Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “gdr”

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

Dual Channel Dual Staging: Hierarchical and Portable Staging for GPU-Based In-Situ Workflow

In-situ workflows have emerged as an attractive approach for addressing data movement challenges at very large scales. Since GPU-based architectures dominate the HPC landscapes, porting these in-situ workflows, and, specifically, the inter-application data exchange, to GPU-based systems can be challenging. Technologies such as GPUDirect RDMA (GDR), which is typically used for I/O in GPU applications as an optimization that circumvents the CPU overhead, can be leveraged to support bulk data exchanges between GPU applications. However, current GDR design often lacks performance portability across HPC clusters built with different hardware configurations. Furthermore, the local CPU may also be effectively used as an auxiliary communication mechanism to offload data exchanges. In this paper, we present a dual channel dual staging approach for efficient, scalable, and performance-portable inter-application data exchange for in-situ workflows. This approach exploits the data access pattern within in-situ workflows along with the inherent execution asynchrony to accelerate data exchanges and, at the same time, improve performance portability. Specifically, the dual channel dual staging method leverages both the local CPU and the remote data staging server to build a hierarchical joint staging area and uses this staging area to transform blocking inter-application bulk data exchanges into best-effort local data movements between GPU and CPU. The dual channel dual staging is implemented as a portability extension of the Dataspaces-GPU staging framework. We present an experimental evaluation of its performance, portability, and scalability using this implementation on three leadership GPU clusters. The evaluation results demonstrate that the dual channel dual staging method saves up to 75% in data-exchange time compared to host-based, GDR, and alternate portable designs, while maintaining scalability (up to 512 GPUs) and performance portability across the three platforms.

Zhang, Bo [University of Utah]↗

Towards the 1 mm/y Stability of the Radial Orbit Error at Regional Scales

An estimated orbit error budget for the Jason-1 and Jason-2 GDR-D solutions is constructed, using several measures of orbit error. The focus is on the long-term stability of the orbit time series for mean sea level applications on a regional scale. We discuss various issues related to the assessment of radial orbit error trends; in particular this study reviews orbit errors dependent on the tracking technique, with an aim to monitoring the long-term stability of all available tracking systems operating on Jason-1 and Jason-2 (GPS, DORIS, SLR). The reference frame accuracy and its effect on Jason orbit is assessed. We also examine the impact of analysis method on the inference of Geographically Correlated Errors as well as the significance of estimated radial orbit error trends versus the time span of the analysis. Thus a long-term error budget of the 10-year Jason-1 and Envisat GDR-D orbit time series is provided for two time scales: interannual and decadal. As the temporal variations of the geopotential remain one of the primary limitations in the Precision Orbit Determination modeling, the overall accuracy of the Jason-1 and Jason-2 GDR-D solutions is evaluated through comparison with external orbits based on different time-variable gravity models. This contribution is limited to an East-West "order-1" pattern at the 2 mm/y level (secular) and 4 mm level (seasonal), over the Jason-2 lifetime. The possibility of achieving sub-mm/y radial orbit stability over interannual and decadal periods at regional scales and the challenge of evaluating such an improvement using in situ independent data is discussed.

Precision Orbit Determination (POD)↗

An Update on the Geothermal Data Repository's Data Standards and Pipelines: Geospatial Data and Distributed Acoustic Sensing Data: Preprint

The Department of Energy's (DOE) Geothermal Data Repository (GDR) team has implemented data standards and automated data pipelines for the following data types: 1) drilling data, 2) geospatial datasets, and 3) DAS data. An additional data pipeline is proposed for stimulation data. These data standards and pipelines are intended to improve the real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning outputs through improving the quality of data. More specifically, through standardizing high-value datasets, the GDR is reducing project-specific data curation requirements, allowing more time to be spent on actual research. By automating this process, the burden of standardization is taken off of the user, overall increasing the availability of standardized data. This paper provides an update on the GDR's transition toward data standardization through automated data pipelines and calls for feedback from the community on how we can improve this process.

cloud-optimized↗

Deep Direct-Use Feasibility Study Temperature-Depth Estimates for West Virginia University, Morgantown, WV

This dataset contains data spreadsheets and figures that summarize the results of a stochastic analysis of temperatures at depth below the West Virginia University campus in Morgantown, WV. These results are extracted from a study by Smith (2019), whose results are included in a GDR submission that provides rasters and shapefiles for the Appalachian Basin states of New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia (GDR submission #1182). Uncertainties considered included geologic properties, thermal properties, and uncertainty from geostatistical interpolation of the surface heat flow. A Monte Carlo analysis of these uncertain properties was used to predict temperatures at depth using a 1-D heat conduction model. For the pixel corresponding to West Virginia University, a .csv file containing the 10,000 temperature-depth profiles estimated from a Monte Carlo analysis is provided. Temperatures are provided for depths from 1-5 km in 0.5 km increments. These data are summarized in a figure containing violin plots that illustrates the probability of obtaining certain temperatures at depth for Morgantown.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DEEPEN Leapfrog Geodata Model Cleaned and Reformatted Exploration Datasets from Newberry Volcano

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) conducted at Newberry Volcano for multiple play types (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), existing geoscientific exploration datasets needed to be acquired, cleaned, reformatted, and assembled in Leapfrog Geothermal. This GDR submission includes all of the cleaned and reformatted (X (m), Y (m), elevation (m), processed data values) datasets used to build the Leapfrog Geodata model. Existing datasets were acquired from the GDR, from AltaRock, and from other sources. This yielded the following datasets: - Digital elevation model produced from LiDAR data by Ramsey and Bard, 2016 - MT surveys from 2006, 2011, 2014, and 2017 (including single inversions) - Gravity surveys from 2006, 2007, and 2011 (including single) - Earthquake catalogs from PNSN, LLNL, and the Newberry EGS Demonstration project - Seismic velocity model from Templeton et al., 2014 - The Frone, 2015 temperature model and a new one produced through extrapolating downhole temperature measurements and the SMU temperature at depth maps. Two versions of the new model are provided: 250 m spacing and 500 m spacing - EarthVision geologic model with alteration from Moser et al., 2016 - Well data from EGS well 55-29, deep geothermal wells, coreholes (GEO N-2 through 5) and several thermal gradient holes - "Newberry Well Data:" Location, simple lithology, directional survey data, and temperature data for the 34 wells and coreholes used in the Newberry PFA Although there are additional 2D datasets available in the area, such as aeromagnetic surveys, these were not included in the analysis. While it may be possible to project these datasets into three dimensions by assuming the surface measurements do not vary with depth, this method is associated with high uncertainty. Preexisting inversions of these data were unavailable, and inverting additional geophysical datasets is outside the scope of this project.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Portable design rules for bulk CMOS

It is pointed out that for the past several years, one school of IC designers has used a simplified set of nMOS geometric design rules (GDR) which is 'portable', in that it can be used by many different nMOS manufacturers. The present investigation is concerned with a preliminary set of design rules for bulk CMOS which has been verified for simple test structures. The GDR are defined in terms of Caltech Intermediate Form (CIF), which is a geometry-description language that defines simple geometrical objects in layers. The layers are abstractions of physical mask layers. The design rules do not presume the existence of any particular design methodology. Attention is given to p-well and n-well CMOS processes, bulk CMOS and CMOS-SOS, CMOS geometric rules, and a description of the advantages of CMOS technology.

Griswold, T. W.↗

Charge-to-mass dispersion methods for abrasion-ablation fragmentation models

Methods to describe the charge-to-mass dispersion distributions of projectile prefragments are presented and used to determine individual isotope cross-sections or various elements produced in the fragmentation of relativistic argon nuclei by carbon targets. Although slight improvements in predicted cross-sections are obtained for the quantum mechanical giant dipole resonance (GDR) distribution when compared qith the predictions of the geometric GDR model, the closest agreement between theory and experiment continues to be obtained with the simple hypergeometric distribution, which treats the nucleons in the nucleus as completely uncorrelated.

Townsend, L. W.↗

Satellite altimetry

Since altimetry data are not really old enough to use the term data archaeology, Mr. Cheney referred to the stewardship of these data. He noted that it is very important to document the basis for an altimetry data set as the algorithms and corrections used to arrive at the Geophysical Data Record (GDR) have been improving and are continuing to improve the precision of sea level data derived from altimetry. He noted that the GEOSAT Exact Repeat Mission (ERM) data set has recently been reprocessed by his organization in the National Ocean Service of NOAA and made available to the scientific community on CD/ROM disks by the National Oceanographic Data Center of the U.S. (NODC). The new data set contains a satellite orbit more precise by an order of magnitude together with an improved water vapor correction. A new, comprehensive GDR Handbook has also been prepared.

Cheney, Robert E.↗

Mean sea surface and geoid gradient comparisons with TOPEX altimeter data

Cycles 4 to 54 of TOPEX data have been analyzed through comparisons with the mean sea surface given on the disturbed geophysical data record (GDR). Two inverted barometer correction procedures were considered for the data reduction. One used a constant atmospheric pressure for all data while the one adopted for use, for most computations, introduced a cycle average pressure. The maximum difference between the two estimates was 3.0 cm with a clear annual signal. With the modified correction the TOPEX sea surface was compared to The Ohio State University (OSU) mean sea surface, given on the GDR, to estimate three translations ( delta x = -2.3 cm; delta y = 25.0 cm; delta z = -0.3 cm) and a bias (43.3 cm) between the two surfaces. The only significant translation is delta y which indicates the reference frame of the TOPEX system differs from that used in the OSU mean sea surface system. The bias between the TOPEX mean sea surface and the OSU mean sea surface was used to estimate an equatorial radius of 6,378,136.55 m based on an 18-cm biased estimate of the TOPEX altimeter. Examination of the average difference, by cycle, between the TOPEX sea surface and the OSU mean sea surface suggested a bias change of 3.1 +/- 2.2 mm/yr with a positive sign indicating the average ocean surface is rising or the altimeter measured distance is decreasing. Models were implemented that solved directly for a bias, bias rate annual/semiannual, and tide correction terms. The computations indicated that a simultaneous solution for this bias, bias rate, and annual/semiannual terms gave the most accurate results. Nonsimultaneous solutions led to slightly different bias rate values. The root mean square difference between the TOPEX sea surface and OSU sea surface, after translation and bias correction, was +/- 17 cm for a typical cycle. Some locations were indentified where the difference could reach 2.3 cm and were repeated over several cycles indicating errors in the mean sea surface. Most of the large differences occur in regions lacking altimeter data prior to the TOPEX/POSEIDON mission and/or areas of significant bathymetric signature. Geoid gradients are needed for the reduction of individual track data to a reference track. The accuracy of the determination of such gradients was determined through the comparison of predicted along-track gradients to the observed gradients. Among four mean sea surfaces tested the best agreement was found with the OSU mean sea surface placed on the TOPEX geophysical data record.

Rapp, Richard H.↗

TOPEX/POSEIDON tides estimated using a global inverse model

Altimetric data from the TOPEX/POSEIDON mission will be used for studies of global ocean circulation and marine geophysics. However, it is first necessary to remove the ocean tides, which are aliased in the raw data. The tides are constrained by the two distinct types of information: the hydrodynamic equations which the tidal fields of elevations and velocities must satisfy, and direct observational data from tide gauges and satellite altimetry. Here we develop and apply a generalized inverse method, which allows us to combine rationally all of this information into global tidal fields best fitting both the data and the dynamics, in a least squares sense. The resulting inverse solution is a sum of the direct solution to the astronomically forced Laplace tidal equations and a linear combination of the representers for the data functionals. The representer functions (one for each datum) are determined by the dynamical equations, and by our prior estimates of the statistics or errors in these equations. Our major task is a direct numerical calculation of these representers. This task is computationally intensive, but well suited to massively parallel processing. By calculating the representers we reduce the full (infinite dimensional) problem to a relatively low-dimensional problem at the outset, allowing full control over the conditioning and hence the stability of the inverse solution. With the representers calculated we can easily update our model as additional TOPEX/POSEIDON data become available. As an initial illustration we invert harmonic constants from a set of 80 open-ocean tide gauges. We then present a practical scheme for direct inversion of TOPEX/POSEIDON crossover data. We apply this method to 38 cycles of geophysical data records (GDR) data, computing preliminary global estimates of the four principal tidal constituents, M(sub 2), S(sub 2), K(sub 1) and O(sub 1). The inverse solution yields tidal fields which are simultaneously smoother, and in better agreement with altimetric and ground truth data, than previously proposed tidal models. Relative to the 'default' tidal corrections provided with the TOPEX/POSEIDON GDR, the inverse solution reduces crossover difference variances significantly (approximately 20-30%), even though only a small number of free parameters (approximately equal to 1000) are actually fit to the crossover data.

Egbert, Gary D.↗

Evaluation of GEOSAT Follow-On Precise Orbit Ephemeris

The GEOSAT Follow-On spacecraft (GFO-l), launched in 1998, began continuous radar altimeter coverage of the oceans in 2000, and after an extensive series of calibration campaigns in 1999 and 2000 was finally accepted by the US Navy on November 29, 2000. By providing high quality altimeter data, GFO can supplement TOPEX/POSEIDON(T/P), ERS-1, and ERS-2 data, providing a different synoptic sampling of the oceans with its 17-day ground track repeat cycle. Altimeter analysis suggests GFO is capable of POSEIDON class altimetry, with orbit error the largest contributor to the GFO altimeter error budget. Satellite laser ranging (SLR), especially in combination with altimeter crossover data, offer the only means of determining high-quality precise orbits. SLR tracking is also augmented by Doppler (Tranet style) beacons. These data were used to tune the gravity field and macromodel (3D representation of the spacecraft geometry and surface properties). Beginning with January 2000 GSFC has produced a 2.5 year span of the Precision Orbit Ephemeris (POE) intended for use on the GFO GDR and for the Pathfinder Project. Using GFO GDR and IGDR altimeter data from NOAA, a two year span of POE orbits are evaluated with respect to the TOPEX orbits by adjusting the GFO data into the TOPEX frame with the help of TOPEX/GFO altimeter crossovers. A 2.5 year span of orbits are also evaluated using tracking data residual analysis, GFO altimeter crossover residual analysis, and direct orbit comparison. In an effort to improve the current POE orbit several ideas are considered, including using recent gravity models which include CHAMP data, the reduced-dynamic approach, and including TOPEX/GFO altimeter crossover data in the orbit solution.

Lemoine, Frank G.↗

The Data Foundry: Secure Collaboration for the Geothermal Industry: Preprint

The Data Foundry provides secure, cloud-based storage and universal access to digital information, enabling the greater geothermal industry to collaborate seamlessly with the Department of Energy (DOE), national labs, universities, and private organizations. Originally developed to support the EGS Collab project, the Data Foundry has been expanded to support FORGE, EDGE, and other DOE-funded projects, some collaborative, some private, by providing each project with a secure space and the ability to fine-tune individual access controls. In response to user feedback, it now also features improved integration with DOE’s Geothermal Data Repository (GDR), to provide a clear and convenient pathway from collaboration to publication, and to register collaborative data projects with well-known data registries like Data.gov and the National Geothermal Data System (NGDS). This paper will explore how recent concerns raised by data-centric, proprietary projects have informed development on the Data Foundry and highlight improvements designed to streamline workflows, improve access control, and promote the timely dissemination of information to the geothermal industry.

Data Foundry↗

Utah FORGE: Phase 3 Microgravity Data

A 4D microgravity survey began in early 2019 in order to benchmark surface and subsurface elevations prior to Phase 3 drilling and stimulation campaigns. Microgravity stations are collocated with GPS deformation benchmarks and use the same location survey data. Surveys are undertaken on a quarterly basis. The focus of current activities is comparative analysis of GPS survey results and InSAR analysis (see GDR Submission 1251) to check seasonal variance and to evaluate possible changes in the groundwater elevation. The attached zip file contains a text file and an Excel spreadsheet containing Utah FORGE Phase 3 processed "final" microgravity data through time. The data are identical in both files. The spreadsheet is only supplied for convenience. There is also a ReadMe.txt file that describes the field headings.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

EGS Collab Experiment 1: Circulation Testing Processed data

This submission includes processed and reduced data for circulation testing that was conducted at the 164' fracture on the 4850 ft level of the Sanford Underground Research Facility. The circulation tests were done to test the flow through the 164' fracture in the EGS Collab Experiment 1 testbed on the 4850 ft level of the Sanford Underground Research Facility in order to validate computer models concerned with flow processes and heat exchange processes in EGS. This data was processed from raw data that is available in the GDR submission linked below: "EGS Collab Circulation Testing Raw Data and Documentation." Python scripts used to process and reduce the data are included. The scripts also serve as "documentation" as well as examples for data processing. More information about the test itself as well as the rationale and process of data processing is available at wiki page linked below.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Deep Wells Temperature Surveys as of September 2022

This Excel spreadsheet contains temperature survey results for Utah FORGE wells 58-32, 78-32, 56-32, 16A(78)-32 and 78B-32. It also contains charts and comparisons, along with a "Data Summary" which provides links to previous GDR submissions with temperature data for each well.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

Utah FORGE: Phase 1a Tensor Strainmeter Data for the April, 2022 Stimulation of Well 16A(78)-32

Data from two Tensor Optical Fiber Strainmeters that were operational during Stages 1, 2, and 3 of the April, 2022 stimulation of well 16A(78)-32. Each csv file contains data from each stimulation stage (stage1, stage2, stage3) for both Phase 1a strainmeter installations (FS01, formerly FS-C, and FS02, formerly FS1-2) in human-readable comma-separated value text files. There are two header lines in each file describing the data contained in that column along with their units, respectively. Data have been decimated from 2 to 1 Hz to match the Pason data found in the linked GDR dataset below (16A78-32 Stimulation Pason Data). These files contain the time series spanning the same time interval as the Pason data as well as ambient data for 5 hours before the stimulation and 5 hours following shut in. The station locations were chosen based on their proximity to the borehole seismometers owned and operated by the University of Utah. See README.txt for more information.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DEEPEN Global Standardized Categorical Exploration Datasets for Magmatic Plays

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the development of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) methodology for magmatic plays (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), weights needed to be developed for use in the weighted sum of the different favorability index models produced from geoscientific exploration datasets. This was done using two different approaches: one based on expert opinions, and one based on statistical learning. This GDR submission includes the datasets used to produce the statistical learning-based weights. While expert opinions allow us to include more nuanced information in the weights, expert opinions are subject to human bias. Data-centric or statistical approaches help to overcome these potential human biases by focusing on and drawing conclusions from the data alone. The drawback is that, to apply these types of approaches, a dataset is needed. Therefore, we attempted to build comprehensive standardized datasets mapping anomalies in each exploration dataset to each component of each play. This data was gathered through a literature review focused on magmatic hydrothermal plays along with well-characterized areas where superhot or supercritical conditions are thought to exist. Datasets were assembled for all three play types, but the hydrothermal dataset is the least complete due to its relatively low priority. For each known or assumed resource, the dataset states what anomaly in each exploration dataset is associated with each component of the system. The data is only a semi-quantitative, where values are either high, medium, or low, relative to background levels. In addition, the dataset has significant gaps, as not every possible exploration dataset has been collected and analyzed at every known or suspected geothermal resource area, in the context of all possible play types. The following training sites were used to assemble this dataset: - Conventional magmatic hydrothermal: Akutan (from AK PFA), Oregon Cascades PFA, Glass Buttes OR, Mauna Kea (from HI PFA), Lanai (from HI PFA), Mt St Helens Shear Zone (from WA PFA), Wind River Valley (From WA PFA), Mount Baker (from WA PFA). - Superhot EGS: Newberry (EGS demonstration project), Coso (EGS demonstration project), Geysers (EGS demonstration project), Eastern Snake River Plain (EGS demonstration project), Utah FORGE, Larderello, Kakkonda, Taupo Volcanic Zone, Acoculco, Krafla. - Supercritical: Coso, Geysers, Salton Sea, Larderello, Los Humeros, Taupo Volcanic Zone, Krafla, Reyjanes, Hengill. **Disclaimer: Treat the supercritical fluid anomalies with skepticism. They are based on assumptions due to the general lack of confirmed supercritical fluid encounters and samples at the sites included in this dataset, at the time of assembling the dataset. The main assumption was that the supercritical fluid in a given geothermal system has shared properties with the hydrothermal fluid, which may not be the case in reality. Once the datasets were assembled, principal component analysis (PCA) was applied to each. PCA is an unsupervised statistical learning technique, meaning that labels are not required on the data, that summarized the directions of variance in the data. This approach was chosen because our labels are not certain, i.e., we do not know with 100% confidence that superhot resources exist at all the assumed positive areas. We also do not have data for any known non-geothermal areas, meaning that it would be challenging to apply a supervised learning technique. In order to generate weights from the PCA, an analysis of the PCA loading values was conducted. PCA loading values represent how much a feature is contributing to each principal component, and therefore the overall variance in the data.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DEEPEN 3D PFA Weights for Exploration Datasets in Magmatic Environments

DEEPEN stands for DE-risking Exploration of geothermal Plays in magmatic ENvironments. As part of the development of the DEEPEN 3D play fairway analysis (PFA) methodology for magmatic plays (conventional hydrothermal, superhot EGS, and supercritical), weights needed to be developed for use in the weighted sum of the different favorability index models produced from geoscientific exploration datasets. This GDR submission includes those weights. The weighting was done using two different approaches: one based on expert opinions, and one based on statistical learning. The weights are intended to describe how useful a particular exploration method is for imaging each component of each play type. They may be adjusted based on the characteristics of the resource under investigation, knowledge of the quality of the dataset, or simply to reduce the impact a single dataset has on the resulting outputs. Within the DEEPEN PFA, separate sets of weights are produced for each component of each play type, since exploration methods hold different levels of importance for detecting each play component, within each play type. The weights for conventional hydrothermal systems were based on the average of the normalized weights used in the DOE-funded PFA projects that were focused on magmatic plays. This decision was made because conventional hydrothermal plays are already well-studied and understood, and therefore it is logical to use existing weights where possible. In contrast, a true PFA has never been applied to superhot EGS or supercritical plays, meaning that exploration methods have never been weighted in terms of their utility in imaging the components of these plays. To produce weights for superhot EGS and supercritical plays, two different approaches were used: one based on expert opinion and the analytical hierarchy process (AHP), and another using a statistical approach based on principal component analysis (PCA). The weights are intended to provide standardized sets of weights for each play type in all magmatic geothermal systems. Two different approaches were used to investigate whether a more data-centric approach might allow new insights into the datasets, and also to analyze how different weighting approaches impact the outcomes. The expert/AHP approach involved using an online tool (https://bpmsg.com/ahp/) with built-in forms to make pairwise comparisons which are used to rank exploration methods against one-another. The inputs are then combined in a quantitative way, ultimately producing a set of consensus-based weights. To minimize the burden on each individual participant, the forms were completed in group discussions. While the group setting means that there is potential for some opinions to outweigh others, it also provides a venue for conversation to take place, in theory leading the group to a more robust consensus then what can be achieved on an individual basis. This exercise was done with two separate groups: one consisting of U.S.-based experts, and one consisting of Iceland-based experts in magmatic geothermal systems. The two sets of weights were then averaged to produce what we will from here on refer to as the "expert opinion-based weights," or "expert weights" for short. While expert opinions allow us to include more nuanced information in the weights, expert opinions are subject to human bias. Data-centric or statistical approaches help to overcome these potential human biases by focusing on and drawing conclusions from the data alone. More information on this approach along with the dataset used to produce the statistical weights may be found in the linked dataset below.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗