SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “DOCUMENTATION”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

At least 1,027 records · Page 57

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2017

Xyce™ Parallel Electronic Simulator Reference Guide Version 6.8

This document is a reference guide to the Xyce Parallel Electronic Simulator, and is a companion document to the Xyce Users' Guide. The focus of this document is (to the extent possible) exhaustively list device parameters, solver options, parser options, and other usage details of Xyce . This document is not intended to be a tutorial. Users who are new to circuit simulation are better served by the Xyce Users' Guide.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2016

Probabilistic Seismic Hazards Update for LLNL: PSHA Results Report

This report presents the Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) performed for Building 332 at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL), near Livermore, CA by Fugro Consultants, Inc. (FCL). This report is specific to Building 332 only and not to other portions of the Laboratory. The study performed for the LLNL site includes a comprehensive review of recent information relevant to the LLNL regional tectonic setting and regional seismic sources in the vicinity of the site and development of seismic wave transmission characteristics. The Seismic Source Characterization (SSC), documented in Project Report No. 2259-PR-02 (FCL, 2015a), and Ground Motion Characterization (GMC), documented in Project Report No. 2259-PR-06 (FCL, 2015c) were developed in accordance with ANS/ANSI 2.29-2008 Level 2 PSHA guidelines. The ANS/ANSI 2.29-2008 Level 2 PSHA framework is documented in Project Report No. 2259-PR-05 (FCL, 2016a). The Hazard Input Document (HID) for input into the PSHA developed from the SSC is presented in Project Report No. 2259-PR-04 (FCL, 2016b). The site characterization used as input for development of the idealized site profiles including epistemic uncertainty and aleatory variability is presented in Project Report No. 2259-PR-03 (FCL, 2015b).

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2017

Solid-State Lighting 2017 Suggested Research Topics Supplement: Technology and Market Context

A 2017 update to the Solid-State Lighting R&D Plan that is divided into two documents. The first document describes a list of suggested SSL priority research topics and the second document provides context and background, including information drawn from technical, market, and economic studies. Widely referenced by industry and government both here and abroad, these documents reflect SSL stakeholder inputs on key R&D topics that will improve efficacy, reduce cost, remove barriers to adoption, and add value for LED and OLED lighting solutions over the next three to five years, and discuss those applications that drive and prioritize the specific R&D.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2017

Solid-State Lighting 2017 Suggested Research Topics

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2018

Test Problems for Programmed Burn [Slides]

This document presents updated FLAG results for the Kenamond programmed burn test problems. Problem definition, exact solutions for constant detonation velocity, and FLAG results using a Huygens solution are provided in Kenamond’s “Lund High Explosive Programmed Burn Model in the FLAG Code” LA-UR-09-08297. FLAG results using Line-of-Sight (LOS) preconditioning of the Huygens solution are presented in Kenamond’s “Line-of-Sight (LOS) High Explosive Programmed Burn Model in the FLAG Code” LA-UR-09-08296. FLAG has an old, serial, uniform-grid “mapped” 2D DSD solver and a new, inline, parallel, conformal mesh 2D/3D DSD solver. These solvers will be exercised with flat Dn-Kappa relations to facilitate comparison with analytic solutions. The remaining slides document FLAG results with 1) Huygens, 2) Huygens with LOS, 3) old DSD, and 4) new DSD. By design, these geometries are coarsely meshed. Plotting error with respect to the analytic solutions reveals sensitivities to element type, element aspect ratio, boundary conditions, detonator timing, and discontinuous detonation velocity. In all plots of this document, color is absolute error relative to the exact solution. In all plots of this document, contours are burntime isochrones of the numerical solution.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2016

CASL Verification and Validation Plan

This report documents the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of LWRs (CASL) verification and validation plan. The document builds upon input from CASL subject matter experts, most notably the CASL Challenge Problem Product Integrators, CASL Focus Area leaders, and CASL code development and assessment teams. This document will be a living document that will track progress on CASL to do verification and validation for both the CASL codes (including MPACT, CTF, BISON, MAMBA) and for the CASL challenge problems (CIPS, PCI, DNB). The CASL codes and the CASL challenge problems are at differing levels of maturity with respect to validation and verification. The gap analysis will summarize additional work that needs to be done. Additional VVUQ work will be done as resources permit. This report is prepared for the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) CASL program in support of milestone CASL.P13.02.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2018

Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model-Prime Model Model Development Process and Model Description, Revision 0

This document presents the results of revisions to the Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain (RM/SM) hydrostratigraphic framework model (HFM) that was constructed for Corrective Action Unit (CAU) 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain. The revised HFM is described as the “RM/SM HFM-Prime” and serves as the base HFM. The modeling efforts and the revisions described in this report have been performed as part of the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Activity that was initiated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) to assess and evaluate the effects of the underground nuclear tests on groundwater at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and vicinity. This document builds on the content of the internal Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model of the Rainier Mesa Area Phase I' - Base Model: Model Development Process & Data Package Description (N-I, 2014a) and specific document review comments from the UGTA RM/SM CAU Preemptive Review members (Zavarin, 2015). This document provides, where necessary, the justifications and rationale for interpretations and revisions to the hydrostratigraphic framework of the RM/SM CAU. The fundamental objective of the effort described in this report was to revise the RM/SM HFM, particularly in the areas and vicinity of the sub-CAU models, in order to incorporate some of the higher-resolution hydrogeologic interpretations used to construct several of the sub-CAU scale flow and transport models.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2018

Concept of Operations: National Technology Test Bed Network for Water Resource Recovery

There is an urgency to advancing wastewater technologies due to aging water infrastructure and emerging regulations. A crosscutting working group proposes a conceptual design for a test bed network to understand and evaluate wastewater technologies to drive acceptance and deployment of new technologies to enhance performance. The working group includes contributors from the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. National Science Foundation, and the Water Research Foundation (formerly known as the Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). Upgrading today's aging wastewater treatment infrastructure to a new generation of water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) requires the development and deployment of innovative technologies. The path to technology adoption depends on expensive, time consuming, and often repetitive cycles of testing and validation. Existing water resource recovery technology testing facilities (e.g., test beds) are underutilized and cannot, by themselves, broaden technology uptake. It has been proposed that technology adoption could be accelerated by a network linking these test facilities with innovators, manufacturers, utilities, regulators, policymakers, and educators. This document proposes a structure for a National Test bed Network (TBN) for water resource recovery. The concepts for its operation are explored herein. This document identifies drivers to launch a TBN and critical needs for successful implementation of the network. An important driver to technology implementation at WRRFs is the relationship between local utilities and state regulators. The TBN could provide access to validated performance data and facilitate deployment. To link the stakeholders and accelerate deployment, the TBN will require standards for methods, data quality, data management, and data security. These standards will enable validation of performance and will expand the “toolbox” that utilities and regulators could consider. Design, set up, and launch of this toolbox is beyond the scope of operations of utilities and regulators and will likely require external support to achieve full operation. Herein, a pathway is proposed to achieve this full operation. This document defines the function of a WRRF TBN. It also proposes a structure for the TBN to achieve its stated goals and mission. Finally, this document summarizes findings from several sources, including a series of workshops about the TBN concept, operators of test beds in ancillary industries, and discussions with regulators and permitting agencies. A description of this work was published in the peer-reviewed literature (Mihelcic 2017).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Catalog of Environmental Metrics for Hydropower

Evaluating the sustainability of new U.S. hydropower development will necessitate an approach that is comprehensive, transparent and consistent. The ORNL Environmental Metrics for Hydropower (EMH) project team addressed this need by conducting a literature review to extract and analyze a swath of environmental metrics related to hydropower projects. The assessed documents included peer-reviewed journal articles, U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission licensing documents, and two sets of certification documents from the Low Impact Hydropower Institute and the International Hydropower Association. Review of 117 documents led to creation of a database of > 3000 current environmental metrics related to hydropower projects in 285 locations worldwide. Information recorded for each environmental metric was used to map the comprehensiveness of environmental measurement types gathered across primary categories, dam life cycle stages, spatial scales and locations. A majority of metrics were related to water quantity and water quality, a large number of metrics were related to biota and biodiversity, and relatively few metrics were related to the categories of geomorphology, land cover, connectivity and fragmentation, and infrastructure and design. Forty-five subcategories of environmental metrics emerged from our analysis, thereby suggesting an envelope of measurements that are important for understanding the environmental effects of new hydropower projects. The categories and subcategories of environmental metrics represented in each type of literature varied, however. The EMH database summarized in this Catalog will be used to inform stakeholder selection of appropriate environmental metrics for evaluating progress toward collective goals for new U.S. hydropower development.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Configuration Management History Report for the RH LLW Disposal Facility Project

This document outlines and summarized the configuration management process that was used for the RHLLW Disposal Facility design and turnover to operations in support of process readiness reviews. The project was originally solicited as a design-build-operate contract, but awarded as a design-build project only to Areva Federal Services in 2014. The RHLLW requirements were captured in two documents: 1) SPC-1437, Design-Build-Operate Performance Specification for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project; and 2) TFR-483, Technical and Functional Requirements for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Project. TFR-483 and SPC-1437 outlined the requirements for the facility and SPC-1437 documented additional requirements regarding quality, design, and construction. A Code of Record (COR) was generated during conceptual design and updated during final design to document the design-basis codes and standards (INL/EXT-10-20044).

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2017

Preliminary Study on the Suitability of a Second-Order Reconstructed Discontinuous Galerkin Method for RELAP-7 Thermal-Hydraulic Modeling

This document presents a preliminary study on the suitability of a second-order reconstructed discontinuous Galerkin (rDG) method for RELAP-7 thermal-hydraulic modeling. The document begins with a brief description of the governing equations for compressible, two-phase vapor and liquid flow, with a presentation of the seven-equation formulation details. A comparative study between the second-order rDG method and the RELAP-7's finite element method (FEM) with a entropy viscosity method (EVM) based numerical stabilization scheme (namely FEM-EVM) over a series of benchmark test problems is demonstrated. The intent for this suite of test problems is to provide baseline comparison data that demonstrate the performance of 1) the rDG solution and 2) the RELAP-7's FEM-EVM solution (with RELAP-7 code version dated August 15, 2017), on problems from single- to specific, limited two-phase flows. For all the test problems in this document, the rDG solutions were obtained with a second-order, two-step, explicit strong stability preserving Runge-Kutta time integration method. The computational results clearly indicate that the performance of the rDG method is superior to that of the RELAP-7's FEM-EVM method in all the test problems presented. Therefore, as far as the test problems in this document are considered, the second-order rDG method is recommended as an improved solution method option for RELAP-7.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2018

Xyce Parallel Electronic Simulator Reference Guide Version 6.10

This document is a reference guide to the Xyce Parallel Electronic Simulator, and is a companion document to the Xyce Users' Guid [1] . The focus of this document is (to the extent possible) exhaustively list device parameters, solver options, parser options, and other usage details of Xyce . This document is not intended to be a tutorial. Users who are new to circuit simulation are better served by the Xyce Users' Guide.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2018

SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria Thermal Theory Manual - Version 4.50.

This document describes the theoretical foundation of thermal analysis in Sierra Mechanics. The SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria, henceforth referred to as Aria for brevity, was developed at Sandia National Laboratories under the ASC program, and approximates linear and nonlinear continuum models of heat transfer. Aria uses the SIERRA Framework, which provides data management services commonly required by computational mechanics software, and facilitates the development of coupled, multi-mechanics applications for massively parallel computers. The mathematical models in Aria are based heavily on those of COYOTE, a well-established thermal analysis program that was also developed at Sandia and its ASC code predecessor, Calore. Aria, Calore and COYOTE share a significant body of numerical methods, which are described in detail by Reddy and Gartling. Throughout this document, the terms software and implementation are synonymous with the Aria thermal-fluid analysis computer program. Whether one uses Aria to perform heat transfer analysis, or in developing a new capability for the Aria application, this document provides the information needed understand the existing numerical algorithm implementations. Justification for the fundamental assumptions of heat transfer, nor derivation of the energy conservation equations are included in this document. For a more thorough theoretical background, one is referred to one of the many available textbooks, e.g. Another reference, which is freely available in downloadable electronic form, is Lienhard and Lienhard.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2018

SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria Thermal Theory Manual - Version 4.48

This document describes the theoretical foundation of thermal analysis in Sierra Mechanics. The SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria, henceforth referred to as Aria for brevity, was developed at Sandia National Laboratories under the ASC program, and approximates linear and nonlinear continuum models of heat transfer. Aria uses the SIERRA Framework, which provides data management services commonly required by computational mechanics software, and facilitates the development of coupled, multi-mechanics applications for massively parallel computers. The mathematical models in Aria are based heavily on those of COYOTE, a well-established thermal analysis program that was also developed at Sandia and its ASC code predecessor, Calore. Aria, Calore and COYOTE share a significant body of numerical methods, which are described in detail by Reddy and Gartling. Throughout this document, the terms software and implementation are syn onymous with the Aria thermal-fluid analysis computer program. Whether one uses Aria to perform heat transfer analysis, or in developing a new capability for the Aria application, this document provides the information needed understand the existing numerical algorithm implementations. Justification for the fundamental assumptions of heat transfer, nor derivation of the energy conservation equations are included in this document. For a more thorough theoretical background, one is referred to one of the many available textbooks, e.g. Another reference, which is freely available in downloadable electronic form, is Lienhard and Lienhard.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗

DOE OSTI2019

Underground Test Area Activity Preemptive Review Guidance Nevada National Security Site, Nevada

This report is a revision to the preemptive review (PER) guidance originally released as U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) document DOE/NV--1552 in 2016 (NNSA/NFO, 2016). PER committees review various products, including data, documents, software/codes, analyses, and models. PER committees provide technical recommendations to support regulatory decisions that are the responsibility of the DOE Environmental Management (EM) Nevada Program and NDEP. PERs are designed to be adaptable to the varying requirements of individual CAU studies. Their goals include the following: Maintaining high technical standards; ensuring work is technically adequate, competently performed, and documented consistent with other programmatic documents; and verifying that established quality requirements are satisfied. Helping focus CAU studies on UGTA Activity objectives identified in the FFACO by implementing Section 3 of Appendix VI, which includes the UGTA Strategy Flowchart (Figure 3-2) and Process Flow Diagram Dictionary for the UGTA CAUs (Table 3-1). Providing a mechanism for early identification of technical and/or strategy issues that could affect successfully implementing the UGTA strategy. Providing assurance to NDEP that work in progress and final reports are technically sound. Providing independent reviews that allow for a better understanding of the technical work, and result in products that are transparent and sufficient to allow the DOE EM Nevada Program to meet regulatory objectives.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2015

Xyce TM Parallel Electronic Simulator Reference Guide, Version 6.3

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2019

Fiscal Year 2018 Annual Summary Report for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites at the Nevada National Security Site, Nye County, Nevada

The U.S. Department of Energy Standard Disposal Authorization Statement and Tank Closure Documentation (DOE-STD-5002-2017) requires preparation of an Annual Summary Report comparing low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities operations with the Disposal Authorization Statement (DAS) and its supporting technical documents including the performance assessment (PA) and the composite analysis (CA). The fiscal year (FY) 2018 Annual Summary Report for the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) was prepared by reviewing planned and discovered changes, waste receipts, monitoring results, research and development (R&D) results, and the status of DAS conditions and issues to assess the validity of the DASs, PAs, and CAs. The Area 3 RWMS was placed in stand-by in 2006 and remained inactive in FY 2018. Resumption of waste disposal operations is planned for FY 2019. No proposed actions, new information, or discoveries affecting the Area 3 RWMS were identified in FY 2018. No significant changes have occurred since preparation of the most recent special analysis, which indicates a continuing reasonable expectation of meeting the PA performance objectives and measures, and the CA dose constraint in DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” No changes were made to documents supporting the Radioactive Waste Management Basis (RWMB) including the PA, CA, DAS, waste acceptance criteria (WAC), closure plan, monitoring plan, or maintenance plan. Monitoring results for the most recent year with available data, calendar year (CY) 2017, indicate no changes to long-term trends and no results inconsistent with expected performance. R&D results for the Area 3 RWMS Drainage Lysimeter Facility continue to be consistent with the conceptual site model (CSM). All Area 3 RWMS DAS conditions and secondary issues were closed in 2002. The Area 5 RWMS continued disposal operations within the Northern Expansion Area in FY 2018. Eighty-six changes involving proposed actions, new information, or discoveries affecting the Area 5 RWMS PA and CA were screened during FY 2018 in the Unreviewed disposal question (UDQ) process. Twenty-two changes required UDQ evaluations and two changes resulted in unreviewed composite analysis question evaluations. None of the proposed actions, new information, or discoveries had significant impacts on the PAs or CAs. All of the planned changes were implemented. No special analyses were performed, and no changes were made to documents supporting the RWMB including the PA, CA, DAS, WAC, closure plan, monitoring plan, or maintenance plan. Planning continued and construction commenced on development of the Western Expansion Area within the Radioactive Waste Management Complex. All Area 5 RWMS DAS conditions and secondary issues were closed in 2002. The cumulative effects of changes occurring since preparation of the Area 5 RWMS PA and CA were assessed with the current baseline PA/CA model. Model results indicate that there is a reasonable expectation that the PA performance objectives and measures, and the CA dose constraint in DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” can be met. No PA or CA mean result exceeds 50% of its performance objective. Monitoring results and R&D results continue to be consistent with the CSM. Monitoring results for CY 2017 indicate no changes to long-term trends and no results inconsistent with expected performance. R&D results for the Area 5 RWMS Weighing Lysimeter Facility continue to be consistent with the CSM. The FY 2018 review of Area 3 RWMS and Area 5 RWMS disposal operations supports the following conclusions: The Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS PA and associated CA assumptions and conclusions remain valid based on consideration of all changes identified or planned; The reasonable expectation that the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs will meet the performance objectives identified in DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management”, remains valid; and The DAS, based on interpretation of the data collected, monitoring results, and other information, continues to be adequate.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2017

Scaled Wind Farm Technology (SWiFT) Facility (Safety Assessment, Rev. 0)

This Safety Assessment (SA) documents the hazard analysis conducted for the Scaled Wind Farm Technology (SWiFT) Facility. The Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) Authorization Basis process requires Safety Assessment documents for all moderate-hazard industrial facilities. Together with the Primary Hazard Screening (PHS) Document [SNL11A00204), the SA documents the SWiFT safety basis, which is defined as the safety analysis and hazard controls that provide reasonable assurance that a DOE facility can be operated in a manner that adequately protects the workers, collocated/onsite workers, the public, and the environment. The SA specifically addresses the potential impact of hazards on the worker, collocated worker, and public.

17 WIND ENERGY↗