SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Open Source Open Science”

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.

1,553 records · Page 87

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2018

Fluid Dynamics Effects on Microstructure Prediction in Single Laser Tracks for Additive Manufacturing

The Laser Powder Bed Fusion Additive Manufacturing (LPBFAM) is one of the most important processes for the production of lightweight, cost-effective, complex, and high-performance enduse parts. At present, the cost and time associated with LPBFAM process development is very high due to a lack of fundamental process understanding. In this project, a multi-physics model was developed on a highly parallel open-source code, Truchas, with the ultimate goal of providing experimentally validated process maps for tailoring microstructure to achieve desired performance for LPBFAM. As a critical step towards fully LPBFAM modeling, modeling of single-track laser fusion (STLF) were conducted. Multi-physics simulations were conducted using Truchas for STLF by considering heat transfer, phase-change, fluid dynamics, surface tension phenomena, and evaporation. In order to assess the effect of the fluid dynamics on the solidification and ensuing microstructure, a heat transfer-and-solidification-only (HTS) model and a fully coupled heat-transfer-solidification and fluid-dynamics (HTS-FD) model were considered. In the HTS_FD model, the fluid flow was considered to be laminar while the molten alloy surface is assumed to be flat and non-deformable. This study is one the first attempt to understand the effect of the fluid flow on microstructure in STLF and LPBFAM. The results show that the fluid flow affects the solidification and ensuing microstructure in STLF. In order to validate Truchas for STLF and LPBFAM modeling, experimental data, which was obtained at GE Global Research (GEGR) for liquid pool shape and microstructure, were compared with those from numerical simulation results. For the keyhole regime case, numerical simulation results indicate that the melt-pool shape was typical to that of the conduction case with very large deviations from the measured melt-pool depths. Two sensitivity studies were conducted by varying the evaporation flux and the surface tension coefficient at fixed laser absorptivities of 0.5 and 0.3, respectively. The minimum value for the overall combined error, between the calculated values with the HTS_FD model and measured values for both the width and height of the melt-pool, was attained for a surface tension coefficient of -0.75e-4 N/m. An analytical solidification model for the columnar-to-equiaxed transition (CET) in rapid solidification was used to assess the microstructure variation within the melt-pool. From numerical simulation results, thermal gradient, G, and solidification velocity, V, were obtained in order to predict the microstructure type (e.g., dendritic, cellular). For the fluid-flow HTS_FD model, G was found to exhibit a maximum at the extremity of the solidified pool (i.e., at the free surface). By contrast, for HTS simulations, G was found to exhibit a maximum around the entire edge of the solidified pool. For the HTS_FD simulations, the minimum values of the cooling rate, GV, were found to be approximately half than their corresponding values for HTS simulations. By contrast with the min GV values, the maximum values for GV were found to occur for the HTS_FD simulations. Thus, HTS_FD simulations were found to exhibit a wider range of cooling rates than the HTS simulations. Concerning the solidification maps, the variation of the solidification velocity, V, as function of the thermal gradient, G, was obtained. It was found that the fluid flow model results (HTS_FD) exhibited an increased spread in the V(G) variation within the melt pool with respect to the HTS model results (without the fluid flow). A preliminary correlation model for the primary dendrite arm spacing (PDAS) based on a power law dependence on thermal gradient and solidification velocity was used to estimate PDAS from HTS and HTS_FD simulations. For low laser powers and low laser speeds, the PDAS obtained 6 with the fluid dynamics model (HTS_FD) was larger by more than 30% with respect to the PDAS calculated with the simple HTS model. In the second part of the project, fifty-seven simulations were conducted in order to obtain data on microstructure variables that can be used for process map development. In order to cover the entire processing space, thirty-three cases were selected STLF process simulations at six power levels and six laser scanning speeds. The 57 STLF process simulations were conducted as follows: 33 simulations with the heat-transfer-only (HTS) model and 24 simulations with the fluid flow model (HTS_FD). The solidification map data shows that for all simulations, a columnar dendritic microstructure would be expected. It was found that the minimum, average, and maximum thermal gradient exhibit exponential variations with respect to a process variable defined as the ratio between the power and square root of scan speed.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

CERF↗

DOE OSTI2024

HydraGNN_Predictive_GFM_2024 - Ensemble of predictive graph foundation models for ground state atomistic materials modeling

We provide the ensemble of fifteen pre-trained graph foundation models (GFMs) for atomistic materials modeling applications. Each one of the fifteen GFMs has been trained on five open-source datasets that (once aggregated) amount to over 154 million atomistic structures, which cover over two-thirds of the natural elements of the periodic table and that comprises a broad set of organic and inorganic compounds. This vast set of atomistic structures comprises ground state configurations that are dynamically stable (i.e., equilibrated structures with atomic forces approximately close to zero values) as well as dynamically unstable structures (i.e., non-equilibrium structures with non-negligible non-zero values of atomic forces). The ensemble of datasets aggregated does NOT include excited states. The datasets have been curated to remove atomistic structures with spectral norm of the force tensor above 100 eV/angstrom. Moreover, a linear term of the energy was computed for each dataset using a linear regression model that uses the chemical concentration of each natural element as regressor. The linear term predicted by the linear regression model has been subtracted from each original energy value to perform a re-alignment of the energy values across different electronic structures approximation theories performed to generate the diverse multi-source, multi-fidelity datasets. The folder "ADIOS_files" contains the set of pre-processed datasets in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used for the development and training of GFMs in this work. The "ADIOS_files" directory contains 6 sub-directories named as follows: - ANI1x-v3.bp - MPTrj-v3.bp - OC2020-20M-v3.bp - OC2020-v3.bp - OC2022-v3.bp - qm7x-v3.bp Each sub-directory contains the pre-processed datasets converted in Adaptable I/O System (ADIOS) format (https://www.exascaleproject.org/research-project/adios/) that have been used to the development, training, and performance testing of the ensemble go predictive graph foundation models. Each GFM was developed using HydraGNN (https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN) as underlying graph neural network (GNN) architecture. The multi-task learning (MTL) capability of HydraGNN was used to simultaneously train the GFMs on labeled values for direct predictions of energy (a total system property of an atomistic structure that measures the chemical stability) and atomic forces (an atomic level property of an atomistic structure that measures the dynamical stability). The hyper parameters of the GFM have been tuned using scalable hyperparameter optimization (HPO) algorithms implemented in the software DeepHyper (https://github.com/deephyper/deephyper). The pre-training of each HPO trial was performed using distributed data parallelism (DDP) to scale the training across 128 compute nodes of the exascale OLCF supercomputer Frontier. Each HPO trial was trained only for 10 epochs and an early stopping was performed to avoid wasting significant computational resources on GNN architectures that were clearly underperforming. For each HPO trial, the 'omnistat' tool developed by (AMD Research - Advanced Micro Device) was used to measure the total energy consumption in kWh. The ensemble of GFMs was obtained by selecting the fifteen best performing HPO trials. Four models have been selected for their clear advantage in accuracy, and these are the GFMs with IDs 229, 156, 147, 260. Additional eleven models have been selected based on judicious balance between accuracy and energy consumption needed for training, and these are the GFMs with IDs 165, 78, 137, 1, 175, 171, 181, 67, 179, 167, 351. Each selected GFM of the ensemble was continued to cumulate a total of at most 30 epochs. In some cases, the total number of epochs actually performed was les than 30 due to two combined factors: (1) the size of the GFM (i.e., the number of model parameters to train) and (2) the total wall-clock time for which the computational resources could be allocated on OLCF-Frontier. The "Ensemble_of_models" directory contains 15 sub-directories named as follows: - gfm_0.229 - gfm_0.156 - gfm_0.147 - gfm_0.260 - gfm_0.165 - gfm_0.78 - gfm_0.137 - gfm_0.1 - gfm_0.175 - gfm_0.171 - gfm_0.181 - gfm_0.67 - gfm_0.179 - gfm_0.167 - gfm_0.351 Each one of these sub-directories refers to one of the fifteen HPO trials that have been selected to continue the pre-training with at most 30 epochs. With each sub-directory associated with a specific HPO trial, the following files can be found: - config.json: file for argument parsing to develop and train an HydraGNN architecture - gfm_0.ID_epoch_N.pk: file with model parameters for HPO ID trial after N epochs of training The ensemble of fifteen GFM architectures was used for (1) ensemble averaging to stabilize the predictions of energy and atomic forces after pre-training for post-processing analysis and (2) ensemble uncertainty quantification (UQ). The code used to develop, pre-train, and load the pre-trained models for post-processing analysis is available on the ORNL-GitHub at the following link: https://github.com/ORNL/HydraGNN/tree/Predictive_GFM_2024

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2025

Initial in-orbit operation of the soft X-ray spectrometer Resolve onboard the X-ray imaging and spectroscopy mission satellite

The X-Ray Imaging and Spectroscopy Mission satellite was launched on September 6, 2023 (UT). Its Resolve instrument is a high-resolution X-ray spectrometer enabled by a microcalorimeter array thermally anchored to a 50-mK heat sink. Many sensitive, critical sub-systems comprise Resolve, including a multistage cryogenic cooling system, thin-film aperture filters, low-noise electronics, on-board signal processing, and several sources of X-rays for calibration. We summarize the initial on-orbit power-on and checkout of Resolve that commenced immediately after launch. Soon after launch, the cryocoolers were activated, and their operation was successfully established. On October 9, 2023, the first cycle of the adiabatic demagnetization refrigerator was carried out, bringing the sensors to their steady-state operational temperatures. Following this, the energy resolution at 5.9 keV was successfully measured. The energy scale of the system is highly sensitive to the thermal environment surrounding both the sensors and their analog electronics. Gain correction was performed using reference X-ray lines from onboard calibration sources. To optimize cooler frequency settings, noise spectra were collected across a range of frequencies, and the most suitable frequency pair was selected based on the in-orbit environment. During the final phase of the checkout, an attempt was made to open the gate valve, which is designed to protect the Dewar’s interior from external pressure during ground operations and launch. Unfortunately, this attempt was unsuccessful. As a result, the checkout process was temporarily paused, and a stable operational strategy was subsequently developed to enable Resolve to function effectively with the gate valve remaining closed.

X-ray micro-calorimeter↗

DOE OSTI2026

Realizing the scientific program with polarized ion beams at the future BNL Electron Ion Collider

Polarized ion beams at the Electron Ion Collider (EIC) are essential to address some of the most important open questions at the twenty-first century frontiers of understanding of the fundamental structure of matter. Here, in this work, we summarize the science case and identify polarized 2 H, 3 He, 6 Li, and 7 Li ion beams as critical technology that will enable experiments which address the most important science. Furthermore, we discuss the required ion polarimetry and spin manipulation at the EIC. The current EIC accelerator design is presented. We identify a significant research and development effort across national and international laboratories and universities that is required over about a decade to realize the polarized ion beams and estimate (based on previous experience) that it will require about 20 full-time equivalent (FTE) over 10 years (or a total of about 200 FTE-years) of personnel, including graduate students, postdoctoral researchers, technicians, and engineers. Attracting, educating, and training a new generation of physicists in experimental spin techniques will be essential for the successful realization. Artificial intelligence and machine learning are seen as having significant potential for both acceleration of research and development and amplification of discovery in the optimal realization of this unique quantum technology on a cutting-edge collider. The research and development effort is synergistic with research in atomic physics and fusion energy science.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗