SEARCH · Search NASA
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.
Description of design reference model for space shuttle propulsion system onboard checkout and monitoring equipment to establish design criteria - Vol. 2
The performance, design, and quality assurance requirements for the Earth Observatory Satellite (EOS) Observatory and Ground System program elements required to perform the Land Resources Management (LRM) A-type mission are presented. The requirements for the Observatory element with the exception of the instruments specifications are contained in the first part.
The Ground System requirements for the Land Resources Management (LRM) type-A and type-B missions of the Earth Observatory Satellite (EOS) program are presented. Specifications for the Thematic Mapper data processing are provided (LRM A mission). The specifications also cover the R and D instruments (Thematic Mapper and High Resolution Pointable Imager) data processing for the LRM type-B mission.
Resource management missions to be performed by TERSSE are described. Mission and user requirements are defined along with information flows developed for each major resource management mission. Other topics discussed include: remote sensing platforms, remote sensor requirements, ground system architecture, and such related issues as cloud cover, resolution, orbit mechanics, and aircraft versus satellite.
The UAS-NAS Project hosted a Systems Integration Operationalization (SIO) Industry Day for the SIO Request for Information (RFI) on November 30, 2017 in San Diego, California. This presentation is being presented to the same group as a follow up regarding the progress that the UAS-NAS project has made on the SIO RFI. The presentation will be virtual with a teleconference
System identification is becoming a relevant research area for numerous applications in power grids due to the increasing complexity of the system. A paradigm shift in power system infrastructure driven by renewable energy resources, controllable loads, and new power electronics technologies have given rise to new challenges in power systems operation and control. This increased complexity of power systems and unavailability of physics-based models of most inverter-based resources requires that traditional modeling of power systems approaches be complemented by system identification-based black or grey box modeling techniques. In light of the importance of system identification and little attention paid to the applications of these techniques in transforming power systems, this paper provides a comprehensive review of active probing-based system identification methods in the context of power system applications. It reviews applications of both linear and nonlinear system identification with discussion on their potential and key takeaways. To motivate a further practical use in power systems, the paper provides an example of system identification, to develop a state space model of an unknown plant with step-by-step details. The paper highlights the advantages of using modern power electronics-based sources in the identification process and discusses the emerging research directions for future.
Spectrally selective materials show high technical potential for use as radiative cooling heat exchangers for buildings. Recent work by Stanford University has applied a photonic approach to tailor the optical properties of a coating material. In a prototype test, a radiative cooler based on that photonic material has demonstrated the ability to maintain radiator surfaces at below-ambient temperatures in the presence of intense, direct sunlight. This paper presents the simulation and parametric analysis of photonic radiative cooling system that integrates the use of the photonic radiative cooler and radiant floor cooling via the whole energy simulation program EnergyPlus. The simulation was made for a medium office building with three floors and a total floor area of 5,000 m2. Three key design parameters including the storage tank size, the radiator area, and the number of floors are expected to have a large impact on system performance were investigated in this paper. The results show that the percentage of cooling electricity savings from the photonic radiative cooling system relative to a reference variable-air-volume system has a linear relationship with the radiator area, and a quadratic correlation with both tank size and the number of floors. The findings from this parametric analysis are valuable to understand how component sizing affects system performance.
System safety assessment is defined in NPR 8715.3C, NASA General Safety Program Requirements as a disciplined, systematic approach to the analysis of risks resulting from hazards that can affect humans, the environment, and mission assets. Achievement of the highest practicable degree of system safety is one of NASA's highest priorities. Traditionally, system safety assessment at NASA and elsewhere has focused on the application of a set of safety analysis tools to identify safety risks and formulate effective controls.1 Familiar tools used for this purpose include various forms of hazard analyses, failure modes and effects analyses, and probabilistic safety assessment (commonly also referred to as probabilistic risk assessment (PRA)). In the past, it has been assumed that to show that a system is safe, it is sufficient to provide assurance that the process for identifying the hazards has been as comprehensive as possible and that each identified hazard has one or more associated controls. The NASA Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel (ASAP) has made several statements in its annual reports supporting a more holistic approach. In 2006, it recommended that "... a comprehensive risk assessment, communication and acceptance process be implemented to ensure that overall launch risk is considered in an integrated and consistent manner." In 2009, it advocated for "... a process for using a risk-informed design approach to produce a design that is optimally and sufficiently safe." As a rationale for the latter advocacy, it stated that "... the ASAP applauds switching to a performance-based approach because it emphasizes early risk identification to guide designs, thus enabling creative design approaches that might be more efficient, safer, or both." For purposes of this preface, it is worth mentioning three areas where the handbook emphasizes a more holistic type of thinking. First, the handbook takes the position that it is important to not just focus on risk on an individual basis but to consider measures of aggregate safety risk and to ensure wherever possible that there be quantitative measures for evaluating how effective the controls are in reducing these aggregate risks. The term aggregate risk, when used in this handbook, refers to the accumulation of risks from individual scenarios that lead to a shortfall in safety performance at a high level: e.g., an excessively high probability of loss of crew, loss of mission, planetary contamination, etc. Without aggregated quantitative measures such as these, it is not reasonable to expect that safety has been optimized with respect to other technical and programmatic objectives. At the same time, it is fully recognized that not all sources of risk are amenable to precise quantitative analysis and that the use of qualitative approaches and bounding estimates may be appropriate for those risk sources. Second, the handbook stresses the necessity of developing confidence that the controls derived for the purpose of achieving system safety not only handle risks that have been identified and properly characterized but also provide a general, more holistic means for protecting against unidentified or uncharacterized risks. For example, while it is not possible to be assured that all credible causes of risk have been identified, there are defenses that can provide protection against broad categories of risks and thereby increase the chances that individual causes are contained. Third, the handbook strives at all times to treat uncertainties as an integral aspect of risk and as a part of making decisions. The term "uncertainty" here does not refer to an actuarial type of data analysis, but rather to a characterization of our state of knowledge regarding results from logical and physical models that approximate reality. Uncertainty analysis finds how the output parameters of the models are related to plausible variations in the input parameters and in the modeling assumptions. The evaluation of unrtainties represents a method of probabilistic thinking wherein the analyst and decision makers recognize possible outcomes other than the outcome perceived to be "most likely." Without this type of analysis, it is not possible to determine the worth of an analysis product as a basis for making decisions related to safety and mission success. In line with these considerations the handbook does not take a hazard-analysis-centric approach to system safety. Hazard analysis remains a useful tool to facilitate brainstorming but does not substitute for a more holistic approach geared to a comprehensive identification and understanding of individual risk issues and their contributions to aggregate safety risks. The handbook strives to emphasize the importance of identifying the most critical scenarios that contribute to the risk of not meeting the agreed-upon safety objectives and requirements using all appropriate tools (including but not limited to hazard analysis). Thereafter, emphasis shifts to identifying the risk drivers that cause these scenarios to be critical and ensuring that there are controls directed toward preventing or mitigating the risk drivers. To address these and other areas, the handbook advocates a proactive, analytic-deliberative, risk-informed approach to system safety, enabling the integration of system safety activities with systems engineering and risk management processes. It emphasizes how one can systematically provide the necessary evidence to substantiate the claim that a system is safe to within an acceptable risk tolerance, and that safety has been achieved in a cost-effective manner. The methodology discussed in this handbook is part of a systems engineering process and is intended to be integral to the system safety practices being conducted by the NASA safety and mission assurance and systems engineering organizations. The handbook posits that to conclude that a system is adequately safe, it is necessary to consider a set of safety claims that derive from the safety objectives of the organization. The safety claims are developed from a hierarchy of safety objectives and are therefore hierarchical themselves. Assurance that all the claims are true within acceptable risk tolerance limits implies that all of the safety objectives have been satisfied, and therefore that the system is safe. The acceptable risk tolerance limits are provided by the authority who must make the decision whether or not to proceed to the next step in the life cycle. These tolerances are therefore referred to as the decision maker's risk tolerances. In general, the safety claims address two fundamental facets of safety: 1) whether required safety thresholds or goals have been achieved, and 2) whether the safety risk is as low as possible within reasonable impacts on cost, schedule, and performance. The latter facet includes consideration of controls that are collective in nature (i.e., apply generically to broad categories of risks) and thereby provide protection against unidentified or uncharacterized risks.
The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) invests millions of dollars in spacecraft and ground system development, and in mission operations in the pursuit of scientific knowledge of the universe. In recent years, NASA sent a probe to Mars to study the Red Planet's upper atmosphere, obtained high resolution images of Pluto, and it is currently preparing to find new exoplanets, rendezvous with an asteroid, and bring a sample of the asteroid back to Earth for analysis. The success of these missions is enabled by mission assurance. In turn, mission assurance is backed by information assurance. The information systems supporting NASA missions must be reliable as well as secure. NASA - like every other U.S. Federal Government agency - is required to manage the security of its information systems according to federal mandates, the most prominent being the Federal Information Security Management Act (FISMA) of 2002 and the legislative updates that followed it. Like the management of enterprise information technology (IT), federal information security management takes a "one-size fits all" approach for protecting IT systems. While this approach works for most organizations, it does not effectively translate into security of highly specialized systems such as those supporting NASA missions. These systems include command and control (C&C) systems, spacecraft and instrument simulators, and other elements comprising the ground segment. They must be carefully configured, monitored and maintained, sometimes for several years past the missions' initially planned life expectancy, to ensure the ground system is protected and remains operational without any compromise of its confidentiality, integrity and availability. Enterprise policies, processes, procedures and products, if not effectively tailored to meet mission requirements, may not offer the needed security for protecting the information system, and they may even become disruptive to mission operations. Certain protective measures for the general enterprise may not be as efficient within the ground segment. This is what the authors have concluded through observations and analysis of patterns identified from the various security assessments performed on NASA missions such as MAVEN, OSIRIS-REx, New Horizons and TESS, to name a few. The security audits confirmed that the framework for managing information system security developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) for the federal government, and adopted by NASA, is indeed effective. However, the selection of the technical, operational and management security controls offered by the NIST model - and how they are implemented - does not always fit the nature and the environment where the ground system operates in even though there is no apparent impact on mission success. The authors observed that unfit controls, that is, controls that are not necessarily applicable or sufficiently effective in protecting the mission systems, are often selected to facilitate compliance with security requirements and organizational expectations even if the selected controls offer minimum or non-existent protection. This paper identifies some of the standard security controls that can in fact protect the ground system, and which of them offer little or no benefit at all. It offers multiple scenarios from real security audits in which the controls are not effective without, of course, disclosing any sensitive information about the missions assessed. In addition to selection and implementation of controls, the paper also discusses potential impact of recent legislation such as the Federal Information Security Modernization Act (FISMA) of 2014 - aimed at the enterprise - on the ground system, and offers other recommendations to Information System Owners (ISOs).
The topics discussed are the UAS-NAS project life-cycle and ARMD thrust flow down, as well as the UAS environments and how we operate in those environments. NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center at Edwards, CA, is leading a project designed to help integrate unmanned air vehicles into the world around us. The Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the National Airspace System project, or UAS in the NAS, will contribute capabilities designed to reduce technical barriers related to safety and operational challenges associated with enabling routine UAS access to the NAS. The project falls under the Integrated Systems Research Program office managed at NASA Headquarters by the agency's Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. NASA's four aeronautics research centers - Armstrong, Ames Research Center, Langley Research Center, and Glenn Research Center - are part of the technology development project. With the use and diversity of unmanned aircraft growing rapidly, new uses for these vehicles are constantly being considered. Unmanned aircraft promise new ways of increasing efficiency, reducing costs, enhancing safety and saving lives 460265main_ED10-0132-16_full.jpg Unmanned aircraft systems such as NASA's Global Hawks (above) and Predator B named Ikhana (below), along with numerous other unmanned aircraft systems large and small, are the prime focus of the UAS in the NAS effort to integrate them into the national airspace. Credits: NASA Photos 710580main_ED07-0243-37_full.jpg The UAS in the NAS project envisions performance-based routine access to all segments of the national airspace for all unmanned aircraft system classes, once all safety-related and technical barriers are overcome. The project will provide critical data to such key stakeholders and customers as the Federal Aviation Administration and RTCA Special Committee 203 (formerly the Radio Technical Commission for Aeronautics) by conducting integrated, relevant system-level tests to adequately address safety and operational challenges of national airspace access by unmanned aircraft systems, or UAS. In the process, the project will work with other key stakeholders to define necessary deliverables and products to help enable such access. Within the project, NASA is focusing on five sub-projects. These five focus areas include assurance of safe separation of unmanned aircraft from manned aircraft when flying in the national airspace; safety-critical command and control systems and radio frequencies to enable safe operation of UAS; human factors issues for ground control stations; airworthiness certification standards for UAS avionics and integrated tests and evaluation designed to determine the viability of emerging UAS technology. Five Focus Areas of the UAS Integration in the NAS Project Separation Assurance Provide an assessment of how planned Next Generation Air Transportation System (NextGen) separation assurance systems, with different functional allocations, perform for UAS in mixed operations with manned aircraft Assess the applicability to UAS and the performance of NASA NextGen separation assurance systems in flight tests with realistic latencies and uncertain trajectories Assess functional allocations ranging from today's ground-based, controller-provided aircraft separation to fully autonomous airborne self-separation Communications Develop data and rationale to obtain appropriate frequency spectrum allocations to enable safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Develop and validate candidate secure safety-critical command and control system/subsystem test equipment for UAS that complies with UAS international/national frequency regulations, standards and recommended practices and minimum operational and aviation system performance standards for UAS Perform analysis to support recommendations for integration of safety-critical command and control systems and air traffic control communications to ensure safe and efficient operation of UAS in the NAS Human Systems Integration Develop a research test bed and database to provide data and proof of concept for GCS - ground control station - operations in the NAS Coordinate with standards organizations to develop human-factors guidelines for GCS operation in the NAS Certification Define a UAS classification scheme and approach to determining Federal Aviation Regulation airworthiness requirements applicable to all UAS digital avionics Provide hazard and risk-related data to support development of type design criteria and best development practices Integrated Tests and Evaluation Integrate and test mature concepts from technical elements to demonstrate and test viability Evaluate the performance of technology development in a relevant environment (full-mission, human-in-the-loop simulations and flight tests)
NASA's Human Research Program's Exploration Medical Capabilities (ExMC) element is defining the medical system needs for exploration class missions. ExMC's Systems Engineering (SE) team will play a critical role in successful design and implementation of the medical system into exploration vehicles. The team's mission is to "Define, develop, validate, and manage the technical system design needed to implement exploration medical capabilities for Mars and test the design in a progression of proving grounds." Development of the medical system is being conducted in parallel with exploration mission architecture and vehicle design development. Successful implementation of the medical system in this environment will require a robust systems engineering approach to enable technical communication across communities to create a common mental model of the emergent engineering and medical systems. Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE) improves shared understanding of system needs and constraints between stakeholders and offers a common language for analysis. The ExMC SE team is using MBSE techniques to define operational needs, decompose requirements and architecture, and identify medical capabilities needed to support human exploration. Systems Modeling Language (SysML) is the specific language the SE team is utilizing, within an MBSE approach, to model the medical system functional needs, requirements, and architecture. Modeling methods are being developed through the practice of MBSE within the team, and tools are being selected to support meta-data exchange as integration points to other system models are identified. Use of MBSE is supporting the development of relationships across disciplines and NASA Centers to build trust and enable teamwork, enhance visibility of team goals, foster a culture of unbiased learning and serving, and be responsive to customer needs. The MBSE approach to medical system design offers a paradigm shift toward greater integration between vehicle and the medical system and directly supports the transition of Earth-reliant ISS operations to the Earth-independent operations envisioned for Mars. Here, we describe the methods and approach to building this integrated model.
The application of machine learning (ML) to power and energy systems (PES) is being researched at an astounding rate, resulting in a significant number of recent additions to the literature. As the infrastructure of electric power systems evolves, so does interest in deploying ML techniques to PES. However, despite growing interest, the limited number of reported real-world applications suggests that the gap between research and practice is yet to be fully bridged. To help highlight areas where this gap could be narrowed, this article discusses the challenges and opportunities in developing and adapting ML techniques for modern electric power systems, with a particular focus on power distribution systems. These systems play a crucial role in transforming the electric power sector and accommodating emerging distributed technologies to mitigate the impacts of climate change and accelerate the transition to a sustainable energy future. The objective of this article is not to provide an exhaustive overview of the state-of-the-art in the literature, but rather to make the topic accessible to readers with an engineering or computer science background and an interest in the field of ML for PES, thereby encouraging cross-disciplinary research in this rapidly developing field. To this end, the article discusses the ways in which ML can contribute to addressing the evolving operational challenges facing power distribution systems and identifies relevant application areas that exemplify the potential for ML to make near-term contributions. At the same time, key considerations for the practical implementation of ML in power distribution systems are discussed, along with suggestions for several potential future directions.
Power system black start readiness is part of the system planning. Utility planners perform periodic studies to assess if their power system is capable of total restoration following a black out. Hydro and diesel generators are the most commonly used black start capable resources by power utilities. However, with increasing penetration of solar generation, inverter-based resources can be considered to provide black start capability. Since the solar inverters can be located at multiple locations throughout the power system, and in view of their unique characteristics, an optimal real-time capable plan is helpful for system operators for faster black start. Black start optimization is a multi stage mixed-integer non-linear optimization which is extremely hard to solve. In this paper, we propose an optimal black start methodology that is easier to solve and scalable in real-time. We demonstrate the proposed methodology on two test systems and illustrate how inverter-based resources can contribute and improve power system restoration.
Proportional to the scale increases in HPC systems, many scientific applications are becoming increasingly data intensive, and parallel I/O has become one of the dominant factors impacting the large-scale HPC application performance. On a typical large-scale HPC system, we have observed that the lack of a global workload coordination coupled with the shared nature of storage systems cause load imbalance and resource contention over the end-to-end I/O paths resulting in severe performance degradation. I/O load imbalance on HPC systems is generally a self-inflicted wound and mostly occurs between the I/O paths and resources consumed by each individual job. In this paper, we introduce TAPP-IO, a dynamic, shared load balancing framework for mitigating resource contention. TAPP-IO extends our previous work and solves two major limitations: First, it transparently intercepts file creation calls during runtime to balance the workload over all available storage targets. The usage of TAPP-IO requires no application source code modifications and is independent from any I/O middleware. The framework can be applied to almost any HPC platform and is suitable for systems that lack a centralized file system resource manager. Second, the framework proposes a new placement strategy to support not only file-per-process I/O, but also single shared file I/O. This opens the door to a new class of scientific applications that can leverage the placement library for improved performance. We demonstrate the effectiveness of our integration on the Titan system at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Our experiments with a synthetic benchmark and real-world HPC workload show that, even in a noisy production environment, TAPP-IO can improve large-scale application performance significantly.
The high power requirement associated with overall operation of regenerative life support systems is a critical Z:p technological challenge. Optimization of individual processors alone will not be sufficient to produce an optimized system. System studies must be used in order to improve the overall efficiency of life support systems. Current research efforts at NASA Ames Research Center are aimed at developing approaches for reducing system power and energy usage in advanced life support systems. System energy integration and energy reuse techniques are being applied to advanced life support, in addition to advanced control methods for efficient distribution of power and thermal resources. An overview of current results of this work will be presented. The development of integrated system designs that reuse waste heat from sources such as crop lighting and solid waste processing systems will reduce overall power and cooling requirements. Using an energy integration technique known as Pinch analysis, system heat exchange designs are being developed that match hot and cold streams according to specific design principles. For various designs, the potential savings for power, heating and cooling are being identified and quantified. The use of state-of-the-art control methods for distribution of resources, such as system cooling water or electrical power, will also reduce overall power and cooling requirements. Control algorithms are being developed which dynamically adjust the use of system resources by the various subsystems and components in order to achieve an overall goal, such as smoothing of power usage and/or heat rejection profiles, while maintaining adequate reserves of food, water, oxygen, and other consumables, and preventing excessive build-up of waste materials. Reductions in the peak loading of the power and thermal systems will lead to lower overall requirements. Computer simulation models are being used to test various control system designs.
Assimilation systems synthesize diverse in-situ and satellite data streams into full four-dimensional state estimates by combining the strengths of each data set and also of the model. The resulting analysis provides an integrated view of the information in the various observations as well as derived estimates of unobserved quantities. Assimilation systems are particularly important for the ocean where subsurface observations, even today, are sparse and intermittent compared with the scales needed to represent ocean variability and where satellites only sense the surface. Increasingly, models and assimilation systems are being used to provide information about the current observing system and to help in the design plans for new observations. Whether it is as a user of observations or a contributor to evaluation of the observing system, ocean synthesis and assimilation systems are now an integral part of the global ocean observing and information system. Major advances have been made over the last decade under the auspices of WCRP's Climate Variability and Predictability Project (CLIVAR) and the Global Ocean Data Assimilation Experiment (GODAE). In addition to advances in the assimilation systems, there have been major developments in the observing system, with satellite altimetry, the tropical moored buoy arrays in the Pacific and Atlantic, and more recently Argo. These developments have led to significant advances in our understanding and prediction of ocean variations at both mesoscale and climate scales. Many challenges remain. Some of these challenges lie in the observations themselves, some in the assimilation systems that, even in the more recent era of unprecedented observations from satellite altimetry and Argo, provide different views of climate variations. Yet there are many examples of successful applications from ocean assimilation products. Use of these systems for assessing the observing system helps identify the strengths of each observation type, and indicates that none of the current observations is redundant. Indeed, the indication is that the ocean remains under-sampled and that further improvements in the observing system are needed for both climate monitoring and prediction. Future developments will be increasingly towards consistent analyses across components of the Earth system using, e.g., coupled atmosphere-ocean models.
A turbine airfoil cooling system including a low pressure cooling system and a high pressure cooling system for a turbine airfoil of a gas turbine engine is disclosed. In at least one embodiment, the low pressure cooling system may be an ambient air cooling system, and the high pressure cooling system may be a compressor bleed air cooling system. In at least one embodiment, the compressor bleed air cooling system in communication with a high pressure subsystem that may be a snubber cooling system positioned within a snubber. A delivery system including a movable air supply tube may be used to separate the low and high pressure cooling subsystems. The delivery system may enable high pressure cooling air to be passed to the snubber cooling system separate from low pressure cooling fluid supplied by the low pressure cooling system to other portions of the turbine airfoil cooling system.
Energy efficiency upgrades to buildings to date through avenues such as utility incentive programs have been largely limited to component-based products (e.g., lamps, RTUs). While some utilities do provide ‘custom’ incentive programs with whole building and system level technical assistance, these programs require deeper levels of analysis, resulting in higher program costs. This results in custom programs being restricted to utilities with greater resources, and are typically applied mainly to large or energy-intensive facilities, leaving much of the market without cost effective access and incentives for these solutions. In addition, with increasingly stringent energy codes, cost effective component-based solutions that achieve significant savings are dwindling. Integrated building systems (e.g., integrated façade, HVAC and/or lighting solutions) can deliver higher savings (Regnier et al. 2017) that translate into large sector-wide savings if deployed at the scale of these programs. However, systems application poses a number of challenges – energy savings assessments are inherently more complex and are not easily suited to the deemed measure model, and implementation of systems can be more disruptive. This paper presents the outcomes of a project to develop validated utility incentive program packages for three specific integrated building systems, in collaboration with ComEd, a consortium of California Public Owned Utilities (CA POUs) (Northern California Power Agency(NCPA) and the Southern California Public Power Authority(SCPPA)), and Xcel Energy (CO, MN). Previous work described the potential for energy savings of these systems at the individual and market level, early test findings for the task-ambient lighting system, and described the work products to develop utility incentive programs (Regnier et al. 2016). This paper presents validated end use energy savings of all three systems showing energy savings of ~20% for automated shading combined with daylight dimming (does not include light fixture retrofit savings); 30-46% for task-ambient lighting systems combined with plug load occupancy controls, depending on technology package and office building size (no daylight dimming impacts); and ~94% in the south-façade daylit zone for workstation specific lighting systems with daylight dimming (including lighting retrofit and task tuning). Using a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reference building model (DOE 2018), this translates to whole building savings of 2-5% (large-medium commercial), 12-23% (large-small commercial), and 13-15% (medium-large commercial) for these systems respectively. Early findings from the utilities in deploying these systems through their incentive programs indicate that deployment methods such as direct install programs might be best suited for these integrated systems. Further, early findings from a scoping study across custom utility programs and federal retrofit programs indicate that component level retrofits are still prevalent even in these programs, pointing towards an opportunity for deeper energy savings deployment. High performance retrofit case studies demonstrate that deeper energy savings is possible through integrated approaches. Market stakeholder interviews indicate however that there is generally a low level of awareness of the potential for energy savings of these three integrated systems.