Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “DOI”

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 271 records · Page 15
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Combined Mesonet and Tracker

Title: Combined Mesonet and Trackers (UNL Mobile Mesonets) Authors University of Nebraska PI: Adam Houston, UNL Professor (ahouston2@unl.edu) Mailing Address: 126 Bessey Hall P.O. Box 880340 Lincoln, NE 68588-0340 CoMeT Overview The University of Nebraska-Lincoln operates three Combined Mesonet and Tracker (CoMeTs). CoMeTs are Ford Explorers (model years 2015, 2017, and 2019) with forward-mounted suites of meteorological sensors and dual moonroofs, combining the capability of a mobile mesonet to collect near-surface observations with the capability of an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) tracker vehicle, which enables an observer in the second row of seats to see the aircraft and maintain compliance with Federal Aviation Administration policies on UAS operation. The CoMeTs collect observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155A, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass (Barbieri et al. 2019). The HMP155A and 109SS-L thermistor are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). This list of sensors is also included in the CoMeT data file metadata. Manufacturer specifications for these instruments are given in Table 1 of Hanft and Houston (2018). The reported measured quantities are summarized below.CoMeT-3 was funded through an equipment allocation included in the NSF TORUS award (AGS-1824649). Instrument Description The specific sensors included on each CoMeT are summarized in the table at the end of this section. In general each CoMeT collects observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210 barometer with a Gill pressure port, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, position using a Garmin 19x HVS receiver, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass. The HMP155 and 109SS are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). Fast temperature and corrected RH measurements (using sensors housed within the U-tube) have a time constant of 10-12 s based on data collected across a temperature and RH shock during the CLOUD-MAP 2017 calibration/validation tests on June 26, 2017. Vehicle speed was < 10 kts for this test. CoMeT-1 CoMeT-2 CoMeT-3 Slow Temperature Slow RH Vaisala HMP155A-L20-PT Part #: 22280-7 Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Fast temperature Campbell Scientific 109SS-L20-PT Part #: 21448-3 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-109 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-150 Pressure Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Wind RM Young 05103-L20-PT Part #: 18435-310 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 GPS Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Compass KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 Logger Campbell Scientific CR6-NA-XT-SW Part #: 28385-9 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Data Collection and Real-Time Processing The reported measured quantities are summarized in the table below. Quantity Units Source Epoch time Seconds GPS Latitude and longitude Degrees GPS Altitude m GPS Pressure hPa PTB210 Temperature (fast) deg C 109SS-L Temperature (slow) deg C HMP155 RH (slow) % HMP155 Vehicle speed m/s GPS Vehicle heading deg C-100 and GPS In addition to the measured variables, several derived variables are calculated. Corrected/fast relative humidity (%) Relative humidity is adjusted to the fast temperature following Richardson et al. (1998) and Houston et al. (2016). Water vapor mixing ratio (g/kg) Dew point temperature (&deg;C) Potential temperature (Kelvin) Virtual potential temperature (Kelvin) Equivalent potential temperature (Kelvin) Regular intercomparisons between all three CoMeTs were performed during TORUS 2019. Comparisons were also conducted between CoMeT-1 and CoMeT-2 during LAPSE-RATE (2018) on 14 July. In these intercomparisons, the vehicles were parked adjacent to each other aligned perpendicular to (and facing into) the wind. To minimize engine heating effects, intercomparisons were only conducted when the wind speed was >10 kts. Data Format Original data files for each deployment are saved as text files and then converted to NetCDF. NetCDF versions have units that are CF compliant and may not match the original units in the txt files. The naming convention for the NetCDF files is as follows: UNL.CoMeT3.{deployment date YYYYMMDD}.{start time of observation collection in UTC HHMM}.L2.{post-processing codes}.cdf example: UNL.CoMeT3.20190627.1931.L2.g1.f1.cdf Post-processing codes are included to track modifications to the raw data. These codes are closely connected to error flags associated with each record. Each letter corresponds to a particular instrument: g: GPS p: Barometer tf: Fast temperature ts: Slow temperature rh: Relative humidity f: Compass w: Wind monitor a: All instruments Each number corresponds to a particular post-processing action described more below. Measured and derived variables are included in the following table. Variable Heading Standard Name Units time Time seconds since 00:00:00, 01-01-1970 Alt Altitude meters lat Latitude degrees north lon Longitude degrees east fast_temp Air Temperature kelvin slow_temp Air Temperature kelvin pressure Air Pressure pascals logger_RH Relative Humidity percent calc_corr_RH Relative Humidity percent wind_speed Wind Speed meters per second wind_dir Wind From Direction degrees vehicle_dir Vehicle Direction degrees dewpoint Dew Point Temperature kelvin mixing_ratio Humidity Mixing Ratio g/g theta Air Potential Temperature kelvin theta_v Virtual Potential Temperature kelvin theta_e Equivalent Potential Temperature Kelvin error_flag The error_flag variable is a string that matches the post-processing codes listed above. All instruments will have an associated code, but will have a &ldquo;0&rdquo; if the datum is unchanged from the initial processed value. Error Codes The following table summarizes the error codes for data collected before 2020: Error Code Relevant CoMeT Description g1 1,2,3 Exact correction. GPS position and time reprocessed from raw data g2 1 As far as we can tell this is an exact correction to an error in the GPS time. During the correct time periods the time suddenly went backwards ~250s and stayed at this offset for 750s when it corrected itself. The offset was applied to the &ldquo;time warp&rdquo; period. p1 2 Approximate correction. Hole in the pressure tube connecting the pressure port to the barometer. Resulted in erroneously low air pressure measurements when the vehicle was in motion. Derived variables recalculated (dew point temperature [e depends on qv and p], water vapor mixing ratio, potential temperature, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) a1 3 Exact correction. Missing data reprocessed from raw data a2 1 Bug fix to bias correction for ts1, ts2, and rh1: water vapor mixing ratio was off by a factor of 10 and virtual potential temperature was wrong because of this. f1 3 No correction, missing data. Fluxgate compass inoperable. Wind speed and direction calculated using GPS-derived vehicle heading instead. rh1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.7% removed from relative humidity. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +0.6 K removed from slow temperature. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts2 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.0 K removed. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) References Bolton, D., 1980: The Computation of Equivalent Potential Temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1046&ndash;1053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1980)108<1046:TCOEPT>2.0.CO;2. Hanft, W., and A. L. Houston, 2018: An Observational and Modeling Study of Mesoscale Air Masses with High Theta-E. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 2503&ndash;2524, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0389.1.Wexler Houston, A. L., R. J. Laurence III, T. W. Nichols, S. Waugh, B. Argrow, and C. L. Ziegler, 2016: Intercomparison of unmanned aircraft-borne and mobile mesonet atmospheric sensors. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 33, 1569-1582, doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0178.1. Lowe, P. R., 1977: An Approximating Polynomial for the Computation of Saturation Vapor Pressure. J. Applied Meteorology, 16, 100&ndash;103. Richardson, S. J., S. E. Frederickson, F. V. Brock, and J. A. Brotzge, 1998: Combination temperature and relative humidity probes: Avoiding large air temperature errors and associated relative humidity errors. Preprints, 10th Symp. On Meteorological Observations and Instrumentation, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 278&ndash;283. Waugh, S., and S. E. Frederickson, 2010: An improved aspirated temperature system for mobile meteorological observations, especially in severe weather. 25th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P5.2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/25SLS/techprogram/paper_176205.htm.]

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Ice nucleation measurements from DRUM impactors during TRACER campaign in the Houston TX region from July to September 2022

During TRACER, three Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM) were used to collect aerosols for ice nucleation measurements in the Brooks laboratory at Texas A&M University. The three instruments were located at AMF1 in La Porte, Ancillary site in Guy (ANC), and onboard the Texas A&M Rapid Onsite Atmospheric Measurements Van (ROAM-V). ROAM-V was deployed to capture airmasses behind (maritime) and ahead (continental) of the passage of the sea-breeze front through Houston. On select sampling days, ROAM-V sampled in the morning/mid-day on the coast and then transited to a second inland site for the afternoon/evening. The suite of instruments deployed on ROAM-V included a Condensation Particle Counter (CPC; GRIMM Model 5.403 CPC), Scanning Mobility Particle Sizer (SMPS; TSI 3750 detector, TSI 3082 classifier, TSI 3088 neutralizer, TSI 3081A Differential Mobility Analyzer), Cloud Condensation Nuclei counter (Droplet Measurement Technologies CCN Counter), micro pulse lidar (Droplet Measurement Technologies Micro Pulse LiDAR (miniMPL)), and one of the Davis Rotating Uniform size-cut Monitors (DRUM; DRUMAir 4-DRUM). Before sampling at each location, the latitude and longitude were recorded using the GPS on the phone application “My Altitude”. Each DRUM sampler was operated at a flow rate of 23 LPM. Each DRUM has four stages where the aerodynamic diameter size cuts are as follows: stage 1 larger than 3 μm, stage 2 from 3 to 1.2 μm, stage 3 from 1.2 to 0.34 μm, and stage 4 from 0.34 to 0.15 μm. Pretreated aluminum foil was used as a substrate on all stages. At AMF1 and ANC sites, the DRUMs were operated on the shared aerosol inlet, with generous support of the DOE ARM site staff. These instruments rotated 24 mm per day and only contained aluminum foil substrates. Substrates were changed weekly and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. The DRUM onboard ROAM-V was operated at a faster rotation rate of 150 mm per day to clearly separate the multiple deployment locations for ROAM-V. For the ROAM-V DRUM, substrates were changed every deployment and transported to Texas A&M for storage in -80C freezer until analysis. At Texas A&M, ice nucleation experiments were conducted to measure the ice nucleation temperature of the ambient aerosol samples collected from the three DRUMs using our previously established procedures (Alsante et al., 2023; Fornea et al., 2009; Matthews et al., 2023). For ice nucleation, only samples collected on stage 3 were analyzed, given that these are the most relevant size (1.2 to 0.34 μm diameter) for potential ice nucleating particles. For the AMF1 and ANC sites, we cut and analyzed 2 mm (2-hour) samples. We analyzed the time periods of the AMF1 site instrument when the ROAM-V was deployed. A 72-hour period from July 11th at 23:49 through July 15th at 1:49 was analyzed from the ANC site instrument. For the ROAM-V instrument, we separated the daily samples by site location. Between 1- and 6-hour independent samples were analyzed at each location. We also cut the ROAM-V samples in half to allow for compositional analysis of the aerosol on the other half of the substrate. All viable samples from the ROAM-V were analyzed. Analysis was done using a custom-built ice nucleation apparatus, recently updated to include an array of 16 individual samples (Matthews et al., 2023). On our experimental setup, we used 100 μL of Ultra-High-Performance Liquid Chromatography (UHPLC) water (Sigma Aldrich, >99.9% purity) to wash off the aerosol from the DRUM substrate. Then, we micropipetted 2 μL droplet samples into each of the 16 wells of the array, using hydrophobically coated microscope slides. Experiments would cycle 28 times from 10 C to -40C over a 20-hour period. During analysis of the TRACER samples, nine experiments were conducted with UHPLC water process blanks that followed an identical preparation procedure. The average freezing temperature and standard deviation for these process blanks is -27.7±2.4 C. This data was collected for ARM Field Campaign AFC07023 and supported by DOE ASR grant DE-SC0021047. For any further questions, please feel free to contact the instrument PI, Sarah D. Brooks, sbrooks@tamu.edu. Alsante, A. N., Thornton, D. C., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Ice nucleation catalyzed by the photosynthesis enzyme RuBisCO and other abundant biomolecules. Communications Earth & Environment, 4(1), 51. Fornea, A. P., Brooks, S. D., Dooley, J. B., & Saha, A. (2009). Heterogeneous freezing of ice on atmospheric aerosols containing ash, soot, and soil. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 114(D13). DOI:10.1029/2009JD011958 Matthews, B. H., Alsante, A. N., & Brooks, S. D. (2023). Pollen Emissions of Subpollen Particles and Ice Nucleating Particles. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Tansey_MICRE_AAD_lidar_cloud_and_precip_phase_V2.0_20160406_201601120

This data file contains retrievals of cloud-base and below-cloud precipitation phase base for the MICRE campaign. The retrieved base is largely based on AAD depolarization lidar measurements. BOM cloud radar (BASTA), ARM ceilometer, and U. Canterbury ceilometer data are used to locate cloud base and below-cloud precipitation. Details on the algorithm and analysis of results are given in Tansey et al. 2023 (submitted DOI: 10.22541/essoar.168394768.89694625/v1). The data is limited to the period 20160406 to 201601120 during which both AAD lidar data and BoM radar data was collected.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Bioaerosol Properties using WIBS from SAIL on Mt. Crested Butte, CO

We deployed a Wideband Integrated Bioaerosol Sensor (WIBS-Neo, DMT) to measure different properties of fluorescent bioaerosol particles (FBAP) during SAIL. Our measurements were collected at the supplementary site on Crested Butte Mountain from inside the ARM Aerosol Observing System (AOS) sampling from the AOS inlet. We had two deployment periods at SAIL during biologically active seasons: summer 2022 (15 June 2022 - 13 September 2022) and spring 2023 (21 March 2023 - 19 June 2023). The WIBS is an online single-particle measurement that detects FBAPs (within a size range of 0.5 - 30 microns in diameter) based on the excitation and emission wavelengths of the individual particles. Using two xenon lamps, the WIBS excites FBAPs at 280 nm and 370 nm. Their emission is detected across two wavebands of 310-400 nm and 420-650 nm. We classified the FBAPs into seven different categories (A, B, C, AB, BC, AC, and ABC) using the classification scheme in Perring et. al. (2015) [1]. Here, we report one-minute averaged number concentration of FBAPs (total and by category) and NFBAPs. We also present one-minute-averaged size distributions and the asymmetry factor (AF, a surrogate for shape) of all FBAPs and NFBAPs. The logarithmic bin width of the size bins is the same as the average bin width of the AOS's optical particle counter (OPC, Grimm) for the range of sizes in which they overlap (26 bins from 0.5 - 30 microns). AF of the particles ranges from 0-100 and is divided into five bins with a linear spacing at increments of 20. The smallest AF bin represents more spherical particles while the largest bin represents more rod-shaped particles. We recommend referring to the readme file for more details of the variables present in the files. [1] Perring, A. E., et al. (2015), Airborne observations of regional variation in fluorescent aerosol across the United States, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 120, 1153-1170, doi:10.1002/2014JD022495. Abstract and description of the campaign can be found here: https://www.arm.gov/research/cam

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

EPCAPE-PT-LANL Measurements: Wideband Integrated Bioaerosol Sensor

Coastal cities offer a unique environment for studying aerosol-cloud interactions and the effects of urban emissions on cloud properties. As part of the Eastern Pacific Cloud Aerosol Precipitation Experiment (EPCAPE), the Partitioning Thrust by Los Alamos National Laboratory (EPCAPE-PT-LANL) was conducted. Our campaign focused on measuring the optical and chemical properties of aerosols and their interactions within marine stratocumulus clouds in La Jolla, California. EPCAPE-PT-LANL enhances the primary goals of EPCAPE through innovative observations of vapor-phase transitions between aerosols and cloud droplets, the impact of black carbon on aerosol-cloud dynamics, and the effects of cloud processing on aerosol optical properties. Instrument: Wideband Integrated Bioaerosol Sensor (Droplet Measurements Technology) Data Notes: The WIBS is an online single-particle measurement that detects FBAPs (within a size range of 0.5 - 30 microns in diameter) based on the excitation and emission wavelengths of the individual particles. Using two xenon lamps, the WIBS excites FBAPs at 280 nm and 370 nm. Their emission is detected across two wavebands of 310-400 nm and 420-650 nm. We classified the FBAPs into seven different categories (A, B, C, AB, BC, AC, and ABC) using the classification scheme in Perring et. al. (2015) [1]. Averaged number concentration of FBAPs (total and by category) and particles that non-fluorescent bioaerosols particles (NFBAPs). In separate files, we also present one-minute-averaged size distributions and the asymmetry factor (AF, a surrogate for shape) of all FBAPs and NFBAPs. The logarithmic bin width of the size bins are the same as the average bin width of the AOS's optical particle counter (OPC, Grimm) for the range of sizes in which they overlap (26 bins from 0.5 - 30 microns). AF of the particles ranges from 0-100 and is divided into five bins with a linear spacing at increments of 20. The smallest AF bin represents more spherical particles while the largest bin represents more rod-shaped particles. [1] Perring, A. E., et al. (2015), Airborne observations of regional variation in fluorescent aerosol across the United States, J. Geophys. Res. Atmos., 120, 1153–1170, doi:10.1002/2014JD022495. Abstract and description of the campaign can be found here : https://www.arm.gov/research/campaigns/amf2023epcape-pt-lanl. Files data_10min_WIBS_AFDist.csv Header: - FBAP_AFDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to Bin_5: Concentration of fluorescent bioaerosol particles in the each of 5 AF bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle AF, capturing the shapes of FBAPs detected during the measurement. - NFBAP_AFDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to Bin_5: Concentration of non-fluorescent bioaerosol particles in the each of 5 AF bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle AF, capturing the shapes of NFBAPs detected during the measurement. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. AF Bins: • Bin 1: 0 – 20 [unitless] • Bin 2: 21 – 40 [unitless] • Bin 3: 41 – 60 [unitless] • Bin 4: 61 – 80 [unitless] • Bin 5: 81 – 100 [unitless] Files data_10min_WIBS_Conc.csv Header: - NumberConcentrationA[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel A, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationB[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel B, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationC[/cm3]: Number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by fluorescence channel C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationAB[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels A and B, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationBC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels B and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationAC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by both fluorescence channels A and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationABC[/cm3]: Combined number concentration of bioaerosol particles detected by all three fluorescence channels A, B, and C, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - NumberConcentrationNFBAP[/cm3]: Number concentration of non-fluorescent bioaerosol particles, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. Files data_10min_WIBS_SizeDist.csv Header: - FBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to FBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_26: Number concentrations of FBAP in each of 26 size bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Each bin represents a specific range of particle sizes, capturing the size distribution of FBAPs detected during the measurement. - NFBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_1 to NFBAP_SizeDist[/cm3]_Bin_26: Number concentrations of NFBAP in each of 26 size bins, measured in particles per cubic centimeter. Similar to FBAP, each bin covers a specific range of particle sizes, detailing the size distribution of NFBAPs detected. - CVI_Flag[bool]: A boolean flag indicating whether the Counterflow Virtual Impactor (CVI) was active (true) or inactive (false) during the measurement. Size Bins: • Bin 1: 0.48 to 0.57 μm • Bin 2: 0.57 to 0.67 μm • Bin 3: 0.67 to 0.79 μm • Bin 4: 0.79 to 0.93 μm • Bin 5: 0.93 to 1.1 μm • Bin 6: 1.1 to 1.29 μm • Bin 7: 1.29 to 1.52 μm • Bin 8: 1.52 to 1.8 μm • Bin 9: 1.8 to 2.11 μm • Bin 10: 2.11 to 2.5 μm • Bin 11: 2.5 to 2.94 μm • Bin 12: 2.94 to 3.46 μm • Bin 13: 3.46 to 4.08 μm • Bin 14: 4.08 to 4.81 μm • Bin 15: 4.81 to 5.67 μm • Bin 16: 5.67 to 6.68 μm • Bin 17: 6.68 to 7.88 μm • Bin 18: 7.88 to 9.29 μm • Bin 19: 9.29 to 10.96 μm • Bin 20: 10.96 to 12.92 μm • Bin 21: 12.92 to 15.23 μm • Bin 22: 15.23 to 17.96 μm • Bin 23: 17.96 to 21.17 μm • Bin 24: 21.17 to 24.96 μm • Bin 25: 24.96 to 29.43 μm • Bin 26: 29.43 to 34.70 μm

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Tansey_MICRE_D98_microphysics_V5

This data file contains retrievals of cloud-effective-radius and cloud-droplet-number-concentration for low clouds based on the Dong et al. 1998 retrieval technique for the MICRE campaign. The retrieval is based on observed downwelling broadband SW fluxes and microwave-radiometer-retrieved-liquid-water-path averaged on a 5 minute time scale (mean when low cloud is present). Details on the algorithm and analysis of results are given in Tansey et al. 2024 (submitted DOI: 10.22541/essoar.173482310.03809503/v1). The data is limited to the period 20160410 to 20160612 AND 20170103 to 20170214 during which time good quality microwave-radiometer measurements are available.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Tansey_MICRE_D98_microphysics_V5

This data file contains retrievals of cloud-effective radius and cloud-droplet-number concentration for low clouds based on the Dong et al. 1998 retrieval technique for the MICRE campaign. The retrieval is based on observed downwelling broadband shortwave (SW) fluxes and microwave-radiometer-retrieved-liquid-water-path averaged on a 5-minute time scale (mean when low cloud is present). Details on the algorithm and analysis of results are given in Tansey et al. 2024 (submitted DOI: 10.22541/essoar.173482310.03809503/v1). The data are limited to the period of 20160410 to 20160612 and 20170103 to 20170214 during which time good quality microwave radiometer measurements are available.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

NGEE Arctic CO2, CH4 and Energy Eddy-Covariance (EC) Flux Tower Auxiliary Measurements, Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska, 2012 - 2019

Measurements began in September 2012 and are generally made throughout the snow-free growing season starting from April (pre-thawing) until November (freeze-up) when the instrumentation is taken down for maintenance and instrument calibration. CO2, CH4 and energy fluxes using the Eddy Covariance (EC) technique (Baldocchi 2003) and meteorological measurements are reported as 30-minute averages. The tower site is registered with AmeriFlux as US-NGB. See http://ameriflux.lbl.gov/sites/siteinfo/US-NGB for more information. Reported data include: (1) additional/extra meteorological and eddy covariance CO2, CH4 and energy flux data, (2) binned spectra for the three wind components, the sonic temperature and gas densities together with the binned cospectra for covariances of w (vertical wind component) and gas densities, (3) binned ogives (cumulative (co)spectra) for the three wind components, the sonic temperature and gas densities, and (4) tower site footprint matrices. Meteorological and eddy covariance CO2, CH4 and energy flux data (AmeriFlux BASE data product) are available from AmeriFlux https://doi.org/10.17190/AMF/1436326. The tower site is adjacent to the NGEE Arctic Tram system with several complementary time-series measurements https://doi.org/10.5440/1558782.This dataset supersedes the previously released dataset "Eddy-Covariance and auxiliary measurements, NGEE-Barrow, 2012-2013" DOI:10.5440/1124200 as this new product includes data for the longer time period processed using consistent methods for the entire record. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas in the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hysteretic temperature sensitivity of wetland CH4 fluxes explained by substrate availability and microbial activity: Model Archive

This Modeling Archive is in support of an NGEE Arctic publication "Hysteretic temperature sensitivity of wetland CH4 fluxes explained by substrate availability and microbial activity" in the Journal Biogeosciences (https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5849-2020), which includes the model data used in the publication. CH4 emissions from terrestrial systems are posited to increase, which can offset mitigation efforts and accelerate climate change. Yet, the accuracy of modeled CH4 emissions is sensitive to the prescribed CH4 production (or emission) temperature dependencies that are currently uncertain. Here, we use a comprehensive biogeochemistry model (ecosys) to investigate factors modulating CH4 production and emission rates across a permafrost thaw gradient encompassing a partly thawed bog and a fully thawed fen. We find that seasonally varying substrate availability drives lower and higher modeled methanogen biomass and activity, and thereby CH4 production, during the earlier and later periods of the thawed season, respectively. Package follows the Model data archiving guidelines with data in a *.zip file with three subfolders containing *.csv files and raw model output files; a data dictionary table (data_dictionary.csv) and two model output description tables (ecosys_plantspecies_output_notes.csv and ecosys_soil_ouput_notes.csv) to explain the format and meaning of individual output variables; and a user guide as a *.pdf. A detailed model description can be found in the supplement of (Grant, 2013). The ecosys source code is available at https://doi:10.5281/zenodo.3906642. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Rapidly changing high-latitude seasonality: Implications for the 21st century carbon cycle in Alaska: Modeling Archive

This Modeling Archive is in support of an NGEE Arctic publication "Rapidly changing high-latitude seasonality: Implications for the 21st century carbon cycle in Alaska" DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ac4362.The dataset contains "ecosys" model outputs reported in Shirley et al. (2022) that explored how climate warming will shift carbon cycle seasonality in Alaska. The study used analysis of seasonal dynamics to support the prediction that high-latitude ecosystems are carbon sinks and will continue to accumulate carbon throughout the century. The study predicts surprisingly large increases in spring net carbon uptake that result in larger net carbon uptake in spring than in summer by year 2100. Included as *.nc files are modeled daily net ecosystem exchange (NEE), net primary productivity (NPP), heterotrophic respiration (Rh), autotrophic respiration (Ra), gross primary productivity (GPP), and plant nitrogen uptake. The output is provided (1) at 25 km resolution across Alaska; (2) for years 2010 through 2100. Scripts to generate publication figures included as text files (*.m) from MATLAB. A user guide included as *.pdf.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Near-Surface Hydrology and Soil Properties Drive Heterogeneity in Permafrost Distribution, Vegetation Dynamics, and Carbon Cycling in a Sub-Arctic Watershed: Modeling Archive

This Modeling Archive is in support of a NGEE-Arctic publication: Shirley et al. (2022) “Near-Surface Hydrology and Soil Properties Drive Heterogeneity in Permafrost Distribution, Vegetation Dynamics, and Carbon Cycling in a Sub-Arctic Watershed". [DOI].The dataset contains outputs from the global sensitivity analysis (GSA) of the “ecosys” model as reported in Shirley et al. (2022). The study showed that discontinuous permafrost environments are characterized by complex feedback loops and strong spatial heterogeneity which is created by variability in near-surface hydrology and soil properties. Additionally, the study demonstrated that missing representation of sub-grid heterogeneity in terrestrial ecosystem models can lead to biased estimates of the high-latitude carbon budget. Included in this dataset are the factor values for each run in the GSA and the model outputs used in this study. Included are two *.csv data files and one *.pdf.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Software: gcamusa_v5.3_im3

GCAM USA version (gcamusa_v5p3_im3) supporting the publication: Khan, Z., Zhao, M., Ahsan, H., Wolfram, P., Vernon, C., Rice, J., Iyer, G., Binsted, M., Snyder, A., Graham, N., Kyle, P., 2023. Coevolution of future water, energy and land systems across the United States in response to national and global socioeconomic, climate, and energy policy drivers. (In progress) Earths Future, DOI: XXX with further details available at the meta-repository: https://immm-sfa.github.io/khan-etal_2023_im3gcamusa

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2023

Output Data: gcam_usa_v5p3_im3

Output databases and tables supporting the publication: Khan, Z., Zhao, M., Ahsan, H., Wolfram, P., Vernon, C., Rice, J., Iyer, G., Binsted, M., Snyder, A., Graham, N., Kyle, P., 2023. Coevolution of future water, energy and land systems across the United States in response to national and global socioeconomic, climate, and energy policy drivers. (In progress) Earths Future, DOI: XXX with further details available at the meta-repository: https://immm-sfa.github.io/khan-etal_2023_im3gcamusa Folder: gcam_usa_im3_outputs (GCAM USA v 5.3 used for IM3 experiment Output Databases): database_rcp45cooler_ssp3.tar.gz database_rcp45cooler_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp45hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp45hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85cooler_ssp3.tar.gz database_rcp85cooler_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85hotter_ssp5.tar.gz database_rcp85hotter_ssp5.tar.gz Folder: gcam_usa_im3_gcamextractor_outputs (gcamextractor post-processing of the GCAM databases for specific downstream models ): dataGCAM_cerf.tar.gz (For CERF Model) dataGCAM_demeter.tar.gz (For Demeter model) dataGCAM_go.tar.gz (For GO model) gcamDataTable.tar.gz (All IM3 scenarios)

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data for "Divergent urban land trajectories under alternative population projections within the shared socioeconomic pathways"

Datasets supporting findings and visualizations behind McManamay et al. (2024) Divergent urban land trajectories under alternative population projections within the shared socioeconomic pathways. Environmental Research Letters, DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ad2eec Using a spatial modeling experiment at high resolution (1-km), this study compared how two alternative US population projections, varying in the spatially explicit nature of demographic patterns and migration, affect urban land dynamics simulated by the Spatially Explicit, Long-term, Empirical City development (SELECT) model for SSP2, SSP3, and SSP5. The numerical experiment, inputs and outputs are fully described in McManamay et al. (2024). The datasets summarize SELECT model simulations within urban areas and rural areas of the conterminous United States. For code to reproduce the results, please refer to https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/mcmanamay_etal_2024_erl Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details. Descriptions of the datasets are provided below. Dataset(s) Descriptions: Urban_Land_delta_UA_County.csv: Urban land area for original (default) population, updated population, and urban land delta (difference between the two) according to Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and year. Urban land is summarized for U.S. counties (FIPS code) and urban areas (GEOID) as unique areas within various counties. JO_Gao_pop_ufdelta.csv: Comparison of population differences and urban land differences between the origial (default) and updated population projections. City_Case_studies.csv: Differences in urban land areas arising from different population projections summarized for selected cities (Atlanta, Los Angeles, Houston, and New York) and their surrounding rural areas UA_county_FID.zip: Zipped folder of .tiff file depicting unique combination of urban areas and US counties used for summarizing urban land differences in urban and rural areas based on different population projections. ULD_clusters.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting normalized changes in urban land delta (difference in urban land arising from population projections) and the respective Ward's hierarchical clusters, which group urban and rural areas based on similarities in temporal trends. Urban_Percent_change_2100.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting percent changes in urban land area for year 2100 based on differences in the original (default) population and updated population. Each file is for SSPs and urban or rural areas.

Land↗
DOE OSTI2024

MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report

Preface The MultiSector Dynamics (MSD) Community of Practice (CoP) hosted an inaugural workshop on October 3-5, 2023 at the University of California, Davis, to bring together members of the MSD community of practice to advance understanding of the co-evolution of human and natural systems, and to build the next generation of tools that bridge sectors, scales, and systems to realize a more resilient and equitable future. The theme of the workshop was "Advancing Complex Adaptive Human-Earth Systems Science in a World of Interconnected Risks". This document outlines the motivation for the workshop, its goals and objectives, the application process, the agenda, overviews of the training sessions offered to the workshop participants and a summary of each breakout session. The MSD workshop report further discusses the feedback from workshop participants and presents some reflections and next steps. The MSD Workshop organizers thank the DOE Office of Science, Earth and Environmental System Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics program area for financial support of its activities through the Integrated Multisector Multiscale Modeling (IM3) project. For more information related to the broader DOE MultiSector Dynamics Program please see https://climatemodeling.science.energy.gov/program-area/multisector-dynamics. D.L.M. and C.M.B. acknowledge support from the Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program of Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the US Department of Energy (DOE). Disclaimer This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither theUnited States Government nor any agency thereof, nor Battelle Memorial Institute, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, complete- ness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial products, 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 Laboratory operated by Battelle for the United States Department of Energy Available from:Office of Scientific and Technical Information http://www.OSTI.gov multisectordynamics.org This work is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4 Suggested citation: Monier, E., Reed, P.M., Vernon, C.R., Hadjimichael, A., Brelsford, C.M., Burleyson, C.B., Dyreson, A.R., Fletcher, S.M., Giang, A., Gupta, R.S., Jackson, N.D., Jones, A.D., Lamontagne, J.R., McCollum, D.L., Morris, J.F., Moss, R.H., Peng, W., Saari, R.K., Srikrishnan, V., Szinai, J.K., Yoon, J. (2024) MultiSector Dynamics: 2023 Inaugural Workshop Report. MSD-LIVE Data Repository. doi:10.57931/2371710.

Monier, Erwan↗