Code-to-code benchmarking of high energy beam transport in a gas cell.
Abstract not provided.
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Abstract not provided.
Abstract not provided.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Overview of the development of a CRAB/MELCOR workflow for mechanistic source term analysis
In this paper we define homological stabilizer codes on qubits which encompass codes such as Kitaev's toric code and the topological color codes. These codes are defined solely by the graphs they reside on. This feature allows us to use properties of topological graph theory to determine the graphs which are suitable as homological stabilizer codes. We then show that all toric codes are equivalent to homological stabilizer codes on 4-valent graphs. We show that the topological color codes and toric codes correspond to two distinct classes of graphs. We define the notion of label set equivalencies and show that under a small set of constraints the only homological stabilizer codes without local logical operators are equivalent to Kitaev's toric code or to the topological color codes. - Highlights: Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We show that Kitaev's toric codes are equivalent to homological stabilizer codes on 4-valent graphs. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We show that toric codes and color codes correspond to homological stabilizer codes on distinct graphs. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We find and classify all 2D homological stabilizer codes. Black-Right-Pointing-Pointer We find optimal codes among the homological stabilizer codes.
The Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program. A 2016 study looked more broadly at overall code impacts and this report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. In 2021, DOE conducted an interim and limited update to its 2016 study to evaluate potential building code updates using the 2016 methodology. That interim update includes estimated savings resulting from updates to the model energy codes, including the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (ASHRAE 90.1-2016) and 2019 editions, as well as the 2018 and 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). In 2023, DOE developed a fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2019 and 2021 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, annual floorspace additions, state code adoption dates, and emission factors, among others. This current version is another fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2022 and 2024 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, state code adoption dates, emission factors, and renewable energy contribution among others. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when the new code is implemented and builders, architects, and engineers are required to comply with the new provisions. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes and are considered in this assessment. Figure ES.1 schematically describes the analysis framework. Energy savings are expressed in terms of energy use intensity (EUI) in the figure.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program; this study looked more broadly at overall code impacts. This report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced CO 2 emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. This analysis does not represent all potential savings from energy codes in the U.S. because it excludes several states which have codes which are fundamentally different from the national model energy codes or which do not have state-wide codes. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when buildings comply with the code. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. Delayed adoption of a model code and incomplete compliance with the code’s requirements erode potential savings. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes, and are considered in this assessment.