Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “distributed sensor”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Unified ELM Suppression on KSTAR and DIII-D via Adaptive Feedback Control Strategies

This paper reports on the extension of our amplitude-based resonant magnetic perturbation (RMP) edge localized mode (ELM) controller to support phasing control (relative toroidal phases of RMP waveforms between rows of coils), multiple toroidal mode numbers, and new ‘jump’ and ‘probing’ strategies, all deployed on KSTAR and DIII-D. By treating the control algorithm as device-independent and adjusting only the real-time interfaces to sensors and power supplies, we have confirmed that the same finite state machine—based feedback logic can be ported between machines with minor modifications. In experiments using n = 2 RMPs on KSTAR and n = 3 on DIII-D, the controller successfully modulated RMP amplitudes in real time to sustain ELM suppression while minimizing confinement degradation. Phasing control broadened the suppression window, as it permitted the system to avoid locked-mode regions and safely access ELM-free conditions. A rotating RMP phasing scheme, integrated into the same framework, distributes divertor heat loads more uniformly, making it a promising strategy for protecting plasma-facing components during long discharges. New ‘jump’ and ‘probing’ techniques demonstrate the possibility for the controller to preempt imminent ELMs and refine the minimum required RMP amplitude without returning to ELMy conditions. Taken together, these upgrades enable extended ELM-free operation while mitigating confinement degradation, providing a practical framework for real-time ELM control in future high-performance tokamaks.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Simulating quantum-classical interfaces via the Lindblad master equation

In hybrid quantum systems, the interface between quantum and classical domains is essential for the generation, control, and measurement of quantum states. Quantum-classical interfaces (QCIs) are ubiquitous in devices such as optical modulators, quantum sensors, and signal processors, where classical signals influence quantum dynamics. In this paper, we employ the Lindblad master equation to simulate the evolution of a quantum system interacting with a classical control system. Our model captures both linear and nonlinear interactions by incorporating first- and second-order susceptibilities, and it quantifies the influence of externally applied control parameters on decoherence and state evolution. As an illustrative example, we analyze an optical modulator and demonstrate how variations in material response and drive conditions affect photon statistics, coherence, and phase-space distributions. In conclusion, the findings offer a path to an all-encompassing model for understanding and optimizing QCIs, with wide-ranging implications for the performance, design, and robustness of next-generation quantum devices.

Quantum engineering↗
DOE OSTI2024

A new aerial approach for quantifying and attributing methane emissions: implementation and validation

Methane (CH 4 ) is a powerful greenhouse gas that is produced by a diverse set of natural and anthropogenic emission sources. Biogenic methane sources generally involve anaerobic decay processes such as those occurring in wetlands, melting permafrost, or the digestion of organic matter in the guts of ruminant animals. Thermogenic CH 4 sources originate from the breakdown of organic material at high temperatures and pressure within the Earth's crust, a process which also produces more complex trace hydrocarbons such as ethane (C 2 H 6 ). Here, we present the development and deployment of an uncrewed aerial system (UAS) that employs a fast (1 Hz) and sensitive (1–0.5 ppb s -1 ) CH 4 and C 2 H 6 sensor and ultrasonic anemometer. The UAS platform is a vertical-takeoff, hexarotor drone (DJI Matrice 600 Pro, M600P) capable of vertical profiling to 120 m altitude and plume sampling across scales up to 1 km. Simultaneous measurements of CH 4 and C 2 H 6 concentrations, vector winds, and positional data allow for source classification (biogenic versus thermogenic), differentiation, and emission rates without the need for modeling or a priori assumptions about winds, vertical mixing, or other environmental conditions. The system has been used for direct quantification of methane point sources, such as orphan wells, and distributed emitters, such as landfills and wastewater treatment facilities. With detectable source rates as low as 0.04 and up to ~1500 kg h -1 , this UAS offers a direct and repeatable method of horizontal and vertical profiling of emission plumes at scales that are complementary to regional aerial surveys and localized ground-based monitoring.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Elastomeric Nanocomposite with Solvent‐Free, One Step, In Situ Shear Exfoliation of Graphite to Graphene

A graphene nanoflake (GNF)‐enhanced elastomeric nanocomposite (G‐EMC) is fabricated following an innovative, cost‐effective, single‐step, in situ shear exfoliation (ISE) method from low‐cost bulk material, graphite, where uniform mixing happens simultaneously within the elastomer matrix. Electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, and photo‐induced force microscopy results show good dispersion of GNFs with exfoliation to a few layers and uniform distribution in the elastomer matrix. X‐ray photoelectron spectroscopy analysis shows less than 1% oxygen‐containing functional groups/impurity, enhanced bonding through the formation of edge sites as fracture occurs across the GNF basal plane, and pi‐pi interactions with newly exfoliated planar basal plane surfaces of the GNFs. Raman spectroscopy results confirm the formation of GNFs with only a few layers of graphene formed by the ISE process. Fabricated 10 wt.% G‐EMC nanocomposites show a 400%–500% increase in strength and fracture toughness. And 35 wt.% G‐EMCs provide an electrical conductivity of 25.64 S m −1 and a sensor gauge factor of 45. The resulting intrinsic piezo resistivity of the fabricated nanocomposite has been exploited to fabricate a multi‐functional wired and wireless sensor for detecting different body movements, speech, human vital functions, solvents, and biomolecules.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Historical Bolide Infrasound Dataset (1960–1972)

We present the first fully curated, publicly accessible archive of infrasonic records from ten large bolide events documented by the U.S. Air Force Technical Applications Center’s global microbarometer network between 1960 and 1972. Captured on analog strip-chart paper, these waveforms predate modern digital arrays and space-based sensors, making them a unique window on meteoroid activity in the mid-twentieth century. Prior studies drew important scientific conclusions from the records but released only limited artifacts, chiefly period–amplitude tables and unprocessed scans, leaving the underlying data inaccessible for independent study. The present release transforms those limited excerpts into a research-ready resource. By capturing ten large events in the mid-20th century, the dataset constitutes a critical reference point for assessing bolide activity before the advent of modern space-based and digital ground-based monitoring. The multi-year coverage and worldwide distribution of events provide a valuable reference for comparing past and more recent detections, facilitating assessments of long-term flux and the dynamics of acoustic wave propagation in Earth’s atmosphere. The dataset’s availability in a consolidated format ensures straightforward access to waveforms and derived measurements, supporting a wide range of scientific inquiries into bolide physics and infrasound monitoring. By preserving these historical acoustic observations, the collection maintains a significant record of mid-20th-century meteoroid entries. It thereby establishes a basis for further refinement of impact hazard evaluations, contributes to historical continuity in atmospheric observation, and enriches the study of meteoroid-generated infrasound signals on a global scale.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Smart Pixels: In-pixel AI for on-sensor data filtering

We present a smart pixel prototype readout integrated circuit (ROIC) designed in CMOS 28 nm bulk process, with in-pixel implementation of an artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML) based data filtering algorithm designed as proof-of-principle for a Phase III upgrade at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) pixel detector. The first version of the ROIC consists of two matrices of 256 smart pixels, each 25$\times$25 $\mu$m$^2$ in size. Each pixel consists of a charge-sensitive preamplifier with leakage current compensation and three auto-zero comparators for a 2-bit flash-type ADC. The frontend is capable of synchronously digitizing the sensor charge within 25 ns. Measurement results show an equivalent noise charge (ENC) of $\sim$30e$^-$ and a total dispersion of $\sim$100e$^-$ The second version of the ROIC uses a fully connected two-layer neural network (NN) to process information from a cluster of 256 pixels to determine if the pattern corresponds to highly desirable high-momentum particle tracks for selection and readout. The digital NN is embedded in-between analog signal processing regions of the 256 pixels without increasing the pixel size and is implemented as fully combinatorial digital logic to minimize power consumption and eliminate clock distribution, and is active only in the presence of an input signal. The total power consumption of the neural network is $\sim$ 300 $\mu$W. The NN performs momentum classification based on the generated cluster patterns and even with a modest momentum threshold, it is capable of 54.4% - 75.4% total data rejection, opening the possibility of using the pixel information at 40MHz for the trigger. The total power consumption of analog and digital functions per pixel is $\sim$ 6 $\mu$W per pixel, which corresponds to $\sim$ 1 W/cm$^2$ staying within the experimental constraints.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2024

Simulation of a scintillator-based fast ion loss detector for steady-state operation in Wendelstein 7-X (invited)

A quantitative theoretical framework has been created to model neutral beam injection and fast ion losses in the Wendelstein 7-X (W7-X) stellarator, including a novel method to develop synthetic diagnostics for fast ion loss detectors (FILDs) of many types, such as scintillating and Faraday Cup FILDs. This is the first time that this has been done in stellarator geometry with this level of fidelity, providing a way for fast ion losses to be predicted more precisely in future stellarator experiments and in W7-X. Simulations of the signal seen by a Faraday Cup FILD have been completed for multiple W7-X plasmas and show close agreement with the measured signals. This method is now applied to an actively water-cooled, scintillator-based FILD, which is currently in development to measure the fast ion loss distribution in W7-X in greater detail. The design makes use of a double slit to measure energy-and-pitch-angle-resolved losses of both co-going and counter-going fast ions. The diagnostic, which can be inserted to different radial positions, has been designed to withstand steady-state heat fluxes of up to 120 kW/m 2 along with additional transient heat loads of 100 kW/m 2 lasting for up to 20 s at a time. Simulations of W7-X standard magnetic configuration show up to 8 × 10 13 (s –1 cm –2 ) ion fluxes onto the sensor from each neutral beam source and no signal from the counter-going slit. Finally, these simulations will help inform experimental proposals for future W7-X campaigns after installation of this diagnostic.

3D printing↗
DOE OSTI2024

Smart Pixels: In-pixel AI for on-sensor data filtering

We present a smart pixel prototype readout integrated circuit (ROIC) designed in CMOS 28 nm bulk process, with in-pixel implementation of an artificial intelligence (AI) / machine learning (ML) based data filtering algorithm designed as proof-of-principle for a Phase III upgrade at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) pixel detector. The first version of the ROIC consists of two matrices of 256 smart pixels, each 25$\times$25 µm\textsuperscript{2} in size. Each pixel consists of a charge-sensitive preamplifier with leakage current compensation and three auto-zero comparators for a 2-bit flash-type ADC. The frontend is capable of synchronously digitizing the sensor charge within 25 ns. Measurement results show an equivalent noise charge (ENC) of $\sim$30e\textsuperscript{-} and a total dispersion of $\sim$100e\textsuperscript{-} The second version of the ROIC uses a fully connected two-layer neural network (NN) to process information from a cluster of 256 pixels to determine if the pattern corresponds to highly desirable high-momentum particle tracks for selection and readout. The digital NN is embedded in-between analog signal processing regions of the 256 pixels without increasing the pixel size and is implemented as fully combinatorial digital logic to minimize power consumption and eliminate clock distribution, and is active only in the presence of an input signal. The total power consumption of the neural network is $\sim$ 300 $\mu$W. The NN performs momentum classification based on the generated cluster patterns and even with a modest momentum threshold, it is capable of 54.4\% – 75.4\% total data rejection, opening the possibility of using the pixel information at 40MHz for the trigger. The total power consumption of analog and digital functions per pixel is $\sim$ 6 $\mu$W per pixel, which corresponds to $\sim$ 1 W/cm\textsuperscript{2} staying within the experimental constraints.

Parpillon, Benjamin↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hydropower Black Start: A Guidebook for Retrofitting Grid Dependent Hydropower

Not all United States (US) hydropower plants were designed to provide black start, but they are increasingly needed to uphold resilience in the evolving electric grid. This guidance is designed to help understand the minimal retrofits required for grid dependent hydropower (GDH) plants behind the point of interconnection (POI). For distribution connected hydropower plants or those with dedicated cranking paths, such upgrades can be sufficient for the plant to provide black start. For others, more coordination with the transmission system operator will be needed. This guidebook answers a number of questions relevant to retrofitting hydropower plants with black start capabilities. For example, the guidebook answers: • How flexible do the wicket gate controls need to be? • Who needs to do hydro governor model validation, why, and how? • How robust and flexible do the excitation and AVR controls need to be? • What protection settings need to be adjusted? • What relay(s) will need to be bypassed or overridden and at what risk? • What is the electrical energy demand of the station load or auxiliary power systems? • What should the strategy to energize transformer(s) along cranking path to address inrush currents be? • How should the critical load restoration be sequenced? In addition to outlining the specifications that hydropower plants need to meet for each component to be able to perform black start, this guidebook provides a set of case studies for specific upgrades needed at actual plants. Between the case studies of plants that have already performed black start retrofits and the examples of how this guidebook can be applied to scope future retrofits, five key themes have been identified for retrofit needs. 1. Protection needs “black start” mode: hydropower plants that are not designed with black start capabilities will have protections that prevent them from interconnecting to a “dead bus.” These protections will need to be overridden in every retrofit case and a separate black start mode should be established so that operators can safely switch between black start and grid connected modes, minimizing the risk to the plant. 2. Wicket gates need modern controls: digital governors accelerate the parameter tuning process and gate position sensors improve controllability, so plants with mechanical governors should be upgraded. Furthermore, a black start and islanding mode should be established for controls to maximize plant performance. 3. Robust excitation support: the DC system or excitation generator needs to be reliable enough to form and sustain the rotor electromagnetic field. These systems are typically undersized in plants that were not designed for black start, so they will need to be upgraded. 4. Turbine-governor model validation and operator training: validation of a standard hydro governor model is needed to characterize the dynamic response (i.e., inertial and primary frequency response) of the GDH. This is required for control development and old hydropower plants often have outdated or incorrect models. Operator training is also typically required to ensure the hardware retrofits are utilized correctly during the black start process. 5. Transformer and cranking path energization: any upgradation and control adjustment in front of the POI will depend upon the existing interconnection. Coordination with the transmission or distribution operator may be required.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Roadmap for a Lightning Modeling Grand Challenge

This document is a roadmap for building an interconnected model of the physical processes that produce a lightning discharge, and its observable optical and radio signals. We call this a Lightning Modeling Grand Challenge, recognizing that significant effort and coordination of human and financial resources is required to realize the capability. The roadmap serves to outline the coordination of resources necessary to enable stitching together existing knowledge and model components to make a lightning prediction, and to test these predictions with observations. Such a capability does not currently exist. The roadmap is motivated not only by a spirit of scientific inquiry, but by practical challenges faced by US Federal and societal stakeholders. Advancements in lightning observations have outpaced our tests of integrated understanding, leaving many stakeholders unsure how to design their missions to properly detect and discriminate lightning, and unsure how to apply the sometimes-disagreeing lightning signals from diverse instruments. The time is right to connect existing theories and models to support stakeholders in understanding the signals they observe, for needs as diverse as climate monitoring, national security, weather forecasting, public safety, and protection of natural and built environments. The roadmap’s two main technical sections describe the components of a linked physical model, followed by a description of models of lightning signals and sensors that are driven by outputs from the physical model. The goal is to predict the time-varying physical properties of lightning that are self-consistent with the thunderstorm’s structure and dynamics. These lightning signals then propagate through the storm, with realistic dispersion and attenuation, to receivers on the ground or in space. At a high level, the model begins with weather (cloud) model output, including explicit prediction of the electrification of cloud particles. The cloud’s electrical structure drives a model of lightning physics, from initiation, through channel development, and discharges along those channels. Key lightning parameters, such as the temperature and currents in the channel, and their space and time distribution, are then used to produce optical and electromagnetic signal sources that propagate to modeled receivers. This architecture therefore generates a dataset suitable for comparison to existing and envisioned observing systems. The need for additional measurements and field campaigns to support model development is described. In each model sub-component, inputs, outputs, uncertainties, evaluation methods, and next steps are summarized, interleaved with references to the scientific literature. Identifying boundaries between the model sub-components aids in segmenting an integrated, complex model into practical work packages and system sub-components, allowing a diverse team to contribute and maintain the system. We estimate that at least five years of effort and a $\$$10M initial investment is necessary to make a significant step forward. Mechanisms to facilitate community coordination, including annual workshops and open-source code repositories, are described.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Online Detection of Power Grid Anomalies via Federated Learning

Data from sensors is critical for advanced applica- tions that support efficient, reliable, and resilient electric grid operations. Historically, data from phasor measurement units (PMU) has been utilized to develop a wide variety of wide area control and protection applications suitable for power grid control centers. However, until now, most of these could not be deployed for automated operations due to a set of data corruption challenges and uncertainty in the incoming data pipeline. In this paper, we address the problem of detecting different variety of anomalies that are evident in different high- speed power grid measurements. The paper discusses a workflow for handling problems with data acquisition and highlights some of the key findings suitable for anomaly detection in a centralized and distributed environment. The effectiveness of the proposed method was demonstrated with results utilizing realistic PMU datasets

Shinkle, Matthew W.↗
DOE OSTI2026

Hydrogen Dispersion Modeling for Development of Smart Distributed Monitoring

Studying hydrogen dispersion is crucial for ensuring the safe and effective deployment of hydrogen as an energy carrier. This study presents a comprehensive CFD modeling framework for simulating hydrogen dispersion at a real-world hydrogen production, storage, and utilization facility. Utilizing the Hydrogen Research Facility under the Advanced Research on Integrated Energy Systems (ARIES) at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL) Flatirons campus, controlled hydrogen releases at 27 kg-H2/hr were simulated. The model incorporated site-specific atmospheric conditions, including hourly wind speeds and temperatures recorded between 8 AM and 8 PM from October to December 2023. To reduce computational demands, a statistical reduction technique was applied to condense the dataset to 100 representative scenarios, validated by statistical tests for wind speeds and power law coefficients. Simulations were conducted using the Reynolds-Averaged Navier-Stokes equations. Results demonstrated that wind speed substantially influences hydrogen dispersion, with low wind conditions forming concentrated clouds and higher wind speeds stretching the plume. Additionally, clustering analysis informed optimal sensor placement at various elevations with up to 10 sensor locations on each elevation. This framework offers a robust approach for understanding hydrogen behavior in ambient conditions and informing detection strategies.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2024

EPCAPE-PT-LANL Measurements: Wideband Integrated Bioaerosol Sensor

Coastal cities offer a unique environment for studying aerosol-cloud interactions and the effects of urban emissions on cloud properties. As part of the Eastern Pacific Cloud Aerosol Precipitation Experiment (EPCAPE), the Partitioning Thrust by Los Alamos National Laboratory (EPCAPE-PT-LANL) was conducted. Our campaign focused on measuring the optical and chemical properties of aerosols and their interactions within marine stratocumulus clouds in La Jolla, California. EPCAPE-PT-LANL enhances the primary goals of EPCAPE through innovative observations of vapor-phase transitions between aerosols and cloud droplets, the impact of black carbon on aerosol-cloud dynamics, and the effects of cloud processing on aerosol optical properties. Instrument: Wideband Integrated Bioaerosol Sensor (Droplet Measurements Technology) Data Notes: The WIBS is an online single-particle measurement that detects FBAPs (within a size range of 0.5 - 30 microns in diameter) based on the excitation and emission wavelengths of the individual particles. Using two xenon lamps, the WIBS excites FBAPs at 280 nm and 370 nm. Their emission is detected across two wavebands of 310-400 nm and 420-650 nm. We classified the FBAPs into seven different categories (A, B, C, AB, BC, AC, and ABC) using the classification scheme in Perring et. al. (2015) [1]. Averaged number concentration of FBAPs (total and by category) and particles that non-fluorescent bioaerosols particles (NFBAPs). In separate files, we also present one-minute-averaged size distributions and the asymmetry factor (AF, a surrogate for shape) of all FBAPs and NFBAPs. The logarithmic bin width of the size bins are the same as the average bin width of the AOS's optical particle counter (OPC, Grimm) for the range of sizes in which they overlap (26 bins from 0.5 - 30 microns). AF of the particles ranges from 0-100 and is divided into five bins with a linear spacing at increments of 20. The smallest AF bin represents more spherical particles while the largest bin represents more rod-shaped particles. [1] Perring, A. E., et al. (2015), Airborne observations of regional variation in fluorescent aerosol across the United States, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 120, 1153–1170, doi:10.1002/2014JD022495. Abstract and description of the campaign can be found here : https://www.arm.gov/research/campaigns/amf2023epcape-pt-lanl. Files data_10min_WIBS_AFDist.csv Header: - FBAP_AFDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to Bin_5: Concentration of fluorescent bioaerosol particles in the each of 5 AF bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle AF, capturing the shapes of FBAPs detected during the measurement. - NFBAP_AFDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to Bin_5: Concentration of non-fluorescent bioaerosol particles in the each of 5 AF bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle AF, capturing the shapes of NFBAPs detected during the measurement. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. AF Bins: • Bin 1: 0 – 20 [unitless] • Bin 2: 21 – 40 [unitless] • Bin 3: 41 – 60 [unitless] • Bin 4: 61 – 80 [unitless] • Bin 5: 81 – 100 [unitless] Files data_10min_WIBS_Conc.csv Header: - NumberConcentrationA[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel A, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationB[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel B, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationC[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationAB[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels A and B, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationBC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels B and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationAC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels A and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationABC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by all three fluorescence channels A, B, and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationNFBAP[/cm3]: Number concentration of non-fluorescent bioaerosol particles, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. Files data_10min_WIBS_SizeDist.csv Header: - FBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to FBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_26: Number concentrations of FBAP in each of 26 size bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle sizes, capturing the size distribution of FBAPs detected during the measurement. - NFBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to NFBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_26: Number concentrations of NFBAP in each of 26 size bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Similar to FBAP, each bin covers a specific range of particle sizes, detailing the size distribution of NFBAPs detected. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. Size Bins: • Bin 1: 0.48 to 0.57 μm • Bin 2: 0.57 to 0.67 μm • Bin 3: 0.67 to 0.79 μm • Bin 4: 0.79 to 0.93 μm • Bin 5: 0.93 to 1.1 μm • Bin 6: 1.1 to 1.29 μm • Bin 7: 1.29 to 1.52 μm • Bin 8: 1.52 to 1.8 μm • Bin 9: 1.8 to 2.11 μm • Bin 10: 2.11 to 2.5 μm • Bin 11: 2.5 to 2.94 μm • Bin 12: 2.94 to 3.46 μm • Bin 13: 3.46 to 4.08 μm • Bin 14: 4.08 to 4.81 μm • Bin 15: 4.81 to 5.67 μm • Bin 16: 5.67 to 6.68 μm • Bin 17: 6.68 to 7.88 μm • Bin 18: 7.88 to 9.29 μm • Bin 19: 9.29 to 10.96 μm • Bin 20: 10.96 to 12.92 μm • Bin 21: 12.92 to 15.23 μm • Bin 22: 15.23 to 17.96 μm • Bin 23: 17.96 to 21.17 μm • Bin 24: 21.17 to 24.96 μm • Bin 25: 24.96 to 29.43 μm • Bin 26: 29.43 to 34.70 μm

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Spin squeezing in an ensemble of nitrogen–vacancy centres in diamond

Spin-squeezed states provide a seminal example of how the structure of quantum mechanical correlations can be controlled to produce metrologically useful entanglement. These squeezed states have been demonstrated in a wide variety of quantum systems ranging from atoms in optical cavities to trapped ion crystals. By contrast, despite their numerous advantages as practical sensors, spin ensembles in solid-state materials have yet to be controlled with sufficient precision to generate targeted entanglement such as spin squeezing. Here we report the experimental demonstration of spin squeezing in a solid-state spin system. Our experiments are performed on a strongly interacting ensemble of nitrogen–vacancy colour centres in diamond at room temperature, and squeezing (−0.50 ± 0.13 dB) below the noise of uncorrelated spins is generated by the native magnetic dipole–dipole interaction between nitrogen–vacancy centres. To generate and detect squeezing in a solid-state spin system, we overcome several challenges. First, we develop an approach, using interaction-enabled noise spectroscopy, to characterize the quantum projection noise in our system without directly resolving the spin probability distribution. Second, noting that the random positioning of spin defects severely limits the generation of spin squeezing, we implement a pair of strategies aimed at isolating the dynamics of a relatively ordered sub-ensemble of nitrogen–vacancy centres. Furthermore, our results open the door to entanglement-enhanced metrology using macroscopic ensembles of optically active spins in solids.

Atomic and molecular physics↗
DOE OSTI2024

DECOVALEX-2023: Task D Final Report

Task D of DECOVALEX-2023 is focused on the simulation of the coupled thermal hydraulic-mechanical (THM) behaviour in the full-scale engineered barrier system (EBS). The Horonobe EBS experiment is the demonstration of the full-scale EBS in the underground research laboratory (URL) (performed by JAEA in the Horonobe URL in Japan). Task D consisted of the three steps, a preliminary step (Step 0), simulation of the laboratory tests (Step 1) and simulation of the in-situ full-scale EBS experiment (Step 2). Since the Horonobe EBS experiment demonstrates the vertical emplacement option of the EBS, the experiment gallery is also backfilled with the backfill material. Therefore, interaction between the EBS and the backfill material can also be demonstrated, such as deformation (change of density) of the buffer material. The underground water in the Horonobe URL is saline. This fact adds chemical processes to THM behaviour. For example, mechanical properties (such as swelling pressure of the buffer material and backfill material) and hydraulic properties (such as permeability of the buffer material and backfill material) change depending on the water chemistry. Task D was therefore a challenging Task focused on not only the relatively simple THM behaviour but also complex THM behaviour including chemical processes. Six research teams (BGR, CAS, JAEA, KAERI, SNL and Taipower) participated the Task D. BGR, CAS, JAEA, KAERI and Taipower research teams selected a THM approach, while the SNL research team selected a TH approach. Step 1 involved the simulation of laboratory test results and was important to check the numerical codes developed by the research teams. Step 1 was divided into four sub steps. The simulation results through the Step 1 identified the parameters for simulation of the Step 2. Basic parameters of the materials (buffer material, backfill material, rock mass, concrete, sand) were provided by JAEA. Special parameters which research team needed were identified by back analysis of Step 1. Most notably the mechanical behaviour of swelling and displacement depended on the applied model (elastic model or elastoplastic model). Parameters such as Young’s modulus were found to need smaller values than characterised in the fundamental laboratory test results (Step 1-1, 1-2) for the elastic model. Although laboratory experiments are usually simple, test results contained some error. For example, if the saturation level is 100 % or higher, it should be considered an error. This situation was presented in the Step 1-3. A possible reason is that the buffer material is a mixture of bentonite and silica sand. When a specimen is cut to measure volume or weight, sand grains will affect the measurement data. In Step 2, boundary conditions such as temperature on the surface of the simulated overpack, heater power of the electrical heaters installed in the simulated overpack, injection pressure and inflow rate of the test water, were applied. The outer boundary conditions can be selected using measured data (injection pressure and inflow rate of the test water that is controlled by the injection systems installed in the sand layer around the buffer material and in the boundary between backfill material and concrete support). Since such measured data has some noise, research teams developed their own simplified boundary conditions. Inner boundary conditions can be selected using measured data as heater power and temperature on the surface of the simulated overpack. These data also contain some noise, so research teams developed their own simplified developed boundary conditions. Task D validated various approaches thorough the simulation of the in-situ full scale EBS system including backfill of the gallery: variations in the coupling processes (THM or THC), analysis codes, and boundary conditions. Temperature distribution in the buffer material was simulated well by all research teams. This means thermal behaviour is not sensitive to the simulation approaches. Although the water content distribution on the outside of the buffer material was well simulated by all research teams, the simulation results differ from the measured values inside the buffer material (at the centre and inside, near the simulated overpack). The buffer material is made from tap water, but in the in-situ experiment, saline groundwater infiltrates the buffer material. Therefore, the selection of the hydraulic parameters of the buffer material greatly affects the simulation results of the re saturation behaviour of the buffer material. In the Horonobe EBS experiment, measured values suitable for validating the simulation results were not obtained near the simulated overpack. When simulating the pressure and deformation of the buffer material, the measurement data is easily affected by the installation conditions of the measurement sensors, so verifying the measurement data itself remains an issue. Mechanical simulation results differ depending on whether they are considered as elastic or elastoplastic phenomena. The accuracy of measured in-situ data can be assessed by detailed analysis comparing sampling specimen analysis and measured data. The Horonobe EBS experiment is scheduled to be dismantled in the future (FY2026 and 2027). This detailed dismantling investigation will finally confirm the measured data.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗