Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “reference systems”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Mil-Std-464C and Mil-Std-464D Electromagnetic Radiation Environment Evaluation

Many systems derive their electromagnetic radiation (EMR) environments from Mil-Std-464C or Mil-Std-464D, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for Systems. This standard defines several EMR environments based on the type of system and expected application. Many nuclear weapon (NW) systems reference the ordnance environments as the starting point for their functional EMR requirements, since any item intended to go into Department of Defense (DOD) custody is expected to be certified hazards of electromagnetic radiation to ordnance (HERO) safe when exposed to the environments listed in Mil-Std-464 Table 9. This environment is defined as the envelope of all sources any system in DOD custody may ever encounter, however, and may include sources that are not relevant for a particular system. This document is intended to provide additional clarity on the Mil-Std-464C and Mil-Std-464D EMR environments, specifically the driving sources for the maximum ordnance levels. This supplementary information may be used to guide tailoring of relevant environments or application to different systems with the additional consideration of any shielding that may reduce the external environments defined in the military standard.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2018

The greenhouse gas cost of agricultural intensification with groundwater irrigation in a Midwest U.S. row cropping system

Abstract Groundwater irrigation of cropland is expanding worldwide with poorly known implications for climate change. This study compares experimental measurements of the net global warming impact of a rainfed versus a groundwater‐irrigated corn (maize)–soybean–wheat, no‐till cropping system in the Midwest US, the region that produces the majority of U.S. corn and soybean. Irrigation significantly increased soil organic carbon (C) storage in the upper 25 cm, but not by enough to make up for the CO 2 ‐equivalent (CO 2 e) costs of fossil fuel power, soil emissions of nitrous oxide (N 2 O), and degassing of supersaturated CO 2 and N 2 O from the groundwater. A rainfed reference system had a net mitigating effect of −13.9 (±31) g CO 2 e m −2 year −1 , but with irrigation at an average rate for the region, the irrigated system contributed to global warming with net greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of 27.1 (±32) g CO 2 e m −2 year −1 . Compared to the rainfed system, the irrigated system had 45% more GHG emissions and 7% more C sequestration. The irrigation‐associated increase in soil N 2 O and fossil fuel emissions contributed 18% and 9%, respectively, to the system's total emissions in an average irrigation year. Groundwater degassing of CO 2 and N 2 O are missing components of previous assessments of the GHG cost of groundwater irrigation; together they were 4% of the irrigated system's total emissions. The irrigated system's net impact normalized by crop yield (GHG intensity) was +0.04 (±0.006) kg CO 2 e kg −1 yield, close to that of the rainfed system, which was −0.03 (±0.002) kg CO 2 e kg −1 yield. Thus, the increased crop yield resulting from irrigation can ameliorate overall GHG emissions if intensification by irrigation prevents land conversion emissions elsewhere, although the expansion of irrigation risks depletion of local water resources.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2022

Wind and Solar Hybrid Power Plants for Energy Resilience

Wind-solar-storage hybrid power plants represent a significant and growing share of new proposed projects in the United States (U.S.). Their uptake is supported by increasing renewable energy market share, technical abilities for dispatch and control, and decreasing wind, solar, and battery storage costs. Simultaneously, generation and storage resources are increasingly used in distributed power systems. While concerns around the reliability of the aging, transforming U.S. electric grid are growing, diversifying energy resources through hybridization or spatial distribution provides an opportunity to enhance power system resilience compared to single-source generation. Understanding where to build hybrids for resilience value, rather than bulk power supply, has not been fully explored in previous studies. Therefore, in this study, we complete a national complementarity analysis to identify areas in the U.S. that are particularly suited for wind-solar hybrid power plant development. We show the importance of seasonal and diurnal patterns in assessing complementarity, and identify that regions in the Great Plains, Midwest, and Southeast are particularly suited for hybrid power plants. We demonstrate the resilience value of hybridization for a reference system based near Memphis, Tennessee, and show optimal sizing of wind, solar, and storage assets given 1.0 and 0.9 critical load factors. Results indicate that pairing wind and solar assets better meet constant load demand and reduce storage requirements compared to solar alone. These results enable future work integrating complementarity metrics in resilience frameworks and indicate a need for more finer resolution of local resource, demand, and hazard data.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2019

A complete quasiclassical map for the dynamics of interacting fermions

We present a strategy for mapping the dynamics of a fermionic quantum system to a set of classical dynamical variables. The approach is based on imposing the correspondence relation between the commutator and the Poisson bracket, preserving Heisenberg's equation of motion for one-body operators. In order to accommodate the effect of two-body terms, we further impose quantization on the spin-dependent occupation numbers in the classical equations of motion, with a parameter that is determined self-consistently. Expectation values for observables are taken with respect to an initial quasiclassical distribution that respects the original quantization of the occupation numbers. The proposed classical map becomes complete under the evolution of quadratic Hamiltonians and is extended for all even order observables. We show that the map provides an accurate description of the dynamics for an interacting quantum impurity model in the coulomb blockade regime, at both low and high temperatures. In conclusion, the numerical results are aided by a novel importance sampling scheme that employs a reference system to reduce significantly the sampling effort required to converge the classical calculations.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2025

Traffic Control via Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs): An Open-Road Field Experiment with 100 CAVs

The CIRCLES project aims to reduce instabilities in traffic flow, which are naturally occurring phenomena due to human driving behavior. Also called “phantom jams” or “stop-and-go waves,” these instabilities are a significant source of wasted energy. Toward this goal, the CIRCLES project designed a control system, referred to as the MegaController by the CIRCLES team, that could be deployed in real traffic. Our field experiment, the MegaVanderTest (MVT), leveraged a heterogeneous fleet of 100 longitudinally controlled vehicles as Lagrangian traffic actuators, each of which ran a controller with the architecture described in this article. The MegaController is a hierarchical control architecture that consists of two main layers. The upper layer is called the Speed Planner and is a centralized optimal control algorithm. It assigns speed targets to the vehicles, conveyed through the LTE cellular network. The lower layer is a control layer, running on each vehicle. It performs local actuation by overriding the stock adaptive cruise controller, using the stock onboard sensors. The Speed Planner ingests live data feeds provided by third parties as well as data from our own control vehicles and uses both to perform the speed assignment. The architecture of the Speed Planner allows for the modular use of standard control techniques, such as optimal control, model predictive control (MPC), kernel methods, and others. The architecture of the local controller allows for the flexible implementation of local controllers. Corresponding techniques include deep reinforcement learning (RL), MPC, and explicit controllers. Depending on the vehicle architecture, all onboard sensing data can be accessed by the local controllers or only some. Likewise, control inputs vary across different automakers, with inputs ranging from torque or acceleration requests for some cars to electronic selection of adaptive cruise control (ACC) setpoints in others. The proposed architecture technically allows for the combination of all possible settings proposed previously, that is {Speed Planner algorithms} × {local Vehicle Controller algorithms} × {full or partial sensing} × {torque or speed control}. As a result, most configurations were tested throughout the ramp up to the MegaVandertest (MVT).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2019

On the Preservation of Non-covalent Peptide Assemblies in a Tandem-Trapped Ion Mobility Spectrometer-Mass Spectrometer (TIMS-TIMS-MS)

Ion mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry (IMS-MS) has demonstrated the ability to characterize structures of weakly-bound peptide assemblies. However, these assemblies can potentially dissociate during the IMS-MS measurement if they undergo energetic ion-neutral collisions. Here, we investigate the ability of tandem-trapped ion mobility spectrometry-mass spectrometry (TIMS-TIMS-MS) to retain weakly-bound peptide assemblies. We assess ion heating and dissociaton in the tandem-TIMS instrument using bradykinin and its assemblies as reference systems. Our data indicate that non-covalent bradykinin assemblies are largely preserved in TIMS-TIMS under carefully selected operating conditions. Importantly, we observe quadruply-charged bradykinin tetramers, which attests to the “softness” of our instrument. .

74 ATOMIC AND MOLECULAR PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Conductive overbraid of continuous fiber thermoplastic composite tows

Here, to meet the increasing demand for lightweight materials with multifunctional capabilities, a new high-rate manufacturing method and material system, referred to as M-TOW ® (multifunctional-tow) is introduced. Overbraiding is used to incorporate highly conductive wire onto the continuous fiber reinforced tow (M-TOW ® ), offering a solution for integrating thermal and electrical conductivity into hybrid-molded composite structures. The conductivity performance of different wire configurations are compared before and after forming the M TOW ® , measuring electrical conductivities up to 5.5 x 10 5 S / cm and thermal conductivities up to 21 W / mK. Results conclude that the integration of conductive wires into thermoplastic preforms is a viable means of expanding the functionality of lightweight, high strength composite structures.

3-dimensional reinforcement↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluating the Chemical Reactivity of DFT-Simulated Liquid Water with Hydrated Electrons via the Dual Descriptor

Modeling the various properties of liquid water, particularly its reactivity, has been a longstanding challenge for simulation methods. Recently, ab initio simulations based on density functional theory (DFT) have come to the fore as tenable methods for calculating the properties and reactivity of water, with varying degrees of success for different exchange-correlation functionals. In particular, hybrid-GGA and meta-GGA functionals have been shown to reproduce many of the structural, dynamical, and energetic properties of water to a high degree of accuracy relative to their computational cost. Here, we show that the dual descriptor (DD) measure of nucleophilicity and electrophilicity, which is sometimes used to elucidate organic chemistry reaction mechanisms, can also be used to characterize the reactivity of DFTsimulated liquid water. The DD is especially apt for understanding the reactivity of excess electrons with water as its calculation explicitly involves adding and removing an excess electron from a reference system. We use the DD to explore the reactivity of water simulated using three different DFT functionals: the LDA functional (LDA), a hybrid-GGA functional (PBE0), and a hybrid meta- GGA functional (SCAN0). Using the DD, we show that the SCAN0 functional with the standard 25% Hartree–Fock exchange produces simulated liquid water with many regions that are far more reactive than either PBE0 or LDA. To understand the implications of these highly reactive regions, we then add a strong nucleophile in the form of an excess electron and find that although PBE0 and LDA predict stable hydrated electrons, the excess electron reacts nearly instantaneously with SCAN0 water via proton abstraction to form a hydrogen atom and hydroxide ion. We show that the DD provides the ability to not only predict whether or not liquid water will react with a hydrated electron but also which particular waters will be involved solely from analyzing pure water configurations generated with each functional. We rationalize this result in terms of the known trap-seeking behavior of injected hydrated electrons, which are able to find the most electronegative region in bulk water. These results highlight the utility of the dual descriptor as a fast and interpretable method for investigating condensed-phase reactivity with excess electrons.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2018

Nanocrystalline Iron Monosulfides Near Stoichiometry

Solids composed of iron and sulfur are earth abundant and nontoxic, and can exhibit interesting and technologically important optical, electronic, and magnetic phenomena. However, the iron-sulfur (Fe-S) phase diagram is congested in regions of slight non-stoichiometric iron vacancies, and even when the iron atomic composition changes by even a few percent at standard temperature and pressure, there are myriad stable crystal phases that form with qualitatively different electronic properties. Here, we synthesized and characterized nanocrystals of the pyrrhotite-4M structure (Fe7S8) in an anhydrous oleylamine solvent. Upon heating from 140 °C to 180 °C, the solid sequentially transformed into two kinetically trapped FeS intermediate phases before reaching the pyrrhotite-4M final product. Finally, we assessed the effects of iron vacancies using the stoichiometric end-member, troilite, as a reference system. Density functional theory calculations show that iron vacancies in troilite shift the structure from hexagonal FeS to a monoclinic structure, similar to crystal structures of pyrrhotites, and suggest that this iron deficient troilite may be a stable intermediate between the two crystal structures. The calculations predict that defects also close the band gap in iron deficient troilite.

Science & Technology - Other Topics↗
DOE OSTI2023

Chemical bonding in americium oxides probed by X-ray spectroscopy

The electronic structure and the chemical state in Am binary oxides and Am-doped UO 2 were studied by means of X-ray absorption spectroscopy at shallow Am core (4d and 5d) edges. In particular, the Am 5f states were probed and the nature of their bonding to the oxygen states was analyzed. The interpretation of the experimental data was supported by the Anderson impurity model (AIM) calculations which took into account the full multiplet structure due to the interaction between 5f electrons as well as the interaction with the core hole. The sensitivity of the branching ratio of the Am 4d 3/2 and 4d 5/2 X-ray absorption lines to the chemical state of Am was shown using Am binary oxides as reference systems. The observed ratio for Am-doped UO 2 suggests that at least at low Am concentrations, americium is in the Am(III) state in the UO 2 lattice. To confirm the validity of the applied AIM approach, the analysis of the Am 4f X-ray photoelectron spectra of AmO 2 and Am 2 O 3 was also performed which revealed a good agreement between experiment and calculations. As a whole, AmO 2 can be classified as the charge-transfer compound with the 5f occupancy (n ƒ ) equal to 5.73 electrons, while Am 2 O 3 is rather a Mott–Hubbard system with n ƒ = 6.05.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2018

Intermolecular structural correlations in model globular and unconcatenated ring polymer liquids

We employ the field theoretic polymer integral equation theory to construct a segment-level theory for the thermodynamics and pair structure of dense liquids of interpenetrating ring polymers and a simple globule model. The latter is defined by a fractal mass distribution on all internal length scales with an exponent equal to the spatial dimension (d F = d s = 3). In an isochoric ensemble the dimensionless compressibility and pressure is predicted to vary exponentially with macromolecular volume fraction. An intermolecular correlation hole exists down to small length scales. This model appears to be useful for a recently studied experimental soft nanoparticle suspension, and also serves as a reference system for our analysis of ring liquids. Motivated by simulations, a two-fractal exponent ring model is adopted for the intramolecular structure factor. At smaller lengths it describes chain-like macromolecules, while on larger scales it corresponds to a space-filling object in the sense that d F = d s = 3. The crossover between these two regimes is of order the entanglement length of the linear chain analog. Based on a constant compressibility ensemble, the effective volume fraction grows at intermediate values of degree of polymerization (N), and crosses over to a very slow logarithmic growth at large N. A weaker intermolecular correlation hole is predicted. The number of nearest neighbor rings increases dramatically at small N, akin to linear chain melts, but then tends to saturate at large N, in accord with simulations. We determine that the tools developed may be relevant for other partially interpenetrating soft objects such as core–shell nanogels or microgels.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2022

Porphyrinoid actinide complexes

The diverse coordination modes and electronic features of actinide complexes of porphyrins and related oligopyrrolic systems (referred to as “porpyrinoids”) have been the subject of interest since the 1960s.

Vargas-Zúñiga, Gabriela I.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Analysis of the bonding in tetrahedrane and phosphorus-substituted tetrahedranes

The bonding structures of tetrahedrane, phosphatetrahedrane, diphosphatetrahedrane and triphosphatetrahedrane are studied by employing an intrinsic quasi-atomic orbital analysis. Ethane, cyclopropane and tetrahedral P 4 are employed as reference systems. The orbital analysis is paired with the computation of strain energies via isodesmic reactions. The results show that the increase in geometric strain upon transition from ethane to cyclopropane to tetrahedrane weakens the CC bonds, despite leading to shorter C–C interatomic distances. With the increase in strain, the orbitals centered on C and involved in the bonding of the cage structure are observed to have elevated p-character, and the orbital structure of C deviates from sp 3 hybridization. The systematic substitution of CH groups by P atoms in the cage structure of tetrahedrane leads to stronger CC bonds, larger angles in the cage structures of the resulting phosphatetrahedranes, lower p-character in the orbitals involved in the bonding of the cages, and lower strain energies. It is found that P is more amenable to strained molecular arrangements than is C, and that the propensity of a given atom to hybridize s and p functions, or the lack thereof, has implications in the stability of molecules with strained geometries. The combination of the calculations presented here with the existing literature provides insight into the apparent propensity of tetrahedrane and P 4 to ‘break’ their tetrahedral structures. Trends in the bonding interactions, such as bond strengths, s- and p-orbital characters and charge transfer are identified and related to the strain energy observed in each of the analyzed systems.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗