Search NASASearch

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “INSTRUMENT PACKAGE”

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

Multi-Year Electric Field Study at the North Slope of Alaska (OYESNSA) Field Campaign Report

The Global Electric Circuit (GEC) of the atmosphere provides a unique perspective on Earth’s changing climate. Monitoring this global electrical signature provides details of the global nature of electrified clouds and thunderstorms. The North Slope of Alaska (NSA) is a unique location for collecting these electric field measurements. Besides being at the opposite pole from many previous electric field measurements taken at Russia’s Vostok station in Antarctica, this site provides a rare opportunity to use other instruments at the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) User Facility’s NSA observatory at Utqiaġvik (formerly known as Barrow), such as the Ka-band ARM Zenith Radar (KAZR), upward-facing micropulse lidar (MPL), vertical profile of meteorological measures, and other aerosol measurements. Since 2017, Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi (TAMUCC) has established an observational instrument package, including CS110 electric fields and anemometer, at ARM’s NSA observatory at Utqiaġvik. This enabled the unique opportunity to not only provide information about the global signature of the GEC, but also the physical inputs to the local electric field, by analyzing the physical properties of the simultaneous cloud, wind, and aerosol properties occurring with the vertical electric field.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Multi-Year Electric Field Study at the North Slope of Alaska (OYESNSA) Field Campaign Report

The Global Electric Circuit (GEC) of the atmosphere provides a unique perspective on Earth’s changing climate. Monitoring this global electrical signature provides details of the global nature of electrified clouds and thunderstorms. The North Slope of Alaska (NSA) is a unique location for collecting these electric field measurements. Besides being at the opposite pole from many previous electric field measurements taken at Russia’s Vostok station in Antarctica, this site provides a rare opportunity to use other instruments at the U.S. Department of Energy Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) User Facility’s NSA observatory at Utqiaġvik (formerly known as Barrow), such as the Ka-band ARM Zenith Radar (KAZR), upward-facing micropulse lidar (MPL), vertical profile of meteorological measures, and other aerosol measurements. Since 2017, Texas A&M University at Corpus Christi (TAMUCC) has established an observational instrument package, including CS110 electric fields and anemometer, at ARM’s NSA observatory at Utqiaġvik. This enabled the unique opportunity to not only provide information about the global signature of the GEC, but also the physical inputs to the local electric field, by analyzing the physical properties of the simultaneous cloud, wind, and aerosol properties occurring with the vertical electric field.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

The Snow Albedo Evolution (SALVO) Campaign at the North Slope of Alaska Field Campaign Report

The springtime surface-albedo transition in the Alaskan Arctic, along with the forces that determine its duration and nature, was the focus of the Snow ALbedo eVOlution (SALVO) campaign. The SALVO team investigated the reasons and durations of the stages of spring melt, during which albedo values decrease from 0.8 to 0.1, signifying the year’s largest and most significant radiative energy change. SALVO II (2022, 2024) built on findings from the successful SALVO I (2019) melt season campaign and previous research on the melt transition period conducted by Grenfell and Perovich (2004). SALVO used the ARM NSA observatory, thus aligning with a core principle of the ARM Decadal Vision to “provide comprehensive and impactful field measurements to support scientific advancement of atmospheric process understanding.” SALVO fieldwork was conducted in the spring near the ARM NSA Central Facility in Utqiagvik, Alaska (Figure 1). Comprehensive data sets were collected in 2019, 2022, and 2024, which included spectral and broadband albedos, snow and meltwater depths, snow stratigraphy, snow grain size data, and aerial imagery. In April of each project year, before the snow began to melt, we established survey lines at three or four locations: inland tundra at NSA E12, coastal tundra at the NSA C1 site, Elson Lagoon, and offshore on the Chukchi Sea sea ice (2022 only). We set up a 200-meter-long line, marked every five meters, to enable repeated measurements of surface albedo and snow depth at each location. During most site visits, the SALVO II team dug at least one snow pit to assess the characteristics of the vertical snow layers, including the types and sizes of snow grains, snow density, and the distribution of liquid water. We evaluated the characteristics of flowing or pooled water at the bottom of the snowpack. Watching snow melt in the Arctic has been compared by some to being as exciting as watching paint dry, but it is far more exciting and dynamic than that. Initially, changes happen slowly while the snow cover remains above 80%, but then reductions in the albedo of the landscape, from about 0.8 to 0.4, combined with rising spring temperatures, begin to accelerate the melt. It happens so quickly that no matter how hard the field team works, they cannot keep up with documenting the changes. At first, liquid water is scarce—only a few wet layers of snow in the snowpack. But then, water becomes ubiquitous, transporting melt energy and creating an extremely heterogeneous albedo and melt landscape. At the end of each field season, the SALVO team is exhausted, relieved to see the snow gone, and joyful to play in the melt ponds on the sea ice under the midnight sun. Overall, the 2024 SALVO field campaign was a highlight, reflecting numerous lessons learned from 2019 and 2022. Daily measurements were taken more than 10 times at each site, resulting in a comprehensive time series of snow conditions and albedo. The team deployed using snowmachines and then on foot when snowmachine travel was no longer permitted on the melting tundra. Instrument mounts and packaging were optimized for quick deployment, regardless of the mode of transportation.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES

Drifting Acoustic Measurements around C-Power's SeaRay WEC

The repository contains underwater noise measurements and associated metadata collected around C-Power's SeaRay wave energy converter on July 15, 2024 and July 16, 2024 while it was deployed at the U.S. Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS) in Kaneohe, HI. Measurements were obtained using Drifting Acoustic Instrumentation SYstems (DAISYs). DAISYs consist of a surface expression connected to a hydrophone recording package by a tether. Both elements are instrumented to provide metadata (e.g., position, orientation, and depth). Information about how to build DAISYs is available at https://www.pmec.us/research-projects/daisy. The repository's primary content is a compressed archive (.zip format), containing multiple MATLAB binary data files (.mat format). The structure of each file is included in the repository as a Word document (Data Description MHK-DR.docx). Each file contains time series information for a single DAISY deployment (file naming convention: WETS_DAISY_[Drift #].mat) consisting of processed hydrophone data and associated metadata. During these measurements, C-Power's SeaRay was located at approximately 21.48112 N, 157.74451 W.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER

DAISY Benchmark Performance Data

This repository contains the underlying data from benchmark experiments for Drifting Acoustic Instrumentation SYstems (DAISYs) in waves and currents described in "Performance of a Drifting Acoustic Instrumentation SYstem (DAISY) for Characterizing Radiated Noise from Marine Energy Converters" (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40722-024-00358-6). DAISYs consist of a surface expression connected to a hydrophone recording package by a tether. Both elements are instrumented to provide metadata (e.g., position, orientation, and depth). Information about how to build DAISYs is available at https://www.pmec.us/research-projects/daisy. The repository's primary content is three compressed archives (.zip format), each containing multiple MATLAB binary data files (.mat format). A table relating individual data files to figures in the paper, as well as the structure of each file, is included in the repository as a Word document (Data Description MHK-DR.docx). Most of the files contain time series information for a single DAISY deployment (file naming convention: [site]_DAISY_[Drift #].mat) consisting of processed hydrophone data and associated metadata. For a limited number of DAISY deployments, the hydrophone package was replaced with an acoustic Doppler velocimeter (file naming convention: [site]_DAISY_[Drift #]_ADV.mat). Data were collected over several years at three locations: (1) Sequim Bay at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory's Marine & Coastal Research Laboratory (MCRL) in Sequim, WA, the energetic tidal channel in Admiralty Inlet, WA (Admiralty Inlet), and the U.S. Navy's Wave Energy Test Site (WETS) in Kaneohe, HI. Brief descriptions of data files at each location follow. - MCRL - (1) Drift #4 and #16 contrast the performance of a DAISY and a reference hydrophone (icListen HF Reson), respectively, in the quiescent interior of Sequim Bay (September 2020). (2) Drift #152 and #153 are velocity measurements for a drifting acoustic Doppler velocimeter in in the tidally-energetic entrance channel inside a flow shield and exposed to the flow, respectively (January 2018). (3) Two non-standard files are also included: DAISY_data.mat corresponds to a subset of a DAISY drift over an Adaptable Monitoring Package (AMP) and AMP_data.mat corresponds to approximately co-temporal data for a stationary hydrophone on the AMP (February 2019). - Admiralty Inlet - (1) Drift #1-12 correspond to tests with flow shielded DAISYs, unshielded DAISYs, a reference hydrophone, and drifting acoustic Doppler velocimeter with 5, 10, and 15 m tether lengths between surface expression and hydrophone recording package (July 2022). (2) Drift #13-20 correspond to tests of flow shielded DAISYs with three different tether materials (rubber cord, nylon line, and faired nylon line) in lengths of 5, 10, and 15 m (July 2022). - WETS - (1) Drift #30-32 correspond to tests with a heave plate incorporated into the tether (standard configuration for wave sites), rubber cord only, and rubber cord, but with a flow shielded hydrophone (November 2022). (2) Drift #49-58 and Drift #65-68 correspond to measurements around mooring infrastructure at the 60 m berth where time-delay-of-arrival localization was demonstrated for different DAISY arrangements and hydrophone depths (November 2022).

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER

A science-driven approach to optimize the design for a biological small-angle neutron scattering instrument

Biological small-angle neutron scattering (SANS) instruments facilitate critical analysis of the structure and dynamics of complex biological systems. However, with the growth of experimental demands and the advances in optical systems design, a new neutron optical concept is necessary to overcome the limitations of current instruments. This work presents an approach to include experimental objectives ( i.e. the science to be supported by a specific neutron scattering instrument) in the optimization of the neutron optical concept. The approach for a proposed SANS instrument at the Second Target Station of the Spallation Neutron Source at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, USA, is presented here. Further, the instrument is simulated with the McStas software package. The optimization process is driven by an evolutionary algorithm using McStas output data, which are processed to calculate an objective function designed to quantify the expected performance of the simulated neutron optical configuration for the intended purpose. Each McStas simulation covers the complete instrument, from source to detector, including realistic sample scattering functions. This approach effectively navigates a high-dimensional parameter space that is otherwise intractable; it allows the design of next-generation SANS instruments to address specific scientific cases and has the potential to increase instrument performance compared with traditional design approaches.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION

ORNL Package Testing Program Overview

When transporting radioactive or hazardous materials, safety and security are top priorities. Packaging and transportation regulations require reliable evidence that containers have passed rigorous performance tests to ensure that the public and the environment are protected from the hazardous nature of the cargo. Because of its long history in energy and security research, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has needed to ship hazardous packages for the past 65 years. Since the 1940s, ORNL has made significant contributions to transportation regulations and has been at the forefront of regulatory testing development. Today, ORNL is a leader in standards development and testing of designs of radioactive material packages. ORNL plays a critical role in ensuring the safe transportation of radioactive materials across the United States by executing rigorous testing campaigns of packages that contain radioactive materials. Early testing activities focused on supporting the development of transportation regulations established by both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United States. Currently, all package testing activities are performed under the Package Testing Program (PTP) at the Package Evaluation Facility (PEF) located at the National Transportation Research Center (NTRC), which is about 10 miles from the main ORNL campus. The PTP develops and evaluates testing solutions, ensuring that they are safe efficient, and in compliance with regulatory requirements. The vision for the PTP is to be a world-class leader in the evaluation and testing of radioactive and hazardous material packages. The key elements necessary to fulfill this mission are an experienced and professional staff; state-of-the-art facilities, equipment, and instrumentation; and completion of challenging programs and projects important to package transportation. Collaborations with other internal and external organizations play a significant role in building stronger teams and achieving this vision. By adhering to and advancing regulatory standards, ORNL’s PTP supports development of safe and compliant packaging, safeguarding the transportation process from potential risks associated with radioactive material logistics.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS

Report on the "Symposium on Advancements in Simulating Neutron Scattering Instruments and Experiments"

An international group of researchers gathered for the “Symposium on Advancements in Simulating Neutron Scattering Instruments and Experiments” at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on October 29- 30, 2024. The symposium highlighted state-of-the-art advancements in neutron scattering instrument simulations and the development of digital twins for scattering instruments. This document summarizes the recurring themes from the 19 talks and discussions. A key focus was on the role of neutronics simulations in the design, analysis, and performance optimization of neutron instruments. Presentations featured the most widely used software packages, such as McStas, McVine, Vitess, and MCNP. Another major theme addressed the analysis and interpretation of experimental neutron data, where materials models and simulations play a critical role. Talks on relevant software tools, including NCrystal, OCLimax, and Paradyse, were delivered by their respective developers. During the symposium, both talks and breakout sessions explored strategies to enhance the interplay between neutronics simulations and materials models. A key question emerged: How can we develop a RealTime Explainable Digital Twin of a neutron scattering experiment? Discussions include the idea that the Digital Twin concept has implications for instrument control and testing. Through this symposium, we gained valuable insights into the challenges and requirements for developing a Real-Time Explainable Digital Twin of a neutron scattering experiment. The discussions and presentations paved the way for future innovations in this rapidly advancing field.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND

MethodOpt: a Shiny-based graphical user interface for multivariate optimization of sampling and analytical instrumentation

Method optimization is an important step in producing useful data in various experimental settings involving the use of sampling and analytical instrumentation, such as gas-chromatography mass-spectrometry or other analytical techniques. However, traditional optimization techniques often lack the sophistication of more modern optimization techniques developed in areas of applied mathematics. A graphical user interface has been developed that implements a multivariate, multi-objective optimization technique for spectra-generating sampling and analytical instrumentation, which saves substantial time and resources compared to the more traditional approaches to method development.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND

Integrating ORNL’s HPC and Neutron Facilities with a Performance-Portable CPU/GPU Ecosystem

We explore the development of a performance-portable CPU/GPU ecosystem to integrate two of the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest scientific instruments, the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing facility and the Spallation Neutron Source (SNS), both of which are housed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory. We select a relevant data reduction workflow use-case to obtain the differential scattering cross-section from data collected by SNS’s CORELLI and TOPAZ instruments. We compare the current CPU-only production implementation using the Garnet Python multiprocess package based on the Mantid C++ framework against our proposed CPU/GPU implementation that uses the LLVM-based, just-in-time Julia scientific language and the JACC.jl performance-portable package. Two proxy apps were developed: (i) an app for extracting relevant Mantid kernels (MDNorm) in C++ and (ii) the Julia MiniVATES.jl miniapp. We present performance results for NVIDIA A100 and AMD MI100 GPUs and AMD EPYC 7513 and 7662 CPUs. The results provide insights for future generations of data reduction software that can embrace performance portability for an integrated research infrastructure across DOE’s experimental and computational facilities.

Hahn, Steven

Research and Development Related to the Commercialization of Perovskite Radiation Detectors (CRADA Final Report)

This work will focus on the development of perovskite radiation detectors fabricated with nanocrystal, thick polycrystalline films, or single crystal materials. This will harness NREL’s instrumentation and expertise in a variety of research areas including but not limited to metal halide perovskites, device characterization, device packaging, accelerated lifetime testing, and ink chemistry development.

14 SOLAR ENERGY

Optimizing the spatial resolution and gamma discrimination of SiPM-based Anger cameras

SiPM Anger cameras have been designed for use as 2-dimensional thermal neutron detectors for scientific applications such as at single crystal diffraction instruments. These cameras utilize a neutron sensitive scintillator and an array of SiPM photosensors, separated by a light spreading glass. While this optics package is very effective at detecting and positioning neutrons, it is also sensitive to gamma rays, which are a source of unwanted noise. In this work, we underwent a search of scintillator and spreader glass thicknesses to determine the optimal combination for maximizing spatial resolution. Both experimental results and GEANT4 simulations are presented. Further, to address the issue of gamma ray detection, we have also designed and presented a multi-layer scintillator that reduces the amount of scintillation light produced via gamma-ray energy deposition, allowing for easier pulse-height discrimination. A sample of this geometry has been produced that results in a factor of 2 improvement over an equivalent thickness monolithic scintillator.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND

fluxfinder: An R Package for Reproducible Calculation and Initial Processing of Greenhouse Gas Fluxes From Static Chamber Measurements

Fluxes of greenhouse gases are a critical component of the earth's natural climate, but anthropogenic emissions have created an imbalance and resulted in global climate change. Quantifying the emission of these gases is vital to our understanding of their sources and sinks, both natural and anthropogenic. The static chamber method, in which a system of interest is enclosed, and gas concentrations are measured over time, is widely used to estimate fluxes of greenhouse gases. With the development of instruments such as infrared gas analyzers (IRGAs) supporting high-frequency concentration data, there is a growing need for open-source workflows to calculate fluxes. Here we present fluxfinder, an R package designed to support reproducible calculations and processing of greenhouse gas fluxes measured with the static chamber method. The package includes raw data file parsing from widely used IRGAs, metadata matching, unit conversion, flux estimations, and initial quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC). Diagnostic graphical plots provide a transparent way to differentiate between measurement issues and nonlinear behavior. The package is also designed to be easily integrated with the gasfluxes package for further fitting of nonlinear concentration-time models, allowing alternative or additional flux QA/QC. The fluxfinder package offers a flexible workflow that is easily adaptable to promote open and reproducible greenhouse gas flux estimations.

Wilson, Stephanie J.

Data & Code from Phoenix CPPP Phase 2 Analysis

This data and code package supports the analysis presented in “Beyond Surface Cooling: Comprehensive Field Assessment of Reflective Pavement Thermal Performance in Phoenix, Arizona” and provides fully reproducible workflows for evaluating the thermal performance of cool pavement treatments in a hot urban environment. The dataset integrates multi-modal field measurements collected across residential and nonresidential settings, including mobile air temperature traverses, stationary air temperature monitoring, residential mean radiant temperature (MRT) measurements, subsurface temperature profiles, and controlled testbed observations. The data package contains raw and processed datasets in comma-separated value (CSV) format, accompanying metadata files describing site characteristics and measurement protocols, and R scripts (.R files) used for data cleaning, time synchronization, spatial and temporal matching, quality control filtering, statistical comparison, and figure generation. All analyses were conducted using R (version ≥ 4.2.0) with commonly available packages (e.g., tidyverse, lubridate, data.table, ggplot2). No proprietary software is required to reproduce results. Field campaigns were designed to quantify the effects of high-reflectance pavement coatings on surface temperature, near-surface air temperature, subsurface heat propagation, and radiative heat exposure. Temporal alignment procedures include standardized timestamp conversion and nearest-neighbor matching of high-frequency sensor measurements to stop-based metadata within defined tolerance windows to ensure comparability across instruments. The workflows generate summary statistics, treatment–control contrasts, depth-dependent thermal gradients, and time-series visualizations used in the associated publication. By integrating mobile, stationary, radiative, and subsurface measurements within a unified and transparent processing framework, this package enables comprehensive evaluation of cool pavement performance across multiple thermal exposure pathways and supports reuse in future urban heat mitigation and climate resilience studies.

AIR TEMPERATURE

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS