Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Building Energy Codes Program”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Dynamic and Responsive Distributed Energy Resource Education Solutions for Building, Fire, and Safety Department Officials (Final Technical Report)

From April 2021 through March 2024, the Interstate Renewable Energy Council (IREC) led a collaborative project to develop a free online clearinghouse of educational resources about solar photovoltaics (PV), energy storage systems (ESS), electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE), and grid-interactive efficient building (GEB) technologies. Two websites—the Clean Energy Clearinghouse and CleanEnergyTraining.org—housed over 70 educational resources. Over the course of the three-year project, 154,272 unique visitors accessed the learning materials. Learner feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Even through the end of the project, there was sustained demand for education and communication. A primary innovation of the project was to drive multiple complementary audiences to the same place. Building owners, designers, installation contractors and developers, authorities having jurisdiction (AHJs), and fire service personnel all benefit from a shared understanding of clean energy technologies, including safety and code-related requirements. When considering the impact on the target audience, the project team worked with partners and advisors to inform resource creation and delivery in such a way as to address key motivational factors of the target audience and compel each user to seek additional information on the topic and return to the Clean Energy Clearinghouse website as their central location for more information. Resources were intentionally developed to be concise—five to 15 minutes—and accessible, meaning not overly technical. Providing basic information demystified the technologies and invited the professional to explore additional learning opportunities. Awardee and partner collaboration was key to project success. IREC facilitated collaboration among the other Topic 2 awardees, Southface and New Buildings Institute (NBI). The three awardees shared relevant information gained through discovery and validation questionnaires that informed product development and reduced duplication of effort by coordinating the development of complementary, and not competing, educational resources. Inspired by this collaboration, IREC brought on additional partners even in the final year of the project. Five regional energy efficiency organizations were part of the project, which expanded the connection between efficiency and distributed energy resources. We also included resources on the Clearinghouse that were developed through other federally funded projects, such as the Buildings Energy Efficiency Frontiers & Innovation Technologies (BENEFIT) program. The website was developed with the learner in mind, and not solely the funding source. Feedback from stakeholders throughout the project, and especially in its final year, indicated the need for continued education and facilitated communication among stakeholders to further the safe and widespread adoption of clean energy.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2002

Software for Processing Flight and Simulated Data of the ATIC Experiment

ATIC (Advanced Thin Ionization Calorimeter) is a balloon borne experiment designed to measure the cosmic ray composition for elements from hydrogen to iron and their energy spectra from approx.50 GeV to near 100 TeV. It consists of a Si-matrix detector to determine the charge of a CR particle, a scintillator hodoscope for tracking, carbon interaction targets and a fully active BGO calorimeter. ATIC had its first flight from McMurdo, Antarctica from 28/12/2000 to 13/01/2001. The ATIC flight collected approximately 25 million events. A C++-class library for building different programs for processing flight and simulated data of the ATIC balloon experiment is described. This library is compatible with the ROOT-system and includes classes and methods for solving a number of problems as the following: Reading data files in different formats (raw-data format, ROOT-format, ASCII-format, different formats for simulated data); Transferring all these formats to the only inner format of the library; Reconstruction of trajectories of primary particles with BGO calorimeter only. The Monte-Carlo simulations with GEANT code were used to obtain the basic tables for computing error corridors and chi(sup 2)-values for the trajectories. Obtaining error corridors for searching for signal of primary particle in the Si-matrix; Searching for hit of primary particle in the Si-matrix with using of error corridor and other criteria (chi(sup 2)-values, agreement between signals in Si-matrix and in the upper layer of scintillator and others); Determination of charge of primary particle; Determination of energy deposit in BGO calorimeter.

Panov, A. D.↗
DOE OSTI2025

stor4build

The EnergyPlus simulation engine supports modeling and simulation of thermal energy storage (TES) systems in several ways, including using the Python-EMS feature, which extends the operation of the engine with custom code written in Python. Creation of models using this feature can be tedious and error prone, with the connection of the model components to the Python code a particularly troublesome area. The stor4build Python package simplifies this process by modifying an input model to add a selected TES technology (implemented with the Python-EMS feature) and runs the simulation. The package leverages the OpenStudio middleware software development kit to automate this process as much as possible, eliminating potential errors and simplifying usage of EnergyPlus. The package provides objects, functions, and OpenStudio measures that implement the necessary operations to automate the creation of EnergyPlus models that integrate TES technologies with building systems. In addition, two user interfaces are provided: a command line interface and a web application programming interface. The automated process implemented by the package greatly simplifies the modeling and simulation process, allowing for parametric studies to be executed much more efficiently and effectively. The OpenStudio-based workflow is also very flexible and will allow for future additions of new technologies.

DeGraw, JasonWilliam [Oak Ridge National Laborator↗
DOE OSTI2024

Initial Development of Fusion Magnet Simulation Capabilities for Performance and Safety Evaluation Using the MOOSE Framework

Fusion energy holds the promise of being a transformative technology as a carbon-neutral, sustainable source of energy. Whole device modeling and the development of fusion digital twins will be increasingly important for emerging fusion device concepts at both national laboratories and within the commercial fusion industry. However, meeting the challenge of whole device modeling of fusion energy devices requires robust, multiphysics, multiscale modeling and simulation technologies capable of running on large-scale supercomputers. Detailed analysis of individual systems at-scale is also required to ensure safe and efficient operation as well as provide the safety basis for future device designs and licensing activities. In a tokamak, toroidal and poloidal magnets confine and shape the fusion plasma to promote the fusion reaction. High plasma temperatures and high magnetic field requirements in modern design concepts (leading to high amounts of energy stored within each magnet) impose electrical, thermal, and mechanical loads on the magnet components, which in turn impacts the safety considerations of the magnet and their supporting systems. Idaho National Laboratory (INL) has a history of working in this space, including development and benchmarking of the Magnetic System Circuitry Analysis Program (MSCAP) and Magnet Arcing (MAGARC) codes to study magnet quench events; notably, MAGARC was used to study quenching during the ITER Engineering Design Activity. However, these legacy codes and capabilities are not parallel and scalable, and new tools are required for future advances in this area, which leads to the INL-developed Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) framework. Developed originally for fission reactor systems under United States Department of Energy, Office of Nuclear Energy modeling and simulation programs, the MOOSE framework has been well-suited to multiscale, multiphysics modeling and simulation needs for nuclear systems. The framework is open-source, well-tested, under continuous development and deployment, and developed to a Nuclear Quality Assurance, Level 1 software quality standard. MOOSE has also been used in the fusion space previously in several projects: INL’s Tritium Migration Analysis Program, Version 8 (TMAP8) for tritium migration, UK Atomic Energy Authority’s A Unified Resource for OpenMC (fusion) Reactor Applications (AURORA) code for fusion thermo-mechanical and neutronics analysis, and Argonne National Laboratory’s Cardinal for high-fidelity computational fluid dynamics and neutronics. However, to model superconducting magnets, several MOOSE enhancements are required: additions to the current MOOSE electromagnetic capabilities, new material libraries for superconductors of interest (such as YBCO), as well as fusion-specific models for thermo-mechanics. This talk will discuss initial development activities to build these capabilities in MOOSE, focusing on initial validation and benchmarking activities. Proposed coupling workflows and future work to support the simulation of fusion magnets and magnet structural assemblies for performance and safety evaluation in MOOSE will also be discussed.

70 - PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2025

EMPOWERED Distributed Energy Resources Permit Accelerator Pilot

This report summarizes the EMPOWERED Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Permit Accelerator Pilot project. Its primary objective was to streamline the design, installation, permitting, and inspections of targeted Distributed Energy Resource (DER) solutions. Streamlining these processes is critical to strengthening and accelerating the adoption of DER solutions nationwide. Moreover, streamlined processes help expedite the clean energy transition and expand energy resilience by improving understanding and capability among key stakeholders like property owners, code officials, and the general workforce. The project team accomplished this by developing and deploying a set of design and permitting guides for simple DER solutions, which they rolled out via a permitting pilot program. The project team developed nine permitting and inspection guides for simple DER solutions, as follows: 1. Single-Family and Duplex: Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE), and Storage, Solar + Storage (each in two code cycles) 2. Multi-family and Office: EVSE, Storage, Solar + Storage (each in two code cycles) 3. A permitting process guide to support the implementation of the permitting guides. The guides cover key code requirements via plan review and field inspection checklists for code officials and building owners to follow to streamline the permitting and inspections process for DER solutions. Following the development of the initial set of guides, the project team formed two cohorts, each made up of four jurisdictions, to participate in the Permit Accelerator Pilot. Each cohort received training and technical assistance to support them in incorporating the guides into use. The project successfully engaged jurisdictions in two disparate US regions: Chelsea, Somerville, Natick, and Norwood in metro Boston; and Pima County, Town of Gilbert, Flagstaff, and Sedona in Arizona. Feedback gathered from the project was valuable in refining the guides to better address jurisdictional needs. After the pilot period, the project team developed final versions of the guides based on extensive feedback from the cohorts and from external technical peer review. Feedback included needs and barriers related to implementation, as well as detailed technical improvements from external peer review. The final guides were presented in a series of webinars with a national reach, with 192 attendees from 35 states in the live session of the final webinar, and the final guides are posted online and available for use nationwide. Key findings: • The most receptive jurisdictions were those adjacent to other jurisdictions that had already adopted similar initiatives. The least receptive jurisdictions were those in the midst of adopting new code cycles. • The most common barrier to jurisdictional adoption of new guidelines were internal administrative and process delays, more so than technical barriers. • The main technical barrier to adoption proved to be the concern of fire hazard risks posed by energy storage systems. There is some apprehension in the code enforcement community about the safety of the batteries. Education coordinated with fire and safety services will help alleviate concerns and increase confidence in the acceptance of innovative technologies. • Opportunities to further leverage and advance the guides and related resources include outreach, education, and jurisdictional support; updates to the resources to align with code cycle changes and local requirements; and advancements supporting emerging technologies.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Status of New Models Hosted on the Virtual Test Bed (VTB) in 2024

The National Reactor Innovation Center (NRIC) mission is to support deployment of novel reactor concepts. This is achieved by providing physical and virtual spaces for building and testing various components, systems, and complete pilot plants. The Virtual Test Bed (VTB) represents the virtual counterpart to the physical test bed. It is in development in collaboration with the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. The mission of the VTB is to accelerate the deployment and licensing of advanced reactors by leveraging state-of-the-art modeling and simulation (M&S) tools developed by the DOE NEAMS program. This is accomplished by three primary means: (1) openly hosting simulations that showcase analysis capabilities, (2) continuously testing the models hosted against code updates to avoid deprecation, and (3) filling key M&S gaps that are relevant for the physical NRIC test beds. The VTB repository consists of two sub-entities: 1. A documentation website detailing the models (https://mooseframework.inl.gov/virtual_test_bed). 2. A GitHub repository that hosts the corresponding files (https://github.com/idaholab/virtual_test_bed). Previous documentation on the models hosted in the VTB can be found in [1,2,3,4]. These references also include additional background information on the various NEAMS codes showcased in the VTB (which is omitted here for brevity). This paper primarily provides a status update of the most recent additions to the repository.

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Infrastructure improvements in the National Reactor Innovation Center Virtual Test Bed

The National Reactor Innovation Center’s (NRIC) mission is to support deployment of novel reactor concepts. This is achieved by providing physical and virtual spaces for building and testing various components, systems, and complete pilot plants. The Virtual Test Bed (VTB) represents the virtual counterpart to the physical test bed. The VTB is being developed in collaboration with the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. The mission of the VTB is to accelerate the deployment and licensing of advanced reactors by leveraging state-of-the-art modeling and simulation (M&S) tools developed by the DOE NEAMS program. This is accomplished via three primary means: (1) openly hosting simulations that showcase analysis capabilities, (2) continuously testing the models hosted against code updates to avoid deprecation, and (3) filling key M&S gaps that are relevant for the physical NRIC test beds. The VTB repository consists of two sub-entities: • A documentation website detailing the models: https://mooseframework.inl.gov/virtual_test_bed • A GitHub repository that hosts the corresponding files: https://github.com/idaholab/virtual_test_bed. This paper presents the infrastructure added to the VTB in the last two fiscal years. Additional information about the VTB can be found in various publications [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8].

22 - GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Integrating Energy-Efficient Computing with Computational Research to Accelerate Energy Technology

NREL's computational sciences center hosts the largest high performance computing (HPC) capabilities dedicated to energy research while functioning as a living laboratory for energy-efficient computing. NREL's HPC capabilities support the research needs of the Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). In ten years of operation, HPC use in EERE-sponsored research has grown by a factor of 30, including work in electricity generation, energy efficiency, transportation, and energy system modeling. This paper analyzes this research portfolio, providing examples of individual use cases. The paper documents NREL's history of operating one of the world's most energy-efficient data centers while examining pathways to reduce economic and environmental impact beyond reduction of Power Usage Efficiency (PUE). This paper concludes by examining the unique opportunities created for accelerating improvements in data center efficiency created by combining an HPC system dedicated to energy research and a research program in energy-efficient computing.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

GPR_calculator: An on-the-fly surrogate model to accelerate massive nudged elastic band calculations

We present GPR_calculator, a package based on Python and C++ programming languages to build an on-the-fly surrogate model using Gaussian Process Regression (GPR) to approximate computationally expensive electronic structure calculations. The key idea is to dynamically train a GPR model during the simulation that can accurately predict energies and forces with uncertainty quantification. When the uncertainty is high, the costly electronic structure calculation is performed to obtain the ground truth data, which is then used to update the GPR model. To illustrate the effectiveness of GPR_calculator, we demonstrate its application in Nudged Elastic Band (NEB) simulations of surface diffusion and reactions, achieving 3-10 times acceleration compared to pure ab initio calculations. The source code is available at https://github.com/MaterSim/GPR_calculator.

Gaussian process regression↗
DOE OSTI2025

Demonstration of a Novel Technology to Manage Electricity Demand in Grid-Independent Military Microgrids

This research was conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) in collaboration with the S&C Electric Inc. through funding provided by the ESTCP. The project demonstrates use of cybersecure Automated Demand Response (ADR) technology to effectively manage microgrid loads during grid-independent, also known as "islanded," operation. When military microgrids become isolated from the main electrical grid, they are required to balance electricity supply and demand locally. Given that local generation may be constrained, the prevailing strategy involves shedding all but the most critical loads by tripping smart circuit breakers, which then necessitate manual resetting. This approach is generally implemented at the building level, which means that the buildings with mission-critical activities are exempt from load management and remain fully powered, whereas those deemed non-critical can experience a complete loss of service. In this research we developed a method that allows building automation systems to selectively control their assets in response to load shedding request from a microgrid controller, avoiding total loss of service in contrast to the conventional control approach. A commercial OpenADR client server by GridFabric is used for communication between the microgrid controller and the building management system (BMS). The microgrid controller monitors both generation capacity and various assets within the microgrid and issues a demand reduction request when necessary. This request is communicated to the OpenADR server via Modbus. Upon receiving the request, the OpenADR server forwards it to the BMS utilizing the OpenADR protocol. The BMS is pre-configured with various levels of load reduction strategies based on the controllable assets available, allowing for a nuanced approach to demand reduction. Both lab and field tests were performed that considered load shedding needed to achieve closed transition into island mode and to accommodate changing loads and power source availability while islanded. A commercial microgrid controller was used for these tests with normal programming within the expected constraints of the system capabilities. That is, the solution did not require any specialized modification to the code base of the controller. Given the latency of the round-trip communication path between the microgrid controller and the various devices involved with the load shed processes, there are certain scenarios for which the demonstrated solution are appropriate and some which are not. The methods described in this report can be used for load shedding/restoration during transitions between islanded and grid-tied modes of operation, as well as accommodating normal variations in load and the need to remove a power source from operation for maintenance. These methods should not be used for scenarios that require load shedding within a second or two such as sudden and unanticipated significant load increases or loss of power sources through equipment faults.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2025

MOOSE-based Tritium Migration Analysis Program, Version 8 (TMAP8) for advanced open-source tritium transport and fuel cycle modeling

Tritium management is critical for the safety, sustainability, and economics of fusion energy systems, and advanced and reliable modeling tools help accelerate the development of tritium technologies. This paper presents the Tritium Migration Analysis Program, Version 8 (TMAP8), an open-source, MOOSE-based application developed to provide state-of-the-art tritium transport and fuel cycle modeling capabilities. TMAP8 aims to expand the capabilities of previous versions (i.e., TMAP4 and TMAP7) by leveraging modern computational techniques, ensuring high software quality assurance standards (key to building trust), and enabling multispecies, multiscale, and multiphysics simulations for integrated tritium transport modeling in complex geometries. This paper outlines TMAP8’s scope and rigorous development practices, emphasizing its transparency, accessibility, modularity, and reliability. We present the current suite of verification and validation cases based on those from TMAP4, demonstrating TMAP8’s accuracy and reliability against analytical solutions and experimental data. Additionally, the paper showcases TMAP8’s integrated fuel cycle modeling capabilities, highlighting its applicability at various scales and levels. The TMAP8 code and documentation are openly available, promoting collaborative development and widespread adoption within the fusion community. Future work will soon expand TMAP8’s verification and validation suite to include those from TMAP7 and other recent experimental studies for validation.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
NASA NTRS2015

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision D

This document is derived from the former National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Constellation Program (CxP) document CxP 70023, titled "The Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE), Revision C." The original document has been modified to represent updated Design Reference Missions (DRMs) for the NASA Exploration Systems Development (ESD) Programs. The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems. These natural environments include the following types of environments: Terrestrial environments at launch, abort, and normal landing sites (winds, temperatures, pressures, surface roughness, sea conditions, etc.); Space environments (ionizing radiation, orbital debris, meteoroids, thermosphere density, plasma, solar, Earth, and lunar-emitted thermal radiation, etc.); Destination environments (Lunar surface and orbital, Mars atmosphere and surface, near Earth asteroids, etc.). Many of the environmental specifications in this document are based on models, data, and environment descriptions contained in the CxP 70044, Constellation Program Natural Environment Definition for Design (NEDD). The NEDD provides additional detailed environment data and model descriptions to support analytical studies for ESD Programs. For background information on specific environments and their effects on spacecraft design and operations, the environment models, and the data used to generate the specifications contained in the DSNE, the reader is referred to the NEDD paragraphs listed in each section of the DSNE. Also, most of the environmental specifications in this document are tied specifically to the ESD DRMs in ESD-10012, Revision B, Exploration Systems Development Concept of Operations (ConOps). Coordination between these environment specifications and the DRMs must be maintained. This document should be compatible with the current ESD DRMs, but updates to the mission definitions and variations in interpretation may require adjustments to the environment specifications.

Roberts, Barry C.↗
NASA NTRS2017

SLS-SPEC-159 Cross-Program Design Specification for Natural Environments (DSNE) Revision E

The DSNE completes environment-related specifications for architecture, system-level, and lower-tier documents by specifying the ranges of environmental conditions that must be accounted for by NASA ESD Programs. To assure clarity and consistency, and to prevent requirements documents from becoming cluttered with extensive amounts of technical material, natural environment specifications have been compiled into this document. The intent is to keep a unified specification for natural environments that each Program calls out for appropriate application. This document defines the natural environments parameter limits (maximum and minimum values, energy spectra, or precise model inputs, assumptions, model options, etc.), for all ESD Programs. These environments are developed by the NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) Natural Environments Branch (MSFC organization code: EV44). Many of the parameter limits are based on experience with previous programs, such as the Space Shuttle Program. The parameter limits contain no margin and are meant to be evaluated individually to ensure they are reasonable (i.e., do not apply unrealistic extreme-on-extreme conditions). The natural environments specifications in this document should be accounted for by robust design of the flight vehicle and support systems. However, it is understood that in some cases the Programs will find it more effective to account for portions of the environment ranges by operational mitigation or acceptance of risk in accordance with an appropriate program risk management plan and/or hazard analysis process. The DSNE is not intended as a definition of operational models or operational constraints, nor is it adequate, alone, for ground facilities which may have additional requirements (for example, building codes and local environmental constraints). "Natural environments," as the term is used here, refers to the environments that are not the result of intended human activity or intervention. It consists of a variety of external environmental factors (most of natural origin and a few of human origin) which impose restrictions or otherwise impact the development or operation of flight vehicles and destination surface systems.

Roberts, Barry C.↗
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↗
NASA NTRS2011

Experimental and Analytical Evaluation of a Composite Honeycomb Deployable Energy Absorber

In 2006, the NASA Subsonic Rotary Wing Aeronautics Program sponsored the experimental and analytical evaluation of an externally deployable composite honeycomb structure that is designed to attenuate impact energy during helicopter crashes. The concept, which is designated the Deployable Energy Absorber (DEA), utilizes an expandable Kevlar honeycomb structure to dissipate kinetic energy through crushing. The DEA incorporates a unique flexible hinge design that allows the honeycomb to be packaged and stowed flat until needed for deployment. A variety of deployment options such as linear, radial, and/or hybrid methods can be used. Experimental evaluation of the DEA utilized a building block approach that included material characterization testing of its constituent, Kevlar -129 fabric/epoxy, and flexural testing of single hexagonal cells. In addition, the energy attenuation capabilities of the DEA were demonstrated through multi-cell component dynamic crush tests, and vertical drop tests of a composite fuselage section, retrofitted with DEA blocks, onto concrete, water, and soft soil. During each stage of the DEA evaluation process, finite element models of the test articles were developed and simulations were performed using the explicit, nonlinear transient dynamic finite element code, LS-DYNA. This report documents the results of the experimental evaluation that was conducted to assess the energy absorption capabilities of the DEA.

Jackson, Karen E.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Evaluation of In-Situ AM Process Monitoring Techniques and Potential for Detecting Process Anomalies and Undesirable Microstructures

The US Department of Energy’s Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technologies (AMMT) program is pursuing rapid qualification of new materials for fabrication of nuclear relevant components using advanced manufacturing techniques. Particular interest is placed on code-qualifying stainless steel (SS) 316H processed by laser powder bed fusion (LPBF) additive manufacturing. A paradigm that incorporates data from in-situ sensing during the printing, ex-situ characterization, and advanced artificial intelligence–based models was established under the Transformation Challenge Reactor (TCR) program to develop a pedigree for each fabricated component that could be tracked from the feedstock to the component’s release for application. Under the TCR program, the Peregrine software was developed as a tool for incorporating the vast amounts of in-situ and ex-situ characterization data collected; all data stored on a rapidly growing digital platform. The digital platform allows for users to link site-specific process anomalies to the macro- and microstructure. The platform will eventually be able to predict component performance, which will be crucial to qualifying materials and components in risk-averse industries such as those supporting and building nuclear reactors. Current in-situ process monitoring techniques that are already integrated with software like Peregrine are advantageous for identifying process anomalies including powder spatter, component edge swelling, recoating-build interactions, and so on. However, additional data are required to fully predict the resulting microstructures needed for identifying relationships to component performance. The rapid cooling rates observed in LPBF are some of the highest of any bulk manufacturing process, resulting in heterogenous microstructures and typically causing anisotropy in mechanical properties. Moreover, evolved residual thermal stresses are high, which can cause severe defects such as delamination or cracking. Therefore, other in-situ monitoring methods are warranted for exploration to measure and map the thermal history, and potentially the stress state, of each build. This report summarizes different in-situ monitoring strategies proposed for LPBF with a focus on the more developed sensor systems. Novel capabilities for measuring melt pool temperatures are also addressed to better inform modeling efforts.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
NASA NTRS2019

InSight's Reconstructed Aerothermal Environments

The InSight Mars Lander successfully landed on the surface on November 26, 2018. This poster will describe the methodologies and margins used in developing the aerothermal environments for design of the thermal protection systems (TPS), as well as a prediction of as-flown environments based on the best estimated trajectory. The InSight mission spacecraft design approach included the effects of radiant heat flux to the aft body from the wake for the first time on a US Mars Mission, due to overwhelming evidence in ground testing for the European ExoMars mission (2009/2010) [1] and 2010 tests in the Electric Arc Shock Tube (EAST) facility [2]. The radiant energy on an aftbody was also recently confirmed via measurement on the Schiaparelli mission [3]. In addition, the InSight mission expected to enter the Mars atmosphere during the dust storm season, so the heatshield TPS was designed to accommodate the extra recession due to the potential dust impact. This poster will compare the predicted aerothermal environments using the reconstructed best estimated trajectory to the design environments. Design Approach: The InSight spacecraft was planned to be a near-design-to-print copy of the Phoenix spacecraft. The determination of the heatshield TPS requirements was approached as if it was a new design due to the new requirement of flying through a dust storm. The baseline for aftbody was build-to-print, and all analyses focused on ensuring adequate margin. This proved to be a challenge because the Phoenix aftbody was designed to withstand only convective heating and the InSight aftbody was evaluated for both convective and radiative heating. Aerothermal environments were predicted using the Langley Aerothermodynamic Upwind Relaxation Algorithm (LAURA) and the Data Parallel Line Relaxation (DPLR) CFD codes, and the Nonequilibrium Radiative Transport and Spectra Program (NEQAIR) utilizing bounding design trajectories derived from Monte Carlo analyses from the Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories II (POST2). In all cases, super-catalytic flowfields were assigned to ensure the most conservative heating results. Two trajectories were evaluated: 1) the trajectory with the maximum heat flux was utilized to determine the flowfield characteristics and the viability of the selection of TPS materials; and 2) the trajectory with the maximum heat load was used to determine the required thicknesses of the TPS materials. Evaluation of the MEDLI data [4], along with ground test data [5] led to the determination of whether or not the flow would transition from laminar to turbulent on the heatshield, which also determined the TPS sizing location for the heatshield. Aerothermal margins were added for the convective heating and developed for the radiative heating. TPS material sizing was determined with the Reaction Kinetic Ablation Program (REKAP) and the Fully Implicit Ablation and Thermal Analysis program (FIAT) using a three-branched approach to account for aerothermal, material response, and material properties uncertainties. In addition, the heatshield recession was augmented by an analysis of the effect of entry through a potential dusty atmosphere using a methodology developed in References [6] and [7]. These analyses resulted in an increase to the Phoenix heatshield TPS thickness. Reconstruction Efforts: Once the best estimated trajectory is reconstructed by the team, the LAURA/HARA (High-Temperature Aerothermo-dynamic Radiation model) and DPLR/NEQAIR code pairs will be used to predict the as-flown aerothermal conditions. In these runs, fully-catalytic flowfields will be assigned because it is a more physically accurate description of the chemistry in the flow. Once again, determination of the onset of turbulence on the heatshield will be evaluated. The as-flown aerothermal environments will then be compared to the design environments.

Beck, R. A.↗