Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Program”

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

ESnet Requirements Review Program Through the IRI Lens: A Meta-Analysis of Workflow Patterns Across DOE Office of Science Programs (Final Report)

The Department of Energy (DOE) ensures America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental, and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions. The DOE’s Office of Science (SC) delivers groundbreaking scientific discoveries and major scientific tools that transform our understanding of nature and advance the energy, economic, and national security of the United States. The SC’s programs advance DOE mission science across a wide range of disciplines and have developed the research infrastructure needed to remain at the forefront of scientific discovery. The DOE SC’s world-class research infrastructure — exemplified by the 28 SC scientific user facilities — provides the research community with premier observational, experimental, computational, and network capabilities. Each user facility is designed to provide unique capabilities to advance core DOE mission science for its sponsor SC program and to stimulate a rich discovery and innovation ecosystem. Research communities gather and flourish around each user facility, bringing together diverse perspectives. A hallmark of many facilities is the large population of students, postdoctoral researchers, and early-career scientists who contribute as full-fledged users. These facility staff and users collaborate over years to devise new approaches to utilizing the user facility’s core capabilities. The history of the SC user facilities has many examples of wildly inventive researchers challenging operational orthodoxy to pioneer new vistas of discovery; for example, the use of the synchrotron X-ray light sources for study of proteins and other large biological molecules. This continual reinvention of the practice of science — as users and staff forge novel approaches expressed in research workflows — unlocks new discoveries and propels scientific progress. Within this research ecosystem, the high-performance computing (HPC) and networking user facilities stewarded by SC’s Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) program play a dynamic cross-cutting role, enabling complex workflows demanding high performance data, networking, and computing solutions. The DOE SC’s three HPC user facilities and the Energy Sciences Network (ESnet) high-performance research network serve all of the SC’s programs as well as the global research community. Argonne Leadership Computing Facility (ALCF), the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), and Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility (OLCF) conceive, build, and provide access to a range of supercomputing, advanced computing, and large-scale data-infrastructure platforms, while ESnet interconnects DOE SC research infrastructure and enables seamless exchange of scientific data. All four facilities operate testbeds to expand the frontiers of computing and networking research. Together, the ASCR facilities enterprise seeks to understand and meet the needs and requirements across SC and DOE domain science programs and priority efforts, highlighted by the formal requirements reviews (RRs) methodology. In recent years, the research communities around the SC user facilities have begun experimenting with and demanding solutions integrated with HPC and data infrastructure. This rise of integrated-science approaches is documented in many community and high-level government reports. At the dawn of the era of exascale science and the acceleration of artificial intelligence (AI) innovation, there is a broad need for integrated computational, data, and networking solutions. In response to these drivers, DOE has developed a vision for an Integrated Research Infrastructure (IRI): To empower researchers to meld DOE’s world-class research tools, infrastructure, and user facilities seamlessly and securely in novel ways to radically accelerate discovery and innovation.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Computer Program for Calculation of Complex Chemical Equilibrium Compositions and Applications II. Users Manual and Program Description: Users Manual and Program Description - 2

This users manual is the second part of a two-part report describing the NASA Lewis CEA (Chemical Equilibrium with Applications) program. The program obtains chemical equilibrium compositions of complex mixtures with applications to several types of problems. The topics presented in this manual are: (1) details for preparing input data sets; (2) a description of output tables for various types of problems; (3) the overall modular organization of the program with information on how to make modifications; (4) a description of the function of each subroutine; (5) error messages and their significance; and (6) a number of examples that illustrate various types of problems handled by CEA and that cover many of the options available in both input and output. Seven appendixes give information on the thermodynamic and thermal transport data used in CEA; some information on common variables used in or generated by the equilibrium module; and output tables for 14 example problems. The CEA program was written in ANSI standard FORTRAN 77. CEA should work on any system with sufficient storage. There are about 6300 lines in the source code, which uses about 225 kilobytes of memory. The compiled program takes about 975 kilobytes.

McBride, Bonnie J.↗

Solar Pathways in Federal Energy Assistance Programs: Expanding the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP)

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and U.S. Department of Energy Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP) are federal programs to help low-income households reduce their energy costs. LIHEAP provides direct assistance to help households cover energy costs and stay connected to utility services, as well as weatherization and minor energy-related repairs, and WAP provides no-cost energy efficiency measures to reduce energy use and energy bills while also improving home comfort for income-qualified households. Across the U.S., states are implementing or considering solar energy as an eligible measure for LIHEAP and/or WAP funding, but the successful implementation pathways remain largely undocumented. This report fills that gap by analyzing states' LIHEAP and WAP annual plans, surveying administrators from LIHEAP grant recipients and WAP grantees about their challenges implementing solar or barriers to doing so, and conducting interviews and workshops with program administrators.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Program manual for the Shuttle Electric Power System analysis computer program (SEPS), volume 1 of program documentation

The Shuttle Electric Power System (SEPS) computer program is considered in terms of the program manual, programmer guide, and program utilization. The main objective is to provide the information necessary to interpret and use the routines comprising the SEPS program. Subroutine descriptions including the name, purpose, method, variable definitions, and logic flow are presented.

Bains, R. W.↗

Computer programs for the interpretation of low resolution mass spectra: Program for calculation of molecular isotopic distribution and program for assignment of molecular formulas

Two FORTRAN computer programs for the interpretation of low resolution mass spectra were prepared and tested. One is for the calculation of the molecular isotopic distribution of any species from stored elemental distributions. The program requires only the input of the molecular formula and was designed for compatability with any computer system. The other program is for the determination of all possible combinations of atoms (and radicals) which may form an ion having a particular integer mass. It also uses a simplified input scheme and was designed for compatability with any system.

Miller, R. A.↗

Computer program documentation: ISOCLS iterative self-organizing clustering program, program C094

The author has identified the following significant results. This program implements an algorithm which, ideally, sorts a given set of multivariate data points into similar groups or clusters. The program is intended for use in the evaluation of multispectral scanner data; however, the algorithm could be used for other data types as well. The user may specify a set of initial estimated cluster means to begin the procedure, or he may begin with the assumption that all the data belongs to one cluster. The procedure is initiatized by assigning each data point to the nearest (in absolute distance) cluster mean. If no initial cluster means were input, all of the data is assigned to cluster 1. The means and standard deviations are calculated for each cluster.

Minter, R. T.↗

Controls-Structures Interaction (CSI) technology program summary. Earth orbiting platforms program area of the space platforms technology program

Control-Structures Interaction (CSI) technology embraces the understanding of the interaction between the spacecraft structure and the control system, and the creation and validation of concepts, techniques, and tools, for enabling the interdisciplinary design of an integrated structure and control system, rather than the integration of a structural design and a control system design. The goal of this program is to develop validated CSI technology for integrated design/analysis and qualification of large flexible space systems and precision space structures. A description of the CSI technology program is presented.

Newsom, Jerry R.↗

Solar Pathways in Federal Energy Assistance Programs: Expanding Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP)

How can solar best fit within your LIHEAP or WAP activities? Come join NREL and learn about the various pathways and new resources available to help implement solar in low-income programs. Panelists will share results from a multi-year research project, including survey results on LIHEAP and WAP solar adoption across the United States. This session will highlight case studies from early implementers, key lessons learned and resources developed based on stakeholder feedback for interested organizations. Attendees can expect gain a better understanding of the perceived barriers and opportunities to solar implementation, including the importance of partner coordination and complementary funding sources, and the next steps for how to get started. Additionally, attendees will hear from a local implementer of solar in WAP about their program and process.

Colorado↗

NASA Graduate Student Researchers Program Ronald E. McNair PhD Program

The NASA Ronald E. McNair PHD Program was funded in September 1995. Implementation began during the spring of 1996. The deferment of the actual program initial semester enabled the program to continue support through the fall semester of 1998. This was accomplished by a no-cost extension from August 15, 1998 through December 31, 1998. There were 12 fellows supported by the program in 1996, 15 fellows in 1997, and 15 fellows 1998. Current program capacity is 15 fellows per funding support. Support for the academic outreach component began in spring 1998. The program was named the "Good Enough" Crew Activity (GECA) in honor of Dr. McNair's philosophy of everyone being good enough to achieve anything they want bad enough. The program currently enrolls 65 students from the third through the eight grades. The program is held 12 Saturdays per semester. The time is 9:00 AM to 12:30 PM each Saturday Morning. Program direction and facilitation is jointly administered with the PHD fellows and the Saturday Academy staff. Dr. John Kelly, REM-PHD Principal Investigator serves in a program oversight and leadership capacity. Ms. Sunnie Howard, The NASA REM-PHD Administrative Coordinator serves in an administrative and logistical capacity. Mr. Aaron Hatch, the NASA-AMES Liaison Officer, serve@'in a consultative and curriculum review capacity. The first recognition activity will be held on December 12, 1998, with the students, parents, faculty, PHD fellows, and other local student support services persons. Program outreach efforts are jointly supported by the NASA REM-PHD Program and the National Space Grant College and Fellowship Program. The Ph.D. program reached its first milestone in May 1998. North Carolina A&T State University graduated the first Ph.D. fellows. The first three Ph.D. Alumni were Ronald E. McNair PHD Program Fellows. It is hoped that this is just the beginning of a highly acclaimed doctoral program. The ultimate program success will be recognized when the program begins to graduate 15 fellows per year. The Ph.D. Program is only three and a half years old and the expectations of graduating PH.D's in that timeframe, is a phenomenal accomplishment for any program in the country. Since inception of the NASA REM-PHD program, tuitions and fees have increased. Stipend support was increased to offer the Ph.D. program on a competitive basis. These increases will place allocation restraints on r_ the current level of funding. These issues are being addressed in the proposal and will bear their own merit.

Howard, Sunnie↗

Repository-Based Software Engineering Program: Working Program Management Plan

Repository-Based Software Engineering Program (RBSE) is a National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) sponsored program dedicated to introducing and supporting common, effective approaches to software engineering practices. The process of conceiving, designing, building, and maintaining software systems by using existing software assets that are stored in a specialized operational reuse library or repository, accessible to system designers, is the foundation of the program. In addition to operating a software repository, RBSE promotes (1) software engineering technology transfer, (2) academic and instructional support of reuse programs, (3) the use of common software engineering standards and practices, (4) software reuse technology research, and (5) interoperability between reuse libraries. This Program Management Plan (PMP) is intended to communicate program goals and objectives, describe major work areas, and define a management report and control process. This process will assist the Program Manager, University of Houston at Clear Lake (UHCL) in tracking work progress and describing major program activities to NASA management. The goal of this PMP is to make managing the RBSE program a relatively easy process that improves the work of all team members. The PMP describes work areas addressed and work efforts being accomplished by the program; however, it is not intended as a complete description of the program. Its focus is on providing management tools and management processes for monitoring, evaluating, and administering the program; and it includes schedules for charting milestones and deliveries of program products. The PMP was developed by soliciting and obtaining guidance from appropriate program participants, analyzing program management guidance, and reviewing related program management documents.

Source record↗

Strategic Energy Management Program Persistence and Cost Effectiveness An Analysis of the SEM Program Landscape

This study examines the relationship between strategic energy management (SEM) programs and their persistence and cost effectiveness, with analysis based on interview data from 24 SEM program administrators, SEM program evaluations, and other reports. The 80 interview questions focused on the topics of program design, energy savings, energy savings persistence, cost effectiveness, and customer SEM persistence. The generosity of interview respondents provided a wealth of data, resulting in a report of sufficient length to warrant inclusion of this brief guide of the report structure. The major sections are listed below with brief descriptions. Individual sections of this report are mainly stand-alone and do not require reading of other sections. As a result, there is some duplication between sections, but with differing levels of detail. Executive Summary: Presents three key conclusions of this work with a short description of potential actions to advance the understanding of each key finding. Brief Observations: Lists a large number of bulleted observations resulting from this research, arranged by the five major topic areas included in the interviews. Analysis details are provided in the Analysis of Interview Results section. Foundations for this Research: Provides an overview of SEM, SEM frameworks, SEM programs, the topics of persistence and cost effectiveness, and the focus of this research. Methodology: Details the approach and strategy of this research, providing background information relevant to the formulation of interview questions and the identification of which SEM programs to interview. Observations from Compiled Evaluations and Other Reports: Reports observations from the collection and analysis of program evaluations, annual reports, utility planning documents, and SEM-related white papers. This section, presented in bullet form, highlights challenges in data collection and ultimately a comparison of program practices as they pertain to persistence and cost effectiveness. Analysis of Interview Results: Presents detailed analysis of responses from SEM program administrators, arranged by the five major categories examined: program design, energy savings, energy savings persistence, cost effectiveness, and customer SEM persistence. Interview questions are generally grouped together into subsections when it makes sense to examine them together. SEM Programs Challenge Traditional Cost-Effectiveness Metrics: Details an analysis based on five key factors showing that applying traditional cost-effectiveness metrics to SEM programs is not straightforward. This invites the opportunity to consider whether traditional cost-effectiveness metrics are applicable to SEM programs, either individually or at large. Resolution of Research Hypotheses: Tabulates a set of hypotheses that were developed to address the fundamental nature of the research at hand. Analysis of responses to multiple questions informs an understanding of each hypothesis and can be used to better understand the SEM program environment at large.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

The Cost of Saving Electricity: A Multi-Program Cost Curve for Programs Funded by U.S. Utility Customers

This study analyzed the cost performance of electricity efficiency programs implemented by 116 investor-owned utilities between 2009 and 2015 in 41 states, representing about three-quarters of the total spending on U.S. efficiency programs. We applied our typology to characterize efficiency programs along several dimensions (market sector, technology, delivery approach, and intervention strategy) and report the costs incurred by utilities and other program administrators to achieve electricity savings as a result of the programs. Such cost performance data can be used to compare relative costs of different types of efficiency programs, evaluate efficiency options alongside other electricity resources, benchmark local efficiency programs against regional and national cost estimates, and assess the costs of meeting state efficiency policies. The savings-weighted average cost of saved electricity for the period was $0.025/kilowatt-hour (kWh). The cost of saved electricity for programs that targeted residential customers was $0.021/kWh, compared to $0.025/kWh for programs for commercial and industrial customers. Ultimately, we developed an aggregate program savings “cost curve” for the actual electricity efficiency resource during the period that provides insights into the relative costs of various types of efficiency programs and the savings contribution of each program type to the efficiency resource at a national level.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

The MSFC Program Control Development Program

It is the policy of the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) that employees be given the opportunity to develop their individual skills and realize their full potential consistent with their selected career path and with the overall Center's needs and objectives. The MSFC Program Control Development Program has been designed to assist individuals who have selected Program Control or Program Analyst Program Control as a career path to achieve their ultimate career goals. Individuals selected to participate in the MSFC Program Control Development Program will be provided with development training in the various Program Control functional areas identified in the NASA Program Control Model. The purpose of the MSFC Program Control Development Program is to develop individual skills in the various Program Control functions by on-the-job and classroom instructional training on the various systems, tools, techniques, and processes utilized in these areas.

Source record↗

A Dynamic Failure Model for Predicting the Impact that a Program Location has on the Program

This paper presents a dynamic technique for predicting the effect that a "location" of a program will have on the program's computational behavior. The technique is based on the three necessary and sufficient conditions for software failure to occur: (1) a fault must be executed, (2) the fault must adversely affect the data state, and (3) the adverse effect in a data state must affect program output. In order to predict the effect that a location of a program will have on the program's computational behavior, the following characteristics of each program location are estimated: (1) the probability that a location of the program is executed, (2) the probability that a location of the program noticeably affects the program state created by the location, and (3) the probability that the data states created by a location affect the program's output. With estimates of these characteristics for each location in a program, we can predict those locations where a fault can more easily remain undetected during testing, as well as predict the degree of testing necessary to be convinced that a fault is not remaining undetected in a particular location.

Voas, Jeffrey↗

Money Matters: A Three-Step Process for Using Budget Data in Program Evaluation to Assess the Design and Management of a Novel Public Health Program

We applied a three-step process, abstracting and analyzing program budgets to examine how Colorectal Cancer Control Program (CRCCP) awardees are structuring their programs and to assess the fidelity of program design to the CRCCP public health model. We reviewed 23 state, one tribal organization, and six university awardee budgets. We assessed resource allocations, staffing structures, and contracted partners and their activities. Awardees allocated 83% of all funds to contracts and personnel. Program managers were the most budgeted personnel type across three measures: number of people, full-time equivalency, and personnel costs. Awardees not only contracted with health care systems and clinics (39% of all contracts) but also contracted other partner types. Contractors were mainly funded to implement evidence-based interventions (25%) and conduct evaluation (24%). Program design varied among awardees in the number of staff (0–22), number of full-time equivalencies (0–5.4), and the number of contracts (1–11) budgeted. State awardees budgeted more resources to contracts, compared with university awardees (57% vs. 31%), while universities budgeted more for total personnel costs (41% vs. 30%). We learned that awardees designed their programs with fidelity to the CRCCP model. Although implementation approaches varied, overall results suggest implementation requires a combination of internal capacities and contracted partners. Budgets provide opportunities to use already existing program data to evaluate program design, partnerships, and planned activities.

Uhd, Justin↗