Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “cost estimates”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2000

Improving the Discipline of Cost Estimation and Analysis

The need to improve the quality and accuracy of cost estimates of proposed new aerospace systems has been widely recognized. The industry has done the best job of maintaining related capability with improvements in estimation methods and giving appropriate priority to the hiring and training of qualified analysts. Some parts of Government, and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in particular, continue to need major improvements in this area. Recently, NASA recognized that its cost estimation and analysis capabilities had eroded to the point that the ability to provide timely, reliable estimates was impacting the confidence in planning man), program activities. As a result, this year the Agency established a lead role for cost estimation and analysis. The Independent Program Assessment Office located at the Langley Research Center was given this responsibility.

Piland, William M.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Solar power satellite cost estimate

The solar power configuration costed is the 5 GW silicon solar cell reference system. The subsystems identified by work breakdown structure elements to the lowest level for which cost information was generated. This breakdown divides into five sections: the satellite, construction, transportation, the ground receiving station and maintenance. For each work breakdown structure element, a definition, design description and cost estimate were included. An effort was made to include for each element a reference that more thoroughly describes the element and the method of costing used. All costs are in 1977 dollars.

Harron, R. J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

Software for Estimating Costs of Testing Rocket Engines

A high-level parametric mathematical model for estimating the costs of testing rocket engines and components at Stennis Space Center has been implemented as a Microsoft Excel program that generates multiple spreadsheets. The model and the program are both denoted, simply, the Cost Estimating Model (CEM). The inputs to the CEM are the parameters that describe particular tests, including test types (component or engine test), numbers and duration of tests, thrust levels, and other parameters. The CEM estimates anticipated total project costs for a specific test. Estimates are broken down into testing categories based on a work-breakdown structure and a cost-element structure. A notable historical assumption incorporated into the CEM is that total labor times depend mainly on thrust levels. As a result of a recent modification of the CEM to increase the accuracy of predicted labor times, the dependence of labor time on thrust level is now embodied in third- and fourth-order polynomials.

Hines, Merion M.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Software for Estimating Costs of Testing Rocket Engines

A high-level parametric mathematical model for estimating the costs of testing rocket engines and components at Stennis Space Center has been implemented as a Microsoft Excel program that generates multiple spreadsheets. The model and the program are both denoted, simply, the Cost Estimating Model (CEM). The inputs to the CEM are the parameters that describe particular tests, including test types (component or engine test), numbers and duration of tests, thrust levels, and other parameters. The CEM estimates anticipated total project costs for a specific test. Estimates are broken down into testing categories based on a work-breakdown structure and a cost-element structure. A notable historical assumption incorporated into the CEM is that total labor times depend mainly on thrust levels. As a result of a recent modification of the CEM to increase the accuracy of predicted labor times, the dependence of labor time on thrust level is now embodied in third- and fourth-order polynomials.

Hines, Merlon M.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Software for Estimating Costs of Testing Rocket Engines

A high-level parametric mathematical model for estimating the costs of testing rocket engines and components at Stennis Space Center has been implemented as a Microsoft Excel program that generates multiple spreadsheets. The model and the program are both denoted, simply, the Cost Estimating Model (CEM). The inputs to the CEM are the parameters that describe particular tests, including test types (component or engine test), numbers and duration of tests, thrust levels, and other parameters. The CEM estimates anticipated total project costs for a specific test. Estimates are broken down into testing categories based on a work-breakdown structure and a cost-element structure. A notable historical assumption incorporated into the CEM is that total labor times depend mainly on thrust levels. As a result of a recent modification of the CEM to increase the accuracy of predicted labor times, the dependence of labor time on thrust level is now embodied in third- and fourth-order polynomials.

Hines, Merlon M.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Deep space network software cost estimation model

A parametric software cost estimation model prepared for Deep Space Network (DSN) Data Systems implementation tasks is presented. The resource estimation model incorporates principles and data from a number of existing models. The model calibrates task magnitude and difficulty, development environment, and software technology effects through prompted responses to a set of approximately 50 questions. Parameters in the model are adjusted to fit DSN software life cycle statistics. The estimation model output scales a standard DSN Work Breakdown Structure skeleton, which is then input into a PERT/CPM system, producing a detailed schedule and resource budget for the project being planned.

Tausworthe, R. C.↗
NASA NTRS1981

Deep space network software cost estimation model

A parametric software cost estimation model prepared for Jet PRopulsion Laboratory (JPL) Deep Space Network (DSN) Data System implementation tasks is described. The resource estimation mdel modifies and combines a number of existing models. The model calibrates the task magnitude and difficulty, development environment, and software technology effects through prompted responses to a set of approximately 50 questions. Parameters in the model are adjusted to fit JPL software life-cycle statistics.

Tausworthe, R. C.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Software cost/resource modeling: Deep space network software cost estimation model

A parametric software cost estimation model prepared for JPL deep space network (DSN) data systems implementation tasks is presented. The resource estimation model incorporates principles and data from a number of existing models, such as those of the General Research Corporation, Doty Associates, IBM (Walston-Felix), Rome Air Force Development Center, University of Maryland, and Rayleigh-Norden-Putnam. The model calibrates task magnitude and difficulty, development environment, and software technology effects through prompted responses to a set of approximately 50 questions. Parameters in the model are adjusted to fit JPL software lifecycle statistics. The estimation model output scales a standard DSN work breakdown structure skeleton, which is then input to a PERT/CPM system, producing a detailed schedule and resource budget for the project being planned.

Tausworthe, R. J.↗
NASA NTRS2006

Software Development Cost Estimation Executive Summary

Identify simple fully validated cost models that provide estimation uncertainty with cost estimate. Based on COCOMO variable set. Use machine learning techniques to determine: a) Minimum number of cost drivers required for NASA domain based cost models; b) Minimum number of data records required and c) Estimation Uncertainty. Build a repository of software cost estimation information. Coordinating tool development and data collection with: a) Tasks funded by PA&E Cost Analysis; b) IV&V Effort Estimation Task and c) NASA SEPG activities.

data mining↗
NASA NTRS1990

Systems engineering and integration: Cost estimation and benefits analysis

Space Transportation Avionics hardware and software cost has traditionally been estimated in Phase A and B using cost techniques which predict cost as a function of various cost predictive variables such as weight, lines of code, functions to be performed, quantities of test hardware, quantities of flight hardware, design and development heritage, complexity, etc. The output of such analyses has been life cycle costs, economic benefits and related data. The major objectives of Cost Estimation and Benefits analysis are twofold: (1) to play a role in the evaluation of potential new space transportation avionics technologies, and (2) to benefit from emerging technological innovations. Both aspects of cost estimation and technology are discussed here. The role of cost analysis in the evaluation of potential technologies should be one of offering additional quantitative and qualitative information to aid decision-making. The cost analyses process needs to be fully integrated into the design process in such a way that cost trades, optimizations and sensitivities are understood. Current hardware cost models tend to primarily use weights, functional specifications, quantities, design heritage and complexity as metrics to predict cost. Software models mostly use functionality, volume of code, heritage and complexity as cost descriptive variables. Basic research needs to be initiated to develop metrics more responsive to the trades which are required for future launch vehicle avionics systems. These would include cost estimating capabilities that are sensitive to technological innovations such as improved materials and fabrication processes, computer aided design and manufacturing, self checkout and many others. In addition to basic cost estimating improvements, the process must be sensitive to the fact that no cost estimate can be quoted without also quoting a confidence associated with the estimate. In order to achieve this, better cost risk evaluation techniques are needed as well as improved usage of risk data by decision-makers. More and better ways to display and communicate cost and cost risk to management are required.

Dean, ED↗
NASA NTRS2022

Bayesian Rules of Thumb: Robust Uncertainty Quantification in Early Project Cost Estimation

Systems engineers often make use of cost Rules ofThumb in order to estimate cost during early phases of projectformulation. These Rules of Thumb typically take the form ofa sequence of percentages over which a total cost is allocatedacross NASA WBS elements. Rules of Thumb can then be usedto extrapolate cost from one or more known WBS elements tothe remaining unknown WBS elements, assisting early projectformulation architecture studies (such as those in JPL’s Team Xand A Team).A number of issues can arise when generating and using costRules of Thumb. For example, many records of project costsconsist of incomplete data. Typical methods of dealing withincomplete cost allocation data include (a) ignoring missionswith incomplete data, or (b) taking averages of the non-zero percentagesacross missions, but both of these methods can result inbiased estimates if the existence of incomplete data correlateswith total mission cost or any particular WBS element. Anothercommon example is cost reported in one or more incorrect WBSelements. This is especially prevalent in smaller missions whereit is more common for engineers to perform tasks that fall underthe purview of multiple WBS elements.Furthermore, a Rule of Thumb estimate is typically reported asa point estimate; there is no reported uncertainty around thepercentages used to generate an allocation. Even in the rarecase in which confidence intervals around mean percentages areprovided, there may be positive or negative correlations betweenWBS elements which can skew estimates.Here we attempt to address these problems by formulatingprobabilistic Rules of Thumb in which a distribution of allocationschemes, rather than a single allocation scheme, is generated.We use a bootstrap imputation method to simultaneouslyaccount for uncertainty in the missing data while using allavailable information contained in the dataset. The imputeddatasets are then input into a multivariate Bayesian modelwhich accounts for correlations between WBS elements andproperly accounts for uncertainty in the final Rule of Thumbpercentages and predictions. We describe the mathematicalmodel and provides snippets of R code utilizing the brms(Bayesian Regression Models using Stan) package. To illustratethis model, we generate a Bayesian Level 2 WBS Cost Rule ofThumb for MIDEX (Medium-Class Explorers) missions withdata extracted from NASA’s CADRe. We then compare thismethod’s performance with the classical Rule of Thumb method.

Hooke, Melissa A↗
NASA NTRS1979

Application of parametric weight and cost estimating relationships to future transport aircraft

A model comprised of system level weight and cost estimating relationships for transport aircraft is presented. In order to determine the production cost of future aircraft its weight is first estimated based on performance parameters, and then the cost is estimated as a function of weight. For initial evaluation CERs were applied to actual system weights of six aircraft (3 military and 3 commercial) with mean empty weights ranging from 30,000 to 300,000 lb. The resulting cost estimates were compared with actual costs. The average absolute error was only 4.3%. Then the model was applied to five aircraft still in the design phase (Boeing 757, 767 and 777, and BAC HS146-100 and HS146-200). While the estimates for the 757 and 767 are within 2 to 3 percent of their assumed break-even costs, it is recognized that these are very sensitive to the validity of the estimated weights, inflation factor, the amount assumed for nonrecurring costs, etc., and it is suggested that the model may be used in conjunction with other information such as RDT&E cost estimates and market forecasts. The model will help NASA evaluate new technologies and production costs of future aircraft.

Beltramo, M. N.↗
NASA NTRS1980

Coal gasification systems engineering and analysis. Appendix E: Cost estimation and economic evaluation methodology

The cost estimation and economic evaluation methodologies presented are consistent with industry practice for assessing capital investment requirements and operating costs of coal conversion systems. All values stated are based on January, 1980 dollars with appropriate recognition of the time value of money. Evaluation of project economic feasibility can be considered a two step process (subject to considerable refinement). First, the costs of the project must be quantified and second, the price at which the product can be manufacturd must be determined. These two major categories are discussed. The summary of methodology is divided into five parts: (1) systems costs, (2)instant plant costs, (3) annual operating costs, (4) escalation and discounting process, and (5) product pricing.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2004

Comparing NASA and ESA Cost Estimating Methods for Human Missions to Mars

To compare working methodologies between the cost engineering functions in NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) and ESA European Space Research and Technology Centre (ESTEC), as well as to set-up cost engineering capabilities for future manned Mars projects and other studies which involve similar subsystem technologies in MSFC and ESTEC, a demonstration cost estimate exercise was organized. This exercise was a direct way of enhancing not only cooperation between agencies but also both agencies commitment to credible cost analyses. Cost engineers in MSFC and ESTEC independently prepared life-cycle cost estimates for a reference human Mars project and subsequently compared the results and estimate methods in detail. As a non-sensitive, public domain reference case for human Mars projects, the Mars Direct concept was chosen. In this paper the results of the exercise are shown; the differences and similarities in estimate methodologies, philosophies, and databases between MSFC and ESTEC, as well as the estimate results for the Mars Direct concept. The most significant differences are explained and possible estimate improvements identified. In addition, the Mars Direct plan and the extensive cost breakdown structure jointly set-up by MSFC and ESTEC for this concept are presented. It was found that NASA applied estimate models mainly based on historic Apollo and Space Shuttle cost data, taking into account the changes in technology since then. ESA used models mostly based on European satellite and launcher cost data, taking into account the higher equipment and testing standards for human space flight. Most of NASA's and ESA s estimates for the Mars Direct case are comparable, but there are some important, consistent differences in the estimates for: 1) Large Structures and Thermal Control subsystems; 2) System Level Management, Engineering, Product Assurance and Assembly, Integration and Test/Verification activities; 3) Mission Control; 4) Space Agency Program Level activities.

Hunt, Charles D.↗
NASA NTRS1973

Cost estimation for unmanned lunar and planetary programs

A basic model is presented for estimating the cost of unmanned lunar and planetary programs. Cost data were collected and analyzed for eight lunar and planetary programs. Total cost was separated into the following components: labor, overhead, materials, and technical support. The study determined that direct labor cost of unmanned lunar and planetary programs comprises 30 percent of the total program cost. Twelve program categories were defined for modeling: six spacecraft subsystem categories (science, structure, propulsion, electrical power, communications, and guidance and integration, test and quality assurance, launch and flight operations, ground equipment, systems analysis and engineering, and program management). An analysis showed that on a percentage basis, direct labor cost and direct labor manhours compare on a one-to-one ratio. Therefore, direct labor hours is used as the parameter for predicting cost, with the advantage of eliminating the effect of inflation on the analysis.

Dunkin, J. H.↗