Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool - (MOCET) 2020/2021
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Mission Operations Cost
Estimation Tool
(MOCET) 2020/2021
Updates
Marc Hayhurst, Brian Wood
The Aerospace Corporation
Cindy Daniels, Lissa Jordin, Washito Sasamoto, Waldo Rodriguez
NASA Langley Research Center
Science Office for Mission Assessments (SOMA)
April 14, 2021
© 2021 The Aerospace Corporation
Aerospace acknowledges NASA’s sponsorship under Contract NNL11AA01B Task Order 80LARC18F0021
Topics
• MOCET Overview
• Mission Data Updates
• Reserves Estimation
• Level 2 WBS Investigation
• ISS and Extended Missions
• User Community
• Conclusion
2
MOCET Overview
• The Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET)
– A capability for Phase E estimation jointly developed by The Aerospace Corporation and NASA
Science Office for Mission Assessments (SOMA)
– Based on actual costs of historical missions with emphasis on competed missions
– Constructed by breaking the mission operations cost into the various phases
– Has few subjective inputs
– Estimates total Phase E mission cost
– Implemented entirely in Excel and requires no additional software or tools
– Also includes a user manual which provides additional instruction and background
Download from ONCE Model Portal
https://oncedata.hq.nasa.gov
Available external to NASA via
Mars 2034 Rover
https://software.nasa.gov
Mission Schedule
Mar-34 Oct-34 Apr-35 Nov-35 May-36 Dec-36 Jun-37
Cruise
For more information:
Approach/EDL
Email: MOCET@aero.org
First Landed Month
Landed Prime Operations
3
Mission Data Updates
Mission/CER Type Program Missions
Planetary Discovery MESSENGER, Stardust, Deep Impact, GRAIL, NEAR, Dawn
Mars Scout Phoenix
Robotic Lunar Exploration LRO, LADEE
New Frontiers New Horizons, Juno, OSIRIS-REx
Mars Exploration MRO, Odyssey, MER, MSL, MAVEN, Insight, Mars 2020
Earth System Science Pathfinder GRACE, CloudSat, CALIPSO, Aquarius, OCO-2, CYGNSS, OCO-3,
Earth Science
(ESSP) GEDI
Aqua, Aura, Terra, Jason-1, OSTM, ICESat, GPM, SMAP, TSIS-1,
Earth Systematic Missions (ESM)
ICESat-2, GRACE-FO
Mission of Opportunity (MO) Suazku (ASTRO-E2), TWINS, CINDI, NICER, GOLD
Explorers
Small Explorers (SMEX) NuSTAR, IRIS, IBEX, AIM, GALEX, RHESSI
Medium Explorers (MIDEX) THEMIS, Swift, WISE, TESS, ICON
Discovery Genesis, Kepler
Near Earth
Solar Terrestrial Probes (STP) STEREO, TIMED, MMS
Discovery
Living With a Star (LWS) RBSP, SDO, PSP
Helio-Astro
Cosmic Origins Spitzer
Physics of the Cosmos Fermi, Chandra
Bold = New Data in 2020 Potential New Data for possible 2021 update
• Numerous missions
updates in 2020 in each
category
• Fewer new missions in
2021 & COVID-19
challenges in data
4
Level 2 WBS Investigation
• Level 2 WBS Modeling investigation performed this year
• Not much precedent for this research
• Study included 27 missions with actual Phase E operations cost available
• NASA Systems, Applications and Products (SAP) monthly financial database is the
most comprehensive data source
• Next best source is NASA End of Mission/End of Prime Mission (EOM/EOPM) Cost
Analysis Data Requirement (CADRe) reports
• Both sources presented challenges as the bookkeeping of Level 2 costs in Phase E
appears to have some inconsistencies
• SAP has Level 2 detail available but accuracy depends on management center
• CADRe EOM/EOPM Level 2 WBS cost data is only available by FY, unlike SAP which is monthly
6
Level 2 WBS Investigation
• Within the data with full Level 2 WBS detail
• Additional bookkeeping issues found
• E.g., no cost bookkept under science, large amount of cost under Payload
• Initially normalization of these costs was attempted
• Apprehension remained if this was the correct approach
• The final determined approach was to downselect to the best data
• Percent rank plots were used to look for trends and attempt to identify potentially
incorrectly bookkept data
Phase Data Source Missions
Mission Type
• Percent rank plots were also useful to Planetary Cruise
SAP
SAP
OSIRIS-REx
MAVEN
establish nominal percent cost ranges for w/Checkout CADRe MESSENGER
SAP OSIRIS-REx
evaluating reasonable Level 2 WBS Nominal Cruise CADRe MESSENGER
allocations Flyby/Encounter N/A None
• Down selected perceived best quality data Approach/Orbit
Insertion
SAP
SAP
OSIRIS-REx
MAVEN
included 8 missions Orbital
SAP
SAP
OSIRIS-REx
MAVEN
Operations
• 3 planetary and 5 EO CADRe MESSENGER
SAP GPM
Checkout SAP MMS
SAP Fermi
Earth SAP GPM
Orbiting SAP MMS
Orbital SAP Fermi
Operations CADRe OCO-2
CADRe NuSTAR
7
Level 2 WBS Investigation
Cruise w/ Checkout Nominal Cruise Flyby/Encounter*
EPO, PM, EPO, EPO, PM, 3%
I&T, 0% I&T, 1%
I&T, 1% 2% SE, 3% 0% PM, 5% SE, 4% 2% SE, 2%
GDS, 6% GDS,
MA, 0% GDS,
3% 0% MA, 1%
0% MA, 0%
Science,
15% Science,
MO, MO, Science, 33%
40% Payloads, 49% 28%
MO,
4%
54%
Spacecraft,
27%
Payload
Payloads, Spacecraft, s, 4%
Spacecraft,
6% 2%
7%
• A proportional allocation model was Approach/Orbit Insertion Orbital Operations
developed by taking the average EPO, PM, 3% EPO, PM, 3%
I&T, 0% I&T, 1%
percent cost from these 8 missions 3% SE, 2% 1% SE, 2%
GDS, GDS,
• Done for each individual operational 0% MA, 0%
0% MA, 0%
phase in the model Percentages are
applied to a top level MOCET
estimate to derive the Level 2 cost Science, Science,
values 31% 34%
MO,
• Planetary model is shown at right MO, 48%
• *No data was available for the 59%
flyby/encounter phase. Payloads,
• An average was taken of the 2%
Spacecraft, Payloads,
approach/orbit insertion and Spacecraft, 6%
0% 5%
orbital operations phases
• Assumed to be a reasonable mix
of science and missions
operations activities • Observation: planetary missions appear to spend more on missions operations,
likely because of the remote nature of operations and diversity of operational phases
9
Level 2 WBS Investigation
• Earth Orbiting (EO) model is shown below
• Observation: unlike planetary missions, EO missions tend to spend the most on
science, likely because of the continuous and homogenous nature of operations.
Checkout Operations
I&T, 0% PM, 4%
I&T, 3% EPO, 2% EPO, 1% SE, 0%
GDS, 6%
MA, 0%
PM, 14%
SE, 7%
GDS, 17%
MO, 20%
MA, 1%
MO, 1%
Spacecraft, Science, Spacecraft, 2%
13% Science,
17%
60%
Payloads,
Payloads, 6%
24%
• The results of this proportional allocation model for EO/Planetary model have been compared against final actual
costs, as well as proposed costs at Step 2 evaluations
• Initial results are encouraging, as potentially this model can be used to identify misallocation of Phase E costs early in the lifecycle
• This model is still however limited including only 8 missions
• Does not cover landed missions or instrument only missions at this time
• As future work, it is planned to continue to collect data, and also to conduct interviews with projects and potentially
help correct data where it appears cost may have been bookkept incorrectly
10ISS Missions & Extended Missions
• ISS Instrument Capability
• Initial version of an instrument only CER was developed
• First version CER combined Spacecraft hosted and ISS Hosted
• Produced less than desired results
• More ISS instrument data has become available
• Assumption ISS instrument missions operated differently that Spacecraft hosted
• Greater technical detail has been gathered
• Mass based CER has been derived for ISS instruments
• This CER will likely be included in the next release of MOCET
• MOCET Extended Mission Cost Investigation
• Users have expressed interest in being able to model extended missions
• A large amount of extended mission data has been collected
• Evaluating data for trends and determining the best way to model it
• Planetary extended orbital and landed operations models were previously developed
• Developing model of Earth Orbiting missions
• Typically, extended mission cost continues to decrease
• There are some exceptions to this general rule
11ONCE Downloads and Users
• To date MOCET has been downloaded from ONCE 238* times since the initial release
• *Downloads include those from inactive users and duplicate downloads
• ONCE output generally only shows active users and unique downloads
• Version 1.0 - 30, Version 1.1 - 60, Version 1.2 – 37, and Version 1.3 – 111
• As of October 2020, 98 unique users have downloaded MOCET from ONCE
• Since the release of v1.0 the number of users has increased steadily
Cumulative Downloads Cumulative Users
250 120
NCS 2016 NCS 2017 NCSS 2018 NCSS 2019 NCS 2017 NCSS 2019
NCS 2016 NCSS 2018
100
200
v 1.3
v 1.3 80
150
v 1.2
v 1.2 60
100 v 1.1
40
v 1.1
50 v 1.0
20 v 1.0
0 0
Oct-15
Oct-16
Oct-17
Oct-18
Oct-19
Oct-20
Oct-15
Jan-16
Apr-16
Jul-16
Oct-16
Jan-17
Apr-17
Jul-17
Oct-17
Jan-18
Apr-18
Jul-18
Oct-18
Jan-19
Apr-19
Jul-19
Oct-19
Jan-20
Apr-20
Jul-20
Oct-20
Jan-21
Jan-16
Apr-16
Jan-17
Apr-17
Jan-18
Apr-18
Jan-19
Apr-19
Jan-20
Apr-20
Jan-21
Jul-16
Jul-17
Jul-18
Jul-19
Jul-20
12software.nasa.gov Downloads and Users
• There are MOCET 88 users on software.nasa.gov since its release there in April of 2017
• Most users are from Industry (39), Representing Self (21), Academic (11), and from NASA (10)
• There are also 7 Other Civil/Government
• Of the 88 users, 31 are also international coming from Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, and South America
Non-US, 3
US,
4
US
Othe
,1
0
9
r Civ
,2
NA US
il
SA
Non-U
S, 5
y
Industr
Academic
US, 6
lf
. Se
,8
Rep
No
US
n-
US
Non-US, 13
,1
0
13Conclusion
• Status of current 2020 and planned 2021 updates presented
• MOCET will continue to be periodically updated with new mission data
• Model is currently being used by both evaluators and proposers
• We will continue to engage and grow the user community
Download MOCET
ONCE Model Portal https://oncedata.hq.nasa.gov
Available external to NASA via https://software.nasa.gov
For More Information
Email: MOCET@aero.org
Publications
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) 2020, 2020 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) Version 1.3 and Beyond, 2019 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT
• The Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET): Development History and 2018 Updates, 2018 AIAA SPACE and Astronautics Forum and Exposition. Orlando FL
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) v1.3, 2018 NASA Cost and Schedule Symposium, August 2018, Greenbelt MD
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET), 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) FY17 Update, 2017 NASA Cost and Schedule Symposium, August 2017, Washington DC
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET) Update, 2016 NASA Cost Symposium, August 2016, Cleveland OH
• Mission Operations Cost Estimation Tool (MOCET), 2015 NASA Cost Symposium, August 2015, Mountain View CA
14You can also read
