NIST GCR 03-844 Low-Cost Manufacturing Process Technology for Amorphous Silicon Detector Panels

NIST GCR 03-844
Low-Cost Manufacturing Process Technology for Amorphous Silicon Detector Panels: Applications in Digital Mammography and Radiography

Appendix C. Step-out Scenario Calculations

Table C1. Projected Additional Senographe 2000D Unit Sales: Step-Out Scenario

	Without ATP-Funded LCM Process: Counterfactual Case			With LCM Process
	U.S. Full-Field Digital Mammography Unit Sales	General Electric Market Share	Senographe 2000D Unit Sales	Number of Additional Senographe 2000D Units	Cumulative Number of Additional Senographe 2000D Units
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001	52	100%	52
2002	57	100%	57
2003	63	90%	57
2004	74	90%	67
2005	111	80%	89	42	42
2006	200	80%	160	86	128
2007	440	70%	308	18	146
2008	484	70%	339	4	150
2009	532	65%	346	10	160
2010	559	65%	363	4	164
2011	587	63%	370	0	164
2012	626	60%	370	11	175
2013	647	60%	388	11	186
2014	679	60%	407	0	186

Table C2. Projected Additional Revolution XR/d Unit Sales: Step-Out Scenario

	Without ATP-Funded LCM Process: Counterfactual Case			With LCM Process
	U.S. Full-Field Digital Radiography Unit Sales	General Electric Market Share	Revolution XR/d Unit Sales	Number of Additional Revolution XR/d Units	Cumulative Number of Additional Revolution XR/d Units
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001	138	50%	69
2002	158	50%	79
2003	183	50%	92
2004	222	50%	111
2005	299	50%	150	41	41
2006	438	50%	219	73	114
2007	689	50%	345	20	134
2008	758	50%	379	22	156
2009	834	50%	417	24	180
2010	917	50%	459	24	204
2011	1000	50%	500	0	204
2012	1000	50%	500	0	204
2013	1000	50%	500	0	204
2014	1000	50%	500	0	204

Table C3. Productivity Gains from Senographe 2000D: Step-Out Scenario

	Cumulative Number of Additional Senographe 2000D Units	Net Operating Cash Flow Variance of Digital Unit over Conventional Unit	Cash Flow Benefit from Higher Digital Productivity
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005	42	203,000	8,526,000
2006	128	219,000	28,032,000
2007	146	236,000	34,456,000
2008	150	255,000	38,250,000
2009	160	275,000	44,000,000
2010	164	275,000	45,100,000
2011	164	275,000	45,100,000
2012	175	275,000	48,125,000
2013	186	275,000	51,150,000
2014	186	275,000	51,150,000

Table C4. Productivity Gains from Revolution XR/d Unit Sales: Step-Out Scenario

	Cumulative Number of Additional Revolution XR/d Units	Net Operating Cash Flow Variance of Digital Unit over Conventional Unit	Cash Flow Benefit from Higher Digital Productivity
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005	41	186,000	7,626,000
2006	114	238,000	27,132,000
2007	134	296,000	39,664000
2008	156	361,000	56,316,000
2009	180	436,000	78,480,000
2010	204	436,000	88,944,000
2011	204	436,000	88,944,000
2012	204	436,000	88,944,000
2013	204	436,000	88,944,000
2014	204	436,000	88,944,000

Table C5. Savings from Avoided False Positives with Senographe 2000D: Step-Out Scenario

	Cumulative Number of Additional Senographe 2000D Units	Cash Flow Benefits from Avoided False Positives per Senographe 2000D Unit	Total Cash Flow Benefits
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005	42	75,960	3,190,320
2006	128	75,960	9,722,880
2007	146	75,960	11,090,160
2008	150	75,960	11,394,000
2009	160	75,960	12,153,600
2010	164	75,960	12,457,440
2011	164	75,960	12,457,440
2012	175	75,960	13,293,000
2013	186	75,960	14,128,560
2014	186	75,960	14,128,560

Table C6. Patient Savings from Avoided Time Off and Travel with Senographe 2000D: Step-Out Scenario

	Cumulative Number of Additional Senographe 2000D Units	Annual Savings from Avoided Time Offpeer Senographe 2000D Unit	Annual Savings from Avoided Time Offpeer Senographe 2000D Unit	Cash Flow Benefits
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005	42	13,467	1,536	976,794
2006	128	13,467	1,536	2,976,896
2007	146	13,467	1,536	3,395,522
2008	150	13,467	1,536	3,488,550
2009	160	13,467	1,536	3,721,120
2010	164	13,467	1,536	3,814,148
2011	164	13,467	1,536	3,814,148
2012	175	13,467	1,536	4,069,975
2013	186	13,467	1,536	4,325,802
2014	186	13,467	1,536	4,325,802

Table C7. Summary Cash Flow Benefits with Senographe 2000D and Revolution XR/d: Step-Out Scenario

	Productivity Gain with Senographe 2000D	Savings from Avoided False Positives with Senographe 2000D	Savings from Avoided Time Off an Travel with Senographe 2000D	Productivity Gain with Revolution XR/d	Expected Value of Total Cash Flow Benefits
1996
1997
1998					-1,773,000
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005	8,526,000	3,190,320	976,794	7,626000	14,223,380
2006	28,032,000	9,722,880	2,976,896	27,132,000	47,504,643
2007	34,456,000	11,090,160	3,395,522	39,664,000	62,023977
2008	38,250,000	11,394,000	3,488,550	56,316,000	76k,613,985
2009	44,000,000	12,153,600	3,721,120	78,480,000	96,848,304
2010	45,100,000	12,457,440	3,814,148	88,944,000	105,220,912
2011	45,100,000	12,457,440	3,814,148	88,944,000	105,220,912
2012	48,125,000	13,293,000	4,069,975	88,944,000	108,102,382
2013	51,150,000	14,128,560	4,325,802	88,944,000	110,983,853
2014	51,150,000	14,128,560	4,325,802	88,944,000	110,983,853
	Net present value of ATP investment Internal rate of return on ATP investment Benefit-to-cost ratio for ATP investment			$339.8 million 77 percent 193:1

Return to Table of Contents or go to Inside Back Cover.

Date created: April 25, 2003
Last updated: August 2, 2005

ATP website comments: webmaster-atp@nist.gov / Technical ATP inquiries: InfoCoord.ATP@nist.gov.

NIST is an agency of the U.S. Commerce Department
Privacy policy / Security Notice / Accessibility Statement / Disclaimer / Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) /
No Fear Act Policy / NIST Information Quallity Standards / ExpectMore.gov (performance of federal programs)