Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “sustainable aviation fuel”

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.

259 records · Page 15

FY26 Progress on Demonstration of a Multiphysics Steady State Capability for Modeling Core Radial Expansion in SFRs

Under the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) Program, an integrated multiphysics approach is being developed to model the core bowing phenomena important to liquid metal-cooled fast reactors. Core bowing is an important passive safety mechanism in liquid metal-cooled fast reactors and involves multiphysics effects including radiation transport, fluid flow, heat transfer, and mechanical response to temperature and flux gradients. This report summarizes recent progress on developing a multiphysics, MOOSE-based workflow to predict core bowing and associated reactivity feedback. Significant new capabilities in the reactor physics code Griffin - sodium backfill and pin power reconstruction for deformed geometries - were applied in this effort. This year’s work included verification, code comparisons, sensitivity studies, and coupled demonstrations that advance the state of MOOSE-based core bowing workflow. Griffin’s sodium backfill capability was verified by demonstrating that its automated treatment of geometry expansion and material-density updates reproduces manual calculations exactly, confirming solid mass conservation and proper coolant backfilling in expanded geometries. Reconstructed pin powers were compared for Griffin’s ductheterogeneous and ring-heterogeneous treatments in single-, seven-, and nineteen-assembly cases, with best agreement observed in lower-leakage configurations and the duct-heterogeneous approach offering substantially lower computational cost. Thermal-hydraulic sensitivity sensitivities showed that MOOSE SCM, SAM, and CFD are expected to produce similar deformation predictions despite variances in their temperature predictions, and that explicit treatment of inter-assembly flow becomes increasingly important as gap flow rate increases. Finally, coupled demonstrations on small multi-assembly configurations using Griffin, MOOSE Solid Mechanics, MOOSE SCM, and Heat Conduction produced physically consistent reactivity feedback from thermal expansion and bowing. The coupled demonstrations simulated grid plate expansion as well as resultant core bowing at full power conditions. Simplifications were made in current workflow, namely the assumption of instantaneous full power conditions following hot zero power, and pre-expanding the Griffin geometry axially due to lack of an axial fuel pin expansion model and temperature feedback to Griffin.

Wozniak, Nicholas

A molecular conveyor belt-associated protein controls the rotational direction of the bacterial type 9 secretion system

ABSTRACT Many bacteria utilize the type 9 secretion system (T9SS) for gliding motility, surface colonization, and pathogenesis. This dual-function motor supports both gliding motility and protein secretion, where rotation of the T9SS plays a central role. Fueled by the energy of the stored proton motive force and transmitted through the torque of membrane-anchored stator units, the rotary T9SS propels an adhesin-coated conveyor belt along the bacterial outer membrane like a molecular snowmobile, thereby enabling gliding motion. However, the mechanisms controlling the rotational direction and gliding motility of T9SS remain elusive. Shedding light on this mechanism, we find that in the gliding bacteriumFlavobacterium johnsoniae, deletion of the C-terminus of the conveyor belt-associated protein GldJ controls and, in fact, reverses the rotational direction of T9SS from counterclockwise (CCW) to clockwise (CW). This suggests that the interface between the conveyor belt-associated protein GldJ and the T9SS ring protein GldK plays an important role in controlling the directionality of T9SS, potentially by modulating its interaction with the stator complex GldLM, which drives motor rotation. Combined with MD simulation of the T9SS stator units GldLM, we suggest a “tri-component gearset” model where GldJ controls the rotational direction of its driver, the T9SS, thus providing adaptive sensory feedback to influence the motility of the gliding bacterium. IMPORTANCE The type 9 secretion system (T9SS) is fundamental to bacterial gliding motility, pathogenesis, and surface colonization. Our findings reveal that the C-terminal region of the conveyor belt-associated protein GldJ functions as a molecular switch which is capable of reversing the rotational direction of T9SS. Through the coordinated actions of the T9SS stator units (akin to a driving motor), the GldK ring (the gear that converts rotational energy into linear movement), and GldJ, this machinery forms a smart conveyor belt system reminiscent of flexible or cognitive mechanical conveyors. Such advanced conveyors can alter their direction to adapt to shifting demands. Here, we show that the bacterial T9SS similarly adjusts its rotational bias based on feedback from the conveyor belt-associated protein GldJ. This dual-role feedback mechanism underscores an evolved, controllable biological snowmobile, offering new avenues for studying how bacteria fine-tune motility in dynamic environments.

Microbiology

Hazard and risk analysis framework for nuclear power plant–based integrated energy systems

Employing integrated energy systems (IESs) with nuclear power plants (NPPs) can improve NPP utilization by leveraging dedicated thermal and electric power delivery, but it may also increase operational safety risks. This paper presents a framework to identify and quantify hazards and risks for such IESs. The framework combines accidentology to review past industrial accidents with failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) to identify potential future incidents. Hydrogen explosion and toxic chemical release hazards are of particular concern. Explosion consequences are quantified using the Bauwens-Dorofeev (Bauwens) and trinitrotoluene equivalent mass (TNT-EM) methods, while chemical release consequences are computed using the Gaussian atmospheric dispersion method. Operational disturbances from direct electrical and thermal integration that may affect NPP safety are modeled using probabilistic risk analysis (PRA). Hazards and risks are then evaluated for regulatory compliance. The framework is applied to IESs comprising pressurized or boiling water reactors supplying three levels of thermal and electrical power to industrial customers. Case studies include high-temperature steam electrolysis hydrogen plants of varying capacities and a synthetic fuel production plant. Sensitivity analysis examines piping component failures in the PRA model as a precursor to cost estimation for thermal extraction line design. Additionally, Fussel-Vessely (FV) and risk increase importance (RII) measures identify risk-informed design improvements for the thermal extraction system. FMEA highlights hazards such as loss of offsite power, prompt loss of electrical load, loss of thermal output, and immediate steam diversion, in addition to hydrogen explosions and toxic chemical releases. Both Bauwens and TNT-EM methods suggest maintaining several hundred meters of separation between the NPP and hydrogen facility to mitigate explosion risks. PRA results show a maximum initiating event frequency increase of 1.15% and an overall risk increase of 0.28%. Importance measure analysis identifies upstream pipe leak isolation components as critical. Evaluating the results against safety regulations, it is concluded that hazards and risks can be managed to comply with regulations through risk-informed thermal and electrical connection designs, component selection, maintenance programs, and safe separation distances between NPPs and integrated industrial facilities.

08 - HYDROGEN

Physics basis for the reference flat-top plasma scenario in the ST–E1 fusion power plant

As part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Milestone-Based Fusion Energy Development Program, Tokamak Energy has completed the pre-concept design of the ST–E1 fusion power plant. ST–E1 is envisaged to operate in two phases: a pilot plant phase, targeting sustained net power production of 300 - 500 MWe for a duration >1 hr, followed by a commercial power plant phase targeting steady-state operations and a normalised overnight capital cost of ⩽12 000 $\$$/kWe. The design process adopted was highly iterative, integrating all major plant systems and progressing in a phased fidelity approach. At the pre-conceptual stage, the emphasis has been on exploring the design space, identifying the main system-level trade-offs, and making the key decisions that define the overall plant concept, rather than optimising a single operating point. This paper, part of a focused collection detailing the ST–E1 pre-concept design, addresses the development of a series of reference flat-top plasma operating points for the pilot plant phase. A modelling workflow was established to develop and assess candidate plasma design points and explore key dependencies. The workflow includes integrated core plasma modelling, magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) stability assessment, equilibrium generation, scrape-off-layer and exhaust modelling, heating & current drive design and optimisation, and turbulent transport modelling. Using this framework, the impact of several key parameters on the flat-top operating space was investigated, including the density limit, core radiation fraction and divertor power loading, level of external heating and curent drive power and assumed pedestal characteristics. The MHD stability, controllability and micro-stability characteristics of these plasmas were also analysed. These investigations informed the definition of a set of fully non-inductive, flat-top reference operating points that satisfy the high-level ST–E1 mission, including a low and high density case, a case that is stable to resistive wall modes and a case with reduced divertor power loading.

ST–E1

Software Validation Work With The ZPPR-15 Data

The analysis activities for fast reactors involve using many different pieces of software that are relied upon for their predictive capabilities. For this software to be considered reliable, documented proof that the predictions of the software are accurate is required. In this manuscript, the validation work that covers some of the Argonne software used in fast reactor design activities is discussed and displayed. This validation work includes neutron and gamma flux distributions, reaction rate distributions, and reactivity worth. In an ideal world, a reactor development program would have access to a comprehensive set of experimental facilities to help inform the design aspects of the reactor itself. While thermal-hydraulics experiments, and to a limited degree mechanical experiments, can be carried out today for validation needs, neutronics related experimental facilities are rather impractical because of the lack of experimental facilities. Given the desired time table for construction of new reactors, the reconstitution or creation of new neutronic experimental facilities is untenable and thus those reactor development programs must rely upon any available experimental measurements that are qualitatively similar to the design. While a methodology has been proposed to assess the similarity between the past experimental measurements and the reactor itself, that aspect is beyond the scope of this manuscript. In this manuscript, the focus is entirely placed on the analysis results for a series of experiments carried out at the ZPPR facility in Idaho in the mid-1980s. In this regard, this manuscript only shows the validation of the stated neutronics software for specific loadings of the ZPPR reactor. Because of the fuel form, its proposed enrichment, and the material content of the reactor core, the ZPPR-15 experiments were identified as potential validation data for the reactor. The ZPPR-15 experiments were intended as mockups of a 330 MWe Integral Fast Reactor program which was a follow on program to the Clinch River Breeder Reactor. In the ZPPR-15 series of experiments, measurements of the neutron spectrum, control rod worth, sodium void worth, foil reaction rate distributions, Doppler worth of heated samples, gamma dose, and axial expansion worth were all carried out and published. In many cases, these reactivity coefficients are good candidates to validate the reactivity coefficient calculation scheme used by the analysis software and included in the safety analysis activities of fast reactor development projects today. This manuscript discusses the modeling methodology and accuracy of the calculated experimental results using the LANL software MCNP and the ANL software package ARC (Argonne Reactor Codes). As will be shown, for many of the experimental measurements, the two software packages are found to be good predictive analysis tools for those experiments. In other cases, problems with the analysis methodology or underlying cross section data are exposed which indicates where predictive analysis is not as reliable. Finally, in some of the measurements the conclusion is reached that the experimental measurement cannot be reproduced with the analysis software as it is simply too difficult.

Aliberti, Gerardo

Evaluating Polymer Properties with Different Additives for Carbon Capture and Other Applications

Anthropogenic climate change is one of this generation’s most pressing concerns, with the potential to completely alter the delicate balance we’ve struck with nature. Already, global temperatures have risen 1.29°C, leading to disrupted weather systems, extinctions, increased risks of wildfires, and sea level rise, to name a few effects. Carbon dioxide emission from the combustion of fossil fuels and other industrial activity is a large driver of this phenomenon, as it absorbs heat before it can be radiated away from Earth, trapping it. Carbon dioxide has reached unprecedented levels in our atmosphere, showing a 50% increase from preindustrial averages to a whopping 430 ppm. Thus, reducing the amount of carbon dioxide via carbon capture technology is an important endeavor that serves to benefit everyone. The Microencapsulated CO 2 Sorbent (MECS) team at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) has turned to microencapsulation to approach this endeavor. Microcapsules provide an attractive approach to carbon capture, combining large surface areas for more efficient mass transfer, regenerative abilities, reduced solvent loss, and improved handling. Additionally, while existing carbon capture technology relies on industrial plants, capsules could present a modular approach to carbon capture, reducing the need for extensive physical infrastructure. The MECS team’s design consists of a polymer membrane that contains a liquid carbon sequestering sorbent, aqueous sodium carbonate. The carbon capturing reaction occurs in three distinct steps, the first of which is the dissolution of carbon dioxide into the sorbent solution and its conversion into carbonic acid (H 2 CO 3 ), shown in equations 1 and 2 respectively. Because this step hinges upon the ability of carbon dioxide to reach the solution inside the capsule, it is necessary that the microcapsule shell is permeable to carbon dioxide gas. The MECS team produces these microcapsules using the in-air droplet encapsulation apparatus (IDEA) shown in figure 1, which can produce uniform micron-scale droplets at speeds much faster than traditional single-dispersal microfluidic-based techniques. The IDEA Is 100 times faster than these current techniques and can reach up to 1000 times their speed when incorporating a multi-nozzle design. Additionally, because droplets are produced in-air via vibration, IDEA can decrease post-processing times and material waste by 99% and can fabricate microgels that are 10 to 100 times more viscous than can be produced via traditional microfluidics. While this design represents a breakthrough in the throughput, efficiency, and tunability of microcapsule production, it imposes a major constraint on the microcapsule curing process. Because microcapsule shells are crosslinked with UV light while falling 30 cm through the air, this gives them a reaction window of approximately 0.2 seconds. Thus, the system and shell formulations must be optimized such that the shells can be fully crosslinked within this very narrow window, prompting investigations into curing behavior.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2026 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for atomistic materials modeling

This release contains data and parameters of HydraGNN-based graph foundation models trained as a result of the work published in the pre-print "Exascale Multi-Task Graph Foundation Models for Imbalanced, Multi-Fidelity Atomistic Data" by M. Lupo Pasini et al. (https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.15380). We jointly train on 16 open first-principles datasets (544+ million structures covering 85+ elements) using a multi-task architecture with per-dataset heads and a scalable ADIOS2/DDStore data pipeline. On Frontier, we execute six large-scale DeepHyper hyperparameter optimization campaigns in FP64 and promote the top-performing message-passing models to sustained 2,048-node training, yielding a PaiNN-based lead model. The version of HydraGNN used to generate the outputs provided in this release is HydraGNN v5.0 (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0) The list of datasets used for the training of the graph foundation model is the following: 1) Alexandria [1] 2) ANI1x [2] 3) MPTrj [3] 4) Open Catalyst 2020 (OC20) [4] 5) Open Catalyst 2022 (OC22) [5] 6) Open Catalyst 2025 (OC25) [6] 7) Open Direct ir Capture 2023 (ODAC23) [7] 8) Open Materials 2024 (OMat24) [8] 9) Open Molecules 2025 (OMol25) [9] 10) OMol25-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with zero total charge) 11) OMol25-non-neutral (subset of OMol25 that contains only molecules with non-zero total charge) 12) Open Polymers 2026 (OPoly2026) [10] 13) Nabla2DFT [11] 14) QCML [12] 15) QM7X [reference 13] 16) transition1x [14] Dataset references: [1] J. Schmidt et al., “A dataset of 175k stable and metastable materials calculated with the PBEsol and SCAN functionals,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 64, 2022. [2] J. S. Smith et al., “The ANI-1ccx and ANI-1x data sets, coupled-cluster and density functional theory properties for molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 7, p. 134, 2020. [Online]. Available: https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41597-020-0473-z [3] A. Jain et al., “Commentary: The Materials Project: A materials genome approach to accelerating materials innovation,” APL Materials, vol. 1, no. 1, p. 011002, 07 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4812323 [4] L. Chanussot et al., “Open catalyst 2020 (oc20) dataset and community challenges,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 11, no. 10, pp. 6059–6072, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.0c04525 [5] K. Tran et al., “Open catalyst 2022 (oc22) dataset and challenges for oxidation electrocatalysts,” ACS Catalysis, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 3066–3084, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.2c05426 [6] S. J. Sahoo et al., “The open catalyst 2025 (oc25) dataset and models for solid-liquid interfaces,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.17862, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.17862 [7] A. Sriram et al., “The open DAC 2023 dataset and challenges for sorbent discovery in direct air capture,” ACS Central Science, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 923–941, 2024. [8] L. Barroso-Luque et al., “Open materials 2024 (omat24) inorganic materials dataset and models,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12771 [9] D. S. Levine et al., “The open molecules 2025 (OMol25) dataset, evaluations, and models,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2505.08762 [10] D. S. Levine et al., The open polymers 2026 (OPoly26) dataset and evaluations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.23117, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.23117 [11] K. Khrabrov et al., “Nabla2dft: A universal quantum chemistry dataset of drug-like molecules and a benchmark for neural network potentials,” in NeurIPS 2024 Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://openreview.net/forum?id=ElUrNM9U8c [12] S. Ganscha et al., “The QCML dataset, quantum chemistry reference data from 33.5M DFT and 14.7B semi-empirical calculations,” Scientific Data, vol. 12, p. 406, 2025. [13] J. Hoja et al., “QM7-X, a comprehensive dataset of quantum-mechanical properties spanning the chemical space of small organic molecules,” Scientific Data, vol. 8, p. 43, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-021-00812-2 [14] M. Schreiner et al., “Transition1x - a dataset for building generalizable reactive machine learning potentials,” Scientific Data, vol. 9, p. 779, 2022. The folder "datasets_ADIOS2_format" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "datasets_ADIOS2_format" directory contains 2 sub-directories, one for the version "v1" of the datasets and one for the version "v2" of the datasets. The version "v1" of the datasets provides values of the total energy as they are extracted from the original data as it was released by the respective institutions. The version "v2" of the datasets provides values of the energy that have been realigned. The realignment was performed by training a linear regression model that predicts the total energy as a function of the chemical composition of the atomistic structure, and then subtract such prediction from the original value of the total energy. Both folders "v1" and "v2" contain 16 sub-directories, each corresponding to an ADIOS2-formatted dataset The folder "DeepHyper-results" contains the configurational files and model's parameters for all the 186 HPO trials that were successfully completed by the scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) runs on Frontier. The content of the folder "DeepHyper-results" I structured as follows: 1) task-list.txt: list of mpnn name, jobid, and deephyper task id 2) gfm_${MPNN}_${JOBID}_0.${TASKID}: run directory with checkpoint files 3) gfm_${MPNN}: deephyper summary directory (*.csv) for each specific MPNN type 4) deephyper-experiment-${JOBID}: output and error logs for each job The file "deephyper-sorted.csv" contains the details of each HydraGNN model built and tested by HPO, obtained by merging the (*.csv) filed from each HPO run executed. Out of all the HPO trials, we selected 10 to continue the training of the respective HydraGNN models. Due to limited computational budget available in the LRN070 allocation we could not complete the training till convergence for all these 10 selected models. The folder "models" contains multiple sub-folders, one per each HydraGNN model trained. Each model sub-folder contains the parameters of each HydraGNN model, with multiple checkpoint-restarts. The list of sub-folders are as follows: 1) multidataset_hpo-BEST1-fp64 2) multidataset_hpo-BEST2-fp64 3) multidataset_hpo-BEST3-fp64 4) multidataset_hpo-BEST4-fp64 5) multidataset_hpo-BEST5-fp64 6) multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64 7) multidataset_hpo-BEST7-fp64 8) multidataset_hpo-BEST8-fp64 9) multidataset_hpo-BEST9-fp64 10) multidataset_hpo-BEST10-fp64 Within each one of these folders, additional auxiliary log files are provided with descriptions about how the training proceeded. The lead PaiNN-model is contained inside "multidataset_hpo-BEST6-fp64". The file "mlp_branch_weights" contains the parameters of the multi-layer perceptron (MLP) used to reconcile the predictions of the 16 output decoding heads of the HydragNN architectures. The MLP takes in input the chemical composition of the atomistic structure and predicts averaging weights to linearly mix the predictions of each output decoding head toward consolidating them into a single one. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 1.1 billion atomistic structures randomly generated. Each structures is associated with energy and forces predicted with the lead-PaiNN model combined with the MLP model for reconciliation of the multi-branch predictions generated by the 16 output decoding heads. The folder "1.1billion-structure-inference" contains 9,300 (*.tar.gz) subdirectories, one per Frontier compute node used to execute the inference at exascale. Once uncompressed, each (*.tar.gz) subdirectory contains an ADIOS2 (*.bp) file container, where each atomistic structure is stored as a PyTorch-Geometric Data object. The file "export_dataset_environment_variables.sh" contains the environment variables that need to be set before running the HydraGNN code to reproduce the results provided in this dataset release. The code that can be used to load the ADIOS2 files, load HydraGNN models, and run inference is available at: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/releases/tag/v5.0

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE