Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “web application”

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.

1,651 records · Page 92

An Integrated Approach To Offshore Wind Energy Assessment: Great Lakes 3D Wind Experiment

This grant supported fundamental research into the characterization of flow parameters of relevance to the wind energy industry focused on offshore and the coastal zone. A major focus of the project was application of the latest generation of remote sensing instrumentation and also integration of measurements and numerical modeling to optimize characterization of time-evolving atmospheric flow parameters in 3-D. Our research developed a new data-constrained Wind Atlas for the Great Lakes, and developed new insights into flow parameters in heterogeneous environments. Four experiments were conducted during the project: At a large operating onshore wind farm in May 2012; At the National Renewable Energy Laboratory National Wind Technology Center (NREL NWTC) during February 2013; At the shoreline of Lake Erie in May 2013; and At the Wind Energy Institute of Canada on Prince Edward Island in May 2015. The experiment we conducted in the coastal zone of Lake Erie indicated very complex flow fields and the frequent presence of upward momentum fluxes and resulting distortion of the wind speed profile at turbine relevant heights due to swells in the Great Lakes. Additionally, our data (and modeling) indicate the frequent presence of low level jets at 600 m height over the Lake and occasions when the wind speed profile across the rotor plane may be impacted by this phenomenon. Experimental data and modeling of the fourth experiment on Prince Edward Island showed that at 10-14 m escarpment adjacent to long-overseas fetch the zone of wind speed decrease before the terrain feature and the increase at (and slightly downwind of) the escarpment is ~3–5% at turbine hub-heights. Additionally, our measurements were used to improve methods to compute the uncertainty in lidar-derived flow properties and to optimize lidar-scanning strategies. For example, on the basis of the experimental data we collected plus those from one of our research partners we advanced a new methodology to estimate a priori the uncertainty in wind speed retrievals from arc scans based on site characteristics such as wind velocity, turbulence intensity and proposed scan geometry. Insights regarding use of remote sensing technologies deriving from project experiments were used to compile a best practice document http://doi.org/10.7298/X4QV3JGF for measuring wind speeds and turbulence offshore through in-situ and remote sensing technologies. A project-specific web-site was developed and is available at: http://www.geo.cornell.edu/eas/PeoplePlaces/Faculty/spryor/DoE_AIATOWEA/index.html

17 WIND ENERGY↗

KIVA-Update June 2012

Development of a fractional step, a Predictor-Corrector Split (PCS), or what is often known as a projection method combining hp-adaptive system in a Finite Element Method (FEM) for combustion modeling has been achieved. This model will advance the accuracy and range of applicability of the KIVA combustion model and software used typically for internal combustion engine modeling. This abstract describes a PCS hp-adaptive FEM model for turbulent reactive flow spanning all velocity regimes and fluids that is being developed for the new KIVA combustion algorithm, particularly for internal combustion engines. The method and general solver is applicable to Newtonian and non- Newtonian fluids and also for incompressible solids, porous media, solidification modeling, and fluid structure interaction problems. The fuel injection and injector modeling could easily benefit from the capability of solving the fluid structure interaction problem in an injector, helping to understand cycle to cycle variation and cavitation. This is just one example where the new algorithm differs from the old, in addition to handling Conjugate Heat Transfer (CHT), although there a numerous features that makes the new system more robust and accurate. In these ways, the PCS hp-adaptive algorithm does not compete with commercial software packages, those often used in conjunction with the currently distributed KIVA codes for engine combustion modeling. In addition, choosing a local ALE method on immersed moving parts represented by overset grid that is 2nd order spatially accurate, allows for easy grid generation from CAD to fluid grid while also provide for robustness in handling any possible moving parts configuration without any code modifications. The combined methods employed produce a minimal amount of computational effort as compared to fully resolved grids at the same accuracy. We demonstrate the solver on benchmark problems for the all flow regimes as follows: (1) 2-D backward-facing step using h-adaption, (2) 2-D driven cavity, (3) 2-D natural convection in a differentially heat cavity with h-adaptation, (4) NACA 0012 airfoil in 2-D, (5) supersonic flows over compression ramps, (6) 2-D natural convection in a differentially heat cavity with hp-adaptation, (7) 3-D natural convection in a differentially heat sphere with hp-adaptation. In addition, we show the new moving parts algorithm for working for a 2-D piston; the immersed moving parts method also for valves and pistons, vanes, etc... The movement is performed using an overset grid method and is 2nd order accurate in space, and never produces a tangle grid, that is, robust system at any resolution and any parts configuration. We also show CHT for the currently distributed KIVA-4mpi software and some fairly automatic grid generation using Sandia's Cubit unstructured grid generator. A new electronic web-based manual for KIVA-4 has been developed as well.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Research and Technology 1997

NASA Lewis Research Center is responsible for developing and transferring critical technologies that address national priorities in aeropropulsion and space applications in partnership with U.S. industries, universities, and Government institutions. As NASA s designated Lead Center for Aeropropulsion, our role is to develop, verify, and transfer aeropropulsion technologies to U.S. industry. As NASA s designated Center of Excellence in Turbomachinery, our role is to develop new and innovative turbomachinery technology to improve the reliability, performance, efficiency and affordability, capacity, and environmental compatibility of future aerospace vehicles. We also maintain a science and technology development role in aeropropulsion, communications, space power and onboard propulsion, and microgravity fluid physics and combustion. We are committed to enabling non-aerospace U.S. industries to benefit directly from the technologies developed through our programs to maximize the benefit to the Nation and the return on each taxpayer s investment. In addition, we are aggressively pursuing continuous improvement in our management and business practices and striving for diversity in our workforce as together we push the edge of technology in space and aeronautics. The Lewis Research Center is a unique facility located in an important geographical area, the southwest corner of Cleveland, Ohio. Situated on 350 acres of land adjacent to the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, Lewis comprises more than 140 buildings that include 24 major facilities and over 500 specialized research and test facilities. Additional facilities are located at Plum Brook Station, which is about 50 miles west of Cleveland. Over 3700 people staff Lewis, including civil service employees and support service contractors. Over half of them are scientists and engineers, who plan, conduct or oversee, and report on our research tasks and projects. They are assisted by technical specialists, skilled workers, and an administrative staff. Our end product is knowledge. This report is designed to help us make this knowledge fully available to potential users the aircraft engine industry, the energy industry, the automotive industry, the aerospace industry, and others. It is organized so that a broad cross section of the community can readily use it. Each article begins with a short introductory paragraph that should prove to be a valuable tool for the layperson. These articles summarize the progress made during the year in various technical areas and portray the technical and administrative support associated with Lewis technology programs. We hope that the information is useful to all. If additional information is desired, readers are encouraged to contact the researchers identified in the articles and to visit Lewis on the World Wide Web (http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/). This document is available on the World Wide Web (http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/RT).

Source record↗

A Study on the Comparison of International WTS for Integrated Management of Radioactive Waste - 19034

Domestic radioactive waste is generated by nuclear power plants, the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute and KEPCO Nuclear Fuel Company. These nuclear energy agencies have their own waste tracking system. To track waste more efficiently, it is necessary to build an integrated tracking system from the viewpoint of the final disposer. As for the korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, the decommissioning waste due to the decommissioning of research reactors No. 1 and 2, and the low and intermediate-level radioactive waste, generated by the operation of the High Flux Advanced Neutron Application Reactor(HANARO), account for the most. The solid waste from each facility and laboratory is sorted and collected according to radiation levels and the contents. For starters, according to the contents, the waste is divided into combustible, noncombustible compressible and non-compressible waste. The combustible waste, generated by the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, is treated according to the low and intermediate-level radioactive waste delivery regulation of the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission and the acceptance criteria of the disposal facility. KEPCO Nuclear Fuel Company is making the nuclear fuel used in nuclear power plants. Radioactive waste is generated in the nuclear fuel manufacturing process, and it is classified into 8 types of waste according to the solid waste management procedure. Most of the radioactive waste, generated while KEPCO Nuclear Fuel Company processes the light-water reactor and heavy-water reactor nuclear fuel, is classified as low and intermediate-level radioactive waste. The radioactive liquid waste, generated in the radiation controlled area in nuclear fuel processing facilities, is divided into low-concentration liquid waste and high-concentration liquid waste. The miscellaneous solids, generated in the Hanbit NPP of Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power Co., Ltd., are classified in consideration of the physical properties, density and amount of the waste, and substances subject to restricted disposal. This paper investigated information on the structure, functions and maintenance of the systems implemented and operated by individual countries and IAEA, and the types of managed data, and analyzed the detailed configuration of the system and the characteristics of DBMS (Data Base Management System), and discovered during the analysis process the information on the waste management in each country or institution. This paper investigated the classification standards and treatment methods according to the characteristics of the radioactive substances handled by each agency. These classification and treatment methods can be applied to the database when the radioactive waste tracking system is implemented in the future. Also, this paper analyzed the radioactive waste tracking system of each country. Most overseas waste tracking systems are configured based on the ORACLE DBMS. The ORACLE DBMS is highly secure, and can manage large-scale databases. Also, Germany's ReVK and US IWTS are using the Bar-Code system that can track and manage all waste data, generated during decommissioning or transportation, in real time, and the real-time tracking system of web-based US CID can simply create and output reports quickly. If the advantages of overseas waste tracking systems are added to the domestic integrated waste tracking system, more efficient and safer management of radioactive waste will be possible.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Research and Technology 2003

The NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field, in partnership with U.S. industries, universities, and other Government institutions, is responsible for developing critical technologies that address national priorities in aeropropulsion and space applications. Our work is focused on research for new aeropropulsion technologies, aerospace power, microgravity science (fluids and combustion), electric propulsion, and communications technologies for aeronautics, space, and aerospace applications. As NASA s premier center for aeropropulsion, aerospace power, and turbomachinery, our role is to conduct world-class research and to develop key technologies. We contribute to economic growth and national security through safe, superior, and environmentally compatible U.S. civil and military aircraft propulsion systems. Our Aerospace Power Program supports all NASA Enterprises and major programs, including the International Space Station, Advanced Space Transportation, and new initiatives in human and robotic exploration. Glenn Research Center leads NASA s research in the microgravity science disciplines of fluid physics, combustion science, and acceleration measurement. Almost every space shuttle science mission has had an experiment managed by NASA Glenn, and we have conducted a wide array of similar experiments on the International Space Station. The Glenn staff consists of over 3200 civil service employees and support service contractor personnel. Scientists and engineers comprise more than half of our workforce, with technical specialists, skilled workers, and an administrative staff supporting them. We aggressively strive for technical excellence through continuing education, increased diversity in our workforce, and continuous improvement in our management and business practices so that we can expand the boundaries of aeronautics, space, and aerospace technology. Glenn Research Center is a unique facility located in northeast Ohio. Situated on 350 acres of land adjacent to the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, Glenn comprises more than 140 buildings, including 24 major facilities and over 500 specialized research and test facilities. Additional facilities are located at Plum Brook Station, which is about 50 miles west of Cleveland. Plum Brook Station has four large, major, world-class facilities for space research available for Government and industry programs. Knowledge is the end product of our activities. The R&T reports help make this knowledge fully available to potential users the aircraft engine industry, the space industry, the energy industry, the automotive industry, the aerospace industry, and others. It is organized so that a broad cross section of the community can readily use it. Each article begins with a short introductory paragraph that should prove valuable for the layperson. These articles summarize the progress made during the year in various technical areas and portray the technical and administrative support associated with Glenn s technology programs. We hope that this information is useful to all. If additional information is desired, readers are encouraged to contact the researchers identified at the end of each article and to visit Glenn on the World Wide Web at http://www.grc.nasa.gov.

Julian Earls↗

WE-H-204-00: History Committee Symposium

“William D. Coolidge, Inventor of the Modern X-ray Tube” David J. Allard, M.S., CHP - Director, PA DEP Bureau of Radiation Protection William David Coolidge 1873–1975 was a research scientist and inventor of the modern X-ray tube. Besides Roentgen, with his 1895 discovery and subsequent studies of X-rays, perhaps no other individual contributed more to the advancement of X-ray technology than did Coolidge. He was born in Hudson, MA and received his Bachelor of Science degree from MIT in 1896. That same year he went to Europe to study under renowned physicists of the time. Coolidge received his Ph.D. summa cum laude from the University of Leipzig in 1899 and soon after joined the staff of MIT. While studying at Leipzig, he met Roentgen. In 1905 he was asked to join the newly established General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, NY. He promptly began fundamental work on the production of ductile tungsten filaments as a replacement for fragile carbon filaments used in incandescent light bulbs. This improved light bulb was brought to market by GE in 1911. It was subsequent application of his tungsten work that led Coolidge to his studies in X ray production. Circa 1910, the state-of-the-art X-ray tube was a “gas tube” or “cold cathode” type tube. These crude X-ray tubes relied on residual gas molecules as a source of electrons for bombardment of low to medium atomic number metal targets. In 1912 Coolidge described the use of tungsten as an improved anode target material for X-ray tubes. Shortly after in 1913 he published a paper in Physical Review describing “A Powerful Roentgen Ray Tube With a Pure Electron Discharge.” This tube used a tungsten filament as a thermionic source of electrons under high vacuum to bombard a tungsten anode target. Great improvements in X-ray tube stability, output and performance were obtained with the “hot cathode” or “Coolidge tube.” With some variation in filament and target geometry, this 100 year old invention is the same basic X-ray tube used today in medicine, research and industry. In 1932 Coolidge became Director of the GE Laboratory, then in 1940 Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1941 he was a member of a small committee, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to evaluate the military importance of research on uranium. This committee’s report led to the establishment of the Manhattan Engineering District for nuclear weapons development during WWII. Coolidge lived to be over 100 years old, he had 83 patents to his credit, numerous awards and honorary degrees, and in 1975 was elected to the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. At the time he was the only inventor to receive this honor in his lifetime. Dr. Coolidge was also the first recipient of the AAPM’s highest science award - named in his honor. From notes of a day-long interview with Coolidge’s son Lawrence in the mid-1990s, previous biographies, publications, books, GE literature, historic photographs, e.g., a wonderful 1874 photo stereoview card with 1 year old baby “Willie Coolidge”, and other artifacts in the author’s collection, this presentation will review Dr. Coolidge’s amazing life, work, accomplishments and awards. “History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and its Members” Gregory A. Good, Ph.D. - Director, AIP Center for History of Physics Melanie J. Mueller, MLIS - Acting Director, AIP Niels Bohr Library & Archives The American Institute of Physics established the Center for History of Physics and the Niels Bohr Library & Archives in the 1960s. Our shared mission is: To preserve and make known the history of the physical sciences. This talk will explore the many ways that AIP’s two history programs support the historical and archival activities of AAPM. Topics will include our ongoing oral history program, web outreach through exhibits and teaching guides, and archiving for AAPM and other Member Societies. We will focus in particular on materials in our collections related to the history of medical physics and to the history of AAPM. We will unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that we are designing specifically to be useful to AAPM and its members. Learning Objectives: Study the background of the medical physicist - William David Coolidge Examine the time-line for his success Review the publications conceptualizing his works and progressions Realize what he invented Evaluate the importance of the invention Relate the success to national prominence Uncover how he influenced medical physicists today Find out how he was celebrated by the AAPM View the AIP established Center for History of Physics Consider the significant efforts and vision to preserve the history of medical physics Learn about the Niels Bohr Library & Archives Look back in time at medical physics in the 1960s Unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that will be useful to AAPM.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

WE-H-204-01: William D. Coolidge, Inventor of the Modern X-Ray Tube

“William D. Coolidge, Inventor of the Modern X-ray Tube” David J. Allard, M.S., CHP - Director, PA DEP Bureau of Radiation Protection William David Coolidge 1873–1975 was a research scientist and inventor of the modern X-ray tube. Besides Roentgen, with his 1895 discovery and subsequent studies of X-rays, perhaps no other individual contributed more to the advancement of X-ray technology than did Coolidge. He was born in Hudson, MA and received his Bachelor of Science degree from MIT in 1896. That same year he went to Europe to study under renowned physicists of the time. Coolidge received his Ph.D. summa cum laude from the University of Leipzig in 1899 and soon after joined the staff of MIT. While studying at Leipzig, he met Roentgen. In 1905 he was asked to join the newly established General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, NY. He promptly began fundamental work on the production of ductile tungsten filaments as a replacement for fragile carbon filaments used in incandescent light bulbs. This improved light bulb was brought to market by GE in 1911. It was subsequent application of his tungsten work that led Coolidge to his studies in X ray production. Circa 1910, the state-of-the-art X-ray tube was a “gas tube” or “cold cathode” type tube. These crude X-ray tubes relied on residual gas molecules as a source of electrons for bombardment of low to medium atomic number metal targets. In 1912 Coolidge described the use of tungsten as an improved anode target material for X-ray tubes. Shortly after in 1913 he published a paper in Physical Review describing “A Powerful Roentgen Ray Tube With a Pure Electron Discharge.” This tube used a tungsten filament as a thermionic source of electrons under high vacuum to bombard a tungsten anode target. Great improvements in X-ray tube stability, output and performance were obtained with the “hot cathode” or “Coolidge tube.” With some variation in filament and target geometry, this 100 year old invention is the same basic X-ray tube used today in medicine, research and industry. In 1932 Coolidge became Director of the GE Laboratory, then in 1940 Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1941 he was a member of a small committee, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to evaluate the military importance of research on uranium. This committee’s report led to the establishment of the Manhattan Engineering District for nuclear weapons development during WWII. Coolidge lived to be over 100 years old, he had 83 patents to his credit, numerous awards and honorary degrees, and in 1975 was elected to the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. At the time he was the only inventor to receive this honor in his lifetime. Dr. Coolidge was also the first recipient of the AAPM’s highest science award - named in his honor. From notes of a day-long interview with Coolidge’s son Lawrence in the mid-1990s, previous biographies, publications, books, GE literature, historic photographs, e.g., a wonderful 1874 photo stereoview card with 1 year old baby “Willie Coolidge”, and other artifacts in the author’s collection, this presentation will review Dr. Coolidge’s amazing life, work, accomplishments and awards. “History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and its Members” Gregory A. Good, Ph.D. - Director, AIP Center for History of Physics Melanie J. Mueller, MLIS - Acting Director, AIP Niels Bohr Library & Archives The American Institute of Physics established the Center for History of Physics and the Niels Bohr Library & Archives in the 1960s. Our shared mission is: To preserve and make known the history of the physical sciences. This talk will explore the many ways that AIP’s two history programs support the historical and archival activities of AAPM. Topics will include our ongoing oral history program, web outreach through exhibits and teaching guides, and archiving for AAPM and other Member Societies. We will focus in particular on materials in our collections related to the history of medical physics and to the history of AAPM. We will unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that we are designing specifically to be useful to AAPM and its members. Learning Objectives: Study the background of the medical physicist - William David Coolidge Examine the time-line for his success Review the publications conceptualizing his works and progressions Realize what he invented Evaluate the importance of the invention Relate the success to national prominence Uncover how he influenced medical physicists today Find out how he was celebrated by the AAPM View the AIP established Center for History of Physics Consider the significant efforts and vision to preserve the history of medical physics Learn about the Niels Bohr Library & Archives Look back in time at medical physics in the 1960s Unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that will be useful to AAPM.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

WE-H-204-02: Part 1: History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and Its Members

“William D. Coolidge, Inventor of the Modern X-ray Tube” David J. Allard, M.S., CHP - Director, PA DEP Bureau of Radiation Protection William David Coolidge 1873–1975 was a research scientist and inventor of the modern X-ray tube. Besides Roentgen, with his 1895 discovery and subsequent studies of X-rays, perhaps no other individual contributed more to the advancement of X-ray technology than did Coolidge. He was born in Hudson, MA and received his Bachelor of Science degree from MIT in 1896. That same year he went to Europe to study under renowned physicists of the time. Coolidge received his Ph.D. summa cum laude from the University of Leipzig in 1899 and soon after joined the staff of MIT. While studying at Leipzig, he met Roentgen. In 1905 he was asked to join the newly established General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, NY. He promptly began fundamental work on the production of ductile tungsten filaments as a replacement for fragile carbon filaments used in incandescent light bulbs. This improved light bulb was brought to market by GE in 1911. It was subsequent application of his tungsten work that led Coolidge to his studies in X ray production. Circa 1910, the state-of-the-art X-ray tube was a “gas tube” or “cold cathode” type tube. These crude X-ray tubes relied on residual gas molecules as a source of electrons for bombardment of low to medium atomic number metal targets. In 1912 Coolidge described the use of tungsten as an improved anode target material for X-ray tubes. Shortly after in 1913 he published a paper in Physical Review describing “A Powerful Roentgen Ray Tube With a Pure Electron Discharge.” This tube used a tungsten filament as a thermionic source of electrons under high vacuum to bombard a tungsten anode target. Great improvements in X-ray tube stability, output and performance were obtained with the “hot cathode” or “Coolidge tube.” With some variation in filament and target geometry, this 100 year old invention is the same basic X-ray tube used today in medicine, research and industry. In 1932 Coolidge became Director of the GE Laboratory, then in 1940 Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1941 he was a member of a small committee, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to evaluate the military importance of research on uranium. This committee’s report led to the establishment of the Manhattan Engineering District for nuclear weapons development during WWII. Coolidge lived to be over 100 years old, he had 83 patents to his credit, numerous awards and honorary degrees, and in 1975 was elected to the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. At the time he was the only inventor to receive this honor in his lifetime. Dr. Coolidge was also the first recipient of the AAPM’s highest science award - named in his honor. From notes of a day-long interview with Coolidge’s son Lawrence in the mid-1990s, previous biographies, publications, books, GE literature, historic photographs, e.g., a wonderful 1874 photo stereoview card with 1 year old baby “Willie Coolidge”, and other artifacts in the author’s collection, this presentation will review Dr. Coolidge’s amazing life, work, accomplishments and awards. “History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and its Members” Gregory A. Good, Ph.D. - Director, AIP Center for History of Physics Melanie J. Mueller, MLIS - Acting Director, AIP Niels Bohr Library & Archives The American Institute of Physics established the Center for History of Physics and the Niels Bohr Library & Archives in the 1960s. Our shared mission is: To preserve and make known the history of the physical sciences. This talk will explore the many ways that AIP’s two history programs support the historical and archival activities of AAPM. Topics will include our ongoing oral history program, web outreach through exhibits and teaching guides, and archiving for AAPM and other Member Societies. We will focus in particular on materials in our collections related to the history of medical physics and to the history of AAPM. We will unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that we are designing specifically to be useful to AAPM and its members. Learning Objectives: Study the background of the medical physicist - William David Coolidge Examine the time-line for his success Review the publications conceptualizing his works and progressions Realize what he invented Evaluate the importance of the invention Relate the success to national prominence Uncover how he influenced medical physicists today Find out how he was celebrated by the AAPM View the AIP established Center for History of Physics Consider the significant efforts and vision to preserve the history of medical physics Learn about the Niels Bohr Library & Archives Look back in time at medical physics in the 1960s Unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that will be useful to AAPM.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

WE-H-204-03: Part 2: History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and Its Members

“William D. Coolidge, Inventor of the Modern X-ray Tube” David J. Allard, M.S., CHP - Director, PA DEP Bureau of Radiation Protection William David Coolidge 1873–1975 was a research scientist and inventor of the modern X-ray tube. Besides Roentgen, with his 1895 discovery and subsequent studies of X-rays, perhaps no other individual contributed more to the advancement of X-ray technology than did Coolidge. He was born in Hudson, MA and received his Bachelor of Science degree from MIT in 1896. That same year he went to Europe to study under renowned physicists of the time. Coolidge received his Ph.D. summa cum laude from the University of Leipzig in 1899 and soon after joined the staff of MIT. While studying at Leipzig, he met Roentgen. In 1905 he was asked to join the newly established General Electric Research Laboratory in Schenectady, NY. He promptly began fundamental work on the production of ductile tungsten filaments as a replacement for fragile carbon filaments used in incandescent light bulbs. This improved light bulb was brought to market by GE in 1911. It was subsequent application of his tungsten work that led Coolidge to his studies in X ray production. Circa 1910, the state-of-the-art X-ray tube was a “gas tube” or “cold cathode” type tube. These crude X-ray tubes relied on residual gas molecules as a source of electrons for bombardment of low to medium atomic number metal targets. In 1912 Coolidge described the use of tungsten as an improved anode target material for X-ray tubes. Shortly after in 1913 he published a paper in Physical Review describing “A Powerful Roentgen Ray Tube With a Pure Electron Discharge.” This tube used a tungsten filament as a thermionic source of electrons under high vacuum to bombard a tungsten anode target. Great improvements in X-ray tube stability, output and performance were obtained with the “hot cathode” or “Coolidge tube.” With some variation in filament and target geometry, this 100 year old invention is the same basic X-ray tube used today in medicine, research and industry. In 1932 Coolidge became Director of the GE Laboratory, then in 1940 Vice-President and Director of Research. In 1941 he was a member of a small committee, appointed by President Franklin D. Roosevelt, to evaluate the military importance of research on uranium. This committee’s report led to the establishment of the Manhattan Engineering District for nuclear weapons development during WWII. Coolidge lived to be over 100 years old, he had 83 patents to his credit, numerous awards and honorary degrees, and in 1975 was elected to the National Inventor’s Hall of Fame. At the time he was the only inventor to receive this honor in his lifetime. Dr. Coolidge was also the first recipient of the AAPM’s highest science award - named in his honor. From notes of a day-long interview with Coolidge’s son Lawrence in the mid-1990s, previous biographies, publications, books, GE literature, historic photographs, e.g., a wonderful 1874 photo stereoview card with 1 year old baby “Willie Coolidge”, and other artifacts in the author’s collection, this presentation will review Dr. Coolidge’s amazing life, work, accomplishments and awards. “History and Archives Resources at AIP for AAPM and its Members” Gregory A. Good, Ph.D. - Director, AIP Center for History of Physics Melanie J. Mueller, MLIS - Acting Director, AIP Niels Bohr Library & Archives The American Institute of Physics established the Center for History of Physics and the Niels Bohr Library & Archives in the 1960s. Our shared mission is: To preserve and make known the history of the physical sciences. This talk will explore the many ways that AIP’s two history programs support the historical and archival activities of AAPM. Topics will include our ongoing oral history program, web outreach through exhibits and teaching guides, and archiving for AAPM and other Member Societies. We will focus in particular on materials in our collections related to the history of medical physics and to the history of AAPM. We will unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that we are designing specifically to be useful to AAPM and its members. Learning Objectives: Study the background of the medical physicist - William David Coolidge Examine the time-line for his success Review the publications conceptualizing his works and progressions Realize what he invented Evaluate the importance of the invention Relate the success to national prominence Uncover how he influenced medical physicists today Find out how he was celebrated by the AAPM View the AIP established Center for History of Physics Consider the significant efforts and vision to preserve the history of medical physics Learn about the Niels Bohr Library & Archives Look back in time at medical physics in the 1960s Unveil and demonstrate a new “Archives Portal” that will be useful to AAPM.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗

Application of Field Evaluations of Ecological Resources at Hanford and Other DOE Sites for Consistency of Resource Protection and Sustainability - 16404

Remediation and management of contaminated facilities, soil, sediment and biota is an essential element of the DOE-EM mission for site completion, contaminant footprint reduction, and protection of human health and the environment. Protecting ecological resources is an integral part of protecting human health because people are part of the ecosystem and rely on ecological resources for food, fiber, clean air and water, recreational, aesthetic, and cultural values. Evaluation and management require understanding the past and current conditions, as well as protecting, preserving, and enhancing ecological resources. Understanding past and current resources includes evaluation of individual and population health within a local and regional context. The objective of this research is to describe a field method of evaluating ecological resources, based on work at the Hanford Site, which can be applied to sustainability of ecological resources as another mandate of DOE. This requires objective methods to characterize and evaluate resources spatially, within a context of local and regional importance. The DOE complex is large, diverse, and multi-state. The habitats and ecological resources are diverse, and the relative importance of ecological resources to the local ecosystem, region, and human communities varies. Large and diverse sites such as Hanford, Idaho National Laboratory, Los Alamos, hold resources of substantial importance to local and regional ecosystems, as well as to the ecology and cultural values of Tribes and other residents. However, other smaller sites (e.g. Oak Ridge, Brookhaven) also hold key ecological resources to local and regional ecosystems, cultures, and economics. Understanding the relative importance of ecological resources on each remediation site at different spatial scales, within and among DOE-EM sites is critical to management, stewardship, and ensuring sustainability for generations to come. Without a standardized methodology it is difficult to develop sound remediation and management plans to protect human health and the environment. The Ecological Evaluation of Resources described in this paper is part of the Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation's (CRESP) Risk Review Project on the Hanford Site. It is an independent assessment based of on-site field evaluations that encompasses evaluations of site resources in comparison to the Columbia Basin Ecosystem prior evaluations made by DOE, the States of Washington and Oregon, Nature Conservancy and Tribes. The on-site field evaluations are the focus of the current paper. The on-site field evaluation methodology was developed to update existing information on habitat values in light of changing landscape features (edge, patch size and shape, connectivity) and the current presence of invasive species. Both aspects change with time, especially given that remediation of remediation units changes the landscape. That is, every time there is a remediation and restoration of an operable unit (remediation site) on a DOE site, it changes the adjacent landscape (and ecological resources). The changes are greater where new roads were built to access a remediation site, staging areas constructed, and as a function of the size and time-frame for the remediation. Since ecological resources form a continuum across the landscape, and activities from remediation on a given site can affect those on adjacent areas, we evaluated resources both on the remediation site itself, and on a buffer equal to the largest diameter of the remediation site. The field evaluation methodology developed at Hanford Site makes use of existing resource level maps (DOE/RL-96-32 2013) and field surveys and measurements of current vegetation and habitat conditions to evaluate potential ecological impacts associated with cleanup activities at the evaluation unit. Additional information used in the ecological resource evaluations include current Endangered and Threatened Species distribution data (both state and federal), aerial imagery, locations of waste sites and infrastructure, and species and habitats of special concern. We suggest that the field methodology developed for the Hanford Site could be used across the DOE complex to evaluate ecological resources. This would provide DOE-EM with a common data base to make long-term decisions about the protection and sustainability of resources on the DOE complex, and would provide Tribes and the public with information on ecological resources on DOE sites. Such information could be provided in a web-based format which DOE, regulators, Tribes, and the public could easily access. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Autonomous System Inference, Trojan, and Adversarial Reprogramming Attack and Defense (Final)

In the world of ever-advancing technology, Autonomous Systems (AS) find extensive application, bolstering functionalities of critical infrastructures such as nuclear power plants. These systems, however, are increasingly becoming a target for nefarious activities, namely through inference attacks, trojan attacks, and adversarial reprogramming. This paper delves into a comprehensive exploration of machine learning (ML)-driven autonomous control systems within advanced nuclear reactor designs, revealing the vulnerabilities and proposing strategies for defense against potential cyber-attacks. Advanced cyber-attacks against critical infrastructure and the energy sector are becoming more common. With the invention of autonomous control systems (ACS) within advanced nuclear reactor designs, system designers, reactor operators, and regulators must consider cybersecurity during the design and operational phases. This article provides a cyber threat assessment of machine learning (ML)- based digital twinning (DT) technologies in the context of advanced reactor ACS. A cyber-physical testbed was created to emulate nuclear reactor digital instrumentation and controls (I&C) and act as a basis for the ACS. The ACS was designed as two plant-level DTs predicting reactor malfunctions and determining control actions and two component-level DTs responsible for classifying component states and forecasting component inputs and outputs (I/O). Two duplicate ACS designs– one using a traditional ML framework and one using an automated ML (AutoML) framework– were created and tested against cyber-attacks on training data, real-time process data, and ML model architectures to determine their respective qualitative cyber-risk in terms of likelihood and impact. Both frameworks showed similar cyber-resilience against training, real-time, and ML architecture attacks, proving that neither is inherently more secure. Recommended safeguard and security measures are posed to system designers, reactor operators, and regulators to maintain the cybersecurity of ML-based DT technologies such as ACS, prompting a holistic view of shared responsibility for maintaining cyber-secure ML-based systems. As global reliance on generation III reactors begins to be critically assessed, the evolution towards advanced reactor systems utilizing digital instrumentation and controls (I&C) becomes not merely preferable, but essential. The integration of semi and fully autonomous control systems (ACS), powered by digital I&C and machine learning (ML)-based digital twinning (DT) technologies, emerges as a potent strategy to mitigate operations and maintenance costs, thereby enhancing the economic feasibility of novel reactor designs. However, with a staggering 500% and 380% increase in cyber-attacks reported against the energy sector by the United States Department of Energy (DoE) and the European Union respectively, a surge in cyber vulnerabilities specifically targeting the nuclear industry has been 2 markedly observed. Notable incidents, such as the W32.Ramnit spyware infiltration at the Gundremmingen nuclear power plant in Germany and the Dtrack spyware intrusion at the Kudankulam nuclear power plant in India, while not directly compromising core industrial control systems (ICS), underscore a compelling necessity to fortify cybersecurity protocols in safeguarding reactor systems against increasingly adept digital adversaries. In light of this, our investigation extends beyond conventional cybersecurity parameters, diving into the intricate web of potential vulnerabilities woven into ML-based DTs and ACS in advanced reactor systems. A crafted cyber-physical testbed and preliminary ACS were devised to act as a mirror, reflecting potential configurations of advanced reactor control designs. Moreover, this study is intertwined with a scrutinization of ML models, developed either through conventional, manually tuned methodologies or via automated means through AutoML, probing into their cyber-risk profiles within operational technology (OT) environments. Expanding on this, two distinct ACS blueprints were forged – one navigating through the corridors of traditional ML and the other traversing the path of AutoML – in an effort to holistically encapsulate the considerations pivotal to ML-based DT control system design. Employing the SANS Institute Industrial Control System (ICS) Kill Chain and the MITRE ATT&CK Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures (TTP) framework, a structured analysis was conducted, launching three targeted attacks against the training dataset, real-time dataset, and ML models, therein dissecting the potential cyber-attack implications against both ML frameworks within an ACS milieu. It is essential to note that three distinct categories of attacks were conducted against both ACS configurations, each encompassing three distinct ML-based DTs, cumulating in a total of 18 varied attacks. This exploration extends into the realms of Autonomous System Inference, Trojan, and Adversarial Reprogramming Attack and Defense, unraveling vulnerabilities, and opportunities for fortified defenses against such intrusions, particularly where ML-driven technologies, and by extension, ACS, are deployed. Final recommendations, articulated through a lens of security, safeguard, and implementation considerations, are presented for both traditional and AutoML models, anchoring upon the existing knowledge landscape and ML-based DT modeling for ACS, and are offered as a beacon to guide the nuclear industry through the intricate cybersecurity challenges that lie ahead.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Combustion energy frontier research center (CEFRC) final report (August 1, 2009 – July 31, 2016)

The Combustion Energy Frontier Research Center (CEFRC) was established to tackle the single overarching grand challenge of energy sustainability, energy security and global warming: to develop a “validated, predictive, multi-scale, combustion modeling capability to optimize the design and operation of evolving fuels in advanced engines for transportation applications,” as identified in the DOE report on “Basic Energy Needs for Clean and Efficient Combustion of 21st Century Transportation Fuels”. The challenge is particularly daunting since energy conversion efficiencies and exhaust emissions are governed by coupled chemical and transport processes at multiple length scales ranging from electron excitation to molecular rearrangements to nanoscale particulate formation to turbulent fuel/air mixing. To tackle this challenge, the CEFRC assembled a world-class team of 15 principal investigators, with the objectives to: 1) develop and test theoretical models to predict elementary reaction rates, molecule thermalization rates, chemical bond dissociation energies, and nonequilibrium transport properties using quantum chemistry calculations that account for strong electron correlation and multiple electronic potential energy surfaces; 2) develop automated kinetic mechanism generation, reduction, and error control methods for predicting alternative fuel including biofuel oxidation, fuel droplet decomposition, and NOx and particulate formation; 3) validate and improve the predictions of these models by measuring ignition delay times, species profiles, flame structures, burning limits, turbulence-kinetic coupling, and NOx and soot emissions at high-pressures and near-limit conditions, by using advanced experimental diagnostic techniques including multiple laser techniques, molecular beam sampling and synchrotron photoionization, and by conducting the measurements in high-pressure shock tubes, jet-stirred and flow reactors, flame bombs, counterflow flames, and advanced-design rapid compression ignition instruments; and 4) develop a suite of validated petascale high-fidelity simulation and modeling capabilities to understand and predict chemistry-turbulence-radiation coupling for new fuels in new regimes, including the high pressure, low-temperature combustion in advanced engine and turbine designs, and 5) establish a knowledge highway between researchers and engineers in academia, national laboratories, and industry to facilitate the dissemination and exchange of knowledge on national and international levels, and enrich the talent pool and capabilities of the next generation of combustion scientists and engineers. The technical activities of the CEFRC were conducted through three Disciplinary Working Groups – Chemistry Theory, Experiment and Mechanism, and Reacting Flows, which coordinated the Center’s research on the development of combustion chemistry of Foundation Fuels (C0–C4 hydrocarbons), Alcohols, and Biodiesel through three corresponding Mechanism Thrust Groups. Such a two-dimensional coordinated and tightly interwoven research structure has been proven to be highly effective in assuring the interplay between the developments of the fundamentals of combustion science and the utilization of the various categories of fuels. The Center has accomplished the above goals over the five year period (August 1, 2009 – July 31, 2014) with appropriated funding, followed by two additional no-cost-extension (NCE) years. The research results are documented in 230 journal publications, with six legacy review papers on the study of combustion chemistry using shock tubes, flow reactors, rapid compression machines, and flames, on uncertainty quantification, and on theoretical reaction dynamics and chemical modeling of combustion. A robust outreach program complemented these PI-led research activities, consisting of: 1) a roving post-doc program comprised of a corps of Center-appointed, co- or multi-sponsored post-doctoral fellows with rotating assignments to conduct seed projects initiated by at least two PIs, in residence with these sponsoring PIs, to rapidly pursue new and high-risk, high-payoff interdisciplinary ideas; 2) an annual summer school on combustion heavily attended (~200) by senior graduate students and practicing researchers covering advanced topics on chemical kinetics, fluid mechanics, turbulent combustion, engine combustion, new technologies, etc.; 3) a robust open web-site providing Center and community information as well as the lecture videos and notes of the summer school; and 4) widely distributed biannual newsletters.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

RTN-095: The Vera C. Rubin Observatory Data Preview 1

We present Rubin Data Preview 1 (DP1), the first release of data from the NSF-DOE Vera C. Rubin Observatory, consisting of raw and calibrated single-epoch images, coadds, difference images, detection catalogs, and other derived data products. DP1 is based on 1792 science-grade optical/near-infrared exposures acquired over 48 distinct nights by the Rubin Commissioning Camera, LSSTComCam, on the Simonyi Survey Telescope at the Summit Facility on Cerro Pachón, Chile during the first on-sky commissioning campaign in late 2024. DP1 covers a total of ~15 sq. deg. over seven roughly equally-sized non-contiguous fields, each independently observed in six broad photometric bands, ugrizy, spanning a range of stellar densities and latitudes and overlapping with external reference datasets. The median image quality across all bands, measured by the FWHM of the point-spread function, is approximately 1.13 arcseconds, with the sharpest images reaching about 0.65 arcseconds. DP1 contains approximately 2.3 million distinct astrophysical objects, of which 1.6 million are extended in at least one band, and 431 solar system objects, of which 93 are new discoveries. DP1 is approximately 3.5 TB in size and available to Rubin data rights holders via the Rubin Science Platform, a cloud-based environment for the analysis of petascale astronomical data. While small compared to future LSST releases, its high quality and diversity of data support a broad range of early science investigations across all four LSST themes, providing a valuable opportunity to engage with Rubin data ahead of the start of full operations in late 2025.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗