Results for “interoperability, Connectivity” — Page 9

DOE OSTI2024

Dialogue Between Lighting and HVAC Systems: Improving building system integration

Lighting systems have long been capable of sensing when someone enters or exits a room and using that knowledge to turn lights on or off. More recently, connected lighting systems with sensors integrated into every luminaire have become broadly available, facilitating highly granular occupancy detection. Similarly, HVAC systems have long been able to use an understanding of building occupancy to adjust temperature setpoints and reduce energy use without significant impacts to occupant comfort. Energy codes (e.g., ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, IECC, Title 24) now require “occupied standby HVAC control,” whereby systems adjust both temperature and ventilation setpoints in zones that are determined to be unoccupied during normal occupancy hours. Here, this article discusses current issues that stymie the integration of Lighting and HVAC systems, and DOE activities focused on addressing them.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Automated End-to-End Spacecraft Connectivity Across Diverse Links

An increasing variety of communications services are available to space missions. Yet varying standards between providers hinder adoption due to the complexity of managing many configurations. We present a software framework to automatically establish end-to-end communications during contacts with a provider by configuring spacecraft protocols at the physical, link, and network layers. Underlying protocols and routes are abstracted, allowing the user to simply send data to a destination with the framework ensuring its delivery. We evaluate a full implementation of the framework in laboratory experiments conducted on an emulated communications testbed. These tests demonstrate data delivery across three different services with rapid (<20s) reconfiguration as the spacecraft transitions between providers.

satellite communication↗

NASA NTRS2007

A Contrast in Use of Metrics in Earth Science Data Systems

In recent years there has been a surge in the number of systems for processing, archiving and distributing remotely sensed data. Such systems, working independently as well as in collaboration, have been contributing greatly to the advances in the scientific understanding of the Earth system, as well as utilization of the data for nationally and internationally important applications. Among such systems, we consider those that are developed by or under the sponsorship of NASA to fulfill one of its strategic objectives: "Study Earth from space to advance scientific understanding and meet societal needs." NASA's Earth science data systems are of varying size and complexity depending on the requirements they are intended to meet. Some data systems are regarded as NASA's "Core Capabilities" that provide the basic infrastructure for processing, archiving and distributing a set of data products to a large and diverse user community in a robust and reliable manner. Other data systems constitute "Community Capabilities". These provide specialized and innovative services to data users and/or research products offering new scientific insight. Such data systems are generally supported by NASA through peer reviewed competition. Examples of Core Capabilities are 1. Earth Observing Data and Information System (EOSDIS) with its Distributed Active Archive Centers (DAACs), Science Investigator-led Processing Systems (SIPSs), and the EOS Clearing House (ECHO); 2. Tropical Rainfall Measurement Mission (TRMM) Science Data and Information System (TSDIS); 3. Ocean Data Processing System (ODPS); and 4. CloudSat Data Processing Center. Examples of Community Capabilities are projects under the Research, Education and Applications Solutions Network (REASON), and Advancing Collaborative Connections for Earth System Science (ACCESS) Programs. In managing these data system capabilities, it is necessary to have well-established goals and to measure progress relative to them. Progress is measured through "metrics", which can be a combination of quantitative as well as qualitative assessments. The specific metrics of interest depend on the user of the metrics as well as the type of data system. The users of metrics can be data system managers, program managers, funding agency or the public. Data system managers need metrics for assessing and improving the performance of the system and for future planning. Program managers need metrics to assess progress and the value of the data systems sponsored by them. Also, there is a difference in the metrics needed for core capabilities that tend to be more complex, larger and longer-term compared to community capabilities and the community capabilities that tend to be simpler, smaller and shorter-term. Even among community capabilities there are differences; hence the same set of metrics does not apply to all. Some provide data products to users, some provide services that enable better utilization of data or interoperability among other systems, and some are a part of a larger project where provision of data or services is only a minor activity. There is also a contrast between metrics used for internal and external purposes. Examples of internal purposes are: ensuring that the system meets its requirements, and planning for evolution and growth. Examples of external purposes are: providing to sponsors indicators of success of the systems, demonstrating the contributions of the system to overall program success, etc. This paper will consider EOSDIS, REASON and ACCESS programs to show the various types of metrics needed and how they need to be tailored to the types of data systems while maintaining the overall management goals of measuring progress and contributions made by the data systems.

Ramapriyan, Hampapuram↗

DOE OSTI2021

Reusability First: Toward FAIR Workflows

The FAIR principles of open science (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) have had transformative effects on modern large-scale computational science. In particular, they have encouraged more open access to and use of data, an important consideration as collaboration among teams of researchers accelerates and the use of workflows by those teams to solve problems increases. How best to apply the FAIR principles to workflows themselves, and software more generally, is not yet well understood. We argue that the software engineering concept of technical debt management provides a useful guide for application of those principles to workflows, and in particular that it implies reusability should be considered as ‘first among equals’. Moreover, our approach recognizes a continuum of reusability where we can make explicit and selectable the tradeoffs required in workflows for both their users and developers.To this end, we propose a new abstraction approach for reusable workflows, with demonstrations for both synthetic workloads and real-world computational biology workflows. Through application of novel systems and tools that are based on this abstraction, these experimental workflows are refactored to rightsize the granularity of workflow components to efficiently fill the gap between end-user simplicity and general customizability. Our work makes it easier to selectively reason about and automate the connections between trade-offs across user and developer concerns when exposing degrees of freedom for reuse. Additionally, by exposing fine-grained reusability abstractions we enable performance optimizations, as we demonstrate on both institutional-scale and leadership-class HPC resources.

Wolf, Matthew↗

NASA NTRS2011

High Level Architecture Distributed Space System Simulation for Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization Simulation Smackdown

Modeling and Simulation plays a very important role in mission design. It not only reduces design cost, but also prepares astronauts for their mission tasks. The SISO Smackdown is a simulation event that facilitates modeling and simulation in academia. The scenario of this year s Smackdown was to simulate a lunar base supply mission. The mission objective was to transfer Earth supply cargo to a lunar base supply depot and retrieve He-3 to take back to Earth. Federates for this scenario include the environment federate, Earth-Moon transfer vehicle, lunar shuttle, lunar rover, supply depot, mobile ISRU plant, exploratory hopper, and communication satellite. These federates were built by teams from all around the world, including teams from MIT, JSC, University of Alabama in Huntsville, University of Bordeaux from France, and University of Genoa from Italy. This paper focuses on the lunar shuttle federate, which was programmed by the USRP intern team from NASA JSC. The shuttle was responsible for provide transportation between lunar orbit and the lunar surface. The lunar shuttle federate was built using the NASA standard simulation package called Trick, and it was extended with HLA functions using TrickHLA. HLA functions of the lunar shuttle federate include sending and receiving interaction, publishing and subscribing attributes, and packing and unpacking fixed record data. The dynamics model of the lunar shuttle was modeled with three degrees of freedom, and the state propagation was obeying the law of two body dynamics. The descending trajectory of the lunar shuttle was designed by first defining a unique descending orbit in 2D space, and then defining a unique orbit in 3D space with the assumption of a non-rotating moon. Finally this assumption was taken away to define the initial position of the lunar shuttle so that it will start descending a second after it joins the execution. VPN software from SonicWall was used to connect federates with RTI during testing and the Smackdown event. HLA software from Pitch Technology and MAK Technology were used to edit and extend FOM and provide HLA services for federation execution. The SISO Smackdown event for 2011 was held in Boston, Massachusetts. The federation execution lasted for one hour, and the event was very successful in catching the attention of university students and faculties.

Li, Zuqun↗

DOE OSTI2024

Building a FAIR data ecosystem for incorporating single-cell transcriptomics data into agricultural genome to phenome research

Introduction The agriculture genomics community has numerous data submission standards available, but the standards for describing and storing single-cell (SC, e.g., scRNA- seq) data are comparatively underdeveloped. Methods To bridge this gap, we leveraged recent advancements in human genomics infrastructure, such as the integration of the Human Cell Atlas Data Portal with Terra, a secure, scalable, open-source platform for biomedical researchers to access data, run analysis tools, and collaborate. In parallel, the Single Cell Expression Atlas at EMBL-EBI offers a comprehensive data ingestion portal for high-throughput sequencing datasets, including plants, protists, and animals (including humans). Developing data tools connecting these resources would offer significant advantages to the agricultural genomics community. The FAANG data portal at EMBL-EBI emphasizes delivering rich metadata and highly accurate and reliable annotation of farmed animals but is not computationally linked to either of these resources. Results Herein, we describe a pilot-scale project that determines whether the current FAANG metadata standards for livestock can be used to ingest scRNA-seq datasets into Terra in a manner consistent with HCA Data Portal standards. Importantly, rich scRNA-seq metadata can now be brokered through the FAANG data portal using a semi-automated process, thereby avoiding the need for substantial expert curation. We have further extended the functionality of this tool so that validated and ingested SC files within the HCA Data Portal are transferred to Terra for further analysis. In addition, we verified data ingestion into Terra, hosted on Azure, and demonstrated the use of a workflow to analyze the first ingested porcine scRNA-seq dataset. Additionally, we have also developed prototype tools to visualize the output of scRNA-seq analyses on genome browsers to compare gene expression patterns across tissues and cell populations. This JBrowse tool now features distinct tracks, showcasing PBMC scRNA-seq alongside two bulk RNA-seq experiments. Discussion We intend to further build upon these existing tools to construct a scientist-friendly data resource and analytical ecosystem based on Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR) SC principles to facilitate SC-level genomic analysis through data ingestion, storage, retrieval, re-use, visualization, and comparative annotation across agricultural species.

Genetics & Heredity↗

NASA NTRS2023

High-Rate Delay Tolerant Networking (HDTN) User Guide Version 1.0

Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN) has been identified as a key technology to enable and facilitate the development and growth of future space networks. Classically, space communications networks are collections of disparate links that are manually managed either point-to-point or use space relays. The accelerating accessibility of space enables a new scaling of space nodes, yet both the manual management of configurations and scheduling and the lack of structure connecting links precisely prohibit scaling. This challenge gives rise to newer and larger classes of communications needs that are met by DTN, which must overcome the disconnection, disruption, latency, and mobility featured in space communications systems. DTN joins the underlying links as an overlay, and can be made to communicate over any protocol stack. The core actions of DTN are store, carry, and forward, where data are stored instead of dropped if there is no immediately available outduct. It does this by taking the DTN unit of data, bundles, and providing necessary layers to adapt these bundles to the underlying transport protocols of choice; these are called convergence layers. DTN's Bundle Protocol (BP) can then be used on top of terrestrial protocol stacks, such as TCP/IP, as well as protocols for space, such as LTP/AOS, all in the same network. For emphasis it is noted that bundles can be of essentially any size, and hence this convergence to lower layers of choice is necessary. Existing DTN implementations have operated in constrained environments with limited resources, resulting in low data speeds. However, as various technologies have advanced, data transfer rates and efficiency have advanced, which has pushed the need for a DTN implementation for ground systems and for spacecraft that is performance-oriented in order to not impose an unnecessary bottleneck. High-rate Delay Tolerant Networking (HDTN) takes advantage of modern hardware platforms to substantially reduce latency and improve throughput compared to today’s DTN operations. The HDTN implementation maintains interoperability with existing deployments of DTN that conform to IETF RFCs 4838, 5050, and 9171. At the same time, HDTN defines a new data format better suited to higher-rate operation. It defines and adopts a massively parallel pipelined and message-oriented architecture, allowing the system to scale gracefully as its resources increase. HDTN’s architecture also supports hooks to replace various processing pipeline elements with specialized hardware accelerators. This offers improved Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) characteristics while reducing development complexity and cost.

Delay Tolerant Networking↗

NASA NTRS2024

High-Rate Delay Tolerant Networking (HDTN) User Guide Version 1.3.0

Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN) has been identified as a key technology to enable and facilitate the development and growth of future space networks. Classically, space communications networks are collections of disparate links that are manually managed either point-to-point or use space relays. The accelerating accessibility of space enables a new scaling of space nodes, yet both the manual management of configurations and scheduling and the lack of structure connecting links precisely prohibit scaling. This challenge gives rise to newer and larger classes of communications needs that are met by DTN, which must overcome the disconnection, disruption, latency, and mobility featured in space communications systems. DTN joins the underlying links as an overlay, and can be made to communicate over any protocol stack. The core actions of DTN are store, carry, and forward, where data are stored instead of dropped if there is no immediately available outduct. It does this by taking the DTN unit of data, bundles, and providing necessary layers to adapt these bundles to the underlying transport protocols of choice; these are called convergence layers. DTN's Bundle Protocol (BP) can then be used on top of terrestrial protocol stacks, such as TCP/IP, as well as protocols for space, such as LTP/AOS, all in the same network. For emphasis it is noted that bundles can be of essentially any size, and hence this convergence to lower layers of choice is necessary. Existing DTN implementations have operated in constrained environments with limited resources, resulting in low data speeds. However, as various technologies have advanced, data transfer rates and efficiency have advanced, which has pushed the need for a DTN implementation for ground systems and for spacecraft that is performance-oriented in order to not impose an unnecessary bottleneck. High-rate Delay Tolerant Networking (HDTN) takes advantage of modern hardware platforms to substantially reduce latency and improve throughput compared to today’s DTN operations. The HDTN implementation maintains interoperability with existing deployments of DTN that conform to IETF RFCs 4838, 5050, and 9171. At the same time, HDTN defines a new data format better suited to higher-rate operation. It defines and adopts a massively parallel pipelined and message-oriented architecture, allowing the system to scale gracefully as its resources increase. HDTN’s architecture also supports hooks to replace various processing pipeline elements with specialized hardware accelerators. This offers improved Size, Weight, and Power (SWaP) characteristics while reducing development complexity and cost.

Delay Tolerant Networking↗

NASA NTRS2024

Tracking Community Building in Open Science

Open Science is enabled by a vibrant community of researchers who regularly engage with the data, from its production to its organization, curation, archiving, dissemination, analysis, and publication. This presentation will examine community building in open science. The NASA Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) makes data available to the public following the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) principles. OSDR takes open science further with the OS Analysis Working Groups (AWGs) that facilitate community development and promotion. The primary activity of each AWG is to establish and validate analytical processes to generate higher-order data from data housed in OSDR. There are a number of these groups on various topics, including the Animal AWG, Plant AWG, Microbial AWG, Multi-Omics AWG, AI/ML AWG, and the Ames Life Sciences Data Archive (ALSDA) AWG. The international volunteers participating in these AWGs come from academia, citizen science initiatives, industry, and government. They include researchers, principal investigators, professors, trained hobbyists, and students from various domains and disciplines. Anyone may request to join the AWGs, and membership requests are vetted monthly by the group organizers before granting admission. Core to membership is demonstrated expertise through records of training, integrity, work in the professed domain(s), and good community standing. Regular virtual meetings are held for each AWG, with a varying cadence depending on the group's needs and goals. AWG communities share their expertise in research including cutting edge tools, software, frameworks, data formats, and libraries accelerating research collectively. This collaborative approach helps community members cross technology gaps and identify emerging challenges. These diverse communities encompass a wide range of individuals hailing from various sectors within the Science Mission Directorate and beyond. They serve as a means to promote and enhance transparency, accessibility, and inclusion. An annual AWG Symposium brings contributors together in person. Participation in AWGs can be synchronous or asynchronous, with some groups performing most of their work in off hours. Participants gain valuable skills and connections that allow them to add value to their communities and new organizations that they join, resulting in an expanded return on investment for the space life science community. Open science is increasingly a federal mandate and initiatives like NASA's Transform to Open Science and instruments like the Decadal Survey of Biological and Physical Sciences in Space demonstrate the need to carefully consider best practices in this domain. Here, we present greater detail about the makeup and participation metrics of the various AWGs affiliated with OSDR and details of successful peer-reviewed publication campaigns.

Christina M Johnson↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Tracking Community Building in Open Science

Open Science is enabled by a vibrant community of researchers who regularly engage with the data, from its production to its organization, curation, archiving, dissemination, analysis, and publication. This presentation will examine community building in open science. The NASA Open Science Data Repository (OSDR) makes data available to the public following the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reusability) principles. OSDR takes open science further with the OS Analysis Working Groups (AWGs) that facilitate community development and promotion. The primary activity of each AWG is to establish and validate analytical processes to generate higher-order data from data housed in OSDR. There are a number of these groups on various topics, including the Animal AWG, Plant AWG, Microbial AWG, Multi-Omics AWG, AI/ML AWG, and the Ames Life Sciences Data Archive (ALSDA) AWG. The international volunteers participating in these AWGs come from academia, citizen science initiatives, industry, and government. They include researchers, principal investigators, professors, trained hobbyists, and students from various domains and disciplines. Anyone may request to join the AWGs, and membership requests are vetted monthly by the group organizers before granting admission. Core to membership is demonstrated expertise through records of training, integrity, work in the professed domain(s), and good community standing. Regular virtual meetings are held for each AWG, with a varying cadence depending on the group's needs and goals. AWG communities share their expertise in research including cutting edge tools, software, frameworks, data formats, and libraries accelerating research collectively. This collaborative approach helps community members cross technology gaps and identify emerging challenges. These diverse communities encompass a wide range of individuals hailing from various sectors within the Science Mission Directorate and beyond. They serve as a means to promote and enhance transparency, accessibility, and inclusion. An annual AWG Symposium brings contributors together in person. Participation in AWGs can be synchronous or asynchronous, with some groups performing most of their work in off hours. Participants gain valuable skills and connections that allow them to add value to their communities and new organizations that they join, resulting in an expanded return on investment for the space life science community. Open science is increasingly a federal mandate and initiatives like NASA's Transform to Open Science and instruments like the Decadal Survey of Biological and Physical Sciences in Space demonstrate the need to carefully consider best practices in this domain. Here, we present greater detail about the makeup and participation metrics of the various AWGs affiliated with OSDR and details of successful peer-reviewed publication campaigns.

Christina M Johnson↗

DOE OSTI2026

Building a Trusted Roaming Hub [Slides]

The Trusted Roaming Hub is a U.S. Department of Energy-backed initiative led by the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) to address one of the most persistent challenges in electric vehicle (EV) charging: fragmented roaming, inconsistent interoperability, and insufficient digital trust across charging networks. As EV adoption accelerates and charging infrastructure scales nationwide, today's many-to-many integration model between eMobility Service Providers (eMSPs) and Charge Point Operators (CPOs) has become increasingly brittle, costly, and difficult to secure. The Trusted Roaming Hub introduces a neutral, cybersecurity-forward "switchboard" architecture that enables standardized, secure, and scalable roaming interactions across the EV charging ecosystem. Rather than replacing existing networks or commercial relationships, the hub acts as a trusted intermediary that enforces consistent identity, authentication, authorization, and routing across participants improving reliability for drivers, lowering integration burden for industry, and creating a foundation for future grid-interactive charging services. This read-ahead provides an overview of the problem the hub is designed to solve, the core functional and security concepts behind the architecture, the value proposition to key stakeholders, and the near-term trajectory of the work.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

DOE OSTI2023

The Energy and Operational Impacts of Using 0-10V Control for LED Streetlights

LED lighting is becoming widely adopted and displacing most traditional lighting technologies. However, the traditional methods used to control light sources have not seen similar displacement. Lighting systems have historically utilized either a proprietary control method, or one of a handful of standardized methods (e.g., 0-10V, DALI, DMX512). The utility and market success of the standardized methods has been limited for a variety of reasons. Analog 0-10V methods have long been popular due to their simplicity and low cost of implementation and are presently the most commonly available control interface for indoor and outdoor LED products in North America. The emergence of “connected lighting systems” with more modern network interfaces and luminaire-level sensors and intelligence was anticipated by many to mark the beginning of the end of analog control. However, 0-10V interfaces continue to be prevalent with these more “digital” systems. The use of 0-10V methods has significant tradeoffs. 0-10V standards have historically not explicitly defined the relationship between the luminaire input control signal and output luminous flux for the full control signal range. As a result, it is difficult to predict relative luminaire light output and input power at any particular control voltage, and in practice the performance across LED drivers and the luminaires power is inconsistent. While this inconsistency has long been acknowledged by experts in the field, it is not accounted for in standard practice deployment, and end-users continue to regularly see unexpected and undesirable performance. It is hoped that the results from this study will help the lighting industry and standards developing organizations better understand and possibly resolve the shortcomings of 0-10V products, and consider what is best for the industry – additional incremental improvements to this fundamentally limited analog technology, or fully moving on to existing digital approaches, such as DALI D4i, that deliver accurate and consistent dimming performance across all luminaires in the system and thus guarantee the delivery of expected light levels, and energy and cost savings. Recommendations consistent with these goals are made to lighting and driver manufacturers, lighting software developers, standard developing organizations, and system designers and specifiers.

0-10V↗

DOE OSTI2025

Demand Response in Residential Energy Code: Technical Brief

As buildings account for over 75% of U.S. electricity use, effectively managing their loads can greatly facilitate the transition towards a clean, reliable grid. Grid-interactive efficient buildings (GEBs) combine efficiency and demand flexibility with smart technologies and communication to provide occupant comfort and productivity while serving the grid as a distributed energy resource (DER). In turn, GEBs can play a key role in ensuring access to an affordable, reliable, sustainable, and modern U.S. electric power system. Their national adoption could provide $\$$100-200 billion in U.S. electric power system cost savings over the next two decades. The associated reduction in CO 2 emissions is estimated at 6% per year by 2030 (DOE 2021). Building codes represent standard design practice in the construction industry and continually evolve to include advanced technologies and innovative practices. Historically, national model energy codes establish minimum efficiency requirements for new construction (ICC 2020). Expanding codes to support GEB capabilities is a pivotal step towards realizing demand flexibility in support of a clean grid by addressing capabilities to improve interoperability between smart building systems, the grid, and renewable energy resources. Realizing GEBs requires buildings with automated demand response (DR) capabilities that enable standardized communication with or control of, subject to explicit consumer consent, energy smart appliances or home energy management systems. This is achieved through direct or indirect (i.e., via an aggregator) communication between appliances and the electric grid. Energy codes can also support DR communication standardization and advance the deployment of building-integrated DERs such as energy storage, generation, and electric vehicles (EVs). Incorporating automated DR capabilities in energy codes provides many benefits to the consumers. Specifically, it aligns building electric load demand with intermittent renewable energy source availability, decreases peak load on the electric grid, allows buildings to respond to utility price signals, supports electrical network reliability and market growth of products and processes aligned with clean economic growth. The incorporation of DR into the model residential energy codes was considered for both the 2021 and 2024 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) code development cycles. The approved DR measures in the 2021 cycle were removed in response to appeals (ICC 2020). Updated language was presented for consideration again for the 2024 IECC, where it was negotiated and again approved, and again removed in response to appeals (ICC 2024). This resulted in many sections, including sections on demand responsive controls, being moved to the credits options or an appendix as a voluntary application. This technical brief updates the proposed DR components such that they can be considered by states and local governments for direct incorporation into their codes, as well as for future IECC energy code development. The proposal refinements are intended to support consistency in approach and provide a degree of certainty for building owners, designers, contractors, manufacturers, and building and fire safety professionals. The scope of this technical brief includes three strategies for DR in residential buildings: 1) smart thermostats with demand-responsive control, 2) electric water heating incorporating demand-responsive controls and communication and 3) grid Integrated solar and energy storage systems.

2021 IECC↗