SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “data review”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 397 records · Page 22

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

Economics↗

DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗

DOE OSTI2021

A Guide to Using GitHub for Developing and Versioning Data Standards and Reporting Formats

Abstract Data standardization combined with descriptive metadata facilitate data reuse, which is the ultimate goal of the Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) principles. Community data or metadata standards are increasingly created through an approach that emphasizes collaboration between various stakeholders. Such an approach requires platforms for collaboration on the development process that centers on sharing information and receiving feedback. Our objective in this study was to conduct a systematic review to identify data standards and reporting formats that use version control for developing data standards and to summarize common practices, particularly in earth and environmental sciences. Out of 108 data standards and reporting formats identified in our review, 32 used GitHub as the version control platform, and no other platforms were used. We found no universally accepted methodology for developing and publishing data standards. Many GitHub repositories did not use key features that could help developers to gather user feedback, or to create and revise standards that build on previous work. We provide guidance for community‐driven standard development and associated documentation on GitHub based on a systematic review of existing practices.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.

Lisk, Matthew↗

DOE OSTI2023

Energy Justice Framework for Marine Energy: Considerations from PacWave

To accelerate the energy transition while addressing land use conflicts and community opposition, federal policies and incentives require that new energy infrastructure provide direct benefits to communities, and ensure that these benefits remain in the community. The objective of this study is to develop a framework for collecting demographic, socioeconomic, and environmental data and supporting communities in understanding how such data can support more just and equitable outcomes. Specifically, this study addresses two research questions: (1) How can energy justice be incorporated into ME project life cycle, and (2) what social and economic data are needed to assess how marine energy development supports energy justice? Based on our literature review and the data collection template, a case study of PacWave, a wave energy testing facility located on the central Oregon Coast, is employed to draw more specific implications for how energy justice can be integrated into marine energy. PacWave represents a flagship investment by Oregon State University, the State of Oregon, and the Department of Energy. The facility is situated in Lincoln County, which is home to the Confederated Tribes of Siletz Indians and family-scale fishing enterprises. PacWave has strong community support as a testing site and holds potential to provide valuable lessons for other communities.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2021

Data Needs for Modeling Low-Temperature Non-Equilibrium Plasmas: The LXCat Project, History, Perspectives and a Tutorial

Technologies based on non-equilibrium, low-temperature plasmas are ubiquitous in today’s society. Plasma modeling plays an essential role in their understanding, development and optimization. An accurate description of electron and ion collisions with neutrals and their transport is required to correctly describe plasma properties as a function of external parameters. LXCat is an open-access, web-based platform for storing, exchanging and manipulating data needed for modeling the electron and ion components of non-equilibrium, low-temperature plasmas. The data types supported by LXCat are electron- and ion-scattering cross-sections with neutrals (total and differential), interaction potentials, oscillator strengths, and electron- and ion-swarm/transport parameters. Online tools allow users to identify and compare the data through plotting routines, and use the data to generate swarm parameters and reaction rates with the integrated electron Boltzmann solver. In this review, the historical evolution of the project and some perspectives on its future are discussed together with a tutorial review for using data from LXCat.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Review: Pre-Darcy flows in low-permeability porous media

The widely used Darcy’s law specifies a linear relation between the Darcy velocity of fluid flow and the pressure gradient that drives the flow. However, studies have shown that Darcy velocity can exhibit a nonlinear dependence on the pressure gradient in low-permeability porous media such as clay and shale when the pressure gradient is adequately low. This phenomenon is referred to as low-velocity non-Darcian flow or pre-Darcy flow. This paper provides a comprehensive review of the theories, experimental data, and modeling methods for pre-Darcy flow in low-permeability porous media. The review begins by outlining the fundamental mechanisms underlying pre-Darcy flow that regulate the unique characteristics such as nonlinear dependence of the Darcy velocity on the pressure gradient and its relevance to fluid–rock interactions. The review then proceeds to present a thorough compilation of experimental investigations performed in various low-permeability geomaterials including tight sandstones, shales, and clays. Next, empirical and theoretical models and simulation methods that have been developed to fit and interpret experimental data are reviewed. Finally, the review underscores the challenges encountered in conducting and interpreting pre-Darcy flow experiments and suggests future research directions. By analyzing previous experimental investigations, this review aims to offer a valuable resource for researchers and practitioners seeking to enhance their understanding of fluid dynamics in low-permeability geomaterials. This provides insights into the application of pre-Darcy flow in numerous natural and engineered processes such as shale oil and gas recovery, contaminant transport in low-permeability aquifers, and geological disposal of nuclear waste.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Development of Renewable Energy Data for Facilitating the Clean Energy Transition in Vietnam

Vietnam is transforming its power system with an increasing share of variable renewable energy (VRE) in the generation mix and plans to achieve 27% VRE by capacity in 2030 and 42% by capacity in 2045, as indicated by the draft Eighth Power Development Plan for 2020–-2045 (PDP8). Further increase in VRE penetration is possible with data-driven analysis where availability of data, specifically VRE data, becomes critical. NREL has worked with various stakeholders in Vietnam to create high-resolution multi-year VRE data publicly available to all. This paper reviews this new VRE data for Vietnam and how different stakeholders can use this data to inform VRE deployment decisions.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2022

HPC Analytics of Fused Thermal Plants Data to Optimize Operating Envelope

In this project, ORNL extensively reviewed the ORAP RAM data, and it guided us to develop machine learning models that can predict time to next failures and forecast failure trends, which will be useful for optimizing power plant operation strategies. More specifically, we trained multiple random forest models and evaluated the model accuracy to validate with 10+ years of historical data. In addition, we implemented a web-based graphical user interface system for the models to show how our models can be used in more intuitive ways. This proof of concept allowed exploration of model use with power plant operators in mind. Developed machine learning models will be helpful for managing risks, planning maintenance and operation, ultimately reducing the down time and increasing the service hours. For future work, there are several interesting research topics including but not limited to model enhancement, creating synergy with traditional failure modeling approaches, and data-driven actionable recommendation and suggestions.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2021

FY21 Progress Report: SRNL Analysis of ICCWR LCM and WAMS data for Corrosion and Cracking

The development of algorithms for machine learning and data analysis for the 3013 Surveillance Program is a collaborative effort by the Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) and the University of South Carolina (USC). For corrosion detection, Laser Confocal Microscope (LCM) or Wide Area 3D Measurement System (WAMS) data is extracted from large binary files, with software written to convert the data to physical attributes (e.g., height, color and grayscale values; all as functions of a location in a plane projection). A user-friendly Matlab Graphical User Interface (GUI) that reads data from either LCM or WAMS files was developed to integrate input data with software developed for processing and evaluation. The GUI can selectively download binary data, interrogate data attributes, label data, flag significant features, execute Machine Learning (ML) algorithms, output parameters for trained ML algorithms, report ML model accuracy with respect to labeled data, and generate graphical representations for various analyses. Features can be called out by user-specified thresholds, manual labeling or machine learning algorithms when they have been completed. The ability to rapidly label data is important because of the volume of data required for training machine learning algorithms. The GUI has the flexibility to allow addition of improved ML algorithms, methods for data visualization, and statistical computations. Statistical analyses via the GUI include areas of pits within a defined range of pit depths, correlations between Red-Green-Blue (RGB) or grayscale intensity and relative surface height, covariances between values associated with features, and feature histograms. The development of supervised machine learning algorithms, however, has been hindered by a lack of training data. The machine learning algorithms for crack identification are being refined but require improvements to the true positive rate for crack detection. This shortcoming is an artifact of the limited training data currently available, perhaps more so than the structure of the neural networks. At present, the best results are had from a consensus over an ensemble of randomly generated Deep Neural Network (DNN) or Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) algorithms. Although the consensus accuracy method has yielded optimum true positive and true negative rates in excess of 80%, additional validation testing is necessary. In addition to the suite of LCM data that was initially used, and which represents the majority of the work presented in this report, WAMS image data was also reviewed at a preliminary level. The review included a comparison between image resolution and dynamic range for each method. WAMS (ZON file) image data was found to have a pixel pitch of 3.69μm compared to 1 μm for the LCM (vk4 file) data, which implies a lower resolution for the WAMS images. Conversely, the ratio of dynamic range of the WAMS data to the LCM data was approximately 41:20 for height data, suggesting that information from WAMS should more accurately determine the depth of pits. At present, the significance of the greater dynamic range of the WAMS data relative to the LCM data has not yet been evaluated.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

FTR for: Reducing plug-load electricity footprint of residential buildings through low-cost, non-intrusive sub-metering and personalized feedback technology

The project started in October 2016 and ended in December 2022. The project's principal goals and achievements were: (i) Measure real and reactive electric power consumption in ~400 apartments in multifamily settings of varying size and vintage and publish the data; data was published according to New York State's recommended 15x15 rule continuously from Jan 2019 through December 2022 (10 second time resolution); with the combination of large number of apartments, real and reactive power, as well as high time resolution (10-seconds), the dataset is first of its kind worldwide; because the dataset New York City apartment consumption pre, during, and post pandemic, it further offers unique insights into changes in residential electricity consumption during lockdowns and after modified work from home schedules. (ii) Measure effectiveness of different feedback types to prompt residents to lower their electricity consumption; achieved 11% (kWh-weighted) reduction versus baseline consumption; confirmed previous studies that social comparisons elicit above average responses; showed, for the first time, that the so called boomerang effect in power consumption feedback projects can be explained by a previously hypothesized norm-conforming "magnet effect" (rather than a non-conforming defiance effect), thus substantially advancing the research in the field. (iii) Disaggregate apartment-level consumption to appliance level; because the hardware for electricity consumption unexpectedly allowed only for 10-second time resolution (rather than the 1-second resolution we had planned on), the disaggregation algorithms we developed on sample data could not be applied to the actual field data we collected. The project has yielded high visibility, with a total of 17 publications, from peer reviewed journals, published data sets (free access), blog posts, NY Times, National Public Radio, and CNN.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2021

Electrical Energy Storage Data Submission Guidelines, Version 2

Energy storage technologies are positioned to play a substantial role in power delivery systems. They have the potential to serve as an effective new resource to maintain reliability and allow for increased penetration of renewable energy. However, because of their relative infancy, there is a lack of knowledge about how these resources truly operate over time. A data analysis can help ascertain the operational and performance characteristics of these emerging technologies. Rigorous testing and a data analysis are important for all stakeholders to ensure a safe, reliable system that performs predictably on a macro level. Standardizing testing and analysis approaches to verify the performance of energy storage devices, equipment, and systems when integrating them into the grid will improve the understanding and benefit of energy storage over time from technical and economic vantage points. Demonstrating the life-cycle value and capabilities of energy storage systems begins with the data that the provider supplies for the analysis. After a review of energy storage data received from several providers, some of these data have clearly shown to be inconsistent and incomplete, raising the question of their efficacy for a robust analysis. This report reviews and proposes general guidelines, such as sampling rates and data points, that providers must supply for a robust data analysis to take place. Consistent guidelines are the basis of a proper protocol and ensuing standards to (1) reduce the time that it takes for data to reach those who are providing the analysis; (2) allow them to better understand the energy storage installations; and (3) enable them to provide a high-quality analysis of the installations. The report is intended to serve as a starting point for what data points should be provided when monitoring. Readers are encouraged to use the guidance in the report to develop specifications for new systems, as well as enhance current efforts to ensure optimal storage performance. As battery technologies continue to advance and the industry expands, the report will be updated to remain current.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2021

PV Field Performance Including Fleet and Bifacial Field Data

This presentation provides a review of two recent presentations - the 2021 PV Fleet Performance Data Initiative covered by the PVRW presentation, and bifacial system performance presented to a February DuraMAT working group. Details include degradation rate distributions from >6000 inverter channels, monthly performance vs expected, bifacial field studies of energy gain and field degradation.

41 EE - Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)↗

DOE OSTI2026

Data supporting conclusions in "Magnetism of single crystalline breathing pyrochlore spinel AgInCr4S8" to be published in Physical Review Materials

Excel files containing the data points in the figures or the data to obtain those points. Included are data for Fig1 (nuclear intensity fit) and Fig 5b (magnetic intensity fit). Included are 2D maps and 1D cuts from the 3D data obtained on WAND² for 5K and 10K.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2025

Qualification of Digitized Legacy Fast Reactor Data

The Integral Fast Reactor (IFR) fuel compatibility test program (1984-1994) included a variety of fuel pin examinations conducted at the Hot Fuel Examination Facility (HFEF) and the Alpha-Gamma Hot Cell Facility (AGHCF). Hard copy data records of these examinations have been recovered, scanned, and preserved in PDF format. Many hard copy records are now qualified in accordance with an NRC-approved Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP), and there is an ongoing effort to qualify additional legacy records. This legacy fuel performance data is vital to support design and licensing of fast reactors with validation of state-of-the-art codes and advanced methods for design and analysis. Stakeholders can most easily utilize this data when the PDF scans have been converted into digital data tables. However, qualification of the scanned hard copy data does not qualify the digital data file resulting from the digitization of the data contained in the record; the subject matter expert (SME) must make a review of the digitized data table as well before it can be designated as qualified. This report outlines a peer review process to qualify the digital data file(s), typically in CSV format, corresponding to hard copy records in accordance with the existing QAPP.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Modeling Grid Data Flows for Transmission and Distribution Operations: Review, Design, Next Steps

Operational scenarios of the power grids grow multifold to accommodate the diverse needs of both the utilities and end consumers, and the various other stakeholders in-between. To comprehensively model and apply analytics to support objectives and business functions of grid sectors, a reliable approach to characterize and design data flows is crucial. The flows bridge business functions with communications protocols, stakeholders such as the grid actors, and data interfaces comprising different data objects. Additionally, constraints applied to the flow such as cybersecurity, trust, privacy, and ownership among others intersect these entities, requiring the delineation of their interactions under different scenarios. This paper aims to not only highlight relevant research in the space of grid data flows, but also proposes, for the transmission-distribution sector, a novel modeling approach that marries the aforementioned entities: objectives, business functions, data interfaces, communication protocols, data stakeholders, and flow constraints. It elaborates on the design philosophy and the significance of each entity within the model and applies it to an example function of fault location, isolation and service restoration (FLISR). Finally, the next steps to extend the application of this data flow model for other practical operational scenarios are discussed.

Sundararajan, Aditya [ORNL] (ORCID:000000033577854↗

DOE OSTI2024

SCALE Procedure for Verified, Archived, Library of Inputs and Data (VALID)

This procedure provides a framework for preparing, reviewing, and storing model inputs and derived data so that individuals with authorized access to the Verified, Archived, Library of Inputs and Data (VALID) repository can use the inputs and data with confidence in their analyses. This procedure uses documented checks and reviews to ensure that the inputs and data were correctly generated using appropriate references. Configuration management is implemented to prevent inadvertent modification of the inputs and data or inclusion of models that have not been reviewed. This procedure also provides guidance to be followed if errors are identified or if input or data revisions are needed.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Initial Efforts Organizing WPNCS SG-8: Preservation of Expert Knowledge and Judgement Applied to Criticality Benchmarks

The Working Party on Nuclear Criticality Safety (WPNCS) under the guidance of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) has over 20 years of experience addressing concerns related to static and transient configurations encountered within the nuclear fuel cycle: fuel fabrication, transportation, reprocessing, storage, and geological disposal. One of the cornerstone activities of the WPNCS is the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP), which was established to identify a comprehensive set of criticality benchmark data, evaluate the data, including quantification of overall uncertainties; compile the data into a standardized format, perform sample calculations utilizing modern nuclear data sets and codes utilized in nuclear criticality safety, and formally document the work into a single source of verified benchmark data. Annually, members of the ICSBEP Technical Review Group (TRG) contribute evaluated benchmark data that undergoes comprehensive technical review prior to publication in the ICSBEP Handbook. In the years since the ICSBEP was established, there has been much work to prepare benchmark data to support validation activities in nuclear criticality safety. The 2020 edition of the ICSBEP Handbook contains acceptable benchmark specifications for 5,053 critical, subcritical, or near-critical configurations in 582 benchmark evaluations. Modern benchmark development benefits from decades of experienced international participants, a well-established handbook format, supplementary guides to deal with uncertainty quantification, and a comprehensive review process based upon independent reviews from international experts. The ICSBEP Handbook also contains 838 configurations deemed unacceptable to support criticality safety efforts. They are recorded, with the reasoning for their rejection, to preserve the experimental data, prevent reevaluation of data that are incomplete or contain known errors, and/or to potentially allow future reevaluation of the experiment pending the identification of sufficient data to resolve identified inconsistencies and errors. Users of the ICSBEP Handbook today might notice that the rigor and quality of modern criticality safety benchmarks is much greater than those prepared within the initial decade of the project. Benchmarks with 1s uncertainties in k eff greater than 1% were traditionally rejected unless they were identified as unique experiment types that encompassed materials, fuels, or designs not available from other benchmark experiments. However, benchmarks developed using modern experimental techniques and practices typically have uncertainties on the order of a few tenths of a percent. There have been ongoing efforts to improve the overall quality of previously published benchmark evaluations. Seventy-eight evaluations, containing approximately 600 configurations, have been revised just within the past decade. An additional eleven benchmarks are under revision for updated release in the 2020 edition of the ICSBEP Handbook. If some of the historic benchmarks were resubmitted in their current form to the TRG today, they would be rejected due to lack of data, missing components in the uncertainty analysis, or incomplete benchmark model development. The use of historic criticality safety benchmarks that underestimate the total uncertainty, lack properly quantified biases, or provide inadequate benchmark specifications do not sufficiently support modern criticality safety and nuclear data efforts. Although the ICSBEP Handbook is recognized by regulating bodies to support criticality safety, users are required to justify their reasons to ignore historic benchmark data and include additional safety margins within their designs. Discussions were held at the WPNCS 23rd Annual Meeting in September 2019 regarding the aforementioned issues. The resultant decision was to establish Subgroup 8 (SG-8): Preservation of Expert Knowledge and Judgement Applied to Criticality Benchmarks. The current activities of SG-8 are discussed herein.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗