Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “reference systems”

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

Projected Urban Morphology of the Los Angeles Area by the Year 2100

This dataset provides projections of urban building morphologies for the Los Angeles urban area at 30-meter spatial resolution. It contains 192 raster files that detail two primary building attributes: building footprint fractions (ranging from 0 to 1) and average building heights (ranging from 0 to 75 meters). The projections account for a wide range of future pathways, covering two Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP) scenarios (SSP3 and SSP5), two population scenarios, two developed land intensification scenarios, and four distinct levels of intensification. The dataset was created using dual Generative Adversarial Networks (GANs) trained on 2015 land cover and building properties from the National Land Cover Database (NLCD) and Model America datasets. Supporting information on the dataset has been described in the LAUrbanAreaMorphologyProjections2100_README.txt file.

Pandey, Bhartendu↗
DOE OSTI2024

Proton Improvement Plan II (PIP-II) Clock and Timing

The PIP-II timing system is planned to be a two-part system consisting of a global timing system (referred to as ACLK) that provides high level, event-based timing for the whole Fermilab accelerator complex while the second part is a RF synchronized clock system unique to the PIP-II Linac itself (referred to as LCLK). The ACLK System will make use of an external 10 MHz GPS based signal source as a reference for its 650 MHz phase lock as it is the reference frequency for the TCLK output of the system (needed to support legacy hardware around complex). The LCLK System will use a PIP-II Linac RF reference (162.5 MHz) from the Linac LLRF system to allow beam synchronized event placement. Both the ACLK and LCLK systems will have a clock output with a data frame of 16 event bits + 32 data bits with frames broadcast at 650 MHz, phase locked to the 10MHz reference in the case of ACLK and the PIP-II LLRF sourced 162.5 MHz reference in the case of LCLK.

43 PARTICLE ACCELERATORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Evaluation of a 5kW Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cell Stack

Solid oxide electrolysis cells (SOECs) are a developing technology for hydrogen production. They are promising due to their utilization of thermal energy to reduce their electricity consumption. The Department of Energy (DOE) has set goals to reduce the price per kilogram of hydrogen, and Idaho National Laboratory (INL) is conducting research to develop and demonstrate advanced methods and technologies to achieve making hydrogen a more affordable, efficient, and sustainable energy source. In this project, INL is collaborating with a vendor to evaluate and validate the design of a 5kW SOEC stack. The test aims to demonstrate a safe startup, operation, and shutdown on INL’s 5kW test stand, providing third-party validation in a different environment. A successful 50-hour test with stable hydrogen production will pave the way for a subsequent 1000-hour test. This project emphasized learning about electrolysis and the various support systems, referred to as balance of plant (BOP) equipment. These systems required modification while swapping to the vendor 5kW SOEC stack, most prominently the furnace door design and the controls system. It also included gaining skills in creating computer-aided design (CAD) drawings for the new door while using available materials and ensuring it met high-temperature requirements. Upon completion of modifications to the test stand, the SOEC will be test-fitted with respective wiring and piping. Instrumentation and piping will be checked for leaks and quality. This must be completed before the vendor’s engineers arrive to observe the test plan, startup, and a collection of 50 hours of data. The vendor’s engineers will ensure their stack performed sufficiently in the 50-hour test to enable the progression to a 1000-hour test.

08 - HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

Lessons learned from the design and operation of a small-scale cross-flow tidal turbine

In 2023, a first-generation prototype of a small-scale marine current turbine was operated in Sequim Bay, Washington (USA) for 141 days. The system, referred to as the Turbine Lander, was the product of a laboratory-to-field effort to develop a system that enables enhanced ocean sensing or vehicle recharge in remote, energetic settings. The turbine consists of a vertical-axis, cantilevered rotor (1.19 m x 0.85 m) with four foils installed on a gravity foundation. A broader range of constraints including the deployment strategy, site characteristics, and estimated loads, drove the system’s design. This work presents the design, characterization, operation, and post-recovery engineering assessment of the Turbine Lander. Pre-deployment characterization efforts yielded a peak power coefficient of approximately 0.3 for the rotor, although system losses resulted in much lower water-to-wire efficiencies under most operating conditions. The results demonstrate the importance of co-design among key components of the powertrain and control systems to achieve acceptable system efficiency across operating conditions.

Co-design↗
DOE OSTI2025

BCARS Simulated Phantom Dataset for Evaluation of Processing Pipelines

Broadband coherent anti-Stokes Raman scattering (BCARS) microscopy is a powerful label-free biological imaging technique, but the raw signal requires careful processing. The vibrationally resonant (Raman) fingerprint signal is usually small compared with instrumental noise sources and the nonresonant background (NRB) inherent in the BCARS signal. Fortunately, the NRB exhibits a systematic phase relationship with the coherent Raman response, acting as a heterodyne amplifier for the weak fingerprint signal. Due to this heterodyne effect, the Raman response can be recovered quantitatively and invariantly across different instruments, provided the NRB shape is known. Even with heterodyne amplification, the amplitudes of fingerprint signal components are often comparable to system noise. Singular value decomposition (SVD), which utilizes spatial information, is often employed for additional noise filtering. Consequently, finding optimal processing parameters to properly distinguish the NRB and Raman responses and suppress noise in the complex BCARS signal requires a reference system that realistically represents the spectral and spatial properties of BCARS signals obtained from biological samples. We present a digital tissue phantom that meets these criteria as a tool for testing candidate signal processing pipelines. The digital phantom is generated with simulated hyperspectral Raman images having system-specific noise and background characteristics. Here, we analyze phantom datasets with differing background and signal-to-noise conditions to evaluate their impact on the performance of multiple signal processing pipelines. Specifically, we investigate the application of a Butterworth filter-based routine to directly estimate the NRB from the BCARS signal. Additionally, we evaluate a Lorentzian wavelet transform as an alternative to the Hilbert transform for extracting the Raman spectrum from the BCARS signal. While we demonstrate this phantom for BCARS, it can be used for any spectroscopic Raman imaging approach.

Dixon, Jessica Z. [Georgia Institute of Technology↗
DOE OSTI2025

Mil-Std-464C and Mil-Std-464D Electromagnetic Radiation Environment Evaluation

Many systems derive their electromagnetic radiation (EMR) environments from Mil-Std-464C or Mil-Std-464D, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for Systems. This standard defines several EMR environments based on the type of system and expected application. Many nuclear weapon (NW) systems reference the ordnance environments as the starting point for their functional EMR requirements, since any item intended to go into Department of Defense (DOD) custody is expected to be certified hazards of electromagnetic radiation to ordnance (HERO) safe when exposed to the environments listed in Mil-Std-464 Table 9. This environment is defined as the envelope of all sources any system in DOD custody may ever encounter, however, and may include sources that are not relevant for a particular system. This document is intended to provide additional clarity on the Mil-Std-464C and Mil-Std-464D EMR environments, specifically the driving sources for the maximum ordnance levels. This supplementary information may be used to guide tailoring of relevant environments or application to different systems with the additional consideration of any shielding that may reduce the external environments defined in the military standard.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas Description This dataset contains locations of existing data center facilities in the United States. Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap (OSM), a crowd-sourced database. Data points from OSM are processed in various ways to determine additional variables provided in the data including: facility area (square feet), associated US county, and US state. This dataset can be used to identify areas of concentrated data center development and inform government and private sector planning strategies for future buildout of data centers and the infrastructure necessary to support it. Usage Notes Validation of OSM-derived data center locations is an ongoing development under the IM3 project, and the database will be updated as new information becomes available. In some instances, both the data center area (e.g., campus) and individual data center buildings are included as overlapping areas in the database. Both values are retained. Data center points, buildings, and campus areas are provided as separate layers in the downloadable data package. Note that data items are not necessarily complete across layers. That is, a specific data center may only be present as a single point geometry in the "point" layer while other data centers are represented in both the campus and building layers. In some cases, data center campuses and/or buildings straddle a county boundary line. Mappings to both counties are retained in the database as separate rows. These data rows will have the same data center id information, but each will have different county information. Crowd-sourced data, by nature, relies on individuals and communities to provide information. As a result, some data may be missing where it has not yet been reported. As we collect information on additional data center locations and as OSM receives additional contributions, the database will be updated to capture additional data points not yet shown. Data items will occasionally be removed from OSM if they are misidentified, if they no longer exist, if they are duplicates of another item, or similar. For that reason, updated versions of this database may not contain all data center locations included in previous versions. Technical Information Data is available for download under the following formats: GeoPackage (GPKG) CSV Geospatial data is provided in the WGS84 (EPSG:4326) coordinate reference system. The GeoPackage download contains the following layers. See usage notes for more information. "point" "building" "campus" The "point" layer includes all data from OSM that had POINT geometry type (i.e., individual coordinates). The "building" layer includes all OSM data that did not have POINT geometry and where the building tag in the OSM export was neither equal to "no" or null. Data that did not meet the "point" or "building" qualification was assumed to be a facility campus and included in the "campus" layer. The dataset contains the following parameters. Variables provided by OSM are labeled with (OSM-provided). id - unique identification number (OSM-provided with prefix of "node/", "relation/" and similar attributes removed) state - name of US state state_abb - two letter US state abbreviation state_id - state ID number county - name of US county county_id - county ID number ref - reference numbers or codes (OSM-provided) operator - the name of the company, corporation, or person in charge facility (OSM-provided) name - name of facility (OSM-provided) sqft - surface area of facility polygon, measured in square feet. Only available for "building" and "campus" layers lat - latitude of data centroid point lon - longitude of data centroid point type – represented spatial information. One of "point", "building", or "campus". geometry – POLYGON geometry of area footprint (in "campus" and "building" layers) or POINT geometry of locations (in "point" layer). This parameter is not included in the csv download. Attribution Data center locations were derived from OpenStreetMap, which is made available at openstreetmap.org under the Open Database License (ODbL). US state and county boundary information was collected from the US Census Bureau for the year 2024, which is made publicly available at https://www.census.gov/geographies/mapping-files.html Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License The IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas is made available under the Open Database License: http://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/1.0/. Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations

IM3 Projected US Data Center Locations This dataset contains model projections of new data center facilities in the contiguous United States (CONUS) through 2035 using the CERF – Data Centers model. Data center locations are modeled across four data center electricity demand growth scenarios (low, moderate, high, higher) and five market gravity scenarios (0%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%). Projected locations are intended to be regional representations of feasible siting locations in the future to assess potential grid and water stress impacts. The data center load growth scenarios correspond with the rates outlined in EPRI (2024) and include 3.71%, 5%, 10%, and 15% annual growth of electricity demand for data centers from 2023 values in 37 states across the CONUS. Market gravity scenarios correspond to the relative importance of proximity to data center markets or high population areas compared to locational cost in the siting algorithm. 0% market gravity means that siting decisions were entirely determined by the locational cost in each feasible location. 100% market gravity means that only market proximity was considered when siting. Other scenarios have weight placed on both components where total weight always equals 100%. Locational cost is dependent on facility cooling type and corresponding electricity cost, taxes, and other factors. Facility cooling type is spatially determined where high water stress and/or areas with high summer wet bulb temperatures are assumed to operate with mechanical cooling for a higher fraction of the year rather than evaporative cooling. Feasible data center siting areas are based on geospatial suitability raster data developed with open-source information. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands Because we use open-source information, proprietary information that can influence siting decisions such as individual tax agreements with cities, detailed fiber line connectivity, electric grid power capacity agreements, and others, are not currently accounted for in the modeling process. Using specific building locations and footprints in the dataset for local planning purposes is not advised. Technical Information Geospatial data is provided in geojson format using the Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) coordinate reference system. The datasets contain the following parameters: id - unique identification number within given scenario file growth_scenario – data center demand growth scenario market_gravity_weight – market gravity weight scenario (%) region – name of region (i.e., US State) total_cost_million_usd – locational siting cost ($million) campus_size_square_ft – total land acquired for data center facility (square ft) data_center_it_power_mw – IT power of data center facility (MW) mechanical_cooling_frac – fraction of year when data center uses mechanical cooling system water_cooling_frac– fraction of year when data center uses evaporative cooling system cooling_energy_demand_mwh – total annual facility energy demand for cooling (MWh) cooling_water_demand_mgy – total annual facility water demand for cooling (MG) cooling_water_consumption_mgy – total annual facility water consumed (MG) normalized_locational_cost – normalized total locational cost score for location normalized_gravity_score – normalized market gravity score for location weighted_siting_score – total weighted siting score of locational cost and gravity score geometry – polygon geometry of facility Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall (ORCID:0000000328077088)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Traffic Control via Connected and Automated Vehicles (CAVs): An Open-Road Field Experiment with 100 CAVs

The CIRCLES project aims to reduce instabilities in traffic flow, which are naturally occurring phenomena due to human driving behavior. Also called “phantom jams” or “stop-and-go waves,” these instabilities are a significant source of wasted energy. Toward this goal, the CIRCLES project designed a control system, referred to as the MegaController by the CIRCLES team, that could be deployed in real traffic. Our field experiment, the MegaVanderTest (MVT), leveraged a heterogeneous fleet of 100 longitudinally controlled vehicles as Lagrangian traffic actuators, each of which ran a controller with the architecture described in this article. The MegaController is a hierarchical control architecture that consists of two main layers. The upper layer is called the Speed Planner and is a centralized optimal control algorithm. It assigns speed targets to the vehicles, conveyed through the LTE cellular network. The lower layer is a control layer, running on each vehicle. It performs local actuation by overriding the stock adaptive cruise controller, using the stock onboard sensors. The Speed Planner ingests live data feeds provided by third parties as well as data from our own control vehicles and uses both to perform the speed assignment. The architecture of the Speed Planner allows for the modular use of standard control techniques, such as optimal control, model predictive control (MPC), kernel methods, and others. The architecture of the local controller allows for the flexible implementation of local controllers. Corresponding techniques include deep reinforcement learning (RL), MPC, and explicit controllers. Depending on the vehicle architecture, all onboard sensing data can be accessed by the local controllers or only some. Likewise, control inputs vary across different automakers, with inputs ranging from torque or acceleration requests for some cars to electronic selection of adaptive cruise control (ACC) setpoints in others. The proposed architecture technically allows for the combination of all possible settings proposed previously, that is {Speed Planner algorithms} × {local Vehicle Controller algorithms} × {full or partial sensing} × {torque or speed control}. As a result, most configurations were tested throughout the ramp up to the MegaVandertest (MVT).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluating the Chemical Reactivity of DFT-Simulated Liquid Water with Hydrated Electrons via the Dual Descriptor

Modeling the various properties of liquid water, particularly its reactivity, has been a longstanding challenge for simulation methods. Recently, ab initio simulations based on density functional theory (DFT) have come to the fore as tenable methods for calculating the properties and reactivity of water, with varying degrees of success for different exchange-correlation functionals. In particular, hybrid-GGA and meta-GGA functionals have been shown to reproduce many of the structural, dynamical, and energetic properties of water to a high degree of accuracy relative to their computational cost. Here, we show that the dual descriptor (DD) measure of nucleophilicity and electrophilicity, which is sometimes used to elucidate organic chemistry reaction mechanisms, can also be used to characterize the reactivity of DFTsimulated liquid water. The DD is especially apt for understanding the reactivity of excess electrons with water as its calculation explicitly involves adding and removing an excess electron from a reference system. We use the DD to explore the reactivity of water simulated using three different DFT functionals: the LDA functional (LDA), a hybrid-GGA functional (PBE0), and a hybrid meta- GGA functional (SCAN0). Using the DD, we show that the SCAN0 functional with the standard 25% Hartree–Fock exchange produces simulated liquid water with many regions that are far more reactive than either PBE0 or LDA. To understand the implications of these highly reactive regions, we then add a strong nucleophile in the form of an excess electron and find that although PBE0 and LDA predict stable hydrated electrons, the excess electron reacts nearly instantaneously with SCAN0 water via proton abstraction to form a hydrogen atom and hydroxide ion. We show that the DD provides the ability to not only predict whether or not liquid water will react with a hydrated electron but also which particular waters will be involved solely from analyzing pure water configurations generated with each functional. We rationalize this result in terms of the known trap-seeking behavior of injected hydrated electrons, which are able to find the most electronegative region in bulk water. These results highlight the utility of the dual descriptor as a fast and interpretable method for investigating condensed-phase reactivity with excess electrons.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2026

Summary of the Initial Post-Irradiation Characterization of HFIR-Irradiated Low-N and High-N HT-9 Steel

Reference cladding systems for sodium fast reactors are based on the historical steel, HT-9. HT-9 is a Fe12Cr ferritic/martensitic steel with additions of Mo, W, V, and other minor elements and demonstrates low irradiation swelling and adequate mechanical properties. Extensive irradiation literature exists on the use of HT-9 as cladding for metal fuel, primarily irradiation on the U-Zr/HT-9 system from the Experimental Breeder Reactor-II (EBR-II) and Fast Flux Test Facility (FFTF) sodium fast reactor, and as a structural material from experiments in the FFTF. The large amount of historical data makes the U-Zr/HT-9 system the reference fuel specification for many nuclear reactor vendors that seek to license modern sodium-cooled fast reactors in the United States. However, it is yet unclear how variations in impurity content within HT-9 fundamentally affect irradiation performance at various irradiation temperatures. Recent work suggests that impurity content may noticeably alter the production of helium through nuclear transmutation. For these reasons, High-Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) irradiation of HT-9 steels with known variations in the impurity content is particularly timely to generate data to enable more accurate refinement of the chemical specification for nuclear-grade HT-9 material. This report summarizes the initial transmission electron microscopy characterization of HFIR-irradiated HT-9 steels following mechanical property measurements by the Advanced Fuels Campaign (AFC). This report includes qualitative results of the cavity, dislocation loop and cluster/precipitate microstructures as well as radiation-induced segregation. Quantitative results are being shared with partner institutions and will be included in more detail in a future report in FY2026.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2025

PID-Regulated Heating System for PIP-II Reference Line

The Proton Improvement Project-2 centers on building a new superconducting linear particle accelerator (Linac) at Fermilab. At the heart of the accelerator is the reference line, a critical system that defines the ideal path for the particle beam as it passes through magnets, RF cavities, and other beamline elements. Temperature stability is crucial for the reliable operation of RF components, such as mixers and filters. Fluctuations affect key performance parameters like conversion loss, isolation, and linearity. To mitigate any drift caused by ambient temperature changes, a heating plate assembly is utilized to maintain key components at a controlled temperature of 40°C. The system utilizes an aluminum 36”x36”x0.5” heat plate powered by a MOSFET-based control circuit, delivering approximately 460 W of thermal energy through a resistor array. Real-time temperature feedback is provided by a PT100 Resistance Temperature Detector (RTD), which interfaces with a Proportional–Integral–Derivative (PID) control algorithm to maintain closed-loop temperature regulation. The control signal actively modulates the gate voltage of an N channel MOSFET, dynamically adjusting power delivery in response to deviations from the temperature setpoint. Simulations and LTspice models validate the functionality and responsiveness of the circuit under varying conditions. The prototype has successfully demonstrated stable thermal control, paving the way for integration into the PIP-II infrastructure. The final design will feature an expanded resistor array, as well as communication with a PLC for continuous data acquisition and diagnostics. This work directly supports Fermilab’s broader mission by contributing to the stability and reliability of core accelerator systems, enhancing the precision of particle beam delivery for future physics experiments.

Mosher, Alexander [Fermilab]↗
DOE OSTI2025

Master Oscillator and Phase Reference Line Design for the PIP-II Linac

The phase averaging reference line system provides the RF phase reference, LO and clock signals to the LLRF and other accelerator sub-systems. The PIP-II linac has RF systems at three frequencies - 162.5 MHz, 325 MHz and 650 MHz. A temperature-stabilized, low-phase-noise oscillator is used as the master oscillator. Phase reference signals at 162.5 MHz, 325 MHz, and 650 MHz, along with LO signals at 182.5 MHz, 345 MHz, 670 MHz and LLRF clocks at 1320 MHz and 1300 MHz, are generated in temperature-controlled RF modules at each frequency section. A phase reference from each module travels to the next section, where it is doubled to produce required frequencies. The reference also travels alongside the accelerating cavities in the tunnel, allowing cavity probe and reference cables to temperature track and reduce measurement errors from temperature changes or phase drift.

Syed, A. [Fermilab]↗
DOE OSTI2025

Fermilab PIP-II Master Oscillator and Precision Reference Line Design and Construction

The phase averaging reference line system pro- vides the RF phase reference, LO and clock sig- nals to the LLRF and other accelerator sub- systems. The PIP-II linac has RF systems at three frequencies – 162.5 MHz, 325 MHz and 650 MHz. A temperature-stabilized, low-phase- noise oscillator is used as the master oscil- lator. Phase reference signals at 162.5 MHz, 325 MHz, and 650 MHz, along with LO signals at 182.5 MHz, 345 MHz, 670 MHz and LLRF clocks at 1320 MHz and 1300 MHz, are generated in temperature-controlled RF modules at each fre- quency section. A phase reference from each module travels to the next section, where it is doubled to produce required frequencies. The reference also travels alongside the accelerating cavities in the tunnel, allowing cavity probe and reference cables to temperature track and reduce measurement errors from temperature changes or phase drift.

Syed, Ahmed [Fermilab]↗
DOE OSTI2025

PID-Regulated Heating System for PIP-II Reference Line

The Proton Improvement Plan 2 (PIP-II) centers on building a new superconducting linear particle accelerator (Linac) at Fermilab. At the heart of the accelerator is the reference line. It is a critical system that defines the ideal path for the beam as it passes through magnets, RF cavities, and other beamline elements. Temperature stability is crucial for the reliable operation of RF components, such as mixers and filters. Fluctuations affect key performance parameters like conversion loss, isolation, and linearity. To mitigate any drift caused by ambient temperature changes, a heating plate assembly is utilized to maintain key components at a controlled temperature of 40 C. Utilizing an actively regulated heating system, a metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistor (MOSFET) based power control circuit which provides input to a controller; forming a closed-loop system that maintains the desired setpoints with high precision.

Mosher, Alexander [U. Illinois, Chicago]↗
DOE OSTI2025

Quantifying Climate Change Effects of Bioenergy and BECCS: Critical Considerations and Guidance on Methodology

Bioenergy is a critical element in many national and international climate change mitigation efforts, including as a carbon dioxide removal strategy combined with the capture and durable geological storage of flue gas emissions (BECCS). However, divergent results on the effectiveness of bioenergy as a climate change mitigation measure are reported in the scientific literature. Climate impacts of bioenergy depend on case-specific factors, primarily biophysical features of the biomass production system, and the design and efficiency of conversion and capture processes. Estimates of climate impacts are also strongly affected by methodological choices and assumptions, and much of the divergence between studies derives from differences in the assumed alternate use of the land or feedstock, the alternate energy source and the system boundaries applied. We present a methodology to support robust estimates of the climate change effects of bioenergy systems, updating the standard methodology developed by the International Energy Agency's Technology Collaboration Program on Bioenergy. We provide guidance on the key choices including the reference land use and energy system that bioenergy is assumed to displace, spatial and temporal system boundaries, co-product handling, climate forcers considered, metrics applied and time horizon of impact assessment. Researchers should consider the whole bioenergy system including all life cycle stages, and choose system boundaries, reference systems and treatment of co-products that are consistent with the intended application of the results. The assessment should be normalised to a functional unit that can be compared with other systems delivering an equivalent quantity of the same function. All significant climate forcers should be included, and climate effects should be quantified using appropriate impact assessment methods that distinguish the impact of time. Consistency in methodology and interpretation will facilitate comparison between studies of different bioenergy systems.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗