Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Current measurement”

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 379 records · Page 21
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2026

Measurement of Local Impedance Characteristics of In-Plane PEM Electrolyzer Component Features via Segmented Cell

Segmented cells are a class of advanced diagnostic devices that enable the measurement of current distribution within the active area of an electrochemical cell, allowing for the evaluation of localized impacts from operating conditions, flow fields and component inhomogeneities. Segmented cell devices have been applied to support R&D efforts for the advancement of polymer electrolyte membrane fuel cell technologies and more recently proton exchange membrane water electrolysis (PEMWE). Beyond current density distributions, segmented cells have been successfully deployed to collect the distribution of other relevant parameters such as high frequency resistance and electrode potentials. Very recently, a promising impedance method has been reported for water electrolysis where a one-dimensional segmented cell is coupled to a multichannel potentiostat, to enable the measurement of local cell impedances, further expanding the diagnostic capabilities of the segmented cell. In this study, we will present recent efforts to accurately measure local impedance characteristics for a PEMWE cell using a two-dimensional segmented cell device coupled with a multichannel potentiostat. The distribution of local resistances, i.e. high frequency, charge transfer, mass transport and catalyst layer, and iR-free overpotentials were successfully measured after eliminating sources of random and systematic error. We will discuss the application of this diagnostic on a cell containing a 1 cm feature simulating an ionomer skin. The results from these tests give insights if such an irregularity needs to be classified as a defect, and highlight the usefulness of coupling impedance spectroscopy with segmented cells for holistic spatial diagnostics of electrochemical devices.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2020

Influence of Proton Activity Gaps between Electrodes on Open-Circuit Potential of H 2 /H 2 and H 2 /Air Cells

Polymer -electrolyte-fuel-cell open-circuit voltages (OCVs) are exactly defined by equation (1), where cathode and anode proton activities [(aH+)cathode and (aH+)anode, respectively] usually are identical, so the third term in the right-hand side of equation (2) is ignored. OCV=E0+RT/2F*ln(a1/2 O2*(a2 H+)cathode/aH2O)-RT/2F*ln((a2 H+)anode/aH2) (1) =E0+RT/2F*ln(a1/2 O2*aH2/aH2O)+RT/2F*ln((a2 H+)cathode/(a2 H+)anode) (2) Water vapor pressure is a colligative property that fundamentally correlates to electrolyte concentrations in aqueous solutions. Proton activity is a function of acid concentration, such as pH, when electrolytes are acids. In polymer-electrolyte membranes, water vapor pressure and acid concentration are understood as relative humidity (RH) and water uptake (λ), respectively, where λ represents number of water molecules per sulfonic acid molecule. Several investigations have reported the relationship between RH and λ, meaning that proton activities and associated water uptakes are intimately related to RH. In actual fuel cell operation, cathode RH is determined by ambient-atmosphere and/or humidifier RH(s), and anode RH depends on hydrogen-circulator RH. Therefore, RH is not always identical at both electrodes, and the difference between electrode RHs is considerable during dry operation of polymer electrolyte fuel cells. Therefore, the third term in the right-hand side of equation (2) may be significant for dry operation. We measured OCVs when hydrogen was supplied to both electrodes at 80°C. One electrode (A) was fixed at 30% RH, while RH at the other electrode (B) was varied (0, 5, 10, 20, and 30%). Measured OCVs varied from 0 to 75 mV. For fuel cell tests, electrode A was supplied with hydrogen at 30% RH; electrode B, oxygen at 0, 5, 10, 20, and 30% RH. OCVs deviated from that measured when RH at electrode B was 30%, increasing from 0 to 60 mV with decreasing RH at electrode B. Results are also shown in Figure 1. Proton activities of both electrodes were thermodynamically calculated. The Gibbs–Duhem relation was applied to obtain molar Gibbs free energies of water and sulfonic acid, and proton activity coefficient was calculated using the Gibbs free energy of sulfonic acid and the relationship between RH and λ1–4, assuming that protons and sulfonic anions show identical ionic-activity coefficients. OCVs were estimated using the third term in the right-hand side of equation (2). Results are shown in Figure 1. Fuel-cell current–voltage performance was poor when RHs at the anode and cathode were 30 and 20%, respectively. To determine kinetic current, we measured the oxygen-reduction reaction (ORR) using a rotating-disk electrode (RDE) in concentrated-acid aqueous solutions, which modeled catalyst-layer ionomers. Kinetic currents decreased with acid concentrations. References T. A. Zawodzinski, Jr., C. Derouin, S. Radzinski, R. J. Sherman, V. T. Smith, T. E. Springer and S. Gottesfeld , J. Electrochem. Soc., 140,1041 (1993) P. K. Das and A. Z. Weber, Proceedings of the ASME 2013 11th Fuel Cell Science, Engineering and Technology Conference, Fuel Cell 18010 (2013) V. A. Sethuraman, J. W. Weidner, A. T. Haug, S. Motupally,b and L. V. Protsailo, J. Electrochem. Soc., 155, B50 (2008) A. Kusoglu and A. Z. Weber, Chem. Rev., 117, 987 (2017) Figure 1

Yoshida, Toshihiko↗
DOE OSTI2020

Non-uniform longitudinal current density induced power saturation in GaAs-based high power diode lasers

The output power of modern 975 nm GaAs-based broad area diode lasers is limited by increasing carrier and photon losses at high bias. Here, we use experiment and one-dimensional calculations on these devices to reveal that higher current densities (and hence higher local recombination rates and higher losses) arise near the front facet due to spatial hole burning and that the non-uniformity is strongly affected by laser geometry, which is more severe for longer resonators and less severe for higher front facet reflectivity. Specifically, we use devices with a segmented p-contact to directly measure the current distribution along the resonator and compare this with laser simulation. Devices with a 6 mm resonator show 29% more current at the front than back, twice as large as the 15% current non-uniformity in devices with a 3 mm resonator. In contrast, increased front facet reflectivity (20% rather than 0.8%) is shown to almost halve the current non-uniformity from 29% to 18% in devices with a 6 mm resonator and reduces power saturation. Although the magnitude of current non-uniformity in experiment and theory is broadly consistent, in experiment, an additional divergence is seen in current flow (and hence recombination rate) near the facets, and earlier power saturation occurs. Finally, we discuss the possible saturation mechanisms that are not included in the simulation.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

The effects of antimony incorporation on the optoelectronic properties of Cd(Se,Te) photovoltaics

One historical limitation of CdTe PV devices has been the open circuit voltage (VOC) deficit (difference between theoretical maximum VOC and measured values). While non-radiative recombination at extended structural defects and interfaces negatively impacts VOC, intentionally adding impurities (dopants) to increase the concentration of free carriers in the photovoltaic (PV) absorber material can increase the VOC. In this contribution we present a detailed analysis of the Sb doped CdTe and the Cd(Se,Te) alloy system via electron beam induced current (EBIC) measurements and the presence as well as spatial distribution of defect levels through cathodoluminescence spectrum imaging (CLSI).

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Site Selection for Field Testing of a Marine Hydrokinetic Turbine Platform to Serve as a Floating Unmanned Mobile Recharging Station for Aerial Drones

Abstract Expanding applications of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in coastal areas suggests a need for stations along or close to the coast where the UAV batteries can be easily recharged. A small-scale low flow marine current turbine in support of a floating autonomous recharge station for small UAVs has been designed and assembled at Florida Atlantic University and is being prepared for field testing. Surveys of identified test sites in the Intracoastal Waterways and at open ocean locations are being conducted to determine their suitability in meeting resource, system design and permitting requirements. A sensor platform has been developed for measuring local currents at the identified sites in support of resource characterization. Two out of the eight sites surveyed in the Intracoastal Waterways are found to meet the field-testing requirements for current resource, water depth, and sea bottom conditions. Planned field testing will include parametric characterization studies of the performance of the current turbine for a range of turbine blade configurations, current speeds, turbine wheel submergence levels, and test site location (channeled flow vs open ocean flow).

McKinney, Adriana Lynell↗
DOE OSTI2020

Gravitational Test beyond the First Post-Newtonian Order with the Shadow of the M87 Black Hole

In this study, the 2017 Event Horizon Telescope (EHT) observations of the central source in M87 have led to the first measurement of the size of a black-hole shadow. This observation offers a new and clean gravitational test of the black-hole metric in the strong-field regime. We show analytically that spacetimes that deviate from the Kerr metric but satisfy weak-field tests can lead to large deviations in the predicted black-hole shadows that are inconsistent with even the current EHT measurements. We use numerical calculations of regular, parametric, non-Kerr metrics to identify the common characteristic among these different parametrizations that control the predicted shadow size. We show that the shadow-size measurements place significant constraints on deviation parameters that control the second post-Newtonian and higher orders of each metric and are, therefore, inaccessible to weak-field tests. The new constraints are complementary to those imposed by observations of gravitational waves from stellar-mass sources.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Second Quarter 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2020. Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the amount projected to meet charging demand by 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the second report in a new series. The first report for the first calendar quarter of 2020 can be found in the publication databases of the Alternative Fuels Data Center and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Third Quarter 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the third calendar quarter of 2020. Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the amount projected to meet charging demand by 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the third report in a new series. Reports for the first two calendar quarters of 2020 can be found in the publication databases of the Alternative Fuels Data Center and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Q1 2020)

The US. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2020 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the amount projected to meet charging demand by 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Q4 2020)

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the fourth calendar quarter of 2020 (Q4). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the projected amount needed to meet charging demand by 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the fourth report in a series. Previous reports for the first (Q1), second (Q2), and third (Q3) calendar quarters of 2020 can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: First Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2021 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the target infrastructure volume for 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the fifth report in a series. Previous reports from 2020 can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Second Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE's) Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private non-residential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2021 (Q2). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with the target infrastructure volume for 2030. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the sixth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Third Quarter 2021)

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the third calendar quarter of 2021 (Q3). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the seventh report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: Fourth Quarter 2021

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the fourth calendar quarter of 2021 (Q4). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape for EV charging. This is the eighth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator: First Q2022

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the first calendar quarter of 2022 (Q1). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the ninth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Trends from the Alternative Fueling Station Locator (Second Quarter 2022)

The U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fueling Station Locator contains information on public and private nonresidential alternative fueling stations in the United States and Canada and currently tracks ethanol (E85), biodiesel, compressed natural gas, electric vehicle (EV) charging, hydrogen, liquefied natural gas, and propane stations. Of these fuels, EV charging continues to experience rapidly changing technology and growing infrastructure. This report provides a snapshot of the state of EV charging infrastructure in the United States in the second calendar quarter of 2022 (Q2). Using data from the Station Locator, this report breaks down the growth of public and private charging infrastructure by charging level, network, and location. Additionally, this report measures the current state of charging infrastructure compared with two different 2030 infrastructure requirement scenarios. This information is intended to help transportation planners, policymakers, researchers, infrastructure developers, and others understand the rapidly changing landscape of EV charging infrastructure. This is the tenth report in a series. Reports from previous quarters can be found in the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC) and National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) publication databases, as well as the AFDC Charging Infrastructure Trends page (https://afdc.energy.gov/fuels/electricity_infrastructure_trends.html).

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Perspective on Traditional and Data Driven Electrochemical Modeling and Analysis

To understand the behavior of electrochemical systems, we need to reduce the dimensionality of the measured current-voltage-time (I-V-t) data by fitting models, thus enabling us to analyze and compare the governing physics. Traditionally, the process for this is an 'expert first' approach: defining the model and its explicit assumptions based on inductive reasoning or empirical observation, fitting small portions of the I-V-t data where assumptions are most valid or carefully designing experiments to enforce key assumptions, and then interpreting the model parameters. However, modern data-driven methods enable a new paradigm: a 'data first' approach, where the latent behaviors governing the system's measured response are identified directly using machine-learning models that optimize both model structure and parameters from the I-V-t data, guaranteeing that the learned model explains as much of the observed system response as possible. After model identification, the model can then be interrogated by an expert to connect observed behaviors with underlying physics. This talk will review several different types of electrochemical analysis (electrochemical impedance, differential voltage-capacity, electrochemical kinetics) and compare the traditional and data-driven methods for analyzing the data.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Simulation and measurement of beam-induced heating of ceramic vacuum chambers

In this article, we summarize recent theoretical and experimental studies of the impedance and beam-induced heating of titanium-coated ceramic vacuum chambers used in the NSLS-II injection kickers. The impedance was calculated using the field matching theory assuming planar approximation and compared with the mpedanceake2 code. For the coating thickness of a few microns, we demonstrated that the beam-induced power is dissipated in the titanium coating and that the longitudinally averaged two-dimensional power density is approximated by an analytical expression, thus allowing the use of a simplified model of the power density as input for the code to simulate the temperature distribution with realistic nonuniform thickness of the Ti coating. For a few values of the NSLS-II beam current, we measured the beam-induced heating of two ceramic chambers using thermal sensors installed along the chamber and compared the measurement results with the simulations. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗