RAMSES: Rule-Based Asset Management
for Space Exploration Systems:
Automatic IMS Self-Reporting
Prof. Olivier de Weck
deweck@mit.edu
MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
(RAMSES Principal Investigator)
Joe C. Parrish
jparrish@aurora.aero
Aurora Flight Sciences Inc.
(RAMSES Project Manager)
Abe Grindle
grindle@mit.edu
MIT Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics
(Graduate Research Assistant)
End of NASA STTR NNC07AB25C Phase 2 System Demonstration
NASA Johnson Space Center
August 14, 2009
The Team
• Massachusetts Institute of Technology
–
–
–
–
Olivier de Weck, Ph.D., Associate Professor (RAMSES PI)
Abe Grindle, Graduate Student, AA and TPP
Sydney Do, Graduate Student AA
Howard Yue, Graduate Student AA
• Aurora Flight Sciences Inc.
–
–
–
–
Joe Parrish, VP (RAMSES PM)
James Francis, Software Engineer
Joe Zapetis, Software Engineer
Joanne Vining, Senior Technician
• NASA
– Nathan Sovik, NASA SSC Stennis, COTR (Phase 1)
– Ray Bryant , NASA SSC Stennis , COTR (Phase 2)
– Sarah Shull, NASA JSC DO5
2
Agenda
• Motivation for Real-Time Automated Asset Management
• Overview of RAMSES STTR Phase 1/2 Project
– Project Heritage
– High-Level System Architecture
– Smart Container (CTB)
– Location-based Asset Tracking Software (RAILS v2)
– Microgravity Testing Results
– Cost-Benefit Analysis
• RAMSES Demo (in Lunar Habitat Mockup)
• Discussion and Suggestions for Phase 3
3
Motivation for Real-Time
Automated Asset Management
4
Evans W., de Weck O., Laufer D., Shull S., “Logistics Lessons
Learned in NASA Space Flight”, NASA/TP-2006-214203, May 2006
Supply
Items
M02
Bags
MPLM
Racks
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Nested Complexity
Pocket
Container
Carrier
Module
Segment
Compartment
Element
Pallet
Assembly
Facility*
Node
Vehicle
MPLM
Cargo
Integration
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Item
Drawer
Kit
Locker
Unit
Rack
Lab
Platform
MPLM
Payload Bay
Fairing
•
•
Component
Subsystem
• System
• SRU
• LRU
• ORU
• CTB
• M-01
• M-02
• M-03
*In-Space Facility
(e.g., the European Technology
Exposure Facility (EuTEF)
Need to track items
across dynamic
parent-child
relationships
MPLM
In Shuttle
5
Current ISS Inventory Architecture
• Barcodes
• CTBs (Cargo Transfer Bags) and other bags/kits
– 1/2, Standard, Double, Triple
– Concentration of Inventory Transactions
• IMS (Inventory Management System)
– Copies in Houston, Moscow, Baikanour, and ISS
– Delta files
• ISO (Integration Stowage Officer)
– Mission Control; assist crew with IMS
– Write stowage notes for all procedures
6
Inventory Tracking on ISS
SSC/NGL
Client
Multiple
SSC/NGL
Clients
D
B
Relatively accurate
system (~ 3% lost)
SSC/NGL File Server
Bar Code R eader
Manual bar-code
based system
Communication occurs
via Radio Frequency
(RF) and is relayed
through the RF Access
Point located in the LAB
OCA Router
OCA
OCA Down
Up
RSA/NASA
Inventory
Management
System (IMS)
Requires substantial
manual labor
(>20min/day/astronaut)
7
ISS Lessons Learned
International Space Station Multilateral Coordination Board
Consolidated Lessons Learned For Exploration, report issued July 22, 2009
10-Lesson: Micromanage Consumables
Resupply, logistics and onboard stowage have proven to be critical issues for
the ISS. Out of necessity, the program carefully re-evaluated the usage rates for
critical consumables and found innovative ways to reduce resupply
requirements. Micromanagement of consumables was found to be
essential to ensure adequate supply inventories. Reliability and
maintenance strategies are critical.
Application to Exploration: Consumables will be even more critical for extended
lunar or Mars expeditions because of the more limited resupply opportunities.
Micromanagement of consumables and inventory will be critical and should be
thoroughly addressed during the systems design phase.
8
ISS Lessons Learned
International Space Station Multilateral Coordination Board
Consolidated Lessons Learned For Exploration, report issued July 22, 2009
NASA ISS Lessons Learned – Logistics, Resupply, and Stowage
Based on the ISS experience, careful management of consumables and
inventory will be critical and should be thoroughly addressed during the systems
design phase. The Exploration Programs should utilize technologies that were
not readily available at the beginning of the ISS Program to help minimize
resupply requirements and track inventory. For example, Radio-Frequency
Identification Devices (RFID) might help to simplify inventory tracking.
9
Functions of a State-of-the-Art IMS
• Automated inventory tracking and management
• Automated mass and C.G. calculations for vehicle
management before launch and during flight operations
• Automatic reports of % full levels (by mass or volume) by
module/vehicle/node for precise stowage planning
• Alerts when critical consumables are about to run low (can
establish dynamic warning thresholds)
• Alerts when incompatible/hazardous items are stored
together or in the wrong place
• Save temperature/pressure history with the item
• Real time assistance in searching for items
• …
10
Implications of Automated ISS Inventory Process
@ ISS Assembly Complete:
• 600 Cargo Transfer Bags
(CTBs) on-orbit
• 730 Crew Hours / Year spent
updating IMS ~ 4 ½ personmonths (40 hrs/wk)
11
RAMSES Project Heritage
12
MIT Space Logistics Planning & Analysis
MIT and Aurora Flight Sciences (formerly Payload Systems Inc.)
have been collaborating on a series of projects relating to space
logistics and automated inventory tracking/management
•Interplanetary Supply Chain Management & Logistics Analysis
(ISCM&LA)
–
–
Funded through NASA Exploration Systems technology BAA 2005-2007,
$4M over 2 years
Multi-faceted project, resulting in SpaceNet software for LEO/Lunar/Mars
supply chain modeling and analysis
Haughton-Mars
Research Station
•Haughton-Mars Research Station Expedition 2005
–
–
Field campaign, applying principles from SpaceNet
RFID-based portals enabled tracking of vehicular traffic in/out of base
camp; personnel and equipment in/out of habitat and lab areas
•Rule-Based Analytic Asset Management for Space Exploration Systems
(RAMSES)
–
–
–
STTR Phase 1 and 2, from NASA Stennis Space Center 2006-2009
Focus on hardware-agnostic architecture for tracking diverse assets on
ground and in space
Several generations of smart containers
13
Smart CTB
Prototype
Introduction to SpaceNet
•
•
SpaceNet is an interplanetary supply chain modeling
and simulation tool
Goal: Support short and long-term architecture and
operational decisions such as:
– What effect will vehicle (element) design decisions have
on future NASA operations and lifecycle costs?
– Are in-space refueling and ISRU helpful in improving
performance?
– Is it better to have cargo vehicles that carry small resupply loads or a few large pre-deploy or resupply flights?
•
Staging Location
Diverse user base
–
–
–
–
Mission/system architects
Mission planners and logisticians
Operations personnel
Etc…
In-Space Refueling
14
SpaceNet – Network View
SpaceNet 1.3
15
Interplanetary Supply Chain
Management and Logistics
15
Architectures
SpaceNet – Manifest View
16
RFID at the Haughton-Mars Project
Research Station
17
HMP Expedition 2005: Objectives
1.
Inventory classes of supply on base
•
2.
Analyze analogy to lunar/Mars base
Model HMP supply chain
•
3.
Quantitative transportation network model
Test and evaluate RFID technology
•
•
4.
Field experiments during normal HMP operations
Test autonomous tracking of supplies, vehicles,
people
Study EVA logistics requirements
•
Short traverses and overnight stays
18
HMP: Inventory
HMP Actuals: Total Mass inventoried at HMP: 20,717 [kg]
Total Mass Inventoried [kg]
Goals: Understand, Categorize Supplies on Base
- Classification of inventory
- Quantify inventory (total imported mass)
- Compare with prediction for a lunar base
- What would it take to ‘create’ an HMP-like base?
102
4153
9305
2934
Comparison by Supply Class
(Full Data Set)
Lunar Long
Lunar Short
470
286
.HMP Est
1723
HMP Actuals
1022
176
547
1. Propellants and Fuels
2. Crew Provisions
3. Crew Operations
1. Propellants and Fuels
2. Crew Provisions
3. Crew Operations
4. Maintenance and Upkeep
5. Stowage and Restraint
6. Exploration and Research
7. Waste and Waste Disposal
8. Habitation and Infrastructure
9. Transportation and Carriers
10. Miscellaneous
4. Maintenance and Upkeep
•
5. Stowage and Restraint
6. Exploration and Research
7. Waste and Waste Disposal
•
8. Habitation and Infrastructure
9. Transportation and Carriers
10. Miscellaneous
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Thousands
Total [kg]
19
•
•
Inventoried 2300 items
(20,717 kg)
Developed inventory
procedures
Validated supply classes
Maintained inventory over
time (for use next season)
19
HMP: Transportation Analysis
Transportation Network Analysis for HMP
• Mass inflow per season ~ 20 mt
• Analysis highlights room for improvement:
Personnel Profile
45
40
35
Plan for reverse logistics
Reduce asymmetric flight usage
Smooth personnel profile
• “Robustness” more important than optimality
–
30-Jun
30
# of People
–
–
–
Number of People Staying in Devon
10-Jul
25
21-Jul
20
31-Jul
7-Aug
15
BOXCAR
10
due to weather, emergencies, aircraft availability
5
34
32
30
28
26
24
22
20
18
16
14
12
8
10
6
4
2
0
0
Days from 8 July
4. M
6. F
Cumulative Cargo Flow HMP 2005
Cargo
Mass Flow
0.D
0.D
6. F
7.
I
60000
7. C
50000
5. H
cum at HMP
20000
10000
27
25
23
21
19
18
16
14
12
8
10
0
6
Normal Trans.
Emergency Trans.
cum out
4
2. E
cum in
30000
0
7. Y
0. D
6. F
0. Dep. Point for Each Team
1. Ottawa
2. Edmonton
3. Resolute
4. Moffet USMC St.
5. HMP Base
6. HMP Field
7. Cambridge Bay
Iqaluit
Yellowknife
40000
2
1.O
Cargo/Crew Mass [lbs]
3. R
Flight Num ber (according to log)
20
20
HMP: Agent & Asset Tracking
(RFID)
Goal: “Smart Base” for Micro-Logistics
– Technology demonstrations
– Observation/Insight for further implementation
Selected Conclusions
– RFID has potential for remote bases
• dramatically improve asset management
• reduce crew time spent in inventory
• increase ground knowledge of base requirements
– Technical hurdles
• reliability, interference, packaging
– STTR to further investigate
Bar Code
RFID
Camp
Activity
07/17 to 07/19
Asset
Flow
ATV Tracking
Number of Triggers
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
9:
00
11
:0
0
13
:0
0
15
:0
0
17
:0
0
19
:0
0
21
:0
0
23
:0
0
1:
00
3:
00
5:
00
7:
00
Seconds
Mean Time
Formal Experiments
Exp 20-4
Exp 10-4
Time of Day
Exp 10-2
21
21
Overview of RAMSES
Phase 1/2 STTR Project
22
RAMSES Project Overview
•
NASA STTR Phase 2 (Research Institution partner: MIT)
– Contract number NNS07AB25C (NASA Stennis Space Center)
•
Objective: Provide asset tracking and management for all of NASA’s assets
– Document in office at NASA center…supply item on International Space
Station…pressurized rover on surface of Moon/Mars
•
Hierarchical to accommodate diverse styles of assets
– Room level…outdoors…orbits and planetary surfaces
•
Device-agnostic to accommodate diverse styles on locating/tracking systems
– RFID…WiFi…Cellular…GPS
•
Emphasis on open source software
– E.g., Google Maps API
•
Strong potential for terrestrial applications
–
–
–
–
Military theater operations
Humanitarian aid
Entertainment industry
Consumer products
23
NASA Applications
LN
R
Local Node
RFID Reader
Applications
RFID RFID Tag
Real-Time Data Capture
Platform
Integrate real-time RFID; Barcode; GPS;
Interplanetary
Network
Connection
Internet
TDRSS
Earth Ground
LN
R
Planetary Surface
In-Space
R
R ISS
CEV
Ground
Processing
LN
LN
Launch
vehicle
Spaceport
R
Lunar
Base
RFID
RFID
RFID
RFID
RFID
24
R
R
Mars
RFID
RAMSES Architecture
Informational Architecture
Physical Architecture
events
Rule-Based
Analytics
Outdoor Tracking
transactions
Indoor Tracking
Container
Tracking
raw data
(e.g. triggers)
system
state
Relational
Database
Messaging
System
Relational
Google
Maps
Database
802.11
interrogate
Tracked
Items
Web
Browser
(RAILS)
Other
Devices
external
information
User
25
Email, SMS
RAILS
• RDF-based Asset Information and Location Software
– Web-based real-time interface
Facility-level Tracking
Item Locator
Container Inventory
Supported Web Browsers: Internet Explorer, Firefox
26
Smart Container Concept
8:41a.m.
www
interface
wireless router
passive
tag
802.11
item
x
PC/laptop
wireless
radio
802.11
switch
RFID
Antennas
(1-4)
RF opaque
“liner”
RFID
Reader (915 MHz)
5V DC
Battery (30Ah)
27
Prototype:
Instrumented
CTB
database
container 1
item x 8:41am
MySQL
Relational
database
….
Smart Container Evolution
Generation 1
Cooler
Proof-of-concept for RF-insulated container and
automated/wireless inventory function
Generation 2
Hard Container
Hard-case with integrated display,
modular electronics
Generation 3
Soft Bag
Generation 4
CTB Retrofit Kit
CTB proxy with RF-shielding insert,
integrated electronics and antennae
CTB-specific prototype, ready to transition to
flight implementation
28
Testing Results (2007 MIT Undergraduate Design Project)
Mean Time vs No. of Items
• 6 Test Subjects
– 3 male, 3 female
• 24 Experiments each
• Time Savings: RFID
versus Bar-coding can be
> factor of 2 time savings
– Benefit increases as
more items have to be
managed in the system
• Accuracy: Above 95% is
feasible if:
– use 3 RFID antennas
– ~20 items
– 2 tags per item helps
90
Barcode
80
RFID
70
60
50
Time (sec)
40
30
20
10
0
6
24
15
33
Number of Items
Mean Accuracy vs No. of Items
100
95
90
% Accuracy
85
80
75
6
15
24
No. of Items
Source: Teresa Pontillo, Alice Fan, 16.622 Final Report, MIT
29
33
Microgravity Testing of
Smart CTB
August 11-12, 2009
Play Movie
Clip X48p test
condition
30
Motivation for Microgravity Testing
• Hypothesis that microgravity environment could actually
improve RFID tag read accuracy
– Tags in free-float will move around in container and present
themselves in randomized orientations to antennae
• Vice laying on top of each other in bottom of container
• MIT and Aurora proposed parabolic flight experiment to
NASA FAST program, and were approved for two sorties
– Sorties took place earlier this week, using Zero-G Corp. B727 from Ellington Field
– Collected data during 68 parabolas, with emphasis on
measuring read rates for different numbers and types of
tagged materials and different tags
31
W=Water Bottles
T=Tissues
M=Metal Cans
X=miXed Items
Parabola 15
X36 ___
v
W30 ___
M30 ___
W30 ___
M30 ___
W24 ___
T24 ___
M24 ___
T24 ___
M18 ___
W18 ___
W6 ___
v
X24 ___
X24 ___
X18 ___
T18 ___
X12 ___
T12 ___
M12 ___
W12 ___
X30 ___
T30 ___
M24 ___
W24 ___
X30 ___
T30 ___
T6 ___
M6 ___
X6 ___
X60 ___
Parabolas 1-7
Parabolas 16-22
Parabolas 8-14
X54 ___
RAMSES System 0-g Test Flights
TEST PLAN – FAST Program
August 10-14, 2009
X48 ___
0g
1.8g
0g
1.8g
X42 ___
MIT-Aurora Flight Sciences
Parabolas 23-34
Flight Day One Results with Alien Tags
Read Rate Tissues Comparison
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-G
Zero-G
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Read Rate Water Comparison
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Zero-G
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
12
18
24
30
Read Rate Mixed Items Comparison
One-G
6
6
Number of Items in CTB
Read Rate Metals Comparison
0
Zero-G
0
Number of Items in CTB
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-G
33
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
One-G
Zero-G
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Number of Items in CTB
Results of Microgravity Testing
• Flight data collected for three materials (water, metal,
paper) and two types of tags (Alien, Omni-D)
• Baseline data collected in 1-G for comparison
• For all materials and tags, microgravity read rates were
equal or better than those from 1-G
• From a performance standpoint, we believe that there are
no fundamental reasons why RFID in 0-G would be
inferior to 1-G
• Caveats:
– Small statistical samples for 0-G cases
– Tag read rates are still not perfect – but we generally saw
90-100% read rates during 20 seconds of reader integration
34
Cost-Benefit Analysis
35
Net Present Value Analysis
• Are the benefits of this RFID application worth the
costs? How likely is this system to result in net
present value?
• Key Equation:
N
NPV  
i 1
Bi  Ci
1  r i
B = Benefits
C = Costs
r = Discount Rate (Set to 7%, per OMB guidelines [1])
N = Number of Years of Study (FY 2009 – FY 2016, N=8)
36
Two Implementation Strategies Modeled
• “Phase-In” Implementation
– Existing CTBs currently on Station are gradually replaced by
new, “wired” CTBs according to the existing launch schedule
– Contents transferred to new bags by Crew; most-used bags first
– CTB launch rate perhaps too low, especially post-Shuttle
Retirement
• Modification Kits Implementation
– Instead of launching new CTBs, just launch RAMSES hardware
in mod-kits that the Crew can install on-orbit to retrofit existing
CTBs
– Assumes all mod-kits launched & installed in FY 2009
37
Costs Considered
• NASA Engineer Time for:
– Flight Certification & Approval
– Operational Support & Maintenance
• Cost for Vendor to Modify CTBs or Cost to Build Mod-Kits
• Cost of RFID Hardware
• “Opportunity Cost” of:
– Launching the System Mass
– Launching the System Volume
– Crew Time to Transfer Items to Wired Bags or Install Mod
Kits
38
Benefits Considered
• Value of Crew Time Saved on:
– Bi-annual Inventory Audits
– Missing Item Searches
– Daily Inventory Management System Updates
• Reduced workload for JSC Inventory Stowage Officers (ISOs)
– Less need to assist Crew with Inventory updates/searches
• Only Partial Savings realized, per “System Effectiveness” (β)
parameter:
β = (% of Inventory Transactions ‘Automate-able’) x (System
Accuracy)
39
Quantifying Value (“Opportunity Cost”) of Cargo
Launch Volume & Mass
• Value of Cargo Launch Volume =
[Annual Net Variable Recurring Cost (all Cargo Missions)]
[Annual Net Dry Cargo Launch Volume Available (habitable)]
= ~ $20.3 million / m^3 (‘09-’10), ~ $31.6 million / m^3 (‘10’16)
• Value of Cargo Launch Mass =
[Annual Net Variable Recurring Cost (all Cargo Missions)]
[Annual Net Cargo Launch Mass Available]
= ~ $25,500 / lb (‘09-’10), ~ $35,700 / lb (‘10-’16)
40
Quantifying Value of On-Orbit Crew Time
• Value of 1 Hour of On-Orbit Crew Time =
[Average Annual ISS Ops Budget (Common Systems Operations Cost)]
[# Crew] x [# “Active” Hours per day / Crew Member] x [365 days/yr]
•
= ~ $185K / hr (’09)
# Crew = 3, Each active 16 hrs/day
= ~ $ 100K / hr (’10-’16)
# Crew = 6, Each active 16 hrs/day
Notes:
– Common Systems Operations (CSO) Cost is defined as “the cost to operate the ISS”,
including “the cost to transport crew and common supplies” and “ground operations
costs” [9]
– International Partners’ negotiated shares of CSO Costs [10]:
NASA = 76.6%; JAXA = 12.8%; ESA = 8.3%; CSA = 2.3% || RSA = Russian Segment & Crew Ops
Costs
41
Key Variables
• 7 “High-Impact”, Uncertain Variables identified via Sensitivity Analysis
of Discrete Calculation results (“best-available” input values):
– Average ISS Ops Budget
– # of “Active” Crew Hours
Value of Crew Time
– % of IMS Transactions that could be Automated
“System Effectiveness”
– System Accuracy
– Volume Required for 1 RAMSES Unit
– “Opportunity Cost” of Cargo Launch Volume
“Cost” of System Volume
– # of CTBs that are to be “Wired”
•
All but “# of CTBs” are randomly varied within reasonable ranges for
probabilistic Monte Carlo simulations; “# of CTBs” is varied between Monte
Carlo simulations
42
Results
• NPV = +$14.8 Million for Discrete Calculation, Mod-Kit Scenario
• NPV = -$ 63.0 Million for Discrete Calculation, Phase-In Scenario
• Monte Carlo general results:
– Mod-Kit Scenario performs better than gradual Phase-In
– Simulations w/ Normally-Distributed Variables perform slightly better
than those w/ Uniformly-Distributed Variables
– Both scenarios less than 50% likely to result in NPV > 0 if inventory
transactions are evenly distributed among all CTBs
– If transactions are somewhat concentrated in subset of CTBs, and
RAMSES installation can be targeted to those CTBs, both
scenarios are likely (to very likely) to result in NPV > 0. Magnitude
and Likelihood of NPV vary with degree of transaction concentration.
43
Results
If the transactions are evenly distributed throughout all CTBs and we wire 100% of the total CTBs:
If 50%
If 75%
of of
allall
transactions
transactions
occur
occur
in in
25%
50%
of of
thethe
total
total
CTBs:
CTBs:
• 43%
probability
of NPV
> NPV
0 > 0> 0
• 95%
• 84%
probability
probability
of ofNPV
• Mean
= $(13.2)
Million
• Mean
•NPV
Mean
NPV
NPV
= $49.4
= $46.8
Million
Million
• NPV
Std.
Dev.
= Dev.
$77.4
• NPV
• NPV
Std.
Std.
Dev.
= $30.6
= Million
$48.7
Million
Million
• Modification Kits Scenario: Normally-Distributed Variables
25%
Mean NPV
NPV Std. Dev.
25%
Actual % 33%
CTBs
Wired
50%
100%
$
$
(6,028,603.41)
19,313,461.96
x
x
x
x
x
x
% NPV
>0
37%
x
x
x
$
$
$
$
Launch Mod Kits (Best Ops Guess); Normally-Distributed Simulations
Effective % of CTBs Wired (As determined by concentration of transactions)
33%
50%
75%
100%
Mean NPV
Mean NPV
Mean NPV
Mean NPV
% NPV
% NPV
% NPV
% NPV
NPV Std. Dev.
NPV Std. Dev.
NPV Std. Dev.
NPV Std. Dev.
>0
>0
>0
>0
12,484,645.27
$ 49,435,199.17
$ 103,185,422.47
x
71%
95%
100%
x
23,066,435.14
$ 30,550,819.73
$
44,754,456.13
x
(6,035,666.20)
$ 29,780,636.00
$
85,406,626.04
x
41%
82%
98%
x
25,918,469.55
$ 32,852,633.72
$
46,558,196.89
x
x
$ (7,233,783.26)
$
46,835,438.82
x
x
43%
84%
x
x
$ 38,902,427.71
$
48,677,956.52
x
x
x
x
$
(13,223,978.27)
x
x
x
43%
x
x
x
$
77,414,934.03
Aurora Flight Sciences / Payload Systems Division
Grindle
44
Page 44
2008
September 9,
Conclusions
•
If inventory transactions are concentrated in some subset of CTBs, and
part or all of that subset can be targeted for RAMSES installation, this
application of RAMSES is quite likely to result in positive Net Present
Value.
– Such concentration has been reported by JSC ISOs, but not quantified. Intuitively,
it makes sense - some desk drawers get almost all the use.
•
•
•
Cost drivers: System Volume, Mass, & Crew Time required to install.
Key Benefit: Saving part of 20 min/day each Crew Member spends
updating IMS (total = 730 hours/yr) . System Effectiveness (β) parameter is
critical.
As with any Cost/Benefit Analysis, results are limited – can provide
guidance, but not absolute truth. Assumptions and unknowns are important.
45
RAMSES Demo
46
Demo Flow
1. Login to RAILS with web browser
2. Smart Container Inventory (what is in it?)
•
•
Inventory database
Real-time updating
3. Supply Item Hierarchical Tracking (where is it moving (item)?)
•
•
Removal of item
Return item
Login Information
4. Supply Item Addition
5. Item Search (where can I find …?)
6. Rule-based Analytics
•
•
•
Low Inventory Warning
Mass Properties, Shelf Life
Supply Class Incompatibility Rule
7. Automatic Messaging (email)
8. Logging out
47
http://projects.payload.com/RailsV2
user: ramses
password: rfid1
Discussion
Suggestions for Phase 3
48
Interest/Contact Points at NASA
• NASA Stennis Space Center
– T9.02 Integrated Life-Cycle Asset Mapping,
Management, and Tracking Lead Center: SSC
• NASA Wireless & RFID Working Group
– Lead Center: JSC
– Asset Management on ISS
– Lunar Surface Micro-Logistics (e.g. in Habitat)
• NASA Glenn (and NASA JSC CHeCS)
– Crew Medical Supply Inventory
• NASA Astronaut Office
– Greg Chamitoff
– ISS Operations Branch
49
Recommendations for Phase 3
• Establish “Permanent” Test Implementation at JSC
– Bldg. 9 ISS Mockup
– Bldg. 14 Lunar Habitat Mockup
• On-Orbit DTO Demonstration in 2010-2011 timeframe
with “a few” retrofitted CTBs
–
–
–
–
How many? What items?
Integration with IMS
Medical supply tracking
STS-134 and E25/E26 are potential targets of opportunity
• Continue/Evolve Database and Rule-Base Development
– Critical Inventory Levels with Crew Size 6
– Extended ISS Operations (2016-2020)
• Possible recommendation by Augustine Commission today
50
Thank you!
Questions?
Backup Slides
52
T9.02 Integrated Life-Cycle Asset Mapping,
Management, and Tracking Lead Center: SSC
STTR Topic Recap
To support NASA’s need for reliable and low-cost asset management in all of its
programs including Earth-based activities, robotic and human lunar exploration, and
planning for later expeditions to Mars and beyond, the Earth Science Applications
Directorate at Stennis Space Center seeks proposals supporting NASA’s
requirements for asset management. With proper physical infrastructure and
information systems, identification tags should allow any item to be tracked
throughout its life cycle. When combined with Earth and lunar GIS, and related
supporting documentation, any significant asset should be located, through
time and space, as well as organization. Starting with programmatic requirements
and design data, assets would be tracked through manufacture, testing, possible
launch, use, maintenance, and eventual disposal. Innovative technology and
information architectures should integrate and visually map infrastructure,
assets, and associated documentation with the ability to link to program structure,
budget, and workflow. …. A simple operator interface would provide “finger-tip
knowledge” about the asset. …
The innovation may eventually interoperate with a holistic information system, and may
not preclude other uses for a terrestrial and lunar GIS such as:
•
•
•
Operational infrastructure support AM/FM (automated mapping / facilities
management);
Asset and resource management, including waste disposal;
2005/6 SBIR Solicitation
Lunar landing and facility site selection, and optimization …..other
53
Commercial RFID vs NASA
• NASA/Exploration
• Commercial RFID Technology
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
– complex supply class
structure
– high value items
– dynamic environment, items
are repackaged, moved
frequently  changing
parent/child relationships
– need high read rates
(reliability) > 95%
– routing less predictable
– extreme environments
– less cost sensitive in terms
of $/tag
pushed by Wal-Mart
some industry leaders (Gillette)
mainly “slap and ship”
good for stable supply and
demand situations
items remain in their packaging
throughout the supply chain
predictable routing
tagging at the box or pallet level,
rarely below at the item level
very cost sensitive ($/tag must
be very low)
54
Frequency and Range
Frequency
Range
Tag cost
Applications
Low-frequency
125 - 148 KHz
3 feet
$1+
Pet and ranch animal
identification;
car keylocks
High-frequency
13.56 MHz
3 feet
$0.50
library book identification;
clothing identification; smart
cards
Ultra-high freq
915 MHz
25 feet
$2+
Supply chain tracking:
Box, pallet, container, trailer
tracking
Microwave:
2.45GHz
100 feet
$25+
Highway toll collection;
vehicle fleet identification
55
Flight Day One Results with Alien Tags
Tissues Comparison
30
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Water Comparison
24
18
Baseline
12
ZeroG
6
Jan Test Data
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
30
24
18
Baseline
12
ZeroG
6
Jan Test Data
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
Metals Comparison
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Mixed Items Comparison
30
24
18
Baseline
12
ZeroG
6
Jan Test Data
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
56
60
54
48
42
36
30
24
18
12
6
0
Baseline
ZeroG
Jan Test Data
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Number of Items in CTB
Flight Day One Results with Alien Tags
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Read Rate Tissues Comparison
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Read Rate Water Comparison
Baseline
ZeroG
Jan Test Data
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Baseline
ZeroG
Jan Test Data
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Read Rate Mixed Items Comparison
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Read Rate Metals Comparison
Baseline
ZeroG
Jan Test Data
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
57
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
Baseline
ZeroG
Jan Test Data
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Number of Items in CTB
Flight Day Two Results with Omni Tags
Tissues Comparison
30
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
Water Comparison
24
18
Baseline
12
ZeroG
6
0
0
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
30
24
18
0
0
Number of Items Detected
Number of Items Detected
24
18
Baseline
ZeroG
0
0
6
12
18
24
6
12
18
24
30
Number of Items in CTB
Mixed Items Comparison
30
6
ZeroG
6
Metals Comparison
12
Baseline
12
30
Number of Items in CTB
58
60
54
48
42
36
30
24
18
12
6
0
Baseline
ZeroG
0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Number of Items in CTB
ZeroG with
Plastic Cover
Flight Day Two Results with Omni Tags
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Tissues Read Rate Comparison
Read Rate
Read Rate
Water Read Rate Comparison
Baseline
ZeroG
0
6
12
18
24
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
30
ZeroG
24
Number of Items in CTB
18
24
30
Mixed Items Read Rate Comparison
Baseline
18
12
30
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Read Rate
Read Rate
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
12
6
Number of Items in CTB
Metals Read Rate Comparison
6
ZeroG
0
Number of Items in CTB
0
Baseline
59
Baseline
ZeroG
ZeroG with
Plastic Cover
0
6 12 18 24 30 36 42 48 54 60
Number of Items in CTB
Analysis Flowchart
60
Monte Carlo Results: CDF
• Modification Kits Implementation
• 100% of CTBs wired
61
Monte Carlo Results: Histogram
• Modification Kits Implementation
• 100% of CTBs wired
62
Quantifying Value (“Opportunity Cost”) of
Cargo Launch Volume & Mass
Cost Per Mission (Variable
Recurring Cost)
Shuttle MPLM
Progress M1
ATV
HTV
$
$
$
$
400,000,000
89,423,000
500,000,000
500,000,000
Max Cargo Max Dry Cargo
Capacity (kg)
Mass (kg)
9400
2230
7667
6000
9400
1800
5500
5500
Available Dry
Cargo Volume
(m^3)
31
6.6
13.8
14
Cost Per Cubic Meter
of Dry Cargo Volume
$
$
$
$
12,903,225.81
13,548,939.39
36,231,884.06
35,714,285.71
Notes:
- Assumed for Shuttle MPLM missions that all cargo capacity is located in MPLM.
- All “Cost Per Mission” values should be regarded as rough approximations, and do not include program costs.
- Dry Cargo Volume is vehicle’s “habitable” volume; this is larger than actual dry cargo volume, but only consistent
value available
References:
- Cost Per Mission [2].
- Max Cargo - Shuttle MPLM [5], Progress M1 [3], ATV [4], HTV [6].
- Max Dry Cargo Mass - Shuttle MPLM [5], Progress M1 [3], ATV [4], HTV [5].
- Available Dry Cargo Volume – Shuttle MPLM [5], Progress M1 [7], ATV [8], HTV [5].
63
Quantifying Value (“Opportunity Cost”) of
Cargo Launch Volume & Mass
64
Quantifying Value of On-Orbit Crew Time
ISS Ops Budget:
US
RSA
JAXA
ESA
CSA
Total:
•
$
$
$
$
$
$
2010-2016
2,261,175,000
550,000,000
377,846,475
245,009,824
67,894,289
3,501,925,587
Sample Calculations:
–
–
–
–
–
•
$
$
$
$
$
$
2009
2,060,200,000
550,000,000
344,263,185
223,233,159
61,859,791
3,239,556,136
US = $2,060,200,000
from NASA FY 2009 Budget Proposal
[11]
Common Systems Operations Costs = (1/.766) * US = $2,689,556,136 [10]
JAXA = (.128)*Common Systems Operations Costs = $344,263,185
[10]
ESA = (.083)*Common Systems Operations Costs =$223,233,159
[10]
CSA = (.023)*Common Systems Operations Costs = $61,859,791
[10]
Note:
– Value of $550 million for RSA is an educated guess; no data available
65
General Inputs (Discrete Calc, Mod-Kits
Implementation Scenario)
Year:
# Crew:
Avg. ISS Budget: $
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
$ / 'Active' Crew Hr: $
2009
3
3,239,556,135.77 $
16
184,906.17 $
2010-2016
6
3,501,925,587.47
16
99,940.80
RFID System Weight (lbs):
Launch Cost ($ / lb): $
$ / System: $
4
25,511.96 $
102,047.85 $
4
35,715.01
142,860.02
Discount Rate:
Volume of Standard CTB (m^3):
Percent of Standard CTB volume required for RFID System:
Volume Cost ($ / m^3): $
$ / System: $
7%
0.053
12%
20,272,793.47 $
128,717.97 $
7%
0.053
12%
31,598,719.79
200,629.63
Note:
•“Launch Cost ($/lb)” and “Volume Cost ($/m^3)” both have different values for Pre- and Post-Shuttle Retirement. For
convenience, these values are listed under “2009” and “2010-2016” respectively, even though the Shuttle will not
retire until the end of 2010. All calculations are performed using the correct retirement date.
66
General Inputs (Discrete Calc, Mod-Kits
Implementation Scenario)
Cost to Build & Prepare Modification Kit to Install RFID System: $
Cost of Hardware Components for 1 RFID System: $
Time Required for Astronauts to Transfer CTB Contents to new CTB (hr):
Number of CTBs upgraded by On-Orbit Crew:
3,000.00
3,000.00
1/3
600
Cost of 1 NASA Engineer Person-Year (Salary + Overhead): $
# NASA Engineer Person-Years for Flight Certification Testing & Review:
# NASA Engineer Person-Years for Operational Maintenance (per year):
# ISOs Employed to Cover 1 Console Shift / Day, 365 Days / Yr:
200,000.00
7
2
12
# of CTBs On-Orbit that are to be wired:
600
First Year to Realize Benefits:
Final Year of ISS Operations:
2010
2016
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be Automated by Wired CTBs:
% of CTB Transactions Accurately Detected by System:
SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS (%) for those CTBs that are Wired:
50%
95%
48%
67
Costs (Discrete Calc, Mod-Kits)
Name
Cost to Build & Prepare Modification Kit to Install RFID System
RAMSES Hardware System (parts & labor)
NASA Engineer Time for Flight Certification testing & approval (Person-Yr)
Opportunity Cost of additional mass launched ('09)
Opportunity Cost of cargo displaced due to volume of RFID systems ('09)
Opportunity Cost for On-Orbit Crew to Upgrade CTBs ('09)
Name
NASA Engineer Time for RAMSES operational maintenance (Person-Yr)
Total Capital Costs
One-Time (FY 2009)
Cost ($) Per Unit
Quantity
$
3,000.00
600
$
3,000.00
600
$
200,000.00
7
$
102,047.85
600
$
128,717.97
600
$
61,635.39
600
TOTAL One-Time:
2009
Total ($)
$
1,800,000.00
$
1,800,000.00
$
1,400,000.00
$
61,228,712.53
$
77,230,779.89
$
36,981,234.43
$ 180,440,726.84
Comment
estimate; new bag = $3-5k
estimate; parts ~$3k
estimate; 1 FTE @ GS 12 Step 5 (Hou, TX) + overhead
estimate; 4lb per system
estimate; 0.12 of std CTB volume. required per sys
estimate; 1/3 crew hr per bag, all bags
Spent in FY 2009; No Discount
Recurring Costs during Operations (Per Year)
Cost ($)
Quantity Total ($)
Comment
$
200,000.00
2 $
400,000.00 Cost = salary + overhead
% of CTBs Launched Fiscal Yr TOTAL Recurring:
100%
2009 $
400,000.00
100%
2010 $
373,831.78
100%
2011 $
349,375.49
100%
2012 $
326,519.15
100%
2013 $
305,158.08
100%
2014 $
285,194.47
100%
2015 $
266,536.89
100%
2016 $
249,099.90
Lifetime TOTAL Costs:
$
Present value; No Discount (Crew = 3)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
182,996,442.60
Aurora Flight Sciences / Payload Systems Division
Grindle
68
Page 68
2008
September 9,
Benefits (Discrete Calc, Mod-Kits)
Name
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Inventory Audits / yr (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Inventory Audits / yr (2010-2016)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Missing Items Searches / yr (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Missing Items Searches / yr (2010-2016)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Updating IMS (offical timeline) (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Updating IMS (offical timeline) (2010-2016)
Flight Controller (ISO) Time to help crew update IMS (Person-Yr)
Potential Value Added (Crew Time Freed) & Cost Savings Per Year
Cost ($)
Quantity Total ($)
$
184,906.17
24 $
4,437,748.13
$
99,940.80
24 $
2,398,579.17
$
184,906.17
10 $
1,849,061.72
$
99,940.80
10 $
999,407.99
$
184,906.17
365 $
67,490,752.83
$
99,940.80
730 $
72,956,783.07
$
150,000.00
6 $
900,000.00
% of CTBs Wired
Fiscal Yr TOTAL Recurring:
0%
2009 $
100%
2010 $
34,295,341.92
100%
2011 $
32,051,721.42
100%
2012 $
29,954,879.84
100%
2013 $
27,995,214.80
100%
2014 $
26,163,752.15
100%
2015 $
24,452,104.81
100%
2016 $
22,852,434.40
ISS Ops currently projected for NASA funding through end of FY 2016;
if RAMSES was installed and operational by end of FY 2010, potential valued-added &
cost-savings over ISS lifetime =
Lifetime TOTAL Savings = $
Net Present Value = $
Comment
4 hrs/yr/crew member; source = Ursula Stockdale
4 hrs/yr/crew member; source = Ursula Stockdale
estimate; ~10 hrs / yr source = Ursula Stockdale
estimate; ~10 hrs / yr source = Ursula Stockdale
official NASA policy (20 min / day / crew member); 3 crew
official NASA policy (20 min / day / crew member); 6 crew
estimated # of ISOs to support 1 console shift /day, 365 days / yr;
assumed 1 FTE @ GS 11 Step 5 (Hou, TX) + overhead
Present value; No Discount (Crew = 3)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
197,765,449.35
14,769,006.75 Lifetime Total Savings - Lifetime Total Costs
Aurora Flight Sciences / Payload Systems Division
Grindle
69
Page 69
2008
September 9,
General Inputs (Discrete Calc, Phase-In
Implementation Scenario)
Year:
# Crew:
Avg. ISS Budget: $
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
$ / 'Active' Crew Hr: $
2009
3
3,239,556,135.77 $
16
184,906.17 $
2010-2016
6
3,501,925,587.47
16
99,940.80
RFID System Weight (lbs):
Launch Cost ($ / lb): $
$ / System: $
4
25,511.96 $
102,047.85 $
4
35,715.01
142,860.02
Discount Rate:
Volume of Standard CTB (m^3):
Percent of Standard CTB volume required for RFID System:
Volume Cost ($ / m^3): $
$ / System: $
7%
0.053
12%
20,272,793.47 $
128,717.97 $
7%
0.053
12%
31,598,719.79
200,629.63
Note:
•“Launch Cost ($/lb)” and “Volume Cost ($/m^3)” both have different values for Pre- and Post-Shuttle Retirement. For
convenience, these values are listed under “2009” and “2010-2016” respectively, even though the Shuttle will not
retire until the end of 2010. All calculations are performed using the correct retirement date.
70
General Inputs (Discrete Calc, Phase-In
Implementation Scenario)
Year:
Cost to Modify 1 CTB for RFID System (add pockets, insulation, install electronics): $
2009
3,000.00
Cost of Hardware Components for 1 RFID System: $
Time Required for Astronauts to Transfer CTB Contents to new CTB (hr):
Number of CTBs Contents Transferred to Wired CTB On-Orbit:
3,000.00
1/3
80
Cost of 1 NASA Engineer Person-Year (Salary + Overhead): $
# NASA Engineer Person-Years for Flight Certification Testing & Review:
# NASA Engineer Person-Years for Operational Maintenance (per year):
# ISOs Employed to Cover 1 Console Shift / Day, 365 Days / Yr
200,000.00
7
2
6
# of CTBs On-Orbit:
Wired CTB Launch Rate (% of Total ISS Population):
First Year to Realize Benefits:
Final Year of ISS Operations:
600
13%
2010
2016
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be Automated by Wired CTBs:
% of CTB Transactions Accurately Detected by System:
SYSTEM EFFECTIVENESS (%) for those CTBs that are Wired:
50%
95%
48%
71
2010-2016
520
Costs (Discrete Calc, Phase-In)
Name
NASA Engineer Time for Flight Certification testing & approval (Person-Yr)
Total Capital Costs
One-Time (FY 2009)
Cost ($)
Quantity Total ($)
Comment
$
200,000.00
7 $
1,400,000.00 estimate; 1 FTE @ GS 12 Step 5 (Hou, TX) + overhead
TOTAL One-Time:
Name
Modify Standard Cargo Transfer Bag for RAMSES (add pockets, insulation)
RAMSES Hardware System (parts & labor)
NASA Engineer Time for RAMSES operational maintenance (Person-Yr)
Opportunity cost of additional mass launched ('09-'10)
Opportunity cost of additional mass launched ('11-'16)
Opportunity Cost of cargo displaced due to volume of RFID systems ('09-'10)
Opportunity Cost of cargo displaced due to volume of RFID systems ('11-16)
Opportunity Cost for On-Orbit Crew to Upgrade CTBs (2009)
Opportunity Cost for On-Orbit Crew to Upgrade CTBs (2010-2016)
2009 $
1,400,000.00 Spent in FY 2009; No Discount
Recurring Costs during Ramp-Up (Per Year)
Cost ($)
Quantity Total ($)
$
3,000.00
80 $
239,400.00
$
3,000.00
80 $
239,400.00
$
200,000.00
2 $
400,000.00
$
102,047.85
80 $
8,143,418.77
$
142,860.02
80 $
11,400,229.67
$
128,717.97
80 $
10,271,693.73
$
200,629.63
80 $
16,010,244.09
$
61,635.39
80 $
4,918,504.18
$
33,313.60
80 $
2,658,425.25
% of CTBs Launched Fiscal Yr TOTAL Recurring:
13%
2009 $
24,212,416.67
27%
2010 $
20,516,203.49
40%
2011 $
24,186,294.09
53%
2012 $
22,604,013.17
67%
2013 $
21,125,245.95
80%
2014 $
19,743,220.51
93%
2015 $
18,451,607.96
100%
2016 $
8,946,391.32
Lifetime TOTAL Costs:
72
$
161,185,393.16
Comment
estimate; new bag = $3-5k
estimate; parts ~$2k
cost = salary + overhead
estimate; 4lb per system
estimate; 4lb per system
estimate; 0.12 of std CTB volume. required per sys
estimate; 0.12 of std CTB volume. required per sys
estimate; 1/3 crew hr per bag, all bags
estimate; 1/3 crew hr per bag, all bags
Present value; No Discount (Crew = 3)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Benefits (Discrete Calc, Phase-In)
Name
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Inventory Audits / yr (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Inventory Audits / yr (2010-2016)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Missing Items Searches / yr (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Missing Items Searches / yr (2010-2016)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Updating IMS (offical timeline) (2009)
Astronaut On-Orbit Hours for Updating IMS (offical timeline) (2010-2016)
Flight Controller (ISO) Time to help crew update IMS (Person-Yr)
Potential Value Added (Crew Time Freed) & Cost Savings Per Year
Cost ($)
Quantity Total ($)
$
184,906.17
24 $
4,437,748.13
$
99,940.80
24 $
2,398,579.17
$
184,906.17
10 $
1,849,061.72
$
99,940.80
10 $
999,407.99
$
184,906.17
365 $
67,490,752.83
$
99,940.80
730 $
72,956,783.07
$
150,000.00
6 $
900,000.00
% of CTBs Wired
Fiscal Yr TOTAL Recurring:
0%
2009 $
13%
2010 $
4,561,280.48
27%
2011 $
8,525,757.90
40%
2012 $
11,951,997.05
53%
2013 $
14,893,454.27
67%
2014 $
17,398,895.18
80%
2015 $
19,512,779.64
93%
2016 $
21,275,616.43
ISS Ops currently projected for NASA funding through end of FY 2016;
if RAMSES was installed and operational by end of FY 2010, potential valued-added &
cost-savings over ISS lifetime =
Lifetime TOTAL
Savings
$
NPV =
$
73
Comment
4 hrs/yr/crew member; source = Ursula Stockdale
4 hrs/yr/crew member; source = Ursula Stockdale
estimate; ~10 hrs / yr source = Ursula Stockdale
estimate; ~10 hrs / yr source = Ursula Stockdale
official NASA policy (20 min / day / crew member); 3 crew
official NASA policy (20 min / day / crew member); 6 cew
estimated # of ISOs to support 1 console shift /day, 365 days / yr;
assumed 1 FTE @ GS 11 Step 5 (Hou, TX) + overhead
Present value; No Discount (Crew = 3)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
Assumes Discount Rate; (Crew = 6)
98,119,780.95
(63,065,612.21) Lifetime Total Savings - Lifetime Total Costs
Normally-Distributed Random Variables
Mod-Kits
Phase-In
Lower 95%
Upper 95%
Mean
Std Dev
2009-2010
Bound
Bound
Avg. Total ISS Budget: $3,100,000,000 $3,650,000,000 $ 3,375,000,000 $ 137,500,000 $ 3,168,583,748
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
10
18
14
2
12
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be
30%
70%
50%
10%
45%
Automated by Wired CTBs:
% of CTB Transactions Accurately
80%
100%
90%
5%
92%
Detected by System:
$ / m^3 of Cargo Up-Volume: $ 10,000,000
$50,000,000 $
30,000,000 $ 10,000,000 $
35,979,362
Percent of Standard CTB volume
4%
20%
12%
4%
8%
required for RFID System:
Lower 95%
Upper 95%
Mean
Std Dev
2009-2010
Bound
Bound
Avg. Total ISS Budget: $3,100,000,000 $3,650,000,000 $3,375,000,000 $137,500,000 $3,188,222,430
13
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
10
18
14
2
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be
30%
70%
50%
10%
48%
Automated by Wired CTBs:
% of CTB Transactions Accurately
80%
100%
90%
5%
96%
Detected by System:
$50,000,000 $ 30,000,000 $ 10,000,000 $ 39,046,734
$ / m^3 of Cargo Up-Volume: $ 10,000,000
Percent of Standard CTB volume required
4%
20%
12.0%
4.0%
14%
for RFID System:
Wired CTB Launch Rate (% of Total ISS
5%
15%
10.0%
2.5%
11%
Population):
74
2011-2016
$ 3,365,681,107
$
28,675,797
2011-2016
$3,524,480,947
$
41,051,962
Uniformly-Distributed Random Variables
Mod-Kits
Avg. Total ISS Budget:
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be Automated by Wired CTBs:
% of CTB Transactions Accurately Detected by System:
$ / m^3 of Cargo Up-Volume:
Percent of Standard CTB volume required for RFID System:
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
2009-2010
$ 3,100,000,000 $ 3,650,000,000 $ 3,145,265,355
10
18
10
30%
70%
41%
80%
100%
97%
$
10,000,000
$50,000,000 $
11,549,377
4%
20%
4%
2011-2016
$ 3,363,132,171
$
49,555,001
Phase-In
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
2009-2010
Avg. Total ISS Budget: $ 3,100,000,000 $ 3,650,000,000 $ 3,357,339,623
13
# "Active" Crew Hours in a Day:
10
18
50%
% On-orbit IMS Entries that could be Automated by Wired CTBs:
30%
70%
85%
% of CTB Transactions Accurately Detected by System:
80%
100%
$ / m^3 of Cargo Up-Volume: $
10,000,000
$50,000,000 $ 15,565,849
4%
20%
13%
Percent of Standard CTB volume required for RFID System:
5%
15%
6%
Wired CTB Launch Rate (% of Total ISS Population):
75
2011-2016
$ 3,490,240,955
$
43,202,514
Future Work – Cost/Benefit Analysis
• Common Systems Operations Costs
– Likely to be larger than currently calculated (baseline uses Proposed NASA FY
2009 ISS Ops Budget as reference, but this does not include launch costs)
 Would increase likelihood & magnitude of NPV (increase value of Crew Time)
– Russian Ops Costs unknown; likely to be larger as well? Same impact.
•
Dry Cargo Volume Capacity of Launch Vehicles
– Only “habitable volume” is consistently available; overestimates cargo space.
 Would decrease likelihood & magnitude of NPV (increase cost of cargo volume)
•
Benefits of Enhanced Safety and Mission Assurance are not included in this
analysis
•
Cost of integrating RAMSES with existing IMS not included (technical &
political)
76
Contacts
Principal Investigator (MIT):
Prof. Olivier de Weck
MIT Dept of Aeronautics and Astronautics
MIT Room E40-261
77 Massachusetts Avenue
Cambridge, MA 02139
deweck@mit.edu
(617) 715-5195
Project Manager (Aurora Flight Sciences):
Joe C. Parrish
Aurora Flight Sciences
One Broadway, 12th Floor
Cambridge, MA 02142
jparrish@aurora.aero
(617) 500-0248
77