Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “COST ESTIMATION”

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 253 records · Page 14
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Effects of radiobiological uncertainty on vehicle and habitat shield design for missions to the moon and Mars

Some consequences of uncertainties in radiobiological risk due to galactic cosmic ray (GCR) exposure are analyzed for their effect on engineering designs for the first lunar outpost and a mission to explore Mars. This report presents the plausible effect of biological uncertainties, the design changes necessary to reduce the uncertainties to acceptable levels for a safe mission, and an evaluation of the mission redesign cost. Estimates of the amount of shield mass required to compensate for radiobiological uncertainty are given for a simplified vehicle and habitat. The additional amount of shield mass required to provide a safety factor for uncertainty compensation is calculated from the expected response to GCR exposure. The amount of shield mass greatly increases in the estimated range of biological uncertainty, thus, escalating the estimated cost of the mission. The estimates are used as a quantitative example for the cost-effectiveness of research in radiation biophysics and radiation physics.

Wilson, John W.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Economic solution for low carbon process heat: A horizontal, compact high temperature gas reactor

In 2018, nuclear energy generated 55% of United States’ and one third of the world’s carbon free electricity, making nuclear energy a key tool in efforts to mitigate climate change before 2050. However, the current nuclear technology, light water reactors (LWRs), is limited to 300°C, so it cannot be used to decarbonize industrial process heat which accounts for 12% of US greenhouse gas emissions. High temperature gas reactors (HTGRs) can meet the high temperature demand with carbon free nuclear heat. The estimated cost of HTGRs, such as the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP), are even higher than state-of-the-art LWRs. In this paper, we expanded our nuclear cost estimating tool to include HTGRs and find that the NGNP overnight capital costs were 32% higher than an advanced LWR per unit capacity. The higher cost will naturally result in larger risk to cost overrun as recently experienced by larger LWRs in western nations. With a design-to-build mindset to minimize cost and construction risk, we introduce the horizontal, compact HTGR (HC-HTGR). The reactor core and steam generator are mounted horizontally on rails and in-line with one another, decreasing the size of the reactor building relative to the power capacity four times when compared to traditional HTGRs. The HC-HTGR reduced overnight civil structure costs by 42%, indirect costs by 38%, and total capital costs by 20% from NGNP. We discussed the required engineering of new systems for the HC-HTGR including vessel supports, the reactor cavity cooling system, and steam generator design. Finally, we estimated the fuel and operations costs of the HC-HTGR, and a survey of low-carbon industrial process heat technology showed the HC-HTGR can deliver a highly competitive levelized cost of heat in the range of $6.13–12.48/GJ.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
NASA NTRS1982

Proposed Reliability/Cost Model

New technique estimates cost of improvement in reliability for complex system. Model format/approach is dependent upon use of subsystem cost-estimating relationships (CER's) in devising cost-effective policy. Proposed methodology should have application in broad range of engineering management decisions.

Delionback, L. M.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Manufacturing Cost Analysis of Advanced Parabolic Trough Collector

The research team performed a detailed bottom-up manufacturing cost estimate for an advanced parabolic trough design - the Solar Dynamics Sunbeam-MT (Sunbeam Mid-Term). This includes all components for manufacturing and assembly in a manufacturing facility (e.g. space frame and arms), and the purchased parts (e.g. mirrors and receiver tubes). Estimates of the construction and assembly activities have been made to then determine an estimated installed cost. Prior analysis has already undertaken detailed bottom-up manufacturing, assembly, and construction analysis for the Ultimate Trough from schlaich bergermann partner (sbp), and this work updates the solar field cost estimates based on a similar aperture area as the SunBeam-MT. For this analysis, the Ultimate Trough is considered the commercial parabolic trough and the Sunbeam-MT as the advanced parabolic trough. For similarity, both the Sunbeam-MT and the Ultimate Trough have been modelled with a solar field with approximately 800,000 square meters (m2) in aperture area - the equivalent of a large CSP plant. The analysis has found a potential installed cost estimate of the Sunbeam-MT could be $120/m2 but must be built at scale to confirm this estimate. Compared to prior analysis, the commercial Ultimate Trough using U.S. conditions, has reduced in installed cost from $178/m2 to $152/m2. Both designs could be even cheaper with Chinese steel.

cost analysis↗
NASA NTRS1973

Seminar presentation on the economic evaluation of the space shuttle system

The proceedings of a seminar on the economic aspects of the space shuttle system are presented. Emphasis was placed on the problems of economic analysis of large scale public investments, the state of the art of cost estimation, the statistical data base for estimating costs of new technological systems, and the role of the main economic parameters affecting the results of the analyses. An explanation of the system components of a space program and the present choice of launch vehicles, spacecraft, and instruments was conducted.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Dangers of Parametrics

Building a parametric cost model is hard work. The data is noisy and often does not behave like we want it to. We need statistics to give us an indication of the goodness of our models, but; statistics can be manipulated and mislead. On top of all of that, our own very human biases can lead us astray; causing us to see patterns in the noise and draw false conclusions from the data. Yet, it is the data itself that is the foundation for making better cost estimates and cost models. I believe the mistake we often make is we believe that our models are representative of the data; that our models summarize the experiences, the knowledge, and the stories contained in the data. However, it is the opposite that is true. Our models are but imitations of reality. They give us trends, but not truth. The experiences, the knowledge, and the stories that we need in order to make good cost estimates is bound up in the data. You cannot separate good cost estimating from a knowledge of the historical data. One final thought. It is our attempts to make sense out of the randomness that leads us astray. In order to make progress as cost modelers and cost estimators, we must accept that there are real limitations on our ability to model the past and predict the future. I do not believe we should throw up our hands and say this is the best we can do. Rather, to see real improvement we must first recognize these limitations, avoid the easy but misleading solutions, and seek to find ways to better model the world we live in. I don't have any simple solutions. Perhaps the answers lie in better data or in a totally different approach to simulating how the world works. All I know is that we must do our best to speak truth to ourselves and our customers. Misleading ourselves and our customers will, in the end, result in an inability to have a positive impact on those we serve.

Prince, Frank A.↗
NASA NTRS2017

The Dangers of Parametrics

Building a parametric cost model is hard work. The data is noisy and often does not behave like we want it to. We need statistics to give us an indication of the goodness of our models, but; statistics can be manipulated and mislead. On top of all of that, our own very human biases can lead us astray; causing us to see patterns in the noise and draw false conclusions from the data. Yet, it is the data itself that is the foundation for making better cost estimates and cost models. I believe the mistake we often make is we believe that our models are representative of the data; that our models summarize the experiences, the knowledge, and the stories contained in the data. However, it is the opposite that is true. Our models are but imitations of reality. They give us trends, but not truth. The experiences, the knowledge, and the stories that we need in order to make good cost estimates is bound up in the data. You cannot separate good cost estimating from a knowledge of the historical data. One final thought. It is our attempts to make sense out of the randomness that leads us astray. In order to make progress as cost modelers and cost estimators, we must accept that there are real limitations on our ability to model the past and predict the future. I do not believe we should throw up our hands and say this is the best we can do. Rather, to see real improvement we must first recognize these limitations, avoid the easy but misleading solutions, and seek to find ways to better model the world we live in. I don't have any simple solutions. Perhaps the answers lie in better data or in a totally different approach to simulating how the world works. All I know is that we must do our best to speak truth to ourselves and our customers. Misleading ourselves and our customers will, in the end, result in an inability to have a positive impact on those we serve.

Prince, Frank A.↗
NASA NTRS1978

How much energy does energy cost?

Estimating the energy cost of producing and delivering an energy product involves the quantitative determination of all relevant energy flows and the aggregation of these flows into meaningful indices of system performance. Five emerging energy technologies are subjected to energy analysis. The energy delivered by each is substantially greater than the energy consumed during construction and lifelong operation of the system. Net energy analysis can provide interesting and perhaps useful information regarding specific technologies, but it does not necessarily provide additional information essential to the making of decisions regarding those technologies.

Devine, W. D., Jr.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Evaluation of the economic implications of varied pressure drawdown strategies generated using a real-time, rapid predictive, multi-fidelity model for unconventional oil and gas wells

Experience has suggested that pressure maintenance in hydraulically fractured reservoirs via lower, more sustained production drawdowns may offer improved cumulative recovery and overall resource extraction efficiency compared to more rapid drawdown approaches aimed at generating high initial production. However, given the inherent variability of oil and natural gas markets, operators pursue production strategies that maximize profitability over resource extraction efficiency. This study focuses on evaluating the implications of contrasting pressure drawdown strategies on the long-term production and resulting economics for a real, producing unconventional gas well in the Marcellus Shale of the Appalachian Basin using a techno-economic analysis approach. Our research combines elements of well-specific horizontal well design, production forecasting, equipment sizing and capital cost estimation, operating cost estimation, and revenue and tax calculations. Gas production forecast outlook scenarios were generated under varying pressure drawdowns using two approaches: 1) a novel physics-informed machine learning workflow and 2) traditional reservoir simulation. A discounted cash flow model was used to evaluate the resulting economic implications for each drawdown scenario—generating output for exploring the coupled effect of factors like the timing and volume of gas production, prevailing economic and market conditions for natural gas, and overall estimated ultimate recovery on profitability metrics such as internal rate of return and net present value. Results show that there is potential to maximize the cumulative gas produced in the specific case study well by employing a lower pressure drawdown. Conversely, the greatest profitability is achieved using rapid drawdown as signified by a small, specific subset of our outlook scenarios. On an averaging basis, we find that the combinations of highest cumulative producing and most profitable scenarios occur under lower drawdowns with long (>40 years) producing timeframes, but require higher relative gas price and lower discounting considerations. Further, the machine learning predictive outlooking capability proved effective for enabling rapid generation of a multitude of scenario forecasts. As a result, a variety of prominent example cases could be generated to strike the balance of greater productivity and economic return given their associated producing features and economic conditions when compared to similar producing scenarios—critical insight that offers improved decision support for unconventional oil and gas operations.

42 ENGINEERING↗
NASA NTRS2015

Underestimation of Project Costs

Large projects almost always exceed their budgets. Estimating cost is difficult and estimated costs are usually too low. Three different reasons are suggested: bad luck, overoptimism, and deliberate underestimation. Project management can usually point to project difficulty and complexity, technical uncertainty, stakeholder conflicts, scope changes, unforeseen events, and other not really unpredictable bad luck. Project planning is usually over-optimistic, so the likelihood and impact of bad luck is systematically underestimated. Project plans reflect optimism and hope for success in a supposedly unique new effort rather than rational expectations based on historical data. Past project problems are claimed to be irrelevant because "This time it's different." Some bad luck is inevitable and reasonable optimism is understandable, but deliberate deception must be condemned. In a competitive environment, project planners and advocates often deliberately underestimate costs to help gain project approval and funding. Project benefits, cost savings, and probability of success are exaggerated and key risks ignored. Project advocates have incentives to distort information and conceal difficulties from project approvers. One naively suggested cure is more openness, honesty, and group adherence to shared overall goals. A more realistic alternative is threatening overrun projects with cancellation. Neither approach seems to solve the problem. A better method to avoid the delusions of over-optimism and the deceptions of biased advocacy is to base the project cost estimate on the actual costs of a large group of similar projects. Over optimism and deception can continue beyond the planning phase and into project execution. Hard milestones based on verified tests and demonstrations can provide a reality check.

Cost estimation↗
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 NTRS2003

Dynamic cost risk estimation and budget misspecification

Cost risk for new technology development is estimated by explicit stochastic processes. Monte Carlo simulation is used to propagate technology development activity budget changes during the technology development cycle.

cost risk random walk Monte Carlo simulation princ↗