Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “PROJECTION”

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.

At least 379 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2012

NYSEG Seneca Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) Demonstration Project

Compressed Air Energy Storage (CAES) is a hybrid energy storage and generation concept that has many potential benefits especially in a location with increasing percentages of intermittent wind energy generation. The objectives of the NYSEG Seneca CAES Project included: for Phase 1, development of a Front End Engineering Design for a 130MW to 210 MW utility-owned facility including capital costs; project financials based on the engineering design and forecasts of energy market revenues; design of the salt cavern to be used for air storage; draft environmental permit filings; and draft NYISO interconnection filing; for Phase 2, objectives included plant construction with a target in-service date of mid-2016; and for Phase 3, objectives included commercial demonstration, testing, and two-years of performance reporting. This Final Report is presented now at the end of Phase 1 because NYSEG has concluded that the economics of the project are not favorable for development in the current economic environment in New York State. The proposed site is located in NYSEG’s service territory in the Town of Reading, New York, at the southern end of Seneca Lake, in New York State’s Finger Lakes region. The landowner of the proposed site is Inergy, a company that owns the salt solution mining facility at this property. Inergy would have developed a new air storage cavern facility to be designed for NYSEG specifically for the Seneca CAES project. A large volume, natural gas storage facility owned and operated by Inergy is also located near this site and would have provided a source of high pressure pipeline quality natural gas for use in the CAES plant. The site has an electrical take-away capability of 210 MW via two NYSEG 115 kV circuits located approximately one half mile from the plant site. Cooling tower make-up water would have been supplied from Seneca Lake. NYSEG’s engineering consultant WorleyParsons Group thoroughly evaluated three CAES designs and concluded that any of the designs would perform acceptably. Their general scope of work included development of detailed project construction schedules, capital cost and cash flow estimates for both CAES cycles, and development of detailed operational data, including fuel and compression energy requirements, to support dispatch modeling for the CAES cycles. The Dispatch Modeling Consultant selected for this project was Customized Energy Solutions (CES). Their general scope of work included development of wholesale electric and gas market price forecasts and development of a dispatch model specific to CAES technologies. Parsons Brinkerhoff Energy Storage Services (PBESS) was retained to develop an air storage cavern and well system design for the CAES project. Their general scope of work included development of a cavern design, solution mining plan, and air production well design, cost, and schedule estimates for the project. Detailed Front End Engineering Design (FEED) during Phase 1 of the project determined that CAES plant capital equipment costs were much greater than the $\$$125.6- million originally estimated by EPRI for the project. The initial air storage cavern Design Basis was increased from a single five million cubic foot capacity cavern to three, five million cubic foot caverns with associated air production wells and piping. The result of this change in storage cavern Design Basis increased project capital costs significantly. In addition, the development time required to complete the three cavern system was estimated at approximately six years. This meant that the CAES plant would initially go into service with only one third of the required storage capacity and would not achieve full capability until after approximately five years of commercial operation. The market price forecasting and dispatch modeling completed by CES indicated that the CAES technologies would operate at only 10 to 20% capacity factors and the resulting overall project economics were not favorable for further development. As a result of all of these factors, the Phase 1 FEED developed an installed CAES plant cost estimate of approximately $\$$2,300/KW for the 210MW CAES 1A and 2 cycles. The capital cost for the 136 MW CAES 1 cycle was even higher due to the lower generating capacity of the cycle. Notably, the large equipment could have generated additional capacity (up to 270MW) which would have improved the cost per KW; however, the output was limited by the night time transmission system capability. The research herein, therefore, is particular to the site-specific factors that influenced the design and the current and forecasted generation mix and energy prices in Upstate New York and may not necessarily indicate that CAES plants cannot be economically constructed in other places in New York State or the world.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2026

Guideline for Characterizing and Evaluating a Candidate Project Site for Solar Thermal Applications

This document presents a structured procedure for characterizing and evaluating candidate project sites for concentrating solar power (CSP) and solar heat for industrial processes (SHIP) applications. The objective is to provide project developers, researchers, and other stakeholders with a consistent, technology-agnostic framework for early-stage site assessment, enabling informed decision-making prior to significant investment in project development. Site selection is a critical factor in project success or failure for both CSP and SHIP projects. Key factors such as solar resource availability, land characteristics, environmental and regulatory constraints, infrastructure availability, and community context are determined by the choice of project site and can materially impact project performance, cost, schedule, and overall viability. This procedure is designed to systematically evaluate these factors, identify potential fatal flaws, and prioritize the most favorable candidate sites for further development. The process begins with rapid screening-level evaluation, using publicly available data to assess solar resource, land availability and suitability, zoning and land-use compatibility, and exclusion zones such as protected lands or sensitive habitats. Sites that meet the minimum screening criteria advance to a more detailed characterization. Subsequent sections of this report provide guidance for a next-level assessment of the most important technical and environmental parameters, including: 1) Solar resource quality, variability, and uncertainty using multiyear datasets and, where appropriate, on-site measurement campaigns; 2) Meteorological conditions such as wind, temperature, extreme weather events, and soiling impacts; 3) Land characteristics including slope, shading, and geotechnical conditions; and 4) Environmental and regulatory considerations, including permitting processes, endangered species, cultural resources, and visual impacts. The procedure also addresses infrastructure and integration considerations, including: 1) Grid interconnection requirements for CSP power generation projects; 2) Electrical and operational integration for SHIP facilities; 3) Water availability, quality, and permitting constraints, which are particularly critical for CSP in arid regions; and 4) Site access, construction logistics, and availability of workforce and supporting services. Recognizing the importance of social and economic context, the procedure includes evaluation of community engagement factors, such as stakeholder sentiment, proximity to sensitive visual receptors, workforce development opportunities, and local economic incentives. The outputs of these assessments are synthesized in a cost and risk evaluation, translating site characteristics into expected impacts on capital cost, operating cost, schedule, and technical risk. This is complemented by screening-level performance modeling, including 8760 simulations and long-term projections, to quantify expected energy or thermal output, assess variability thereof, and support comparison between candidate sites. Finally, the procedure provides high-level guidance on a structured go/no-go decision framework, categorizing sites based on identified risks and constraints, and outlining a clear path forward to feasibility studies and front-end engineering design for viable projects. By standardizing the site characterization process across both CSP and SHIP applications, this guideline aims to: 1) Improve consistency and transparency in early-stage project evaluation; 2) Reduce development risk and avoid investment in nonviable project sites; 3) Support collaboration between developers, researchers, and public agencies; and 4) Accelerate successful deployment of concentrating solar technologies for both power generation and industrial process heat.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2014

TH-E-17A-05: Optimizing Four Dimensional Cone Beam Computed Tomography Projection Allocation to Respiratory Bins

Purpose: Four dimensional cone beam computed tomography (4DCBCT) is an emerging image guidance strategy but it can suffer from poor image quality. To avoid repeating scans it is beneficial to make the best use of the imaging data obtained. For conventional 4DCBCT the location and size of respiratory bins is fixed and projections are allocated to the respiratory bin within which it falls. Strictly adhering to this rule is unnecessary and can compromise image quality. In this study we optimize the size and location of respiratory bins and allow projections to be sourced from adjacent phases of the respiratory cycle. Methods: A mathematical optimization framework using mixed integer quadratic programming has been developed that determines when to source projections from adjacent respiratory bins and optimizes the size and location of the bins. The method, which we will call projection sharing, runs in under 2 seconds of CPU time. Five 4DCBCT datasets of stage III-IV lung cancer patients were used to test the algorithm. The standard deviation of the angular separation between projections (SD-A) and the standard deviation in the volume of the reconstructed fiducial gold coil (SD-V) were used as proxies to measure streaking artefacts and motion blur respectively. Results: The SD-A using displacement binning and projection sharing was 30%–50% smaller than conventional phase based binning and 59%–76% smaller than conventional displacement binning indicating more uniformly spaced projections and fewer streaking artefacts. The SD-V was 20–90% smaller when using projection sharing than using conventional phase based binning suggesting more uniform marker segmentation and less motion blur. Conclusion: Image quality was visibly and significantly improved with projection sharing. Projection sharing does not require any modifications to existing hardware and offers a more robust replacement to phase based binning, or, an option if phase based reconstruction is not of a suitable quality. This project is supported by an NHMRC Australia Fellowship and NHMRC project grant number 1034060.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

GEOPHIRES Simulations for Deep Direct Use (DDU) Projects

This folder contains the GEOPHIRES codes and input files for running the base case scenarios for the six deep direct-use (DDU) projects. The six DDU projects took place during 2017-2020 and were funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office. They investigated the potential of geothermal deep direct-use at six locations across the country. The projects were conducted by Cornell University, West Virginia University (WVU), University of Illinois (U of IL), Sandia National Laboratory (SNL), Portland State University (PSU), and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). Four projects (Cornell, WVU, U of IL, SNL) investigated geothermal for direct heating of a local campus or community, the project by PSU considered seasonal subsurface storage of solar heating, and the NREL project investigated geothermal heating for turbine inlet cooling using absorption chillers. To allow comparison of techno-economic results across the six DDU projects, GEOPHIRES simulations were set up and conducted for each project. The GEOPHIRES code was modified for each project to simulate the local application and incorporate project-specific assumptions and results such as reservoir production temperature or financing conditions. The base case input file is included which simulates the base case conditions assumed by each project team. The levelized cost of heat (LCOH) is calculated and matches the base case LCOH reported by the project teams.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2013

TidGen Power System Commercialization Project

ORPC Maine, LLC, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ocean Renewable Power Company, LLC (collectively ORPC), submits this Final Technical Report for the TidGen® Power System Commercialization Project (Project), partially funded by the U.S. Department of Energy (DE-EE0003647). The Project was built and operated in compliance with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) pilot project license (P-12711) and other permits and approvals needed for the Project. This report documents the methodologies, activities and results of the various phases of the Project, including design, engineering, procurement, assembly, installation, operation, licensing, environmental monitoring, retrieval, maintenance and repair. The Project represents a significant achievement for the renewable energy portfolio of the U.S. in general, and for the U.S. marine hydrokinetic (MHK) industry in particular. The stated Project goal was to advance, demonstrate and accelerate deployment and commercialization of ORPC’s tidal-current based hydrokinetic power generation system, including the energy extraction and conversion technology, associated power electronics, and interconnection equipment capable of reliably delivering electricity to the domestic power grid. ORPC achieved this goal by designing, building and operating the TidGen® Power System in 2012 and becoming the first federally licensed hydrokinetic tidal energy project to deliver electricity to a power grid under a power purchase agreement in North America. Located in Cobscook Bay between Eastport and Lubec, Maine, the TidGen® Power System was connected to the Bangor Hydro Electric utility grid at an on-shore station in North Lubec on September 13, 2012. ORPC obtained a FERC pilot project license for the Project on February 12, 2012 and the first Maine Department of Environmental Protection General Permit issued for a tidal energy project on January 31, 2012. In addition, ORPC entered into a 20-year agreement with Bangor Hydro Electric Company on January 1, 2013 for up to 5 megawatts at a price of $215/MWh, escalating at 2.0% per year.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2021

Properties, Theory, and Measurements for Understanding the Function of Heavy Elements (Project 20180474CR, Final Technical Report)

The FY18-20 Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) funded Properties, Theory, and Measurements for Understanding the Function of Heavy Elements Project aim has been to advance heavy element science in a comprehensive project connecting targeted research with Los Alamos mission imperatives. The mechanisms for project implementation were (1) support of a multi-year broad-based postdoctoral fellows project, (2) a summer student fellows research project and two seminar series, and (3) organization of structured workshops and integrated educational and career development opportunities. The project was successfully administered by the Glenn T. Seaborg Institute (GTSI) for Transactinium Science and has shown to be an exceptional investment in supporting the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) mission areas requiring heavy element and actinide science by attracting and funding the future generation of scientists and engineers. This project exhibited its value across the laboratory in heavy element and actinide science areas include materials, material properties, signatures, modeling, predictions, fabrication, detection, disposal, global security implications, forensics, and the specialized science surrounding plutonium, uranium, and their surrogates as fuels for energy and nuclear weapons. In this report, the GTSI project staff documents the “high return on investment” implementation as measured against the successes of previous actinide research and science-based projects and as evidenced by the retention of 30% of G.T. Seaborg Postdoctoral Fellows as permanent employees. With additional funding through LDRD Reserve funding during this project period, the GTSI expanded its support for heavy element and actinide science research with a Visiting Research Seaborg Scholar and a Rapid Response Small Projects call. These innovations have served to advance GTSI pursuits as communicated in our FY21-23 LDRD Proposal Project#: 20210527CR Seaborg Institute: Center for Advancing Actinide Science and Technology at LANL

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

HERO CarbonSAFE Phase 2 Project in the Columbia River Basalt Group

The Hermiston, Oregon Basalt CarbonSAFE Phase II project (HERO CarbonSAFE) seeks to accelerate the deployment of commercial carbon dioxide (CO2) storage projects in basaltic rocks. Basalt CO2 storage has several advantages to conventional saline storage reservoirs including 1. The potential for rapid mineralization of CO2, 2. Associated decreases in pressure and CO2 migration risks, 3. Reduced long-term monitoring requirements with respect to plume tracking, 4. Widespread geographic distribution and, 5. Large storage potential due to thickness, porosity, and CO2 interactions with basalt. And for locations such as the Pacific Northwest, Hawaii, Iceland, India and Japan, basalts may offer the only economically feasible option for local CO2 storage. However, there are limited field-scale assessments of CO2 storage in basalt, and current carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS) permitting and regulatory frameworks were developed for conventional saline reservoirs. HERO CarbonSAFE is designed to address research gaps and uncertainties associated with basalt storage. Specifically, the project will assess the feasibility of CO2 injection in the deep layered basalts, long-term storage (mineralization), practical approaches for large-scale implementation (50+ million metric tons of CO2 over 30 years), lithology-specific risks, and the technoeconomic potential for CO2 storage in basalts. The HERO CarbonSAFE project will assess feasibility of developing a commercial-scale (50+ million metric tons of CO2) geological storage complex within the Columbia River Basalt Group (CRBG), a layered continental flood basalt complex that underlies Calpine’s natural gas-fired Hermiston Power Project (HPP) in Hermiston, OR (Figure 1). Under this 2-year CarbonSAFE Phase II project, the HERO team will conduct a data acquisition campaign that includes drilling a stratigraphic well to a total depth of ~1,500 m into the thick layered basalts proximal to HPP. A comprehensive well logging and hydrologic testing program will be augmented with new core collected from flow zones and sealing units, and comprehensive laboratory testing to help refine the kinetic rates of mineralization. The newly acquired information will be integrated with existing data from regional wells to correlate basalt injection zone properties to develop storage hub/commercial-scale models. Using these models, the project team will evaluate injection scenarios to define the technical and economic potential for storing a minimum of 50 million metric tons of CO2 over a 30-year period, along with a robust sensitivity analysis on key parameters governing reservoir viability for sustainable injection over a commercial project lifetime. Specific technical objectives of HERO are: (1) assessing the reservoir response of a series of stacked layered reservoir flowtop sequences occurring in this area of the CRBG to commercial-scale injection volumes; (2) extending prior efforts by the project team to characterize the deep layered basalts encountered in regional studies, to leverage prior investments by U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Carbon Storage program; (3) leveraging DOE’s mineralization characterization efforts to advance model parametrization for commercial scale injection of CO2 in basalts; (4) conducting risk assessments associated with scaling up to commercial storage hub injection goals, while validating DOE’s National Risk Assessment Partnership (NRAP) tools, to identify potential constraints that would prevent the CRBG from serving as a commercial-scale storage complex; (5) developing mitigation plans to address identified risks; (6) developing a commercial-scale injection and monitoring, verification and accounting (MVA) strategy; (7) utilizing computational models to define and minimize, if possible, the Area of Review (AoR) under Class VI regulations; and (8) developing a robust CO2 management strategy for CRBG that also considers a regional source/sink approach that is responsive to stakeholder needs and industrial demand. Specific institutional objectives are: (1) identifying and developing plans to mitigate the nontechnical challenges associated with the build-out of a commercial-scale storage complex within the CRBG with integrated CO2 sources; (2) implementing the community outreach plan; (3) conducting regulatory research, including a survey of issues related to pore space ownership, MVA and long-term assurance of mineralization-based storage, to support an eventual application for a UIC Class VI permit; (4) advancing the project’s plan for CO2 liability management; and (5) continuing to refine and update the project’s economic model. The final objective is the preparation of a comprehensive Site Characterization Plan that draws upon the technical and institutional feasibility assessments to prepare the project for future commercialization efforts.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

LAMP Project Facility and Space Requirements

The project will require significant space over the lifetime of the project to successfully execute design, technology maturation, component testing and verification, and final removal and installation. The types of space required falls into three general categories: office, storage, and laboratory. Figure 1 below summarizes the project space requirements by project lifecycle. The specific color coding indicates the availability (and potential risk to the project) of the particular type of space: green indicates space that is already allocated and in use by the LAMP project; yellow indicates space that is expected to be easily transitioned from its current use to the project; red indicates a space that is use by multiple users or other projects, and will most likely require high-level negotiations and planning to become available to the project. Figure 2 summarizes the LAMP Space Requirements by calendar year and type throughout the duration of the project. As can be seen in Fig. 2, the maximum space needed by the project exceeds 40,000 square feet, with an average space requirement over the lifetime of the project equal to approximately 25,000 square feet.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2016

Projections of leaf area index in earth system models

The area of leaves in the plant canopy, measured as leaf area index (LAI), modulates key land–atmosphere interactions, including the exchange of energy, moisture, carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), and other trace gases and aerosols, and is therefore an essential variable in predicting terrestrial carbon, water, and energy fluxes. Here our goal is to characterize the LAI projections from the latest generation of earth system models (ESMs) for the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5 and RCP4.5 scenarios. On average, the models project increases in LAI in both RCP8.5 and RCP4.5 over most of the globe, but also show decreases in some parts of the tropics. Because of projected increases in variability, there are also more frequent periods of low LAI across broad regions of the tropics. Projections of LAI changes varied greatly among models: some models project very modest changes, while others project large changes, usually increases. Modeled LAI typically increases with modeled warming in the high latitudes, but often decreases with increasing local warming in the tropics. The models with the most skill in simulating current LAI in the tropics relative to satellite observations tend to project smaller increases in LAI in the tropics in the future compared to the average of all the models. Using LAI projections to identify regions that may be vulnerable to climate change presents a slightly different picture than using precipitation projections, suggesting LAI may be an additional useful tool for understanding climate change impacts. Going forward, users of LAI projections from the CMIP5 ESMs evaluated here should be aware that model outputs do not exhibit clear-cut relationships to vegetation carbon and precipitation. Lastly, our findings underscore the need for more attention to LAI projections, in terms of understanding the drivers of projected changes and improvements to model skill.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Climate projections over the Great Lakes Region: using two-way coupling of a regional climate model with a 3-D lake model

Abstract. Warming trends in the Laurentian Great Lakes and surrounding areas have been observed in recent decades, and concerns continue to rise about the pace and pattern of future climate change over the world's largest freshwater system. To date, most regional climate models used for Great Lakes projections either neglected the lake-atmosphere interactions or are only coupled with a 1-D column lake model to represent the lake hydrodynamics. This study presents a Great Lakes climate change projection that has employed the two-way coupling of a regional climate model with a 3-D lake model (GLARM) to resolve 3-D hydrodynamics essential for large lakes. Using the three carefully selected Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 5 (CMIP5) general circulation models (GCMs), we show that the GLARM ensemble average substantially reduces surface air temperature and precipitation biases of the driving GCM ensemble average in present-day climate simulations. The improvements are not only displayed from an atmospheric perspective but are also evident in the accurate simulations of lake temperature and ice coverage. We further present the GLARM projected climate change for the mid-21st century (2030–2049) and the late 21st century (2080–2099) in the Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios. Under RCP 8.5, the Great Lakes basin is projected to warm by 1.3–2.1 ∘C by the mid-21st century and 4.1–5.0 ∘C by the end of the century relative to the early century (2000–2019). Moderate mitigation (RCP 4.5) reduces the mid-century warming to 0.8–1.8 ∘C and late-century warming to 1.8–2.7 ∘C. Annual precipitation in GLARM is projected to increase for the entire basin, varying from 0 % to 13 % during the mid-century and from 9 % to 32 % during the late century in different scenarios and simulations. The most significant increases are projected in spring and fall when current precipitation is highest and a minimal increase in winter when it is lowest. Lake surface temperatures (LSTs) are also projected to increase across the five lakes in all of the simulations, but with strong seasonal and spatial variability. The most significant LST increases occur in Lakes Superior and Ontario. The strongest warming is projected in spring that persists into the summer, resulting from earlier and more intense stratification in the future. In addition, diminishing winter stratification in the future suggests the transition from dimictic lakes to monomictic lakes by the end of the century. In contrast, a relatively smaller increase in LSTs during fall and winter is projected with heat transfer to the deep water due to the strong mixing and energy required for ice melting. Correspondingly, the highest monthly mean ice cover is projected to reduce to 3 %–15 % and 10 %–40 % across the lakes by the end of the century in RCP 8.5 and RCP 4.5, respectively. In the coastal regions, ice duration is projected to decrease by up to 60 d.

Xue, Pengfei (ORCID:000000025702421X)↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 + EPRI Data Center Load Projections

This dataset contains scenarios of hourly total electricity demand with and without projected loads from data centers over the period 2022-2040. The root projections without data center demands are identical to those documented in Burleyson et al. 2024. In short, those projections encompass hourly electricity demands for 54 Balancing Authorities (BAs) in the United States across a range of eight of weather and socioeconomic scenarios. Refer to the root dataset and accompanying publication, Burleyson et al. 2025, for information about how those projections were generated. For this derivative dataset we used the base loads from the following scenarios: rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 The root load projections did not reflect the drastic expansion of data centers that has occurred in the last several years to support artificial intelligence and cloud computing. To reflect growth in data center demand, a second set of load projections were created in which we layered in additional data center load projections based on the data center load growth scenarios described in a 2024 report by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI): "Powering Intelligence: Analyzing Artificial Intelligence and Data Center Energy Consumption". The EPRI projections from the report are included in this dataset (EPRI_2024_Projections.xlsx). That report contained annual state-level data center load projections for four year-over-year growth rates for data center demands: Low (3.71% annual growth) Moderate (5% annual growth) High (10% annual growth) Higher (15% annual growth) To homogenize the load projections with and without data centers we had to get them to a common scale. The first step was to take the EPRI annual state-level data center energy consumption values and convert them to 8760-hr loads for each year. We did that by assuming a flat (e.g., not weather- or time-sensitive) load profile and distributing the data center loads in each state evenly across all hours in a year. From there the loads were downscaled from the state-level to the county-level using 2019 county-level populations as weights. Finally, the county-level hourly data center loads were summed to the BA-level using the county-to-BA mapping underpinning the root load projections. The net result is 16 (4 weather and socioeconomic scenarios crossed with 4 data center load growth scenarios) unique load projections for the period 2022-2040. The file format follows that of the root dataset with a single additional column "Scaled_TELL_BA_Load_with_DC_MWh" that contains the hourly loads with the added data center loads for a given BA-year-scenario combination. Please refer to the readme file in the root dataset for more information on the file format.

Burleyson, Casey [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
NASA NTRS1996

Neurochemical, morphologic, and laminar characterization of cortical projection neurons in the cingulate motor areas of the macaque monkey

The primate cingulate gyrus contains multiple cortical areas that can be distinguished by several neurochemical features, including the distribution of neurofilament protein-enriched pyramidal neurons. In addition, connectivity and functional properties indicate that there are multiple motor areas in the cortex lining the cingulate sulcus. These motor areas were targeted for analysis of potential interactions among regional specialization, connectivity, and cellular characteristics such as neurochemical profile and morphology. Specifically, intracortical injections of retrogradely transported dyes and intracellular injection were combined with immunocytochemistry to investigate neurons projecting from the cingulate motor areas to the putative forelimb region of the primary motor cortex, area M1. Two separate groups of neurons projecting to area M1 emanated from the cingulate sulcus, one anterior and one posterior, both of which furnished commissural and ipsilateral connections with area M1. The primary difference between the two populations was laminar origin, with the anterior projection originating largely in deep layers, and the posterior projection taking origin equally in superficial and deep layers. With regard to cellular morphology, the anterior projection exhibited more morphologic diversity than the posterior projection. Commissural projections from both anterior and posterior fields originated largely in layer VI. Neurofilament protein distribution was a reliable tool for localizing the two projections and for discriminating between them. Comparable proportions of the two sets of projection neurons contained neurofilament protein, although the density and distribution of the total population of neurofilament protein-enriched neurons was very different in the two subareas of origin. Within a projection, the participating neurons exhibited a high degree of morphologic heterogeneity, and no correlation was observed between somatodendritic morphology and neurofilament protein content. Thus, although the neurons that provide the anterior and posterior cingulate motor projections to area M1 differ morphologically and in laminar origin, their neurochemical profiles are similar with respect to neurofilament protein. This suggests that neurochemical phenotype may be a more important unifying feature for corticocortical projections than morphology.

NASA Discipline Neuroscience↗
NASA NTRS2005

Shared Voyage: Learning and Unlearning from Remarkable Projects

Shared Voyage is about four remarkable projects: the Advanced Composition Explorer (NASA), the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile (U.S. Air Force), the Pathfinder Solar-Powered Airplane (NASA), and the Advanced Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile (U.S.Air Force). Each project is presented as a case study comprised of stories collected from key members of the project teams. The stories found in the book are included with the purpose of providing an effective learning source for project management, encouraging the unlearning of outdated project management concepts, and enhancing awareness of the contexts surrounding different projects. Significantly different from project concepts found in most project management literature, Shared Voyage highlights concepts like a will to win, a results-oriented focus, and collaboration through trust. All four project teams researched in this study applied similar concepts; however, they applied them differently, tailoring them to fit the context of their own particular projects. It is clear that the one best way approach which is still the prevailing paradigm in project management literature should be replaced by a new paradigm: Even though general project management principles exist, their successful application depends on the specifics of the situation.

Laufer, Alexander↗
NASA NTRS2008

Guidance and Control Software Project Data - Volume 1: Planning Documents

The Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project was the last in a series of software reliability studies conducted at Langley Research Center between 1977 and 1994. The technical results of the GCS project were recorded after the experiment was completed. Some of the support documentation produced as part of the experiment, however, is serving an unexpected role far beyond its original project context. Some of the software used as part of the GCS project was developed to conform to the RTCA/DO-178B software standard, "Software Considerations in Airborne Systems and Equipment Certification," used in the civil aviation industry. That standard requires extensive documentation throughout the software development life cycle, including plans, software requirements, design and source code, verification cases and results, and configuration management and quality control data. The project documentation that includes this information is open for public scrutiny without the legal or safety implications associated with comparable data from an avionics manufacturer. This public availability has afforded an opportunity to use the GCS project documents for DO-178B training. This report provides a brief overview of the GCS project, describes the 4-volume set of documents and the role they are playing in training, and includes the planning documents from the GCS project. Volume 1 contains five appendices: A. Plan for Software Aspects of Certification for the Guidance and Control Software Project; B. Software Development Standards for the Guidance and Control Software Project; C. Software Verification Plan for the Guidance and Control Software Project; D. Software Configuration Management Plan for the Guidance and Control Software Project; and E. Software Quality Assurance Activities.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS2001

A Statistical Project Control Tool for Engineering Managers

This slide presentation reviews the use of a Statistical Project Control Tool (SPCT) for managing engineering projects. A literature review pointed to a definition of project success, (i.e., A project is successful when the cost, schedule, technical performance, and quality satisfy the customer.) The literature review also pointed to project success factors, and traditional project control tools, and performance measures that are detailed in the report. The essential problem is that with resources becoming more limited, and an increasing number or projects, project failure is increasing, there is a limitation of existing methods and systematic methods are required. The objective of the work is to provide a new statistical project control tool for project managers. Graphs using the SPCT method plotting results of 3 successful projects and 3 failed projects are reviewed, with success and failure being defined by the owner.

Bauch, Garland T.↗
NASA NTRS2016

A Brief Description of My Projects

My internship was in the IDC which consist of a machine shop and an array of design space. During my tour I worked on a wide variety of projects some of which included design, research, machining and fabrication. I gained further knowledge on some machines that I have had prior experience on such as the lathe and Hurco CNC machines. The first thing we did was complete our checkout in the machine shop which went pretty well, since I was already familiar with most of the machines. I also did a couple of practice parts on some of the machines, I made a name block on the CNC machine and I also used the vertical milling machine to complete this project. One of the other projects that I did was machine a hammer with my initials with the use of the lathe and CNC machine, this project took much longer since I had to set up a cylindrical piece on the CNC machine. The first project that I began work on was the Systems Engineering & Management Advancement Program (SEPMAP) Hexacopter project and helped them to assemble and modify one of their particle capture doors on their boxes. After a while we ended up helping them make a hinge and holes to reduce the weight of their design. We helped the NASA Extreme Environment Mission Operations (NEEMO) team a bit with some of their name tags and assembly of some of their underwater parts. One of the more challenging projects was a rail that came in with a rather weirdly drawn part. The biggest project that I worked on was the solar array project. Which consisted of a variety of machining and 3D printing and it took me about 3 different times of re-designing to come up with a final prototype. Along with this project I also had to complete a project in which I had to modify a thermos. This was rather simple since I just had to draw up a part and print it out on the 3D printer. I also learned how to use Pro E/Creo parametric to design a square block and print it on the 3D Printer. All of these projects increased my experience on all of the machines and equipment that I used. I also got to tweak my design skills and better understand how to modify my designs and how to improve those specific designs.

Barnes, Tobin↗
DOE OSTI2019

Quantitative Risk Management - Risk Informed Decision Making on High-Risk Waste Remediation Projects - 19022

For every $1 billion invested in projects, $97 million is wasted due to poor project performance. That means 9.7% of money spent on projects is wasted due to poor risk and uncertainty management. High-risk projects, similar to those in waste remediation, have the most to lose. A solid quantitative risk management program is one of the keys to increasing the likelihood that a project will succeed. A quantitative risk program solves two major problems that challenge the effective management of risk and uncertainty: 1. Risks arise at all levels of an organization; however, not all organizational levels have an effective way to identify and resolve them. This can lead to risks that, even if identified, are not reported. 2. Decision-makers are often forced to operate solely on intuition when implementing mitigation strategies, not fully understanding the effects that certain decisions have on the program's cost and schedule. A quantitative risk program uses a risk register and builds it into the project/program integrated schedule to assess the impact of these risks, typically at the 80% confidence contingency level for specific milestones and/or project completion. Implementing a quantitative risk program drives a forward-thinking, proactive mentality to problem solving into all levels of the organization. A healthy risk program for regular reporting and communication ensures that all members of an organization are thinking about risks and using their communication channels to resolve them. It gives a method of communication and incentive for all levels in the organization and helps to ensure that risks will be reported and resolved. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) has developed tools and methods that provide a level of realism for analyzing different scenarios and estimating contingency that does not exist in the standard industry risk tool kit. These tools and methods provide decision-makers with actionable, quantitatively based information to guide their decision making. The first tool is a probabilistic branching risk model for mitigation strategies. Current quantitative risk analysis tools in the industry simulate two cases: fully mitigated and un-mitigated. In the fully mitigated case, the user assumes that every planned mitigation activity is successful. In the un-mitigated case, the user assumes that none are successful. The truth lies between these two extremes. The PNNL team has developed a probabilistic risk model for mitigation scenarios that includes a probability that a mitigation activity will succeed and a probability that a mitigation action will be funded. These probabilities are elicited from subject matter experts and ensure that the contingency calculations at the specified confidence are approaching reality. The second tool developed at PNNL is the Risk Box, which is a tool that integrates with different scenarios in the risk register. For example, say the user is faced with two different and mutually exclusive mitigation actions to reduce a risk. The Risk Box methodology performs the contingency calculations and then displays them on a time-phased graph that shows how each scenario reduces the risk contingency needed on the project/program. This graph then provides quantitative information to show decision-makers which mitigation action provides the greatest reduction (cost and schedule) in risk contingency for the program. Implementing these and other tools within a structured risk program increases the likelihood that a project will come in on schedule and budget, ensures that all personnel are proactively thinking about problems and resolutions, creates communication channels for all members to submit and resolve potential problems, produces a prioritized list of risk rankings to focus leadership on issues that may cause the biggest problems, and implements processes that drive updates to the risk program as the risk profile changes. PNNL has been developing these methods and using them on projects for over 20 years. They have been successfully applied on waste management projects, high-tech research and development projects, and construction projects, and they continue to be used on a number of U.S. Department of Energy projects today. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2013

Developing Renewable Energy Projects Larger Than 10 MWs at Federal Facilities

To accomplish Federal goals for renewable energy, sustainability, and energy security, large-scale renewable energy projects must be developed and constructed on Federal sites at a significant scale with significant private investment. For the purposes of this Guide, large-scale Federal renewable energy projects are defined as renewable energy facilities larger than 10 megawatts (MW) that are sited on Federal property and lands and typically financed and owned by third parties.1 The U.S. Department of Energy’s Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) helps Federal agencies meet these goals and assists agency personnel navigate the complexities of developing such projects and attract the necessary private capital to complete them. This Guide is intended to provide a general resource that will begin to develop the Federal employee’s awareness and understanding of the project developer’s operating environment and the private sector’s awareness and understanding of the Federal environment. Because the vast majority of the investment that is required to meet the goals for large-scale renewable energy projects will come from the private sector, this Guide has been organized to match Federal processes with typical phases of commercial project development. FEMP collaborated with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) and professional project developers on this Guide to ensure that Federal projects have key elements recognizable to private sector developers and investors. The main purpose of this Guide is to provide a project development framework to allow the Federal Government, private developers, and investors to work in a coordinated fashion on large-scale renewable energy projects. The framework includes key elements that describe a successful, financially attractive large-scale renewable energy project. This framework begins the translation between the Federal and private sector operating environments. When viewing the overall

Developing, Renewable, Energy, Projects, Facilitie↗