Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Transactive Control”

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.

167 records · Page 10
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1986

An expert system prototype for aiding in the development of software functional requirements for NASA Goddard's command management system: A case study and lessons learned

At NASA Goddard, the role of the command management system (CMS) is to transform general requests for spacecraft opeerations into detailed operational plans to be uplinked to the spacecraft. The CMS is part of the NASA Data System which entails the downlink of science and engineering data from NASA near-earth satellites to the user, and the uplink of command and control data to the spacecraft. Presently, it takes one to three years, with meetings once or twice a week, to determine functional requirements for CMS software design. As an alternative approach to the present technique of developing CMS software functional requirements, an expert system prototype was developed to aid in this function. Specifically, the knowledge base was formulated through interactions with domain experts, and was then linked to an existing expert system application generator called 'Knowledge Engineering System (Version 1.3).' Knowledge base development focused on four major steps: (1) develop the problem-oriented attribute hierachy; (2) determine the knowledge management approach; (3) encode the knowledge base; and (4) validate, test, certify, and evaluate the knowledge base and the expert system prototype as a whole. Backcasting was accomplished for validating and testing the expert system prototype. Knowledge refinement, evaluation, and implementation procedures of the expert system prototype were then transacted.

Liebowitz, Jay↗
DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Zero-Trust Architecture for Autonomous Edge Computing

We are at the apex of an aviation revolution where autonomy will play a central role in enabling complex, multi-agent systems to communicate, interact, and collaborate on a myriad of applications spanning autonomous swarms to wild-fire management. Autonomy is not an absolute but rather a spectrum ranging from a system requiring significant human intervention to one requiring little to none [1]. For example, the extreme, in the case of an autonomous aircraft, is one that operates independently in the airspace interacting with all other elements (air traffic controllers, other pilots) as if it were a human pilot. Critical to this vision is an architecture that enables autonomous agents to interact with minimal latency. Edge computing is an emerging architecture where compute and storage is pushed to the ‘edge’ of the network in order to minimize the round-trip time from agent to resource thereby mitigating the latency associated with cloud-only based approaches. Additionally, services can generate massive amounts of data (e.g., video feeds), which may require analysis in near real-time. Moving this data to the cloud for further processing may not be feasible due to latency, bandwidth, and cost. Privacy, security, and reliability can also be improved by edge computing architectures. However, this geo-distributed and dynamic* architecture complicates the establishment of unambiguous network security boundaries and can lead to vulnerabilities including man in the middle attacks, replay attacks, physical security breaches of edge nodes, signal interception, etc. This motivates the need for zero-trust architectures [2–4] which de-emphasize the notion of static network perimeters and, as the name implies, do not instill any innate trust in any particular agent. It is required that all agents must be authorized and approved in every transaction. In this paper, we present a zero-trust architecture suitable for edge-computing applications that demand significant low-latency, security, privacy, and reliability.

zero trust↗
DOE OSTI2021

Estimating the value of jointly optimized electric power generation and end use: a study of ISO-scale load shaping applied to the residential building stock

A generation-to-load simulation estimated the impact, in terms of production costs and CO2 emissions, attributable to the joint optimization of electric power generation and flexible end uses to support increasing penetrations of renewable energy. Newly conceived, evaluated, and foundational in developing a U.S. National Standard was a transaction-less yet continuous demand response system based on a day-ahead optimum load shape (OLS) designed to encourage Internet-connected devices to autonomously and voluntarily explore options to favour lowest cost generators - without requiring two-way communications, personally identifiable information, or customer opt-in. Boundary conditions used for model calibration included historical weather, residential building stock construction attributes, home appliance and device empirical operating schedules, prototypical power distribution feeder models, thermal generator heat rates, startup and ramping constraints, and fuel costs. Results of an hourly-based annual case study of Texas indicate a 1/3 reduction in production costs and a 1/5 reduction in CO2 emissions are possible.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2019

EGS Collab Testbed 1: Second Set Tracer Test Results

The EGS Collab project is developing ~10-20 m-scale field sites where fracture stimulation and flow models can be validated against controlled, small-scale, in-situ experiments. The first multi-well experimental site was established at the 4850 level in the Homestake Mine in Lead, South Dakota, where hydraulic fractures were created at an injection well drilled sub-horizontal from the drift. This file contains the second set of tracer data (also include the data uploaded previously, https://gdr.openei.org/submissions/1128) for the EGS Collab testbed. The tracer tests were conducted during October 2018 - November 2019. Injected tracers include DNA, C-dots (fluorescein nano particles), fluorescein, rhodamine-b, sodium chloride, lithium bromide and cesium iodine. The tracers have been detected in three flowing wells located about 7.5 to 9 meters away from the injection interval. The tracer breakthrough curves from these locations have been adjusted to account for the residence time in the injection and production tubing. The details about the tracer test can be found in Background and Methods of Tracer Tests (Mattson et al. (2019,a,b)) (also included in this package). References Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Plummer, M.A., Hawkins, A., Zhang, Y. and the EGS Collab Team 2019a. Preliminary Collab fracture characterization results from flow and tracer testing efforts. In Proceedings 44th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, edited, Stanford University, Stanford, California. Mattson, E.D., Neupane, G., Hawkins, A., Burghardt, J., Ingraham, M., Plummer, M., and the EGS Collab Team, 2019b. Fracture tracer injection response to pressure perturbations at an injection well. GRC Transactions, Vol. 43, 2019. Neupane, Ghanashyam, Earl Mattson, Adam Hawkins, Mitchell Plummer, and Yuran Zhang. EGS Collab Testbed 1: Tracer data sets. No. 1128. DOE Geothermal Data Repository; Idaho National Laboratory, 2019.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗