Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Best Estimate Plus Uncertainty”

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.

24 records · Page 2

Atmospheric opacity in the Schumann-Runge bands and the aeronomic dissociation of water vapor

Knowledge of the aeronomic production of odd hydrogen in the dissociation of water vapor is limited by uncertainties in the penetration of solar irradiance in the Schumann-Runge bands of O2 and by incomplete information concerning the products of photolysis at Lyman alpha. Consideration of all error sources involved in computing the H2O dissociation rate in the wavelength region 175-200 nm leads to an estimated uncertainty of plus or minus 35% at an altitude of 90 km for an overhead sun. The uncertainty increases with decreasing altitude such that the true dissociation rate at 60 km for an overhead sun lies between 0.45 and 1.55 times the results computed using the best input parameters currently available. Calculations of the H2O dissociation rate by Lyman alpha should include the variation in O2 opacity across the solar line width. Neglect of this can lead to errors as large as 50% at altitudes where the process is the major source of odd hydrogen.

Frederick, J. E.↗

Effective radiative forcing and adjustments in CMIP6 models

The effective radiative forcing, which includes the instantaneous forcing plus adjustments from the atmosphere and surface, has emerged as the key metric of evaluating human and natural influence on the climate. We evaluate effective radiative forcing and adjustments in 17 contemporary climate models that are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) and have contributed to the Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP). Present-day (2014) global-mean anthropogenic forcing relative to pre-industrial (1850) levels from climate models stands at 2.00 (±0.23) W/sq. m, comprised of 1.81 (±0.09) W/sq. m from CO2, 1.08 (± 0.21) W/sq. m from other well-mixed greenhouse gases, −1.01 (± 0.23) W/sq. m from aerosols and −0.09 (±0.13) W/sq. m from land use change. Quoted uncertainties are 1 standard deviation across model best estimates, and 90 % confidence in the reported forcings, due to internal variability, is typically within 0.1 W/sq. m. The majority of the remaining 0.21 W/sq. m is likely to be from ozone. In most cases, the largest contributors to the spread in effective radiative forcing (ERF) is from the instantaneous radiative forcing (IRF) and from cloud responses, particularly aerosol–cloud interactions to aerosol forcing. As determined in previous studies, cancellation of tropospheric and surface adjustments means that the stratospherically adjusted radiative forcing is approximately equal to ERF for greenhouse gas forcing but not for aerosols, and consequentially, not for the anthropogenic total. The spread of aerosol forcing ranges from −0.63 to −1.37 W/sq. m, exhibiting a less negative mean and narrower range compared to 10 CMIP5 models. The spread in 4×CO2 forcing has also narrowed in CMIP6 compared to 13 CMIP5 models. Aerosol forcing is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the increasing spread in climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, particularly related to high-sensitivity models, is a consequence of a stronger negative present-day aerosol forcing and little evidence that modelling groups are systematically tuning climate sensitivity or aerosol forcing to recreate observed historical warming.

effective radiative forcing↗

Risk Analysis of Various Design Architectures for High Safety-significant Safety-related Digital Instrumentation and Control Systems of Nuclear Power Plants during Accident Scenarios

This report documents the plus-up activities performed by Idaho National Laboratory (INL) during Fiscal Year (FY) 2022 for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program, Risk Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway, digital instrumentation and control (DI&C) risk assessment project. In FY 2019, the RISA Pathway initiated a project to develop a risk assessment strategy for delivering a strong technical basis to support effective, licensable, and secure DI&C technologies for digital upgrades/designs. An integrated risk assessment technology for the DI&C systems was proposed for this strategy, which aims to (1) provide a best-estimate, risk-informed capability to quantitatively and accurately estimate the safety margin obtained from plant modernization, especially for the high safety-significant safety-related (HSSSR) DI&C systems, (2) support and supplement existing advanced risk-informed DI&C design guides by providing quantitative risk information and evidence, (3) offer a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems to support system design decisions and diversity and redundancy applications, (4) assure the long-term safety and reliability of HSSSR DI&C systems, and (5) reduce uncertainty in costs and support integration of DI&C systems in the plant. To achieve these technical goals and deal with the expensive licensing justifications from regulatory insights, the LWRS-developed framework instructs nuclear vendors and utilities on how to effectively lower the costs associated with digital compliance and speed industry advances by: (1) defining an integrated risk-informed analysis process for DI&C upgrade, including hazard analysis, reliability analysis, and consequence analysis, (2) applying systematic and risk-informed tools to address common cause failures (CCFs) and quantify corresponding failure probabilities for DI&C technologies, particularly software CCFs, (3) evaluating the impact of digital failures at the component level, system level, and plant level, and (4) providing insights and suggestions on designs to manage the risks, thus to support the development, licensing, and deployment of advanced DI&C technologies on nuclear power plant (NPPs). Adding diversity within system or components is the main means to eliminate and mitigate CCFs, but diversity also increases plant complexity and errors and may not address all sources of systematic failures. How to optimize the diversity and redundancy applications for the safety-critical DI&C systems remains a challenge. To deal with the technical issues in addressing potential software CCFs in HSSSR DI&C systems of NPPs and supporting relevant design optimization, the framework provides: ? An integrated best-estimate, risk-informed capability to address new technical digital issues quantitatively, accurately, and efficiently in plan modernization progress, such as software CCFs in HSSSR DI&C systems of NPPs ? A common and a modularized platform for DI&C designers, software developers, cybersecurity analysts, and plant engineers to efficiently predict and prevent risk in the early design stage of DI&C systems ? Technical bases and risk-informed insights to assist U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and industry to address and fulfill the risk-informed alternatives for evaluation of CCFs in HSSSR DI&C systems of NPPs ? An integrated risk-informed tool that offers a capability of design architecture evaluation of various DI&C systems to support system design decisions in diversity and redundancy applications. The plus-up research and development efforts of this project in FY 2022 are focused on methodology improvement of software CCF modeling and estimation, prevention analysis, importance analysis and risk analysis of various design architectures of HSSSR DI&C systems. This work greatly enhances the capability of the LWRS-developed framework for the risk assessment and design optimization of safety-critical DI&C systems. It should be noted that all the analyses are performed for the demonstration of the LWRS-developed framework, not for the evaluation of relevant systems. Results are obtained based on very limited design information and testing data.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Effective radiative forcing and adjustments in CMIP6 models

Abstract. The effective radiative forcing, which includes the instantaneous forcing plus adjustments from the atmosphere and surface, has emerged as the key metric of evaluating human and natural influence on the climate. We evaluate effective radiative forcing and adjustments in 17 contemporary climate models that are participating in the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) and have contributed to the Radiative Forcing Model Intercomparison Project (RFMIP). Present-day (2014) global-mean anthropogenic forcing relative to pre-industrial (1850) levels from climate models stands at 2.00 (±0.23) W m−2, comprised of 1.81 (±0.09) W m−2 from CO2, 1.08 (± 0.21) W m−2 from other well-mixed greenhouse gases, −1.01 (± 0.23) W m−2 from aerosols and −0.09 (±0.13) W m−2 from land use change. Quoted uncertainties are 1 standard deviation across model best estimates, and 90 % confidence in the reported forcings, due to internal variability, is typically within 0.1 W m−2. The majority of the remaining 0.21 W m−2 is likely to be from ozone. In most cases, the largest contributors to the spread in effective radiative forcing (ERF) is from the instantaneous radiative forcing (IRF) and from cloud responses, particularly aerosol–cloud interactions to aerosol forcing. As determined in previous studies, cancellation of tropospheric and surface adjustments means that the stratospherically adjusted radiative forcing is approximately equal to ERF for greenhouse gas forcing but not for aerosols, and consequentially, not for the anthropogenic total. The spread of aerosol forcing ranges from −0.63 to −1.37 W m−2, exhibiting a less negative mean and narrower range compared to 10 CMIP5 models. The spread in 4×CO2 forcing has also narrowed in CMIP6 compared to 13 CMIP5 models. Aerosol forcing is uncorrelated with climate sensitivity. Therefore, there is no evidence to suggest that the increasing spread in climate sensitivity in CMIP6 models, particularly related to high-sensitivity models, is a consequence of a stronger negative present-day aerosol forcing and little evidence that modelling groups are systematically tuning climate sensitivity or aerosol forcing to recreate observed historical warming.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Updating PV and Battery Bill Savings Calculations for Net Billing: New Best Practices for Input Data and Uncertainty

Jurisdictions are increasingly adopting compensation structures for distributed PV and PV-battery systems that price exported energy lower than energy consumed onsite (net billing rates). Standard methods for calculating the bill savings from PV and PV-battery systems were developed for net metering structures, and applying these same methods to net billing structures (such as using Typical Meteorological Year weather with actual year load) introduces bias errors that underestimate PV-battery system bill savings by between 1.5\% and 9\%, depending on the utility rate. We assess the magnitude of these errors and compare them to other sources of uncertainty when estimating the bill savings from PV and PV-battery systems under more complex utility rates.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Risk-Informed MultiPphysics BestEestimate Plus Uncertainties (BEPU) Application Development of RELAP5-3D Perturbation Model

The United States nuclear industry is facing a strong challenge to ensure maximum safety while enhancing economic benefit. Safety is a key parameter to all aspects related to light water reactor (LWR) nuclear power plants (NPPs), especially cost savings. Since the goal is to extend the lifetimes of these NPPs, the traditional deterministic safety concept may not guarantee a current economic asset. The Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program has been promoting a wide range of research and development (R&D) in this field to maximize the safety, economics, and performance of these NPPs through improved scientific understanding. One of the best practices to achieve this goal is to identify and optimize safety margins, which can lead to cost reduction. To do this, under the LWRS framework, the Risk-Informed Systems Analysis (RISA) Pathway will focus on the optimization of safety margin and minimization of uncertainties to ensure both safety and economics at the highest level. The RISA Pathway will provide enhanced capabilities for analyzing and characterizing LWR systems performance by developing and demonstrating methods, tools, and data to enable risk-informed margins management (RIMM). The goals of the RISA Pathway are twofold: (1) deploy the risk-informed tools and methods that enable better representation of safety margins and factors that contribute to cost and safety; and (2) conduct advanced risk assessment applications with industry to support margin management strategies that enable more cost-effective plant operation. The tools and methods provided by the RISA Pathway will support effective margin management for both active and passive safety systems, structures, and components (SSC) of an NPP. The tools and methods used in the RISA Pathway should have high confidence and highest technical maturity for and implementation to industry at its current setting. They should also have a capability to support risk-informed decision making for both probabilistic and deterministic elements of safety. The RISA Pathway will, therefore, perform a comprehensive assessment of verification and validation (V&V) status of RISA Toolkit to enhance credibility RISA Toolkit which be used by industry. This report summarizes RELAP5-3D development activities for best estimated and uncertainty (BEPU) capability to support ongoing RISA Pathway pilot projects for risk informed uncertainty quantification applications. Work scope includes (1) development of initial perturbation model for selected closure laws and (2) testing of suitable probability distribution functions (PDF) for the selected correlations. Developed BEPU modules are tested with selected separate effect cases and compared with conventional thermal-hydraulics model.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗