Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Start Date”

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 235 records · Page 13
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2009

Design Evolution and Verification of the A-3 Chemical Steam Generator

Following is an overview of the Chemical Steam Generator system selected to provide vacuum conditions for a new altitude test facility, the A-3 Test Stand at Stennis Space Center (SSC) in Bay St. Louis, MS. A-3 will serve as NASA s primary facility for altitude testing of the J-2X rocket engine, to be used as the primary propulsion device for the upper stages of the Ares launch vehicles. The Chemical Steam Generators (CSGs) will produce vacuum conditions in the test cell through the production and subsequent supersonic ejection of steam into a diffuser downstream of the J-2X engine nozzle exit. The Chemical Steam Generators chosen have a rich heritage of operation at rocket engine altitude test facilities since the days of the Apollo program and are still in use at NASA White Sands Test Facility (WSTF) in New Mexico. The generators at WSTF have been modified to a degree, but are still very close to the heritage design. The intent for the A-3 implementation is to maintain this heritage design as much as possible, making minimal updates only where necessary to substitute for obsolete parts and to increase reliability. Reliability improvements are especially desired because the proposed system will require 27 generators, which is nine times the largest system installed in the 1960s. Improvements were suggested by the original design firm, Reaction Motors, by NASA SSC and NASA WSTF engineers, and by the A-3 test stand design contractor, Jacobs Technology, Inc. (JTI). This paper describes the range of improvements made to the design to date, starting with the heritage generator and the minor modifications made over time at WSTF, to the modernized configuration which will be used at A-3. The paper will discuss NASA s investment in modifications to SSC s E-2 test facility fire a full-scale Chemical Steam Generator in advance of the larger steam system installation at A-3. Risk mitigation testing will be performed in early 2009 at this test facility to verify that the CSGs operate as expected. The generator which will undergo this testing is of the most recent A-3 configuration, and will be instrumented far in excess of what is normally required for operation. The extra data will allow for easier troubleshooting and more complete knowledge of expected generator performance. In addition, the early testing will give SSC personnel experience in operating the CSG systems, which will expedite the process of installation and activation at A-3. Each Chemical Steam Generator is supported by a complement of valves, instruments, and flow control devices, with the entire assembly called a "module." The generators will be installed in groups of three, historically called "units". A module is so called because of its modular ability to be replaced or serviced without disturbing the other two modules installed on the same unit. A module is pictured in Figure 1, shown with its generator secured by white bands in its shipping (vs. installed) configuration. The heritage system at WSTF is composed of a single unit (three generator modules), pictured in Figure 2 as it was installed in 1965. In contrast, A-3 will have nine units operating in parallel to achieve vacuum conditions appropriate for testing the J-2X engine. Each of the combustors operates in two modes and achieves the so-called "full-steam" mode after all three of its stages ignite. Ignition of the first stage is achieved by exciting a spark plug; the second stage and main stage are lit by the flame front of the previous stage. The main stage burns approximately 97% of the total propellant flow and uses the heat energy to vaporize water into superheated steam. While the main stage remains unlit, the combustor is in so-called "idle" mode. In the WSTF system, this idle mode is not optimized for water usage, and does not need to be, as the water is pumped from a large reservoir. The water supply at A-3 will be contained in tanks with finite volume, so water optimization is preferred for the modnized configuration. Multiple solutions for this issue have been proposed, with the leading concept being a change to the operational definition of "idle mode," with the generator running in a lower heat flux condition.

Kirchner, Casey K.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Introduction: Prediction of F-16XL Flight Flow Physics

This special section is the result of fruitful endeavors by an international group of researchers in industry, government laboratories and university-led efforts to improve the technology readiness level of their CFD solvers through comparisons with flight data collected on the F-16XL-1 aircraft at a variety of test conditions. These 1996 flight data were documented and detailed the flight-flow physics of this aircraft through surface tufts and pressures, boundary-layer rakes and skin-friction measurements. The flight project was called the Cranked Wing Aerodynamics Project (CAWAP), due to its leading-edge sweep crank (70 degrees inboard, 50 degrees outboard), and served as a basis for the International comparisons to be made, called CAWAPI. This highly focused effort was one of two vortical flow studies facilitated by the NATO Research and Technology Organization through its Applied Vehicle Panel with a title of Understanding and Modeling Vortical Flows to Improve the Technology Readiness Level for Military Aircraft. It was given a task group number of AVT-113 and had an official start date of Spring 2003. The companion part of this task group dealt with fundamentals of vortical flow from both an experimental and numerical perspective on an analytically describable 65 degree delta-wing model for which much surface pressure data had already been measured at NASA Langley Research Center at a variety of Mach and Reynolds numbers and is called the Vortex Flow Experiment - 2 (VFE-2). These two parts or facets helped one another in understanding the predictions and data that had been or were being collected.

Lamar, John E.↗
NASA NTRS2009

The GLACE-2 Experiment

A major motivation for the study of the coupled land-atmosphere system is the idea that soil moisture anomalies may affect future meteorological variables through their effects on future surface energy and water budgets. If true, the accurate initialization of soil moisture in a subseasonal or seasonal forecast system may improve forecast skill, making the forecast products more valuable to society. The Global Land-Atmosphere Coupling Experiment (GLACE-2) project is examining, with a wide variety of models, the degree to which subseasonal (out to two months) precipitation and air temperature forecasts improve through the realistic initialization of soil moisture. For the first time ever, a global consensus should emerge regarding the value of land initialization for forecasts, perhaps motivating national forecast centers to make full use of land moisture initialization in their operations. Participants in GLACE-2 perform two series of forecasts, each consisting of 100 2-month forecast ensembles (10 members per ensemble) covering ten boreal spring and summer start-dates in each of the years 1986-1995. Series 1 utilizes realistic land surface state initialization, provided through a decadal offline simulation using realistic meteorological forcing, as provided by the Global Soil Wetness Project - Phase 2 (GSWP-2), a research activity of the Global Land-Atmosphere System Study (GLASS) of GEWEX. Series 2 is identical to Series 1 in every way except for the fact that it does not benefit from realistic land state initialization. Through the comparison of Series 1 and 2, we isolate the impact of land initialization on the forecasts. Optional extensions to these base runs include forecasts covering additional years, using alternative meteorological forcing for the land initialization. To date, GLACE-2 has garnered participation from eleven modeling groups, covering 13 atmospheric models. Analysis of available results is already well underway, both at the individual modeling institutions and at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, which is coordinating the project. Analysis focuses on two elements of the forecast problem: (i) the quantification of model-specific "predictability" (i.e., the degree to which simulated atmospheric chaos will foil a forecast, even under the assumption of"perfect" model physics, initialization data, and validation data) and its decay with time; and (ii) the quantification of forecast skill, determined through a comparison of predicted precipitation and air temperature against observations. Indeed, the specific contribution of land initialization to both these elements is isolated through a comparison of the Series 1 and 2 forecasts. We examine the two elements at four different forecast leads: 1-15, 16-30, 31-45, and 46-60 days. Statistics-based approaches for enhancing skill (essentially using observational statistics to reduce the impact of the models' climatic biases) are also tested. In the present talk, we provide an update of progress in GLACE-2, featuring quantifications of predictability and forecast skill for a number of the participating models and providing a "first look" at the desired consensus view of land impacts on subseasonal forecasts.

Koster, Randal↗
NASA NTRS2010

Gravitational Waves: A New Observational Window

The era of gravitational wave astronomy is rapidly approaching, with a likely start date around the middle of this decade ' Gravitational waves, emitted by accelerated motions of very massive objects, provide detailed information about strong-field gravity and its sources, including black holes and neutron stars, that electromagnetic probes cannot access. In this talk I will discuss the anticipated sources and the status of the extremely sensitive detectors (both ground and space based) that will make gravitational wave detections possible. As ground based detectors are now taking data, I will show some initial science results related to measured upper limits on gravitational wave signals. Finally Z will describe new directions including advanced detectors and joint efforts with other fields of astronomy.

Camp, Jordan B.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Predicting Hydrological Drought: Relative Contributions of Soil Moisture and Snow Information to Seasonal Streamflow Prediction Skill

in this study we examine how knowledge of mid-winter snow accumulation and soil moisture conditions contribute to our ability to predict streamflow months in advance. A first "synthetic truth" analysis focuses on a series of numerical experiments with multiple sophisticated land surface models driven with a dataset of observations-based meteorological forcing spanning multiple decades and covering the continental United States. Snowpack information by itself obviously contributes to the skill attained in streamflow prediction, particularly in the mountainous west. The isolated contribution of soil moisture information, however, is found to be large and significant in many areas, particularly in the west but also in region surrounding the Great Lakes. The results are supported by a supplemental, observations-based analysis using (naturalized) March-July streamflow measurements covering much of the western U.S. Additional forecast experiments using start dates that span the year indicate a strong seasonality in the skill contributions; soil moisture information, for example, contributes to kill at much longer leads for forecasts issued in winter than for those issued in summer.

Koster, R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Prediction of Hydrological Drought: What Can We Learn From Continental-Scale Offline Simulations?

Land surface model experiments are used to quantify, across the coterminous United States, the contributions (isolated and combined) of soil moisture and snowpack initialization to the skill of seasonal streamflow forecasts at multiple leads and for different start dates. Forecasted streamflows are compared to naturalized streamflow observations where available and to synthetic (model-generated) streamflow data elsewhere. We find that snow initialization has a major impact on skill in the mountainous western U.S. and in a portion of the northern Great Plains; a mid-winter (January 1) initialization of snow in these areas leads to significant skill in the spring melting season. Soil moisture initialization also contributes to skill, and although the maximum contributions are not as large as those seen for snow initialization, the soil moisture contributions extend across a much broader geographical area. Soil moisture initialization can contribute to skill at long leads (up to 5 or 6 months), particularly for forecasts issued during winter.

Koster, Randal↗
NASA NTRS2012

Where's My Data - WMD

WMD provides a centralized interface to access data stored in the Mission Data Processing and Control System (MPCS) GDS (Ground Data Systems) databases during MSL (Mars Science Laboratory) Testbeds and ATLO (Assembly, Test, and Launch Operations) test sessions. The MSL project organizes its data based on venue (Testbed, ATLO, Ops), with each venue's data stored on a separate database, making it cumbersome for users to access data across the various venues. WMD allows sessions to be retrieved through a Web-based search using several criteria: host name, session start date, or session ID number. Sessions matching the search criteria will be displayed and users can then select a session to obtain and analyze the associated data. The uniqueness of this software comes from its collection of data retrieval and analysis features provided through a single interface. This allows users to obtain their data and perform the necessary analysis without having to worry about where and how to get the data, which may be stored in various locations. Additionally, this software is a Web application that only requires a standard browser without additional plug-ins, providing a cross-platform, lightweight solution for users to retrieve and analyze their data. This software solves the problem of efficiently and easily finding and retrieving data from thousands of MSL Testbed and ATLO sessions. WMD allows the user to retrieve their session in as little as one mouse click, and then to quickly retrieve additional data associated with the session.

Quach, William L.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Estimating Tropical Cyclone Threats to Floating Rigs in the Gulf of Mexico

Offshore drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico are particularly vulnerable during hurricane season. When a weather threat arises, a decision to evacuate the rig and/or move to a safe location may need to be made. Depending on the activities in progress at the time of the threat, securing the well, evacuating, and/or moving to a safe location can take a considerable amount of time. This transition time is called T-time. T-time is not only rig dependent, but also depends on the activity being performed at the time of the threat. For these reasons it is important to assess tropical cyclone threats and the time it takes for them to reach the rig location. The objective of this study is to use the available 50 years of past cyclone history to estimate cyclone threats at any location in the Gulf of Mexico. The cyclone threat is estimated based on the rig location as well as the start date and duration of the offshore activity. By threat, it is meant the likelihood that a specific location with an associated offshore activity would be exposed to an upcoming cyclone whose forecasted track cone and storm size lies within that location. Three representative rig locations in the Gulf of Mexico were selected as assessment sites to evaluate the threat of incoming cyclones for different T-times. To conduct this tropical cyclone study, an Excel spreadsheet tool was developed to automate the analysis of the tropical cyclone data from the Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) Version 4. The spreadsheet tool allows the user to input any location (i.e., longitude and latitude) in the Gulf of Mexico and displays a list of historical cyclones that have passed within 150 nautical miles of that location during the activity period selected by the user. Also, the tool allows the user to input a T-time to assess the threat of cyclones that would not provide adequate time to secure the well, evacuate, and/or move to a safe location.

Risk↗
NASA NTRS2022

Estimating Tropical Cyclone Threats to Floating Rigs in the Gulf of Mexico

Offshore drilling operations in the Gulf of Mexico are particularly vulnerable during hurricane season. When a weather threat arises, a decision to evacuate the rig and/or move to a safe location may need to be made. Securing the well, evacuating, and/or moving to a safe location can take a considerable amount of time. This transition time is called T-time. T-time is not only rig dependent, but also depends on the activity being performed at the time of the threat. For these reasons, it is important to assess tropical cyclone threats and the estimated time it will take the storm to reach the rig location from the time it is first detected. The objective of this study is to use 50 years of cyclone history from a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) database, the International Best Track Archive for Climate Stewardship (IBTrACS) to estimate cyclone threats at any location in the Gulf of Mexico. The cyclone threat is estimated based on the rig location as well as the start date and duration of the offshore activity. By threat, it is meant the likelihood that a specific location with an associated offshore activity lies within the forecasted track cone and storm size of the upcoming cyclone. Three representative rig locations in the Gulf of Mexico were selected as assessment sites to evaluate the threat of incoming cyclones for different T-times. To conduct this tropical cyclone study, an Excel spreadsheet tool was developed to automate the analysis of the tropical cyclone data. The spreadsheet tool allows the user to input any location (i.e., longitude and latitude) in the Gulf of Mexico and displays a list of historical cyclones that have passed within 150 nautical miles of that location during the activity period selected by the user. In addition, the tool allows the user to input any T-time to assess the threat of cyclones that would not provide adequate time to secure the well, evacuate, and/or move to a safe location.

Offshore Oil Drilling↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sensitivity and Uncertainty Quantification of Transition Scenario Simulations

This report documents the first collective attempt at developing and applying capabilities to quantify uncertainties, assess parametric sensitivities, and optimize multiple parameters and metrics in fuel cycle simulations generated by the SA&I Campaign. To do this, external codes that were designed to perform sensitivity analysis and uncertainty quantification (SA&UQ) needed to be coupled to the SA&I Campaign’s nuclear fuel cycle simulators (NFCS). In FY20, two approaches were pursued: 1) coupling Cyclus to an ORNL-internal code called MOT (Metaheuristic Optimization Tool) and 2) coupling DYMOND to the opensource SA&UQ tool kit Dakota. The primary objective of having these NFCS/SA&UQ coupled capabilities is to better inform DOE-NE and other stakeholders on the results generated from the NFCS. For a given set of fuel cycle strategies, policies, and technology assumptions that make up a fuel cycle scenario, these NFCS have traditionally been used by the SA&I Campaign to provide quantitative answers in terms of year-by-year mass flows, infrastructure requirements, costs, etc. With these newly developed coupled capabilities, the SA&I Campaign can now efficiently simulate hundreds or thousands of these scenarios, sample large ranges of parameters and assumptions, and use the unique features of the SA&UQ tools to process the data. This enables providing answers with known and propagated uncertainties, determining the sensitivity of important metrics to different parameters and assumptions, quantifying how much fuel cycle and technology parameters impact each other, and producing optimized fuel cycle strategies for single and multiple variables. To demonstrate these new capabilities, the Cyclus/MOT was used to model several scenarios ranging from simple fleet retirements to transitions to advanced reactors. Specifically, for a transition scenario from LWRs to SFRs and advanced LWRs, uncertainty quantification, sensitivity analysis, and optimization studies were applied to cases involving single and multiple parameter (input) and single and multiple metric (output) variations. In addition, a similar transition scenario was modeled to demonstrate how to optimize the reprocessing capacity parameter to minimize two performance metrics while taking into account uncertainties from two other parameters. Lastly, a depletion module based on SCALE/ORIGEN was added in Cyclus to simulate the third scenario that was designed to quantify the impact of the modeling assumption that all LWR used nuclear fuel have the same burnup. The newly developed DYMOND/Dakota capability was also applied to a transition scenario from the existing fleet to small modular reactors and fast reactors. This particular scenario involves not only explicit isotopic depletion via ORIGEN-2, but also includes multirecycling and utilizing the criticality search feature to determine the fresh fuel composition of recycled fuel, a feature unique to the DYMOND NFCS. A large database of simulations were run with 4 main parameters that were sampled: start date of reprocessing, reprocessing capacity, energy demand growth rate, and advanced reactor share of the fleet. The 4 main metrics were uranium consumption, enrichment requirements, waste generation, and levelized cost of electricity using data from the Cost Basis Report. The demonstrated SA&UQ results include those that inform on how to choose parameters to avoid “failed” scenarios, Sobol’ indices that inform on the importance of various parameters individually and synergistically, and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) studies that decompose parameter ranges into groups and informs on whether variations are statistically significant.

Feng, B.↗
DOE OSTI2023

System Analysis Support of Consent-Based Siting Efforts - 23400

To better enable informed decision-making regarding the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, the Integrated Waste Management (IWM) program within the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) has been sponsoring the development and application of system analysis tools capable of analyzing various system options for the management of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste. With these tools, integrated waste management system (IWMS) architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analyses and assessments typically use these modeling and simulation tools to investigate things like the implications of changes in various assumptions and parameters such as acceptance rates, receipt logic, facility capacities and capabilities, use of standardized canisters, and different assumed system operation start dates. Some example system analysis results have been published previously. With the passage of the consolidated appropriations acts for fiscal years 2021 and 2022, Congress provided funding and direction for the DOE to move forward with interim storage to support near-term action in managing the nation’s SNF as an important component of an IWMS. Consent-based siting is a phased, adaptive, and collaborative approach to siting facilities that focuses on the needs and concerns of people and communities. Communities participate in the siting process by working carefully through a series of phases and steps with the DOE (as the implementing organization). Each step and phase helps a community determine whether and how hosting a facility to manage SNF is aligned to the community’s goals. By its nature, a consent-based siting process must be transparent, flexible, adaptive, and responsive to community concerns. Thus, the phases and steps are intended to serve as a guide, not a prescriptive set of instructions. System analysis research analysts interface with DOE’s consent-based siting for a federal interim storage program and can perform preliminary system analyses as requested to support various aspects of the consent-based siting team’s work. This paper provides an overview of IWM program’s system analysis activities that support the ongoing consent-based siting process. The questions that decision-makers, planners, communities, and stakeholders might have during the consent-based siting process are similar to questions that have been explored by system analysts previously. Specifically, this paper discusses work that will inform consent-based siting efforts in the areas of community impacts, cost estimates, various SNF acceptance rates by potential facilities, potential consolidated interim storage facility (CISF) capacities and configurations, and the implications of a CISF on the overall waste management system. It is expected that system analysis will continue to be performed to support the consent-based siting process in the future.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Update on Parallel Process Execution in the Next Generation System Analysis Model

As of the end of 2021, 88,880 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) (44,741 MTHM in dry storage; 44,139 MTHM in wet storage) of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) were stored at various reactor sites across the United States [1]. The Office of Storage and Transportation in the Department of Energy is planning for the transportation, storage, and eventual disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). To aid in this effort and inform decision-makers about the backend of the spent fuel cycle, systems analysis tools capable of analyzing the various options with respect to SNF and HLW management are being used as well as continuously improved to meet the evolving needs of the program. System analysts typically use these tools to vary underlying assumptions (shipping rates, allocation priority, available facilities, start dates, etc.) and study the implications of these changes on site clearance schedules, campaign costs, transportation infrastructure acquisition, etc.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Update on Parallel Process Execution in the Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM)

As of the end of 2022, it is estimated that over 90,000 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) were stored at various commercial nuclear power reactor sites (both operating and shutdown) across the United States [1]. The Office of Storage and Transportation within the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Nuclear Energy is planning for the transportation, storage, and eventual disposal of SNF and high-level radioactive waste (HLW). To aid in this effort and inform decision-makers about the backend of the spent fuel cycle, systems analysis tools capable of analyzing the various options with respect to SNF and HLW management are being used as well as continuously improved to meet the evolving needs of the program. System analysts typically use these tools to vary underlying assumptions (shipping rates, available facilities, start dates, interim storage capacity, etc.) and study the associated system implications such as timing for clearing sites of SNF, various cost elements, transportation infrastructure acquisition needs, etc.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Overview of System Integration Analysis Activities for Integrated Waste Management

Spent nuclear fuel (SNF) generated by the current fleet of commercial nuclear reactors is being stored at the reactor sites in spent fuel pools (SFPs) and in dry independent spent fuel storage installations (ISFSIs). The US Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) is developing an Integrated Waste Management Program (IWMP) comprising a suite of options and supporting analyses to enable future informed choices. The IWMP is organized into the following five major areas: 1) Consent-Based Siting, 2) IWM Facilities and Equipment Concepts and Development, 3) Transportation Capability Analysis and Support, 4) Information Technology Solutions and Support, and 5) System Integration Analysis and Support. This paper discusses the activities ongoing in the IWMP System Integration Analysis and Support area. Two main areas of research in system integration are data and tools development, as well as system analysis assessments. One of the tools being developed in the system integration area is the Used Nuclear Fuel-Storage, Transportation & Disposal Analysis Resource and Data System (UNF-ST&DARDS) tool. It is being developed as a foundational resource for DOE-NE to manage SNF data, along with several compatible analysis tools for time-dependent characterization of SNF and related systems. UNF-ST&DARDS has the unparalleled ability to track SNF through the entire back end of the fuel cycle—from the time the fuel is discharged from a reactor through its disposal in a geological repository. UNF ST&DARDS interfaces with the SCALE code system for nuclear analysis and COBRA-SFS for thermal analysis. Another main tool being developed is the Next Generation System Analysis Model (NGSAM). NGSAM is an agent-based simulation software tool expressly designed to be capable of modeling the waste management system. NGSAM has been developed to enable informed decision-making by providing the capability of analyzing various potential system options for the management of SNF and HLW. Using NGSAM, system architecture analyses are being conducted to support the future deployment of a comprehensive nuclear waste management system that considers all major back-end aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle (i.e., transportation, storage, and disposal). System analysis assessments may investigate the implications of various strategies such as different acceptance rates, acceptance queues, facility capacities and options, standardized canisters, and different assumed system operation start dates. Recently, some system analysis effort has begun to look at how the waste management system might operate for advanced reactor fuel cycles.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Fox Trails

1. This software utilizes python pandas to pull data from P6 databases or XER files. The software transforms the datasets into multiple main tables by joining, filtering, iteratively flattening hierarchical structured data, and pivoting datasets to give simple flat output tables. The activity table includes all of the information related to an activity including activity codes, global, EPS, and project codes, UDFs, and WBS information as separate columns. This includes the code id, code value and sequence number for all levels in hierarchical codes. The resource table is similar to the activity table and includes all of the information related to resources on activities including UPFs and resource codes. The resource time phased table takes the resource information and time phases it for the budget, forecast, late, and actual dates/units/costs that closely matches P6's user interface's values as it implements the resource curve and calendars. The wbs table contains the WBS structure broken out by levels and includes UDFs, codes, and notebook topics. The final P6 data table is the relationships table which simply contains the relationships. 2. When a user updates the tool with data (via giving it P6 project names with database username/password information or XER files) the system creates the data in #1, then creates a networkx graph with the activity data imbedded in the node data and the relationships added as edges. Each edge also has it's float calculated (working time distance between the predecessor and successor) and attached to the edge. Activities are also tagged as a potential start of a path based on their constraints, constraint dates, remaining start date, and activity status. When a user enters an activity ID into the UI, it runs a shortest path calculation on the network graph between each node tagged as potential start to the entered activity id based on the float tagged on the edge. Each path returned by the algorithm contains all of the nodes on the path in order, as well as the total float of the edges that make the path. This data is then collected and returned to the user in the form of a gantt chart with groupings for each path that includes the total float for each group. 3. Similar to 2, if the user passes through a reference dataset each activity set in the path is checked to see if it had a path in the reference dataset, if that path was the primary path between the start and end activities, and what has changed regarding logic and durations. These changes are color coded and summarized before sent to the user to be displayed by the UI for simple discovery. 4. Utilizing the data from #1, the user can submit desired grouping code(s) and filters to the system. The system will then pull the activities, resources, and relationships and create a gantt chart based on the groupings sent and filtered based on the filters sent. 5. The system will produce a gantt chart in a similar method to #4, but allows interactivity with the data. As the user interacts with the gantt chart, the software captures the changes and stores it with the user making the change so that project controls and implement those changes in P6.

Fox, Ben↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2022

ESS-DIVE Reporting Format for Dataset Package Metadata

ESS-DIVE’s (Environmental Systems Science Data Infrastructure for a Virtual Ecosystem) dataset metadata reporting format is intended to compile information about a dataset (e.g., title, description, funding sources) that can enable reuse of data submitted to the ESS-DIVE data repository. The files contained in this dataset include instructions (dataset_metadata_guide.md and README.md) that can be used to understand the types of metadata ESS-DIVE collects. The data dictionary (dd.csv) follows ESS-DIVE’s file-level metadata reporting format and includes brief descriptions about each element of the dataset metadata reporting format. This dataset also includes a terminology crosswalk (dataset_metadata_crosswalk.csv) that shows how ESS-DIVE’s metadata reporting format maps onto other existing metadata standards and reporting formats.Data contributors to ESS-DIVE can provide this metadata by manual entry using a web form or programmatically via ESS-DIVE’s API (Application Programming Interface). A metadata template (dataset_metadata_template.docx or dataset_metadata_template.pdf) can be used to collaboratively compile metadata before providing it to ESS-DIVE.Since being incorporated into ESS-DIVE’s data submission user interface, ESS-DIVE’s dataset metadata reporting format, has enabled features like automated metadata quality checks, and dissemination of ESS-DIVE datasets onto other data platforms including Google Dataset Search and DataCite.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Leaf phenology data at The Morton Arboretum Forestry Plots 2019-2023

We are collecting long-term leaf phenology data at The Morton Arboretum to determine seasonal patterns of leaf production in trees. This data on leaf phenology will be integrated with other ongoing data streams to create a connection between above- and below-ground tree processes. This data package contains raw and smooth outputs from phenology data, as well as extracted phenophase dates (i.e., start, peak, and end of season): the raw and smooth outputs from the PhenoCam GUI can be found in the "leafRaw.csv" and "leafSmooth.csv" files, respectively, and the extracted phenophase dates can be found in the "leafPhenophaseDates2019-2023.csv" file. Extracted phenophase dates for evergreen species in 2023 are currently unavailable, and the files will be updated once they are extracted. Additional information on units and other file-level metadata can be found within each data file's respective data dictionary, and metadata for each of the 23 surveyed plots can be found within the "Location_metadata.csv" file. While the "leafRaw.csv" and the "leafSmooth.csv" files contain all data for all species, the "leafPhenophaseDates2019-2023.csv" file currently excludes the dates for evergreen species in 2023. Another version of the file will be added as those dates are extracted.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗