Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “surface shape fitting”

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.

62 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Wavelength modulation laser-induced fluorescence for plasma characterization

Laser-Induced Fluorescence (LIF) spectroscopy is an essential tool for probing ion and atom velocity distribution functions (VDFs) in complex plasmas. VDFs carry information about the kinetic properties of species that is critical for plasma characterization. Accurate interpretation of these functions is challenging due to factors such as multicomponent distributions, broadening effects, and background emissions. Our research investigates the use of Wavelength Modulation (WM) LIF to enhance the sensitivity of VDF measurements. Unlike standard Amplitude Modulation (AM) methods, WM–LIF measures the derivative of the LIF signal. This approach makes variations in VDF shape more pronounced. VDF measurements with WM–LIF were investigated with both numerical modeling and experimental measurements. The developed model enables the generation of both WM and AM signals, facilitating comparative analysis of fitting outcomes. Experiments were conducted in a weakly collisional argon plasma with magnetized electrons and non-magnetized ions. Measurements of the argon ion VDFs employed a narrow-band tunable diode laser, which scanned the 4p 4 D 7/2 –3d 4 F 9/2 transition centered at 664.553 nm in vacuum. A lock-in amplifier detected the second harmonic WM signal, which was generated by modulating the laser wavelength with an externally controlled piezo-driven mirror of the diode laser. Finally, our findings indicate that the WM–LIF signal is more sensitive to fitting parameters, allowing for better identification of VDF parameters such as the number of distribution components, their temperatures, and velocities. In addition, WM–LIF can serve as an independent method to verify AM measurements and is particularly beneficial in environments with substantial light noise or background emissions, such as those involving thermionic cathodes and reflective surfaces.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Refinements to the Graves–Pitarka Kinematic Rupture Generator, Including a Dynamically Consistent Slip-Rate Function, Applied to the 2019 Mw 7.1 Ridgecrest Earthquake

The main objective of this study is to develop physics–based constraints on the spatiotemporal variation of the slip–rate function using a simplified dynamic rupture model. First, we performed dynamic rupture modeling of the 2019 M w 7.1 Ridgecrest, California, earthquake, to analyze the effects of depth–dependent stress and material friction on slip rate. Then, we used our modeling results to guide refinements to the slip–rate function that were implemented in the Graves–Pitarka kinematic rupture generation technique. The dynamic ruptures were computed on a surface–rupturing, planar strike–slip fault that includes a weak (negative to low–stress–drop) zone in the upper 4 km of the crust. Below the weak zone, we placed high–stress–drop patches designed to mirror the large–slip areas seen in various rupture model inversions of the event. The locations of the high–stress–drop patches and the hypocenter were varied in multiple realizations to investigate how changing the dynamic conditions affected the resulting rupture kinematics, in particular, the slip rate. From these simulations, we observed a systematic change in the shape of the slip–rate function from Kostrov type below the weak zone to a predominantly symmetric shape within the weak zone, along with a depth–dependent reduction of peak slip rate. We generalized these shallow rupture features into a depth–dependent parametric variation of the slip–rate function and implemented it in the Graves–Pitarka kinematic rupture model generator. The performance of the updated kinematic approach was then verified in 0–4 Hz simulations of the M w 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake, which showed that incorporating the depth–dependent variation in the shape of the slip–rate function improves the fit to the observed near–fault ground motions in the 0.5–3 s period range.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

A White Dwarf with Transiting Circumstellar Material Far outside the Roche Limit

We report the discovery of a white dwarf exhibiting deep, irregularly shaped transits, indicative of circumstellar planetary debris. Using Zwicky Transient Facility DR2 photometry of ZTF J013906.17+524536.89 and follow-up observations from the Las Cumbres Observatory, we identify multiple transit events that recur every ≈107.2 days, much longer than the 4.5–4.9 hr orbital periods observed in WD 1145+017, the only other white dwarf known with transiting planetary debris. The transits vary in both depth and duration, lasting 15–25 days and reaching 20%–45% dips in flux. Optical spectra reveal strong Balmer lines, identifying the white dwarf as a DA with ${T}_{\mathrm{eff}}=10,530\pm 140\,{\rm{K}}$ and $\mathrm{log}(g)=7.86\pm 0.06$. A Ca ii K absorption feature is present in all spectra both in and out of transit. Spectra obtained during one night at roughly 15% transit depth show increased Ca ii K absorption with a model atmospheric fit suggesting [Ca/H] = –4.6 ± 0.3, whereas spectra taken on three nights out of transit have [Ca/H] of –5.5, –5.3, and –4.9 with similar uncertainties. While the Ca ii K line strength varies by only 2σ, we consider a predominantly interstellar origin for Ca absorption unlikely. Here, we suggest a larger column density of circumstellar metallic gas along the line of site or increased accretion of material onto the white dwarf's surface are responsible for the Ca absorption, but further spectroscopic studies are required. In addition, high-speed time series photometry out of transit reveals variability with periods of 900 and 1030 s, consistent with ZZ Ceti pulsations.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

First-Principles Treatment of Vibrational Broadening in X-Ray Excited Valence Band Spectra for n-SrTiO 3 (001)

The valence band maximum (VBM) is an important quantity for semiconductors as it locates the Fermi level relative to the band edge. Accurate measurement of this quantity in near-surface regions of semiconductors by photoemission is a first step toward determining the electronic properties of heterostructures involving these materials. While extrapolating the leading edge of the valence band to the energy axis in photoemission spectra is a widely used way to find the VBM, this method can be ambiguous if the leading edge exhibits multiple slopes. Another way to determine the VBM is to fit the leading edge to an appropriately broadened, cross-section modulated theoretical density of states (DOS). Three kinds of broadening that should be included for maximum accuracy are those due to: (1) finite instrumental resolution, (2) valence hole lifetime, and (3) vibrational excitations. While steps (1) and (2) are straightforward to implement, (3) is more difficult because the appropriate amount of broadening is not known a priori. Here, we demonstrate that explicit inclusion of vibrational broadening using ab initio molecular dynamics facilitates accurate VBM determination for n-SrTiO 3 (001). The total DOS is constructed by summing time-averaged projections at elevated temperature onto s - , p - , and d orbitals for the constituent atoms and modulating with the associated photoemission cross sections. Subsequent convolutions of the total DOS, first with a Gaussian of width equal to the experimental energy resolution and second with a Lorentzian to simulate valence hole lifetime effects, yield line shapes that reproduce the experimental leading edges rather well. The VBM is then given by the energy at which the vibrationally broadened total DOS (prior to the convolutions) goes to zero. The VBMs generated by this method quantitatively agree with those resulting from extrapolating from the middle of the measured leading edge for SrTiO 3 .

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2019

The Shape and Density Evolution of Snow Aggregates

Abstract Snow aggregates evolve into a variety of observed shapes and densities. Despite this diversity, models and observational studies employ fractal or Euclidean geometric measures that are assumed universal for all aggregates. This work therefore seeks to improve understanding and representation of snow aggregate geometry and its evolution by characterizing distributions of both observed and Monte Carlo–generated aggregates. Two separate datasets of best-fit ellipsoid estimates derived from Multi-Angle Snowflake Camera (MASC) observations suggest the use of a bivariate beta distribution model for capturing aggregate shapes. Product moments of this model capture shape effects to within 4% of observations. This mathematical model is used along with Monte Carlo simulated aggregates to study how combinations of monomer properties affect aggregate shape evolution. Plate aggregates of any aspect ratio produce a consistent ellipsoid shape evolution whereas thin column aggregates evolve to become more spherical. Thin column aggregates yield fractal dimensions much less than the often-assumed value of 2.0. Ellipsoid densities and fractal analogs of density (lacunarity) are much more variable depending on combinations of monomer size and shape. Simple mathematical scaling relationships can explain the persistent triaxial ellipsoid shapes that appear in both observed and modeled aggregates. Overall, both simulations and observations prove aggregates are rarely oblate. Therefore, the use of the proposed bivariate ellipsoid distribution in models will allow for similar-sized aggregates to exhibit a realistic dispersion of masses and fall speeds.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation: Model Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation (in prep), which introduces a watershed decomposition and parameterization method for large scale permafrost hydrology simulation. With this dataset, this study aims to address the research question: whether a computationally efficient hillslope-based modeling framework can reliably simulate discharge at Arctic river-basin scales. This dataset contains model input and output data for five modeling scenarios at a study site located in the Sagavanirktok River basin. The five modeling scenarios include three modeling cases under temperate conditions using full 3D, decomposed 3D, and decomposed 2D modeling strategies; and two modeling cases under actual Arctic conditions with permafrost using full 3D and decomposed 2D modeling strategies. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.6 for three temperate scenarios and v1.5 for two Arctic scenarios), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model with cryo-hydrology features. For the three temperate models, simulations were conducted for the period of 10/01/1993 - 09/30/2002; and for the two Arctic models, simulations were conducted for the period of 01/01/1994 - 12/31/2002. To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized hierarchically. The dataset contains: (1) Mesh files (.exo) for full 3D model, decomposed 3D models, and decomposed 2D models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/mesh/. Mesh files can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python. (2) Climate forcings (.h5) for full 3D model and decomposed 3D/2D models are located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/daymet_onePiece/, and huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/vp_pr_revised_daymet_1980_2006_with_wind/ separately. Accessible by Python. (3) Raw measured gage discharge (.csv) from USGS, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/gaged_basin15906000_discharge_usgs/. Accessible by Python. (4) Delineated subdomain raster (.tif) and shape files (.shp), and the final parameterized results (.npy) for decomposed models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/data_preprocessed-meshing. Accessible by Python. (5) Temperate models are located in nonpermaf_huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes three cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_0*-hillslope_*), decomposed 3D models (inside model_1*-subcatchment_*), and full 3D model (inside model_2*-onepiece_*). Two step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_*1-*_spinup_steadystate and model_*2-*_spinup_cycle, separately, which are used to initialize real transient models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the real transient models are located in model_*3-*_transient/. Especially, for two example hillslope models (ID=-11 and 11), additional h5py files are included in model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope-11/, model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope11, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment-11/, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment/11, respectively, which are used to plot the saturation figure (Figure 5) in the manuscript. Accessible by Python. (6) Arctic models are located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes two cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_04-hillslope_transient), and full 3D model (inside model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra). Three step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_01-column_freezeup/, model_02-column_spinup/, model_03-hillslope_spinup/, respectively, which are used to initialize real 2D transient hillslope models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of transient 2D hillslope models are located in model_04-hillslope_transient/. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the full 3D transient model is located in model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra/. The full 3D transient model is initialized by model_02-column_spinup/. Accessible by Python. (7) The MOSART routed discharge results (.csv) under Arctic conditions is located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/MOSART/. Accessible by Python. (8) All Python codes (.py) used to parameterize full 3D model to decomposed 2D models are located in script/. These codes fit with watershed workflow (a watershed delineation tool) v1.4 under the branch gaob/v1.4 from https://github.com/gaobhub/watershed-workflow.git.

EARTH SCIENCE > CRYOSPHERE↗
DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Switched source data from collecting records from each state independently to using the WestDAAT dataset v1.0 - Initial public release Description In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, as well as geospatial data defining the areas in which water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. In addition, while all states make their water rights publicly available, each provides their records in unique formats, meaning that file types, field availability, and terms vary from state to state. This leads to additional challenges to managing resources which cross state lines, or conducting consistent multi-state water analyses. For the first version of HarDWR, we collected the water rights databases from 11 Western States of the United States. In order to preform regional analyses with the collected data, the raw records had to be harmonized into one single format. The Water Data Exchange (WaDE) is a program dedicated to the sharing of water-related data for the Western U.S. in a singular consistent format. Created by the Western States Water Council (WSWC) to facilitate the collection and dissemination of water data among WSWC's member states and the public, WaDE provides an important service for those interested in water resource planning and management in their focus region. Of the services which WaDE provides, the one of the most interesting is the WestDAAT dataset, which is a collection of water rights data provided by the 18 WSWC member states that have been standardized into a single format, much like we had done on a more limited scale with HarDWR v1. For this version of HarDWR we decided to use WestDAAT, specifically a snapshot created in Feburary 2024, as our water rights source data. A full explanation of the benefits gained from this switch can be found in the description of the updated Harmonized Water Rights Records v2.0, but in short it has allowed us to focus more of our efforts on answering research questions and gaining a more realistic understanding of how water rights are allocated. For more information on how the data for WestDAAT was collected, please see the WaDE data summary. Terms of Use While WaDE works directly with the state agencies to collect and standardize the water rights records, the ultimate authority for the water rights data remains the individual states. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. As several of the states update their water rights databases daily, the information provided here is not the latest possible, and should not be used for legal purposes. WestDAAT itself has irregular updates. Additional questions about the data the source states provided should be directed to the respective state agencies (see methods.csv and organization.csv files described below). In addition, although data was presented here was not collected directly from the states, several states requested specifically worked disclaimers when sharing their data. These disclaimers are included here as an acknowledgement from where the water rights data is primarily sourced. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." File Descriptions The unmodified February, 2024 WestDAAT snapshot is composed of nine files. Below is a brief description of each file, as well as how they were utilized for HarDWR. WaDEDataDictionaryTerms.xlsx: As the file's name implies, this is a data dictionary for all of the below named files. This file describes the column names for each of the following files, with the exception of citation.txt which does not have any columns. The descriptions for each file are divided by tab,with the same name as their associated file, within this document. allocationamount.csv: The "main" file of the group, it contains the water right records for each state. Of particular note, each water right is broken down into one or more water allocations. Allocations may be withdrawn from one or more locations, or even multiple allocations associated with a particular location. This is a more subtle and realistic representation of how water is used than what was available in the first version of HarDWR. For the records from some states, this can mean that multiple allocations listed under a single right will appear as rows within this file. citation.txt: A combination of contact information for WaDE personnel, disclaimer about how the data should be used, and guidelines for citing WestDAAT. methods.csv: A file describing the source and method by which WaDE collected water rights data from each state. organization.csv: A file listing the water rights authoritative agencies for each state. sites.csv: This file provides the geographic, and other descriptors, of the physical location of allocations, called 'sites'. To reiterate, it is possible for one allocation to be associated with multiple sites, as well as one site to be associated with multiple allocations. The two descriptors which we were most interested in where the site's coordinates, as well as whether the site was classified as a Point of Diversion (POD) or a Place of Use (POU). As a general rule, PODs are geographic points, while POUs are areas typically represented as property boundaries or irregularly shaped polygons. sites_pouGeometry.csv: For those allocations with a POU site, this file contains the defining points for the associated polygons. variables.csv: A file describing the units in which an allocation's water amount is reported within WestDAAT. This information is essentially a repeat of the 'AllocationFlow_CFS' and 'AllocationVolume_AF' columns within allocationamount.csv, at least for our purposes. watersources: This file describes the source of water from which each site extracts from. For our purposes, this table was used to determine whether the water came from Surface Water, Groundwater, or Unspecified Water.

Lisk, Matthew↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

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

Lisk, Matthew↗