Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “minimum operational performance standards”

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 OSTI2024

Foundations for the Future Power System: Inverter-Based Resource Interconnection Standards

As power systems evolve to become reliant on solar, wind, batteries, and other inverter-based resources (IBRs), it is essential that those resources meet certain minimum performance and capability criteria designed to ensure the power system operates stably and reliably. Because those criteria, as enshrined in interconnection standards, take years to develop and are very long lived, they need to account for not only the present state of the power system but also its expected future state over the lifetime of the power plants to which they will apply. In addition, they need to be specific enough to ensure reliability without over specifying and, thereby, impeding innovation. Because power systems are shifting rapidly from a state where IBRs make up a small to medium portion of generation to one where the generation will, at times, come predominantly from IBRs, interconnection standards are especially challenging to develop today. Good interconnection standards can make the power system more reliable and less costly to operate, whereas poorly designed standards can lead to major problems, like the famous German 50.2-Hz problem, which introduced a risk of losing many gigawatts of solar on a frequency excursion and resulted in many IBRs being retrofitted at great cost to mitigate a major system reliability risk. Readying the power system by specifying forward-looking technical minimum functional capabilities for IBRs can be an effective approach to avoid future retrofits.

data models↗
DOE OSTI2021

High Temperature Thermal Barrier Coating Evaluation of Yttrium Aluminum Garnet for Gas Turbine Applications

The Solution Precursor Spray Process (SPPS) process has been shown to overcome the durability and property challenges of applying yttrium aluminum garnet (YAG) coating for high temperature thermal barrier coating (TBC) applications (1200°C+) but only limited testing has been performed in representative application environments. In this study, YAG coatings were developed to optimize microstructure and tailor properties for combustion components in an industrial gas turbine. Thermal conductivity, erosion resistance and furnace cycling durability were used to validate YAG properties against the standard yttria-stabilized zirconia coating (YSZ). Graded and multi-layered microstructures were applied to enhance performance while maintaining durability. Further YAG process development was required to replicate coating properties and optimize deposition on more complex fuel injector nozzle and combustion liner components. Rig testing of both components was performed and compared against the baseline YSZ coating validating the high temperature capability and lower thermal conductivity of the SPPS YAG coating. The components in both tests were cycled for a minimum of ten cycles with the fuel injector test targeting a higher operating temperature while the combustor liner operated at standard conditions. A development engine test is planned to further validate performance in a gas turbine engine of this promising material.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Optimal band selection for target detection with a LWIR multispectral imager

Multispectral imaging can offer many benefits in cost, complexity, resolution, size, weight, and power, relative to hyperspectral imaging. When designing a multispectral system, spectral bandpasses can be selected using optimization algorithms configured to maximally separate target detection scores between target and background regions. A hyperspectral image (HSI) can serve as the source of data from which band groupings can be tested for optimality. The output of an adaptive cosine estimator target detection algorithm is used in an objective function. Three optimization algorithms are compared: particle swarm, dual annealing, and differential evolution. A global optimum is also found using a brute force approach on the Livermore Computing Syrah supercomputer. Three materials are investigated: calcite, gypsum, and limestone. This is done for 3-, 4-, and 5-band systems. The data originate from a longwave infrared HSI of a material display board. The optimization algorithms were run 30 times for every scenario. Performance statistics (maximum, minimum, mean, standard deviation, and median) based on the separation values are given. Additional characterization was performed using receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves and the area under the ROC curve. While good performance was obtained for the three optimization algorithms, the dual annealing algorithm produced the highest and most consistent detection separation scores on average.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Effluent Management Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Effluent Management Facility (EMF) stack monitor location was qualified using a combination of scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that the sampling location does not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. The LV-S1 scale model stack was used as a baseline, augmented by the LB-S1 and LV-S2 scale model stacks to address the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Effluent Management Facility Vessel Vent Process (DVP) injection into the main Active Confinement Ventilation (ACV) system duct. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling locations were geometrically similar to the actual stack, and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. The LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV-S2 scale model stack tests have met the criteria of the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard to demonstrate the stack sampling locations are well mixed. Verification tests of the EMF stack were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value and the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determine the range of stack flow rates for which the full-scale stack may be operated while remaining in compliance with the stack verification criterion. A practical range for the full-scale stack qualification uses the average DV through 6 DV from the scale model tests to compute the corresponding flow rates. Table S1 lists the operating flow rate along with the average and maximum qualified stack flow rate based on the LV-S1 scale model DV values. The operating flow is below the maximum qualified stack flow, which means that the scale model test results are acceptable for stack qualification. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be ≤20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be ≤20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack test at the EMF. Flow angle results were <5°; all flow angle results were within the ≤20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition ranged between 2.2% COV and 4.3% COV, all of which were within the range of the target % COV values from the scale model tests on the LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV S2 scale models. Based on these stack verification test results, the EMF filtered exhaust stack sampling location meets the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all planned fan operating configurations. This includes each combination of ACV fans with DVP exhausters. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the qualified flow rates described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

A reference open-source controller for fixed and floating offshore wind turbines

Abstract. This paper describes the development of a new reference controller framework for fixed and floating offshore wind turbines that greatly facilitates controller tuning and represents standard industry practices. The reference wind turbine controllers that are most commonly cited in the literature have been developed to work with specific reference wind turbines. Although these controllers have provided standard control functionalities, they are often not easy to modify for use on other turbines, so it has been challenging for researchers to run representative, fully dynamic simulations of other wind turbine designs. The Reference Open-Source Controller (ROSCO) has been developed to provide a modular reference wind turbine controller that represents industry standards and performs comparably to or better than existing reference controllers. The formulation of the ROSCO controller logic and tuning processes is presented in this paper. Control capabilities such as tip speed ratio tracking generator torque control, minimum pitch saturation, wind speed estimation, and a smoothing algorithm at near-rated operation are included to provide modern controller features. A floating offshore wind turbine feedback module is also included to facilitate growing research in the floating offshore arena. All of the standard controller implementations and control modules are automatically tuned such that a non-controls engineer or automated optimization routine can easily improve the controller performance. This article provides the framework and theoretical basis for the ROSCO controller modules and generic tuning processes. Simulations of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 5 MW reference wind turbine and International Energy Agency 15 MW reference turbine on the University of Maine semisubmersible platform are analyzed to demonstrate the controller's performance in both fixed and floating configurations, respectively. The simulation results demonstrate ROSCO's peak shaving routine to reduce maximum rotor thrusts by over 10 % compared to the NREL 5 MW reference wind turbine controller on the land-based turbine and to reduce maximum platform pitch angles by nearly 30 % when using the platform feedback routine instead of a more traditional low-bandwidth controller.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Long and Winding Road to Higher Efficiency-The RTU Story: Preprint

Rooftop units (RTUs) and other packaged heating, ventilating, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment consume more than four quads of energy annually while conditioning more than 50% of the commercial building floor area in the United States. Historically, these systems have low operating efficiencies and receive infrequent maintenance. In addition, the market has a low first cost, run-to-failure, like-for-like replacement mentality and has been slow to adopt change. This paper explores the broad market transformation that has resulted in higher efficiencies and tremendous energy savings. Although there are many factors in this market transformation, this paper highlights: research behind advancements in components and controls; adoption of an operational efficiency metric; raising the bar for high efficiency with the RTU Challenge; market barriers overcome through the Advanced RTU Campaign; upstream and midstream incentive programs and HVAC distribution networks; alignment of the market efficiency drivers of ASHRAE Standard 90.1, federal minimum efficiency standards, the ENERGY STAR® program, and the Consortium for Energy Efficiency's (CEE's) efficiency tiers. Measures of the market transformation include more than 50% increase in RTU efficiencies, more than 1 billion kWh saved and 160,000 RTUs upgraded with high-efficiency measures by the Advanced RTU Campaign partners, large increases of high-efficiency RTUs purchased through incentive programs, and the largest energy savings from any federal minimum standards action. Although these results are impressive, the market transformation is just beginning, and there remain exciting opportunities for improvements in equipment efficiencies and improved operating performance with advanced controls and fault detection and diagnostics.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Commercial Zero Code Plug-In: Zero Energy and Operational Emissions Overlay for Model Energy Codes (Technical Brief)

Model energy codes (MEC) describe requirements needed to demonstrate building energy performance compliance. They can be readily adopted by states and local jurisdictions to support desirable energy efficiency investment in new buildings and major renovations. This report provides commercial building energy code language as an overlay to current MEC, which is recognized by the U.S. DOE as ASHRAE Standard 90.1 2022. The code language provides a performance-based compliance path for achieving net zero energy or net zero operational energy emissions buildings with MEC. The path requires meeting two compliance metric target values: 1) a required minimum level of efficiency and 2) a measure of zero energy or emissions. The supporting documentation illustrates the magnitude of needed efficiency improvement and the additional offsets to be achieved from renewable energy sources.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2023

EUI Benchmarks for Net-Zero Energy Buildings in India

In our study we present EUI benchmarks for NZEBs for six building types across residential and non-residential typologies and for India's five climate zones. This approach is similar to the simulation-based benchmarks used by the B3 program in Minnesota, the Cal-Arch methodology in California, and the US Solar Decathlon approach, which combine simulations with actual building data. Of the six building types we explore one in detail with a range of operation scenarios, specifically narrowing down the EUI benchmarks for mixed-mode building operation and for variable temperature set-points as prescribed in the National Building Code of India.The contribution of this work is to provide rigorous end-use level EUI benchmarks for six building types, and to describe a method for simulation-based EUI benchmarks for mixed-mode operation with variable setpoints to highlight the difference between the standard approach used for the five building types and the On-Site Construction Worker Housing which additionally has the mixed-mode variable setpoint approach.On-Site Construction Worker Housings are typically poorly constructed temporary structures, without adequate thermal comfort, It is critical to provide adequate thermal comfort to protect people from the warming effects of climate change, and to discover super efficient and cost-effective ways to do so.The methodology used for the On-Site Construction Worker Housing (CWH) results in an 80% acceptability according to the India Model for Adaptive Comfort in the National Building Code of India. EUIs of all six buildings are 60% lower than the minimum compliance with India's Energy Conservation Building Codes, providing benchmarks for efficiency levels. The end-use level EUI benchmarks are now provided to over 1800 Solar Decathlon India participants so that they can compare the performance of their NZEB designs.In particular, the CWH results provide an insight into the importance of the mixed-mode operation with variable temperature set-points. The results from the simulation study show that for an NZEB target, the EUI with standard thermal comfort model and without mixed operation is 58.26 kWh/m2*year, while that with the variable set-points of the adaptive model with mixed mode operation is 24.23 kWh/m2*year. This is a 58% reduction in EUI. Given that many building types including residential, and non-residential operate in mixed mode, it is important to take this work further to develop mixed-mode operation NZEB benchmarks so that the carbon intensity of these buildings could be lower than the standard thermal comfort model approach.

benchmarking↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Simple Data-Centric Methodology for Producible Geothermal Well Determinations: Preprint

The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has traditionally lacked a standardized methodology for determining if a newly drilled geothermal well is "producible," a designation essential for deciding whether a lease should be "held by production." This is a straightforward problem to solve in oil and gas: Demonstrate that a well is economically viable, meaning it produces sufficient oil or gas to exceed direct operating costs and lease-related expenses, such as rentals or minimum royalties. In geothermal, the problem is more complex: Geothermal wells are tightly coupled with the downstream infrastructure - specifically, the power plant, which is often not designed until well after a lease is deemed as "held by production." Although this designation is critical for advancing geothermal power plant development on BLM-managed lands, current geothermal well assessments often rely on ad hoc approaches that can be complex, operator-biased, and heavy in assumptions related to economic viability. To address this, we have developed two complementary methodologies: a minimum power requirement-based approach and a productivity index (PI)-based approach. These methods leverage key flow test data - pressure, temperature, flow rate, and specific enthalpy - to provide reliable and standardized producible well determinations. The minimum power requirement-based approach evaluates wells against specific power output thresholds informed by reservoir experts and the associated temperature requirements. The PI-based approach assesses well productivity using widely accepted reservoir engineering metrics, proposing a threshold of 2.5 kg/s/bar. Both methods are data-driven and grounded in empirical production data from operational geothermal wells, avoiding uncertain economic assumptions while maintaining decision-making accuracy. Wells falling below key performance thresholds (i.e., PI, specific power) are deemed non-producible. These methodologies aim to streamline BLM's decision-making process, reduce nontechnical barriers to geothermal energy adoption, and enable regulatory expansion into states lacking geothermal expertise. Preliminary results indicate clear trends and thresholds in production data that provide actionable insights for evaluating well producibility. Validation using well completion report (WCR) data is ongoing, with promising results demonstrating the potential for these standardized methodologies to impact geothermal development significantly.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on these DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for each of the LAB stacks are 625 to 47,237 scfm for LB-C2, 1,704 to 103,131 scfm for LB-S1, and 467 to 18,088 scfm for LB-S2. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10 degrees, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 17.6 degrees; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 3.5% COV, which were all within the range of the target %COV values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Low Activity Waste Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring - Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant low activity waste (LAW) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAW stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on these DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for each of the LAW stacks are 815–55,758 scfm for LV-S1, 980–112,078 scfm for LV-S2, 264–22,901 scfm for LV-S3, and 981–79,832 scfm for LV-C2. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAW facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10°, except for one LV-S2 Fan A result, which was 13.2°; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition ranged between 1.5 COV and 9.2% COV, which were all within the range of the target % COV values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the four LAW filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan operating conditions for LV-S1 and LV-S2, dual-fan operations for LV-S3 at both the continuous air monitor and record sampler locations, and both the single-fan as well as the dual-fan operations for LV-C2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Effluent Management Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Effluent Management facility (EMF) stack monitor location was qualified using the LV-S1 scale model stack as a baseline, augmented by the LB-S1 and LV-S2 scale model stacks to address the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Effluent Management Facility Vessel Vent Process (DVP) injection into the main Active Confinement Ventilation (ACV) system duct. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale models and its sampling locations were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the EMF stack was performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of stack flow rates for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on the LV-S1 scale model test DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for the EMF stack are as listed in Table S1. Table S1. Effluent Management Facility Stack Qualified Flow Range. Stack Parameter EM-1 Minimum Qualified Stack Flow (scfm) 781 Maximum Qualified Stack Flow (scfm) 53,432 The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack test at the EMF. Flow angle results were less than 5°; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition ranged between 2.2% COV and 4.3% COV, which were all within the range of the target % COV values from the scale model tests on the LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV S2 scale models. Based on these stack verification test results, the EMF filtered exhaust stack sampling location meets the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes each combination of ACV fan with the DVP exhausters. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the qualified flow rates described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack, and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing, determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. A practical range for the full-scale stack qualification uses the average DV through 6 DV from the scale model tests to compute the corresponding flow rates. Table S1 lists the operating flow rates along with the average and maximum qualified stack flow rates for each of the LAB facility stacks. For each stack, the operating flow is below the maximum qualified stack flow, which means that the scale model test results are acceptable for stack qualification. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be ≤20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be ≤20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10°, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 13.7°; all flow angle results were within the ≤20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 4.1% COV, which were all within the range of the target percent coefficient of variation values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Low Activity Waste Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation (Rev.1)

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Low Activity Waste (LAW) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of discovering that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stacks. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAW stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing, determines the range of stack flow rates for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. For this analysis, the range of qualified flow rates listed is conservatively based on the average DV through 6 DV for LV-S1, LV-S2, and LV-C2, and 1/3 DV to 3 DV for LV-S3. Table S1 lists the operating flow rates along with the conservative lower and upper qualified stack flow rates for each of the LAW facility stacks. For each stack, the operating flow is below the upper qualified stack.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Design and operational considerations of catalytic membrane reactors for ammonia synthesis

Production of ammonia using hydrogen derived from renewable electricity instead of hydrocarbon reforming would dramatically reduce the carbon footprint of this commodity chemical. Novel technologies such as catalytic membrane reactors may potentially be more compatible with distributed ammonia production than the conventional Haber-Bosch process. Here, a reactor model is developed based on integrating a standard industrial iron catalyst into a catalytic membrane reactor (CMR) equipped with an inorganic membrane that is selective to NH 3 over N 2 /H 2 . CMR performance is studied as functions of wide ranges of membrane properties and operating conditions. Conversion and ammonia recovery are dictated principally by the ammonia permeance, and the benefits by using membranes become significant above 100 GPU = 3.4 × 10 –8 mol m –2 s –1 Pa –1 . To be effective, the CMR requires a minimum selectivity for ammonia of 10 over both nitrogen and hydrogen, and purity scales with the effective selectivity. Increasing the pressure of operation significantly improves all metrics, and at P = 30 bar with a quality membrane ammonia is almost completely recovered, enabling direct recycle of un-reacted hydrogen and nitrogen without need for recompression. Temperature drives conversion and scales monotonically without thermodynamic limitations in a CMR. Alternatively, the temperature may be reduced as low as 300°C while achieving conversion levels surpassing equilibrium limits at T = 400°C in a conventional reactor.

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

ComStock Measure Documentation: Heat Pump Rooftop Units with Standard Performance

This documentation focuses on a single end-use savings shape measure - heat pump rooftop units (HP-RTUs) with standard efficiencies that are prevalent in the current market. Today, these products are claimed as standard efficiency by the manufacturers and are most commonly installed. This document will primarily discuss the additional changes of performance and configuration of the standard efficiency HP-RTUs while a comprehensive overview of the fundamental modeling methodology and background of the HP-RTU measure, including applicability, sizing scheme, and other key assumptions can be found in the original documentation: Heat Pump RTU. The definition of "standard efficiency" can be a bit vague when considering detailed specifics other than efficiency metrics of a heat pump. Thus, we have focused on reflecting products where manufacturers claim as standard efficiency and products that are not top-of-the-line in their model lineup. Based on gathering information from eight products from four major manufacturers, there are some common (or relatively prevalent) characteristics and we have defined standard efficiency product as follows: direct drive outdoor unit fan, two stages of heat pump cooling, single stage heat pump heating (i.e., all compressors running at the same time), heat pump minimum lockout temperature of 0°F (-17.8°C), backup electric resistance heating, backup heating runs at the same time as heat pump heating , heat pump heating locking out below minimum operating temperature, IEER in between 11-13, and HSPF in between 8-8.9. There are cases where some of these products have other variations: a variable frequency drive fan, dual fuel (i.e., gas backup heating) option, three or more cooling stages, two stages of heat pump heating, no backup heating as default , etc. However, this work tried to reflect the most common and prevalent options for a standard efficiency product.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Innovating the next generation of commercial smart building software

Nearly 30% of commercial building energy use is wasted due to equipment faults and HVAC controls problems. The result is increased emissions, compromised comfort and productivity, and less reliable coordination of building power needs with a clean grid. The energy impact alone represents $17 billion in potential savings. Today’s smart building software provides a robust solution to address these operational deficiencies. Energy management and information systems (EMIS) are saving up to 9% on average, with two-year paybacks. They are being incorporated into energy management processes, commissioning services, and utility programs. As effective as they are, two barriers prevent even deeper benefits; limited personnel to fix problems once they are identified, and the expense and time to manually implement changes in control systems. In partnership with the research community, the EMIS industry is developing new capabilities to overcome these barriers. Moving beyond siloed products for either fault detection and diagnostics, or optimal control, these new capabilities empower users to not only automatically identify faults, but also to push corrective action, and control improvements to their buildings. In this paper, several areas for enhancements are documented: ‘one-time’ correction of faults such as setpoints, schedules, and economizer lockouts; short-term active testing for automated proportional integral derivative (PID) loop tuning and functional testing; and continuous supervisory control for demand flexibility and year-round efficiency. Results are presented from a pair of partner implementations out of a dozen providers integrating these enhancements into their products, including field tests from across the country, and insights into operator acceptance and integration into operations and maintenance practices.

Casillas, Armando↗
DOE OSTI2024

EVs@Scale NextGen Profiles: High Level Analysis and Procedures Report

As part of the U.S. DOE EVs@Scale consortium, the NextGen Profiles (NGP) project presents analysis and results from the study of High Power Charging Electric Vehicles and Battery Charging Infrastructure. High Power Charging equipment is capable of recharging electric vehicle traction batteries at power levels of 200KW and above. The NextGen Profiles project has three pillars of investigation: Electric Vehicle Charging Profile Capture, Electric Vehicle Service Equipment Performance Characterization and Fleet Utilization analysis. All NextGen Profiles project testing was conducted under test conditions that comprise a diverse range of realistic real-world operating conditions including nominal conditions that should transfer the maximum allowable energy in the minimum time possible and off-nominal conditions that typify charging performance under suboptimal charging conditions. Results from 13 unique EVs, eight EVSEs and four electrified fleets are included in the NextGen Profiles project analysis.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗