parametric cost evaluation to improve product competitiveness.pdfparametric cost evaluation to...

8323

0910

-DO

C-T

AS-IT

-003

18/10/2013

Ref.:

Parametric cost evaluation to improve product competitiveness

COST MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK WORLDWIDE WORKSHOPRome, 24-25/10/2013

Il documento non deve essere riprodotto, modificato, adattato, pubblicato, tradotto in qualsiasi forma sostanziale, in tutto o in parte,né divulgato a terze parti senza il preventivo consenso scritto di Thales Alenia Space - © 2013, Thales Alenia Space

18/10/2013

2

Ref.:

Contents

Thales Alenia Space: a complete range of solutions

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation using Price/True Planning

Bid preparation process & Cost Estimate

From Bid Preparation to Project Control


18/10/2013

3

Ref.:

Thales Alenia Space - A Global Offer

3 3

We design, build and

deliver end-to-end

space systems for

telecommunications,

observation,

navigation and

exploration

A Global Offer from Equipment to End-to-End Space Systems


18/10/2013

Ref.:

Thales Alenia SpaceA committed partner to deliver cutting-edge solutions

4 44 4

A world player in each of the space markets

Telecommunications Observation Navigation Exploration/Science

Fixed / Mobile

Broadband

Dual / Military

Secured

Climate Change

Meteorology

Oceanography

Intelligence

Surveillance

Localization

Aeronautical Communications

Data collect

Planetology

Fundamental physics

Astronomy

Human spaceflights

Space transportationsystems

AMC 21, Amos 4/5, Arabsat , Arsat-1, Athena-Fidus, Ciel 2, EuropaSat, Express MD1/MD2, Globalstar , Hispasat , Iridium Next, Kazsat 2, Koreasat 6, Loutch 5/6, Nilesat 201, O3B, OverHorizon 1, Palapa-D1, RascomStar-Qaf 1R, Satcom BW 2a/2b, Sicral 1B, Sicral 2, Syracuse 1/2/3, Thor 6,Turksat 3A, W2A, W3B, W3C, W3D, W7,W6A, Yahsat 1A/1B, Yamal 401/402

Meteosat/MSG/MTG Jason, Calipso, COSMO-SkyMed, Sentinel 1&3, Envisat, ERS, GOCE, Helios, IASI, Pleiades, SPOT, CSO, Gokturk…

EGNOS, Galileo, MTSat… Herschel,Planck, Exomars, Alma, Corot, Cassini-Huygens, Node 2&3, Columbus, Cupola, MPLM, Automated Transfer Vehicle (ATV), …


TAS-13-OCS-03Heritage Current Future

• ESA: ERS 1&2• NASA/ASI: Cassini to Saturn• ESA: ENVISAT• NASA/ASI: SLR-1,2 and SRTM• CSA/MDA: Radarsat-2• ESA/EUMETSAT: METOP• ESA/EUMETSAT: Meteosat Second

Generation• NASA/CNES: Jason 1&2• ESA: Cryosat-1&2• ISS: SADKO-1&2• ESA/ASI: Mars Express• NASA/ASI: Mars MRO• German BWD: SARLUPE• ASI: Archeo Airborne SAR• Telaer Consortium: Telaer Airborne

SAR

• ASI/I-MOD: Cosmo SkyMED• I-MOD: Imaging & Exploitation

Station (SFM)• CONAE: SIASGE• KARI: KOMPSAT-5• OCCAR/I-MOD/DGA: MUSIS• ESA: Cryosat-3• CNES/ISRO: Altika• ESA/EUMETSAT: Meteosat Third

Generation• ESA: GMES Sentinel 1 A&B• ESA: GMES Sentinel 3 A&B• ASI: PRISMA

Observation Systems and Radar Missions:A Unique Heritage & Role in the International Scenario

• ASI/I-MOD: COSMO Second Generation

• ESA: BIOMASS• ESA: CoreH20• ESA: GMES Sentinels Follow-on• ESA/CNES: Jason Continuity• ISS: SADKO-3• CNES/NASA: SWOT• CNES: SWIM• METOP Second Generation• ESA/NASA: JUICE, Jupiter Icy

Moons Explorer• KARI: KOMPSAT-6• Other Export Opportunities


18/10/2013

6

Ref.:

TAS-I ExperienceParametric cost evaluation using True Planning

Transfer to TAS-I working group the knowledge on Price methodology and True Planning tool

Share the approach

Select a subset of components to be used for parametric cost estimation

Focus on development and production costs of specific components

True Planning has been used for parametric cost evaluation in the frame of Cosmo Second Generation proposal phase

OBJECTIVESProvide an independent evaluation for specific ItemsSupport the Customer in project data modeling for parametric cost estimation

Activity carried out

with the support of

Price Systems

consultants

MAIN STEPS


18/10/2013

7

Ref.:

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation Project Phases – PBS Definition

Definition of the Project Breakdown Structure (PBS) including:

- PBS Satellite- PBS System Level Tools & Facilities - PBS Launch Vehicle & Satellite Simulator & Operations

Training on True Planning Methodology

Theoretical Training On-the-job training on real cases


18/10/2013

8

Ref.:

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation Project Phases – Components IdentificationIdentification of

componentsfor parametric cost

evaluation

Enter project data foridentified components

e.g.• Memory modules• Antenna systems• On-board Software.

Multiplier for Sustaining Structural Tooling and Test Sets

30 Percent of New Electronics (%) 15

Multiplier for Sustaining Electronic Tooling and Test Sets

29 Manufacturing Complexity forElectronics

14

Multiplier for Initial Structural Tooling and Test Sets

28 Percent of Design Repeat for Structure (%)

13

Multiplier for Initial Electronic Tooling and Test Sets

27 Percent of New Structure (%) 12

Hardware Software Integration Factor26 Manufacturing Complexity for Structure11

External Integration Complexity for Electronics 25 Volume (l) 10

External Integration Complexity for Structure 24 Weight of Electronics (kg) 9

Year of Technology23Weight of Structure (kg) 8

Technology Obsolescence Control22 Operating Specification7

Technology Improvement Control21 Equipment Type6

Manufacturing Process Index20 Total Number of Prototypes Produced 5

Material Learning Curve (%) 19 Total Number of Production Units Produced

4

Labor Learning Curve (%) 18 Number of Additional Prototypes3

Engineering Complexity17 Number of Additional Production Units 2

Percent of Design Repeat for Electronics (%) 16 Quantity Per Next Higher Level 1

PARAMETER # PARAMETER #

Multiplier for Sustaining Structural Tooling and Test Sets

30 Percent of New Electronics (%) 15

Multiplier for Sustaining Electronic Tooling and Test Sets

29 Manufacturing Complexity forElectronics

14

Multiplier for Initial Structural Tooling and Test Sets

28 Percent of Design Repeat for Structure (%)

13

Multiplier for Initial Electronic Tooling and Test Sets

27 Percent of New Structure (%) 12

Hardware Software Integration Factor26 Manufacturing Complexity for Structure11

External Integration Complexity for Electronics 25 Volume (l) 10

External Integration Complexity for Structure 24 Weight of Electronics (kg) 9

Year of Technology23Weight of Structure (kg) 8

Technology Obsolescence Control22 Operating Specification7

Technology Improvement Control21 Equipment Type6

Manufacturing Process Index20 Total Number of Prototypes Produced 5

Material Learning Curve (%) 19 Total Number of Production Units Produced

4

Labor Learning Curve (%) 18 Number of Additional Prototypes3

Engineering Complexity17 Number of Additional Production Units 2

Percent of Design Repeat for Electronics (%) 16 Quantity Per Next Higher Level 1


Estimate to Complete (%) 26

Fixed Headcount for Maintenance51 Project Constraints25

Repair Level Multiplier50 Language Object Oriented24

Defect Detection Multiplier49 Language23

Lifecycle Organizational Productivity48 Auto Translation Tool Efficiency22

Adaptation Level Multiplier47 Auto Trans Size Non-executable (%) 21

Quality Multiplier46 Auto Translated Code Size20

Adaptation Distribution45 Auto Gen Size Non-executable (%) 19

Security Process Level44 Auto Generated Code Size18

Security Level43 Code Removal Complexity17

Tailoring Multiplier42 Deleted Code Size16

Tailoring Complexity41 Reused Size Non-executable (%) 15

Evaluation Multiplier40 Reused Code Size14

Components under Detailed Evaluation(%) 39 Percent of Test Adapted (%) 13

Components under Evaluation38 Percent of Code Adapted (%) 12

Amount for Purchased Software (€) 37 Percent of Design Adapted (%) 11

External Integration Complexity36 Adapted Size Non-executable (%) 10

Internal Integration Complexity35 Adapted Code Size9

Number of Spirals or Increments 34 New Size Non-executable (%) 8

Development Process33 New Code Size7

Multiple Site Development32 Size Units6

Test Tools31 Development Team Complexity5

Code Tools30 Organizational Productivity4

Design Tools29 Operating Specification3

Design for Reuse28 Functional Complexity2

Design Repeat (%) 27 Application Type1


Estimate to Complete (%) 26

Fixed Headcount for Maintenance51 Project Constraints25

Repair Level Multiplier50 Language Object Oriented24

Defect Detection Multiplier49 Language23

Lifecycle Organizational Productivity48 Auto Translation Tool Efficiency22

Adaptation Level Multiplier47 Auto Trans Size Non-executable (%) 21

Quality Multiplier46 Auto Translated Code Size20

Adaptation Distribution45 Auto Gen Size Non-executable (%) 19

Security Process Level44 Auto Generated Code Size18

Security Level43 Code Removal Complexity17

Tailoring Multiplier42 Deleted Code Size16

Tailoring Complexity41 Reused Size Non-executable (%) 15

Evaluation Multiplier40 Reused Code Size14

Components under Detailed Evaluation(%) 39 Percent of Test Adapted (%) 13

Components under Evaluation38 Percent of Code Adapted (%) 12

Amount for Purchased Software (€) 37 Percent of Design Adapted (%) 11

External Integration Complexity36 Adapted Size Non-executable (%) 10

Internal Integration Complexity35 Adapted Code Size9

Number of Spirals or Increments 34 New Size Non-executable (%) 8

Development Process33 New Code Size7

Multiple Site Development32 Size Units6

Test Tools31 Development Team Complexity5

Code Tools30 Organizational Productivity4

Design Tools29 Operating Specification3

Design for Reuse28 Functional Complexity2

Design Repeat (%) 27 Application Type1


Cost Object Parameters


18/10/2013

9

Ref.:

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation Project Phases – Input Data

An example of Components parametric cost evaluation

PBS INPUT PARAMETERS COST EVALUATION RESULTS


18/10/2013

10

Ref.:

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation Project Phases – Complexity factors

An example of Components parametric cost evaluation

INPUT PARAMETERS COST EVALUATION RESULTS

COST OBJECT - HARDWARE

Manufacturing Complexity for

StructurePower Supply Module 6,541819Supervisor Module 6,534373TC/TM Module 6,534373Input Module 6,534373Output Module 6,534373Memory Module 6,705032Mother Board 6,76Mechanical Housing 6,458621


18/10/2013

11

Ref.:

TAS-I Experience: parametric cost evaluation Main Results

Cost Estimation Main Results

Well compared with consolidated bottom-up estimated costs &

real cost from past experience

Identification of cost driver parameters

e.g.• Percent of New Structure• Percent of New Electronics• Engineering Complexity


18/10/2013

12

Ref.:

Cost engineering tools for Bid preparation: Why?

PRICE Systems provide cost management solutions to improve reliability in cost estimates and product

competitiveness

• Improve Product Competitiveness on the market• Define market cost for benchmark (especially for new products)• Define target cost and top-down cost allocation• Improve time & reliability of ROM price, also in case of

configuration changes• Identify cost drivers• Establish product cost benchmark through independent

evaluation

The tool


13

Ref.:

Bid preparation & Parametric Cost Estimate The process

A reliable cost estimate during Bid preparation phaseis a key element for the success of the Project

Estimate Process

Prepare Bid Manage the project

HandoverReview

Organize & Plan the Project

HANDOVER

Perform estimationInitialiseReview &

Consolidate Estimation

Establish Project baseline

Control & Update


14

Ref.:

Bid preparation & Parametric Cost Estimate Top-down & bottom-up estimation for cost consolidation

Starting from our past

experience we may

implement an overall system

cost estimation based on a

predicting tool to enhance

the top-down evaluation

process

Top-Down Approach(Price / True Planning)

Cross-check & Consolidate

Bottom-up Estimates


18/10/2013

Ref.:

Bid preparation & Parametric Cost Estimate Top-down approach for Early Cost Estimation

Top-Down Approach

Early Cost Estimation

COS T OBJE CT

Qua ntity Pe r Ne x t Hig he r Le v el Num ber oNum be r oTota l Num

Tota l Numbe r of Prototype Equipm e nt Ty pe

O pe ra ting Spec ific ation

We ight of Structure ( kg )

We ight of Ele ctronics (kg ) Volum e (l)

Manufacturing Com ple x it y for

Structure

Pe rce nt of Ne w

Structure (% )

Pe rce nt of De sig n Repe at

for S tructure

Ma nufa cturing Com ple xity for

E lec tronics

Pe rce nt of Ne w

Ele ctronic s (%)

Perc ent of De sign Re pe at for Ele ctronics

E nginee ring Com ple x ity

L abor L ea rning

Curve

Mate rial Le ar ning

Curv e Ma nufa cturing Proce ss Inde x

Te chnology Im prov e me

nt Control

T ec hnolog y Obsole sce nce

Control

Ye ar of T ec hnolo

gy

E xt erna l Inte gra ti

on

E xte rnal Integ rati

on

Hardwa re

S oftw are

Multip lier for

In itial

Multipl ier for

Initia l

Multip l ier for

S us tain in

Multip lier for

Susta ininMa int enance

Conce pt

E quipment S upply

Points

O rga niz ation

S upply

Inter me diate

Supply

De pot Supply Points

O rga niz ation

Ma inte na

Inte rme diate

Mainte na

De pot Ma inte na

nce

Num be r of

Oper atio

Me an T im e

Be twe e n

Num ber Of Pa rt T ype s

Num be r Of

Module

Units PEquipm

nt Pa nel Structure 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 10 9,13 0 5 00 6 ,058 51 6 50 0 7 1 00 0 0,7 0 0 1 1 0 5 3 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Ra dia ting Boa rd 80 0 0 0 0 None 2 0 ,33 6 0 0 ,5 6 ,726 53 5 1 00 50 7 1 00 0 0,7 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1TPSU 20 0 0 0 0 None 2 0 ,4 1 0 ,45 2 ,8 6 ,096 78 6 1 00 0 9,2 68 96 4 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1TCU 5 0 0 0 0 None 2 0 ,1 2 1 ,38 2 ,8 6 ,096 78 6 95 5 10 ,83 60 2 9 5 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1TDL 20 0 0 0 0 None 2 0 ,7 7 0 ,36 2 ,8 6 ,096 78 6 95 5 10 ,87 59 7 9 5 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1EF E 40 0 0 0 0 None 2 1 ,5 3 1 ,62 1 6,2 68 19 1 00 0 10 ,56 88 2 1 00 0 1,3 0 0 0 1 0 4 5 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1HRM 6 0 0 0 0 None 2 1 ,0 5 0 3,37 7 ,162 08 8 1 00 40 7 1 00 0 0,2 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1LADM 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 1 1,3 3 0 6,75 6 ,963 53 8 1 00 40 7 1 00 0 0,6 0 0 1 1 0 2 3 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Pa nel Harne ss 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 1 1,3 0 28 ,3 16 85 6 ,5 8 1 00 0 7 1 00 0 0,6 0 0 1 1 0 4 4 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Tile Le v el Harne ss 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 9 0 28 ,3 16 85 6 ,5 8 1 00 0 7 1 00 0 0,6 0 0 1 1 0 4 4 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1The rma l H/W 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 1 7,5 2 0 28 ,3 16 85 6 ,871 42 5 1 00 0 7 1 00 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 4 3 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Be a m Form ing Ne tw 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 4,5 4 ,85 28 ,3 16 85 6 ,585 39 2 1 00 70 9,8 9 1 00 0 0,9 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1Ante nna Harne ss 1 0 0 0 0 None 2 6 0 28 ,3 16 85 6 ,5 8 1 00 0 7 1 00 0 0,6 0 0 1 1 0 4 4 0 1 1 1 1 No Mainte na nce 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

COS T OBJE CT - ASS EMBL Y

Qua ntity Pe r Ne x t Hig he r Le v el

Num ber of Additional Produc tion Units

Num be r of Additiona l Protot ype s

Oper ating Spe cifica tion

Multiple S ite

De ve lopme nt

S oftwa re E xte rnal Inte gra tion Comple xity

Hardwa re P latform Sta bil ity

Ha rdw are P la tform

Av ailabil ity

Num ber of Unique

Ha rdwar e P lat form s

S ys te m Comple xit

y

Ha rdwa re Ex te rnal Inte gra tion Complex ity

E nginee ring Com ple x it y

Dev e lopm ent E ng ine e ring

Inde x for Struct ure

De ve lopm e nt E nginee ring

Index for E lect ronics

Num be r of E quiv ale nt

Requirem e ntsRe quire me nts

S tabil ity

Num be r of Unique

Inte rfa ce s

N um ber of

Ve ndors

Num be r of

Opera tiona l

S ce na riosMa inte nance

Conce pt

Equipm e nt Supply Points

Org aniza tion Supply Points

Interm e dia te

Supply Points

Depot S upply Points

Org aniza tion

Mainte nance

Point s

Inter me diate

Maintenance

Points

De pot Ma inte na

nc e Points

Num be r of

Opera tional Hours

DSHA As se mbly 1 0 0 2 1 1 rdware Dev e lopmore tha n 9 5% o 1 50 3 1 ,6 70 70 2 5 nominal change s e 4 0 1 N o Ma intenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0DSHA SW 2 0 0 2 1 1 rdware Dev e lopmore tha n 9 5% o 1 50 3 1 ,6 70 70 2 5 e, fe w m a jor chang 4 0 1 N o Ma intenance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Price / True PlanningPrice / True Planning

Costs Results per:Cost ObjectsPer ActivitiesPer Resources

Project Breakdown Structure

Identification of components for parametric cost

evaluation

Component Modelling

Capitalization of experience and available modeling

(as applicable)


18/10/2013

16

Ref.:

Bid preparation & Parametric Cost Estimate Cost Consolidation and Optimization

Top-Down Approach(Price / True Planning)

Cross-Check (QDV)

Bottom-up Estimates

Enhance product competitiveness on the market

Establish a benchmark through independent evaluation

Capitalize and reuse “building blocks”

Mapping between True Planning and bottom up

estimation

• Expert team estimation• Real costs from past

experience• Products WBS

Optimization Areas Identification & Cost reduction


18/10/2013

17

Ref.:

From Cost Consolidation to Cost Management

Cost Estimation Project ControlQDV

Reuse and reconfiguration of

Thales Corporate and TAS-F templates

BID Phase PROJECT Phase

parametric cost evaluation to improve product competitiveness.pdfparametric cost evaluation to...

Documents