Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “public release”

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 397 records · Page 22

Zeteotech, LLC TRGR Project Final Report

Reliable detection of aerosolized pathogens is difficult due to need to distinguish between the benign bioaerosols such as dander and pollen and the thousands of pathogens capable of infecting people. Accurate identification of airborne pathogens of concern in the past has required the collection of aerosol samples in a filter, periodic collection of the samples, and processing and identification in the laboratory. This process is labor intensive and expensive. Additionally, this method necessarily has a time to detection window of hours to days depending on the collection frequency. Biological pathogens have an incubation period before the onset of symptoms and severe health effects and/or mortality, people will typically be exposed to them without realizing it. This has resulted in a detect to treat strategy for protection against bio releases. While prophylactic measures can still be effective over these time scales, reducing the time to detection will significantly improve the effectiveness of these measures and subsequently reduce the consequences of a release. Various attempts to reduce the time to detection and identification have been plagued by highly undesirable false-positives which degrade confidence in the system. Zeteotech, LLC has developed a mass spectrometer based bioaerosol sensing system which is capable of autonomously identifying airborne pathogens of concern and alert authorities within minutes instead of hours to days. They have deployed these instruments to protect high-risk facilities by alerting authorities of public health events and intentional bioterrorism events in near real time. This makes it possible to more accurately identify the time and location of the release and minimize the number of people that are exposed through prompt quarantining of affected areas.

47 OTHER INSTRUMENTATION↗

U.S. Hydropower Market Report (January 2021 edition)

This is the third complete edition of the U.S. Hydropower Market Report (the first two were the 2014 and 2017 Hydropower Market Report published in 2015 and 2018, respectively). In intervening years between publishing the full report, updated data are also summarized and released, and can be found at the Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL) HydroSource website. This report combines data from public and commercial sources as well as research findings from other Department of Energy (DOE) R&D projects in order to provide a comprehensive picture of developments in the U.S. hydropower and PSH fleet and industry trends. Prior to the first Market Report being published, there was a noted lack of publicly available and easily accessible information about hydropower in the United States and other important trends affecting this important sector of the energy industry. New and valuable types of information are constantly being developed in the course of DOE research activities and, in a rapidly evolving energy industry, it is important that these data be made available in a predictable and consistent manner for use by all different types of stakeholders and decision-makers.The report highlights developments in 2017–2019 (the years for which new data has become available since the publication of the 2017 Hydropower Market Report), and contextualizes this information compared to evolving high-level trends over the past 10–20 years. Apart from presenting trends over time, the report discusses differences in those trends by region, plant size, owner type, or other attributes.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

U.S. Hydropower Market Report

The January 2021 edition of the U.S. Hydropower Market Report is the third complete edition of this report (the first two were the 2014 and 2017 Hydropower Market Report published in 2015 and 2018, respectively). In intervening years between publishing the full report, updated data are also summarized and released, and can be found at the Oak Ridge National Lab (ORNL) HydroSource website. This report combines data from public and commercial sources, as well as research findings from other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) R&D projects to provide a comprehensive picture of developments in the U.S. hydropower and pumped-storage hydropower fleet and industry trends. The report highlights developments in 2017–2019 (the years for which new data has become available since the publication of the 2017 Hydropower Market Report), and contextualizes this information compared to evolving high-level trends over the past 10–20 years. Apart from presenting trends over time, the report discusses differences in those trends by region, plant size, owner type, or other attributes.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

Feedstock Carbon Intensity Calculator (FD-CIC) Users’ Manual and Technical Documentation

A transparent and easy-to-use tool for feedstock-specific, farm-level CI calculation of feedstocks is helpful. With the ARPA-E support, we have developed a tool–the Feedstock Carbon Intensity Calculator (FD-CIC). The first version of FD-CIC was released with the GREET® model in 2020 (Wang et al., 2020) so that corn feedstock producers could use this publicly available tool (https://greet.es.anl.gov/tool_fd_cic) to quantify corn grain CIs with farm-level input data and management practices. In the 2021 version, we expand the tool’s capabilities by including additional feedstocks such as soybeans, sorghum, and rice. Similar to corn, it calculates the farm-level CI for these feedstocks by allowing user-defined farm-level farming inputs and incorporating the GHG emission intensities of these inputs from GREET (in particular, GREET1, the fuel cycle model of GREET).

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Technology-Neutral, Accident Containment-Based Path to Reduce Nuclear Power Costs

Cost remains a substantial impediment to nuclear power plant (NPP) deployment. The origin of the multifold cost difference between NPPs and other industrial facilities is in their unique potential for societally disruptive accidents. Consequently, one means to substantially reduce NPP costs would be to provide a transparent means of demonstrating that a plant’s potential for land-contamination accidents is so remote to amount to a practical certainty that no significant quantity of radionuclides would ever reach the public. The necessary confidence can be developed through employing a containment capable of withstanding both a complete internal energy release accident along with credible external events with ample margin. This paper provides an overview of a path forward to develop a technology-neutral, containment-based safety-adequacy demonstration method.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Default Radioactive and Hazardous Waste Management (RHWM) Dose Conversion Factors (DCFs) and Weighting Factors and plutonium-239 equivalent Curie (PE-Ci) methodology for acceptance into the Waste Storage Facilities

DOE-STD-5506-2007 (Ref. 1) is the standard that provides the methodology for preparing hazard analysis and accident analysis for transuranic (TRU) waste facilities. The Waste Storage Facilities hazard and accident analysis for the DSA is developed in accordance with DOE-STD- 5506-2007. Two related issues need to be addressed when implementing DOE-STD-5506-2007 regarding the calculation of consequences from TRU waste releases in accident analysis: Consequences determined in accident analysis must be modeled using inhalation Dose Conversion Factors (DCFs) that are consistent with those from the International Commission on Radiological Protection Publication 72 (ICRP-72, Ref. 2).; The use of a statistical Material at Risk (MAR) representing the distribution of radiological loading of TRU waste containers based on the use of a plutonium-239 equivalent Curie (PE-Ci) methodology. The PE-Ci methodology simplifies accident analysis by allowing one to model releases based on the Curie value of one standard nuclide (e.g., Pu-239) instead of needing to model releases for every potential nuclide of interest. This is accomplished by normalizing the Curie value of all nuclides to a single Curie value of a standard nuclide by using a Weighting Factor that is a ratio of the DCFs associated with the nuclides and that of the standard nuclide. By using the ICRP-72 DCFs to calculate PE-Ci values used in the statistical MAR, the accident analysis that uses that statistical MAR will be consistent with the consequence methodology identified in DOE-STD- 5506-2007.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

"Source Term Modeling for Advanced Gas Micro-Reactors"

Maintaining the safety of the public, environment, and operating personnel is the most important factor in designing, operating, maintaining, and decommissioning nuclear reactors. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the development of micro-reactors employing TRi-structural ISOtropic (TRISO)-coated particle fuel. In gas reactors, TRISO fuel plays an important role in the safety case for high temperature reactors because of the fission product retention properties of the fuel. This ability enables the use of a functional containment strategy for the reactor where multiple barriers are used to prevent fission product release to the environment. Part of the safety analysis of these advanced reactors is the assessment of radionuclide releases under normal and accident conditions through the multiple credited safety barriers. Using conservative assumptions, a mechanistic analysis can be performed to quantify these releases that combines the probabilistic assessment of failure with analytic solutions to radionuclide transport equations. Source term modeling for TRISO fuel has been performed for previous reactor designs; however, these models are outdated, in many cases proprietary, and need updates to be applied to the current state of TRISO fuel technology and alternative gas reactor core configurations [1]. Currently, the only publicly available source term assessment for gas reactors is an expert-based Monte Carlo simulation based on the effectiveness of the fuel kernel, coating layers, and graphite block in a modular high temperature gas reactor [2]. Thus, there is a need to develop a simple, versatile, and mechanistic model of fission product release and transport in gas reactor cores that could be applied to a variety of reactors through user inputs and reactor-specific radionuclide inventories. The release is calculated by the diffusion of the key safety important fission products through the kernel, silicon carbide (SiC), graphite for both intact and defective TRISO particles based on fuel and graphite temperatures in the reactor under normal operation. These releases from the fuel enter the coolant where they can plate-out on cooler surfaces. A clean-up model is included for designs with a coolant purification system to remove fission gases. This initial distribution of fission products in the reactor serves as an initial condition for potential releases under postulated accident conditions. The model then can calculate the fission product release for any transient temperature profile and fission product releases can then be used to assess radiological dose to the workers and the public using conventional dose tools. Data on the diffusion of fission products is based on historic German TRISO experiments and the more current Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) TRISO fuel development program. The model is coded in python with inputs and outputs in excel spreadsheets, as well as python plotting utilities to aid in the interpretation of the results. References: [1] INL, NGNP Mechanistic Source Term White Paper, INL-10-17997, July 2010. [2] David A. Petti, Richard R. Hobbins, Peter Lowry, Hans Gougar, “Representative Source Terms and The Influence of Reactor Attributes on Functional Containment in Modular High Temperature Gas-cooled Reactors,” Nuclear Technology, Vol. 184, p. 181-197, Nov. 2013.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC Site 300 Facility ID N-472 Toxics Emissions Inventory Plan for AB 2588 California Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act of 1987

The Air Toxics "Hot Spots" Information and Assessment Act (AB 2588 or the “Act”) was enacted in September 1987. Under the Act, stationary sources are required to report the types and quantities of certain toxic substances their facilities routinely release into the air. AB 2588 is designed to provide information to state and local agencies and to the general public on the extent of airborne emissions from stationary sources and the potential public health impacts of those emissions. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (the District) is mandated by the State to implement AB 2588.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

The Challenges of Air Monitoring at a Soil Remediation Project in a Suburban Setting - 20448

Air monitoring during soil excavation at a chemically and radiologically impacted site in a suburban setting presents unique challenges. Site activities were conducted in a manner that minimized the release of airborne particulates of concern, principally radionuclides of concern (ROC). Dust and air monitoring were performed to ensure the public was not being exposed to the soil contaminants. The project team collected representative air and dust data while being mindful to not impose on the lives of residents in the area. Due to the close proximity to the public, there was a high level of oversight from the client and regulatory agencies. The challenges involved with air sampling at this soil remediation site located in a suburban setting included the number of contaminants, the ranges of risks and hazards presented by the contaminants and the method of remediation, the concerns of the regulators and the public, and the perception of risk from the public. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Summary Report for the NEPA Impact Analysis. Revision 1

The Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), located in southeastern New Mexico, has been developed by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for the geologic (deep underground) disposal of defense-related transuranic (TRU) waste. Containment of TRU waste at the WIPP facility is derived from standards set forth in Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 191. The DOE assesses compliance with the containment standards according to the Certification Criteria in Title 40 CFR Part 194 by means of Performance Assessment (PA) calculations performed by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL). WIPP PA calculations estimate the probability of radionuclide releases from the repository to the accessible environment for a regulatory period of 10,000 years after facility closure. The DOE Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) has initiated a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) action for a proposal to excavate and use additional transuranic (TRU) waste disposal panels at the WIPP facility. This report documents an analysis undertaken as part of an effort to evaluate the potential environmental consequences of the proposed action. Although not explicitly required for a NEPA analysis, evaluations of a dose indicator to hypothetical members of the public after final facility closure are presented in this report. The analysis is carried out in two stages: first, Performance Assessment (PA) calculations quantify the potential releases to the accessible environment over a 10,000-year post-closure period. Second, dose was evaluated for three hypothetical exposure pathways using the conservative radionuclide concentrations assumed to be released to the accessible environment.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

TRISO Fuel’s Safety Functions, Contributions to Reactor Safety, and Necessary Safety Limits

Safety functions are the actions, passive or active, that structures, systems, and components of nuclear facility that contribute to the safety of the workers, the public, or the environment. Well-defined safety functions are the foundation of a solid safety case for a reactor. For reactors that use TRISO-coated particles, the TRISO fuel plays an important part of the safety case because of its ability to contain radionuclides in the fuel itself. This ability enables the use of a functional containment strategy for the reactor where radionuclide retention is the primary safety function supported by the safety functions of controlling reactivity control and controlling heat rejection. This paper establishes at a deeper level the role that TRISO fuel plays in each of these safety functions and associated quality assurance and testing requirements for TRISO particle manufacturing to ensure these safety functions. Safety limits necessary to protect these safety functions include: operational limits, time at temperature limits, and fission gas release activity limits. In conclusion, this approach demonstrates the role that specific aspects of TRISO fuel play in protecting the safety of workers, the public, and the environment.

11 - NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

Hardware-Based Demonstration of Temperature Control Functions for Reactor Systems

Establishing autonomy in reactor control systems has become essential for the expansion of nuclear technologies. Thermal regulation in particular remains crucial for maintaining stable operation and ensuring the integrity of fuel. To alleviate public skepticism of the safety of nuclear reactors, demonstrating control over this key factor is pivotal. Utilizing electric heat pads to simulate the heat released in a reactor core, thermocouples for temperature monitoring, and an Arduino micro programmable logic controller (PLC) for control, a hardware-based demonstration of a reactor heating system validates the efficacy of reactor control over this key parameter. To improve precision, a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) algorithm was implemented in the heating control loop to ensure meticulous control of reactor functions. In addition, the integration of this physical system with a digital simulator tool such as RELAP5-3D establishes a foundation for a comprehensive testing environment. This allows for a refinement of temperature control under various simulated reactor conditions, bringing another layer of reliability to the operation of the system. By facilitating a physical demonstration of reactor thermal management and control strategies, this project provides a foundation for expanded testing and educational outreach. Ultimately, this system advances the broader goal of demonstrating the safety and viability of autonomous reactor operations, contributing to public trust and future reactor deployment.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

A clinically and genomically annotated nerve sheath tumor biospecimen repository

Nerve sheath tumors occur as a heterogeneous group of neoplasms in patients with neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1). The malignant form represents the most common cause of death in people with NF1, and even when benign, these tumors can result in significant disfigurement, neurologic dysfunction, and a range of profound symptoms. Lack of human tissue across the peripheral nerve tumors common in NF1 has been a major limitation in the development of new therapies. To address this unmet need, we have created an annotated collection of patient tumor samples, patient-derived cell lines, and patient-derived xenografts, and carried out high-throughput genomic and transcriptomic characterization to serve as a resource for further biologic and preclinical therapeutic studies. In this work, we release genomic and transcriptomic datasets comprised of 55 tumor samples derived from 23 individuals, complete with clinical annotation. All data are publicly available through the NF Data Portal and at http://synapse.org/jhubiobank.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Cambium Documentation: Version 2021

Cambium is a tool that assembles structured data sets of simulated hourly emission, cost, and operational data for modeled futures of the U.S. electric sector with metrics designed to be useful for long-term decision-making. It was built to expand the metrics reported in the National Renewable Energy Laboratory's (NREL's) Standard Scenarios - an annually released set of projections of how the U.S. electric sector could evolve across a suite of different potential futures, looking forward through 2050 (Cole et al. 2021) Information about Cambium and related publications can be found at https://nrel.gov/analysis/cambium.html, and the Cambium data sets for the Standard Scenarios can be viewed and downloaded at https://cambium.nrel.gov/. In this documentation, we define the metrics reported in Cambium databases (Section 4) and document the Cambium-specific methods for calculating those metrics (Section 5). As this document is intended to cover multiple Cambium data releases, we do not document specific scenarios here - for individual data releases, readers should look for an accompanying report that describes the assumptions and data that underlie that specific release. For Cambium databases that are built on NREL's Standard Scenarios, for example, reports describing the scenarios can be found on the Standard Scenarios web site (https://www.nrel.gov/analysis/standard-scenarios.html).

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Nuclear Criticality Safety [Book Chapter]

Nuclear Criticality Safety is a field of nuclear engineering that involves worker and public safety during the handling, processing, transportation, and storage activities of fissile isotopes ( 233 U, 235 U, and 239 Pu) outside of nuclear reactors. Criticality accidents release energy as a result of accidentally producing a self-sustaining fission chain reaction. If these occur during hands-on operations the results can be lethal to worker within about 4.6 m (15 ft.) of the accident. There have been 22 process criticality accidents in the world between 1953 and 1999 resulting in physical injury, on and off-site dose, or death. Nuclear Criticality Safety involves work by qualified persons to preclude criticality accidents and their consequences by ensuring activities with fissionable materials remain subcritical, i.e., safe, during all normal and credible abnormal conditions. This article presents information about those nuclear fuel cycle steps presenting Nuclear Criticality Safety concerns that must be considered to ensure worker and public safety is assured.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

r-process abundances in neutron-rich merger ejecta given different theoretical nuclear physics inputs

This data release contains nucleosynthesis predictions for the r-process abundances presented in Côté, Eichler, Yagüe, Vassh et al. (2021) for compact object merger ejecta based on the publicly available simulation trajectories of Rosswog et al. (2013). All ejecta for the merger scenarios considered here are very neutron-rich (Ye ~ 0.016-0.11). Calculations were performed with the PRISM code (Mumpower et al. 2018) which accounts for nuclear reheating (here with a reheating efficiency of 50%). Results are reported for several different theoretical nuclear physics inputs but all calculations make use of the GEF fission yield prescription (see Vassh et al. 2019). All abundances are given at 1 Myr (10^6 years) post-merger. Please see the README file for more details and references. When using these nucleosynthesis yields, please cite this Zenodo data release (Vassh et al. 2021), and refer to Vassh et al. (2019) and Côté, Eichler, Yagüe, Vassh et al. (2021) for further details on the nuclear data applied as well as Rosswog et al. (2013), Piran et al. (2013), and Korobkin et al. (2012) for further details on the merger ejecta trajectories.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Hydropower Geotechnical Foundations: Current Practice and Innovation Opportunities for Low-Head Applications

Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to Hydropower is a renewable energy resource that produces electricity from flowing water under pressure. Engineered hydropower structures, such as dams, are used to create a hydraulic head, enabling a turbinegenerator unit to convert pressurized flow into electricity. While hydropower has been a source of renewable energy since antiquity, new development in the United States has slowed in recent decades. Based on recent resource assessments, the largest opportunity to expand hydropower in the United States is from new stream-reach development (i.e., new hydropower development along stream-reaches that do not currently have hydroelectric facilities or other forms of infrastructure, such as dams). Roughly 75% of identified new stream-reach development potential is from low-head sites (less than 30 ft of head), which typically suffer from smaller power densities and higher normalized costs, given economies of scale. Hydropower developers and other stakeholders are thus interested in strategies to reduce initial capital costs while practicing sustainable development to maximize environmental compatibility with minimal disruption to natural aquatic life, sediment, and water flows. Historically, civil works have represented a significant cost driver for new hydropower development, with the foundation system representing a major cost component and source of uncertainty. The foundation system is the collection of engineered structural features (e.g. cutoff trenches, walls, grouting, anchors) constructed at or below the preconstruction ground surface that interfaces between the overlying structures (superstructures) and the bed material below (subsurface). Development of a hydropower foundation system must consider the various characteristics of the surrounding stream environment and subsurface while adhering to the engineering requirements of the superstructure that it supports. The care of water, excavation, and other construction activities are important features of foundation design and construction. The design and construction cost of the foundation system is largely dependent on the site geology and riverbed composition and is influenced by the level of geotechnical assessment required and conducted. Thus, a hydropower facility’s geotechnical foundation is often highly site-specific, with proper site selection and assessment being important to project success. The foundation system is designed to provide structural stability (of the foundation and dam), limit seepage, ensure public safety, and maintain functionality for the project life, during both construction and facility operations. Inadequate foundation or dam design can result in dam failure and the uncontrolled release of significant volumes of water, which could cause a high number of casualties and extensive property damage downstream of the failure. According to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials, approximately 30% of all historical dam failures in the United States are attributed to foundation or abutment defects, and another 20% are attributed to piping or seepage through the embankment, foundation, or abutment. To ameliorate these safety considerations, foundations often require massive amounts of construction material (e.g., grout, concrete, engineered dam fill) and long construction times. Foundation design also requires significant analysis prior to construction because the initial in-stream and abutment subsurface conditions are site-specific, and sufficient data for them often are lacking. Current practice requires on-site assessment, using expensive drilling and invasive and non-invasive investigation methods, to determine the expected cost of foundation material and treatment. Additionally, foundation construction often requires site dewatering (and other care of water activities), which involves constructing temporary diversion structures upstream and often downstream, called cofferdams, and water diversion systems that route water around the construction site. Cofferdams and water diversion systems can drastically increase construction costs and contribute to environmental disruption, including modification of flow patterns and benthic habitats. Given the technical, economic, and environmental challenges associated with hydropower foundations, opportunities exist to improve the current state of practice and to develop new and innovative solutions to challenges frequently encountered with traditional approaches. With this understanding, it is critically important to understand and document the current state of practice for hydropower geotechnical foundations, identify key challenges, and define opportunities for innovative solutions. To this end, this report documents the current state of practice across the three main phases of geotechnical foundation development: (1) geotechnical site assessment, (2) design, and (3) construction for hydropower systems. It also describes the major challenges with conventional approaches and identifies opportunities for innovation to reduce hydropower foundations costs, timelines, and risks. Key takeaways from this report include the following: Approximately 80% of available low-head sites are expected to have foundations on soil beds rather than rock beds, suggesting that rockfill and earthfill dams may be the most cost-effective conventional dam type for new projects.; Geotechnical and geologic investigation activities are time-consuming and expensive but are essential to define the parameters and criteria needed for foundation design.; Certain riverbed soil and bedrock types present significant technical challenges or require expensive foundation construction, which can prove financially prohibitive for low-head project development.; Modular hydropower design and prefabricated modular foundations represent a promising but unproven paradigm for new hydropower development. Design and construction approaches using optimized and highly repeatable, reliable components would benefit project cost, time, and risk but require additional research and development.; Temporary construction features for foundations, including cofferdams, water diversion, and water control systems, can prove costly and have inherent construction risk.; For economically viable development, hydropower geotechnical foundations should be limited to 4 to 15% of the project’s total initial capital costs. Many proposed projects have experienced cost overruns attributable to foundation difficulties or surprises during construction. These overruns may have been due to inadequate investigations, lack of adequate engineering effort to tailor the structures to site geology and topography, and/or contractual terms, among other considerations.; Challenges for hydropower foundations and opportunities for innovative technology solutions are identified in the following areas (consistent with the three main phases of foundation development): Geotechnical site assessment, Foundation design and materials, Construction methods and technology. Ultimately, this report aims to provide information about geotechnical foundations for low-head hydropower and to motivate transformative technologies to support hydropower growth.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

Brain‐age prediction: Systematic evaluation of site effects, and sample age range and size

Abstract Structural neuroimaging data have been used to compute an estimate of the biological age of the brain (brain‐age) which has been associated with other biologically and behaviorally meaningful measures of brain development and aging. The ongoing research interest in brain‐age has highlighted the need for robust and publicly available brain‐age models pre‐trained on data from large samples of healthy individuals. To address this need we have previously released a developmental brain‐age model. Here we expand this work to develop, empirically validate, and disseminate a pre‐trained brain‐age model to cover most of the human lifespan. To achieve this, we selected the best‐performing model after systematically examining the impact of seven site harmonization strategies, age range, and sample size on brain‐age prediction in a discovery sample of brain morphometric measures from 35,683 healthy individuals (age range: 5–90 years; 53.59% female). The pre‐trained models were tested for cross‐dataset generalizability in an independent sample comprising 2101 healthy individuals (age range: 8–80 years; 55.35% female) and for longitudinal consistency in a further sample comprising 377 healthy individuals (age range: 9–25 years; 49.87% female). This empirical examination yielded the following findings: (1) the accuracy of age prediction from morphometry data was higher when no site harmonization was applied; (2) dividing the discovery sample into two age‐bins (5–40 and 40–90 years) provided a better balance between model accuracy and explained age variance than other alternatives; (3) model accuracy for brain‐age prediction plateaued at a sample size exceeding 1600 participants. These findings have been incorporated into CentileBrain ( https://centilebrain.org/#/brainAGE2 ), an open‐science, web‐based platform for individualized neuroimaging metrics.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗