Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Life Cycle Analysis”

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 NTRS2006

An Integrated Approach to Life Cycle Analysis

Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is the evaluation of the impacts that design decisions have on a system and provides a framework for identifying and evaluating design benefits and burdens associated with the life cycles of space transportation systems from a "cradle-to-grave" approach. Sometimes called life cycle assessment, life cycle approach, or "cradle to grave analysis", it represents a rapidly emerging family of tools and techniques designed to be a decision support methodology and aid in the development of sustainable systems. The implementation of a Life Cycle Analysis can vary and may take many forms; from global system-level uncertainty-centered analysis to the assessment of individualized discriminatory metrics. This paper will focus on a proven LCA methodology developed by the Systems Analysis and Concepts Directorate (SACD) at NASA Langley Research Center to quantify and assess key LCA discriminatory metrics, in particular affordability, reliability, maintainability, and operability. This paper will address issues inherent in Life Cycle Analysis including direct impacts, such as system development cost and crew safety, as well as indirect impacts, which often take the form of coupled metrics (i.e., the cost of system unreliability). Since LCA deals with the analysis of space vehicle system conceptual designs, it is imperative to stress that the goal of LCA is not to arrive at the answer but, rather, to provide important inputs to a broader strategic planning process, allowing the managers to make risk-informed decisions, and increase the likelihood of meeting mission success criteria.

Chytka, T. M.↗
NASA NTRS2015

Advanced Launch Technology Life Cycle Analysis Using the Architectural Comparison Tool (ACT)

Life cycle technology impact comparisons for nanolauncher technology concepts were performed using an Affordability Comparison Tool (ACT) prototype. Examined are cost drivers and whether technology investments can dramatically affect the life cycle characteristics. Primary among the selected applications was the prospect of improving nanolauncher systems. As a result, findings and conclusions are documented for ways of creating more productive and affordable nanolauncher systems; e.g., an Express Lane-Flex Lane concept is forwarded, and the beneficial effect of incorporating advanced integrated avionics is explored. Also, a Functional Systems Breakdown Structure (F-SBS) was developed to derive consistent definitions of the flight and ground systems for both system performance and life cycle analysis. Further, a comprehensive catalog of ground segment functions was created.

Space Flight Architecture↗
NASA NTRS2004

"ATLAS" Advanced Technology Life-cycle Analysis System

Making good decisions concerning research and development portfolios-and concerning the best systems concepts to pursue - as early as possible in the life cycle of advanced technologies is a key goal of R&D management This goal depends upon the effective integration of information from a wide variety of sources as well as focused, high-level analyses intended to inform such decisions Life-cycle Analysis System (ATLAS) methodology and tool kit. ATLAS encompasses a wide range of methods and tools. A key foundation for ATLAS is the NASA-created Technology Readiness. The toolkit is largely spreadsheet based (as of August 2003). This product is being funded by the Human and Robotics The presentation provides a summary of the Advanced Technology Level (TRL) systems Technology Program Office, Office of Exploration Systems, NASA Headquarters, Washington D.C. and is being integrated by Dan O Neil of the Advanced Projects Office, NASA/MSFC, Huntsville, AL

Lollar, Louis F.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Life Cycle Analysis of Dedicated Nano-Launch Technologies

Recent technology advancements have enabled the development of small cheap satellites that can perform useful functions in the space environment. Currently, the only low cost option for getting these payloads into orbit is through ride share programs. As a result, these launch opportunities await primary payload launches and a backlog exists. An alternative option would be dedicated nano-launch systems built and operated to provide more flexible launch services, higher availability, and affordable prices. The potential customer base that would drive requirements or support a business case includes commercial, academia, civil government and defense. Further, NASA technology investments could enable these alternative game changing options.With this context, in 2013 the Game Changing Development (GCD) program funded a NASA team to investigate the feasibility of dedicated nano-satellite launch systems with a recurring cost of less than $2 million per launch for a 5 kg payload to low Earth orbit. The team products would include potential concepts, technologies and factors for enabling the ambitious cost goal, exploring the nature of the goal itself, and informing the GCD program technology investment decision making process. This paper provides an overview of the life cycle analysis effort that was conducted in 2013 by an inter-center NASA team. This effort included the development of reference nano-launch system concepts, developing analysis processes and models, establishing a basis for cost estimates (development, manufacturing and launch) suitable to the scale of the systems, and especially, understanding the relationship of potential game changing technologies to life cycle costs, as well as other factors, such as flights per year.

modeling↗
NASA NTRS2014

Life Cycle Analysis of Dedicated Nano-Launch Technologies

Recent technology advancements have enabled the development of small cheap satellites that can perform useful functions in the space environment. Currently, the only low cost option for getting these payloads into orbit is through ride share programs - small satellites awaiting the launch of a larger satellite, and then riding along on the same launcher. As a result, these small satellite customers await primary payload launches and a backlog exists. An alternative option would be dedicated nano-launch systems built and operated to provide more flexible launch services, higher availability, and affordable prices. The potential customer base that would drive requirements or support a business case includes commercial, academia, civil government and defense. Further, NASA technology investments could enable these alternative game changing options. With this context, in 2013 the Game Changing Development (GCD) program funded a NASA team to investigate the feasibility of dedicated nano-satellite launch systems with a recurring cost of less than $2 million per launch for a 5 kg payload to low Earth orbit. The team products would include potential concepts, technologies and factors for enabling the ambitious cost goal, exploring the nature of the goal itself, and informing the GCD program technology investment decision making process. This paper provides an overview of the life cycle analysis effort that was conducted in 2013 by an inter-center NASA team. This effort included the development of reference nano-launch system concepts, developing analysis processes and models, establishing a basis for cost estimates (development, manufacturing and launch) suitable to the scale of the systems, and especially, understanding the relationship of potential game changing technologies to life cycle costs, as well as other factors, such as flights per year.

nanolaunch↗
NASA NTRS1978

Terrestrial central station array life-cycle analysis support study

Plant elements evaluated included designs for module, panel and array structures, as well as balance-of-plant systems. Installation and maintenance procedures and the impact of site environment were also evaluated. In terms of the cost of energy produced, the horizontal array configuration was found to be less expensive than the tandem array at latitudes less than 40 deg. Both of these configurations are less expensive than the rack design. However, the costs of energy for all three configurations are within approximately ?10 percent of each other. For flat plate panels, the seasonally adjusted and tracking array configurations are not economically attractive when compared to the three other designs. Balance-of-plant costs are approximately equal to (goal) module costs. The array structures and foundations are the most expensive items in the balance-of-plant costs.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2009

Refractory Materials for Flame Deflector Protection System Corrosion Control: Flame Deflector Protection System Life Cycle Cost Analysis Report

A 20-year life cycle cost analysis was performed to compare the operational life cycle cost, processing/turnaround timelines, and operations manpower inspection/repair/refurbishment requirements for corrosion protection of the Kennedy Space Center launch pad flame deflector associated with the existing cast-in-place materials and a newer advanced refractory ceramic material. The analysis compared the estimated costs of(1) continuing to use of the current refractory material without any changes; (2) completely reconstructing the flame trench using the current refractory material; and (3) completely reconstructing the flame trench with a new high-performance refractory material. Cost estimates were based on an analysis of the amount of damage that occurs after each launch and an estimate of the average repair cost. Alternative 3 was found to save $32M compared to alternative 1 and $17M compared to alternative 2 over a 20-year life cycle.

Calle, Luz Marina↗
NASA NTRS1980

Life-cycle cost analysis task summary

The DSN life cycle cost (LCC) analysis methodology was completed. The LCC analysis methodology goals and objectives are summarized, as well as the issues covered by the methodology, its expected use, and its long range implications.

Mckenzie, M.↗
NASA NTRS1978

The role of interest and inflation rates in life-cycle cost analysis

The effect of projected interest and inflation rates on life cycle cost calculations is discussed and a method is proposed for making such calculations which replaces these rates by a single parameter. Besides simplifying the analysis, the method clarifies the roles of these rates. An analysis of historical interest and inflation rates from 1950 to 1976 shows that the proposed method can be expected to yield very good projections of life cycle cost even if the rates themselves fluctuate considerably.

Eisenberger, I.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Life prediction of expulsion bladders through fatigue test and fold strain analysis

Cycle life data are presented in terms of true maximum strain for four metals, two plastics, and two elastomers. The Coffin-Manson fatigue theory was applied for metals and plastics, and cut-growth fatigue theory for elastomers. The data are based on measurements made at room and elevated temperatures. It was found that double folds give rise to far severer folding strains than do simple folds. It was also found that, except for the elastomers, all the bladder materials develop surface cracks due to double folds after only one cycle. The findings indicate that metals, which are bets for premeation resistance, are worst for fatigue resistance, and vice versa for elastomers. The intermediate plastics were found to be unsatisfactory for both permeation and fatigue resistance for missions of extended duration.

Chu, H. N.↗
NASA NTRS1982

Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Shuttle-Derived Launch Vehicles, Volume 1

The design, performance, and programmatic definition of shuttle derived launch vehicles (SDLV) established by two different contractors were assessed and the relative life cycle costs of space transportation systems using the shuttle alone were compared with costs for a mix of shuttles and SDLV's. The ground rules and assumptions used in the evaluation are summarized and the work breakdown structure is included. Approaches used in deriving SDLV costs, including calibration factors and historical data are described. Both SDLV cost estimates and SDLV/STS cost comparisons are summarized. Standard formats are used to report comprehensive SDLV life cycle estimates. Hardware cost estimates (below subsystem level) obtained using the RCA PRICE 84 cost model are included along with other supporting data.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

Altair Lander Life Support: Design Analysis Cycles 4 and 5

Life support systems are a critical part of human exploration beyond low earth orbit. NASA s Altair Lunar Lander team is pursuing efficient solutions to the technical challenges of human spaceflight. Life support design efforts up through Design Analysis Cycle (DAC) 4 focused on finding lightweight and reliable solutions for the Sortie and Outpost missions within the Constellation Program. In DAC-4 and later follow on work, changes were made to add functionality for new requirements accepted by the Altair project, and to update the design as knowledge about certain issues or hardware matured. In DAC-5, the Altair project began to consider mission architectures outside the Constellation baseline. Selecting the optimal life support system design is very sensitive to mission duration. When the mission goals and architecture change several trade studies must be conducted to determine the appropriate design. Finally, several areas of work developed through the Altair project may be applicable to other vehicle concepts for microgravity missions. Maturing the Altair life support system related analysis, design, and requirements can provide important information for developers of a wide range of other human vehicles.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2011

Altair Lander Life Support: Design Analysis Cycles 4 and 5

Life support systems are a critical part of human exploration beyond low earth orbit. NASA s Altair Lunar Lander team is pursuing efficient solutions to the technical challenges of human spaceflight. Life support design efforts up through Design Analysis Cycle (DAC) 4 focused on finding lightweight and reliable solutions for the Sortie and Outpost missions within the Constellation Program. In DAC-4 and later follow on work, changes were made to add functionality for new requirements accepted by the Altair project, and to update the design as knowledge about certain issues or hardware matured. In DAC-5, the Altair project began to consider mission architectures outside the Constellation baseline. Selecting the optimal life support system design is very sensitive to mission duration. When the mission goals and architecture change several trade studies must be conducted to determine the appropriate design. Finally, several areas of work developed through the Altair project may be applicable to other vehicle concepts for microgravity missions. Maturing the Altair life support system related analysis, design, and requirements can provide important information for developers of a wide range of other human vehicles.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2010

Altair Lander Life Support: Requirements Analysis Cycles 1 and 2

Life support systems are a critical part of human exploration beyond low earth orbit. NASA's Altair Lunar Lander has unique missions to perform and will need a unique life support system to complete them. Initial work demonstrated a feasible minimally -functional Lander design. This work was completed in Design Analysis Cycles (DAC) 1, 2, and 3 were reported in a previous paper'. On October 21, 2008, the Altair project completed the Mission Concept Review (MCR), moving the project into Phase A. In Phase A activities, the project is preparing for the System Requirements Review (SRR). Altair has conducted two Requirements Analysis Cycles (RACs) to begin this work. During this time, the life support team must examine the Altair mission concepts, Constellation Program level requirements, and interfaces with other vehicles and spacesuits to derive the right set of requirements for the new vehicle. The minimum functionality design meets some of these requirements already and can be easily adapted to meet others. But Altair must identify which will be more costly in mass, power, or other resources to meet. These especially costly requirements must be analyzed carefully to be sure they are truly necessary, and are the best way of explaining and meeting the true need. If they are necessary and clear, they become important mass threats to track at the vehicle level. If they are not clear or do not seem necessary to all stakeholders, Altair must work to redefine them or push back on the requirements writers. Additionally, the life support team is evaluating new technologies to see if they are more effective than the existing baseline design at performing necessary functions in Altair's life support system.

Anderson, Molly↗
NASA NTRS2009

Altair Lander Life Support: Requirement Analysis Cycles 1 and 2

Life support systems are a critical part of human exploration beyond low earth orbit. NASA s Altair Lunar Lander has unique missions to perform and will need a unique life support system to complete them. Initial work demonstrated a feasible minimally-functional Lander design. This work was completed in Design Analysis Cycles (DAC) 1, 2, and 3 were reported in a previous paper. On October 21, 2008, the Altair project completed the Mission Concept Review (MCR), moving the project into Phase A. In Phase A activities, the project is preparing for the System Requirements Review (SRR). Altair has conducted two Requirements Analysis Cycles (RACs) to begin this work. During this time, the life support team must examine the Altair mission concepts, Constellation Program level requirements, and interfaces with other vehicles and spacesuits to derive the right set of requirements for the new vehicle. The minimum functionality design meets some of these requirements already and can be easily adapted to meet others. But Altair must identify which will be more costly in mass, power, or other resources to meet. These especially costly requirements must be analyzed carefully to be sure they are truly necessary, and are the best way of explaining and meeting the true need. If they are necessary and clear, they become important mass threats to track at the vehicle level. If they are not clear or do not seem necessary to all stakeholders, Altair must work to redefine them or push back on the requirements writers. Additionally, the life support team is evaluating new technologies to see if they are more effective than the existing baseline design at performing necessary functions in Altair s life support system.

Anderson, Molly↗