Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “INSTRUMENTS FOR MEASURING PERFORMANCE”

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 OSTI2025

High temperature nuclear data measurements of SiC, ZrC, and MgO [Slides]

Performed temperature dependent measurements of SiC and ZrC at ARCS instrument at SNS. Performed temperature dependent measurements of SiC, ZrC, and MgO at VISION instrument at SNS. Performed initial atomistic modeling of these materials using various techniques, including machine learned potentials. Future work includes temperature dependent transmission measurements of these materials, as well as improving the machine learned potentials with more training data and different machine learned frameworks.

ARCS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluation of average leaf inclination angle quantified by indirect optical instruments in crop fields

Average leaf inclination angle ($\overline{θ}$ L ) is an important canopy structure variable that influences light regime, photosynthesis, and evapotranspiration of plants. $\overline{θ}$ L can be measured through direct methods (e.g., protractor), which are labor-intensive and time-consuming, or through indirect optical instruments, which are more efficient than the direct methods. However, uncertainties of different indirect optical instruments for quantifying $\overline{θ}$ L remain largely unquantified. In this study, we evaluated and compared the performances of three major indirect optical instruments: (1) LAI-2200, (2) 30°-tilted camera, and (3) digital hemispherical photography (DHP), in different crop fields over a growing season, benchmarked with direct measurements. LAI-2200 and 30°-tilted camera showed higher agreement with direct $\overline{θ}$ measurements (R 2 = 0.54, RMSE = 7.37°; R 2 = 0.58, RMSE = 8.08°) than DHP (R 2 = 0.14, RMSE = 13.96°). Different performances of indirect optical instruments could be attributed to the accuracy of gap fraction measurement and the performance of the $\overline{θ}$ L quantification algorithms. When using the LAI-2200 algorithm, larger gap fraction gradients over view zenith angles led to larger $\overline{θ}$ L values, and smaller gap fraction gradients led to smaller $\overline{θ}$ L values. Such error propagation was larger in sparse canopy than in dense canopy. The Wilson G function of the LAI-2200 algorithm performed better in estimating $\overline{θ}$ L than the G function based on the ellipsoidal LAD function used by the CAN_EYE algorithm. We also proposed a modification of the LAI-2200 algorithm, which further improved the performance of LAI-2200 and 30°-tilted cameras in estimating $\overline{θ}$ L . We envision that the low-cost 30°-tilted cameras provide a promising sensor solution to continuously monitor canopy structure for various ecosystems.

30°-tilted camera↗
DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory and field assessment of mid-infrared absorption (MIRA) instrument performance for methane and ethane dry mole fractions

Concurrent measurements of methane (CH 4 ) and ethane (C 2 H 6 ) can be used to identify and separate methane sources, as ethane is present in thermogenic sources (e.g., oil and natural gas) but not in biogenic sources (e.g., agriculture). In this study, we evaluated the performance of multiple Aeris MIRA Ultra instruments (Versions 1 and 2) through controlled laboratory tests and tower-based deployments under field conditions. The systems were modified with an external pump, flow control, a Nafion dryer, and a custom-built auxiliary box to automate the system and transmit near real-time data. We determined the best calibration approach for our application, given practical limitations, to be a full calibration cycle (with ambient and high calibration cylinders) about once per day and an ambient calibration cylinder sampled hourly. Measurement uncertainty was assessed, including the uncertainty due to instrument noise as a function of calibration frequency, uncertainty in the water vapor correction, and cylinder assignment uncertainty. Instrument noise was the dominant source of uncertainty for C 2 H 6 , while the water vapor correction dominated the CH 4 uncertainty. For Version 2 systems with hourly calibrations and a Nafion dryer with counterflow, the mean total uncertainty, including both systematic errors and noise, of hourly averages was 0.8–3.0 ppb CH 4 and 0.35–0.37 ppb C 2 H 6 . Laboratory intercomparisons showed network compatibility within 1.2 ppb CH 4 and 0.23 ppb C 2 H6, and a collocated deployment with a NOAA Picarro system agreed within 1.8 ppb CH 4 . Instrument noise varied substantially amongst the instruments, with errors reaching up to 11 ppb CH 4 and 2 ppb C 2 H 6 for hourly means, with similar variability indicated in a 50 h cylinder test. With appropriate engineering and calibration, the Aeris MIRA Ultra has the potential to distinguish regional methane emission sources in many field settings.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nonlinear light-output calibration of the oxygenated xylene scintillators used in OMEGA neutron time-of-flight spectrometers

Neutron time-of-flight (nTOF) spectrometers are essential instruments for measuring and evaluating the performance of inertial confinement fusion implosions. The neutron spectrometers utilized for the OMEGA laser include two liquid-based scintillators, each consisting of a large volume filled with xylene that is coupled to four photomultiplier tubes. Analysis of the signal from these detectors requires detailed knowledge of the scintillator’s light output, which is needed to fit the nTOF spectrum, from which the neutron energy spectrum is informed. The light output is nonlinearly proportional to the neutron energy, which, in turn, affects the interpretation of the neutron energy spectrum from a TOF signal. A recent campaign on OMEGA was performed to calibrate the xylene detectors and infer the shape of the light-output curve. The campaign utilized materials with increasing Z placed in the OMEGA target chamber to initiate scattering events with the 14 MeV fusion neutrons. This process leads to the production of backscatter neutrons of varying energies that appear as peaks in the nTOF data. Simulations using a neutron transport code were combined with the measured deuterium–tritium neutron yields to calculate the expected backscattered neutron yields from the well-known scattering cross sections of each material. Furthermore, the neutron-energy dependent light output of the scintillator inferred from the experiment is compared to the light-output curve simulated with a neutron transport code for the following neutron energies: 1.5, 2.5, 6, and 14 MeV.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

The Psyche Gamma-Ray and Neutron Spectrometer

A Gamma-Ray and Neutron Spectrometer (GRNS) instrument has been developed as part of the science payload for NASA’s Discovery Program Psyche mission to the M-class asteroid (16) Psyche. The GRNS instrument is designed to measure the elemental composition of Psyche with the goal to understand the origin of this mysterious, potentially metal-rich planetary body. The GRNS will measure the near-surface abundances for the elements Ni, Fe, Si, K, S, Al, and Ca, as well as the spatial distribution of Psyche’s metal-to-silicate fraction (or metal fraction). These measurements address three of the five Psyche mission science objectives: determine if Psyche is a core; determine whether small metal bodies incorporate light elements into the metal phase; and determine whether Psyche was formed under reducing conditions. The Gamma-Ray Spectrometer (GRS) uses a cryocooled, high-purity Ge (HPGe) sensor to detect cosmic-ray generated gamma rays in the 60 to 9000-keV energy range. The HPGe sensor is surrounded by a borated plastic anticoincidence shield that provides three functions: active background rejection from charged particle interactions in the HPGe sensor; fast neutron measurements; and direct measurements of the incident galactic cosmic ray flux. The Neutron Spectrometer (NS) uses three 3 He gas proportional sensors, each with different material wraps to measure thermal (<0.4 eV), low-energy epithermal (0.4 eV to 1 keV), and high-energy epithermal (up to 100 keV) neutrons. This paper provides an overview of the Psyche GRNS, including: its science and measurement objectives; the design of the instrument hardware, software, and operation; pre-launch performance measurements and its initial performance in space; and an overview of its data products and expected operation for different Psyche mission phases.

Engineering - Instrumentation related to nuclear s↗
DOE OSTI2026

Evaluation of a Smoke Opacity Sensor for Improving Residential Wood Heater Combustion

Residential wood heating lacks real-time particulate matter (PM) monitoring technologies capable of measuring emissions directly from flue gases. This study evaluates the performance of the Octoring, an opacity-based smoke sensor developed to monitor wood heater emissions and provide feedback for improved combustion. The device was tested on catalytic and non-catalytic cordwood heaters and a pellet heater during startup, high-burn, and low-burn phases. Performance was assessed against reference particle instruments and gravimetric measurements using concordance, correlation, and agreement analyses. Results show that temperature-dependent drift is the primary limitation affecting sensor accuracy, with systematic drift observed across ambient and combustion conditions. Agreement with reference instruments ranged from poor to good depending on operating conditions, with the strongest performance observed during pellet heater high-burn operation. These findings establish a performance baseline for opacity-based sensing technologies and identify key areas for further development before practical deployment in residential wood combustion monitoring systems.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Resonance Ionization Spectroscopy Experiment at Facility for Rare Isotope Beams

This manuscript reports on the commissioning of the Resonance Ionization Spectroscopy Experiment (RISE) at the BEam COoler and LAser spectroscopy (BECOLA) facility at Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB). The instrument implements the collinear resonance ionization spectroscopy technique for sensitive measurements of isotope shifts and hyperfine structure of short-lived isotopes produced at FRIB. The existing BECOLA beamline was extended to integrate an electrostatic ion-beam bender and an ion detector at ultrahigh vacuum. An injection-seeded titanium-sapphire laser and a multiharmonic pulsed neodymium-doped yttrium aluminum garnet laser were installed to perform resonant excitation and selective ionization. Commissioning tests were performed to demonstrate the capabilities of the instrument by measuring the hyperfine structure of stable 27 Al produced in an offline ion source. The RISE instrument is ready and operational for future studies of short-lived isotopes at FRIB.

Atomic spectra↗
DOE OSTI2025

Boron isotopic analysis in bulk silicate materials using the Neoma MS/MS MC-ICP-MS

Boron (B) isotopes are a valuable tracer with applications ranging from geological, environmental, and nuclear studies because B isotopic fractionation is highly sensitive to chemical processes yielding distinct isotopic trends in natural and anthropogenic systems. Despite this wide applicability, there remain relatively few measurements on well-described reference materials and in some cases, poor agreement between various methods. We report a method for boron isotope ratio measurement in solution on the Neoma MS/MS MC-ICP-MS specifically targeting bulk silicates. We evaluate the performance of the method and instrument as it relates to the measurement of the absolute boron isotope ratio ( 10 B/ 11 B). The results indicate that the method produces data in agreement with literature values and that the sample–standard bracketing technique is appropriate for the Neoma MS/MS MC-ICP-MS which has been in use for decades on previous generation instruments. Careful tuning of the MS/MS lenses is required to obtain precision comparable to non MS/MS equipped MC-ICP-MS. With careful tuning, internal and external precisions of ∼0.3‰ were achieved. However, when the MS/MS is not properly tuned external precisions exceed 3‰. Nevertheless, our results for IAEA B-6, BCR-2, BHVO-2 and W-2a reference materials overlap the 1σ range of previously reported 10 B/ 11 B. Data are reported for total boron quantities down to a few tens of nanograms. Our procedure yielded blanks as low as 3 ng but up to 29 ng, making blank corrections important for small samples sizes in the few 10s of nanogram range. We report B isotope ratios for AGV-2G, SL-1G, GSC-2G, GSD-2G, GSE-2G, RLS-132, RLS-140, NKT-1G, and T1-G glass reference materials that have not been previously reported in the literature.

Scott, Sean R. [Pacific Northwest National Laborat↗
DOE OSTI2026

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↗
DOE OSTI2026

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↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

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 at Snodgrass Mountain. 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 SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. 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↗
DOE OSTI2026

Filtration Performance of Simulated 200 West Area Waste Feeds

This report describes the scaled experimental system and approach used to examine dead-end filtration performance of representative 200W waste feeds. The scaled system, which was originally designed and assembled to test Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) system performance with higher-than-expected solid loadings in 2021 (Schonewill et al. 2021), was repurposed to conduct the current experiments at ~1/145 of full scale (based on throughput). Six experimental runs were conducted with five different 200W waste feed simulants: three using a DEF module scaled for TSCR and three using a DEF module scaled for the 200W process modules (based on the current design for the Advanced Modular Pretreatment System). Each experiment was run continuously for multiple days with an operating approach prototypic of the full-scale system. Staff performing the experimental runs monitored performance, obtained data from calibrated process instruments, and collected samples for observation and analysis. The measured data are presented with a focus on assessing DEF performance – specifically, the filters’ differential pressure response to the five waste simulants, frequency and efficacy of backwashing, and baseline recovery between experimental runs; data related to ion exchange column performance are also discussed in cases where the opportunity arose. The experimental campaign demonstrated that the DEFs satisfied their primary function of protecting the ion exchange column from solid intrusion for all the representative simulants used. The filters readily handled solids loadings of =500 ppm (and even greater), especially the modules scaled to the 200W process modules. Adjustments to the processing flow rate and reductions in feed temperature were observed to affect the rate of differential pressure increase on the filters, but neither adversely affected the ability of the DEFs to perform their primary function. Backflushing reliably recovered filter performance in all runs, although it did not prevent irreversible fouling for one simulant. The run that exhibited irreversible fouling established that both the quantity and the nature of the solids being filtered need to be considered when projecting filter performance.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2026

Entanglement Throughput Measurements and Capacity Estimates for Aerial-Inground Fiber

The throughput of entangled qubit pairs per second (eqps) is a basic performance metric of quantum networks that provide the entanglement distribution capability. Over fiber connections, it is measured using specialized instruments, including photonic entanglement sources and single-photon detectors. Extensive theory has been developed to estimate the capacity of a generic quantum channel, which in turn is applied to estimate the maximum achievable eqps over a fiber connection. However, there is a gap in relating these two performance metrics, in part due to their disparate nature, namely, mathematical formulae of the channel capacity and specialized instrumentation for eqps measurements. We describe eqps measurements collected over testbed connections composed of aerial and inground fiber of lengths up to 45 km. We estimate the normalized capacity using the transmissivity parameter derived from single photon detector measurements. These estimates are then converted to capacity bounds on the connection's eqps using the source eqps rate derived from co-located detector measurements. The results indicate a consistency between eqps measurements and their capacity estimates, and provide insights into relating the parameters of analytic capacity estimates to physical measurements.

Rao, Nageswara [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000234085941)↗
DOE OSTI2025

CFD modeling of natural circulation in LiCl-KCl molten salt closed loop

Characterizing flow within a molten salt closed-loop system is crucial for assessing system requirements, evaluating performance, and identifying potential flaws. Direct flow measurement using instrumentation is challenging due to extreme environmental conditions and the limitations associated with measuring molten salt flow under natural convection. Here, this study aims to provide comprehensive insights into the thermal-hydraulic behavior of a closed loop, with a particular focus on temperature distribution and velocity prediction. The Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) model demonstrated the capability to effectively simulate and predict both temperature distributions and flow velocities within the molten salt loop. The CFD model's predictive capability was validated by its ability to replicate temperature measurements under varying boundary conditions. The analysis revealed that the CFD model tends to underpredict temperatures in the cold leg and overpredict them in the hot leg, highlighting the need for continuous model refinement and acknowledging the limitations of using a steady-state approach. Furthermore, the potential of using external temperature measurements to estimate internal molten salt temperatures and predict flow velocity was explored, revealing that this approach could introduce up to a 5.5% error in flow velocity calculations. Line probes mapping temperature distributions across the tube's cross-section and molten salt provided valuable insights into temperature gradients, emphasizing the need for a thermal conductivity equation for molten salt with lower uncertainty to achieve more accurate temperature predictions of the system.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Experimental Evaluation of a High-Performance Cold-Climate Heat Pump Using Tandem Vapor-Injection Compressors

A high-performance cold-climate heat pump (CCHP) was developed and experimentally validated through comprehensive laboratory and field testing. The system utilized two equal-size tandem vapor-injection (VI) compressors with an inter-stage flash tank to improve efficiency and capacity retention under subfreezing conditions. Laboratory testing was conducted on a 3-ton prototype in a controlled environmental chamber equipped with calibrated thermocouples, refrigerant-side mass flow and pressure transducers, and precision airflow measurement for energy balance verification. The prototype achieved heating coefficients of performance (COPs) of 4.4 at 47 °F, 3.1 at 17 °F, and 2.0 at –13 °F, while maintaining 88% of its rated heating capacity at –13°F. These results confirm strong low-temperature performance and indicate the potential for significant reductions in electric resistance backup use. A field prototype was installed and monitored in a residential building in Fairbanks, Alaska, during a heating season. Instrumentation included real-time power, temperature, and refrigerant state measurements to evaluate performance under dynamic outdoor conditions. The heat pump operated reliably down to –30 °F, delivering 75% of its rated heating capacity with a COP of 1.8, while maintaining stable operation, effective defrost control, and indoor comfort without auxiliary heating. The combined laboratory and field results demonstrate that the tandem VI compressor configuration provides a practical and energy-efficient approach for residential heat pumps designed for cold and very cold climate regions.

Hu, Yifeng [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000242875185)↗
DOE OSTI2024

Atmospheric H 2 observations from the NOAA Cooperative Global Air Sampling Network

Abstract. The NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory (GML) measures atmospheric hydrogen (H2) in grab samples collected weekly as flask pairs at over 50 sites in the Cooperative Global Air Sampling Network. Measurements representative of background air sampling show higher H2 in recent years at all latitudes. The marine boundary layer (MBL) global mean H2 was 552.8 ppb in 2021, 20.2 ± 0.2 ppb higher compared to 2010. A 10 ppb or more increase over the 2010–2021 average annual cycle was detected in 2016 for MBL zonal means in the tropics and in the Southern Hemisphere. Carbon monoxide measurements in the same-air samples suggest large biomass burning events in different regions likely contributed to the observed interannual variability at different latitudes. The NOAA H2 measurements from 2009 to 2021 are now based on the World Meteorological Organization Global Atmospheric Watch (WMO GAW) H2 mole fraction calibration scale, developed and maintained by the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry (MPI-BGC), Jena, Germany. GML maintains eight H2 primary calibration standards to propagate the WMO scale. These are gravimetric hydrogen-in-air mixtures in electropolished stainless steel cylinders (Essex Industries, St. Louis, MO), which are stable for H2. These mixtures were calibrated at the MPI-BGC, the WMO Central Calibration Laboratory (CCL) for H2, in late 2020 and span the range 250–700 ppb. We have used the CCL assignments to propagate the WMO H2 calibration scale to NOAA air measurements performed using gas chromatography and helium pulse discharge detector instruments since 2009. To propagate the scale, NOAA uses a hierarchy of secondary and tertiary standards, which consist of high-pressure whole-air mixtures in aluminum cylinders, calibrated against the primary and secondary standards, respectively. Hydrogen at the parts per billion level has a tendency to increase in aluminum cylinders over time. We fit the calibration histories of these standards with zero-, first-, or second-order polynomial functions of time and use the time-dependent mole fraction assignments on the WMO scale to reprocess all tank air and flask air H2 measurement records. The robustness of the scale propagation over multiple years is evaluated with the regular analysis of target air cylinders and with long-term same-air measurement comparison efforts with WMO GAW partner laboratories. Long-term calibrated, globally distributed, and freely accessible measurements of H2 and other gases and isotopes continue to be essential to track and interpret regional and global changes in the atmosphere composition. The adoption of the WMO H2 calibration scale and subsequent reprocessing of NOAA atmospheric data constitute a significant improvement in the NOAA H2 measurement records.

Pétron, Gabrielle↗
DOE OSTI2025

Analyze the real-time performance of the optimized fiber-PTR instrument

An instrument to perform in-reactor, real-time thermal property measurements of nuclear fuels and materials was recently designed, optimized, and tested at Massachusetts Institute of Technology Research Reactor. It was the second insertion experiments of a total of two rounds. Here we report the collection and analysis of the real-time captured thermal diffusivity data on the preloaded SiC. With the optimized design, the instrument temperature had been successfully raised as we expected. Only one probe (the top one) returned real-time thermal diffusivity in a time span of approximately two days. Measured thermal diffusivity of the preloaded SiC was significantly lower than the literature value at the same temperature, indicating a significant influence from the irradiation induced microstructure damage. Meanwhile, the real-time thermal diffusivity value continuously reduced with time, indicating the dynamic microstructure evolution. The possible reasons of the probes that did not return data were hypothesized. The further optimization of the instrument with the objective to improve the measurement accuracy and instrument survivability is also discussed.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Performance of a Drifting Acoustic Instrumentation SYstem (DAISY) for characterizing radiated noise from marine energy converters

Marine energy converters can generate electricity from energetic ocean waves and water currents. Because sound is extensively used by marine animals, the radiated noise from these systems is of regulatory interest. However, the energetic nature of these locations poses challenges for performing accurate passive acoustic measurements, particularly with stationary platforms. The Drifting Acoustic Instrumentation SYstem (DAISY) is a modular hydrophone recording system purpose-built for marine energy environments. Using a flow shield in currents and mass–spring–damper suspension system in waves, we demonstrate that DAISYs can effectively minimize the masking effect of flow noise at frequencies down to 10 Hz. In addition, we show that groups of DAISYs can utilize time-delay-of-arrival post-processing to attribute radiated noise to a specific source. Consequently, DAISYs can rapidly measure radiated noise at all frequencies of interest for prototype marine energy converters. Furthermore, the resulting information from future operational deployments should support regulatory decision-making and allow technology developers to make design adjustments that minimize the potential for acoustic impacts as their systems are scaled up for utility-scale power generation.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗