Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “source location”

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 289 records · Page 16
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Safe and Private Forward-trading Platform for Transactive Microgrids

Power grids are evolving at an unprecedented pace due to the rapid growth of distributed energy resources (DER) in communities. These resources are very different from traditional power sources, as they are located closer to loads and thus can significantly reduce transmission losses and carbon emissions. However, their intermittent and variable nature often results in spikes in the overall demand on distribution system operators (DSO). To manage these challenges, there has been a surge of interest in building decentralized control schemes, where a pool of DERs combined with energy storage devices can exchange energy locally to smooth fluctuations in net demand. Building a decentralized market for transactive microgrids is challenging, because even though a decentralized system provides resilience, it also must satisfy requirements such as privacy, efficiency, safety, and security, which are often in conflict with each other. As such, existing implementations of decentralized markets often focus on resilience and safety but compromise on privacy. In this article, we describe our platform, called TRANSAX, which enables participants to trade in an energy futures market, which improves efficiency by finding feasible matches for energy trades, enabling DSOs to plan their energy needs better. TRANSAX provides privacy to participants by anonymizing their trading activity using a distributed mixing service, while also enforcing constraints that limit trading activity based on safety requirements, such as keeping planned energy flow below line capacity. We show that TRANSAX can satisfy the seemingly conflicting requirements of efficiency, safety, and privacy. We also provide an analysis of how much trading efficiency is lost. Trading efficiency is improved through the problem formulation, which accounts for temporal flexibility, and system efficiency is improved using a hybrid-solver architecture. Lastly, we describe a testbed to run experiments and demonstrate its performance using simulation results.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Wasatch Fault Structure from Machine Learning Arrival Times and High-Precision Earthquake Locations

Abstract On 18 March 2020, a magnitude 5.7 earthquake hit the Salt Lake valley in the state of Utah, United States. Using a dense geophone deployment and machine learning (ML), an additional several thousand events were detected and located. Currently, both the mainshock and the majority of the aftershocks are suspected to have occurred on or near a deeper portion of the Salt Lake segment of the Wasatch fault—part of a large range-bounding fault system thought to be capable of generating an Mw 7.2 earthquake. However, a small subset of aftershocks may have occurred on a portion of the more steeply, eastward dipping, and poorly understood West Valley fault. Unfortunately, the catalog locations and lack of focal mechanisms for this subset of aftershocks provide only a crude constraint on the true fault structure. To better illuminate fault structure, we relocate the ML-generated catalog with a range of magnitudes from −2 to 4.6, using: (1) NonLinLoc, a nonlinear location algorithm, (2) source-specific station terms, and (3) waveform coherence. We further compute first-motion focal mechanisms for 68 events. Results of the relocation suggest a simpler, minimally listric Wasatch fault geometry, contrary to what has been previously proposed. We also find that analysis of the focal mechanisms and waveform similarity indicates minimal event similarity throughout the Magna sequence, suggesting a highly complex and heterogeneous rupture zone, as opposed to rupture on a single plane. These findings suggest an increased seismic hazard due to the overall shallowness of the earthquake sequence and highly varied rupture mechanisms.

Geochemistry & Geophysics↗
DOE OSTI2026

Reply to “Comment on ‘The Reduced Detection Rate of Signals That Are Hidden by Earthquakes: Case Studies with Spotlight Detectors That Operate at Seismic Arrays,’ by Joshua D. Carmichael, Brent G. Delbridge, and Richard Alfaro-Diaz” by Paul G. Richards

We reply to a comment that Paul G. Richards (Richards, 2026) directed to an article by Carmichael et al. (2025). Richards expressed concern over two issues. The first issue relates to the size of the explosions discussed in the article. The second relates to the probability that earthquakes and explosions sourced near the same location coincide in time, by chance. We do not address the first issue because the original article does not assign significance to the size of the explosions from the point of view of an experimental party. We do respond to Richards’ comment on the second issue and claim that it can be explained through a clarification about conditional versus joint probabilities. Our present discussion, therefore, describes the difference between the conditional probability that a correlator fails, given that an explosion and earthquake coincidently occur in the same place, and the joint probability that a correlator fails while an earthquake and explosion also coincidentally occur in the same place. This latter, joint probability appears to be rare. We clarify that our original article did not treat the joint probability, only the conditional probability.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2022

Batteries Included: Top 10 Findings from Berkeley Lab Research on the Growth of Hybrid Power Plants in the United States

One of the most important electric power system trends of the 2010s was the rapid deployment of wind turbines and photovoltaic arrays, but a twist for the 2020s may be the rapid deployment of ‘hybrid’ generation resources. Hybrid power plants typically combine solar or wind (or other energy sources) with co-located storage. While hybridization helps to ease the challenge of balancing variable supply and demand, its relative novelty means that research is needed to facilitate integration and promote innovation. Combining the characteristics of multiple energy, storage, and conversion technologies poses complex questions for grid operations and economics. Project developers, system operators, planners, and regulators would benefit from better data, methods, and tools to estimate the costs, values, and system impacts of hybrid projects. This publication showcases some of Berkeley Lab’s robust research program intended to support private- and public-sector decision-making about hybrid plants in the United States. Our short briefing summarizes articles that we published between 2020 and 2022, links to the in-depth reports, and provides contact details for further engagement on the specific research topics: Growth: Developer interest in hybrid power plants is strong and growing Price vs. Value: PV+storage hybrids have low PPA prices and high value in some regions Market Drivers: Solar hybridization is driven by tax credits and other benefits Configuration Choices: Market prices have incentivized shorter duration batteries with PV Capacity Value: The capacity contribution of a hybrid is less than the sum of its parts Ancillary Services: AS markets are a valuable yet fleeting option for hybrids Market Participation: Hybrids can more flexibly engage with electricity markets Operations: The power system value of hybrids depends on how they are operated Distributed Hybrids: Growth of customer-sited PV+storage hybrids offers new opportunities Future Research: Where next? Priority areas for hybrid power research.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Benefit Analysis of CO 2 Delivery Options for Offshore Storage or Enhanced Oil Recovery

The analysis presented in this report evaluates the benefits of CO₂ offshore transport via pipeline or ship within the GOM. It takes a top-down framework to estimate the costs. First, this analysis designed a reduced-order model (ROM) based on the cash flows in the FECM/NETL CO₂ Transport Cost Model (also known as CO2_T_COM). The ROM takes capital expenses (CAPEX) and operating expenses (OPEX) to calculate the CO₂ breakeven price based on the cash flows. Second, this analysis developed regression models utilizing published data from other analyses to estimate CAPEX and OPEX. Since the ROM is a simplified cash flow calculation, it is easy to exchange the core regression models to estimate various costs. The ROM and regression models provided a framework that can be easily used by other researchers, decision-makers, operators, and regulators. The objective of this analysis is to assess the CO₂ breakeven cost range for pipeline and ship transport of captured CO₂ given the CO₂ source and storage reservoir located in the GOM.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2025

Optimizing Geospatial Assessments for Nuclear Safeguards Applications with Large Language Models

A multidisciplinary team at Argonne National Laboratory evaluated the ability of large language models (LLMs) to identify geographic locations from open-source text and assessed post-processing measures to strengthen the reliability of those extractions in support of international nuclear safeguards. The study focused on addressing challenges such as toponym ambiguity, imprecise descriptions, and misinformation, which often undermine the accuracy of LLM-derived geospatial assessments. By integrating authoritative geospatial datasets, employing rigorous validation techniques, and leveraging human-in-the-loop processes, the project aimed to enhance the precision, transparency, and reproducibility of geospatial localization workflows. The findings demonstrate that while LLMs exhibit significant potential for accelerating geospatial analysis, their outputs require systematic grounding and verification to ensure reliability in high-stakes applications. This work contributes to the broader field of geospatial intelligence and supports strategic objectives of international organizations such as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2024

CarbonSAFE Phase II: Optimizing Alabama’s CO 2 Storage in Shelby County, Alabama (Project OASIS), Milestone M3 - Site Specific Drilling Report

The Phase II Storage Complex Feasibility project, entitled "Optimizing Alabama's CO 2 Storage in Shelby County, Alabama (Project OASIS)," is a part of the DOE/NETL's CarbonSAFE initiative. The Project is managed by the Southern States Energy Board (SSEB), and includes participation from Advanced Resources International, Inc. (ARI), Crescent Resource Innovation, Southern Company, Alabama A&M University, Auburn University, and Oklahoma State University. Project OASIS is working to establish the foundation for a commercial-scale geologic storage complex for CO 2 captured from Plant Gaston (home of the National Carbon Capture Center) and surrounding industrial sources of CO 2 located in Shelby County, Alabama. The Project objectives are: • Demonstrate that the subsurface saline formations at the storage complex can store commercial volumes of CO 2 safely and permanently. • Develop a comprehensive Community Benefits Plan. • Develop the infrastructure framework for a CO 2 storage hub. • Develop a rigorous risk registry and to conduct a comprehensive risk assessment. • Develop a monitoring plan. • Develop a comprehensive site characterization plan to support an Underground Injection Control Class VI Permit in a future Phase III program. • Evaluate the commercial viability of the project. Project OASIS is about 30 miles southeast of Birmingham, Alabama within a geologic province called the Valley and Ridge (Figure 1.1). The Valley and Ridge Province comprises a sequence of Paleozoic carbonate and clastic rocks that underwent structural deformation during the Alleghanian Orogeny. Storage prospects occur in relatively flat lying structural panels located between thrust faults. Available geologic studies related to hydrocarbon exploration suggest that Cambro-Ordovician carbonates and Cambrian clastic units offer multiple potential storage intervals, and that regional confining systems are present, such as the tectonically thickened Floyd-Parkwood Shale. The surface property is owned by a timber and land stewardship company, The Westervelt Company, Inc., who worked with the Project Team to select and prepare adequate sites for geologic assessment. The purpose of drilling the Westover Stratigraphic Test Well #2 was to collect geologic data to model the feasibility of commercial scale CO 2 injection and storage. This includes geological and geophysical evaluations, reservoir engineering analyses, and risk assessments.

20 FOSSIL-FUELED POWER PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2024

PCOR Partnership Atlas 6th Edition, Revised

The Plains CO 2 Reduction (PCOR) Partnership Atlas provides a profile of CO 2 sources and potential storage locations across the PCOR Partnership region. The revised sixth edition of the Atlas provides an up-to-date look at PCOR Partnership initiative activities, including additional regional characterization and updates on commercial projects. Additional background information on carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) is included to give a better understanding of how CCUS addresses concerns about climate change while allowing future energy needs to be met.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗
DOE OSTI2023

Quantitative Characterization of Hyper-Local Atmospheric Greenhouse Gas Sources

Atmospheric greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are often characterized using stationary, tower-based sensors. Ground based sensors reside in the turbulent boundary layer and are subject to intense concentration impulses from hyper-local (<100m) point sources of emissions. These high frequency spikes are often filtered out in broader emission flux studies, losing valuable information about how hyper-local sources influence receptors. In this study, we investigated how empirical atmospheric data can be used to locate and quantify a concurrently measured hyper-local point source in a dense urban setting. An eddy covariance style tower and a low-cost sensor tower were deployed in various locations around an urban, hyper-local CO2/CH4 emissions source (a continuously measured restaurant exhaust vent). A model using different processing and statistical techniques was built to examine the most effective procedures for source isolation, directional location, and emission quantification. Using excess concentrations above a minimum baseline, we identify the source using bivariate polar plots and quantify the relationship between source size, receptor distance, and statistical proxies. Furthermore, we find that varying statistical thresholds allows for identification of less influential sources which are drowned out by larger or closer sources. Finally, we show that large sources can be effectively characterized using low-cost sensors, a valuable outcome informing how networks for monitoring larger areas could be implemented. This work may provide a basis for source identification and monitoring protocols for networks that feature sensors influenced by hyper-local point sources, subject to site-specific assumptions.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

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

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2026

IM3 Open Source Data Center Atlas

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

Mongird, Kendall [Pacific Northwest National Labor↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impact of gas injection location and divertor surface material on ITER fusion power operation phase divertor performance assessed with SOLPS-ITER *

Abstract The ITER divertor design and performance assessment, primarily based on the SOLPS-4.3 burning plasma database (Pitts R. et al 2019 Nucl. Mater. Energy 20 100696), assumes the use of beryllium (Be) as the divertor surface material and the injection of gas from the main chamber top. However, the current ITER baseline favors gas injection from the more toroidally symmetric sub-divertor region. This paper evaluates the implications of these assumptions for divertor performance in the ITER fusion power operation phase. The impact of the divertor surface material and the gas injection location on the main ions mirrors the hydrogen only low power phase scenario shown in Park J.-S. et al (2020 Nucl. Fusion 61 016021). However, during burning plasma operation, extrinsic impurity seeding will be required. In the case of neon (Ne), studied here, impurity retention is influenced by both the divertor surface material and the fueling location. Neon leakage increases due to more energetic reflection from tungsten than beryllium, but equivalent divertor performance can be achieved by adjusting the neon seeding rate. While the impurity seeding location does not affect the distributions of impurity or radiation, the fueling location does. Top fueling provides local ionization sources mainly in the mid-SOL under detached conditions, enhancing divergences of the flux there (source-driven flow), bringing stagnation points close to the fueling location, and equilibrating flows towards both targets. In contrast, the global flow pattern (in the absence of fluid drifts) in the case of sub-divertor fueling is biased towards the inner target. Impurity flows, driven by force balance, largely mirror those of the main ion flow, including the stagnation point. The case with top fueling enhances Ne retention and corresponding radiation in the outer divertor, effectively reducing the total and peak target heat fluxes by 20%–40%, compared to the case with divertor fueling. Meanwhile, the case with outer target fueling also achieves similar reductions by enhancing plasma-neutral interactions. These results suggest the possibility that the selection of the fueling location and throughput can be used as an actuator to control impurity divertor retention and divertor radiation asymmetry.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Decision-Making Framework to Evaluate Opportunities for Recovery of Rare Earth Elements and Critical Minerals in Produced Water Networks

Oil and gas development activities require a significant amount of water. Given the environmental impacts associated with high consumption and subsequent disposal of this water, there is a need for strategies to support effective reuse of, treatment of, and/or resource recovery from this produced water. These streams can contain appreciable concentrations of rare earth elements (REE) and critical minerals (CM) (e.g., Lithium), which are critical for many important applications in electronics, technology, manufacturing, energy, and medicine [1]. Along with REE/CM present in produced water, other waste streams such as fly ash from coal-fired power plants and acid mine discharge present other potential sources for recovery of REE/CM [2-4]. And with increases in demand for REE/CM, the need for recovery from wastewater streams is becoming even more important. There is a need to develop effective decision-making tools to evaluate the economic and environmental potential for REE/CM recovery from produced water networks while supporting the needs of drilling and hydraulic fracturing activities. In this work, we present our progress in developing a decision-making framework to efficiently design and operate produced water networks for REE/CM recovery. Our approach considers REE/CM recovery from produced water streams alongside other potential wastewater sources. The models consider the location and capacity of storage and decentralized treatment processes as well as the design and operation of pipeline and transportation networks to connect different sources and effectively schedule inventories, reuse, and recovery opportunities. We focus on the evaluation of opportunities for REE/CM recovery with treatment constraints on composition and flow. We demonstrate this framework with an illustrative case study that features diverse production sites, storage facilities, transportation, and treatment sites. This proposed framework will be deployed in an open-source software package that is compatible with the PARETO framework to deliver analysis and decision-making tools that allow stakeholders to quantitatively evaluate potential opportunities for REE/CM recovery in produced water networks.

Pulsipher, Joshua↗
DOE OSTI2023

How Good Is Your Location? Comparing and Understanding the Uncertainties in Location for the 1993 Rock Valley Sequence

Accurate event locations are important for many endeavors in seismology, and understanding the factors that contribute to uncertainties in those locations is complex. In this article, we present a case study that takes an in-depth look at the accuracy and precision possible for locating nine shallow earthquakes in the Rock Valley fault zone in southern Nevada. These events are targeted by the Rock Valley Direct Comparison phase of the Source Physics Experiment, as candidates for the colocation of a chemical explosion with an earthquake hypocenter to directly compare earthquake and explosion sources. For this comparison, it is necessary to determine earthquake hypocenters as accurately as possible so that different source types have nearly identical locations. Our investigations include uncertainty analysis from different sets of phase arrivals, stations, velocity models, and location algorithms. For a common set of phase arrivals and stations, we find that epicentral locations from different combinations of velocity models and algorithms are within 600 m of one another in most cases. Event depths exhibit greater uncertainties, but focusing on the S-P times at the nearest station allows for estimates within approximately 500 m.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Source term estimation using noble gas and aerosol samples

Algorithms that estimate the location, time, and magnitude of a point-source atmospheric release using remotely sampled air concentrations typically use data for a single chemical or radioactive isotope. Here, a Bayesian algorithm is presented that uses data from multiple radioactive isotopes that are all released in the same short-duration event. Data from noble gas and aerosol samplers can be used simultaneously in the model. Application to a large synthetic data set using four isotopes shows the new algorithm generally gives more accurate location and time estimates than a comparable model using a single isotope.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Remote Radiation Sensing Using Aerial and Ground Platforms

Remote sensing of ionizing radiation has a significant role in waste management, nuclear material management and nonproliferation, and radiation safety. Robotic platforms can surpass the number of tasks that are achieved by humans. With this technique, the operator's radiation exposure can be decreased. Remote sensing allows for the evaluation and monitoring of radiological contamination. Gamma-ray and neutron sensors were integrated onto the robotic platforms. This approach allows for the radiation sensor data to be dynamically tracked and mapped thus enabling further analysis of the radiation flux in temporal and spatial domains. The goal is to complete scheduled tasks while the robot is being irradiated. To achieve this, electronic components must be shielded and radiation hardened. CZT Detector: Cadmium Zinc Telluride (CZT) detector technology has been a promising solution for gamma-ray and x-ray measurements. Detector data is transferred to the Odroid minicomputer that controls and powers the module via the USB. Robot Operating System (ROS) was utilized for data acquisition and data fusion. The Mariscotti method was employed for the spectrum analysis. A function was programmed in ROS for the automatic identification of photopeaks. CLYC Detector: A Cs{sub 2}LiYCl{sub 6}:Ce{sup 3+} (CLYC) detector was used for simultaneous medium-resolution gamma-ray measurements and neutron counting. A 2.54 cm diameter photomultiplier tube (PMT) was equipped with a high voltage supply and a miniature digitizer. Gamma-ray excitation: fast core-to-valence luminescence (CVL) with 1 ns decay constant, and prompt Ce{sup 3+} emission with 50 ns decay constant. Neutron excitation: slow cerium self-trapped excitation (Ce{sup 3+} STE), 1000 ns decay constant. Radiation Source Localization: Maximum Likelihood Estimation (MLE) and gradient-based methods were used to locate the position of a radiation source based on measured radiation intensities. Multi-Particle Transport Code FLUKA: Estimation of radiation damage of the electronic components is important in order to optimize the robot's operational time while it is irradiated. Displacement per atom (DPA) represents the radiation damage in materials exposed to the ionizing radiation. Various shielding layers of different thickness t were analyzed (< 5% statistical error). The model of the controller of the UAS was designed in FLUKA. Conclusion: CZT and CLYC detectors were integrated onto the robotic platforms. Radiation source localization and contour mapping using robotic platforms were studied. Functions for data analysis and fusion were developed in ROS. FLUKA code was utilized to analyze DPA values. Layers of low-density and high-density materials were used to shield the UAS electronics.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Radiation Simulation using Wi-Fi Signal Strength and Frequency

For routine radiological operations, lost radioactive sources, decommissioning and cleanup of nuclear facilities, and radiological terrorist events such as Radioactive Dispersive Devices (RDDs) or Radiological Exposure Devices (REDs), individuals are tasked with accurately locating both point and distributed sources of radiation. Radiation workers must often practice these tasks, whether part of initial training or periodically as part of formal or informal exercises or drills. In such circumstances, it is desirable to have an accurate recreation of a radioactive source, including a method of detecting it, which does not include dangerous amounts of radiation. The goal of this research was to develop a radiation simulation technology that uses IEEE 802.11x W-LAN protocol, i.e. Wi-Fi sources and detectors for these, as an inexpensive, precise and accurate method of replicating sources of gamma radiation. For this work, existing 802.11x sources were used. Software was developed for use with an Android smartphone to detect the presence of these sources. The measurements followed the expected behavior as a function of distance from the sources, mimicking that of gamma radiation, thus demonstrating the fundamental principle of operation. The ultimate system will be used in an outreach program to interest students in the radiation protection field.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Neural MUSE Analysis

Researchers at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) created data as part of the MUSE (Multi-Agency Urban Search Experiment Detector and Algorithm Test Bed) project simulating illicit nuclear materials located in various buildings along a road. In the simulation, a truck containing a radiation detector drives down the road gathering listmode data (counting the and energy of incident gamma radiation). Building materials, source shielding, driving speed, truck direction, truck location on the road, source type, and source placement are all varied between runs of the data set. This data was created using deterministic neutron transport and Monte Carlo methods through a combination of SCALE, MAVRIC, MCNP, and GADRAS. As part of a follow-on NA-22 project, two Kaggle competitions were created to determine the best algorithms for finding and identifying gamma sources in this simulated urban environment. The winning algorithm was neural network-based and had a test accuracy of 76.4% accuracy for source identification. This work seeks to build upon this work and improve the results through the application of novel machine learning techniques. As a first step, the data was classified by a simple Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) To accomplish this, the data was first preprocessed into “waterfall plots.” These plots are composed of energy vs count plots that are stacked vertically to show progression in time. The horizontal axis indicating the particle energy incorporated user defined bin spacing with options for in linear-, logarithmic-, square root-, and user-spaced bins. The z or color dimension showed the number of counts corresponding the energy-time combination. This data was then used to generate more data, by generating a local estimate of the mean of the distribution for a bin and then randomly re-sampling that bin from a Poisson distribution. Once all of this data was generated, it was fed into a well-known CNN architecture, ResNet50. The output layer of this model was removed and replaced with layers corresponding to the shape desired isotope outputs. The provided training data was used to train the classifier and the remaining testing data was used to evaluate the model. Results are soon to be forthcoming.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗