Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Calculations”

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.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

ICE Calculator 2: Final Report for Phase 1 and 2 of the National Initiative to Update the Interruption Cost Estimate (ICE) Calculator

ICE 2.0 Phase 2 Final Report In 2021, Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations, Inc. launched the “ICE Calculator 2 Initiative” – a national study to refresh the underlying data and enhance the functionality of the ICE Calculator. The Initiative involves Berkeley Lab contracting with sponsoring utilities to administer identical, updated and comprehensive interruption cost surveys to statistically representative samples of each utility’s customers. Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations then pool the survey results across the utilities and use them to update the analytical engines that drive the ICE Calculator. The ICE Calculator 2 Initiative is being conducted in phases. Each phase involves the administration of interruption cost surveys to the customers of sponsoring utilities, followed by an update to the ICE Calculator based on analysis of the pooled survey results. This report describes the activities and findings from Phase 1 and 2 of the ICE Calculator 2 Initiative. Phase 1 was sponsored by eight utilities: American Electric Power, Commonwealth Edison, Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, DTE Electric, Exelon, National Grid, and Puget Sound Energy. Phase 2 was sponsored by six utilities: Empire District Electric Company, Evergy Missouri, Pacific Gas & Electric, San Diego Gas & Electric, Southern California Edison, and Union Electric. Phase 1 and 2 involved 15 customer interruption cost survey activities representing a total of 30 electricity distribution service territories. ICE Calculator Version 2.0 and 2.2 Comparison This memorandum describes–at a high-level–the improvements in interruption cost estimates for the version 2.2 of the ICE Calculator (released February 2026) compared to version 2.0 (released in April 2025). Version 2.2 of the ICE Calculator corresponds to Phase 2 of the initiative, while version 2.0 corresponds to Phase 1. The improvements in version 2.2 result from both a significant increase in the number of customer responses that have been collected and the identification of seven additional factors that help estimate customer interruption costs.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

GPR_calculator: An on-the-fly surrogate model to accelerate massive nudged elastic band calculations

We present GPR_calculator, a package based on Python and C++ programming languages to build an on-the-fly surrogate model using Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) to approximate computationally expensive electronic structure calculations. The key idea is to dynamically train a GPR model during the simulation that can accurately predict energies and forces with uncertainty quantification. When the uncertainty is high, the costly electronic structure calculation is performed to obtain the ground truth data, which is then used to update the GPR model. To illustrate the effectiveness of GPR_calculator, we demonstrate its application in Nudged Elastic Band (NEB) simulations of surface diffusion and reactions, achieving 3-10 times acceleration compared to pure ab initio calculations. The source code is available at https://github.com/MaterSim/GPR_calculator.

Gaussian process regression↗
DOE OSTI2025

ICE Calculator 2.0: Final Report for Phase 1 of the National Initiative to Update the Interruption Cost Estimate (ICE) Calculator

In 2021, Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations, Inc. launched the “ICE 2.0 Initiative” – a national study to refresh the underlying data and enhance the functionality of the ICE Calculator. The Initiative involves Berkeley Lab contracting with sponsoring utilities to administer identical, updated and comprehensive interruption cost surveys to statistically representative samples of each utility’s customers. Berkeley Lab and Resource Innovations then pool the survey results across the utilities and use them to update the analytical engines that drive the ICE Calculator. The ICE 2.0 Initiative is being conducted in phases. Each phase involves the administration of interruption cost surveys to the customers of sponsoring utilities, followed by an update to the ICE Calculator based on analysis of the pooled survey results. This report describes the activities and findings from Phase 1 of the ICE 2.0 Initiative. Phase 1 was sponsored by eight utilities: American Electric Power, Commonwealth Edison, Dominion Energy, Duke Energy, DTE Electric, Exelon, National Grid, and Puget Sound Energy. Phase 1 involved 11 customer interruption cost survey activities representing a total of 24 electricity distribution service territories, 23 of them located in the Eastern and Midwestern regions of the U.S. and one located in the Pacific Northwest. ICE 2.0 vs. 1.0 Comparison This memorandum compares customer power interruption costs estimated using the recently updated Interruption Cost Estimate (ICE) Calculator (“ICE 2.0”) to the original ICE Calculator (“ICE 1.0”). ICE 1.0 was developed in 2009 based on 15 independent power interruption cost surveys conducted by 10 electric utilities between 1989 and 2012. ICE 2.0 was developed in 2025 through a national initiative based on a consistent set of power interruption cost surveys and 11 surveying efforts conducted across 24 electric utility service territories between 2022 and 2024.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Practical Approach to Wave Function Propagation, Hopping Probabilities, and Time Steps in Surface Hopping Calculations

We compare several established approaches for propagating wave functions and calculating hopping probabilities within the fewest switches surface hopping (FSSH) algorithm for difficult cases with many electronic states and many trivial crossings. If only a single time step (Δt c ) is employed, we find that no published approach can accurately capture the dynamics correctly unless Δt c → 0 (which is not computationally feasible). If multiple time steps are employed, for a fixed classical time step (Δt c ), a robust scheme can be found for dynamically choosing quantum time steps (δt q1 and δt q2 ) and calculating hopping probabilities so that one can systematically reduce all errors and achieve maximally efficient accuracy; scattering calculations confirm that one can choose a fairly large classical time step. Furthermore, the robust scheme presented here uses both the “local diabatic” and adiabatic interpolation and thus borrows elements from both the Granucci/Persico and Meek/Levine algorithms. Our findings should be broadly applicable in the future.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2025

Enhancing the accuracy of XPS calculations: Exploring hybrid basis set schemes for CVS-EOMIP-CCSD calculations

Reliable computational methodologies and basis sets for modeling x-ray spectra are essential for extracting and interpreting electronic and structural information from experimental x-ray spectra. In particular, the trade-off between numerical accuracy and computational cost due to the size of the basis set is a major challenge, since molecular orbitals undergo extreme relaxation in the core-hole state. To gain clarity on the changes in electronic structure induced by the formation of a core-hole, the use of sufficiently flexible basis for expanding the orbitals, particularly for the core region, has been shown to be essential. This work focuses on the refinement of core-hole ionized state calculations using the equation-of-motion coupled cluster family of methods through an extensive analysis on the effectiveness of “hybrid” and mixed basis sets. In this investigation, we utilize the CVS-EOMIP-CCSD method in combination and construct hybrid basis sets piecewise from readily available Dunning’s correlation consistent basis sets in order to calculate x-ray ionization energies (IEs) for a set of small gas phase molecules. Our results provide insights into the impact of basis sets on the CVS-EOMIP-CCSD calculations of K-edge IEs of first-row p-block elements. Furthermore, these insights enable us to understand more about the basis set dependence of the core IEs computed and allow us to establish a protocol for deriving reliable and cost-effective theoretical estimates for computing IEs of small molecules containing such elements.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Preservation of kinetics parameters generated by Monte Carlo calculations in two-step deterministic calculations

The generation of accurate kinetic parameters such as mean generation time Λ and effective delayed neutron fraction β eff via Monte Carlo codes is established. Employing these in downstream deterministic codes warrants another step to ensure no additional error is introduced by the low-order transport operator when computing forward and adjoint fluxes for bilinear weighting of these parameters. Another complexity stems from applying superhomogenization (SPH) equivalence in non-fundamental mode approximations, where reference and low-order calculations rely on a 3D full core model. In these cases, SPH factors can optionally be computed for only part of the geometry while preserving reaction rates and K-effective, but the impact of such approximations on kinetics parameters has not been thoroughly studied. This paper aims at studying the preservation of bilinearly-weighted quantities in the Serpent–Griffin calculation procedure. Diffusion and transport evaluations of IPEN/MB-01, Godiva, and Flattop were carried out with the Griffin reactor physics code, testing available modeling options using Serpent-generated multigroup cross sections and equivalence data. Verifying Griffin against Serpent indicates sensitivities to multigroup energy grid selection and regional application of SPH equivalence, introducing significant errors; these were demonstrated to be reduced through the use of a transport method together with a finer energy grid.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

One-bond 13 C– 13 C spin-coupling constants in saccharides: a comparison of experimental and calculated values by density functional theory using solid-state 13 C NMR and X-ray crystallography

Methyl aldohexopyranosides were 13 C-labeled at contiguous carbons, crystallized, and studied by single-crystal X-ray crystallography and solid-state 13 C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to examine the degree to which density functional theory (DFT) can calculate one-bond 13C–13C spin-coupling constants ( 1 J CC ) in saccharides with sufficient accuracy to permit their use in MA'AT analysis, a newly-reported hybrid DFT/NMR method that provides probability distributions of molecular torsion angles in solution (Zhang et al., J. Phys. Chem. B, 2017, 121, 3042–3058; Meredith et al., J. Chem. Inf. Model., 2022, 62, 3135–3141). Experimental 1 J CC values in crystalline samples of the doubly 13 C-labeled compounds were measured by solid-state 13 C NMR and compared to those calculated from five different DFT models: (1) 1 J CC values calculated from single structures identical to those observed in crystalline samples by X-ray crystallography (all atom refinement); (2) 1 J CC values calculated from the single structures in (1) but after Hirshfeld atom refinement (HAR); (3) 1 J CC values calculated from the single structures in (1) after DFT-optimization of hydrogen atoms only; and (4 and 5) 1 J CC values calculated in rotamers of torsion angle θ 2 (C1–C2–O2–O2H) or ω(C4–C5–C6–O6) from which either specific or generalized parameterized equations were obtained and used to calculate 1 J CC values in the specific θ 2 or ω rotamers observed in crystalline samples. Good qualitative agreement was observed between calculated 1 J CC values and those measured by solid-state 13 C NMR regardless of the DFT model, but in no cases were calculated 1 J CC values quantitative, differing (over-estimated) on average by 4–5% from experimental values. These findings, and those reported recently from solution NMR studies (Tetrault et al., J. Phys. Chem. B 2022, 126, 9506–9515), indicate that improvements in DFT calculations are needed before calculated 1 J CC values can be used directly as reliable constraints in MA'AT analyses of saccharides in solution.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

How does uncertainty of soil organic carbon stock affect the calculation of carbon budgets and soil carbon credits for croplands in the U.S. Midwest?

Cropland carbon budget depicts the amount of carbon flowing in and out of agroecosystems and the changes in carbon stocks of soil and living biomass during the same period. Soil carbon credit is the additional change in soil carbon stock under certain farming practices compared with the business-as-usual practices. Accurately calculating cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is critical to assessing climate change mitigation potential in agroecosystems. The calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit is sensitive to local soil and climatic conditions, especially initial soil organic carbon (SOC) stock, which is determined by both SOC concentration (SOC%) and bulk density (Bulk_Density). SOC stock data are either from soil sampling or gridded public survey data. In agroecosystem models, SOC stock data are a key model input for quantifying cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. However, various types and degrees of uncertainties exist in SOC stock datasets, which propagate to the quantification of SOC stock change. In particular, a large discrepancy is found in two widely used SOC stock datasets — Rapid Carbon Assessment dataset (RaCA) and Gridded Soil Survey Geographic Database (gSSURGO) — in the U.S. Midwest, with a relative difference (quantified using Normalized Root Mean Square Error, NRMSE) of 48.0% for 0–30 cm SOC stock between the two datasets. It remains largely unclear how uncertainty in SOC stocks affects the calculation of cropland carbon budget and soil carbon credit. To address this question, we used a well-validated process-based agroecosystem model, ecosys, to assess the impacts of SOC stock uncertainty on carbon budget and soil carbon credit calculation in the U.S. Midwestern corn-soybean rotation systems. Our results reveal the following findings: (1) A sizable discrepancy exists in simulated cropland carbon budget between using gSSURGO and using RaCA for their SOC% and Bulk_Density as model inputs, with a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of only 0.4 for simulated change of SOC stock (ΔSOC) using these two different soil datasets. (2) Simulated cropland carbon budget components were more sensitive to initial SOC% than to Bulk_Density. For example, the upper and lower quartiles of multi-year averaged ΔSOC were –29.8 and 4.8 gC/m 2 /year for the selected counties respectively, with an uncertainty of 13.7 and 0.7 gC/m 2 /year induced by uncertainties in initial SOC% and Bulk_Density, respectively. (3) Both simulated ΔSOC and its uncertainty were negatively correlated with initial SOC%, whereas ΔSOC was negatively correlated with air temperature, and ΔSOC uncertainty was positively correlated with air temperature. (4) The uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits was much smaller compared with the uncertainty of calculated absolute carbon budgets assuming the same SOC stock uncertainty level in the inputs. Specifically, in our assessment comparing planting cover crops vs no cover crop, the uncertainty of calculated soil carbon credits induced by initial SOC% uncertainty was less than 4% (relative to the quantified value of the soil carbon credits) for 90% of the cases. Our analysis highlights that high accuracy measurement of SOC% as inputs is needed for the calculation of cropland carbon budgets; however, soil carbon credit quantification is much less sensitive to the initial SOC% inputs, and the current publicly available soil datasets (e.g., gSSURGO) are largely suitable for the calculation of soil

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Decay Dose Shielding Analysis with Hybrid Unstructured Mesh/Constructive Solid Geometry Monte Carlo Calculation and ADVANTG Acceleration

Here, the target segments of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory Second Target Station (STS) neutron production facility become highly activated due to spallation reactions or nuclei transmutation by primary protons and emitted neutrons. Once the target segments are removed from their location within the core vessel, decay dose rates must be accurately quantified to determine the shielding configurations of remote-handling tools and transport casks and to aid in planning maintenance activities. For this analysis, we utilized a hybrid unstructured mesh (UM)/constructive solid geometry approach for calculating spallation products and neutron fluxes, activation calculations using the AARE package that includes the CINDER2008 activation code to calculate the decay photon source at different cooling times, and the ADVANTG code to accelerate the final decay photon transport calculation. Both Type 316 stainless steel (SS-316) and lead were investigated as candidates for shielding materials. The decay photon transport calculation through the thick SS-316 or lead shields exhibited between 25 and 30 orders-of-magnitude attenuations in the radial direction, depending on the shield. Such a difficult shielding calculation required advanced variance reduction. ADVANTG has some missing features, which limits its usability in spallation neutron source applications. It does not support volumetric sources created for MCNP6.2 UM capability. An approximate source was created for this problem. Not only was this approximate source needed for running the ADVANTG calculation to generate the weight windows, but also it was essential to develop source biasing (SB) parameters that were crucial for dramatically accelerating the decay photon transport in this problem. With this approximate source, the analysis was completed in a very reasonable computational time, and the design of the STS remote-handling equipment was finalized. This paper compares the efficiency of Monte Carlo simulations with different weight window and SB parameters calculated using different approximate ADVANTG calculations.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Technical Background and Validation Report on the Residential Water Inhalation Risk Calculator Presented in the Risk Assessment Information System

Indoor air quality (IAQ) is critical for human health. Poor IAQ is linked to respiratory issues, cardiovascular diseases, and cancer. Indoor pollutants are emitted by typical household items such as cleaning products, personal care items, building materials, and tap water - an understudied volatile organic compound (VOC) source. This document presents the Residential Water Inhalation Risk Calculator (RWIRC), which estimates daily VOC exposure concentrations from various household water uses, such as showering and dishwashing, to assess exposure risks for the most vulnerable occupant. Integrated into the Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS) and sponsored by the US Department of Energy (DOE), the calculator divides a house into three compartments: shower, bathroom, and other spaces, accounting for daily water usage patterns and calculating VOC concentrations. Exposure data generated using the calculator can assist health assessors in estimating excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) and hazard index (HI) from VOC inhalation. Unlike traditional exposure models that utilize Andelman’s constant, the RWIRC continuously assesses variability in VOC concentrations and environmental conditions using differential equations to track VOC concentrations and air exchange between compartments. The calculator also provides unique volatilization fractions for each chemical and appliance, enhancing accuracy of the exposure concentration estimation. The RWIRC is accessible online and allows users to customize parameters (i.e., number of bathrooms, water temperature, and exhaust fan conditions) and input VOC characteristics (i.e., tap water and ambient air concentrations). This document provides a step-by-step guide on implementing the calculator. It also provides comparisons with the ATSDR-SHOWER calculator, using eight VOCs with varying physicochemical properties to reveal differences in algorithms and output concentrations. Simulations also assess how bathroom door positions and exhaust fan usage affect VOC exposure. The calculator results can enhance EPA risk screening levels for inhalation exposure to VOCs from tap water, offering a sophisticated tool for assessing inhalation risks and improving public health protection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Polarization consistent dielectric screening in polarizable continuum model calculations of solvation energies

A polarization consistent framework, where dielectric screening is affected consistently in polarizable continuum model (PCM) calculations, is employed for the study of solvation energies. The computational framework combines a screened range-separated-hybrid functional (SRSH) with PCM calculations, SRSH-PCM, where dielectric screening is imposed in both PCM self-consistent reaction field (SCRF) iterations and the electronic structure Hamiltonian. We begin by demonstrating the impact of modifying the Hamiltonian to include such dielectric screening in SCRF iterations by considering the solutions of electrostatically embedded Hartree–Fock (HF) exact exchange equations. Long-range screened HF-PCM calculations are shown to capture properly the linear dependence of gap energy of frontier orbitals on the inverse of the dielectric constant, whereas unscreened HF-PCM orbital energies are fallaciously semi-constant with respect to the dielectric constant and, therefore, inconsistent with the ionization energy gaps. Similar trends affect density functional theory (DFT) calculations that aim to achieve predictive quality. Importantly, the dielectric screened calculations are shown to significantly affect DFT- and HF PCM-based solvation energies, where screened solvation energies are smaller compared to the unscreened values. Importantly, SRSH-PCM, therefore, appears to reduce the tendency of DFT-PCM to overestimate solvation energies, where we find the effect to increase with the dielectric constant and the polarity of the molecular solute, trends that enhance the quality of DFT-PCM calculations of solvation energy. Understanding the relationship of dielectric screening in the Hamiltonian and DFT-PCM calculations can ultimately benefit on-going efforts for the design of predictive and parameter free descriptions of solvation energies.

Chemistry↗
DOE OSTI2025

Calculation of ion–ion mutual neutralization rate constants using Landau–Zener theory coupled with trajectory simulations for Ar + –Cl − , Br − , I −

In this computational study, we self-consistently calculate the rate constants of mutual neutralization reactions by incorporating the electron transfer probability, using Landau–Zener state transition theory with inputs derived from ab initio quantum chemistry calculations, into classical trajectory simulations. Electronic structure calculations are done using correlation consistent basis sets with multi-reference configuration interaction to map all the molecular electronic states below the ion-dissociation limit as a function of the distance between the reacting species. Our electronic structure calculations have been significantly improved from our previous work through improved selection of molecular electronic configurations maintaining a fine grid of 1a 0 over a wide range of bond lengths and accurate treatment of spin–orbit couplings. Non-adiabatic coupling matrix elements are calculated with the three-point central difference method near each avoided crossing to estimate the exact crossing point R x and coupling parameter H if , which are inputs to the multi-channel Landau–Zener theory to calculate the electron transition probability. Our approach is applied to estimate the mutual neutralization rate constants for the following ion pairs: Ar + –Cl − , Ar + –Br − , Ar + –I − at ∼133 Pa. Furthermore, our predictions are compared against the experimental data reported. It is seen that the improvement in the electronic structure calculation results in excellent agreement between the simulation results and the available experimental data to within a factor of ∼2 or ∼±50%.

Complete-active space self-consistent field↗
DOE OSTI2023

User Guide for the Los Alamos National Laboratory Fallout Calculator (V.1.1)

The Los Alamos National Laboratory Fallout Calculator is a Java™ application that can calculate the dose from many nuclear detonations producing fallout. The fallout calculations are performed for one or multiple selected winds. The winds are from the years 2000 to 2010, for all 12 months, and for the 1 st , 10 th , and 20 th of each month. The winds are available from 0 meters to 50,000 meters altitude MSL. This Fallout Calculator performs ideal calculations. There is no terrain. The ground is perfectly flat at sea level. There is no rain that would cause radioactive hot spots. The wind is historical, not a current wind. Also, the wind is fixed in time. It does not vary over the 24 hours it takes the fallout to arrive on the ground. Therefore, this calculator is suitable for operational type studies. For instance, it can be used to calculate the relative difference in fallout patterns from different possible nuclear laydowns. It can be used to understand how frequently fallout would be likely to occur in a particular part of the US. It could be used to develop plans for how to protect the population from a nuclear attack. However, it should not be used to predict the dose in a city from an actual laydown, or to predict safe corridors for the population to use to egress from areas with high fallout.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗