The Certification of Standard Reference Material 1979: Powder Diffraction Line Profile Standard for Crystallite Size Analysis
Abstract not provided
Cline, James P.↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “standardization”
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.
Frequency shifts in a rubidium frequency standard due to coupling to another standard
Highly reliable timing system, such as used on board satellites, may incorporate a hot standby atomic clock besides the active one. RF couplings between them may affect the performance of the active clock. The effect of such couplings between two rubidium atomic clocks was investigated, and it was found that they will add an oscillatory term to the Allan Variance of the active clock, degrading its frequency stability, and that under certain circumstances they may also shift the active clock's operating frequency. These two effects are discussed in detail, and the level of isolation required to render them negligible is established.
Jaduszliwer, Bernardo↗
The National Education Standards Quilts: a display method aiding teachers link NASA education materials to national education standards
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
education↗
NASA Standards Update: Electrical, Electronic, Electromechanical, and Electro-optical (EEEE or Quad-E) Parts Selection, Testing and Derating Standard (NASA-STD-8739.11)
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Peter Majewicz↗
Precision Corrections in the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model Standard Model
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Pierce, D.↗
Radiation Protection Standards: ANSI/HPS N13 Accredited Standards Committee.
Abstract not provided.
Barnett, J. Matthew↗
Standards Roadmapping for Mission Assurance in Commercial Spaceflight
This paper explores the application of established roadmapping approaches in standards planning and roadmap development to support mission assurance objectives. Mission assurance requires proactive planning across multiple domains including technical, schedule, cost, organizational, and policy. The intersection of these domains happens at the enterprise level, and enterprise systems engineering processes can systematically guide mission assurance activities, including development of standards roadmaps. Standards planning and development is a critical contributor to an effective mission assurance strategy, although standards are often developed and adopted reactively. Technology and standards planning is a key Enterprise Process Management activity, as identified by the Systems Engineering Body of Knowledge, and technology and standards roadmaps are strategic tools used to enable that process. Technology roadmapping has proven effective in guiding enterprise architecture and concept design, and standards planning supports enterprise requirements definition and management. However, there are limited methodologies to guide such standards planning activities. The application of technology roadmapping principles to standards planning formalizes the process and establishes a repeatable framework for standards development and integration. The framework development described in this paper fills a methodological gap by adapting proven roadmapping techniques to standards planning. Through a comparison of roadmapping methodologies and a case study analysis, this approach outlines a systematic process for anticipating and planning standards needs. In the case of developing a standards integration roadmap for NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA), technology roadmapping principles were adapted to develop a roadmap framework to allow NASA and OSMA to define an agency-wide standards integration plan for commercial and industry safety and mission assurance standards. The outcome highlights key adaptations required for roadmapping in a standards context and describes the process steps to formalize a standards planning activity. The roadmapping framework adapted for standards development and integration enables more strategic, forward-looking standards planning and allows for better alignment between evolving capabilities and mission assurance requirements. Beyond its application to mission assurance, this methodology can be transferred to other domains requiring standards development, providing a systematic approach that integrates systems engineering principles into policy strategy and decision-making processes.
Enterprise Systems Engineering↗
National Cost-effectiveness of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016
The purpose of this analysis is to examine the cost-effectiveness of the 2016 edition of ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1 (ASHRAE 2016). Standard 90.1 is developed by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. It is the model energy standard for commercial and multi-family residential buildings over three floors (42 USC 6833). PNNL analyzed the cost-effectiveness of changes in Standard 90.1 from 90.1-2013 to 90.1-2016, as applied in commercial buildings across the United States. During the development of new editions of Standard 90.1, the cost-effectiveness of individual changes (addenda) is often calculated to support the deliberations of ASHRAE Standard Standing Project Committee (SSPC) 90.1. The ASHRAE process, however, does not include analysis of the cost-effectiveness of the entire package of addenda from one edition of the standard to the next, which is of particular interest to adopting State and local governments. Providing States with an analysis of cost-effectiveness may encourage more rapid adoption of newer editions of energy codes based on Standard 90.1. This information may also inform the development of future editions of Standard 90.1. To establish the cost-effectiveness of Standard 90.1-2016, three main tasks were addressed: (1) Identification of building elements impacted by the updated standard; (2) Allocation of associated installation, maintenance, and replacement costs; and (3) Cost-effectiveness analysis of required changes In addition to installation, maintenance, and replacement costs, energy cost differences were needed to determine cost-effectiveness. The energy costs for each edition of Standard 90.1 were determined previously under the development of Standard 90.1-2016, as described below. The current analysis builds on the previous PNNL analysis (as outlined in Section 5.2) of the energy use and energy cost saving impacts of Standard 90.1-2016 compared to previous editions. The overall energy savings analysis of Standard 90.1 utilized a suite of 16 prototype EnergyPlus building models in 15 climate locations representing all eight U.S. climate zones. Detailed methodology and overall energy saving results from Standard 90.1-2016 are documented in the DOE technical report titled Energy Savings Analysis: ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (DOE. 2018b).
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
Development of a Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW - 18062
Throughout its 70+-year history, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies have performed a wide mission involving nuclear materials and weapons development, production, testing, and modernization. While the initial mission components relied heavily upon reactor physics and chemistry, the environmental programs have increasingly relied upon development of more accurate and effective measurement methodologies to determine the radiological and chemical properties of the unique waste streams that were generated during the weapons production and testing mission. Over time, the DOE laboratories and former production sites have developed a wide range of site-specific processes and procedures for conducting radiological characterization of dry active waste (DAW) that is managed as low-level radioactive waste. This has resulted in a Complex-wide variability among sites with respect to the methodologies and instrumentation used to characterize individual waste streams. The DAW-type waste was selected for development of a characterization standard since it is a simple, voluminous, and repetitive waste stream with a substantial knowledge base, established experience history at multiple site locations, and the potential for realization of programmatic benefits though standardization. The Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Waste Management Working Group (WMWG) has proposed the development of a new DOE Technical Standard for radiological characterization of DAW. The purpose of the proposed new standard is to provide a technical resource that integrates and enhances the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. A Technical Basis Document (TBD) has been prepared to support the development and utilization of the new standard by providing detailed information for use by site personnel when implementing the guidance provided in the standard. It also provides the rationale for and details concerning the recommended technical approaches for radiological characterization of representative DAW-type waste streams. The TBD will be included as an appendix to the proposed standard. Adoption of a standardized approach to DAW characterization will take advantage of multiple applications for a technology that is both mature and stable. The DAW characterization process is repetitive and lends itself to implementation at a wide range of operating locations - resulting in economies of scale, compliance with regulatory requirements, and consistent implementation of procedures which support design, operations, maintenance, and management of facilities, activities and programs. The purpose of the proposed new Technical Standard for DAW Radiological Characterization is to integrate and improve the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes and will include a comprehensive evaluation and comparison of current radiological characterization methodologies to determine which ones are most reliable and effective in producing relevant and valid data. In view of the long history and participation by several agencies in the regulation of nuclear programs, existing Voluntary Consensus Standards have also been reviewed for relevancy and applicability to the new proposed standard. The proposed new Standard will be developed in concert with existing scientific and regulatory guidance to produce a document that incorporates the state of current knowledge and site practices with a graded approach to applying those methodologies that are applicable and effective for characterizing a wide range of DAW-type wastes - including, but not limited to, debris, low specific activity (LSA) material, and surface contaminated objects (SCO). Under the leadership of the National Laboratory Subgroup of the EFCOG/WMWG), an EFCOG team will develop the proposed technical standard. This process will incorporate the information gathered during preparation of the TBD, which will serve as a technical resource to support the technical approach for selection of DAW characterization methodologies. Preparation of the TBD included a detailed survey of historical site practices and examination of the characterization approaches and measurement methodologies currently being applied to DAW-type wastes. Future activities include the development and submittal of a Project Justification Statement that will be submitted to the DOE Technical Standards Program for review and comment. The EFCOG/WMWG Team will respond to reviewer comments, as required. Following final concurrence by affected organizations through the DOE Technical Standards Coordination process, the EFCOG/WMWG Team will prepare the draft technical standard and respond to comments generated during RevCom review and final format review by the DOE Technical Standards Management Program. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Domestic and International Consensus Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status
The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) were developed based on the lessons-learned from process criticality accidents. These consensus standards were developed to reduce the rate of process criticality accidents in facilities that process, store, handle, or transport fissionable materials by hand. After a significant increase in criticality accidents through the mid-1960s, the rate of criticality accidents decreased as a result of these standards, and the criticality accident rate is extremely low from an industrial safety perspective. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 47 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (almost 26 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American National Standards (ANS) that are prepared and published by the American Nuclear Society and approved by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently 18 standards in the ANS-8 series. Nine ANS-8 standards are either in revision mode or planned for revision. A new standard for the use of nondestructive assay measurements (ANSI/ANS-8.28-2024) for NCS was approved in March of 2024. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 “Nuclear Energy,” Subcommittee 5, “Nuclear Fuel Technology,” and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, four standards are proposed for revision, and four standards are at various stages of development. This paper provides the NCS community with a high-level overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.
Bowen, Douglas G [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000212460026)↗
Development of a Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW - 19552
Since the Manhattan Project, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and its predecessor agencies have performed a wide mission involving nuclear materials and weapons development, production, testing, and modernization. While the initial mission components relied heavily upon reactor physics and chemistry, the environmental programs have increasingly relied upon development of more accurate and effective measurement methodologies to determine the radiological and chemical properties of the unique waste streams that were generated during the weapons production and testing mission. During the ongoing site cleanup program, the DOE laboratories and former production sites have developed a wide range of site-specific processes and procedures for conducting radiological characterization of dry active waste (DAW) that is managed as low-level radioactive waste. This has resulted in a Complex-wide variability among sites with respect to the methodologies and instrumentation used to characterize individual waste streams. The DAW-type waste was selected for development of a characterization standard since it is a simple, voluminous, and repetitive waste stream with a substantial knowledge base, established experience history at multiple site locations, and the potential for realization of programmatic benefits though standardization. Implementation of a consistent, standardized approach to DAW characterization will take advantage of multiple applications for a technology that is both mature and stable. The DAW characterization process is repetitive and lends itself to implementation at a wide range of operating locations - resulting in economies of scale, compliance with regulatory requirements, and consistent implementation of procedures which support design, operations, maintenance, and management of facilities, activities and environmental restoration programs. In response to a request from DOE, the Energy Facility Contractors Group (EFCOG) Waste Management Working Group (WMWG) is supporting the development of a new DOE Technical Standard for Radiological Characterization of DAW. The purpose of the proposed new standard is to provide a technical resource that integrates and enhances the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. An EFCOG/WMWG technical team has prepared a Technical Basis Document (TBD) to support the development and utilization of the new standard. The TBD provides detailed reference information for use by site personnel when implementing the guidance to be provided in the standard. It also provides the rationale for and details concerning the recommended technical approaches for radiological characterization of representative DAW-type waste streams. The TBD is an essential resource and will be included as an appendix to the proposed standard. Formulation of the new standard will draw upon the information contained in the TBD in order to integrate and improve the utilization of current site-specific methodologies and processes. It will also include a comparison of current radiological characterization methodologies to determine which ones are most reliable and effective in producing relevant and valid data. In view of the long history and participation by several agencies in the regulation of nuclear programs, existing Voluntary Consensus Standards have also been identified in the TBD and will be referenced for relevancy and applicability to the new proposed standard. A Project Justification Statement (PJS) was also developed by the EFCOG/WMWG Team. Following internal Team review and approval by EFCOG, the draft PJS was submitted through Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and the DOE Argonne Site Office Technical Standards Managers for review and approval by the DOE Argonne Site Office Manager. After resolution of comments and approval by the Manager, the PJS will be submitted to the DOE/HQ Technical Standards Program Manager (TSPM) for formal coordination. Following resolution of technical comments received during the PJS coordination process and receipt of a technical standards project number assigned by the TSPM, the Team will confirm the overall preparation schedule and develop an Internal Draft Technical Standard for coordination with the DOE Argonne Site Office. Following comment resolution, the Team will then prepare a Coordination Draft for submittal to the DOE Technical Standards RevCom review process and will respond to comments generated during this Complex-wide review. (authors)
12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety – Overview and Status
The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (23 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in revision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.
73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status [Abstract]
The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (22 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in re- vision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.
96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
Comparison of ISO and ANSI/ANS Nuclear Criticality Safety Standards [Slides]
This paper provides a high-level comparison between the international and domestic nuclear criticality safety (NCS) standards, as requested by members of the Nuclear Criticality Safety Division. Currently, there are 18 enacted American National Standards Institute (ANSI)/American National Standards (ANS) standards, and 1 ANSI/ANS standard, in progress. There are 11 NCS standards from the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 (TC85) on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 (SC5) on Nuclear Fuel Cycle, Working Group 8 (WG8). NCS standard revisions are in progress for both standards organizations. The key differences between the ISO TC85/SC5/WG8 and ANSI/ANS-8 consensus NCS standards are summarized. The hard work done by the ANS-8 and WG8 volunteers allows for applicable, high-quality consensus standards for use by the NCS community. This paper defines the current status of each ANSI/ANS and ISO standard, the work in in progress, the revisions/amendments in progress, and WG8/ANS-8 non-standard business in progress. A forthcoming paper will compare the development process for ISO and ANSI/ANS standards.
73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
Overview and status of domestic and international standards for nuclear criticality safety
For many years, the domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for those performing hands-on operations involving fissionable materials. These consensus standards have been crucial to reducing the number of criticality accidents in process facilities. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (39 years ago at this writing) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-Mura, Japan, in 1999 (18 years ago at this writing). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in revision (seven) or maintenance (eleven) cycles, and one standard is currently in development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, Nuclear Criticality Safety. Seven standards are currently available, one standard is in revision, and four standards are at various stages of development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development. (author)
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
ANS-8 Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Standards - Current Initiatives
The nuclear criticality safety (NCS) consensus standards are developed as using rigorous procedures of the Standards Board of the American Nuclear Society. These procedures have been accredited by the American National Standards Institute, Inc., as meeting the criteria for American National Standards. The Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Committee (NCSCC) that approved all 18 NCS consensus standards is balanced to ensure that competent, concerned, and varied interests have had an opportunity to participate. The ANS-8 subcommittee (ANS-8) consists of 17 NCS experts with many years of experience as end users of ANS standards who serve on standard working groups to develop and maintain standards. ANS-8 ensures that the technical content of the standards is adequate for NCS community use. Attempts are made to ensure that ANS-8 consists of NCS professionals with a diverse range of experience such that all standards are applicable to as many sites as possible. ANS-8 is a very active subcommittee, and some active projects in progress are discussed in this paper: basis statement development for all standards, development of a glossary for consistency of definitions across all ANS-8 standards, and Considering the Criticality Safety Support Group (CSSG) Recommendation 2016-04 to the ANS Standards Board for changes in several ANS-8 standards.
96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
Optical media standards for industry
Optical storage is a new and growing area of technology that can serve to meet some of the mass storage needs of the computer industry. Optical storage is characterized by information being stored and retrieved by means of diode lasers. When most people refer to optical storage, they mean rotating disk media, but there are 1 or 2 products that use lasers to read and write to tape. Optical media also usually means removable media. Because of its removability, there is a recognized need for standardization, both of the media and of the recording method. Industry standards can come about in one or more different ways. An industry supported body can sanction and publish a formal standard. A company may ship enough of a product that it so dominates an application or industry that it acquires 'standard' status without an official sanction. Such de facto standards are almost always copied by other companies with varying degrees of success. A governmental body can issue a rule or law that requires conformance to a standard. The standard may have been created by the government, or adopted from among many proposed by industry. These are often known as de jure standards. Standards are either open or proprietary. If approved by a government or sanctioning body, the standard is open. A de facto standard may be either open or proprietary. Optical media is too new to have de facto standards accepted by the marketplace yet. The proliferation of non-compatible media types in the last 5 years of optical market development have convinced many of the need for recognized media standards.
Hallam, Kenneth J.↗