Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “area array package”

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.

20 records · Page 2

Magnetic Gears: The Key to Robust, Cost-Effective Hydropower Drivetrains

Based on previous demonstrated success at fabricating 5 and 10 kW scale magnetic gearbox (MGB) prototypes, Emrgy and its partners (the project team) proposed to design and construct a 100 kW scale MGB with a 30:1 gear ratio for the low-head hydro applications. The Statement of Project Objectives included tasks covering: 1) Market Applicability; 2) Technical Metrics; 3) Design (initial); 4) Electromagnetic (EM) Load and Structural Analysis; 5) Modal Analysis; 6) Sealing Design and 7) Final Design during Budget Period 1. Budget Period 2 included tasks covering: 1) Materials Procurement and Test Plan Development; 2) Assembly; and 3) Testing. The Market Applicability study (Task 1) led to a clear conclusion and recommendation toward “Low Head” technologies for maximum market share of both New Stream Reach development as well as powering Non-Powered Dams. The findings of this study also identified the opportunity for a larger scale magnetic gearbox-based drive train as a function of increased torque, as opposed to increased speed. The Technical Metrics Study (Task 2) concluded a horizontal orientation was preferred, examined potential loss mechanisms, concluded that a Halbach Array magnetic design was preferred, established a 30:1 gear ratio as optimal, and established a power rating of 100 kW as optimal. The subsequent initial and final detailed design process included electro-magnetic (EM) load and structural analysis (Task 4), a Modal analysis (for vibration) (Task 5), and a sealing design (Task 6) to assure water impermeability. The final design package (Task 7) included 729 individual parts, 117 unique part numbers, and 15 assemblies. In order to facilitate procurement, the full bill of materials was broken down into several sub-components: 1) custom magnetic parts; 2) custom machined parts; 3) custom casted parts; and 4) commercial off the shelf (COTS) parts. The casted parts were fabricated by Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) via a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) with Emrgy and funded by the Advanced Manufacturing Office (AMO). The procurement effort (Task 8) ultimately covered three time periods based on challenges encountered in meeting the budgeted cost for the prototype. Following the first effort in the early stages of Budget Period 2 in 2017, a no-cost time extension was granted to seek alternative fabrication and procurement options. The project was re-booted in 2020 based on the new ORNL CRADA that would focus on five (5) of the more difficult and expensive parts using their advanced manufacturing expertise. Procurement efforts for the other custom machined parts resulted in quotations that still exceeded the budget by more than $\$$100k. This was, in part, also due to the concurrent COVID-19 pandemic that caused both supply chain disruptions and labor shortages. As the project continued, pricing and availability degraded further. In Q2 FY’22, it was decided to not proceed with the fabrication of the prototype (Task 9) based on budgetary limitations. Outcomes included a full and detailed design of a 100 kW magnetic gearbox and associated indented bill of materials (BOM) and CAD drawings, a full assembly instruction manual with an associated BOM for materials necessary to support assembly, the fabrication of the double Halbach magnetic array for the rotor/stator system, fabrication of five (5) sand-casted/machined parts (via CRADA with ORNL) and an initial draft of a comprehensive testing plan. The most significant non-outcome was the actual fabrication and testing of the prototype gearbox based on budget limitations. Lessons learned included the need for an Application / Design / Cost trade analysis to better elucidate the cost potential of the MGB in the projected volumes anticipated for future demand. This would better establish the efficacy of the original cost target ($\$$0.80/Watt) and/or the need for reconsideration of designs and applications. Likewise, additional consideration of the prototype nature of the gearbox – single use, short lifetime, etc. - either as a separate exercise or in place of the design process completed, to reduce the cost of the demonstration prototype device. Additionally, project continuity was cited as a significant risk based on the loss of the primary design engineering firm after Budget Period 1. A design analysis exercise was conducted at the conclusion of the project to identify potential areas for cost reduction. One concept considered was the removal of the inner ring of magnets (with associated changes in the outer ring magnets) to enable a horizontal collapse of the design. It was estimated this could reduce cost by 10-25% without impacting performance.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) 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.

CERF↗