This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Equivalent Mass Versus Life Cycle Cost for Life Support Technology Selection
Technical Paper
2003-01-2635
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
The decision to develop a particular life support technology or to select it for flight usually depends on the cost to develop and fly it. Other criteria such as performance, safety, reliability, crew time, and technical and schedule risk are considered, but cost is always an important factor. Because launch cost would account for much of the cost of a future planetary mission, and because launch cost is directly proportional to the mass launched, equivalent mass has been used instead of cost to select advanced life support technology. The equivalent mass of a life support system includes the estimated mass of the hardware and of the spacecraft pressurized volume, power supply, and cooling system that the hardware requires. The equivalent mass of a system is defined as the total payload launch mass needed to provide and support the system. An extension of equivalent mass, Equivalent System Mass (ESM), has been established for use in the Advanced Life Support project. ESM adds a mass-equivalent of crew time and possibly other cost factors to equivalent mass. Traditional equivalent mass is strictly based on flown mass and reflects only the launch cost. ESM includes other important cost factors, but it complicates the simple “flown mass” definition of equivalent mass by adding a non-physical mass penalty for crew time that may exceed the actual flown mass. Equivalent mass is used only in life support analysis. Life Cycle Cost (LCC) is much more commonly used. LCC includes DDT&E, launch, and operations costs. For Earth orbit rather than planetary missions, the launch cost is less than the cost of Design, Development, Test, and Evaluation (DDT&E). LCC is a more inclusive cost estimator than equivalent mass. The relative costs of development, launch, and operations vary depending on the mission destination and duration. Since DDT&E or operations may cost more than launch, LCC gives a more accurate relative cost ranking than equivalent mass. To select the lowest cost technology for a particular application we should use LCC rather than equivalent mass.
Authors
Citation
Jones, H., "Equivalent Mass Versus Life Cycle Cost for Life Support Technology Selection," SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-2635, 2003, https://doi.org/10.4271/2003-01-2635.Also In
References
- BVAD, Advanced Life Support Baseline Values and Assumptions Document JSC CTSD-ADV-484 5 8 2002
- Carrasquillo R. L. Carter D. L. Holder D. W. Jr. McGriff C. F. Ogle K. Y. Space Station Freedom Environmental Control and Life Support System Regenerative Subsystem Selection NASA TM-4340 February 1992
- Doll S. Eckart P. “Environmental Control and Life Support Systems (ECLSS),” Larson W. K. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Drysdale A. “Metrics and System Analysis,” SAE Technical Paper No. 981746 Society of Automotive Engineers Warrendale, PA 28th International Conference on Environmental Systems 1998
- Drysdale Alan Mark Thomas Mark Fresa Ray Wheeler “OCAM - A CELSS Modeling Tool: Description and Results,” SAE Technical Paper No. 921241 Society of Automotive Engineers Warrendale, PA 22nd International Conference on Environmental Systems 1992
- Drysdale “Equivalent Mass and Infrastructure Costs,” ALS Systems Workshop March 26, 1998
- Drysdale “ESM Calculation - current SIMA methods,” teleconference March 11, 2002
- Drysdale A.E. Hanford A.J. Advanced Life Support Research and Technology Development Metric - Baseline CTSD-AD-384, JSC 39503 November 1999
- Eckart P. Spaceflight Life Support and Biospherics Space Technology Library Kluwer Academic Dordrecht 1996
- Fisher J. W. “The Effect of Mission Location on Mission Costs and Equivalent System Mass,” SAE Technical Paper No. 2003-01-2633 33rd International Conference on Environmental Systems 2003
- Greenberg J.S. “Appendix: CERs and Models” “Cost-Estimating Relationships in Space Programs,” Space Economics Greenberg J.S. Hertzfeld H.R. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Washington 1992
- Guerra L. Shishko R. “Estimating the Cost of Crewed Space Systems,” Larson W. J. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Jones H. W. “The Cost and Equivalent System Mass of Space Crew Time,” SAE Paper No. 2001-01-2359 31st International Conference on Environmental Systems 2001
- Jones H. W. “Multiple Metrics for Advanced Life Support,” SAE Technical Paper No. 1999-01-2079 Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Environmental Systems 1999
- Jones H. W. Dillon-Merrill R. Tri T.O. Henninger D.L. “ Reducing the Risk of Human Space Missions with INTEGRITY,” SAE Technical Paper No. 2003-01-2572 Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Environmental Systems 2003
- Larson W. J. Balogh W. “Designing Human Space Missions,” in” Larson W. J. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Larson W. J. Pranke L. K. Human Spaceflight: Mission Analysis and Design McGraw-Hill New York 2000
- Levri J. A. Vaccari D. A. Drysdale A. E. “Theory and Application of the Equivalent System Mass Metric,” SAE Paper No. 2000-01-2395 30th International Conference on Environmental Systems 2000
- Maxwell S. Drysdale A. “Assessment of Waste Processing Technologies for 3 Missions,” SAE Paper No. 2001-01-2365 31st International Conference on Environmental Systems 2001
- National Academy Press Reducing the Costs of Space Science Research Missions http://www.nationalacademies.org/ssb/jctmenu.html Washington 1997
- Wertz J. R. Larson W. J. Reducing Space Mission Cost Space Technology Series Kluwer, Dordrecht 1996
- Wertz J. R. Larson W. J. Space Mission Analysis and Design third edition Space Technology Series Kluwer, Dordrecht 1999