memory Stack - RTIMS; Ultra-Low-Dropout Linear Regulator; Excitation of a Parallel Plate Waveguide by an Array of Rectangular Waveguides; FPGA for Power Control of MSL Avionics; UAVSAR Active Electronically Scanned Array; Lockout/Tagout (LOTO) Simulator; Silicon Carbide Mounts for Fabry-Perot Interferometers; Measuring the In-Process Figure, Final Prescription, and System Alignment of Large; Optics and Segmented Mirrors Using Lidar Metrology; Fiber-Reinforced Reactive Nano-Epoxy Composites; Polymerization Initiated at the Sidewalls of Carbon Nanotubes; Metal-Matrix/Hollow-Ceramic-Sphere Composites; Piezoelectrically Enhanced Photocathodes; Iridium-Doped Ruthenium Oxide Catalyst for Oxygen Evolution; Improved Mo-Re VPS Alloys for High-Temperature Uses; Data Service Provider Cost Estimation Tool; Hybrid Power Management-Based Vehicle Architecture; Force Limit System; Levitated Duct Fan (LDF) Aircraft Auxiliary Generator; Compact, Two-Sided Structural Cold Plate Configuration; AN Fitting Reconditioning Tool; Active Response Gravity Offload System; Method and Apparatus for Forming Nanodroplets; Rapid Detection of the Varicella Zoster Virus in Saliva; Improved Devices for Collecting Sweat for Chemical Analysis; Phase-Controlled Magnetic Mirror for Wavefront Correction; and Frame-Transfer Gating Raman Spectroscopy for Time-Resolved Multiscalar Combustion Diagnostics.

Source record↗