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.
132 Urban parameters based on building physical dimensions and location were generated for the city of Los Angeles at 100m resolution using the NATURF model. To use the binary file with WRF, the binary file and the index file must be placed in their own directory in WRF_GEOG and accessed in the same way NUDAPT44 would be accessed. The kmz file can be visualized on Google Earth.
This software automates the collection of waveform data on a timed schedule so that an operator does not need to be at the computer to initiate the collection of data sets.It provides real time display of up to 16 channels of data as a time display, frequency display, or frequency vs time (spectrogram) display. The software provides the ability to collect data sets of a user selected time length at a selected interval. This operation can be set to occur during a selected time interval during the day. This software provides the capability to write two copies of the data files simultaneously so that the data is backed up as collected. This software automates the collection of waveform data on a timed schedule so that an operator does not need to be at the computer to initiate the collection of data sets. It provides real time display of up to 16 channels of data as a time display, frequency display, or frequency vs time (spectrogram) display. The software provides the ability to collect data sets of a user selected time length at a selected interval. This operation can be set to occur during a selected time interval during the day. This software provides the capability to write two copies of the data files simultaneously so that the data is backed up as collected.
This dataset contains identifiers, metadata, and a map of the locations where field measurements have been conducted at the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory located in the Upper Colorado River Basin, United States. This is version 3.3 of the dataset and replaces the prior version 3.2 (see below for details on changes between the versions). Dataset description: The East River-Taylor Watershed is the primary field site of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) and the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory. Researchers from several institutions generate highly diverse hydrological, biogeochemical, climate, vegetation, geological, remote sensing, and model data at the East-Taylor Watershed in collaboration with the WFSFA. Thus, the purpose of this dataset is to maintain an inventory of the field locations and instrumentation to provide information on the field activities in the East-Taylor Watershed and coordinate data collected across different locations, researchers, and institutions. The dataset contains (1) a README file with information on the various files, (2) three csv files describing the metadata collected for each surface point location, plot and region registered with the WFSFA, (3) csv files with metadata and contact information for each surface point location registered with the WFSFA, (4) a csv file with with metadata and contact information for plots, (5) a csv file with metadata for geographic regions and sub-regions within the watershed, (6) a compiled xlsx file with all the data and metadata which can be opened in Microsoft Excel, (7) a kml map of the locations plotted in the watershed which can be opened in Google Earth, (8) a jpg image of the kml map which can be viewed in any photo viewer, and (9) a zipped file with the registration templates used by the SFA team to collect location metadata. The zipped template file contains two csv files with the blank templates (point and plot), two csv files with instructions for filling out the location templates, and one compiled xlsx file with the instructions and blank templates together. Additionally, the templates in the xlsx include drop down validation for any controlled metadata fields. Persistent location identifiers (Location_ID) are determined by the WFSFA data management team and are used to track data and samples across locations. Dataset uses: This location metadata is used to update the Watershed SFA’s publicly accessible Field Information Portal (an interactive field sampling metadata exploration tool; https://wfsfa-data.lbl.gov/watershed/), the kml map file included in this dataset, and other data management tools internal to the Watershed SFA team. Version Information: The latest version of this dataset publication is version 3.3. This version contains 167 new point locations, 1 new plot, and 2 new geographic regions. Overall, there are a total of 1439 point locations, 75 plots, and 54 geographic regions. Additionally, the kml map of locations and image now includes two boundaries (Upper Ohio Creek (UO) and Carbon Creek (CA)) outside of the East River watershed (USGS HUC-10) and accompanying stream network that represents areas of focus. Refer to methods for further details on the version history. This dataset will be updated on a periodic basis with new measurement location information. Researchers interested in having their East-Taylor Watershed measurement locations added to this list should reach out to the WFSFA data management team at wfsfa-data@googlegroups.com. Acknowledgments: Please cite this dataset if using any of the location metadata in other publications or derived products. If using the location metadata for the 2018 NEON hyperspectral campaign, additionally cite Chadwick et al. (2020). doi:10.15485/1618130. 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. Part of this work was performed at SLAC Accelerator Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515.
Measurement and verification (M&V) are key to determining and confirming the continued operation of, and savings associated with, performance-based contracts. The Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) updates these guidelines to reflect the evolution of M&V to incorporate industry best practices and ensure that savings from these performance-based projects are properly planned, communicated, and realized. FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Federal Energy Projects Version 3.0 in 2008. This document was developed with input from industry-government working groups, previous M&V guideline authors, and national laboratory subject matter experts. The document provided the methods and guidelines, with a focus on federal energy savings performance contracts (ESPCs). When FEMP released M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts Version 4.0 in 2015, FEMP expanded the intended audience to include anyone (energy managers, procurement officers, and contractors) involved in implementing performance-based contracts. The streamlined M&V Guidelines Version 4.0 provided the procedures and guidelines needed to quantify savings resulting from installing energy-efficient equipment, water conservation, improved operation and maintenance (O&M), renewable energy, and cogeneration projects with a performance-based contract; however, it removed some of the associated details on topics such as developing regression models and sampling plans. The details and information provided in M&V Guidelines v. 3.0 are still pertinent to M&V for performance-based contracts. The objective is to keep FEMP M&V version 4.0 condensed, providing the reference document for specifying M&V methods and procedures and a resource for developing project-specific M&V plans; this supplement provides additional details. The content of this supplement has been updated to include pertinent revisions between M&V version 3.0 and M&V version 4.0 by providing details and updating the content to ensure relevancy.
The Monte Carlo N-Particle® (MCNP® ) code is a general-purpose, continuous-energy, generalized-geometry, time-dependent, radiation transport code developed by the MCNP development team. MCNP calculations provide predictive capabilities that can replace expensive or impossible-to-perform experiments. Specific application problems include simulations of experimental diagnostics, intrinsic radiation, radiation detection and measurement, criticality safety, nuclear threat reduction and response, radiation health protection, nuclear weapons effects, and nuclear forensics. This MCNP code, version 6.3.1, follows the MCNP6.3.0 version. Since the release of MCNP6.3.0, a variety of bug fixes and code enhancements have been completed for MCNP6.3.1. A few new features have also been added to this release to support both ongoing research and the release of the latest ENDF/B-VIII.1 nuclear data library. The MCNP code, version 6.3.1, theory and user input information is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Theory & User Manual, the build guidance for various platforms is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Build Guide, and the verification and validation testing for various application benchmark test suites is documented in MCNP® Code Version 6.3.1 Verification & Validation Testing.
The continental flood inundation mapping (CFIM) framework is a high-performance computing (HPC)-based computational framework for the Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND)-based inundation mapping methodology. Using the 10m Digital Elevation Model (DEM) data produced by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 3DEP (the 3-D Elevation Program) and the NHDPlus hydrography dataset produced by USGS and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a hydrological terrain raster called HAND is computed for HUC6 units in the conterminous U.S. (CONUS). The value of each raster cell in HAND is an approximation of the relative elevation between the cell and its nearest water stream. Derived from HAND, a hydraulic property table is established to calculate river geometry properties for each of the 2.7 million river reaches covered by NHDPlus (5.5 million kilometers in total length). This table is a lookup table for water depth given an input stream flow value. Such lookup is available between water depth 0m and 25m at 1-foot interval. The flood inundation map is then computed by using HAND and this lookup table based on the near real-time water forecast from the National Water Model (NWM) at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). HAND and the Hydraulic Property Table version v0.21 is an upgrade to v0.2. Version 0.21 applies NHD HR etching to DEMs for all HUC6 units before running the HAND workflow. This new version also fixed the issue of void areas along HUC boundary. This dataset comprises 331 HUC6 units for CONUS (excluding the five great lakes units), each is a downloadable zip file. Version 0.1 was computed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois at Urban-Champaign in 2016 and is currently hosted at the Texas Advanced Computing Center (TACC). Please cite this data DOI and the following publications and data DOIs when you use HAND and the hydraulic property table: Liu, Yan Y. Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND) and Hydraulic Property Table for CONUS - Version 0.2. (20200301). Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility. (2020). DOI: 10.13139/ORNLNCCS/1608331 Liu, Yan Y., David R. Maidment, David G. Tarboton, Xing Zheng, and Shaowen Wang. 'A CyberGIS integration and computation framework for high-resolution continental-scale flood inundation mapping.' JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 54, no. 4 (2018): 770-784. DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12660 Zheng, Xing, David G. Tarboton, David R. Maidment, Yan Y. Liu, and Paola Passalacqua. 'River channel geometry and rating curve estimation using height above the nearest drainage.' JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association 54, no. 4 (2018): 785-806. DOI: 10.1111/1752-1688.12661 Liu, Y. (2018). Height Above Nearest Drainage (HAND) for CONUS, HydroShare, https://doi.org/10.4211/hs.69f7d237675c4c73938481904358c789 LICENSE FOR USE -- MAPS AND DATA DISCLAIMER This resource is shared under the Creative Commons Attribution CC BY, http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ MAPS AND DATA DISCLAIMER The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) shall not be held liable for improper or incorrect use of the data described or information contained on this map or associated series of maps. The data and related map graphics are not legal, land survey or engineering documents and are not intended to be used as such. ORNL gives no warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, reliability, utility or completeness of this information. The user of these maps and data assumes all responsibility and risk for the use of the maps and data. ORNL disclaims all warranties, representations or endorsements either express or implied, with regard to the information contained in this map product, including, but not limited to, all implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose or non-infringement. This preliminary map product is for research and review purposes only. It is not intended to be used for emergency management operational or life safety decisions at the local or regional governmental level or by the general public. Users requiring information regarding hazardous conditions or meteorological conditions for specific geographic areas should consult directly with their city or county emergency management office.
This report documents the verification of the RESRAD-BUILD code, Version 4.0, which was released on December 22, 2022. Two earlier reports verifying Versions 3.0 and 3.1, respectively, were published in 2001 (Kamboj, et al. 2001) and 2003 (Tetra Tech NUS 2003). Version 4.0 of the RESRAD-BUILD code has many new features and modeling enhancements over the earlier versions, including the previously released Version 3.5. Chapter 2 of this report focuses on verifying the external dose and risk modeling for point, line, area, and volume sources, as well as for floor deposition. Besides verification, the external radiation doses calculated by RESRAD-BUILD were also benchmarked with those calculated by the MCNP code (Briemeister 1993). Section J.3 of the RESRAD-BUILD User’s Manual Vol. 1 (Yu et al. 2022) documents the results of that benchmarking effort. Chapter 3 of this report focuses on verifying the ventilation modeling, from checking the remaining source inventory, releases of radionuclides to the air, air concentrations and deposited floor concentrations over time, to the radiation dose and risk associated with inhalation, ingestion, and air submersion, with and without vacuuming. The verification efforts involve designing spreadsheets to perform calculations the same as or like those performed by the RESRAD-BUILD code and then comparing the spreadsheet results with those produced by the code. When the results agree or the differences are within acceptable range, the accuracy of model implementation in the code is verified. In addition to model implementation, the implementation of key functions and features that facilitate the modeling or the use of the code were also verified during the release testing of the code. Appendix A presents the test cases developed for these verification testing, and Appendix B presents the testing results that verify proper implementation of key functions and features.
Following the release of the version 4 Cloud-Aerosol Lidar with Orthogonal Polarization (CALIOP) data products from the Cloud-Aerosol Lidar and Infrared Pathfinder Satellite Observations (CALIPSO) mission, a new version (version 4; V4) of the CALIPSO Imaging Infrared Radiometer (IIR) Level 2 data products has been developed. The IIR Level 2 data products include cloud effective emissivities and cloud microphysical properties such as effective diameter and ice or liquid water path estimates. Dedicated retrievals for water clouds were added in V4, taking advantage of the high sensitivity of the IIR retrieval technique to small particle sizes. This paper (Part I) describes the improvements in the V4 algorithms compared to those used in the version 3 (V3) release, while results will be presented in a companion (Part II) paper. The IIR Level 2 algorithm has been modified in the V4 data release to improve the accuracy of the retrievals in clouds of very small (close to 0) and very large (close to 1) effective emissivities. To reduce biases at very small emissivities that were made evident in V3, the radiative transfer model used to compute clear-sky brightness temperatures over oceans has been updated and tuned for the simulations using Modern-Era Retrospective analysis for Research and Applications version 2 (MERRA-2) data to match IIR observations in clear-sky conditions. Furthermore, the clear-sky mask has been refined compared to V3 by taking advantage of additional information now available in the V4 CALIOP 5 km layer products used as an input to the IIR algorithm. After sea surface emissivity adjustments, observed and computed brightness temperatures differ by less than ±0.2 K at night for the three IIR channels centered at 08.65, 10.6, and 12.05 µm, and inter-channel biases are reduced from several tens of Kelvin in V3 to less than 0.1 K in V4. We have also improved retrievals in ice clouds having large emissivity by refining the determination of the radiative temperature needed for emissivity computation. The initial V3 estimate, namely the cloud centroid temperature derived from CALIOP, is corrected using a parameterized function of temperature difference between cloud base and top altitudes, cloud absorption optical depth, and CALIOP multiple scattering correction factor. As shown in Part II, this improvement reduces the low biases at large optical depths that were seen in V3 and increases the number of retrievals. As in V3, the IIR microphysical retrievals use the concept of microphysical indices applied to the pairs of IIR channels at 12.05 and 10.6 µm and at 12.05 and 08.65 µm. The V4 algorithm uses ice look-up tables (LUTs) built using two ice habit models from the recent “TAMUice2016” database, namely the single-hexagonal-column model and the eight-element column aggregate model, from which bulk properties are synthesized using a gamma size distribution. Four sets of effective diameters derived from a second approach are also reported in V4. Here, the LUTs are analytical functions relating microphysical index applied to IIR channels 12.05 and 10.6 µm and effective diameter as derived from in situ measurements at tropical and midlatitudes during the Tropical Composition, Cloud, and Climate Coupling (TC4) and Small Particles in Cirrus Science and Operations Plan (SPARTICUS) field experiments.
Abstract. This work assesses a recently produced 21-member climate model large ensemble (LE) based on the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) version 2 (E3SM2). The ensemble spans the historical era (1850 to 2014) and 21st century (2015 to 2100), using the SSP370 pathway, allowing for an evaluation of the model's forced response. A companion 500-year preindustrial control simulation is used to initialize the ensemble and estimate drift. Characteristics of the LE are documented and compared against other recently produced ensembles using the E3SM version 1 (E3SM1) and Community Earth System Model (CESM) versions 1 and 2. Simulation drift is found to be smaller, and model agreement with observations is higher in versions 2 of E3SM and CESM versus their version 1 counterparts. Shortcomings in E3SM2 include a lack of warming from the mid to late 20th century, likely due to excessive cooling influence of anthropogenic sulfate aerosols, an issue also evident in E3SM1. Associated impacts on the water cycle and energy budgets are also identified. Considerable model dependence in the response to both aerosols and greenhouse gases is documented and E3SM2's sensitivity to variable prescribed biomass burning emissions is demonstrated. Various E3SM2 and CESM2 model benchmarks are found to be on par with the highest-performing recent generation of climate models, establishing the E3SM2 LE as an important resource for estimating climate variability and responses, though with various caveats as discussed herein. As an illustration of the usefulness of LEs in estimating the potential influence of internal variability, the observed CERES-era trend in net top-of-atmosphere flux is compared to simulated trends and found to be much larger than the forced response in all LEs, with only a few members exhibiting trends as large as observed, thus motivating further study.
Nuclear data processing is an important interface between an evaluated nuclear data library and neutronics calculation codes. JAEA has been developed the new nuclear data processing code FRENDY from 2013. FRENDY version 1 generates the ACE files used for the continuous-energy Monte Carlo codes including PHITS, Solomon, Serpent,and MCNP and it was released as the open-source software under the 2-clause BSD license in 2019.After we released FRENDY version 1, many functions, e.g., the multi-group neutron cross-section library generation, the statistical uncertainty quantification of the probability tables for unresolved resonance cross-section, the 'perturbation' of the ACE file for uncertainty quantification, and the modification of the ENDF-6 formatted nuclear data file, have been developed. We released FRENDY version 2 including these functions. The present paper gives an overview of FRENDY and presents features of new functions implemented in FRENDY version 2. (authors)
This disclosure is for version 2.x of a mesoscale model called Phase Field Dislocation Dynamics (PFDD). PFDD is used for investigating deformation in nanoscale (grain sizes of ~300 nm and less) materials, such as metals and alloys. This approach models the motion and interaction of individual defects, namely dislocations, in the material using scalar-valued phase field variables, also called order parameters. The system is evolved through energy minimization thus the model calculates the total energy density in terms of the phase field variables. The energy minimization is completed using the Ginzburg-Landau equation, and is implemented with explicit time integration. The total system energy can be comprised of several terms, including the strain energy (which describes dislocation-dislocation interactions), the energy due to an applied stress (dislocation interactions with the applied stress), and a core/lattice (perfect dislocations) or generalized stacking fault (partial dislocations) energy (described the dislocation core structure). The latter term in particular may vary based on the crystal structure being modeled and is typically informed using lower length scale (e.g., atomistic) approaches, although no such (atomistic) calculations are completed within the PFDD algorithm. This basic formulation was previously reviewed by Los Alamos National Laboratory and released under license number C17113. This previously reviewed version we will henceforth refer to as PFDD v1.0. PFDD v1.0 consisted of 2 codes (one parallel and one serial) plus input files, all written in the C language. This new disclosure is addressing the next versions of the PFDD, versions 2.x. There have been several enhancements of PFDD v1.0, which are described here and included in the attached code, which we will refer to as PFDD v2.0. There are also several new features described here that are either planned or already in process and are expected to be subsequent releases, i.e., v2.1, v2.2, ...v2.x.
Abstract We evaluate the simulated teleconnection of El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) to winter season precipitation extremes over the United States in a long (98 years) 1950 control high-resolution version (HR; 25-km nominal atmosphere model horizontal resolution) of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1 (E3SMv1). The model bias and spatial pattern of ENSO teleconnections to mean and extreme precipitation in HR overall are similar to the low-resolution model’s (LR; 110 km) historical simulation (four-member ensemble, 1925–59). However, over the southeastern United States (SE-U.S.), HR produces stronger El Niño–associated extremes, reducing LR’s model bias. Both LR and HR produce weaker than observed increase in storm track activity during El Niño events there, but HR improves the ENSO-associated variability of moisture transport over SE-U.S. During El Niño, stronger vertical velocities in HR produce stronger large-scale precipitation, causing larger latent heating of the troposphere that pulls in more moisture from the Gulf of Mexico into the SE-U.S. This positive feedback also contributes to the stronger mean and extreme precipitation response in HR. Over the Pacific Northwest, LR’s bias of stronger than observed La Niña associated extremes is amplified in HR. Both models simulate stronger than observed moisture transport from the Pacific Ocean into the region during La Niña years. The amplified HR bias there is due to stronger orographically driven vertical updrafts that create stronger large-scale precipitation, despite weaker La Niña–induced storm track activity. Significance Statement New high-resolution Earth system models (ESMs) solve mathematical equations of fluid flow at much smaller spatial scales than prevalent ESMs, and thus are prohibitively expensive to compute. However, they can be useful for simulating accurate details of regional climate extremes that are driven by naturally occurring climate oscillations like El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO). Here, we evaluate the simulation of ENSO-driven precipitation extremes over the United States in the high-resolution version of the U.S. Department of Energy’s new Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1. We find that the high-resolution model improves upon its low-resolution counterpart over the southeastern United States by producing a better transport of moisture into the region from the Gulf of Mexico during El Niño. Over the U.S. Pacific Northwest, the high-resolution model simulates the atmospheric flow in more detail over the complex mountainous terrain. However, it also brings in more moisture from the Pacific Ocean just like the low-resolution model. This causes it to produce precipitation extremes during La Niña years there that are stronger than that observed in the real world.
SimpleMass v2 is an updated GUI version of the SimpleMass Excel spreadsheet. It was developed using Python 3.7 and wxPython, a cross-platform GUI toolkit. The program was developed on Windows 10 and tested on macOS Catalina. In theory, the program should work on Linux based operating systems such as Ubuntu, but this has not been tested. Executable versions of the code were built using PyInstaller. The version described in this report is an alpha version that is still in development. It has only been tested by the developer.
The HyRAM+ software toolkit provides a basis for conducting quantitative risk assessment and consequence modeling for hydrogen, natural gas, and autogas systems. HyRAM+ is designed to facilitate the use of state-of-the-art models to conduct robust, repeatable assessments of safety, hazards, and risk. HyRAM+ integrates deterministic and probabilistic models for quantifying leak sizes and rates, predicting physical effects, characterizing hazards (thermal effects from jet fires, overpressure effects from delayed ignition), and assessing impacts on people. HyRAM+ is developed at Sandia National Laboratories to support the development and revision of national and international codes and standards, and to provide developed models in a publicly-accessible toolkit usable by all stakeholders. This document provides a description of the methodology and models contained in HyRAM+ version 5.0. The most significant change for HyRAM+ version 5.0 from HyRAM+ version 4.1 is the ability to model blends of different fuels. HyRAM+ was previously only suitable for use with hydrogen, methane, or propane, with users having the ability to use methane as a proxy for natural gas and propane as a proxy for autogas/liquefied petroleum gas. In version 5.0, real natural gas or autogas compositions can be modeled as the fuel, or even blends of natural gas with hydrogen. These blends can be used in the standalone physics models, but not yet in the quantitative risk assessment mode of HyRAM+.
RESRAD-RDD&IND is part of the RESRAD family of codes that Argonne National Laboratory developed for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). An earlier version, RESRAD-RDD published in 2009, dealt only with radiological dispersal device (RDD) incidents (DOE 2009). This new version, RESRAD-RDD&IND, is designed to evaluate both RDD incidents and improvised nuclear device (IND) incidents. This report is Volume 1 of the RESRAD-RDD&IND User’s Manual that documents the methodology, models, and radionuclide-specific data used in RESRAD-RDD&IND code Version 2.0. Volume 2 of the RESRAD-RDD&IND User’s Manual is called the User’s Guide for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code . It describes how to use RESRAD-RDD&IND code Version 2.0 and includes screen shots and parameter information.
Version 2.0 of the RESRAD-RDD&IND computer code is designed to support the implementation of protective action guides (PAGs) after a nuclear emergency incident including a radiological dispersal device (RDD) and/or an improvised nuclear device (IND) incident (EPA 2017). Eight different group types, addressing various decisions, are available for selection. The RESRAD-RDD&IND code calculates radiological doses, stay times, etc., for the selected group that the user wishes to focus on. (That is, the results for all the groups are not calculated simultaneously, and the input for those other groups do not matter, although some parameter values are shared between groups.) Version 2.0 has a user-friendly interface so that the RESRAD-RDD&IND code can be used with minimal training. For example, the user can select the major characteristics of the problem-event type, source term, and decision type from the left side of the interface and then calculate the results with the default assumptions for the exposure scenarios. More in-depth analysis would include specifying site-specific exposure scenario characteristics in the right side of the interface. The procedures for data entry and results viewing are self-explanatory. This is because common window maneuvering features and text instructions were incorporated in the interface design. General and context-specific help are available to aid users entering parameter values, as well. The RESRAD-RDD&IND computer code gives the user the option to select either an RDD or IND incident for analysis. For an RDD event analysis, 11 radionuclides (Am-241, Cf-252, Cm-244, Co-60, Cs-137, Ir-192, Po-210, Pu-238, Pu-239, Ra-226, and Sr-90) are included. These 11 radionuclides are the radionuclides most likely used for an RDD. More than 90 radionuclides can be selected for an IND event analysis. Initial default concentrations are provided for 44 radionuclides for a uranium-fueled IND event. These 44 radionuclides are those that would contribute significantly to the radiation dose associated with a uranium-fueled bomb detonation. The radionuclides generated from ingrowth of these 44 initial radionuclides are also automatically included in the analysis. Pu-239, Cs-134m, Ru-105, and Rb-89 and their progeny can be selected for analysis if they are detected and their concentrations are determined. This user’s guide, which is Volume 2 of the User’s Manual for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code Version 2, provides instructions to users on how to install the RESRAD-RDD&IND code, navigate the interface, and use the various features, including those discussed above, to set up an analysis and view/print the results in text outputs. Volume 1 of the User’s Manual for RESRAD-RDD&IND Code Version 2 (Yu et al. 2026), which contains descriptions of the methodology and theoretical basis for dose modeling and the mathematical equations implemented in the code, can be accessed and viewed through the Help menu in the code or can be downloaded from the RESRAD website (https://resrad.evs.anl.gov).
Embodiments may include systems and methods to create and edit a representation of a worksite, to create various data objects, to classify such objects as various types of pre-defined “features” with attendant properties and layout constraints. As part of or in addition to classification, an embodiment may include systems and methods to create, associate, and edit intrinsic and extrinsic properties to these objects. A design engine may apply of design rules to the features described above to generate one or more solar collectors installation design alternatives, including generation of on-screen and/or paper representations of the physical layout or arrangement of the one or more design alternatives. Some embodiments may provide viewing, creating, and manipulating of multiple versions of a solar collector layout design for a particular installation worksite. The use of versions may allow analysis of alternative layouts, alternative feature classifications, and cost and performance data corresponding to alternative design choices. Version summary information providing a representative comparison between versions across a number of dimensions may be provided.
Embodiments may include systems and methods to create and edit a representation of a worksite, to create various data objects, to classify such objects as various types of predefined “features” with attendant properties and layout constraints. As part of or in addition to classification, an embodiment may include systems and methods to create, associate, and edit intrinsic and extrinsic properties to these objects. A design engine may apply of design rules to the features described above to generate one or more solar collectors installation design alternatives, including generation of on-screen and/or paper representations of the physical layout or arrangement of the one or more design alternatives. Some embodiments may provide viewing, creating, and manipulating of multiple versions of a solar collector layout design for a particular installation worksite. The use of versions may allow analysis of alternative layouts, alternative feature classifications, and cost and performance data corresponding to alternative design choices. Version summary information providing a representative comparison between versions across a number of dimensions may be provided.