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 163 records · Page 9
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1989

Cost estimates for removal of orbital debris

While there are currently no active measures for the removal of nonfunctional satellites or spent rocket stages from earth orbit, it has been deemed prudent to begin to identify and economically evaluate potential approaches for such orbital decluttering. The methods presently considered encompass retrieval with an OMV, forcible deorbiting via attached propulsive devices, and deorbiting via passive, drag-augmentation devices; the increases in payload-delivery costs they represent are respectively $15-20 million/object, $7.8 million/vehicle, and $5.5-15.5 million/unit. OMV removal appears the least economically feasible method.

Petro, Andrew↗
NASA NTRS1972

Nuclear electric propulsion mission engineering study development program and costs estimates, Phase 2 review

The results are presented of the second six-month performance period of the Nuclear Electric Propulsion Mission Engineering Study. A brief overview of the program, identifying the study objectives and approach, and a discussion of the program status and schedule are presented. The program results are reviewed and key conclusions to date are summarized. Planned effort for the remainder of the program is reviewed.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1976

Payload specialist station study. Volume 3: Program study cost estimates. Part 1: Work breakdown structure

The work breakdown structure (WBS) for the Payload Specialist Station (PSS) is presented. The WBS is divided into two elements--PSS contractor and mission unique requirements. In accordance with the study ground rules, it is assumed that a single contractor, hereafter referred to as PSS Contractor will perform the following: (1) provide C and D hardware (MFDS and elements of MMSE), except for GFE; (2) identify software requirements; (3) provide GSE and ground test software; and (4) perform systems engineering and integration in support of the Aft Flight Deck (AFD) C and D concept. The PSS Contractor WBS element encompasses a core or standardized PSS concept. Payload peculiar C and D requirements identified by users will originate as a part of the WBS element mission unique requirements; these requirements will be provided to the PSS Contractor for implementation.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1979

DOE/NASA SIMS Prototype Solar System, no. 4. Part 1: Market analysis. Part 2: Modular manufacturing cost estimate

The findings of the IIT Research Institute (IITRI) market study of the SIMS Prototype System 4, a hot water (DHW) system are documented. The feasibility of prepackaging currently available solar heating components into modular subsystems for site assembly is addressed. A documented design and installation procedure and a performance test report were prepared. The potential markets and applications for this particular system in the nonfederal market are profiled by assessing the needs and requirements of potential users and specifiers, by characterizing the nature of the market and the competitive environment, by identifying the barriers to commercial acceptance, and by estimating the size of the potential market.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

Space transfer vehicle concepts and requirements study. Volume 3: Program cost estimates. Book 2: WBS and dictionary

This document describes the products and services to be developed, tested, produced, and operated for the Space Transfer Vehicle (STV) Program. The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and WBS Dictionary are program management tools used to catalog, account by task, and summarize work packages of a space system program. The products or services to be delivered or accomplished during the STV C/D phase are the primary focus of this work breakdown structure document.

Peffley, A. F.↗
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 NTRS2017

Heuristic Area Cost Estimation for Observational Coverage Schedulers

This paper presents a comparison of heuris- tics used to estimate the amount of time it would take for a spacecraft to image an area using Boustrophedon decomposition (Choset and Pignon 1998). Machine learning tech- niques are used to characterize algorithmic performance of coverage algorithms. It is shown that an ordinary least-squares linear model is among the most accurate in a set of constant and linear order regression models both in terms of memory consumption and schedule duration. These are demonstrated using the ASPEN planning system (Fukunaga et al. 1997) on the Eagle Eye domain.

Knight, Russell↗