Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Version 5 Schedule”

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.

8 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Revealing Decision Conservativeness Through Inverse Distributionally Robust Optimization

This paper introduces Inverse Distributionally Robust Optimization (I-DRO) as a method to infer the conservativeness level of a decision-maker, represented by the size of a Wasserstein metric-based ambiguity set, from the optimal decisions made using Forward Distributionally Robust Optimization (F-DRO). By leveraging the Karush-Kuhn-Tucker (KKT) conditions of the convex F-DRO model, we formulate I-DRO as a bi-linear program, which can be solved using off-the-shelf optimization solvers. Additionally, this formulation exhibits several advantageous properties. We demonstrate that I-DRO not only guarantees the existence and uniqueness of an optimal solution but also establishes the necessary and sufficient conditions for this optimal solution to accurately match the actual conservativeness level in F-DRO. Furthermore, we identify three extreme scenarios that may impact I-DRO effectiveness. Our case study applies F-DRO for power system scheduling under uncertainty and employs I-DRO to recover the conservativeness level of system operators. Numerical experiments based on an IEEE 5-bus system and a realistic NYISO 11-zone system demonstrate I-DRO performance in both normal and extreme scenarios. An extended version of this paper with additional analyses is available at li2024revealing.

distributionally robust optimization↗
DOE OSTI2026

Inputs to GCAM-USA: IM3 Phase 2 Experiments

Overview This dataset contains XML input files for the IM3 Phase 2 version of GCAM-USA. The files are organized into two categories: Scenario-specific inputs represent hydroclimate and socioeconomic effects on water availability, heating and cooling degree-hours, and agricultural productivity. They support eight IM3 canonical scenarios: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 Model-improvement inputs extend GCAM-USA v5.3 with updated representations of coal and nuclear power plant retirements, electricity trade among U.S. interconnections, offshore carbon storage costs, and groundwater depletion constraints. Data structure Scenario-specific inputs rcp45_runoff/ and rcp85_runoff/XML files describing water availability by HUC2 basin under the RCP 4.5 and RCP 8.5 scenarios. rcp45_hdcd/ and rcp85_hdcd/XML files containing monthly-day and monthly-night heating and cooling degree-hours at the U.S. state level for different RCP-SSP combinations. rcp45_agyields/ and rcp85_agyields/XML files describing changes in agricultural productivity at the intersection of GCAM regions and HUC2 water basins for different RCP-SSP combinations. rcp45_emissions_pathway/The emissions-constraint XML file used to represent the RCP 4.5 pathway. Model-improvement inputs core_retire/Updates coal-fired power plant retirement schedules based on New England ISO. GCAMUSA_IM3_elec_trade_interconnect.xmlRestricts electricity trade to occur within the ERCOT, WECC, and IE interconnections. nuclear_USA.xmlUpdates the retirement schedules of the Diablo Canyon and Palisades nuclear power plants. high_cost_offshore_carbon.xmlUpdates the assumed cost of offshore carbon storage. water_supply_constrained_gleeson_5pct.xmlReplaces WaterGAP historical groundwater-depletion estimates with data from the Gleeson dataset and limits groundwater extraction to 5% of the available groundwater in each Superwell grid cell. How to use the data This dataset is designed for use with the IM3 version of GCAM-USA. Download or clone GCAM-USA from the IM3 GCAM GitHub repository at https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/gcam-core and check out the gcam-usa-im3 branch. Place the downloaded folder im3scenarios in the gcam-core/input directory while preserving the provided folder structure.

Energy↗
DOE OSTI2024

Celeritas R&D Report: Accelerating Geant4

Celeritas is a new Monte Carlo (MC) detector simulation code designed for computationally intensive applications on high-performance heterogeneous architectures. In the past two years Celeritas has advanced from prototyping a Graphics Processing Unit (GPU)-based single physics model in infinite medium to implementing a full set of electromagnetic (EM) physics processes in complex geometries. The current release of Celeritas, version 0.4, has incorporated full device-based navigation, an event loop in the presence of magnetic fields, and detector hit scoring. New functionality incorporates a scheduler to offload electromagnetic physics to the GPU within a Geant4-driven simulation, enabling straightforward integration of Celeritas into the high energy physics (HEP) experimental frameworks CMSSW and ATLAS FullSimLight. On the Perlmutter supercomputer, Celeritas performs EM physics between 3× and 18× faster using the machine’s Nvidia GPUs compared to using only CPUs, corresponding to an electrical power efficiency up to a factor of 5. When running a multithreaded Geant4 ATLAS test beam application with full hadronic physics, using Celeritas to accelerate the EM physics results in an overall simulation speedup of 1.7–2.2× on GPU and 1.2× on CPU. In a CMS test application using tt¯ events and the prototype Run 4 configuration, compared to Geant4 CPU, Celeritas with a Nvidia A100 improves overall throughput up to a factor of 2.7× but cannot be efficiently shared with more than 8 cores.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2026

AmeriFlux FLUXNET-1F US-RC1 Cook Agronomy Farm - No Till

This is the AmeriFlux Management Project (AMP) created FLUXNET-1F version of the carbon flux data for the site US-RC1 Cook Agronomy Farm - No Till. This is the FLUXNET version of the carbon flux data for the site US-RC1 Cook Agronomy Farm - No Till produced by applying the standard ONEFlux (1F) software. Site Description - RC1 operated from 2013-2016 at the R.J. Cook Agronomy Farm, as part of a cluster of 5 towers (RC1 to RC5) operated for the Regional Approaches to Climate Change (REACCH) USDA-supported research project. The tower predates the Longterm Agroecosystem Research (LTAR) site common experiment, which was established in nearby fields at the Cook Agronomy Farm in 2017. Cook Agronomy Farm is in the high precipitation agroecological zone of the Columbia Plateau’s dryland cropping region. Wheat-based crop rotations are grown on an annual planting schedule. RC1 was in no-till management since 1998, and was contrasted with RC2, which had conventional, reduced-tillage management. RC1 captured the same tillage practices as the US-CF1 site established in 2017 as part of LTAR common experiment. However, the towers have distinct footprints, aspects, and soil series composition.

Chi, Jinshu [The Hong Kong University of Science a↗
DOE OSTI2022

National Ignition Facility. Facility and Infrastructure Systems Maintenance Plan

Ensuring the reliability of the NIF, including its support systems, laser systems, target diagnostic systems, and utilities, is essential to the availability of the NIF in its support of NNSA missions. NIF is a key capability in the DOE Stockpile Stewardship Program and supports high energy physics experiments for nuclear weapons, energy, and astrophysics applications. High system reliability provides opportunities for shots and scientific discoveries with opportunities to enhance and upgrade capabilities. This Maintenance Plan (MP) identifies the policies and procedures used to perform and support asset management of the NIF Facility and Infrastructure Systems (FInS), NIF Lasers & Alignment (LASE), NIF Target Experimental Operations (TOPS), NIF Target Area Science and Engineering (TASE), and NIF&PS Control Systems (NCS). The FInS systems include the facility, HVAC, contamination control, beampath, and Line Replaceable Units (LRUs) as well as utilities which create the beampath environments, such as vacuum, argon, or clean dry air. The LASE systems are Programmatic systems which include laser diagnostics, alignment, power conditioning, pulsed power, and input laser systems. The TOPS and TASE systems are also Programmatic systems which include target and diagnostic delivery systems and positioners, many different insertable and fixed target diagnostics, and cryogenic and target gas fill systems. Finally, the NCS systems include both software and hardware for industrial and shot operation control systems. Policies governing administrative and operational practices related to maintenance of FInS, LASE, TOPS, TASE, and NCS systems are described in this plan. In addition, the plan provides processes and procedures for managing, tracking, and documenting the work. This document, the NIF Operations Management Plan, NIF-5020544 (Ref. 1), and NIF Shot Operations Plan, NIF-5018506 (Ref. 2), together satisfy the requirements of the Conduct of Operations. Duties, responsibilities, and reporting requirements of the various positions associated with FInS, LASE, and TOPS maintenance are detailed in this plan. The FInS systems include both Real Property systems with asset management requirements specified in DOE Order 430.1C (Ref. 3) and Programmatic systems. In addition, for FInS, there is a list of the System Level Maintenance Plans (SLMPs) in NIF-1007419198 (Ref. 4) which provide the system descriptions and maintenance plan and schedule. In addition, the list includes the Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) and Experience Centered Maintenance (ECM) evaluations that have been performed for applicable FInS systems as well as reliability criticality per Section 3.5. The -AM version of the NIF Maintenance Plan focuses on the reliability program for FInS, LASE, TOPS, TASE, and NCS within the context of the overall NIF Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) program and incorporates changes since the -AL version from August 2011 and has been updated to be fully consistent with the updates to Ref. 1. It also includes asset management considerations, updates to the Work Order (WO) process within the NIF Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) which is EAM infor® System Maintenance and Reliability Tracking (SMaRT) (Ref. 5), and updates to metrics and key performance indicators (KPIs).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

King City Asbestos Corporation (KCAC) Mine Carbon Mineralization Field Test (Final Combined Report)

The overall objective of the KCAC carbon mineralization project is to determine the most successful approaches to CO 2 mineralization of asbestos-bearing serpentinite rocks and mine waste at the closed KCAC asbestos mine. The objectives of Budget Period 1 (BP1) are to characterize the site including, mineralogical and geochemical variability in site materials, baseline conditions including CO 2 flux and local climate, and to establish the designs for the second, experimental phase of the project. As described in Section 3 of this report, all tasks outlined in the Statement of Project Objective (SOPO) have been completed or are on schedule to be completed by the end of BP1. As described in Section 4, all success criteria and milestones have been met or will be met by the end of BP1. We conclude that the findings of BP1 strongly support moving to the second phase of the project to investigate methods to increase the rate of CO 2 mineralization. CO 2 flux monitoring during BP1 established an estimated baseline uptake of CO 2 over the 142,193 m 2 KCAC mine site of 147 and 179 metric tons CO 2 /yr using dynamic closed chamber and eddy covariance monitoring methods, respectively. Mineralogical analysis shows that the loose surficial waste material contains pyroaurite and minor hydromagnesite, indicating past carbon mineralization. Sediment samples at depths below 60 cm contained ~3 wt% brucite and localized high brucite contents of ~24 wt% were measured at depth, indicating significant unreacted material at relatively shallow depths. Together, these results demonstrate that despite prolonged exposure to the atmosphere, reactive material is still present and accessible and is naturally taking up atmospheric CO 2 . However, these natural rates are still well below rates that can be achieved by applying practices that can accelerate the CO 2 mineralization reaction. Designs for the Field-Testing Phase (BP2) of the project have been established, incorporating the findings of BP1. Based on results to date we have selected two methods to accelerate the rate of CO 2 mineralization, which we refer to as the Tilling Method and the Greenhouse Method. We hypothesize that these methods can increase the CO 2 mineralization rate by up to 5 times greater than the natural background rate measured in BP1. An Initial Lifecyle Assessment (LCA) and techno-economic analysis (TEA) were conducted for these two methods. The LCA concluded that the baseline version of the Greenhouse and Tilling methods at commercial scale are expected to achieve a CDR efficiency of 97% and 71%, respectively (cumulative, over 30 years of operation). Incorporating the net CO 2 removal rates calculated in the LCA, the TEA found the levelized, 30-year costs of the baseline Greenhouse and Tilling methods to be $\$$95/t-CO 2 and $\$$119/t-CO 2 , respectively, and that costs could be brought to well below $\$$100/t-CO 2 for either method by scaling up the volume of rock utilized. An initial EH&S Risk Assessment, evaluating the potential EH&S risks of the proposed carbon mineralization methods at commercial scale, was completed by LLNL EH&S professionals for these two methods.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Validation of MFUEL Metal Fuel Performance Models of SAS4A/SASSYS-1

The fuel characterization models of SAS4A/SASSYS-1 (SAS) have recently been extended to include a new U-Pu-Zr metal fuel model, MFUEL. MFUEL is equipped with mechanistic physics based models to predict the pre-transient characterization and transient response of metal fuel, with emphasis on fuel melting, cladding failure, and the metal fuel’s impact on core reactivity. The MFUEL model will be available in the full version of SAS4A/SASSYS-1 5.7, which is scheduled to be released in June 2023. Fast reactor fuel pins that operated in EBR-II and FFTF with low smear density U-Zr and U-Pu-Zr metal fuels and irradiation resistant ferritic-martensitic cladding showed significant advantages in achieving high burnups and assuring inherent safety characteristics during anticipated transients, design basis events, and beyond design basis events. For safety analysis, a fuel performance model must be able to predict (1) Fuel pin mechanics and compositional and dimensional changes, (2) Clad failure, and (3) Fuel pin thermal resistance. Achieving these high level goals accurately is strongly related to the model performance of individual physical processes taking place within a fuel pin during its lifetime. Metal fuels typically operate above the mid-point temperature of melting during normal, as well as off-normal, conditions. At these elevated temperatures, the availability of thermal activation provides a driving force for various diffusional processes leading to complex phase transformations, micro-structure evolution, significant amounts of fuel swelling, interconnected porosity formation, excessive amounts of fission gas release, and fuel clad chemical interactions. Clad failure in fast reactors primarily occurs as a result of creep rupture augmented by clad wastage formation. The reaction is driven by thermal creep induced dislocation motion, grain boundary cavity nucleation, growth and breakup of grain boundaries. The high level complexity and limited available data requires introducing physics-based modeling approaches to gain extrapolation ability and sensitivity with respect to various conditions. The objective of this report is to perform validation of MFUEL using the experimental data for (1) Normal operation EBR-II fuel behavior, (2) Normal operation PHENIX fuel behavior, (3) HT9 Pressure tube ramp-and-hold creep rupture tests, (4) Whole Pin Furnace (WPF) creep strain, creep rupture and eutectic tests, (5) Fuel Behavior Test Apparatus (FBTA) eutectic tests, and (6) TREAT M5-7 OverPower tests up to clad failure. Section-2 includes a brief description of the MFUEL models. A detailed description of the MFUEL physics-based, semi-empirical models will be presented in the SAS V 5.7 theory manual. Section-3, 4, and 5 describes the validation effort for the pre-transient irradiation, furnace transients, and TREAT M-Series transients, respectively.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Composite Analysis for Low-Level Waste Disposal in the Hanford Site Central Plateau (FY 2020) (Rev. 2)

This document provides an updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA). A Hanford Site CA was prepared and issued in 1998 (PNNL-11800) with an addendum provided in 2002 (PNNL-11800 Addendum 1). The CA was approved in 2002 (Frei, 2002) and has been maintained (DOE/RL-2000-29 and subsequent revisions) to support low-level waste disposal performance assessments (PAs) and disposal authorizations for facilities at the Hanford Site, including the following: Continued operation of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility (ERDF) and the 200 East and 200 West Low-Level Burial Grounds; Construction of the Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF); Forthcoming closure of tank residual waste systems such as Waste Management Area (WMA) C. The CA maintenance program resulted in a determination in 2015 (DOE/RL-2015-66) that the Hanford Site CA needed an update for the following reasons: While the initial Hanford Site CA has been maintained since 2001, the accumulation of basis changes reported in the annual summary reports over the succeeding 14 years merit evaluation in an updated analysis; The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Headquarters requested in a memorandum in 2015 (Gilbertson and Marcinowski, 2015) that “as soon as the relevant PAs are complete, the CA will be revised to account for all of the new information.” This updated Hanford Site CA accounts for the following new information: 1. Inclusion of a detailed Hanford Site baseline disposition that projects remedial activities through site closure. There have been significant changes through decision making in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) process that were not available when the original CA was produced; 2. Inclusion of an updated inventory basis, new modeling capabilities, and new decisions reached in the associated record of decision (ROD) that was provided by issuance of DOE/EIS-0391 in fiscal year (FY) 2013. Development of a Hanford Site groundwater model from the baseline provided in a technical transfer of models for the Final Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (DOE/EIS-0391) commenced in FY 2014 and resulted in the plateau-to-river (P2R) groundwater flow model that is used in this updated Hanford Site CA; 3. Accounting for pump and treat systems, which were not evaluated in the initial CA. Pump and treat systems have had significant impact on groundwater flow system behavior, contaminant transport, and contaminant removal from Hanford Site groundwater. This process is accounted for in the use of the P2R model for this updated Hanford Site CA; 4. Inclusion of water-level data collected since the initial CA was completed. Data collected as the unconfined aquifer water levels continue to recede since the cessation of large liquid discharges in the late 1990s have led to marked improvement in understanding of the flow system for future conditions, particularly regarding northward flow potential in the critical Gable Gap area. The calibration in the latest version of the P2R model accounts for this information; 5. Inclusion of results from the revised ERDF PA completed in 2013 (WCH-5209) that account for updated inventory and expansion of the ERDF facility to about twice the size that was evaluated in the original CA; 6. Use of updated geoframeworks to provide the structural basis for numerical fate and transport models in the groundwater pathway of this updated CA. The geologic basis for groundwater models has continued to improve with additional data collection and interpretation with the creation and maintenance of the Hanford South Geoframework and the Central Plateau Vadose Zone Geoframework tools; 7. Incorporation of updated tank residual inventory estimates. Tank residual inventory estimates have improved with the incorporation of tank retrieval inventory data for those tanks that have completed retrieval. The CA inventory data package includes this updated information; 8. Incorporation of WMA C PA results. Two additional PAs for tank farm closure decisions are in preparation during the period required to prepare an updated Hanford Site CA: WMA C (FY 2016) and WMA A-AX (in preparation). The WMA C PA results are incorporated into the updated Hanford Site CA, and its grouted residuals model is used as the basis for a release model to account for the other tank farm systems modeling in this updated CA; 9. An update to the IDF PA was submitted in FY 2017 and has been reviewed and approved. The results of the IDF PA are incorporated into this updated CA; 10. Updated risk assessment scenarios. The risk assessment scenarios currently in use for Hanford Site CERCLA and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA) analyses differ from those evaluated in the initial Hanford Site CA. The representative person exposure scenario evaluated in this updated Hanford Site CA is consistent with recent PAs and CERCLA and RCRA analyses as the Hanford Site. This updated Hanford Site CA provides the following: A comparison of the updated Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the compliance period, which is assumed to begin with site closure in calendar 2070 with the last scheduled disposal action and continue for 1,000 years postclosure (to calendar year 3069); A comparison of Hanford Site CA all-pathway dose results with the performance measures during the postcompliance period to address potential peaks beyond the compliance period. This is accomplished by evaluating dose in the period for 9,000 years following the compliance period (i.e., from calendar year 3070 to 12070).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗