• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Cocomo ii estimation

Cocomo ii estimation






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Cocomo ii estimation Cocomo ii estimation Document Transcript

    • IntroductionTS Cocomo II based estimated sheet is a toolkit for software sizing and estimation. One can estimate the size of work using FPSLOC. Effort is then estimated using Cocomo II. Effort can then be distributed into different project phases and the project coscalculated. There is a Rates Sheet for selecting appropriate rate for a specific customer.FP (Function Points)Function points are a unit measure for software much like an hour is to measuring time, miles are to measuring distance or Cemeasuring temperatureSLOCSource Line of Code, one line in a computer program. In many languages, each SLOC ends with a semicolon. SLOC is used iCOCOMO as the basis for estimating software-development time.Cocomo IICOCOMO is a model designed by Barry Boehm to give an estimate of the number of programmer-months it will take to develosoftware productHow to estimate project size using this toolkit?Pre-requisite of using this sheet is that user should have familiarity of Function Points (FP). He should be aware of FP countingthe FPs sheet for each feature/component of the application estimate the count and complexity of Internal Logical Files (ILF), EInterface Files (EIF), External Inputs (EI), External Outputs (EO) and External Queries (EQ). There are 3 columns Low, Avg. aunder each category; these columns should have the count of low, average and high complexity components against each appfeature. Guidelines on how to judge complexity are provided in comments of ILF, EIF and other headings at the top. Totals areautomatically calculated.If there are some features in the applications which doesnt support creation of front-end or maintenance of back-end tables thcannot measure its size. Example of such features is any special code libraries that are invoked on schedule or through somemeans to do certain functions. For such functions estimate the lines of code in SLOC sheet. Provide feature details, the progralanguage it will be written in and the estimated LOC count and system will automatically calculate its FPs.How to estimate effort using this toolkit?After the FPs and SLOC is estimated go to the effort sheet and estimate the scaling factors and effort multipliers. Guidelines oselect appropriate value for an effort multiplier or the scaling factor are provided in comments of their respective description. Ahave selected the appropriate values please check the consolidated size and effort estimates below.Now the effort is calculated and its time to break this effort into different phases of the project. Please set the percentages in thDistribution" sheet. Ensure that all percentage should sum to 100%. After setting the percentages please check the effort brea"Effort Summary" sheet.How to estimate Cost using this toolkit?After the size and effort are estimated its time to estimate cost. First go to the "Rates" sheet to select primary and secondary raAfter selecting the factor check what is the rate tier selected by the system. If "Borderline Case" appear next to the selected rashould double check if the selected rate is appropriate.After selecting the rate go to the cost sheet and adjust effort to quote. Round the effort numbers if you feel appropriate. Also chblended rate is appropriate and competitive.How to estimate schedule using this toolkit?After the cost estimation is complete go to the "Plan sheet" to check if the project can be finished in appropriate duration. AdjuResources, Slacks and Other Factors and then check if the estimated project duration is appropriate and feasible to the client.schedule is not appropriate then re-adjust resources etc to verify if the required project duration can be achieved.
    • ILF EIF EI EO EQFeatures Comments Reference Low Avg High Low Avg High Low Avg High Low Avg High LowFeature 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0Feature 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0Feature 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0Feature 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Artifacts 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0Total FP 24
    • EQAvg High Total FPs 0 0 3 0 0 11 0 0 4 0 0 6 0 0
    • Features Comments Reference Language Estimated SLOCFeature 5 Java 300Feature 6 Java 500Feature 7 Java 100 Total: 900
    • Total FPs 5.6604 9.4340 1.8868 16.9811
    • Cocomo IIPM = A*Size^E*Product(All Effort Multipliers - EM)Exponent E = B+(0.01*SUM(Scaling Factors))Scaling FactorsSF Description Level ValueMaturity Process Maturity Nominal 4.68 Experience of similarPREC Projects Very High 1.24 Flexibility required in theFLEX System Very Low 0TEAM Team Conhesiveness Extremely High 0 Project Risk andRESL Architectural Complexity Nominal 2.83Effort Multiplier EMEM Description Level Value System reliability, complexity and sizeRCPX indicator Very Low 0.6 Reusablity cocern with respect to current andRUSE future projects Nominal 1PDIF Platform Difficulty Extra Low 0.87 Personal capability of team. Like technical capability of Programmers,PERS Designers and testers. High 0.83 Application, Language andPREX tool experience High 0.87 Using Case tools forFCIL development etc Nominal 1SCED Schedule Pressure Nominal 1Constants ValueB 0.91A 2.94E 1EM 0.38Consolidated Size and EffortTechnology JavaIncrease due tolifecycle 0%SLOC per FP 53SLOC 2172PM 2.4023Man-days 45.6443FP from LOC 40.9811Hours per FP 8.9103
    • SF Scale PREC FLEX TEAM RESL MaturityVery Low 6.20 0.00 5.48 0.00 7.80Low 4.96 1.01 4.38 1.41 6.24Nominal 3.72 2.03 3.29 2.83 4.68High 2.48 3.04 2.19 4.24 3.12Very High 1.24 4.05 1.10 5.65 1.56Extremely High 0.00 5.07 0.00 7.07 0.00EM Scale RCPX RUSE PDIF PERS PREX FCILExtra Low 0.49 0.95 0.87 2.12 1.59 1.43Very Low 0.60 0.95 0.87 1.62 1.33 1.30Low 0.83 0.95 0.87 1.26 1.22 1.10Nominal 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00High 1.33 1.07 1.29 0.83 0.87 0.87Very High 1.91 1.15 1.81 0.63 0.74 0.73Extremely High 2.72 1.24 2.61 0.50 0.62 0.62
    • SCED 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.14 1.43 1.43
    • Summary UnitsCategory Percentage of DevelopmentRequirements/Design 25%Development 45%Test Planning 8%Testing 10%Documentation 5%Deployment 1%Off-shore Management 5%On-site Management 1% 100%
    • Category Effort Comments/Assumptions Outputs are Technical Design and Information Architecture doc. Information Architecture doc will have guidelines forRequirements/Design Effort 11.41 interface design.Development Effort 20.54 Source CodeTest Planning 3.65 Output are Test Plan and Test CasesTesting Effort 4.56 Output is Test Results Outputs are Deployment and BuildDocumentation Effort 2.28 DocumentsDeployment Effort 0.46 Effort to deploy application Output is Detailed Project Plans, Risk andOff-shore Management 2.28 Issues tracking, Weekly status reports etc. Client Communication. Output is usually anyOn-site Management Effort 0.46 list of issues or improvement opportunities Total Effort 45.64
    • Rate TiersUnits Low Medium HighArchitect/Designer 20 30 50Developer (Blended rate for Seniorand Junior Developer) 15 20 30Testing Lead 20 30 50Tester 15 20 30Technical Writing Cost 15 20 30Manager 25 40 70On-site Manager 60 100 150Primary Rate Factors Weightage Weighted ValueCustomer Buying Orientation Gold-Standard 7 0.7Hours Availability forTechnology Sufficient 5 0.25Secondary Rate FactorsCustomer Type One Time Customer 1 0.1Build Domain Competency Doesnt Matter 1 0.05Build Technology Competency Doesnt Matter 2 0.1Scope Creep Risk High 2 0.2Payment Pattern Delayed Payments 2 0.2 20 1.6Selected Rate HighBuying Orientations Value DescriptionPrice-Oriented 0 Price is the main factor in making decision for this project Price, quality and other factors combined make the criteria forSolution-Oriented 1 winning project Customer is highly focused on quality and project features anGold-Standard 2 would give it prime importance in making decisionsHours Availability Value DescriptionSurplus 0 Hours Inventory has many hours free in this technology area Hours Inventory has some hours free but technology area isSufficient 1 utilized more than break-evenLess 2 Hours Inventory has very low hours free in this technology areCustomer Type Value DescriptionGood Existing Customer 0Existing Customer 1One Time Customer 2Strategic Value Customer 0Build Technology Competency Value DescriptionYes 0Doesnt Matter 1Avoid Technology 2
    • Build Domain Competency Value DescriptionYes 0Doesnt Matter 1Avoid Domain 2Payment Pattern Value DescriptionUpfront Timely Payments 0Timely Payments 1Delayed Payments 2Scope Creep Risk Value DescriptionHigh 2Moderate 1Low 0
    • Selected 50 30 50 30 30 70 150 g decision for this projectcombined make the criteria forquality and project features and n making decisionss free in this technology areas free but technology area isours free in this technology area
    • Cost UnitsUnits per hour per daysArchitect/Designer 50 400Developer (Blended rate forSenior and JuniorDeveloper) 30 240Testing Lead 50 400Tester 30 240Technical Writing Cost 30 240Manager 70 560On-site Manager 150 1200Total Project Cost Effort (Days) Effort (Days)Category Estimated to Quote CostRequirements/Design Effort 11.4 11.0 $4,400Development Effort 20.5 21.0 $5,040Test Planning 3.7 4.0 $1,600Testing Effort 4.6 5.0 $1,200Documentation Effort 2.3 3.0 $720Deployment Effort 0.5 1.0 $400Off-shore Management 2.3 3.0 $1,680On-site Management Effort 0.5 1.0 $1,200 Total 45.6 49.0 $16,240 Blended Rate $41.43Total Support CostMan Months 1Man Days 5Category Hours per day Total Hours CostDesigners 0.5 2.5 $125Developers 8 40 $1,200Testers 1 5 $150Managers 0.5 2.5 $175 Total $1,650
    • AssumptionsTest Planning, Documentation and Management activities are carried outin parallel to other main activities of design, development and testingResourcesDesigners 1Developers 2Testers 1OthersPossible Critical Chain Delay inDevelopment 5%Possible Fixation Delay inTesting 5%Working days in a month 21Ratio of calendar days 1.48Project Plan - WaterfallPhase Duration (days) Duration (months)Requirements/Design Phase 11.0 0 Month 16 DayDevelopment Phase 11.0 0 Month 16 DayTesting Phase 5.3 0 Month 8 Day Total 27.3 1 Month 9 Day Slack 3.0 Grand Total 30.3 1 Month 14 DayIterative Plan Iteration DurationIterations 1 (without Slacks)1 100% 27.282 0% 0.003 0% 0.004 0% 0.005 0% 0.00Total 100%
    • SlacksInitial Ramp-up 0.5Deployment for testing etc 0.5Code/Peer Reviews 1Shipment Packaging & Review 1Total Slack 3Requirements/Design Development Testing 11.0 11.0 5.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0