Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “FIRS”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Low power on-chip data transmission for wafer-scale monolithic active pixel sensors

Here, this paper details the implementation of the digital pulse shaping subsystem within the Backbone Transmission Line Encoding (BTLE) driver, a low-power, long-distance on-chip data transmission solution designed in a 65 nm CMOS process. Digital pulse shaping is critical for minimizing inter-symbol interference (ISI) caused by bandwidth limitations of on-chip interconnects, especially in wafer-scale monolithic active pixel sensors (MAPS). A duobinary encoder coupled with a parallelized polyphase finite impulse response (FIR) filter is used for efficient shaping of the transmitted signal spectrum. This reconfigurable architecture achieves reliable 160 Mb/s data transfer over a 10 cm on-chip link, as validated by simulations demonstrating low power consumption (FoM 37.3 fJ/bit/mm of transmission line length) and effective ISI mitigation.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Multiphase outflows in post-starburst E+A galaxies – I. General sample properties and the prevalence of obscured starbursts

ABSTRACT E+A galaxies are believed to be a short phase connecting major merger ultraluminous infrared galaxies (ULIRGs) with red and dead elliptical galaxies. Their optical spectrum suggests a massive starburst that was quenched abruptly, and their bulge-dominated morphologies with tidal tails suggest that they are merger remnants. Active galactic nucleus (AGN)-driven winds are believed to be one of the processes responsible for the sudden quenching of star formation and for the expulsion and/or destruction of the remaining molecular gas. Little is known about AGN-driven winds in this short-lived phase. In this paper, we present the first and unique sample of post-starburst galaxy candidates with AGNs that show indications of ionized outflows in their optical emission lines. Using Infrared Astronomical Satellite–far infrared (IRAS–FIR) observations, we study the star formation in these systems and find that many systems selected to have post-starburst signatures in their optical spectrum are in fact obscured starbursts. Using SDSS spectroscopy, we study the stationary and outflowing ionized gas. We also detect neutral gas outflows in 40 per cent of the sources with mass outflow rates 10–100 times more massive than in the ionized phase. The mean mass outflow rate and kinetic power of the ionized outflows in our sample ($\dot{M}\sim 1\, \mathrm{M_{\odot }\, yr^{-1}}$, $\dot{E}\sim 10^{41}\, \mathrm{erg\, s}^{-1}$) are larger than those derived for active galaxies of similar AGN luminosity and stellar mass. For the neutral outflow ($\dot{M}\sim 10\, \mathrm{M_{\odot }\, yr^{-1}}$, $\dot{E}\sim 10^{42}\, \mathrm{erg\, s}^{-1}$), their mean is smaller than that observed in (U)LIRGs with and without AGN.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Star formation efficiency and AGN feedback in narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies with fast X-ray nuclear winds

ABSTRACT We present the first systematic study of the molecular gas and star formation efficiency in a sample of ten narrow-line Seyfert 1 galaxies selected to have X-ray Ultra Fast Outflows and, therefore, to potentially show AGN feedback effects. CO observations were obtained with the IRAM 30-m telescope in six galaxies and from the literature for four galaxies. We derived the stellar mass, star formation rate, AGN, and FIR dust luminosities by fitting the multi-band spectral energy distributions with the CIGALE code. Most of the galaxies in our sample lie above the main sequence (MS), and the molecular depletion time is one to two orders of magnitude shorter than the one typically measured in local star-forming galaxies. Moreover, we found a promising correlation between the star formation efficiency and the Eddington ratio, as well as a tentative correlation with the AGN luminosity. The role played by the AGN activity in the regulation of star formation within the host galaxies of our sample remains uncertain (little or no effect? positive feedback?). Nevertheless, we can conclude that quenching by the AGN activity is minor and that star formation will likely stop in a short time due to gas exhaustion by the current starburst episode.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Prediction of Power Measurements Using Adaptive Filters

With the advent of smart grid concept, Internet of Things (IoT) and the deployment of smart meters, the cyberattack threats on power networks have increased due to the use of communication systems that can be accessed by adversaries. Attackers will have the ability to manipulate the outcomes of smart meters which in turn influence the core application of Energy Management System 9EMS): State Estimation (SE). Bad data analytic tools may fail to detect some attacks into measurements. Meanwhile, Machine Learning (ML) solutions have been proposed for detecting False Data Injection (FDI) attacks. However, there is a lack of ML time-series solutions presented in the state-of-the-art that is yet to be complex. In signal processing, time-series solutions do not only consider the signal, but also the statistics of the signal over time. Therefore, in this paper, a machine learning for time-series solutions is presented as an application to model the measurements of the power grid that are used in SE. The presented model takes into account adaptive linear and non-linear filters: Finite Impulse Response (FIR), and Infinite Impulse Response (IIR). The presented models are implemented and performed on the IEEE-118 bus system. The results indicate the advantage of applying those filters over the state-of-the-art machine learning solutions.

Hamad, Khaled↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Hybrid Transmitter With Voltage-Mode SST Preemphasis and Current-Mode Transmitter Equalization Capable of Operating at 77 K in DUNE

The Deep Underground Neutrino Experiment (DUNE) requires that the front-end transmitters operate at cryogenic temperature and drive 25–35 m long twin-axial (twinax) cables. Here, to compensate the frequency-dependent channel loss over the long cables and alleviate the de-emphasizing of the low-frequency signal magnitude, a hybrid of a current-mode (CM) transmitter equalization (TXEQ) and a voltage-mode (VM) preemphasis is proposed. The TXEQ employs a finite-impulse response (FIR) filter to boost the high-frequency components while de-emphasizing the low-frequency signal magnitude, thereby flattening the overall channel frequency response and reducing the intersymbol interference (ISI). The VM preemphasis is proposed to further mitigate ISI by boosting the high-frequency portion without degrading the signal magnitude, allowing for high signal swing. The main driver utilizes VM source-series-terminated (SST) output stages, which offers higher signal swing and better power efficiency than the conventional CM logic (CML) drivers. To ensure the lifetime and reliability at cryogenic temperature, the transmitter is implemented in a 65-nm CMOS process operating at 1.1 V of supply voltage and employing transistors with larger than minimum lengths. Silicon measurement results at 77 K have validated the proposed approaches.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2021

Toroidal polar topology in strained ferroelectric polymer

Polar topological texture has become an emerging research field for exotic phenomena and potential applications in reconfigurable electronic devices. Here, we report toroidal topological texture self-organized in a ferroelectric polymer, poly(vinylidene fluoride-ran-trifluoroethylene) [P(VDF-TrFE)], that exhibits concentric topology with anticoupled chiral domains. The interplay among the elastic, electric, and gradient energies results in continuous rotation and toroidal assembly of the polarization perpendicular to polymer chains, whereas relaxor behavior is induced along polymer chains. Such toroidal polar topology gives rise to periodic absorption of polarized far-infrared (FIR) waves, enabling the manipulation of the terahertz wave on a mesoscopic scale. Our observations should inform design principles for flexible ferroic materials toward complex topologies and provide opportunities for multistimuli conversions in flexible electronics.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Chapter 24: The Compound Middle Lamella as a Target for Improved Deconstruction of Woody Biomass

The compound middle lamella (CML) of woody angiosperm species, such as poplar (Populus spp.), birch (Betula spp.), and alder (Alnus spp.), and gymnosperm species, such as pine (Pinus spp.), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), and spruce (Picea spp.), is an amalgam of lignin, hemicellulosic xylans, and pectic polysaccharides that is the major site of cell-cell adhesion of fibre cells and tracheary elements. In grass species, such as sorghum (Sorghum bicolor), switchgrass (Panicum virgatum), and sugarcane (Saccharum officinarum), a phenylpropanoid network deposited in xylan-rich primary walls extends into the lignified CML. This review traces the early history of discovery of the molecular components of the CML and presents the current state of knowledge on the development of the CML in bioenergy-relevant woody species and grasses. This chapter emphasises the role of the CML in the recalcitrance of biomass to deconstruction by mechanical and enzymatic means for conversion to biofuels and valuable bioproducts. The use of genetic engineering to alter CML composition and structure to facilitate biomass deconstruction and to redesign wood to generate materials with novel properties is discussed.

BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

<i>Finite Element Modeling of Biomass Hopper Flow</i>

The hopper is one of the widely used biomass handling devices that channels the bulk biomass from storage to the subsequent handling systems. Although Jenike's approach has been successfully used for hoppers handling grains and other agricultural produces for decades, designing a hopper, ensuring reliable biomass handling is found to be challenging. This study aims to address this engineering problem with alternative constitutive material models concerning the flow behavior of bulk solids. Finite element modeling is an approach that allows for implementing different material models. Underlying constitutive theories of different material models assist in investigating the mechanical behavior of a particulate system, including the flow characteristics of ground biomass. This study demonstrates hopper flow models of two types of biomass, i.e., ground corn stover and Douglas fir, with the Mohr-Coulomb model, which is based on Jenike's approach, modified Cam-Clay model, and Drucker-Prager/Cap model. The modeling results are compared with hopper flow experiments to highlights the advantages and shortfalls of each constitutive biomass flow model.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Forest carbon sequestration on the west coast, USA: Role of species, productivity, and stockability

Forest ecosystems store large amounts of carbon and can be important sources, or sinks, of the atmospheric carbon dioxide that is contributing to global warming. Understanding the carbon storage potential of different forests and their response to management and disturbance events are fundamental to developing policies and scenarios to partially offset greenhouse gas emissions. Projections of live tree carbon accumulation are handled differently in different models, with inconsistent results. We developed growth-and-yield style models to predict stand-level live tree carbon density as a function of stand age in all vegetation types of the coastal Pacific region, US (California, Oregon, and Washington), from 7,523 national forest inventory plots. We incorporated site productivity and stockability within the Chapman-Richards equation and tested whether intensively managed private forests behaved differently from less managed public forests. We found that the best models incorporated stockability in the equation term controlling stand carrying capacity, and site productivity in the equation terms controlling the growth rate and shape of the curve. RMSEs ranged from 10 to 137 Mg C/ha for different vegetation types. There was not a significant effect of ownership over the standard industrial rotation length (~50 yrs) for the productive Douglas-fir/western hemlock zone, indicating that differences in stockability and productivity captured much of the variation attributed to management intensity. Our models suggest that doubling the rotation length on these intensively managed lands from 35 to 70 years would result in 2.35 times more live tree carbon stored on the landscape. These findings are at odds with some studies that have projected higher carbon densities with stand age for the same vegetation types, and have not found an increase in yields (on an annual basis) with longer rotations. We suspect that differences are primarily due to the application of yield curves developed from fully-stocked, undisturbed, single-species, “normal” stands without accounting for the substantial proportion of forests that don’t meet those assumptions. The carbon accumulation curves developed here can be applied directly in growth-and-yield style projection models, and used to validate the predictions of ecophysiological, cohort, or single-tree style models being used to project carbon futures for forests in the region. Our approach may prove useful for developing robust models in other forest types.

Chisholm, Paul J. (ORCID:0000000238784707)↗
DOE OSTI2023

Sapflow and xylem water isotopes from Snodgrass Mountain, East River Watershed, Colorado USA

This dataset includes sapflux and stable water isotopes of soil water and xylem water for aspen, fir and spruce trees along the Snodgrass Mountain transect in the East River Watershed, Colorado USA. The purpose of generating this dataset was to understand: (1) the total flux of water being used by trees in the watershed, (2) separate the component of transpiration that was derived from recent precipitation vs. older water such as winter precipitation of groundwater and (3) understand how total water use and water sources for the trees varies between species and position on a hillslope. The data were collected from May 2019 until October 2022. The sap flux data were collected using ICT SFM1 sensors and are presented in both units of cm h^-1 and as kg h^-1 by multiplying the sap flux by the sapwood area of the tree. All sap flow data has been been corrected using estimates of wounding diameter, water content of wood and sap wood depth. The xylem water isotope data were collected approximately weekly from each of the trees instrumented with sap flux. The stems were collected and the water extracted using classic cryogenic methods. Isotope measurements were done using a Picarro 2140i analyzer. We provide an estimate of the Seasonal Origin Index for each measurements following Allen et al., 2019 (10.5194/hess-23-1199-2019) where values of -1 equate to trees relying on winter precipitation and +1 tree relying on summer precipitation. We also provide the simultaneous sap flux for each isotope measurement when this data was available. This is an update to an earlier data repository with the same name that only included 2019 data. The new dataset was posted in January 2023 and is inclusive of the original 2019 data but now includes 2021 and 2022 data. Please note there was an error in the units of transpiration in the original dataset. It was incorrectly listed as mm h-1 when it should have been kg h-1. This change was made in May 2024.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Sap Velocity Data for East River Watershed Sites (2023-2025)

This dataset includes sap velocity measurements for aspen (populus tremuloides), fir (abies lasiocarpa), spruce (Engelmann spruce) and lodgepole pine (pinus contorta) trees at nine sites in the East River Watershed near Gothic, CO. This dataset was generated following a similar method as a previous dataset (Dataset. doi:10.15485/1647654) but was conducted at different sites in the area and now includes lodgepole pine. Site selection was done to explicitly improve understanding of topographic controls of tree water use. The data collection began in June 2023 and we provide data until December 2025 - though data collection is ongoing. The sap flux data were collected using ICT SFM1 sensors and are presented in both units of cm h^-1 and as kg h^-1 by multiplying the sap flux by the sapwood area of the tree. All sap flow data has been been corrected using estimates of wounding diameter, water content of wood and sap wood depth. We also provide a normalized sap velocity estimate by subtracting each measurement from that trees' annual minimum and dividing by that trees' annual maximum. This provides data for each tree and year on a 0-1 scale. This data entry contains one CSV file that includes all available sap flow data. The timestamps are provided in local time as year, day of year and hour and each measurement contains an associated latitude, longitude and site number which can be used to identify trees in a given stand. Each species is given a numeric value as: 1= populus tremuloides, 2=Engelmann spruce, 3=abies lasiocarpa and 4=pinus contorta.

abies↗
DOE OSTI2020

Materials Data on Li5Sm3(SbO6)2 by Materials Project

Li5Sm3(SbO6)2 crystallizes in the triclinic P1 space group. The structure is three-dimensional. there are twenty inequivalent Li1+ sites. In the first Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.81–2.38 Å. In the second Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 3-coordinate geometry to five O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–2.43 Å. In the third Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with four SbO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 49–52°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.98 Å. In the fourth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.79–2.43 Å. In the fifth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.82–2.16 Å. In the sixth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.80–2.52 Å. In the seventh Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 3-coordinate geometry to six O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.88–2.71 Å. In the eighth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.83–2.52 Å. In the ninth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.81–2.36 Å. In the tenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.84–2.19 Å. In the eleventh Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with four SbO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 43–54°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.85–1.98 Å. In the twelfth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to six O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.86–2.65 Å. In the thirteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to six O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–2.74 Å. In the fourteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with four SbO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 49–53°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.88–1.95 Å. In the fifteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.81–2.26 Å. In the sixteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to six O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.84–2.74 Å. In the seventeenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with four SbO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 49–52°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.88–1.96 Å. In the eighteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to five O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–2.75 Å. In the nineteenth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.82–2.41 Å. In the twentieth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to four O2- atoms. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.83–2.15 Å. There are twelve inequivalent Sm3+ sites. In the first Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.39–2.63 Å. In the second Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.38–2.65 Å. In the third Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.37–2.58 Å. In the fourth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.38–2.64 Å. In the fifth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.37–2.66 Å. In the sixth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.35–2.66 Å. In the seventh Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.35–2.60 Å. In the eighth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.35–2.67 Å. In the ninth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.36–2.60 Å. In the tenth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a 8-coordinate geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.33–2.68 Å. In the eleventh Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a 8-coordinate geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.35–2.81 Å. In the twelfth Sm3+ site, Sm3+ is bonded in a distorted body-centered cubic geometry to eight O2- atoms. There are a spread of Sm–O bond distances ranging from 2.35–2.62 Å. There are eight inequivalent Sb5+ sites. In the first Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with two LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.01–2.04 Å. In the second Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with three LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.01–2.04 Å. In the third Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with two LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 1.99–2.05 Å. In the fourth Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share a cornercorner with one LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.01–2.06 Å. In the fifth Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share a cornercorner with one LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.01–2.03 Å. In the sixth Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with three LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.01–2.04 Å. In the seventh Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with two LiO4 tetrahedra. There are four shorter (2.02 Å) and two longer (2.03 Å) Sb–O bond lengths. In the eighth Sb5+ site, Sb5+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form SbO6 octahedra that share corners with two LiO4 tetrahedra. There are a spread of Sb–O bond distances ranging from 2.02–2.04 Å. There are forty-eight inequivalent O2- sites. In the first O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 2-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the second O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the third O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom to form a mixture of distorted corner and edge-sharing OLiSm2Sb tetrahedra. In the fourth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the fifth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the sixth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the seventh O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the eighth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to three Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the ninth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the tenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the eleventh O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twelfth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the fourteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom to form distorted corner-sharing OLiSm2Sb tetrahedra. In the fifteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom to form distorted corner-sharing OLiSm2Sb tetrahedra. In the sixteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the seventeenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the eighteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the nineteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom to form a mixture of distorted corner and edge-sharing OLiSm2Sb tetrahedra. In the twentieth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-first O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom to form distorted corner-sharing OLiSm2Sb tetrahedra. In the twenty-second O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-third O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-fourth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-fifth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 1-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-sixth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-seventh O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-eighth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 4-coordinate geometry to one Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the twenty-ninth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirtieth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 1-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-first O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to three Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-second O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-third O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to three Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-fourth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 1-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-fifth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-sixth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 6-coordinate geometry to three Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-seventh O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-eighth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the thirty-ninth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a distorted octahedral geometry to three Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the fortieth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a 5-coordinate geometry to two Li1+, two Sm3+, and one Sb5+ atom. In the forty-fir

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2020

Materials Data on Li2FeCo3O8 by Materials Project

Li2FeCo3O8 is Spinel-derived structured and crystallizes in the triclinic P1 space group. The structure is three-dimensional. there are eight inequivalent Li1+ sites. In the first Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 57–60°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.93–1.96 Å. In the second Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 57–61°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.93–1.95 Å. In the third Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 57–63°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.94–1.97 Å. In the fourth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 56–63°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.93–1.96 Å. In the fifth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 56–63°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.92–1.97 Å. In the sixth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 57–64°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.92–1.97 Å. In the seventh Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 56–66°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.93–1.97 Å. In the eighth Li1+ site, Li1+ is bonded to four O2- atoms to form LiO4 tetrahedra that share corners with three FeO6 octahedra and corners with nine CoO6 octahedra. The corner-sharing octahedra tilt angles range from 57–61°. There are a spread of Li–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.98 Å. There are four inequivalent Fe3+ sites. In the first Fe3+ site, Fe3+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form FeO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra and edges with six CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Fe–O bond distances ranging from 1.88–1.94 Å. In the second Fe3+ site, Fe3+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form FeO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra and edges with six CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Fe–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.94 Å. In the third Fe3+ site, Fe3+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form FeO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra and edges with six CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Fe–O bond distances ranging from 1.97–2.07 Å. In the fourth Fe3+ site, Fe3+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form FeO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra and edges with six CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Fe–O bond distances ranging from 1.89–1.96 Å. There are twelve inequivalent Co+3.67+ sites. In the first Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.94 Å. In the second Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There is two shorter (1.89 Å) and four longer (1.91 Å) Co–O bond length. In the third Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.92–1.94 Å. In the fourth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.93 Å. In the fifth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–1.93 Å. In the sixth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.94 Å. In the seventh Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.85–1.94 Å. In the eighth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.92–1.94 Å. In the ninth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–1.93 Å. In the tenth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.87–1.92 Å. In the eleventh Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.91–1.96 Å. In the twelfth Co+3.67+ site, Co+3.67+ is bonded to six O2- atoms to form CoO6 octahedra that share corners with six LiO4 tetrahedra, edges with two FeO6 octahedra, and edges with four CoO6 octahedra. There are a spread of Co–O bond distances ranging from 1.92–1.94 Å. There are thirty-two inequivalent O2- sites. In the first O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with ten OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiFeCo2 tetrahedra, and an edgeedge with one OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramid. In the second O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form a mixture of distorted corner and edge-sharing OLiFeCo2 tetrahedra. In the third O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+ and three Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with eight OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the fourth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form a mixture of distorted corner and edge-sharing OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the fifth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with ten OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids. In the sixth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+ and three Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids that share a cornercorner with one OLiFeCo2 tetrahedra, corners with eight OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the seventh O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share a cornercorner with one OLiFeCo2 tetrahedra, corners with ten OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, and edges with two OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the eighth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with three OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with nine OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, and edges with two OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the ninth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with six OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the tenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share a cornercorner with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with eight OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the eleventh O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+ and three Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiCo3 tetrahedra that share a cornercorner with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with nine OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the twelfth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a distorted rectangular see-saw-like geometry to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms. In the thirteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with three OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with seven OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, and edges with two OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the fourteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+ and three Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiCo3 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with ten OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and an edgeedge with one OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramid. In the fifteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with three OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with nine OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, and edges with two OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the sixteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with seven OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 tetrahedra, and edges with two OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the seventeenth O2- site, O2- is bonded in a distorted rectangular see-saw-like geometry to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms. In the eighteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with three OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with seven OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and an edgeedge with one OLiCo3 trigonal pyramid. In the nineteenth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+ and three Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiCo3 tetrahedra that share corners with three OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with seven OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, and edges with three OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids. In the twentieth O2- site, O2- is bonded to one Li1+, one Fe3+, and two Co+3.67+ atoms to form distorted OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids that share corners with two OLiCo3 tetrahedra, corners with eight OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramids, edges with two OLiFeCo2 tetrahedra, and an edgeedge with one OLiFeCo2 trigonal pyramid. In the twenty-fir

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F CA-Gro Ontario - Groundhog River, Boreal Mixedwood Forest

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site CA-Gro Ontario - Groundhog River, Boreal Mixedwood Forest. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site CA-Gro Ontario - Groundhog River, Boreal Mixedwood Forest produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Groundhog River (FCRN or CCP site "ON-OMW") is situated in a typical boreal mixedwood forest in northeastern Ontario (48.217 degrees north and 82.156 degrees west) about 80 km southwest of Timmins in Reeves Twp. near the Groundhog River. Rowe (1972) places the site in the Missinaibi-Cabonga Section of the Boreal Forest Region. In terms of ecoregion and ecozone, the site is in the Lake Timiskaming Lowlands of the Boreal Shield. The forest developed after high-grade logging in the 1930's. The average age in 2013 is estimated at beteen 75 and 80 years. The forest is dominated by five species characteristic of Ontario boreal mixedwoods: trembling aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.), black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) B.S.P.), white spruce (Picea glauca (Moench.) Voss.), white birch (Betula papyrifera Marsh.), and balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.). The surficial geology is a lacustrine deposit of varved or massive clays, silts and silty sands. The soil is an orthic gleysol with a soil moisture regime classified as fresh to very fresh. Plonski (1974) rates it as a site class 1. The topography is simple and flat with an overall elevation of 340 m ASL.

McCaughey, Harry↗
DOE OSTI2025

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-xWR NEON Wind River Experimental Forest (WREF)

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xWR NEON Wind River Experimental Forest (WREF). This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xWR NEON Wind River Experimental Forest (WREF) produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - Located in an old growth Pacific Northwest forest west of the Cascade Range, Wind River Experimental Forest has a rich history of research and timber management since the early 1900s. The area is best known for its old-growth forests of Douglas-fir and western hemlock. Data collected at this site provides an interesting comparison to NEON’s ABBY site which is located Yacolt Burn State Forest, a relatively young growth industrial timber production forest.

Network), NEON (National Ecological Observatory [N↗
DOE OSTI2025

AmeriFlux US-CPF Cameron Peak

This is the AmeriFlux version of the carbon flux data for the site US-CPF Cameron Peak. Site Description - This site was established in 2021 in the wake of the Cameron Peak fire, the largest wildfire in Colorado to date. The site is situated at 3,100m elevation on a ~0.5km^2 flat ridgetop within the burn zone between Sawmill Creek and Chambers Lake. The site, populated by lodgepole pine, subalpine fir and Engelmann spruce, burned heavily in fall 2020. The tower consists of one level of construction scaffolding with instruments mounted at 4.3m height.

Frank, John [US Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Res↗
DOE OSTI2026

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-xTE NEON Lower Teakettle (TEAK)

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xTE NEON Lower Teakettle (TEAK). This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-xTE NEON Lower Teakettle (TEAK) produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - The site encompasses 5,138 hectares (12,696 acres) of mixed conifer and red fir forest, ranging in elevation from 1,990 to 2,807 m (6,529 – 9,209ft). The varied terrain is typical of the Sierra Nevada, with rugged mountains, meadows and prominent granite outcrops. TEAK has been designated as one of two relocatable terrestrial sites for the Pacific Southwest domain. The core aquatic site, Teakettle Creek, is just south of the terrestrial site.

Network), NEON (National Ecological Observatory [N↗
DOE OSTI2020

Carbon Cycling, Environmental & Rural Economic Impacts of Collecting & Processing Specific Woody Feedstocks in Biofuels

Woody biomass will be an essential feedstock for a large-scale cellulosic biofuel industry. The life cycle carbon accounting for the production of biofuels from woody feedstocks is complex and has engendered significant controversy. Issues such as below ground carbon, carbon debt, varied regional forest practices, multiple parallel forest product lines, and development of realistic counterfactual scenarios all contribute to the complexity. DOE funded CORRIM to develop comprehensive and definitive lifecycle inventories and assessments on the production of fuels from woody feedstocks. CORRIM brought together expertise in forest practices, short rotation woody crops, bioconversion of woody biomass, process modeling, and life cycle assessment to successfully accomplish this goal. The CORRIM team has developed data on forest productivity, fuel usage, and fuel production for six regionally specific forest systems. These six forest systems include three current commercial systems; southern pine plantations, Douglas-fir plantations, naturally regenerated Northeastern (NE) spruce/fir, and three ‘short rotation woody crops’, poplar, eucalyptus and willow, which are at different stages of demonstration in the US. The fuel production systems include cellulosic ethanol and bio-oil based hydrocarbons. The project was successfully reviewed at the BETO Program review in March 2015, 2017, and 2019 and has resulted currently in 19 publications and reports and 35 presentations at both national and international conferences, with more in the pipeline. See publications and presentations for links to each document. Finally, and most importantly, CORRIM has gone beyond the scope of the original DOE proposal to work closely with GREET at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) to incorporate all the life cycle data and scenario models into their modeling system. GREET is the most widely used and definitive information source for evaluating lifecycle carbon emissions for fuels. The incorporation of CORRIM data from this project guarantees the results of the research will be extensively used and widely disseminated. Technical process improvements and policy relevant accomplishments are detailed in the relevant programmatic sections in the full report including citations therein. Highlights are summarized here for easy reference.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗