Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “facility”

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 OSTI2015

Visibility and Visual Characteristics of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System Power Tower Facility

This report presents the results of a study conducted to document the visibility and visual characteristics of the Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System (ISEGS), a utility-scale solar power tower facility located on land administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management in southern California. Study activities consisted of field observations of the ISEGS facility and comparison of the observations made in the field with the visual contrast assessments and visual simulations in the ISEGS Final Environmental Impact Statement (Final EIS) and supporting documents created prior to ISEGS construction. Field observations of ISEGS were made from 19 locations within 35 mi (56 km) of the facility in the course of one week in September 2014. The study results established that reflected sunlight from the receivers was the primary source of visual contrast from the operating ISEGS facility. The ISEGS facility was found to be a major source of visual contrast for all observations up to 20 mi (32 km), and was easily visible at 35 mi. Glare from individual heliostats was frequently visible, and often brighter than the reflected light from the receivers. Heliostat glare caused discomfort for one or more viewers at distances up to 20 mi. The ISEGS power blocks were brightly lit at night, and were conspicuous at the observation distance of approximately 6 mi (10 km). The facility is substantially brighter and is seen more clearly in the field than in photographs of the facility or in the prepared simulations, which were based on photographs. The simulations of the ISEGS facility in the Final EIS, which were evaluated as part of this study, sometimes lacked spatial accuracy and realism. The evaluated simulations generally under-represented the actual visual contrast from the project, and some of the contrast ratings in the Final EIS predicted substantially lower levels of visual contrast than were actually observed for the operating facility.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2018

California CO 2 Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (C2SAFE): Final Technical Report

The California CO 2 Storage Assurance Facility Enterprise (C2SAFE) project conducted a preliminary study into the feasibility of a commercial-scale carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) storage complex located in California’s Southern San Joaquin Valley (SSJV). The work represents the first phase of a multi-phased development approach outlined by the United States Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Carbon Storage Assurance and Facility Enterprise (CarbonSAFE) program meant to develop carbon storage sites capable of permanently storing 50 million metric tonnes of CO 2 , or greater, injected over a typical facility life of 20 to 30 years. This report represents the culmination of work performed under C2SAFE and outlines a phased implementation plan for large-scale, industrial carbon capture and permanent storage in California’s SSJV. The report is meant to be a standalone document and as such provides high-level summaries of all tasks of the project, but is also meant to complement the other three topical reports issued by the project – reports referenced herein. The study considered multiple scenarios including an east-side storage facility, a west-side storage facility, and potential multi-site storage facilities. The east-side storage facility is to be located at Clean Energy Systems, Inc.’s Kimberlina Power Plant, or nearby, and the west-side facility will be located at the California Resources Corporation’s (CRC’s) Elk Hills oil field. The majority of carbon emissions are planned to be captured from existing sources and transported to the selected and verified storage site(s). Capture from the single closest source to the eastern storage facility and the sources within the Elk Hills field would meet the CarbonSAFE storage goal of 50 million tonnes. The study has shown there is sufficient storage capacity to meet this requirement and more; thus, capture from any of the numerous additional large nearby sources would substantially leverage the CarbonSAFE investment. A comparison of preliminary CO 2 capture, transportation, and storage costs to economic value and incentives in the state shows current market conditions make it economically feasible to develop large-scale industrial storage sites in California’s SSJV. The business case for Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in California’s SSJV appears economically viable today for large CO 2 point sources involved in the production of transportation fuels, such as oilfield cogeneration units and steam boilers. The overall levelized CCS cost is estimated at roughly 125 per tonne of CO 2 , which includes CO 2 amine-solvent post-combustion capture, transportation, and storage. The levelized CO 2 capture cost is based on today’s technology, with no future cost reduction factored in for technology improvement. The sum of the value of incentives and revenue from California Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) credits (discounted roughly 20% from their current transaction value), sale of California cap-and-trade emission allowances, and Section 45Q tax credits—either for saline storage or the Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) credit plus CO 2 sales revenue—is about 165/tonne-CO 2 . The economic viability of CCS for Natural Gas Combined Cycle (NGCC) power plants in the SSJV is more site-specific. A plant providing power solely to the electric grid, if it added CCS, should be eligible for Section 45Q tax credits and could sell its excess cap-and-trade emission allowances, but it would not generate LCFS credits. Using the cost and incentive values detailed in this report, it would not be economical for such a plant to add CCS today, barring other considerations. An NGCC plant within an oilfield (e.g., CRC Elk Hills and NRG Sunrise) that provides power to the oilfield as well as to the grid should receive “partial credit” in terms of generating LCFS credits if it added CCS (pro-rated for the fraction of power going to the oilfield). Such a plant should also be eligible for Section 45Q tax credits and garner revenue from selling its excess cap-and-trade emission allowances. Using the cost and incentive values described in this report, the economic viability of adding CCS today would depend on the relative fractions of electricity supplied to the oilfield and the grid. As the value of cap-and-trade emission allowances grows over time (either by market forces or the escalating floor price), the relative fraction of power needing to remain in the oilfield to achieve “breakeven” would diminish. At some point, even plants providing all their power to the grid would be candidates for economical CCS application. The C2SAFE team has proposed to expand upon the knowledge gained during this study by conducting a detailed feasibility assessment under a follow-on phase of the program, Phase II – Feasibility. This would include detailed data collection at the two sites, analysis, reporting, stakeholder outreach, and risk mitigation activities to support the development of a commercial carbon storage complex in the SSJV.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

Jupiter Laser Facility Annual Report, FY 2025

Dear JLF community, I cannot believe I am now entering my third year as JLF director — time definitely flies when you are having fun! FY25 was another pivotal year for the Jupiter Laser Facility, marked by both scientific achievement and growing visibility for our community. Building on the successful reopening and refurbishment of the facility, we continued to demonstrate how JLF drives innovation in high energy density and fusion energy science, laser technology, and workforce development. Across Janus, Titan, and COMET, users executed a diverse portfolio of experiments, from dynamic compression and opacity measurements to laser plasma interactions, laboratory astrophysics, and advanced diagnostics. These efforts are highlighted in this report, including the development of new probes that capture the time evolution of plasmas on a single shot, and diagnostics and platforms that are already impacting experiments at NIF and other large facilities. JLF continues to serve as both a testbed for new ideas and a bridge to larger scale campaigns. FY25 also showcased the broader role of JLF within the Laboratory and the national HED science ecosystem. The NIF JLF User Groups Meeting in February brought nearly 180 participants to Livermore and highlighted the scientific progress made during JLF’s first full year of renewed operations. JLF research and users were recognized with Director’s Institutional Awards and Early and Mid Career awards, underscoring the quality and impact of the work performed here. Our team also contributed prominently to national conversations about laser safety, plasma physics, and inertial fusion energy through invited talks, conferences, and professional society leadership. JLF’s integration with LaserNetUS deepened this year as well. We launched a new technical exchange program across LaserNetUS facilities and kicked it off with a JLF team visit to the BELLA Center at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. These exchanges are strengthening operations, sharing best practices, and improving the user experience across the network. Filming for the LaserNetUS “Behind the Scenes” series and participation in the annual LaserNetUS meeting further increased the visibility of our facility and our users. At the same time, JLF continues to play a central role in ambitious new programs, such as the Big Aperture Thulium laser effort funded through one of the DOE Office of Science Microelectronics Science Research Centers, which will use JLF infrastructure to explore next generation high rep rate lasers for EUV and x-ray source development. A core part of our mission remains training the next generation of scientists. In FY25, we welcomed another cohort of summer students, who joined experimental teams on Titan and presented their research at LLNL’s student poster symposium and national inertial fusion energy meetings. JLF users and early career scientists showcased their work at conferences across the country, highlighting experiments performed at the facility. These hands on experiences, and the mentoring provided by our staff and user teams, are central to JLF’s identity as a true user facility. Finally, FY25 reinforced JLF’s role as a focal point for partnerships and outreach. We hosted visits from international collaborators, science leaders, and we shared the story of the facility through venues such as the Big Ideas Lab podcast. These interactions help connect our work to a broader scientific and policy audience and open new pathways for collaboration. As we look ahead, the combination of refurbished hardware, new capabilities like STILETTO and enhanced short pulse performance on Titan, strong partnerships across LLNL and LaserNetUS, and a growing user community positions JLF for an even more ambitious program in the coming years. I am deeply grateful to our technical and operations staff for their dedication, to our LLNL partners for their continued support, and to our users for bringing bold, creative ideas to the facility. I look forward to more experiments, capabilities, partnerships, and groundbreaking science in the years to come! With brightest regards, Félicie Albert, JLF Director.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRS1991

Nuclear thermal propulsion test facility requirements and development strategy

The Nuclear Thermal Propulsion (NTP) subpanel of the Space Nuclear Propulsion Test Facilities Panel evaluated facility requirements and strategies for nuclear thermal propulsion systems development. High pressure, solid core concepts were considered as the baseline for the evaluation, with low pressure concepts an alternative. The work of the NTP subpanel revealed that a wealth of facilities already exists to support NTP development, and that only a few new facilities must be constructed. Some modifications to existing facilities will be required. Present funding emphasis should be on long-lead-time items for the major new ground test facility complex and on facilities supporting nuclear fuel development, hot hydrogen flow test facilities, and low power critical facilities.

Allen, George C.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Transonic turbine blade cascade testing facility

NASA LeRC has designed and constructed a new state-of-the-art test facility. This facility, the Transonic Turbine Blade Cascade, is used to evaluate the aerodynamics and heat transfer characteristics of blade geometries for future turbine applications. The facility's capabilities make it unique: no other facility of its kind can combine the high degree of airflow turning, infinitely adjustable incidence angle, and high transonic flow rates. The facility air supply and exhaust pressures are controllable to 16.5 psia and 2 psia, respectively. The inlet air temperatures are at ambient conditions. The facility is equipped with a programmable logic controller with a capacity of 128 input/output channels. The data acquisition system is capable of scanning up to 1750 channels per sec. This paper discusses in detail the capabilities of the facility, overall facility design, instrumentation used in the facility, and the data acquisition system. Actual research data is not discussed.

Verhoff, Vincent G.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Transonic turbine blade cascade testing facility

NASA LeRC has designed and constructed a new state-of-the-art test facility. This facility, the Transonic Turbine Blade Cascade, is used to evaluate the aerodynamics and heat transfer characteristics of blade geometries for future turbine applications. The facility's capabilities make it unique: no other facility of its kind can combine the high degree of airflow turning, infinitely adjustable incidence angle, and high transonic flow rates. The facility air supply and exhaust pressures are controllable to 16.5 psia and 2 psia, respectively. The inlet air temperatures are at ambient conditions. The facility is equipped with a programmable logic controller with a capacity of 128 input/output channels. The data acquisition system is capable of scanning up to 1750 channels per sec. This paper discusses in detail the capabilities of the facility, overall facility design, instrumentation used in the facility, and the data acquisition system. Actual research data is not discussed.

Verhoff, Vincent G.↗
NASA NTRS1994

Space facilities: Meeting future needs for research, development, and operations

The National Facilities Study (NFS) represents an interagency effort to develop a comprehensive and integrated long-term plan for world-class aeronautical and space facilities that meet current and projected needs for commercial and government aerospace research and development and space operations. At the request of NASA and the DOD, the National Research Council's Committee on Space Facilities has reviewed the space related findings of the NFS. The inventory of more than 2800 facilities will be an important resource, especially if it continues to be updated and maintained as the NFS report recommends. The data in the inventory provide the basis for a much better understanding of the resources available in the national facilities infrastructure, as well as extensive information on which to base rational decisions about current and future facilities needs. The working groups have used the inventory data and other information to make a set of recommendations that include estimates of cast savings and steps for implementation. While it is natural that the NFS focused on cost reduction and consolidations, such a study is most useful to future planning if it gives equal weight to guiding the direction of future facilities needed to satisfy legitimate national aspirations. Even in the context of cost reduction through facilities closures and consolidations, the study is timid about recognizing and proposing program changes and realignments of roles and missions to capture what could be significant savings and increased effectiveness. The recommendations of the Committee on Space Facilities are driven by the clear need to be more realistic and precise both in recognizing current incentives and disincentives in the aerospace industry and in forecasting future conditions for U.S. space activities.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

X-Ray Testing Constellation-X Optics at MSFC's 100-m Facility

In addition to the 530-m-long X-Ray Calibration Facility (XRCF), NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) operates a 104-m-long (source-to-detector) X-ray-test facility. Originally developed and still occasionally used for stray-light testing of visible-fight optical systems, the so-called "Stray-Light Facility" now serves primarily as a convenient and inexpensive facility for performance evaluation and calibration of X-ray optics and detectors. The facility can accommodate X-ray optics up to about 1-m diameter and 12-m focal length. Currently available electron-impact sources at the facility span the approximate energy range 0.2 to 100 keV, thus supporting testing of soft- and hard-X-ray optics and detectors. Available MSFC detectors are a front-illuminated CCD (charge-coupled device) and a scanning CZT (cadmium--zinc--telluride) detector, with low-energy cut-offs of about 0.8 and 3 keV, respectively. In order to test developmental optics for the Constellation-X Project, led by NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC), MSFC undertook several enhancements to the facility. Foremost among these was development and fabrication of a five-degree-of-freedom (5-DoF) optics mount and control system, which translates and tilts the user-provided mirror assembly suspended from its interface plate. Initial Constellation-X tests characterize the performance of the Optical Alignment Pathfinder Two (OAP2) for the large Spectroscopy X-ray Telescope (SXT) and of demonstration mirror assemblies for the Hard X-ray Telescope (HXT). With the Centroid Detector Assembly (CDA), used for precision alignment of the Chandra (nee AXAF) mirrors, the Constellation-X SXT Team optically aligned the individual mirrors of the OAPZ at GSFC. The team then developed set-up and alignment procedures, including transfer of the alignment from the optical alignment facility at GSFC to the X-ray test facility at MSFC, using a reference flat and fiducials. The OAPZ incorporates additional ancillary features --- fixed aperture mask and movable sub-aperture mask --- to facilitate X-ray characterization of the optics. Although the OAPZ was designed to- have low sensitivity to temperature offsets and gradients, analyses showed the necessity of active temperature control for the X-ray performance testing. Thus, the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory (SAO) implemented a thermal control and monitoring system, designed to hold the OAP2 close to its assembly.

O'Dell, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2004

NASA Glenn's Single-Stage Axial Compressor Facility Upgraded

NASA Glenn Research Center's Single-Stage Axial Compressor Facility was upgraded in fiscal year 2003 to expand and improve its research capabilities for testing high-speed fans and compressors. The old 3000-hp drive motor and gearbox were removed and replaced with a refurbished 7000-hp drive motor and gearbox, with a maximum output speed of 21,240 rpm. The higher horsepower rating permits testing of fans and compressors with higher pressure ratio or higher flow. A new inline torquemeter was installed to provide an alternate measurement of fan and compressor efficiency, along with the standard pressure and temperature measurements. A refurbished compressor bearing housing was also installed with bidirectional rotation capability, so that a variety of existing hardware could be tested. Four new lubrication modules with backup capability were installed for the motor, gearbox, torquemeter, and compressor bearing housing, so that in case the primary pump fails, the backup will prevent damage to the rotating hardware. The combustion air supply line for the facility inlet air system was activated to provide dry air for repeatable inlet conditions. New flow conditioning hardware was installed in the facility inlet plenum tank, which greatly reduced the inlet turbulence. The new inlet can also be easily modified to accommodate 20- or 22-in.-diameter fans and compressors, so a variety of existing hardware from other facilities (such as Glenn's 9- by 15-Foot Low-Speed Wind Tunnel) can be tested in the Single-Stage Axial Compressor Facility. An exhaust line was also installed to provide bleed capability to remove the inlet boundary layer. To improve the operation and control of the facility, a new programmable logic controller (PLC) was installed to upgrade from hardwired relay logic to software logic. The PLC also enabled the usage of human-machine interface software to allow for easier operation of the facility and easier reconfiguration of the facility controls when necessary. Finally, a new health-monitoring system was installed to measure shaft speed, shaft movement, and machine vibration on all of the rotating equipment. The system also provides automatic alarms and shutdown of the equipment when required. An integrated systems test for checkout of the facility was completed on June 17, 2003. Research testing resumed on June 30 with data obtained in support of the Ultra-Efficient Engine Technology Project's Compressor Casing Treatment Project.

Brokopp, Richard A.↗
NASA NTRS2008

Computational Analyses in Support of Sub-scale Diffuser Testing for the A-3 Facility: Unsteady Analyses and Risk Assessment - Part 2

Simulation technology can play an important role in rocket engine test facility design and development by assessing risks, providing analysis of dynamic pressure and thermal loads, identifying failure modes and predicting anomalous behavior of critical systems. This is especially true for facilities such as the proposed A-3 facility at NASA SSC because of a challenging operating envelope linked to variable throttle conditions at relatively low chamber pressures. Design Support of the feasibility of operating conditions and procedures is critical in such cases due to the possibility of startup/shutdown transients, moving shock structures, unsteady shock-boundary layer interactions and engine and diffuser unstart modes that can result in catastrophic failure. Analyses of such systems is difficult due to resolution requirements needed to accurately capture moving shock structures, shock-boundary layer interactions, two-phase flow regimes and engine unstart modes. In a companion paper, we will demonstrate with the use of CFD, steady analyses advanced capability to evaluate supersonic diffuser and steam ejector performance in the sub-scale A-3 facility. In this paper we will address transient issues with the operation of the facility especially at startup and shutdown, and assess risks related to afterburning due to the interaction of a fuel rich plume with oxygen that is a by-product of the steam ejectors. The primary areas that will be addressed in this paper are: (1) analyses of unstart modes due to flow transients especially during startup/ignition, (2) engine safety during the shutdown process (3) interaction of steam ejectors with the primary plume i.e. flow transients as well as probability of afterburning. In this abstract we discuss unsteady analyses of the engine shutdown process. However, the final paper will include analyses of a staged startup, drawdown of the engine test cell pressure, and risk assessment of potential afterburning in the facility. Unsteady simulations have been carried out to study the engine shutdown process in the facility and understand the physics behind the interactions between the steam ejectors, the test cell and the supersonic diffuser. As a first approximation, to understand the dominant unsteady mechanisms in the engine test cell and the supersonic diffuser, the turning duct in the facility was removed. As the engine loses power a rarefaction wave travels downstream that disrupts the shock cell structure in the supersonic diffuser. Flow from the test cell is seen to expand into the supersonic diffuser section and re-pressurizes the area around the nozzle along with a upstream traveling compression wave that emanates from near the first stage ejectors. Flow from the first stage ejector expands to the center of the duct and a new shock train is formed between the first and second stage ejectors. Both stage ejectors keep the facility pressurized and prevent any large amplitude pressure fluctuations from affecting the engine nozzle. The resultant pressure loads the nozzle experiences in the shutdown process are small.

Ahuja, Vineet↗
NASA NTRS2013

An Overview of the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) Facility and the Research Performed in the MSG on the International Space Station (ISS)

The Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) is a rack facility aboard the International Space Station (ISS) designed for investigation handling. The MSG was built by the European Space Agency (ESA) which also provides sustaining engineering support for the facility. The MSG has been operating on the ISS since July 2002 and is currently located in the US Laboratory Module. The unique design of the facility allows it to accommodate science and technology investigations in a "workbench" type environment. The facility has an enclosed working volume that is held at a negative pressure with respect to the crew living area. This allows the facility to provide two levels of containment for small parts, particulates, fluids, and gases. This containment approach protects the crew from possible hazardous operations that take place inside the MSG work volume. Research investigations operating inside the MSG are provided a large 255 liter enclosed work space, 1000 watts of dc power via a versatile supply interface (120, 28, +/- 12, and 5 Vdc), 1000 watts of cooling capability, video and data recording and real time downlink, ground commanding capabilities, access to ISS Vacuum Exhaust and Vacuum Resource Systems, and gaseous nitrogen supply. These capabilities make the MSG one of the most utilized facilities on ISS. The MSG has been used for over 14500 hours of scientific payload operations. MSG investigations involve research in cryogenic fluid management, fluid physics, spacecraft fire safety, materials science, combustion, plant growth, and life support technology. The MSG facility is operated by the Payloads Operations Integration Center at Marshall Space flight Center. Payloads may also operate remotely from different telescience centers located in the United States and Europe. The investigative Payload Integration Manager (iPIM) is the focal to assist organizations that have payloads operating in the MSG facility. NASA provides an MSG engineering unit for payload developers to verify that their hardware is operating properly before actual operation on the ISS. This paper will provide an overview of the MSG facility, a synopsis of the research that has already been accomplished in the MSG, and an overview of video and biological upgrades.

Jordan, Lee P.↗
NASA NTRS2016

X-ray Cryogenic Facility (XRCF) Handbook

The X-ray & Cryogenic Facility (XRCF) Handbook is a guide for planning operations at the facility. A summary of the capabilities, policies, and procedures is provided to enhance project coordination between the facility user and XRCF personnel. This handbook includes basic information that will enable the XRCF to effectively plan and support test activities. In addition, this handbook describes the facilities and systems available at the XRCF for supporting test operations. 1.2 General Facility Description The XRCF was built in 1989 to meet the stringent requirements associated with calibration of X-ray optics, instruments, and telescopes and was subsequently modified in 1999 & 2005 to perform the challenging cryogenic verification of Ultraviolet, Optical, and Infrared mirrors. These unique and premier specialty capabilities, coupled with its ability to meet multiple generic thermal vacuum test requirements for large payloads, make the XRCF the most versatile and adaptable space environmental test facility in the Agency. XRCF is also recognized as the newest, most cost effective, most highly utilized facility in the portfolio and as one of only five NASA facilities having unique capabilities. The XRCF is capable of supporting and has supported missions during all phases from technology development to flight verification. Programs/projects that have benefited from XRCF include Chandra, Solar X-ray Imager, Hinode, and James Webb Space Telescope. All test programs have been completed on-schedule and within budget and have experienced no delays due to facility readiness or failures. XRCF is currently supporting Strategic Astrophysics Technology Development for Cosmic Origins. Throughout the years, XRCF has partnered with and continues to maintain positive working relationships with organizations such as ATK, Ball Aerospace, Northrop Grumman Aerospace, Excelis (formerly Kodak/ITT), Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory, Goddard Space Flight Center, University of Alabama Huntsville, and more.

XRCF↗
NASA NTRS2016

Overview of the Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) Facility and the Research Performed in the MSG

The Microgravity Science Glovebox (MSG) is a rack facility aboard the International Space Station (ISS) designed for investigation handling. The MSG was built by the European Space Agency (ESA) which also provides sustaining engineering support for the facility. The MSG has been operating on the ISS since July 2002 and is currently located in the US Laboratory Module. The unique design of the facility allows it to accommodate science and technology investigations in a "workbench" type environment. The facility has an enclosed working volume that is held at a negative pressure with respect to the crew living area. This allows the facility to provide two levels of containment for small parts, particulates, fluids, and gases. This containment approach protects the crew from possible hazardous operations that take place inside the MSG work volume. Research investigations operating inside the MSG are provided a large 255 liter enclosed work space, 1000 watts of direct current power via a versatile supply interface (120, 28, plus or minus 12, and 5 volts direct current), 1000 watts of cooling capability, video and data recording and real time downlink, ground commanding capabilities, access to ISS Vacuum Exhaust and Vacuum Resource Systems, and gaseous nitrogen supply. These capabilities make the MSG one of the most utilized facilities on ISS. The MSG has been used for over 27,000 hours of scientific payload operations. MSG investigations involve research in cryogenic fluid management, fluid physics, spacecraft fire safety, materials science, combustion, plant growth, biological studies and life support technology. The MSG facility is operated by the Payloads Operations Integration Center at Marshall Space Flight Center. Payloads may also operate remotely from different telescience centers located in the United States and Europe. The Investigative Payload Integration Manager (IPIM) is the focal to assist organizations that have payloads operating in the MSG facility. NASA provides an MSG engineering unit for payload developers to verify that their hardware is operating properly before actual operation on the ISS. This poster will provide an overview of the MSG facility, a synopsis of the research that has already been accomplished in the MSG, and an overview of video and biological upgrades. The author would like to acknowledge Teledyne Brown Engineering and the entire MSG Team for their inputs into this poster.

Jordan, Lee↗
DOE OSTI2022

Towards an HPC Complementary Computing Facility

This Letter considers the design for computing facilities that are complementary to the leadership class High Performance Computing (HPC) facilities. This design envisions a future where funding agencies are allocating greater resources for leadership class facilities and these facilities will provide a significant part of the total compute cycles for HEP Experiments. While a leadership class facility (LCF) may provide cycles and advanced architectures, the facility does not necessarily provide all of the services needed to help HEP users make the best use of the HPC facility, as well as the services needed to provide computing for workflows that are not a good fit for the HPC facilities. This Letter outlines some of the necessary components of a facility designed to provide those services and capabilities.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗
DOE OSTI2017

Methodology on cyber security evaluation in nuclear facilities considering I and C architecture - 224

Cyber security has become a major issue in nuclear facilities recently due to obsolescence of existing analog system and increasing the use of digital system for instrumentation and control (I and C) system. There are several cases which are similar to cyber-attacks in nuclear facilities such as Davis-Besse NPP, Browns Ferry NPP, Hatch NPP, Natanz Nuclear Facility, and Monju NPP. Since the cyber-attack called 'Stuxnet' occurred to a Natanz Nuclear Facility at 2010, the regulatory agencies have developed regulatory guidance for cyber security of nuclear facilities. In this paper, we will propose a methodology on cyber security evaluation in nuclear facilities considering I and C architecture. We will introduce the cyber security evaluation model for I and C system with Bayesian Belief Network (BBN). The cyber security evaluation model for nuclear facilities consists of I and C architecture, cyber threat such as malicious activity of attacker, and mitigation measure against malicious activity. In order to make benchmark model with I and C architecture, cyber threat, and mitigation measure, the likelihood and consequence concepts are used as prior information to the model. Bayesian update can be used to evaluate the cyber security for nuclear facility by calculating posterior information and comparing between prior information and posterior information with the model. Moreover, we will propose the methodology on application of the cyber security to existing PSA by using the cyber security evaluation model with BBN. It presents quantitative information for cyber security against cyber-attack and it is helpful to communicate between licensee and regulator on nuclear facilities. (authors)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Integral and Separate Effects Test Facilities To Support Water Cooled Small Modular Reactors: A Review

This study reviews previous experimental facilities and test programs relevant to water-cooled reactor system design and analysis to meet regulatory compliances. This study aims to find the best solution for designing the required experiments, obtaining necessary test data, and verifying the developed computer code/models to support the new reactor design and development while minimizing cost and time while leveraging experiences from previous facilities to minimize. Nuclear reactor licensing requires supportive design, analysis, and experimental results to ensure the safety of the full-scale prototype reactor in regular operation, as well as during postulated accident scenarios. These reactor design analyses are generally performed using system codes and other associated simulation tools that require assessment, verification and validation using an appropriate experimental dataset. Experimental facilities used for reactor system safety analysis and system code assessments are categorized into integral effects test (IET) and separate effects test (SET) facilities. Further, these IET and SET experiments and studies use geometrically scaled systems to reproduce the prototype system behavior at a reasonable cost, albeit with some scaling-related distortions. The design challenge of these model facilities is to identify and minimize scaling distortions while reproducing the most important operational phenomena in steady-state operation and in postulated accident scenarios. Lessons learned from previous experimental facilities, models, and correlations can support the development of new multipurpose, scaled, hybrid, integrated, and modular experimental facilities for advanced light water-cooled small modular reactors (SMRs). Successful operation of these facilities can significantly reduce upfront reactor development and demonstration costs and time to deployment.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Annual Summary Report for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste Disposal Facility—FY 2025

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requires the performance assessment (PA) (Department of Energy Idaho Operations Office [DOE-ID] 2018a), composite analysis (CA) (DOE-ID 2012), and CA addendum (DOE-ID 2018b) for the Remote-Handled Low-Level Waste (RHLLW) Disposal Facility at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) Site shall be maintained to evaluate changes that could affect the performance, design, and operating basis for the facility (DOE Manual 435.1-1 Change 3, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual,” Section IV.P. [4]). The RHLLW Disposal Facility became operational in September 2018 after the completion of operational readiness activities required by DOE Order 425.1D, “Verification of Readiness to Start Up or Restart Nuclear Facilities,” and the issuance of the startup authorization by the Startup Approval Authority (Boston 2018). The first waste disposals at the RHLLW Disposal Facility began in Fiscal Year (FY) 2019. In Fiscal Year (FY) 2025, no significant operational changes or other activities occurred that would cause deviation from the assumptions in the PA and CA pertaining to disposal geometry, verification of waste characteristics, tracking disposal inventories against total limits, facility closure design, or institutional controls. This FY 2025 annual summary report (ASR) documents the continued adequacy of the PA, CA, operating disposal authorization statement (ODAS) (ODAS 2018), ODAS technical-basis documents, and the radioactive waste management basis (RWMB) (INL 2024a) to meet DOE Order 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” performance objectives for the RHLLW Disposal Facility. Annual review of the adequacy of the PA and CA at the RHLLW Disposal Facility ensures that conclusions of the analyses remain valid in accordance with requirements of DOE Order 435.1.

12 - MGMT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE↗