Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “loss”

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 OSTI2022

Overall Performance Losses and Activated Mechanisms in Double Glass and Glass-backsheet Photovoltaic Modules with Monofacial and Bifacial PERC Cells, under Accelerated Exposures

Commercial PV modules have various packaging choices nowadays, which influence their long-term reliability. This study compared the degradation behaviors of sixteen module variants from two brands with varying encapsulant materials (EVA or POE), encapsulant types, module architectures (GB or DG), and cell types (monofacial or bifacial) using null hypothesis testing to determine statistical significant findings. The modules were exposed for 2,520 hours under two accelerated exposures: modified damp heat (mDH) and modified damp heat with full-spectrum light (mDH+FSL). For both brands, two DG module variants with UV-Cutoff rear encapsulant are found to have significantly lower average power loss than the module variants of EVA+GB with opaque rear encapsulant after each accelerated exposure. Metallization interconnect corrosion is identified as the primary degradation mechanism. Furthermore, unsupervised hierarchical clustering finds that the degradation behaviors of modules from one brand with a more strict manufacturing quality control depends on module architectures only.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Differentiating the bonding states in calcium carbonate polymorphs by low-loss electron-energy-loss spectroscopy

Calcium carbonate is one of the important building components in organisms, especially the two most common polymorphs, calcite and aragonite. Here, to understand the difference in bonding state, the two polymorphs are characterized by valence (low-loss) electron energy loss spectroscopy. It is found that the difference in Ca M 23 edge originating from 3p to 3d states is consistent with the change of Ca-O bonds in the two studied polymorphs. Surprisingly, the measured Ca M 23 edge is in qualitative agreement with the calculated partial density of states (PDOS) of Ca-d states in contrast to their L edges (from 2p to 3d states) which are strongly influenced by atomic multiplet effect (spin-orbit coupling). This is because the atomic multiplet effect is much reduced for the Ca 3p orbital, which permits the corresponding Ca M 23 edge to be compared with the PDOS results. Our findings show insights that PDOS can potentially be used to interpret the M 23 edge of lighter 3d transition metals such as scandium, titanium, vanadium and chromium when such interpretation may not be achieved for their L edges.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Are 100 Ensemble Members Enough to Capture the Remote Atmospheric Response to +2°C Arctic Sea Ice Loss?

This study presents results from the Polar Amplification Multimodel Intercomparison Project (PAMIP) single-year time-slice experiments that aim to isolate the atmospheric response to Arctic sea ice loss at global warming levels of +2°C. Using two general circulation models (GCMs), the ensemble size is increased up to 300 ensemble members, beyond the recommended 100 members. After partitioning the response in groups of 100 ensemble members, the reproducibility of the results is evaluated, with a focus on the response of the midlatitude jet streams in the North Atlantic and North Pacific. Both atmosphere-only and coupled ocean–atmosphere PAMIP experiments are analyzed. Substantial differences in the midlatitude response are found among the different experiment subsets, suggesting that 100-member ensembles are still significantly influenced by internal variability, which can mislead conclusions. Despite an overall stronger response, the coupled ocean–atmosphere runs exhibit greater spread due to additional ENSO-related internal variability when the ocean is interactive. The lack of consistency in the response is true for anomalies that are statistically significant according to Student’s t and false discovery rate tests. This is problematic for the multimodel assessment of the response, as some of the spread may be attributed to different model sensitivities whereas it is due to internal variability. Here, we propose a method to overcome this consistency issue that allows for more robust conclusions when only 100 ensemble members are used.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Examining Ohmic Losses in Fuel-Cell Catalyst Layers with Different Pt/C Ratios

A model of a fuel-cell cathode with distinct proton conductivities at the agglomerate and electrode scales was used to simulate polarization curves under conditions with facile oxygen transport. Here, the model was applied to electrodes containing agglomerates with different ratios of platinum to carbon in order to examine the hypothesis that intra-agglomerate proton conductivity is substantially lower than ionomer conductivity. The model predicts decreasing performance and increasing sensitivity to Pt/C ratio as intra-agglomerate conductivity declines relative to a constant through-electrode conductivity. Experiments on catalyst layers with Vulcan supports do not show the predicted trend indicating that mesoscale intra-agglomerate conductivity is not orders of magnitude lower than bulk ionomer conductivity.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2025

A Comparison of Pre‐Construction and Operational Wake Loss Estimates for Land‐Based Wind Plants

The overall bias between pre‐construction energy yield assessment (EYA) estimates of wind plant energy production and the achieved operational production is improving in the wind industry, but uncertainty remains high for individual wind plants. Wake effects within wind plants are one of the largest sources of energy loss considered in the EYA process, and previous work shows wake loss estimates to be a major source of disagreement among wind energy consultants who perform EYAs. To better understand the accuracy of wake loss predictions, we compare overall operational wake loss estimates based on supervisory control and data acquisition data to pre‐construction estimates provided by six wind energy consultants for five land‐based wind plants in North America. By augmenting existing approaches for quantifying operational wake losses, we estimate wake losses during the period of record for which operational data are available as well as the expected long‐term wake losses, based on historical reanalysis weather data, to which the EYA estimates are compared. To account for power variations at different turbine locations caused by terrain‐induced wind resource heterogeneity, we correct the operational wake loss estimates using predicted freestream wind speed variations from the Wind Systems Engineering Reynolds‐averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) tool. We identify long‐term corrected operational wake losses between 1.9% and 6.4% for the five plants, with a mean loss of 4%. For the project deemed most acceptable for operational wake loss assessment, which is located in the simplest terrain and isolated from neighboring plants, the mean EYA wake loss estimate is within 0.7 percentage points of the operational value of 6.4%. For most of the remaining plants, results suggest that wake losses are generally overpredicted by 2.6–6.3 percentage points. However, operational wake losses may be underestimated for many of these projects because of spatial wind resource variations not captured by the RANS model, external wake effects that are unaccounted for in the estimation process, and wind plant blockage effects. To better understand factors that contribute to the observed wake losses, we investigate operational wake losses as a function of wind direction and wind speed. As expected, wake losses are generally concentrated near wind directions that are aligned with rows of closely spaced turbines and at below‐rated wind speeds; however, for some projects, the energy produced by the wind plant exceeds the estimated potential energy of the plant without wake interactions for certain wind directions and wind speeds, suggesting inaccurate assumptions in the wake loss estimation method for those plants. Lastly, we compare predicted and operational wake losses for individual wind turbines, finding that even when overall wake losses are predicted accurately, large uncertainty exists at the turbine level.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Economic Model for Estimation of GDP Losses in the MACCS Offsite Consequence Analysis Code

The MACCS (MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System) code is the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) tool used to perform probabilistic health and economic consequence assessments for atmospheric releases of radionuclides. It is also used by international organizations, both reactor owners and regulators. It is intended and most commonly used for hypothetical accidents that could potentially occur in the future rather than to evaluate past accidents or to provide emergency response during an ongoing accident. It is designed to support probabilistic risk and consequence analyses and is used by the NRC, U.S. nuclear licensees, the Department of Energy, and international vendors, licensees, and regulators. This report describes the modeling framework, implementation, verification, and benchmarking of a GDP-based model for economic losses that has recently been developed as an alternative to the original cost-based economic loss model in MACCS. The GDP-based model has its roots in a code developed by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Homeland Security to estimate short-term losses from natural and manmade accidents, called the Regional Economic Accounting analysis tool (REAcct). This model was adapted and modified for MACCS and is now called the Regional Disruption Economic Impact Model (RDEIM). It is based on input-output theory, which is widely used in economic modeling. It accounts for direct losses to a disrupted region affected by an accident, indirect losses to the national economy due to disruption of the supply chain, and induced losses from reduced spending by displaced workers. RDEIM differs from REAcct in its treatment and estimation of indirect loss multipliers, elimination of double counting associated with inter-industry trade in the affected area, and that it is designed to be used to estimate impacts for extended periods that can occur from a major nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan. Most input-output models do not account for economic adaptation and recovery, and in this regard RDEIM differs from its parent, REAcct, because it allows for a user-definable national recovery period. Implementation of a recovery period was one of several recommendations made by an independent peer review panel to ensure that RDEIM is state-of-practice. For this and several other reasons, RDEIM differs from REAcct. Both the original and the RDEIM economic loss models account for costs from evacuation and relocation, decontamination, depreciation, and condemnation. Where the original model accounts for an expected rate of return, based on the value of property, that is lost during interdiction, the RDEIM model instead accounts for losses of GDP based on the industrial sectors located within a county. The original model includes costs for disposal of crops and milk that the RDEIM model currently does not, but these costs tend to contribute insignificantly to the overall losses. This document discusses three verification exercises to demonstrate that the RDEIM model is implemented correctly in MACCS. It also describes a benchmark study at five nuclear power plants chosen to represent the spectrum of U.S. commercial sites. The benchmarks provide perspective on the expected differences between the RDEIM and the original cost-based economic loss models. The RDEIM model is shown to consistently predict larger losses than the original model, probably in part because it accounts for national losses by including indirect and induced losses; whereas, the original model only accounts for regional losses. Nonetheless, the RDEIM model predicts losses that are remarkably consistent with the original cost-based model, differing by 16% at most for the five sites combined with three source terms considered in this benchmark.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Updated Economic Model for Estimation of GDP Losses in the MACCS Offsite Consequence Analysis Code RDEIM Model Report for MACCS v4.2

This report updates the Regional Disruption Economic Impact Model (RDEIM) GDP-based model described in Bixler et al. (2020) used in the MACCS accident consequence analysis code. MACCS is the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) used to perform probabilistic health and economic consequence assessments for atmospheric releases of radionuclides. It is also used by international organizations, both reactor owners and regulators. It is intended and most commonly used for hypothetical accidents that could potentially occur in the future rather than to evaluate past accidents or to provide emergency response during an ongoing accident. It is designed to support probabilistic risk and consequence analyses and is used by the NRC, U.S. nuclear licensees, the Department of Energy, and international vendors, licensees, and regulators. The update of the RDEIM model in version 4.2 expresses the national recovery calculation explicitly, rather than implicitly as in the previous version. The calculation of the total national GDP losses remains unchanged. However, anticipated gains from recovery are now allocated across all the GDP loss types – direct, indirect, and induced – whereas in version 4.1, all recovery gains were accounted for in the indirect loss type. To achieve this, we’ve introduced new methodology to streamline and simplify the calculation of all types of losses and recovery. In addition, RDEIM includes other kinds of losses, including tangible wealth. This includes loss of tangible assets (e.g., depreciation) and accident expenditures (e.g., decontamination). This document describes the updated RDEIM economic model and provides examples of loss and recovery calculation, results analysis, and presentation. Changes to the tangible cost calculation and accident expenditures are described in section 2.2. The updates to the RDEIM input-output (I-O) model are not expected to affect the final benchmark results Bixler et al. (2020), as the RDEIM calculation for the total national GDP losses remains unchanged. The reader is referred to the MACCS revision history for other cost modelling changes since version 4.0 that may affect the benchmark. RDEIM has its roots in a code developed by Sandia National Laboratories for the Department of Homeland Security to estimate short-term losses from natural and manmade accidents, called the Regional Economic Accounting analysis tool (REAcct). This model was adapted and modified for MACCS. It is based on I-O theory, which is widely used in economic modeling. It accounts for direct losses to a disrupted region affected by an accident, indirect losses to the national economy due to disruption of the supply chain, and induced losses from reduced spending by displaced workers. RDEIM differs from REAcct in in its treatment and estimation of indirect loss multipliers, elimination of double-counting associated with inter-industry trade in the affected area, and that it is intended to be used for extended periods that can occur from a major nuclear reactor accident, such as the one that occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi site in Japan. Most input-output models do not account for economic adaptation and recovery, and in this regard RDEIM differs from its parent, REAcct, because it allows for a user-definable national recovery period. Implementation of a recovery period was one of several recommendations made by an independent peer review panel to ensure that RDEIM is state-of-practice. For this and several other reasons, RDEIM differs from REAcct.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗