Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Dynamic feature selection”

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.

419 records · Page 24
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

TRACER-Coastal Urban Boundary-Layer Interactions with Convection (TRACER-CUBIC) Field Campaign Report

To better understand the complicated web of processes governing convective cloud life cycle and aerosol-convection interactions, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) user facility supported deployment of a variety of advanced atmospheric measurement systems to the greater Houston, Texas, area from 1 October 2021 to 30 September 2022 as part of the Tracking Aerosol Convection Interactions Experiment (TRACER). Houston was selected as a study area because isolated convection and a variety of aerosol conditions are common in this region. This one-year ARM Mobile Facility (AMF) deployment featured a four-month intensive operational period (IOP) during summer 2022 (1 June–30 September). The ARM instrumentation was deployed at three sites along an east-west transect from La Porte, Texas to an ancillary site in a less-polluted rural region southwest of downtown Houston (Figure 1). At the La Porte Site, which is located near the Houston ship channel in an area that experiences significant pollution, the first ARM Mobile Facility (AMF1) was deployed. During the IOP, the ARM tethered balloon system (TBS) operated at the ancillary site. The second-generation C-Band Scanning ARM Precipitation Radar (CSAPR) operated near Pearland, Texas, roughly halfway between the Laporte and ancillary sites. As part of the TRACER- Coastal Urban Boundary-Layer Interactions with Convection (CUBIC) project, three boundary-layer profiling systems) were deployed along a north-south transect spanning from the University of Houston Coastal Center to the Aldine site north of downtown Houston (also blue dot in Figure 1) during the TRACER IOP. These systems included the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) National Severe Storms Laboratory CLAMPS2 (C2), which was deployed at the UHCC, the University of Wisconsin SPARC, which was deployed at the ARM CSAPR site near Pearland (orange diamond in middle of map in Figure 1), and the University of Oklahoma CLAMPS1 (C1), which was deployed at Aldine. These three systems have been successfully operated in various field campaigns, providing data sets that collectively offer new insights into atmospheric-boundary-layer (ABL) processes, sea-breeze (SB) circulations, and convection initiation (CI). For the TRACER IOP window, these systems ran continuously between 1 June and 26 September, 2022. Due to commitments to NOAA projects, the Doppler lidar at the UHCC site was not available until 24 June 2022. The CLAMPS and SPARC profiling systems are self-contained platforms that have benefited from several years of development and deployment. Instruments and data processing were maintained remotely, which made the 4-month deployment for the TRACER-CUBIC IOP period possible. The same basic instrument configuration comprises each system: a scanning Doppler wind lidar for flow characterization and passive profiler(s) for characterizing planetary-boundary-layer (PBL) thermodynamic properties. Each platform includes a Halo Streamline Doppler wind lidar, an Atmospheric Emitted Radiance Interferometer (AERI), and a surface meteorology station. CLAMPS1 and CLAMPS2 each also include a microwave radiometer (MWR, Figure 1d). The TRACER-CUBIC hypotheses included (i) Interactions of SB and urban circulations and how they affect the PBL structure in the Houston environment, causing spatially (horizontally and vertically) and temporally highly variable flow patterns, (ii) heat, moisture, and aerosol transport and mixing depend on these flow dynamics, and (iii) an improved understanding of the flow patterns and PBL structure are critical for investigating the processes leading to CI. To test these hypotheses, the project aimed at (i) characterizing SB circulations and their impacts on the diurnal evolution of the structure of the ABL, (ii) studying the evolution of Houston’s complex urban boundary layer, and (iii) identifying effects of urban-induced circulations on pre-convective environments. TRACER-CUBIC observations generally provide good coverage during the summer IOP. Initial screening of the data indicates a good number of cases with bay-breeze (BB) and/or SB signatures, local CI, and interesting boundary-layer features such as strong nocturnal low-level jets (LLJs, Table 1). The numbers listed in rows 3-5 in this table will be further updated as part of ongoing in-depth analyses and systematic identification of local circulations and CI events. More detailed information about the data availability and quality for each instrument is provided in the “readme” files that were submitted to the ARM Data Center along with each archived data sets. These “readme” files also provide instrument descriptions, information about the data collection and processing procedures, data formats, and any additional information relevant for further data analysis.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra: Modeling Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper Permafrost Thaw, Uneven Subsidence and Projected Drying of Ice-wedge Polygon Tundra (in prep) to support a modeling study investigating how projected increases in Arctic temperature and precipitation will jointly influence hydrologic conditions in ice-rich tundra landscapes. With this dataset, this study is to address the research question: Will Arctic tundra landscapes become wetter or drier with increasing precipitation and temperature in the future when thaw-induced ground subsidence and associated microtopographic evolution are represented? The simulations focus on ice-wedge polygon tundra, a widespread form of ice-rich permafrost terrain that is highly sensitive to thaw-driven landscape change. This dataset contains model input and output data for four study watersheds in Alaska: Anaktuvuk, Utqiagvik (formerly Barrow), Brooks Foothills, and Prudhoe Bay. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.5), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model. For each watershed, ten modeling cases were performed representing two landscape evolution conditions (with subsidence and without subsidence) combined with five climate forcing scenarios derived from Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP5, SSP5 with precipitation trend, SSP2, SSP2 with precipitation trend, and SSP2 with double precipitation trend). Particularly, for each watershed under the forcing SSP2 with precipitation trend, there are two additional simulations considering spatially heterogeneous subsidence distributions: one assumes randomly distributed scaling and the other includes elevation dependent distribution scaling. These simulations span 1980–2099 and include spin-up runs (1980–2009) followed by transient projections (2010–2099). To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized by watershed. For each study watershed, the dataset contains: (1) Pre-partitioned mesh files for 32-core modeling (.par.32.XX), located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh/basin; and also a non-partitioned mesh file (.exo) located in EACH_WATERSHED/mesh; (2) Climate forcings corresponding to the five SSP scenarios (.h5), located in EACH_WATERSHED/data; (3) Final states (.h5) from column spin-up modeling used to initialize historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009, located in EACH_WATERSHED/PreSpinupHistorical; (4) Final states (.h5) of historical watershed-scale spin-up runs from 1980 to 2009 used to initialize projection runs, located in EACH_WATERSHED/Spinup_daymetERA5; (5) ATS modeling input files (.xml), located in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/inputfiles; (6) ATS modeling output files (.dat), located in in EACH_WATERSHED/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/combined_obs; (7) For the Brooks Foothills watershed, additional spatial model outputs are provided (.h5) for selected years (2033 and 2093) used to generate spatial figures in this study, located in Brooksfoothills/EACH_SIMULATION_SCENARIO/results-WITH/WITHOUT_SUBSIDENCE-year2033/2093. All data files with suffix .h5 can be accessible through Python h5py, and all data files with suffix of .dat can be imported by Python pandas. Mesh file with .exo can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python netCDF. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments in the Arctic (NGEE Arctic) project is a research effort to reduce uncertainty in the Department of Energy’s Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) by developing a predictive understanding of Arctic tundra ecosystems underlain by permafrost and to quantify feedbacks from the Arctic tundra to the Earth system. NGEE Arctic is supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. Over Phases 1–3, observations made by the NGEE Arctic team across a gradient of permafrost landscapes in Arctic Alaska improved the representation of tundra processes in the land surface component of E3SM (the E3SM Land Model, ELM). Model improvements emphasized unique aspects of permafrost environments and explored reductions in model complexity while retaining predictive power. The Arctic-informed ELM developed by NGEE Arctic has been used to make novel predictions on processes ranging from permafrost thaw to soil biogeochemical cycling to Earth system feedbacks associated with the unique characteristics of tundra plants. In Phase 4, the NGEE Arctic team is evaluating our new predictive understanding under novel conditions across the Arctic domain. In collaboration with partners at long-term pan-Arctic research sites we are examining whether an Arctic-informed ELM can faithfully simulate interactions among surface and subsurface processes at site, regional, and pan-Arctic scales. In turn, we are using variety of tools to dynamically extend and evaluate ELM inference, with an emphasis on data synthesis and pan-Arctic model evaluation, reintegration of code with an evolving E3SM, scaling across heterogeneous Arctic landscapes, and the appropriate representation of the impacts of increasingly frequent Arctic disturbances.

EARTH SCIENCE > ATMOSPHERE > PRECIPITATION↗
NASA NTRS2011

Methodology and Results of the Near-Earth Object (NEO) Human Space Flight (HSF) Accessible Targets Study (NHATS)

Near-Earth Asteroids (NEAs) have been identified by the current administration as potential destinations for human explorers during the mid-2020s. While the close proximity of these objects' orbits to Earth's orbit creates a risk of highly damaging or catastrophic impacts, it also makes some of these objects particularly accessible to spacecraft departing Earth, and this presents unique opportunities for solar system science and humanity's first ventures beyond cislunar space. Planning such ambitious missions first requires the selection of potentially accessible targets from the growing population of nearly 7,800 NEAs. To accomplish this, NASA is conducting the Near-Earth Object (NEO) Human Space Flight (HSF) Accessible Targets Study (NHATS). Phase I of the NHATS was executed during September of 2010, and Phase II was completed by early March of 2011. The study is ongoing because previously undetected NEAs are being discovered constantly, which has motivated an effort to automate the analysis algorithms in order to provide continuous monitoring of NEA accessibility. The NHATS analysis process consists of a trajectory filter and a minimum maximum estimated size criterion. The trajectory filter employs the method of embedded trajectory grids to compute all possible ballistic round-trip mission trajectories to every NEA in the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) Small-Body Database (SBDB) and stores all solutions that satisfy the trajectory filter criteria. An NEA must offer at least one qualifying trajectory solution to pass the trajectory filter. The Phase II NHATS filter criteria were purposely chosen to be highly inclusive, requiring Earth departure date between January 1st, 2015 and December 31st, 2040, total round-trip flight time <= 450 days, stay time at the NEA >= 8 days, Earth departure C(sub 3) energy <= 60 km(exp 2)/s(exp 2), total mission delta-v <= 12 km/s (including an Earth departure maneuver from a 400 km altitude circular parking orbit), and a maximum atmospheric re-entry speed of 12 km/s. After determining which NEAs offer at least one trajectory solution meeting the criteria, the estimated size constraint is then imposed whereby those NEAs may only be considered NHATS- qualifying NEAs if their maximum estimated size is >= 30 m. This corresponds to an absolute magnitude H <= 26.5 with an assumed albedo p = 0:05. The following is a brief high-level summary of the Phase II study results. Of the 7,665 NEAs in the SBDB as of February 3rd, 2011, 765 NEAs passed the trajectory filter and yielded a total of 79,157,604 trajectory solutions. The trajectory solutions for each NEA are post-processed into Pork Chop Contour (PCC) plots which show total mission delta-v as a function of Earth departure date and total mission duration. Although the PCC plots necessarily compress a very multi-dimensional design space into a two-dimensional plot, they permit rapid assessment of the breadth and quality of an NEA's available Earth departure season and clearly indicate the regions of the trajectory design space which warrant further analysis and optimization. The PCC plot for the NEA with the greatest number of NHATS-qualifying trajectory solutions, 2000 SG-344, is shown. Of the 765 NEAs which passed the Phase II trajectory filter, a total of 590 NEAs also satisfied the further constraint of maximum estimated size >= 30 m. The distributions of osculating heliocentric orbital semi-major axis (a), eccentricity (e), and inclination (i), for those 590 NEAs are shown. Note that the semi-latus rectum used is equal to alpha (1-e(exp 2)). To further our understanding of round-trip trajectory accessibility dynamics, it is instructive to examine the distribution of the NHATS-Qualifying NEAs according to orbit classification. NEAs are grouped into four orbit families: Atiras (aphelion < 0.983 AU), Atens (aphelion > 0.983 AU, alpha < 1.0 AU), Apollos (perihelion < 1.017 AU, alpha > 1.0 AU), and Amors (1.017 < perihelion < 1.3 AU). Of the 765 NEAhich satisfied the NHATS trajectory criteria, none are Atiras, 193 are Atens (31% of known Atens), 456 are Apollos (11% of known Apollos), and 116 are Amors (4% of known Amors). While Apollos comprise 60% of the NEAs which pass the NHATS trajectory filter and Atens comprise only 25%, the percentages according to orbit family are perhaps more relevant. Note that only 11% of known Apollos passed the trajectory filter while 31% of known Atens passed. These simple statistics alone strongly suggest that Aten orbits possess features which tend to enhance their round-trip trajectory accessibility as compared to Apollos or Amors. This is significant because Atens' orbits cause them to spend considerable time in Earth's daytime sky, making them difficult to discover and track using ground-based observing assets. In this paper we will detail the NHATS analysis algorithms, present and analyze all NHATS results to date, and discuss aspects of HSF mission architecture design for future NEA missions.

Barbee, Brent↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mineralogical Analysis of Calcium-Aluminum-Rich Inclusions Provides Insight Into Post-Formation Processes

Introduction: Calcium-aluminum inclusions (CAIs) are cm- to mm-sized intergrowths of refractory phases found in chondritic meteorites [1]. Their mineral compositions closely match the compositions of the solids thought to condense from an extremely hot (>1500K) gas with a bulk solar composition [2-4], suggesting that CAIs were the earliest solids within the Solar System [2-4]. These inclusions provide invaluable insights into the conditions and dynamics of the early Solar System. CAIs must be transported from their formation region near the protosun to the chondrite parent-body accretion region. The nature of their journey could affect how, when, and where the secondary processes recorded in these CAIs occurred [4]. Did these secondary processes occur in the solar nebula or during accretion with the parent body, or both? How were the CAIs affected by varying thermochemical processes? To better answer these questions, we have undertaken an in-depth, textural study of the secondary alteration of select CAI samples. Methods: We chose three CAIs that experienced a range of post-formation processing to gain better understanding of secondary alteration based on previous preliminary examination [5]. Representative CAIs were chosen from NWA 5508 (CV3), NWA 12772 (CV3), and Coolidge (CL4) carbonaceous chondrites. We used scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and electron backscatter diffraction (EBSD) techniques for detailed chemical, mineralogical, and textural analysis of the CAIs. Backscattered electron (BSE) images and X-ray elemental maps were taken of Coolidge and NWA 5508 using the Lunar and Planetary Institute (LPI) Phenom SEM. The JEOL 7900F SEM at NASA Johnson Space Center (JSC) was used to obtain energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDS) chemical maps of all samples. High resolution EBSD analysis identified the mineral phases and textures, providing key information on their nature. Based on the SEM and EBSD data, minerals of interest were selected for quantitative chemical electron probe micro-analysis (EPMA) using the JEOL JXA-8530F at NASA JSC. Results and Discussion: The EDS maps show that the NWA 5508 and NWA 12772 CAIs designated “Saguaro” and “Hoopoe” respectively [5] are enriched in calcium while the Coolidge CAI designated “Cottonwood” is aluminum and magnesium rich. Saguaro. A ~1.5cm diameter igneous Type B CAI with a rounded shape. The dominant phases are melilite, spinel, and Al-Ti pyroxene with minor anorthite. Spinel is subhedral and occurs in clusters. Some of these clusters have a circular geometry which encloses other minerals, known as a palisade structure [6] (Fig. 1). Some palisades form near perfect circles while others are more irregular in shape. Melilite in Saguaro ranges in size from coarse (>250m) to fine-grained (5-7m) and forms intergrown laths. A third of the melilite grains exhibit simple twinning about their <001> axis. The spinel palisades and twinned melilite in Saguaro suggest an igneous history, and the lack of secondary minerals suggests minimal aqueous alteration. At some point in time after the initial condensation of the minerals and formation of the inclusion, the sample was remelted and quickly solidified. The formation of the palisades is still heavily debated. One hypothesis is that the palisades are the rims of smaller CAIs that accreted early on, essentially acting as xenoliths within the larger CAIs [7]. Another hypothesis suggests an igneous origin for palisade structures [6-8] wherein the melt traps gas bubbles, and the spinel nucleates on the surface of this bubble. Based on the WDS spot analyses of 41 melilite grains using EPMA, the data suggest that the composition inside and outside the palisades is nearly identical. This finding indicates that these palisades are likely not exogenous but rather formed from melt-vapor reactions. Our results are consistent with studies by Simon and Grossman,1997 [6] and Zhang et al. (2019) [8]. Hoopoe. A ~0.5cm compact Type A CAI with an irregular shape. The dominant mineral phases are melilite, spinel, and hibonite with minor amounts of anorthite, augite, and perovskite. The melilite ranges in size from ~500 to 50µm. The larger melilite grains have simple twinning along the <001> axis like melilite in Saguaro. Melilite in Hoopoe exhibits crystal-plastic strain with misorientation dominantly about the <010> and <110> axes. Spinel shows subhedral to euhedral morphology and appears in clusters. Hibonite grains are similar to spinel in habit and size but show more plastic strain. The two minerals are often found together with one appearing to replace the other. Perovskite appears in fine grained recrystallized regions alongside fine augite and spinel. The abundant strain and deformation features in the melilite and hibonite suggest that Hoopoe experienced shock. This shock could have occurred in the nebula [9] or from an impact of another body on the parent body asteroid. The appearance of fine-grained (<10m) areas of augite, perovskite, and spinel in the dominantly coarse-grained inclusion suggest recrystallization, possibly due to the sudden increase in pressure and temperature. Cottonwood. This ~0.5cm CAI exhibits distinct mineralogy and textures suggesting a high degree of alteration. It is irregular in shape. The dominant mineral phases are spinel and anorthite with minor amounts of augite and rutile. The two main texture types can be seen in Fig. 2. The first type consists of coarse euhedral to subhedral spinel and anorthite. The second includes fine grained spinel, anorthite, rutile, and iron sulfides. Within these fine-grained regions, the anorthite grains are clustered into domains exhibiting the same crystallographic orientation. Rutile exclusively occurs with fine anorthite indicating a potential relationship between the two. Cottonwood has a clear and unbroken Wark-Lovering [10] rim (Fig. 2) on one side that consists of a sequence of spinel followed by anorthite and an outer layer of augite. The abundance of the fine-grained regions containing iron oxides and iron sulfides, secondary phases such as rutile, and oriented anorthite grains is evidence for recrystallization associated with a high degree of thermal metamorphism. The EPMA analyses on both coarse- and fine-grained spinel show that the fine spinel grains are more enriched in Cr (1-2 wt. %) than their coarse counterparts (0.1-0.5 wt. %). The data suggest thermal metamorphism drove chemical exchange of the previously refractory inclusion, introducing chromium and iron as well as sulfur, which is moderately volatile. Conclusions: The three CAIs analyzed record distinct secondary nebular and parent body processes. Saguaro melted in the nebula as seen by the twinned melilite and spinel palisades. Hoopoe experienced intense shock which deformed its melilite and recrystallized perovskite, augite, and spinel in fine-grained regions. Cottonwood shows evidence of recrystallization and chemical changes consistent with thermal metamorphism occurring after accretion into the parent-body.

V E Burnette↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗