ONE NASA, ONE ESA, TWO PARTNERS

1
ONE NASA, ONE ESA, TWO PARTNERS

• Achievements and prospective on Cost Engineering
  collaboration

Presented by H. Joumier Head of ESA Cost
Engineering
2
Europe in Space
The European Space Agency was established in 1975
ESA replaced the former Eldo launcher and Esro
satellite organisations, grouping the complete
range of civilian space activities in a single
agencyPortugal joined as 15th member state in
2000
Esro Satellites
Eldo Launchers
Cooperation arrangement Canada
3
ESA Member States

• ESA has 16 member states
• Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France,
  Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Norway, the
  Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland
  and the United Kingdom.
• Canada takes part in some projects under a
  cooperation agreement.
• Greece officially a member since March 2005
• Luxemburg to be soon ratified

4
Establishments Permanent ESA staff 1912
Cologne, Germany EAC (European
Astronaut Centre) Astronaut training Staff 18
Noordwijk, The Netherlands ESTEC (European Space
Research and Technology Centre) Project
management, testing of spacecraft,development of
new technologies,space science Staff 1102
Darmstadt, Germany ESOC (European Space
Operations Centre) Satellite operations Staff
244
Paris, France Head Office Incl. offices in
Brussels, Toulouse, Kourou, Moscow, Washington,
Houston Staff 387
Frascati, Italy ESRIN Earth Observation,Data
Processing and Distribution Staff 153
Kourou, French Guiana CSG Europes Spaceport for
Ariane launches
(Status Jan 2004)
GEN 15 - Feb 2003
5
ESA World Locations
Svalbard
Kiruna
ESTECNoordwijk
EACCologne
Brussels
ESOCDarmstadt
ESA Head OfficeParis
Redu
Toulouse
ESRINFrascati
Villafranca
CDN
Moscow
Washington
Houston
Maspalomas
Kourou
Malindi
New Norcia
Perth
Santiago
GEN 17 - Jan 2001
6
Budget for 2004 Income from member states and
participating states
Income from member and participating states 2
275.92 M Other income 422.40 M Total 2
698.32 M
L 0.07, 1.48 M
A 1.41, 32.19 M
G 0.07, 1.50 M
CZ 0.01, 0.25 M
B 7.12, 162 M
P 0.45, 10.20 M
DK 1.08, 24.48 M
CND 0.79, 18.01 M
FIN 0.70, 16 M
UK 8.20, 186.60 M
CH 3.78, 85.94 M
S 2.42, 55 M
E 4.89, 111.21 M
N 1.31, 29.88 M
F 29.71, 676.28 M
NL 3.34, 76 M
I 11.85, 270 M
IRL 0.40, 9.17 M
D 22.40, 509.73 M
M Million of Euro
BUD 01 - Feb 2004
7
Budgets for 2004Breakdown by programmes
Approved programmes 2 566.78 M Programmes
financed by third parties 131.54 M Total 2
698.32 M
General Budget 7, 185.78 M
Financed by third parties 5, 131.55 M
Associated to General Budget 5, 133.13 M
Technology Exploration 2, 66 M
Science 14, 370 M
Launchers 17, 458.26 M
Budgets 2004 2 698.32 M
Earth Observation 12, 322.77 M
Microgravity 3, 78.94 M
Human Spaceflight 16, 421.11 M
Telecommunications 7, 194.37 M
Navigation 12, 336.41 M
M Million of Euro
BUD 02 - Feb 2004
8
ESA Organigramme
Director General Jean-Jacques Dordain
Director of Science
Director of Launchers
Director of Human Missions and Exploration
Director of Earth Observation
Director of European Union and Industrial Programm
es
Antonio Fabrizi
Daniel Sacotte
Volker Liebig
Giuseppe Viriglio
David Southwood
Director of Operations and Infrastructure
Director of Technical and Quality Management
Director of Resources Management
Director of External Relations
Michel Courtois
Hans Kappler
Gaele Winters
Jean-Pol Poncelet
GEN 14 - Apr 2005
9
Working as  ONE ESA What does it mean for Cost
Engineering?

• Closer interractions and collaboration between
  functions
• Filling in the gap between Contracts and Finance
• Filling in the gap between technical disciplines
  and Project Teams
• Filling the gap between Finance and Design
• Etc
• Cost Engineering is at the borderline of all
  these functions
• Team work prevails
• Cost Engineering is a Team
• Common ethics
• Common methods
• Standardised services
• Cost Engineering is a solution provider for study
  and project teams

10
The ESA Concurrent Design Facility

• Started in 1998
• Visit Joe Hamaker/B. Ruthledge in August 1998
• Initiative ESA General Studies Program in
  September 1998
• Cost Engineereing invited as member of the Core
  Team
• Start of Pilot case in November 1998
• Exponential development
• Puts Cost Engineering on equal chair basis with
  other design disciplines
• Success from start
• Used mainly for early studies and education
• Backbone of the System engineering competences
  currently developed into the Technical and
  Quality Management Directorate.
• Cost engineers hold time to time System engineer
  or Team Leader positions.

11
The ESA Concurrent Design Facility
12
CDF activity statistics
13
Concurrent Engineering an iterative process
Mission analysis
The Spiral Model
Mission requirements analysis
Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
Sub-system design
Design verification
Risk assessment
14
CDF Achievements

• The CDF has performed more than 50 activities
  including
• Internal pre-phase A, mission feasibility and
  preliminary design studies
• Architecture level assessment studies, jointly
  with Industry
• Complex payload instrument design (IDA), incl.
  platform, system, mission
• Reviews of Industrial Phase A studies (internal
  Industry)
• ISS on-board facilities/experiments accommodation
  studies teaming with/supporting Industry in
  Phase A
• Preparation of specifications for Phase-B (e.g.
  ExoMars)
• Educational, training, promotion and
  standardisation activities
• One joint study with NASA/JPL/PDC-Team X, for the
  scientific STEP project

Credits NASA/JPL/University of Colorado, LASP
15
ESTEC CDF / JPL Team X STEP joint design sessions
Credits Brockmann Consult/ESA
16
ESTEC CDF / JPL Team X STEP joint design sessions
Credits SOHO/LASCO/EIT (ESA NASA)
17
Collaboration with NASA

• Early Case study for Space Exploration
• Action commonly decided -Joe Hamaker/H. Joumier-
  in 2002 i.e. two years before the US presidential
  Space Exploration initiative
• Study carried out by Charles Hunt (MSFC) and
  Michel van Pelt (ESA)
• Objectives
• Compare ESA/NASA Costing methodologies
• Prepare tools for space exploration missions
• Get ready for international collaboration on real
  cases
• Opportunity for cross-cultural enrichment
• Based on the public domain case for Mars from R.
  Zubrin

18
Results Affordability
Are Human Mars Missions Expensive?
Mars Direct Investment per Year Comparison - Beer
versus Mars
19
Human exploration mission studies
Lunar Excursion Vehicle
Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
20
Human exploration mission studies
Human Mission to Mars
21
The precursor models

• The rationale
• Linking performances, architecture, technologies
  to size and complexities
• Emulating collaboration between technical and
  costing functions
• Conciliating proprietary data issues with
  external collaboration

Credits ESA / AEOS - Medialab
22
The precursor models
Design to Cost oriented Models
Precursormodels
Cost Sched. Risk
DEVT
Correlates mission parameters to standard cost
drivers
Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
Cost/Technical meeting point
DTC LOOP
correlate mission parameters to Cost/Schedule/Risk
23
The way to collaborate through precursor models
Credits ESA-D.Ducros
24

• Precursor model example for launcher
• "Day One" Preliminary Design for large SRM

Launchers Precursor model
25
How to perform a  Day One  cost estimate for
providing early real time answers in CDF?
ESA Cost Engineering has developed RACE (Rapid
Avanced Cost Estimates)
Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
An integrated suite of CERs than derives
sub-system level cost estimates from mission
requirements and payload definition
26

• Various precursor models already developed
• TIW-D for digital equipment
• TIW-O for Optical Instruments
• SOCRATES (full life cycle RLV system simulator
  coupled with cost models)
• Others under progress
• TIW-R for RF Equipment
• TIW-A for antennas
• Heavy launcher full life cycle system/cost
  simulator
• Lunar and Martian bases full life cycle
  system/cost simulator

27
Precursor Design Model
Set number and type of engines
28
Precursor Design Model
Operations cost estimates can be based on some
results from the preliminary design tool and some
additional parameters to be set
Type of engines gt type of propellants

• Fleet size
• Flight rate

29
Preliminary Cost Estimates
Once everything has been set-up, the combined
Design Tool and Cost Model work something like
this
30
TIW-D Application example
31
TIW-O Estimating Optical Instruments
Payload / Instrument(s)
System Level Activities
Optical assembly(ies)
System Hardware
Focal Plane Assembly(ies)
Cooling Subsystem
Structure
Product Tree
Calibration subsystem
Mechanism(s)
Instrument Control Electronics
System Software
32
Early Stage mode
Design-to-cost
Mission requirements
No

Cost drivers
Detailed layout
?
Cost
Standard configurations
Yes
Cost model
Precursor models 2
Precursor models 1
33
Example Telescope Optical Assembly and
Structure Subsystem

• Number and type of optical elements
  (mirrors/lenses)
• Class of mirrors

Type of Telescope
Optical AssemblyDetailed Layout
Aperture
F
Mirrors Size
Structure SubsystemDetailed Layout
Structure Material

Baseplate Size
34
Space Exploration Life Cycle Cost modelling
Mission Objectives
Infrastructure Matrices (Element Type vs
instances)
Element 1D
Element iD
Element 2D
Element nD
Element 11
Element i1
Element 21
Element n1
Scenario A
Scenario B
Element 1j
Element ij
Element 2j
Element nj
Element 1m
Element 2m
Element im
Element nm
Elements are detailed down the Product Tree at
appropriate level
35
Space Exploration Life Cycle Cost modelling
Mission Objectives
Transp.,Ops and Maintenance Matrices (Vehicles vs
traject. X Nb trips)
Leg 1D
Leg iD
Leg 2D
Leg nD
Leg 11
Leg i1
Leg 21
Leg n1
Scenario A
Scenario B
Leg 1j
Leg ij
Leg 2j
Leg nj
Leg 1m
Leg im
Leg 2m
Leg nm
36
Space Exploration Life Cycle Cost modelling
Top-Down LCC estimate
CDF STUDIES
CDF studies performed in the frame of the Aurora
programme allow to progressively calibrate the
global Life Cycle cost estimate model
37
Space Exploration Life Cycle Cost modelling
Mission Objectives
Infrastructure Matrix
Infrastructure Matrix
Transport Operations Maintenance Matrix
Transport Operations Maintenance Matrix
Scenario B
Scenario C
Cost/Benefits Analysis
Cost/Benefits Analysis
Selection
38
Evolution towards an operational service

• Maturing processes
• The ESA Cost Engineering RoadMap
• Code of Cost Engineering Best Practices
• Classes of estimates / Charter of services
• Accountability

Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
39
Cost Engineering RoadMap
Credits ESA/DLR/FU Berlin (G. Neukum)
40
Credits NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute
Current skills per product
41

• Accountability
• E_MIS ESA missed cost item
• I_MIS Industry missed cost item
• TRL Heritage/TRL difference
• DDV HW Matrix/development plan difference
• PROC Procurement approach/Industrial team build
  up difference
• RISK Cost Risk Analysis/Management reserve
  difference
• MOD_U ESA model under-estimate
• MOD_O ESA model over-estimate

42
Cost Engineering Charter of Services

• Framework agreement with Users
• What type of Cost Engineering services?
• For what quality (accuracy) and delivery date?
• For what Price i.e. effort to prepare?
• Similar to NASA CRL
• Based on the AACE1 International recommended
  Practice No 17R-97
• Adapted and completed for ESA environment
• Valid for Cost Estimating
• Extended for Proposal assessment and reviews

Credits EIT Consortium (ESA/NASA)
1-Association for the Advancement of Cost
Engineering
43

• Metrics for Cost Estimating
• Accuracy f(Complexity and Time to Prepare)
• Design Maturity Margin f(Complexity and class
  of Estimate)
• Effort f(Complexity and magnitude)
• Correcting factors to account for the Input data
  quality
• Accessibility of data
• Stucture of data
• Availibility of specialists for interview
• Percentage of effort for estimates updating
• Metrics for Proposals evaluation
• As a function of Complexity and Phase
• Corrective factor for the number of proposals per
  ITT to estimate
• Metrics for Reviews
• As a function of Complexity and Phase

44
Class of Estimates Definition
45
Few Metrics Table examples
Credits NASA/JPL/Space Science Institute
46
Final words