Results for “TIME VARYING DELAYS” — Page 10

DOE OSTI2023

Observations and Lessons Learned From Installing Residential Roofing-Integrated Photovoltaics

Building-sited solar photovoltaics (PV) could play a key role in decarbonizing the building sector either through racked and mounted PV or through Building-integrated PV (BIPV). BIPV is installed into the building envelope itself, with solar cells and/or modules forming the outer layer of a building structure, thus transforming a single-purpose structure into one that serves the dual purposes of the building envelope and electricity. BIPV can be applied to building roofs, facades, awnings, pergolas, windows, skylights, balustrades, and other external surfaces. Given BIPV products vary widely, the focus of this research is residential roofing integrated PV (RIPV), where solar is incorporated into or otherwise replaces the roofing material. Previous research suggests that residential RIPV could reduce customer acquisition, labor, supply chain, and equipment costs. These products have yet to realize these cost savings and deployment remains significantly less than conventional rooftop PV as a relative share of the addressable market in the US. One potential barrier to broader residential roofing integrated PV deployment may be higher costs relative to conventional rooftop PV, primarily because the design and installation of these products is still evolving. Here, we explore residential RIPV cost-reduction opportunities by analyzing installation processes. Our study documents residential RIPV installations at 2 reroofing sites and the equivalent of 9 new construction sites in California through a methodology known as time and motion study. We also conducted interviews with subject-matter experts to identify barriers and solutions to maximize these products' market penetration. Our time and motion study breaks the RIPV installation process into four steps: 1) staging, unloading, and roof preparation; 2) fire resistant underlayment(s) (synthetic material laid between roof shingles and roof deck); 3) flashings and PV installation; and 4) wiring and monitoring. We measure the time required for each step in terms of worker-hours, representing an hour of labor from a single worker. We further normalize process time by dividing worker-hours by kilowatt (kW) of system capacity. The most time-intensive step was flashings and PV installation, taking around 2.4 worker-hours per kW on average and accounting for around 60% of the process time for an average installation. The total installation process took on average about 6.4 and 3.5 worker-hours per kW at the reroofing sites and new construction sites, respectively. For comparison, a previous time and motion study documented a time of 6.9 worker-hours per kW for conventional rooftop PV. The shorter RIPV installation times are consistent with previous studies suggesting that RIPV could be installed faster than conventional rooftop PV. The time and motion results and feedback from interviewees provide insights into potential residential RIPV cost reduction opportunities. Several interviewees suggested that these products would be more efficient if PV installation was more fully integrated into the roofing/construction industries, which currently use separate supply chains and skillsets. Further integration could reduce supply chain delays and labor force redundancies. Future research could explore specific ways to integrate these industries to help realize the cost savings potential of RIPV.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2023

An automated and portable method for selecting an optimal GPU frequency

Power consumption poses a significant challenge in current and emerging graphics processing unit (GPU) enabled high-performance computing systems. In modern GPUs, dynamic voltage frequency scaling (DVFS) appears to be a reliable control to regulate power consumption and performance. However, the DVFS design space is large - hence, brute-force approaches are infeasible to select the optimal frequency. Furthermore, no single frequency can be universally optimal for applications with varying computational intensities. Thus, the application's complexity and the availability of a wide range of frequency settings are a challenge in selecting the optimal frequency configuration for a given GPU workload. To that end, this paper proposes a systematic approach that consists of three steps. The feature characterization study identifies the fine-grain GPU utilization metrics that influence the power consumption and execution time of a given workload. To understand the performance, power, and energy consumption behaviors of a workload across GPU's DVFS design space, we derived analytical power and performance models using the identified fine-grain features. Here, it is shown that the same set of GPU utilization metrics can estimate both the power consumption and execution time while being agnostic of changes to frequency and input sizes. Applying a power control with the single objective of reducing power may cause performance degradation, leading to more energy consumption. A multi-objective approach is proposed to select the optimal GPU DVFS configuration for a workload that reduces power consumption with negligible degradation in performance. The evaluation was conducted using SPEC ACCEL benchmarks and three real applications - NAMD LAMMPS, and LSTM on NVIDIA GV100, GA100, and AMD MI210 GPUs. On average, real applications showed 29.6% energy savings with a performance loss of 5.2% on GA100 and 22.6% energy savings with a performance loss of 4.7% on GV100. Moreover, the proposed models are portable to real applications, GPU architectures, and vendors, and require metric collection at only the default frequency rather than all supported DVFS configurations. Additionally, we conducted a comparison between our models and the GPU assembly instructions (PTX)-based static models. The results revealed a significant reduction in the average error rates, with a decrease from 19.7% to 3.1% for power models and from 29.4% to 5.2% for performance models.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗