SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Case studies of selected streams from the EPA FGD Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640
Data from the USGS Brackish Water Database on brackish water compositions from across the US. Data has been filtered for high salinity and completeness of data attributes. Data has been transposed and converted for ease of input into aqueous chemistry modeling software including OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench. Original data from: Qi, S.L., and Harris, A.C., 2017, Geochemical Database for the Brackish Groundwater Assessment of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F72F7KK1.
Case studies from the USGS Brackish Water Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench files. Original data from: Qi, S.L., and Harris, A.C., 2017, Geochemical Database for the Brackish Groundwater Assessment of the United States: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F72F7KK1.
Data from the USGS Produced Waters Database on produced water compositions from across the US. Data has been filtered for completeness of data attributes. Data has been transposed and converted for ease of input into aqueous chemistry modeling software including OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench. Original data from: Blondes, M. S., Gans, K. D., Engle, M. A., Kharaka, Y. K., Reidy, M. E., Saraswathula, V., Thordsen, J. J., Rowan, E. L., & Morrissey, E. A. (2019). U.S. Geological Survey National Produced Waters Geochemical Database v2.3 [Data set]. U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J964W8
Case studies from the USGS Produced Waters Database. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench files. Original data from: Blondes, M. S., Gans, K. D., Engle, M. A., Kharaka, Y. K., Reidy, M. E., Saraswathula, V., Thordsen, J. J., Rowan, E. L., & Morrissey, E. A. (2019). U.S. Geological Survey National Produced Waters Geochemical Database v2.3 [Data set]. U.S. Geological Survey. https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J964W8
Case studies of selected streams from the EPA Ash Dataset. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640
Case studies of selected streams from the EPA Leachate Dataset. Includes OLI Studio and Geochemist's Workbench example files. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640
Data from Cravotta, Brady, "Priority pollutants and associated constituents in untreated and treated discharges from coal mining or processing facilities in Pennsylvania, USA". Applied Geochemistry, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2015.03.001 Dataset includes information on water quality composition including inorganic compounds from untreated and treated streams of coal-mine discharge from coal mining and coal processing locations. Data is provided in the original version as well as in a summarized version for easy input into aqueous chemistry modeling software.
Data from the US EPA Gasification Database containing gasification effluent data from selected U.S. coal power plants. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640 Files include: Original data tab, processed data and charge balance information in "NEWTS_EPA_Gasification_Effluent_Dataset_all_tabs.xlsx" Individual .csv files for data in format for input into aqueous chemistry modeling software (OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench) Data input templates for modeling streams in OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench Case studies for selected solved streams modeled in OLI Systems and Geochemist's Workbench
Data from the US EPA Ash Database containing Ash pond effluent data from selected U.S. coal power plants. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640
Data from the US EPA Leachate Database containing ash landfill leachate data from selected U.S. coal power plants. Original data from: Nguyen, Dan-Tam, Eastern Research Group. Sep 29, 2015. Analytical Database for the Steam Electric Rulemaking - DCN SE05359. https://www.regulations.gov/document/EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819-5640
Abstract Machine learning (ML) offers promising tools to develop surrogate models for polymers' structure–property relations. Surrogate models can be built upon existing polymer data and are useful for rapidly predicting the properties of unknown polymers. The accuracy of such ML models appears to depend on the feature space representation of polymers, the range of training data, and learning algorithms. Here, we establish connections between these factors for predicting the glass transition temperature (T g ) of polymers. Our analysis suggests linear models with fewer fitting parameters are as accurate as nonlinear models with many hidden and unexplainable parameters. Also, the performance of a monomer topology‐based ML model is found to be qualitatively identical to that of a physicochemical descriptor‐based ML model. We find that the ML models's performance in the extrapolative region is enhanced as the property range of the training data increases. Moreover, we establish newT g – polymer chemistry correlations via ML. Our work illustrates how ML can advance the fundamental understanding of polymer structure–property correlations and its efficacy for extrapolation problems.
Uncertainty analysis is a critical requirement in reactor simulation as it is used to quantify the reliability of best-estimate calculation. A comprehensive uncertainty analysis should characterize all sources of uncertainties in a computationally-feasible and scientifically-defendable manner. Here we employ a well-established reduced order modeling (ROM) based uncertainty quantification methodology to propagate uncertainties throughout neutronic calculations. ROM relies on recent advances in randomized data mining techniques applied to large data streams. In our proposed implementation, the nuclear data uncertainties are first propagated from multi-group level through lattice physics calculation to generate few-group parameter uncertainties, described using a vector of mean values and a covariance matrix. Employing an ROM-based compression of the covariance matrix, the few-group uncertainties are then propagated through downstream core simulation in a computationally efficient manner. This straightforward approach, albeit efficient as compared to brute force forward and/or adjoint-based methods, often employs a number of assumptions that have been unquestioned in the literature of neutronic uncertainty analysis. This manuscript argues that these assumptions could introduce another source of uncertainty referred to as modeling uncertainties, whose magnitude needs to be quantified in tandem with nuclear data uncertainties. Thus, our primary goal is to explore the interactions between these two uncertainty sources in order to assess whether modeling uncertainties have an impact on parameter uncertainties. To explore this endeavor, the impact of a number of modeling assumptions on core attributes uncertainties is quantified. The study employs a CANDU reactor model, with Serpent and NEWT as lattice physics solvers and NESTLE-C as core simulator. The modeling assumptions investigated include those related with the uncertainty propagation method employed, e.g., deterministic vs. stochastic, the few-group energy structure employed to represent the cross-sections, the resonance treatment in lattice physics calculation, the reference values for the cross-section, and the number of samples employed to render ROM compression. Results indicate that some of the modeling assumptions could have a non-negligible impact on the core responses propagated uncertainties, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach to combine parameter and modeling uncertainties.
The SCALE 6.2.4 code package contains four sequences for calculating $k_{eff}$ sensitivity coefficients. Two of these sequences use deterministic transport solvers: a one-dimensional (1D) capability based on XSDRN, and a two-dimensional (2D) capability based on NEWT. These sequences are restricted to the multigroup (MG) treatment of neutron energy. The three-dimensional (3D) sequences use the KENO V.a or KENO-VI Monte Carlo transport codes and can be used to calculate sensitivity coefficients with either MG or continuous-energy (CE) transport. The 3D sensitivities are ultimately reported in an MG structure, regardless of the method used in the transport calculations. If desired, the sensitivity coefficients can be reported with very fine energy resolution from a CE calculation, but they are calculated only in the MG library structure in the MG mode. CE TSUNAMI methods are available in SCALE starting in SCALE version 6.2. Sensitivity coefficients were generated using the 3D sequences as part of the generation of the SCALE 6.2.2 Validation Report; difficulties encountered when using the CLUTCH method for thick, fissionable-material reflectors were discussed and investigated as documented in a previous paper. This paper discusses the difficulties encountered in generating accurate sensitivity coefficients using the CLUTCH technique for polyethylene reflectors for two fast spectrum benchmarks. Direct perturbation (DP) calculations were performed to confirm the accuracy of the total sensitivity coefficient for important isotopes with large sensitivities in the system. Discrepancies were detected for CLUTCH-calculated sensitivity coefficients in the reflector of a critical experiment with a radial polyethylene reflector. A simple polyethylene-reflected plutonium sphere was then used to further investigate the discrepancy. Calculations performed using the iterated fission probability (IFP) method generated accurate sensitivity coefficients in both cases. The results of this study emphasize the need to confirm CLUTCH sensitivity results with DP calculations. IFP calculations are generally less efficient but more reliable than CLUTCH calculations. Improvements to the CLUTCH methodology that retain the greater efficiency but address identified difficulties are therefore potentially useful to analysts.
The purpose of this tool is to estimate key parameters that may be missing in public wastewater composition datasets. The tool can be applied to develop complete treatment and critical mineral extraction profiles for leachate, produced water and other aqueous waste streams. The tool applies machine learning algorithms to replace missing data in a user’s water data set that are adjusted based on user preferences for options including algorithm type, number of features, and classification variables. The tool can use the user’s data alone or combine user data with the NEWTS USGS Produced Water Database for more robust training. This research was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office Fossil Energy and Carbon Management (FECM) through National Energy Technology Laboratory’s ongoing research under the Water Management for Power System Field Work Proposal, DE-FECM 1022428 and Critical Minerals Field Work Proposal, DE-FECM 1022420.
A database of geochemical compositions of aqueous species in produced water reported to the PA DEP. Samples were collected between mid-2012 to early-2020. Data from publicly-available PA DEP 26r reports were scraped from pdf files and cumulated into tabular spreadsheet format for >1000 produced water streams from Marcellus wells in Pennsylvania. In addition to providing the original values, the NETL NEWTS team has reformatted the dataset to allow sample streams to be easily copied into OLI Studio and Geochemist WorkBench (GWB) software for modeling the geochemistry and the recovery of critical minerals, such as lithium, from these produced water streams. In addition, a version of the dataset has been included with predictions for some missing values in the original dataset using machine learning techniques within CoDaRT software, a public ML software developed by the Nation Energy Technology Laboratory. We have made the Input into CoDaRT and one example output from CoDaRT available in this dataset.
A database of geochemical compositions of aqueous species in produced water reported to the PA Department of Environmental Protection (PA DEP). Samples were collected between late-2010 to late-2024. Data from publicly available PA DEP 26r reports were scraped from pdf files and cumulated into tabular spreadsheet format for >3,000 produced water streams from Marcellus Shale wells in Pennsylvania. In addition to providing the original values, the NETL NEWTS team has reformatted the dataset to allow sample streams to be easily copied into OLI Studio and Geochemist WorkBench (GWB) software for modeling the geochemistry and the recovery of critical minerals, such as lithium, from these produced water streams. ***This dataset is an updated version of the PA DEP 26r Detailed Produced Water Compositions (version 1.0) dataset, providing expanded spatial and temporal coverage.***
This talk summarizes the potential for critical minerals extraction from produced water and the current data constraints on making these evaluations. First, we present results from production simulations carried out using data from the Marcellus shale showing the lithium resource potential from this formation. Second, we broaden our estimations to show the critical mineral resource estimates from U.S. domestic shale operations. Lastly, we conclude with an overview of the NEWTS database and dashboard where we host the data used in our assessments.