Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “risk communication”

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.

275 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Adaptive Protection and Validated Models to Enable Deployment of High Penetrations of Solar PV (PV-MOD)

The availability and validation of various PV models in commercial tools differ, with some models not yet thoroughly validated for advanced inverter functionalities and reliable performance under weak system conditions. Many existing models do not fully incorporate new inverter control functions, which can affect system stability. The increasing deployment of solar PV and other inverter-based resources (IBRs), including distributed energy resources (DERs), is influencing the reliable operation of protection schemes in distribution systems and microgrids. Emerging adaptive protection schemes (APS) offer new opportunities for protecting these systems during varying configurations and DER operating conditions, though their demonstration and validation remain limited. Adaptive protection schemes face similar challenges, as they are typically designed for specific configurations. There is a growing need for tools and methodologies to streamline the deployment of adaptive protection for safe and reliable DER integration. The project main objective was to develop and validate high-fidelity generic models of solar PV facilities for stability, protection, EMT, and QSTS analyses. This objective was achieved, and these models can now be integrated into commercial software tools, enabling utilities, vendors, and developers to study high-penetration PV systems more confidently. The project also demonstrated advanced applications of these models, including the design and deployment of adaptive protection schemes in high-penetration field applications and microgrids, supporting grid safety and reliability. Several milestones were reached by the end of the project. A sophisticated inverter test plan was developed, and inverters representative of the North American marketplace were selected. EPRI and NREL tested various inverters, conforming to IEEE standards. Improvements were made to existing generic models of IBR units, IBR plants, and aggregated feeders for various analyses. The first generic electromagnetic transient (EMT) model for a solar PV plant was developed, conforming to IEEE Std 2800™-2022 and validated against laboratory measurements of a 2.2 MVA large-scale battery energy storage system (BESS) inverter. That model was then used to produce reference responses illustrating examples of validated and verified IBR plant models that pass or fail tests for technical minimum capability and performance as specified in the IEEE standard. The developed, tested, and validated generic models can be used for transmission planning, stability assessments, expansion planning, and evaluating potential future IBR interconnection requirements. They can also support interconnection screens and conformity assessments of IBR plants, including solar PV. The project significantly contributed to the ongoing standardization and model-based representation and verification of IBR responses. The project further addressed challenges of common distribution protection schemes with increasing deployment of DER by developing, validating, and demonstrating adaptive protection schemes (APS) that can improve the reliable and safe integration of DER into distribution systems. New APS were designed using improved DER models for three common distribution systems: a radial feeder, a meshed network, and a microgrid. Modeling and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing of the APS were conducted, successfully showing their effectiveness and selectivity. Proof-of-concept field demonstration was achieved for two APS, i.e., one on a radial feeder and another one in a microgrid. Field demonstration could not be achieved for the APS on a meshed network, primarily due apprehension of one utility partner and also due to limited access to the protective algorithms in the network protectors. Guidelines developed from the lessons learned in the project lay out the general process followed in the design, installation, and commissioning of APS for various distribution systems. Distribution utility partners’ apprehension about field demonstration of the new APS were addressed—with varying success—by taking a stepped risk-management approach of modeling of a wide range of sensitivities first, performing in-depth proof-of-concept testing in the laboratory including HIL next, and finally deliberately implementing and commissioning the actual protection equipment and algorithms into parts of—or in parallel operation to—the three real distribution systems. Future work should include pilot projects that further show the acceptable performance of the developed APS before these schemes be rolled out more widely. Inclusion of both utility and original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) in future projects could increase chances of successful field demonstration. Despite challenges in achieving the field demonstration goal of the project for all three APS, the research significantly contributed to the innovation of adaptive protection solutions for scalable and reliable DER integration into distribution systems. This project significantly enhances the understanding of the impact of using appropriate inverter models on distribution and transmission (T&D) systems. By addressing the limitations of existing generic models, the project introduces high-fidelity models for stability, protection, electromagnetic transient (EMT), and quasi-static time series (QSTS) analyses. These models, integrated into commercial software tools, enable utilities, vendors, and developers to confidently study high-penetration PV systems. The project also demonstrates advanced applications, including adaptive protection schemes (APS) for distribution systems and microgrids, ensuring grid safety and reliability. The technical effectiveness and economic feasibility of the methods are evident through the development and validation of sophisticated inverter test plans and the selection of representative inverters. Testing by EPRI and NREL on retail, commercial, and utility-scale inverters, conforming to IEEE standards, underscores the robustness of the models. Improvements to existing generic models for various analyses further enhance their validity and applicability. The project also identifies gaps in common distribution protection schemes and designed new APS using improved DER models, demonstrating their effectiveness through modeling and hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing. The project’s benefits to the public are manifold. By advancing the standardization and model-based representation of IBR response, it supports transmission planning, stability assessments, and future IBR interconnection requirements. The generic models can facilitate better communication between transmission planners and developers, supporting expected IBR plant capability and performance. Additionally, the development of APS for radial feeders, meshed networks, and microgrids supports the integration of distributed energy resources (DERs) into distribution systems, enhancing grid reliability and safety. The project’s emphasis on thorough testing and simplicity in design ensures practical and scalable solutions for DER integration.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Resilience Metrics and Framework for Distributed Wind Presentation

This presentation communicates information about the MIRACL project Resilience Metrics report and Resilience Framework report. It was created for the 2021 MIRACL advisory board meeting. We propose a three-tiered approach for the resilience framework. At the top level, we consider the time horizons on which resilience will be evaluated and executed. At the middle level, we consider the core functions of resilience, which span across the time horizons. At the lower level, we consider the process steps that correspond to implementing practices for resilience in each of the core functions. The framework considers three time horizons in order to enable organizations to assess and improve their system’s resilience throughout its lifecycle. We call these time horizons the planning, operational, and future stages. The planning stage uses organizational needs and current system evaluation to prepare for potential hazards. The operational stage seeks to execute responses to hazards as prudently and efficiently as possible to maintain system resilience. The future stage seeks to improve on current system resilience and feeds back into the planning stage to promote continuous improvement. While all three time horizons are important when considering a specific topic, the planning and evaluation phase (i.e., what is done in advance of the event) is critical in defining a system’s resilience characteristics and in outlining how a system responds to an event. This framework intentionally emphasizes the planning stage to highlight the overarching emphasis of this effort, not to imply that the other two time-related horizons (i.e., operational and change the future) are less important. The core functions in the framework are identify, prepare, detect, adapt, and recover. These five functions stem from a rigorous analysis of definitions used across the industry, and they represent the core capabilities that an organization must have to enable lifecycle resilience. Within each core function, process steps are described that help walk an organization through the information gathering, evaluation, decision-making, and implementation processes they will need to ensure their resilience goals are maintained throughout the system and the system lifecycle. Also highlighted in the figure is the concept that a resilience framework should be cyclical in nature. Because a system’s resilience is based on finite resources and time, it must continually evolve through this framework’s risk management and capital investment steps at an appropriate level of scope and pace.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Maximizing efficiency of dataset compression for machine learning potentials with information theory

Machine learning interatomic potentials (MLIPs) balance high accuracy and lower costs compared to density functional theory calculations, but their performance often depends on the size and diversity of training datasets. Large datasets improve model accuracy and generalization but are computationally expensive to produce and train on, while smaller datasets risk discarding rare but important atomic environments and compromising MLIP accuracy/reliability. Here, we develop an information-theoretical framework to quantify the efficiency of dataset compression methods and propose an algorithm that maximizes this efficiency. By framing atomistic dataset compression as an instance of the minimum set cover (MSC) problem over atom-centered environments, our method identifies the smallest subset of structures that contains as much information as possible from the original dataset while pruning redundant information. The approach is extensively demonstrated on the GAP-20 and TM23 datasets and validated on 64 varied datasets from the ColabFit repository. Across all cases, MSC consistently retains outliers, preserves dataset diversity, and reproduces the long-tail distributions of forces even at high compression rates, outperforming other subsampling methods. Furthermore, MLIPs trained on MSC-compressed datasets exhibit reduced error for out-of-distribution data even in low-data regimes. We explain these results using an outlier analysis and show that such quantitative conclusions could not be achieved with conventional dimensionality reduction methods. The algorithm is implemented in the open-source QUESTS package and can be used for several tasks in atomistic modeling, from data subsampling, outlier detection, and training improved MLIPs at a lower cost.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2019

Support for Reactor Operators in Case of Cyber-Security Threats (NEUP Final Report)

Increasing use of digital technology in nuclear power plants (NPPs) poses cyber-security as a crucial threat to public safety and to continuous energy production. Cyber-security risks are comprised of complex known and unknown interactions between various entities, system vulnerabilities, network protocols, human users and malicious attacks. There is little understanding or research geared towards plant operators’ response under cyber-security threats and operational procedures to cope with such threats. This is particularly critical when a cyber-security event masquerades as a safety incident or an evolving accident. Instead of leading operators to the remediation of the accident, the masked cyber event may lead them to circumvent the safety mechanisms of the plant. Given these challenges, the objective of this project is to develop a tool to characterize abnormal NPP events as “cyber” or “safety” incidents, and to further develop this tool as a real-time operator aid to assist in response to the incident. This NEUP Final Report summarizes the research efforts towards the above goals and the results in the following three aspects. First, a methodology for classifying abnormal NPP events as cyber-attacks or safety incidents was developed. This provides the basis for responding to potential cyber-attacks. In this methodology, the causal relationships between various variables (i.e., physical variables, network variables, and control variables) for a nuclear system under consideration are modeled using dynamic Bayesian networks. Based on observations of certain variables (i.e., the evidence), inference is performed to identify the state of hidden variables, which helps indicate the occurrence of cyber-attacks or safety incidents. The proposed methodology was applied to the full scope NPP simulator system at The Ohio State University as a case study. The result shows that the proposed methodology is capable of distinguishing between cyber-attacks and safety incidents. Second, a game-theoretic approach for responding to cyber-attacks on nuclear power plants was developed. This is the second major goal of the project, and the method is used to recommend optimal responses to reactor operators in the case of cyber-attacks. We consider two cases in this research. In the first case, the interaction between the defender (i.e., the reactor operator) and the attacker is modeled as a two-player, nonzero-sum, Markov game with an infinite time horizon. In the second case, we consider a semi-Markov game between the defender and the attacker within a finite time horizon. The model in the second case enables us to consider the time sensitive response of the defender. In each case, the method for deriving the Nash equilibrium is developed. The Nash Equilibrium of the game provides the valid prediction of both players’ actions because no single player can benefit from unilaterally deviating from the equilibrium policy if the other player adheres to his/hers, hence it provides the best response of the defender to cyber-attacks. The proposed method in each case is demonstrated through a simplified benchmark digital feedwater control system. Third, a prototype display is developed to integrate the above information. The prototype display depicts the communication information to the operator and incorporates the cyber-security tool developed by the team into the interface. It consists of the regular display in current control rooms, as well as a panel used to indicate the occurrence of cyber-attacks or safety events and a panel used to guide the operator’s response to detected cyber-attacks.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

The role of peer review and science for advancing public understanding

We live in a time of rapid change. The Covid-19 pandemic has united the world to understand and develop solutions to protect the health and wellbeing of society. At the same time, access to information on the internet and social media has exploded. People are exposed to information with many claims. Some of the information is relevant and accurate. A significant fraction may be inaccurate, biased, and potentially dangerous. With Covid-19, the information might point to cures that are toxic or risks that are not relevant. The scientific community has developed a process to develop and convey knowledge. The validation of results and their interpretation is critical to advancing knowledge. The core of the scientific process is based on developing a hypothesis-driven concept, designing and executing an experimental approach to prove or disprove the hypothesis, conducting a statistical analysis of the results to confirm their validity, and interpreting their meaning and impact. When their work is completed the scientist prepares to publish the work. Publication requires peer review. Hypotheses, experimental approaches, results, and interpretation of results are independently and anonymously reviewed by a scientific peer. The reviewers are selected based on their expertise in the field. The peer review process is essential for the integrity of the scientific process. Without a robust scientific process, society cannot discriminate between validated results and interpretations and biased, inaccurate, and potentially dangerous conjecture. With inaccurate science society and policy makers may make poor decisions that could hurt people and the world around them. While scientists should not censor information available to the public, scientists have a responsibility to inform the public. We must articulate what the scientific process is and why it is essential when considering the validity of information. Scientist are responsible for pointing out when public information has not been vetted through a scientific process and therefore cannot be considered conclusive. Scientists are responsible for highlighting information that has been generated and vetted with the scientific process. Over time, our goal is for the public to value the scientific process based on peer review. The public could become enlightened to the necessity for peer review to support decisions and action. Scientists need to contribute to advancing public knowledge. When invited to serve as a peer reviewer, scientists have a responsibility to contribute to the process. We all are extremely busy making peer review a distraction. While peer review does not directly benefit our own work and career, it benefits our chosen field of science. This is very important for the research area that our journal, Water-Energy Nexus, is focusing on. We cover the convergence of science and technology integrating across large spatial ranges (micro to global) in environmental pollution and the balance of remediation issues with energy use. Water-Energy Nexus wants to provide scientists with a platform for scientific debate and discussion on this rich and complicated topic. With the manuscripts submitted to WEN cover integrated research topics across a broad range of subjects from environment sciences through energy engineering, the role of peer review is essential. Peer review on a new submission to WEN should not be biased towards a specific science field. It should be done considering the complex nature of issues in the water-energy nexus. Scientists need to contribute to the public dialog. To accomplish these goals, we need to be honest, accurate, articulate, and use understandable language. The impact of WEN is very diverse affecting society in many ways. The scientific audience for WEN is diverse and readers may not fully understand the content of the papers outside their research expertise. Therefore, scientists, especially those who want to contribute to WEN, should work with communications specialists to convey message to benefit society. The audience includes the general public and researchers outside the author’s core specialty. While the peer-reviewed journal article is the cornerstone of our careers and critical for advancing scientific knowledge, a general interest story could benefit society even more. The author cannot lose sight that our work has two audiences, the science community, and more importantly, our family, friends, neighbors, and policy makers.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗