SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Manual”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2015

Comparison of CT Fluoroscopy-Guided Manual and CT-Guided Robotic Positioning System for In Vivo Needle Placements in Swine Liver

PurposeTo compare CT fluoroscopy-guided manual and CT-guided robotic positioning system (RPS)-assisted needle placement by experienced IR physicians to targets in swine liver.Materials and MethodsManual and RPS-assisted needle placement was performed by six experienced IR physicians to four 5 mm fiducial seeds placed in swine liver (n = 6). Placement performance was assessed for placement accuracy, procedure time, number of confirmatory scans, needle manipulations, and procedure radiation dose. Intra-modality difference in performance for each physician was assessed using paired t test. Inter-physician performance variation for each modality was analyzed using Kruskal–Wallis test.ResultsPaired comparison of manual and RPS-assisted placements to a target by the same physician indicated accuracy outcomes was not statistically different (manual: 4.53 mm; RPS: 4.66 mm; p = 0.41), but manual placement resulted in higher total radiation dose (manual: 1075.77 mGy/cm; RPS: 636.4 mGy/cm; p = 0.03), required more confirmation scans (manual: 6.6; RPS: 1.6; p < 0.0001) and needle manipulations (manual: 4.6; RPS: 0.4; p < 0.0001). Procedure time for RPS was longer than manual placement (manual: 6.12 min; RPS: 9.7 min; p = 0.0003). Comparison of inter-physician performance during manual placement indicated significant differences in the time taken to complete placements (p = 0.008) and number of repositions (p = 0.04) but not in other study measures (p > 0.05). Comparison of inter-physician performance during RPS-assisted placement suggested statistically significant differences in procedure time (p = 0.02) and not in other study measures (p > 0.05).ConclusionsCT-guided RPS-assisted needle placement reduced radiation dose, number of confirmatory scans, and needle manipulations when compared to manual needle placement by experienced IR physicians, with equivalent accuracy.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2016

Automated and Semiautomated Segmentation of Rectal Tumor Volumes on Diffusion-Weighted MRI: Can It Replace Manual Volumetry?

Purpose: Diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) tumor volumetry is promising for rectal cancer response assessment, but an important drawback is that manual per-slice tumor delineation can be highly time consuming. This study investigated whether manual DWI-volumetry can be reproduced using a (semi)automated segmentation approach. Methods and Materials: Seventy-nine patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) that included DWI (highest b value [b1000 or b1100]) before and after chemoradiation therapy (CRT). Tumor volumes were assessed on b1000 (or b1100) DWI before and after CRT by means of (1) automated segmentation (by 2 inexperienced readers), (2) semiautomated segmentation (manual adjustment of the volumes obtained by method 1 by 2 radiologists), and (3) manual segmentation (by 2 radiologists); this last assessment served as the reference standard. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and Dice similarity indices (DSI) were calculated to evaluate agreement between different methods and observers. Measurement times (from a radiologist's perspective) were recorded for each method. Results: Tumor volumes were not significantly different among the 3 methods, either before or after CRT (P=.08 to .92). ICCs compared to manual segmentation were 0.80 to 0.91 and 0.53 to 0.66 before and after CRT, respectively, for the automated segmentation and 0.91 to 0.97 and 0.61 to 0.75, respectively, for the semiautomated method. Interobserver agreement (ICC) pre and post CRT was 0.82 and 0.59 for automated segmentation, 0.91 and 0.73 for semiautomated segmentation, and 0.91 and 0.75 for manual segmentation, respectively. Mean DSI between the automated and semiautomated method were 0.83 and 0.58 pre-CRT and post-CRT, respectively; DSI between the automated and manual segmentation were 0.68 and 0.42 and 0.70 and 0.41 between the semiautomated and manual segmentation, respectively. Median measurement time for the radiologists was 0 seconds (pre- and post-CRT) for the automated method, 41 to 69 seconds (pre-CRT) and 60 to 67 seconds (post-CRT) for the semiautomated method, and 180 to 296 seconds (pre-CRT) and 84 to 91 seconds (post-CRT) for the manual method. Conclusions: DWI volumetry using a semiautomated segmentation approach is promising and a potentially time-saving alternative to manual tumor delineation, particularly for primary tumor volumetry. Once further optimized, it could be a helpful tool for tumor response assessment in rectal cancer.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2017

Phantom Study Investigating the Accuracy of Manual and Automatic Image Fusion with the GE Logiq E9: Implications for use in Percutaneous Liver Interventions

PurposeTo determine the accuracy of automatic and manual co-registration methods for image fusion of three-dimensional computed tomography (CT) with real-time ultrasonography (US) for image-guided liver interventions.Materials and MethodsCT images of a skills phantom with liver lesions were acquired and co-registered to US using GE Logiq E9 navigation software. Manual co-registration was compared to automatic and semiautomatic co-registration using an active tracker. Also, manual point registration was compared to plane registration with and without an additional translation point. Finally, comparison was made between manual and automatic selection of reference points. In each experiment, accuracy of the co-registration method was determined by measurement of the residual displacement in phantom lesions by two independent observers.ResultsMean displacements for a superficial and deep liver lesion were comparable after manual and semiautomatic co-registration: 2.4 and 2.0 mm versus 2.0 and 2.5 mm, respectively. Both methods were significantly better than automatic co-registration: 5.9 and 5.2 mm residual displacement (p < 0.001; p < 0.01). The accuracy of manual point registration was higher than that of plane registration, the latter being heavily dependent on accurate matching of axial CT and US images by the operator. Automatic reference point selection resulted in significantly lower registration accuracy compared to manual point selection despite lower root-mean-square deviation (RMSD) values.ConclusionThe accuracy of manual and semiautomatic co-registration is better than that of automatic co-registration. For manual co-registration using a plane, choosing the correct plane orientation is an essential first step in the registration process. Automatic reference point selection based on RMSD values is error-prone.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗

DOE OSTI2014

U.S. Department of Energy Vehicle Technologies Program: Battery Test Manual For Plug-In Hybrid Electric Vehicles

This battery test procedure manual was prepared for the United States Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Vehicle Technologies Office. It is based on technical targets for commercial viability established for energy storage development projects aimed at meeting system level DOE goals for Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicles (PHEV). The specific procedures defined in this manual support the performance and life characterization of advanced battery devices under development for PHEV’s. However, it does share some methods described in the previously published battery test manual for power-assist hybrid electric vehicles. Due to the complexity of some of the procedures and supporting analysis, future revisions including some modifications and clarifications of these procedures are expected. As in previous battery and capacitor test manuals, this version of the manual defines testing methods for full-size battery systems, along with provisions for scaling these tests for modules, cells or other subscale level devices. The DOE-United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) supported the development of the manual. Technical Team points of contact responsible for its development and revision are Renata M. Arsenault of Ford Motor Company and Jon P. Christophersen of the Idaho National Laboratory. The development of this manual was funded by the Unites States Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office. Technical direction from DOE was provided by David Howell, Energy Storage R&D Manager and Hybrid Electric Systems Team Leader. Comments and questions regarding the manual should be directed to Jon P. Christophersen at the Idaho National Laboratory (jon.christophersen@inl.gov).

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

DOE OSTI2015

Battery Test Manual For Electric Vehicles, Revision 3

This battery test procedure manual was prepared for the United States Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), Vehicle Technologies Office. It is based on technical targets for commercial viability established for energy storage development projects aimed at meeting system level DOE goals for Electric Vehicles (EV). The specific procedures defined in this manual support the performance and life characterization of advanced battery devices under development for EVs. However, it does share some methods described in the previously published battery test manual for plug-in hybrid electric vehicles. Due to the complexity of some of the procedures and supporting analysis, future revisions including some modifications and clarifications of these procedures are expected. As in previous battery and capacitor test manuals, this version of the manual defines testing methods for full-size battery systems, along with provisions for scaling these tests for modules, cells or other subscale level devices. The DOE-United States Advanced Battery Consortium (USABC), Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) supported the development of the manual. Technical Team points of contact responsible for its development and revision are Chul Bae of Ford Motor Company and Jon P. Christophersen of the Idaho National Laboratory. The development of this manual was funded by the Unites States Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Vehicle Technologies Office. Technical direction from DOE was provided by David Howell, Energy Storage R&D Manager and Hybrid Electric Systems Team Leader. Comments and questions regarding the manual should be directed to Jon P. Christophersen at the Idaho National Laboratory (jon.christophersen@inl.gov).

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

NASA NTRS1990

Architectural study of the design and operation of advanced force feedback manual controllers

A teleoperator system consists of a manual controller, control hardware/software, and a remote manipulator. It was employed in either hazardous or unstructured, and/or remote environments. In teleoperation, the main-in-the-loop is the central concept that brings human intelligence to the teleoperator system. When teleoperation involves contact with an uncertain environment, providing the feeling of telepresence to the human operator is one of desired characteristics of the teleoperator system. Unfortunately, most available manual controllers in bilateral or force-reflecting teleoperator systems can be characterized by their bulky size, high costs, or lack of smoothness and transparency, and elementary architectures. To investigate other alternatives, a force-reflecting, 3 degree of freedom (dof) spherical manual controller is designed, analyzed, and implemented as a test bed demonstration in this research effort. To achieve an improved level of design to meet criteria such as compactness, portability, and a somewhat enhanced force-reflecting capability, the demonstration manual controller employs high gear-ratio reducers. To reduce the effects of the inertia and friction on the system, various force control strategies are applied and their performance investigated. The spherical manual controller uses a parallel geometry to minimize inertial and gravitational effects on its primary task of transparent information transfer. As an alternative to the spherical 3-dof manual controller, a new conceptual (or parallel) spherical 3-dof module is introduced with a full kinematic analysis. Also, the resulting kinematic properties are compared to those of other typical spherical 3-dof systems. The conceptual design of a parallel 6-dof manual controller and its kinematic analysis is presented. This 6-dof manual controller is similar to the Stewart Platform with the actuators located on the base to minimize the dynamic effects. Finally, a combination of the new 3-dof and 6-dof concepts is presented as a feasible test-bed for enhanced performance in a 9-dof system.

Tesar, Delbert↗

NASA NTRS2017

Validation of a Manually Oscillating Chair for In-The-Field Assessment of Dynamic Visual Acuity on Crewmembers Within Hours of Returning From Long-Duration Spaceflight

Long-duration spaceflight results in sensorimotor adaptations, which cause functional deficits during gravitational transitions, such as landing on a planetary surface after long-duration microgravity exposure. Both the vestibular system and the central nervous system are affected by gravitational transitions. These systems are responsible for coordinating head and eye movements via the vestibulo-ocular reflex (VOR) and go through an adaptation period upon exposure to microgravity. Consequently, they must also re-adapt to Earth's gravitational environment upon landing. This re-adaptation causes decrements in gaze control and dynamic visual acuity, with crewmembers reporting oscillopsia and blurred vision caused by retinal slip, or the inability to keep an image focused on their retina. This is thought to drive motion sickness symptoms experienced by most crewmembers following landing. Retinal slip can be estimated by dynamic visual acuity (DVA); visual acuity while in motion. Previously, DVA has been assessed in the laboratory where subjects walked at 6.4 km/hr on a motorized treadmill. Using this method, Peters et al. (2011) found that DVA is worsened in astronauts by an average of 0.75 eye-chart lines one day after landing. However, it is believed that re-adaptation occurs quickly and that DVA might be worse immediately upon re-exposure to a gravitational environment. Since many crewmembers are unable to walk safely upon landing, it was necessary to develop a method for replicating the vertical head movements associated with walking. In addition, the use of a chair to imitate the head displacement caused by walking isolates eye-head interactions without allowing for trunk and lower-body compensation, as seen with treadmill walking (Mulavara & Bloomberg 2003). Therefore, a modality for assessing DVA in the field within a few hours of landing was developed. In this study, we validated the ability of a manually operated oscillating chair to reproduce the oscillatory frequency of walking on a treadmill. Healthy non-astronaut subjects (n=14) participated in one test session and completed three static (seated) and three dynamic (walking/oscillated) visual acuity tests. DVA was assessed using a motorized treadmill, an automated oscillating chair, and a manually operated chair, both developed in the Neuroscience Laboratory at JSC. The automated chair was motor-driven and set to oscillate vertically at 2 Hz with a vertical displacement of +/- 5 cm to simulate vertical translation while walking. The manually operated chair was oscillated vertically by a test operator to the beat of a metronome at 120 beats/min (2 Hz) and a vertical displacement of approximately +/- 5 cm. As the subject was oscillated, they were asked to discern the direction gap of Landolt-C optotypes of varying sizes and verbally reported the direction while an operator recorded their response using a gamepad. Subjects were outfitted with accelerometers (sampling rate = 128 Hz) on their head, trunk and lumbar spine. A fast Fourier transform was performed on the vertical trunk acceleration to compare the peak and spread of the distribution of oscillation frequencies for each oscillating condition. The spread of the frequency distribution for the manual chair was not significantly different from either the treadmill or the automated chair. However, all three conditions had similar non-zero standard error values, suggesting a variance in head movement frequency which may affect DVA. The average oscillation frequency of the manual chair (1.85 Hz) was significantly different (α=0.05) from that of treadmill walking (2.24 Hz), but not significantly different from that of the automated chair (1.85 Hz) and all three conditions had small standard errors (SEM = 0.04, 0.06, and 0.08 Hz for manual, treadmill, and automated respectively). This implies that both chairs oscillate at a frequency below that of treadmill walking, but are comparable to each other and reproducible across sessions. Additionally, DVA scores did not vary significantly across conditions. The smaller spread values of the oscillating chairs' frequencies indicated mitigation of variation induced by locomotor strategies, which enables better examination of the issue of VOR adaptation. Furthermore, due to the deconditioned state of crewmembers in the initial hours after landing, it is easier to transport a manual bouncing chair into the field and safer to perform a vision test while seated in a chair versus walking on a treadmill. Therefore, the manually oscillating chair has been deemed to meet and exceed the DVA testing capabilities previously obtained by treadmill walking.

Kreutzberg, G. A.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS In this study, we will examine operational piloting tasks following International Space Station (ISS) missions in a simulated lunar landing using a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base. The motion-based simulation will be implemented in our laboratory at the Johnson Space Center (JSC) and will be available within hours following the return from commercial crew landings. The primary goals of this study are (1) to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override tasks, (2) to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency, and (3) compare performance during late “just-in-time” on-board training with early post-flight crew performance. The impact of spaceflight on piloting capability will be assessed from pre- versus post-flight changes in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). Individual differences in post-flight vestibular and cognitive changes include motion sickness reports, measures of tilt motion perception accuracy and precision, and dual-task tracking. During the 6DOF lunar simulation, the crew will manually takeover attitude and rate-of-descent to the nominal or re-designated landing aim point during the approach phase. The outcome measures for the lunar crew override tasks will be the percent time maintaining actual vehicle states, e.g., attitude and rate-of-descent, within recommended guidance during the landing approach, number and maximum deviation outside limits, and root mean square error (RMSE). Given that “just-in-time” (JIT) training is an operational expectation for the Human Landing System (HLS) program, all participants will perform late inflight JIT training for each manual crew override task in which they will participate. Crew proficiency will be captured inflight during JIT training that will be implemented on a laptop with hand controllers to allow the crewmember to practice the landing task procedures like the approach implemented for JIT training with Shuttle landing and ISS telerobotic tasks. COUNTERMEASURE UPDATES The lunar lander simulation has been implemented onto a two-laptop display system where subjects select from alternative landing points, based upon avoiding hazards that the on-board system identifies during the landing. The subject makes inputs using a rotational hand controller (i.e., joystick) and a translational hand controller, which are processed by simulated vehicle dynamics to update the vehicle attitude and rate of descent. Subjects will utilize a combination of flight, situation, and status displays to monitor the state of the simulated vehicle. The simulation exports tilt and translation movements to a 6DOF motion base synced to visual movements and provides representative vestibular cues to the subject while performing the task inside an enclosed cabin featuring a simulated lunar out-the-window view and a heads-down lander cockpit view. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew override capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew override performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. The inclusion of “just-in-time” on-board training will ensure we are characterizing changes in override proficiency with this expected countermeasure in place. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, HLS Joint Test Panel, Crew HLS Interfaces for Piloting Working Group, and Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab toward the development of the lunar landing simulation. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Austin M Bollinger↗

DOE OSTI2016

SHARP User Manual

SHARP is an advanced modeling and simulation toolkit for the analysis of nuclear reactors. It is comprised of several components including physical modeling tools, tools to integrate the physics codes for multi-physics analyses, and a set of tools to couple the codes within the MOAB framework. Physics modules currently include the neutronics code PROTEUS, the thermal-hydraulics code Nek5000, and the structural mechanics code Diablo. This manual focuses on performing multi-physics calculations with the SHARP ToolKit. Manuals for the three individual physics modules are available with the SHARP distribution to help the user to either carry out the primary multi-physics calculation with basic knowledge or perform further advanced development with in-depth knowledge of these codes. This manual provides step-by-step instructions on employing SHARP, including how to download and install the code, how to build the drivers for a test case, how to perform a calculation and how to visualize the results. Since SHARP has some specific library and environment dependencies, it is highly recommended that the user read this manual prior to installing SHARP. Verification tests cases are included to check proper installation of each module. It is suggested that the new user should first follow the step-by-step instructions provided for a test problem in this manual to understand the basic procedure of using SHARP before using SHARP for his/her own analysis. Both reference output and scripts are provided along with the test cases in order to verify correct installation and execution of the SHARP package. At the end of this manual, detailed instructions are provided on how to create a new test case so that user can perform novel multi-physics calculations with SHARP. Frequently asked questions are listed at the end of this manual to help the user to troubleshoot issues.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Manual Crew Override of Vehicle Landings Following G-Transitions

BACKGROUND Manual control during exploration spaceflight consists of both planned automated supervisory control and unplanned crew override. This crew override capability is critical to enable overall mission success during landing contingencies. However, the introduction of manual override capabilities must be implemented to enable crews to mitigate risks introduced by human error. Adaptive changes in the sensorimotor system can manifest during g-transitions as spatial disorientation. While training and landing aids enable successful landing through disorientation, these adaptive changes may increase cognitive demand that needs to be accounted for in the manual control strategy. It is important to characterize these effects as soon as possible following the G-transition to develop appropriate countermeasures. METHODS The following study seeks to inform the risk associated with altered sensorimotor and vestibular function impacting critical mission tasks. We aim to characterize the effects of short and long-duration weightlessness on manual control following G-transitions using simulated lunar landing on a six-degree-of-freedom (6DOF) motion base, a fixed base simulation, and a supervisory control tablet task. The primary goal is to understand the impact of spaceflight on crew ability to perform manual crew override and supervisory control. This aim will be assessed by comparing pre- versus postflight simulation performance in crewmembers assigned to either short duration (< 30 day) or long duration (~6- month) missions to the International Space Station (ISS). We hypothesize there will be postflight increases in the percent time that pilots are outside of the acceptable range for recommended vehicle state parameters and the reaction time for secondary cognitive tasks. Ground-based control subjects, who are demographically matched to the crew considering age (± 5 years) and gender, will undergo the same testing schedule as the crew to examine the effects of flight phase independent of microgravity exposure. The second aim is to examine how adaptive changes in vestibular and cognitive function relate to changes in manual crew override proficiency. Crew performance for a sensorimotor perceptual test battery will evaluate motion perception tracking, roll nulling, and/or vection sensitivity using the 6DOF motion base. We hypothesize that a higher severity of vestibular alterations will be associated with increased percent time outside of guidance limits. Motion sickness severity and sleepiness will also be evaluated. To determine the impact of “just-in-time” training, the third aim seeks to compare performance during on-board lunar landing tasks conducted late in-flight to early postflight. We hypothesize that proficiency on the “just-in-time” laptop trainer late in mission will be positively correlated with early postflight proficiency on the same task. The final aim will establish assessments of performance, training protocols, and the learning progression in a ground-control cohort of first-time users. RESULTS The assessment of the learning progression associated with the piloting task on the motion base system with thirty ground subjects will be reported. Learning curves will be established across four distinct sessions and within session considering trial difficulty. The difficulty of the landing task can be modulated with the landing divert distance and cross or downrange difficulty. Results may include changes in performance across multiple trials of a multi-attribute lunar tablet supervisory control task. Preliminary investigations of eighteen subjects who completed vestibular threshold and motion perception tasks offer expected performance ranges for upcoming preflight crew evaluations. The results yielded an average roll threshold of 0.46 ± 0.30 deg/s and an average roll nulling root mean square error performance of 2.52 ± 0.52 deg/s. RELEVANCE This project will deliver an operational demonstration of crew monitoring capability following spaceflight and identify potential deficits that may require remediation. Comparison of individual vestibular and cognitive changes with crew performance will help better characterize the manual control risks associated with sensorimotor alterations. Ground testing will evaluate learning progression, refine training protocols, and serve as a control cohort for comparisons to crew performance. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: The authors acknowledge contributions from Draper, the Dynamic Skills Trainer (DST) Lab, and the Software, Robotics, and Simulation Division toward the development of the lunar landing simulation platforms. This project is funded by the Human Health Countermeasures Element.

Hannah M. Weiss↗

DOE OSTI2016

SU-C-BRB-05: Determining the Adequacy of Auto-Contouring Via Probabilistic Assessment of Ensuing Treatment Plan Metrics in Comparison with Manual Contours

Purpose: To determine if auto-contour and manual-contour—based plans differ when evaluated with respect to probabilistic coverage metrics and biological model endpoints for prostate IMRT. Methods: Manual and auto-contours were created for 149 CT image sets acquired from 16 unique prostate patients. A single physician manually contoured all images. Auto-contouring was completed utilizing Pinnacle’s Smart Probabilistic Image Contouring Engine (SPICE). For each CT, three different 78 Gy/39 fraction 7-beam IMRT plans are created; PD with drawn ROIs, PAS with auto-contoured ROIs, and PM with auto-contoured OARs with the manually drawn target. For each plan, 1000 virtual treatment simulations with different sampled systematic errors for each simulation and a different sampled random error for each fraction were performed using our in-house GPU-accelerated robustness analyzer tool which reports the statistical probability of achieving dose-volume metrics, NTCP, TCP, and the probability of achieving the optimization criteria for both auto-contoured (AS) and manually drawn (D) ROIs. Metrics are reported for all possible cross-evaluation pairs of ROI types (AS,D) and planning scenarios (PD,PAS,PM). Bhattacharyya coefficient (BC) is calculated to measure the PDF similarities for the dose-volume metric, NTCP, TCP, and objectives with respect to the manually drawn contour evaluated on base plan (D-PD). Results: We observe high BC values (BC≥0.94) for all OAR objectives. BC values of max dose objective on CTV also signify high resemblance (BC≥0.93) between the distributions. On the other hand, BC values for CTV’s D95 and Dmin objectives are small for AS-PM, AS-PD. NTCP distributions are similar across all evaluation pairs, while TCP distributions of AS-PM, AS-PD sustain variations up to %6 compared to other evaluated pairs. Conclusion: No significant probabilistic differences are observed in the metrics when auto-contoured OARs are used. The prostate auto-contour needs improvement to achieve clinically equivalent plans.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

SIGNAL Game Manual

SIGNAL is a first of its kind experimental wargame developed as part of the Project on Nuclear Gaming (PoNG). In this document we describe the rules and game mechanics associated with the online version of SIGNAL created by team members from the University of California, Berkeley, Sandia National Laboratories, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and sponsored by the Carnegie Corporation of New York. The game was developed as part of a larger research project to develop the experimental wargaming methodology and explore its use on a model scenario: the impact of various military capabilities on conflict escalation dynamics. We discuss the results of this research in a forthcoming paper that will include this manual as an appendix. It is our hope that this manual will both contribute to our players' understanding of the game prior to play and that it will allow for replication of the SIGNAL game environment for future research purposes. The manual begins by introducing the terminology used throughout the document. It then outlines the technical requirements required to run SIGNAL. The following section provides a description of the map, resources, infrastructure, tokens, and action cards used in the game environment. The manual then describes the user interface including the chat functions, trade mechanism, currency and population counts necessary for players to plan their actions. It then turns to the sequence of player actions in the game describing the signaling, action, and upkeep phases that comprise each round of play. It then outlines the use of diplomacy including alliances with minor states and trade between players. The manual also describes the process for scoring the game and determining the winner. The manual concludes with tips for players to remember as they embark upon playing the game.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Sierra/SD - How To Manual - 5.2

The How To Manual supplements the User’s Manual and the Theory Manual. The goal of the How To Manual is to reduce learning time for complex end to end analyses. These documents are intended to be used together. See the User’s Manual for a complete list of the options for a solution case. All the examples are part of the Sierra/SD test suite. Each runs as is. The organization is similar to the other documents: How to run, Commands, Solution cases, Materials, Elements, Boundary conditions, and then Contact. The table of contents and index are indispensable. The Geometric Rigid Body Modes section is shared with the Users Manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Sierra/SD - How To Manual - 5.4

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SD - How To Manual - 5.6

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SD - How To Manual - 5.8

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SD - How To Manual - 5.10

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

MPACT Theory Manual (V.4.3)

This manual presents the theory underlying the three-dimensional (3D) whole-core, pin-resolved neutron transport calculation methodologies employed in the MPACT code. MPACT’s primary goal is to provide accurate sub-pin power distributions in a computationally efficient manner. To accomplish this, MPACT offers several different transport method options. The 2D/1D method, in which 3D problems are decomposed into an axial stack of radial “slices,” is currently the most commonly used. In this option, two-dimensional (2D) planar solutions are provided by the method of characteristics (MOC), and axial solutions are provided via one-dimensional (1D) approximate diffusion, or P3 solutions. The radial and axial solutions are coupled by (i) axial and radial transverse leakages, and (ii) a global 3D coarse mesh finite difference (CMFD) solve, which provides both acceleration and stability to the solution iteration scheme. The subsequent chapters of this manual present a range of topics, including MOC, CMFD, axial nodal transport solvers, 2D/1D, self-shielding, depletion, thermal-hydraulics, and transient methods. Development of the underlying theory of the 2D/1D method is presented, diagrams are included to highlight important algorithmic flow, and important concepts are discussed as appropriate. This manual is intended to be self-sufficient, but references to published articles and other materials are included for further reading. MPACT is a relatively new code, with new capabilities and many computational methods that did not exist until recently. This manual is an even newer document, with chapters written by several different code contributors working under time constraints. For these reasons, the manual is not yet complete and finalized. Future versions of this manual will address current deficiencies.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗