Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Contingency planning”

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.

465 records · Page 26
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2006

Jet Propulsion Laboratory: Annual Report 2005

What an amazing host of new sights 2005 brought us. With impeccable choreography, one spacecraft sent an impactor slamming into a comet, reversing the traditional view of these space wayfarers by revealing it to be buried in deep drifts of a fine talcum-like powder. Another spacecraft delivered a probe from our European partners to the surface of Saturn's haze-shrouded moon Titan, disclosing a landscape eerily like Earth's, if we had methane rivers cascading down hillsides of ice. An orbiting observatory for the first time showed us the light from planets circling other stars, which astronomers previously knew to exist only from indirect clues. Throughout the year we also amassed continually expanding views of Earth as well as Mars, by far the most-explored planet after our own. In all, 18 spacecraft and five instruments were stationed across the solar system, studying our own world, other planets, comets and the deeper universe. These missions were enabled by the efforts of everyone at JPL. The Deep Space Network of communications complexes across three continents continued to experience a period of remarkable activity. Others were at work creating technologies both for NASA missions and other uses. JPL's contingent of scientific researchers was equally busy coordinating the science activities of our missions or pursuing independent investigations. None of this would be possible without the support of world-class business and administrative teams. All of our missions in one way or another support our nations Vision for Space Exploration, which envisages a gradually widening robotic and human presence across the solar system in the years ahead. The year was not without its challenges. NASA set forth to implement the Vision for Space Exploration, which resulted in some flight projects and technology efforts being terminated. To adjust to this new direction, it was necessary for us to reduce the JPL workforce by about five percent. Taking steps like this is painful, but we tried to make the process as orderly as possible. In the end, the adjustments made have left JPL on a healthy footing for the years ahead.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Adaptive Optimization for System Performance and Combined Bernstein Polynomial, Optimal Reciprocal Collision Avoidance, Differential Dynamic Programming for Trajectory Replanning and Collision Avoidance for UAM Vehicles

The emerging urban air mobility (UAM) sector in aerospace is driving development of unconventional multi-modal vehicle configurations and autonomous flight. The combination of multi-modal vehicle dynamics, complex environment, requirements to deal with flight contingencies in an efficient and safe manner, as well as necessity for precise trajectory following and performance, are the driving influence behind adaptive optimization for system performance. We are interested in trajectory optimization algorithm that would system parameter estimation and identifying the optimal switching time between modes of hybrid dynamical systems. This presentation discusses a parameterized optimal control trajectory optimization algorithm that is an extended and generalized version of Differential Dynamic Programming (DDP), titled Parameterized Differential Dynamic Programming (PDDP). DDP is an efficient trajectory optimization algorithm relying on second order approximations of a system’s dynamics and cost function and has recently been applied to optimize systems with time invariant parameters. Experiments are presented applying PDDP to solve model predictive control (MPC) and moving horizon estimation (MHE) tasks simultaneously. In particular, PDDP is used to determine the optimal transition point between flight regimes of a complex urban air mobility (UAM) class vehicle exhibiting multiple phases of flight and to identify and compensate for actuation faults.

optimization↗
DOE OSTI2026

PowerModelsGAT-AI: Physics-Informed Graph Attention for Multi-System Power Flow With Continual Learning

Solving the alternating current power flow equations in real time is essential for secure grid operation, yet classical Newton–Raphson solvers can be slow under stressed conditions. Existing graph neural networks for power flow are typically trained on a single system and often degrade on different systems. We present PowerModelsGAT-AI, a physics-informed graph attention network that predicts bus voltages and generator injections. The model uses bus-type-aware masking to handle different bus types and balances multiple loss terms, including a power-mismatch penalty, using learned weights. We evaluate the model on 14 benchmark systems (4 to 6,470 buses) and train a unified model on 13 of these under contingency conditions with up to two branch outages, achieving an average normalized mean absolute error of 0.89% for voltage magnitudes and R 2 >0.99 for voltage angles. We also show continual learning: when adapting a base model to a new 1,354-bus system, standard fine-tuning causes severe forgetting with error increases exceeding 1000% on base systems, while our experience replay and elastic weight consolidation strategy keeps error increases below 2% and in some cases improves base-system performance. Interpretability analysis shows that learned attention weights correlate with physical branch parameters (susceptance: r=0.38 ; thermal limits: r=0.22 ), and feature importance analysis supports that the model captures established power flow relationships.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Connecting Community Scientific Hypotheses to Mars Sample Science

The proposed Mars Sample Return (MSR) program seeks to bring back to Earth a set of specially curated samples from the surface of Mars. The first segment of the MSR program is presently under-way; the Mars 2020 rover Perseverance has, to date, collected 24 samples of martian rock, regolith, and at-mosphere within Jezero crater. Its geologically diverse rock sample set can provide insight into the time evolu-tion of the Jezero environment, including the possible preservation of ancient biosignatures. Presently, a cache of 10 samples has been deposited in the Three Forks region on the floor of Jezero crater. These sam-ples, deemed scientifically return worthy by the Mars science community [1], are intended as a contingency sample set, as Perseverance has subsequently obtained more samples, and is therefore storing a more compre-hensive and scientifically valuable set of samples that will grow as the rover ascends to the rim of Jezero crater. The return of samples from Mars has been identi-fied as the highest priority planetary mission in the past three National Academies Decadal Surveys [2-4]. Sub-stantial work has gone into establishing science objec-tives for an MSR program, an overall framework for sample retrieval and analysis, and the expected impact on future Mars science and exploration (e.g., [5]). These objectives have been established at a relatively high level, e.g., “Interpret the primary geologic pro-cesses and history that formed the martian geologic rec-ord, with an emphasis on the role of water.” (Objective 1 in [5]) and are designed to encapsulate the broad sci-entific priorities of, and lay the groundwork for, inves-tigation strategies and measurements to be conducted by a future MSR program. It is from this overarching framework that the Connecting Community Scientific Hypotheses to Mars Sample Science workshop (‘The Workshop’) was conceived, with the purpose of distil-ling these high-level scientific objectives into discrete, testable hypotheses across a range of scientific disci-plines. The output of the workshop is meant to be a ‘hy-pothesis document’ serving as a starting point for cata-loging and condensing specific hypotheses for consid-eration by the scientific community. The template for this approach is based on the “driving hypotheses” de-veloped by the OSIRIS-REx team as part of their Sam-ple Analysis Plan [6].

Michael A Mischna↗
NASA NTRS2002

INTEX-NA: Intercontinental Chemical Transport Experiment - North America

INTEX-NA is an integrated atmospheric chemistry field experiment to be performed over North America using the NASA DC-8 and P-3B aircraft as its primary platforms. It seeks to understand the exchange of chemicals and aerosols between continents and the global troposphere. The constituents of interest are ozone and its precursors (hydrocarbons, NOX and HOX), aerosols, and the major greenhouse gases (CO2, CH4, N2O). INTEX-NA will provide the observational database needed to quantify inflow, outflow, and transformations of chemicals over North America. INTEX-NA is to be performed in two phases. Phase A will take place during the period of May-August 2004 and Phase B during March-June 2006. Phase A is in summer when photochemistry is most intense and climatic issues involving aerosols and carbon cycle are most pressing, and Phase B is in spring when Asian transport to North America is at its peak. INTEX-NA will coordinate its activities with concurrent measurement programs including satellites (e. g. Terra, Aura, Envisat), field activities undertaken by the North American Carbon Program (NACP), and other U.S. and international partners. However, it is being designed as a 'stand alone' mission such that its successful execution is not contingent on other programs. Synthesis of the ensemble of observation from surface, airborne, and space platforms, with the help of global/regional models is an important It is anticipated that approximately 175 flight hours for each of the aircraft (DC-8 and P-3B) will be required for each Phase. Principal operational sites are tentatively selected to be Bangor, ME; Wallops Island, VA; Seattle, WA; Rhinelander, WI; Lancaster, CA; and New Orleans, LA. These coastal and continental sites can support large missions and are suitable for INTEX-NA objectives. The experiment will be supported by forecasts from meteorological and chemical models, satellite observations, surface networks, and enhanced O3,-sonde releases. In addition to characterizing Atlantic-outflow and Pacific-inflow, INTEX-NA will characterize air masses transported between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. INTEX-NA will be the first continental scale inflow, outflow, and transformation experiment to be performed over North America. It will provide the most comprehensive observational data set to date to understand the O3/NOX/HOX/aerosol photochemical system and the carbon cycle. One of the critical needs of the carbon cycle research is to obtain large-scale vertical and horizontal concentration gradients of CO2, throughout the troposphere over continental source/sink regions. INTEX-NA is ideally suited to perform this role. Coastal and continental operational sites will allow us to develop a curtain profile of greenhouse gases (e. g. CO2,) and other key pollutants across North America. Such information is central to our quantitative understanding of chemical budgets on the continental scale. We expect to provide a number of satellite under-flights over land and water to test and validate observations from the appropriate satellite platform (e. g. Aura). We plan to develop strong collaborations with other national and international observational programs. Results from INTEX-NA should directly benefit the development of environmental policy for air quality and climate change.

Singh, Hanwant B.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

A Crew and Logistics Lander for the Common Habitat Architecture

The Common Habitat Architecture is a conceptual study that explores the use of a large habitat derived from the Space Launch System (SLS) liquid oxygen tank as a core habitation element that can be used for crew missions or training in 0g, 1/6g, 3/8g, and 1g. This is not part of current NASA Artemis mission planning, but instead represents an architecture that could potentially follow after the Artemis missions and initial human Mars landings. This architecture leverages Starship-derived vehicles for crew landing on and ascent from the Moon and Mars in support of long-duration surface missions with pressurized crew transfer baselined as a nominal capability. This is not the Human Landing System variant of Starship but represents a number of modifications to enable long-duration surface missions with an eight-person crew size. A rapid brainstorming study was conducted in February of 2021, using only public data, to identify options to deliver the 90-ton Common Habitat to the surface and emplace it at the intended habitation site. This study compared three lunar lander concepts and three Mars lander concepts before ultimately selecting the SpaceX Starship as the most viable lander. The Common Habitat Architecture assumes that this Starship variant can further be modified for crew and cargo delivery, assuming that the use of a common system will lead to cost benefits. It is assumed that the Starship will expend too much propellant in landing crew and logistics to be able to launch, given the assumed absence of surface propellant production. Consequently, a separable ascent stage is used for crew ascent. The pressurized elements of this modified Starship are discussed: Starship Ascent Module, Airlock, Transfer Tunnel, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module, and Logistics Modules. For each element, a description, dimensions, rough mass estimates, core capabilities, and design features are presented. Key mechanisms and internal structures of the starship are also discussed. This will include flame diverters for the ascend module, the orbital docking hatch, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module Garage door, Starship Ascent Module fairing, flame diverter blow-out panels, Pressurized Crew Transfer Module lift system, logistics module lift system, contingency crew ascent via the logistics module lift system, internal catwalks, and structural interfaces. Concept of Operations will be discussed for both Moon and Mars. This will include in-space crew rendezvous and transfer, crewed landing, shirtsleeve crew transfer, crew departure, contingency surface operations, and final element disposition. Key differences for Mars will be discussed, such as the Martian atmosphere, dust storms, the absence of crew handover, and Deep Space Exploration Vehicle rendezvous. Contingency microgravity maintenance access will also be discussed. This work will demonstrate viable pressurized crew transfer with a Starship-based lander architecture. Forward work includes Garage lighting and camera systems, Starship Ascent Module propulsion system and docking port trades, contingency habitation trades, and mass/power equipment estimation. Finally, forward work includes developing a heavy cargo return system derived from the Crew and Logistics Starship. The goal of this system is the return of at least 10,000 kg payloads from the surfaces of the Moon and Mars.

Lunar Lander↗
NASA NTRS2008

Jet Propulsion Laboratory: Annual Report 2007

Many milestones are celebrated in the business of space exploration, but one of them that arrived this year has particular meaning for us. Half a century ago, on January 31, 1958, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory was responsible for creating America's first satellite, Explorer 1, and joined with the Army to launch it into orbit. That makes 2007 the 50th year we have been sending robotic craft from Earth to explore space. No other event before or since has had such a profound effect on JPL's basic identity, setting it on the path to become the world's leader in robotic solar system exploration. It is not lost on historians that Explorer 1, besides being America's first satellite, was also the first spacecraft from any country to deliver scientific results in its case, the discovery of the Van Allen Radiation Belts that surround Earth. Science, of course, has been the prime motivator for all the dozens of missions that we have lofted into space in the half-century since then. JPL has sent spacecraft to every planet in the solar system from Mercury to Neptune, some of them very sophisticated machines. But in one way or another, they all owe their heritage to the 31-pound bullet-shaped probe JPL shot into space in 1958. Although we have ranged far and wide across the solar system, we have a very strong contingent of satellites and instruments dedicated, like Explorer, to the environment of our home planet. JPL missions have been providing much of the data to establish the facts of global warming - most especially, the melting of ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica. During the past year, JPL and our parent organization, the California Institute of Technology, have created a task force to focus the special capabilities of the Laboratory and campus on ways to better understand the physics of global change. While Earth is a chaotic and dynamic system capable of large natural variations, evidence is mounting that human activities are playing an increasingly important role. A central piece of this effort is a search for novel energy sources to replace fossil fuels, the combustion of which adds carbon dioxide to our atmosphere. All of this is supported by our worldwide Deep Space Network, which provides the communication link between spacecraft and the ground. In addition, missions are infused with technologies developed by researchers working on projects for non-NASA sponsors as well as on pure research.

Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)↗
DOE OSTI2023

Frequency Recovery in Power Grids Using High-Performance Computing

Maintaining electric power system stability is paramount, especially in extreme contingencies involving unexpected outages of multiple generators or transmission lines that are typical during severe weather events. Such outages often lead to large supply-demand mismatches followed by subsequent system frequency deviations from their nominal value. The extent of frequency deviations is an important metric of system resilience, and its timely mitigation is a central goal of power system operation and control. This paper develops a novel nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) method to minimize frequency deviations when the grid is affected by an unforeseen loss of multiple components. Our method is based on a novel multi-period alternating current optimal power flow (ACOPF) formulation that accurately models both nonlinear electric power flow physics and the primary and secondary frequency response of generator control mechanisms. We develop a distributed parallel Julia package for solving the large-scale nonlinear optimization problems that result from our NMPC method and thereby address realistic test instances on existing high-performance computing architectures. Our method demonstrates superior performance in terms of frequency recovery over existing industry practices, where generator levels are set based on the solution of single-period classical ACOPF models.

nonlinear model predictive control↗
DOE OSTI2025

Toward Drilling the Perfect Geothermal Well: An International Research Coordination Network for Geothermal Drilling Optimization Supported by Deep Machine Learning and Cloud Based Data Aggregation

The EDGE project, supported by the U.S. Department of Energy Geothermal Technologies Office under award DE-EE0008793, established a data-driven framework for improving the efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and reliability of geothermal well drilling. The project focused on developing scalable data infrastructure, advanced machine learning and probabilistic models, and integrated analytics tools to support continuous drilling optimization. A central objective was to reduce geothermal drilling costs by up to seventy percent while minimizing the risk of well failure through predictive diagnostics and adaptive planning. Over the project period, a comprehensive data repository was designed and deployed, incorporating records from over one hundred geothermal wells across varied geological settings. This repository supported both structured and unstructured data and adhered to FAIR data principles, enabling provenance tracking, quality control, and standardized metadata. The project introduced automated ingestion pipelines and a cloud-hosted platform that facilitated access to raw, processed, and derived datasets. This infrastructure served as the foundation for model development and analysis. Machine learning workflows were developed to predict key drilling metrics including rate of penetration, non-productive time, and total drilling costs. Self-organizing maps and dimensionality reduction methods were used to uncover operational patterns and outliers, while supervised learning algorithms such as random forests and deep neural networks were applied to forecast performance outcomes. The models were validated on heterogeneous datasets from both U.S. and Icelandic fields, demonstrating variable but significant predictive accuracy. The results indicated that finer temporal resolution, inclusion of lithological data, and consistency in operational annotations could substantially improve model performance. The project also implemented process mining techniques to reconstruct state-transition models from drilling event logs. These models enabled the identification of deviations from optimal workflows and provided insights into recurring failure modes. Analysis of non-productive time highlighted the impact of equipment failures, geological challenges, and human factors, offering opportunities for targeted mitigation strategies. The EDGE Dashboard was developed as a web-based expert system integrating data visualization, model outputs, and user-driven queries. It provided an accessible interface for operators to explore historical data, evaluate predicted outcomes, and compare drilling scenarios. Initial feedback from project partners suggested that the dashboard could serve as a foundation for more advanced advisory and optimization tools. Overall, the EDGE project demonstrated the feasibility and value of applying modern data science techniques to geothermal drilling. It delivered a set of interoperable tools and models that can support more efficient, lower-risk well development. The findings point toward a viable path for transitioning from advisory analytics to semi-autonomous drilling systems, contingent on continued collaboration, expanded datasets, and field validation. The project results have immediate relevance for drilling operations, data management practices, and future geothermal R&D efforts aimed at achieving reliable, cost-competitive geothermal energy at scale.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Using Open Standards and NASA Open Source Simulation Tools to Model Artemis Base Camp Mission Timelines

The United States’ National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has announced that the Artemis Program will return humans to the Moon, establishing a persistent presence with the Artemis Base Camp (ABC), and extend human exploration to Mars. The NASA Exploration Systems Simulations (NExSyS) team at NASA’s Johnson Space Center is using internationally developed simulation interoperability standards and NASA open source simulation tools to support Artemis concept, analysis, designs, development, training, and ultimately operations. The NExSyS team has been tasked to support early ABC architecture and mission analysis using mission time lines developed by the crew operations mission planning team. The NExSyS team is developing a distributed simulation framework with initial Artemis element implementations to model the ABC mission timelines using the international simulation interoperability standard High Level Architecture (HLA), the Simulation Interoperability Standards Organization’s Space Reference Federation Object Model (SpaceFOM), the NASA open source Trick Simulation Environment, and another NASA open source interface package called TrickHLA. The ABC architecture is composed of a number of key surface elements and resources. Some examples of modeled elements (also known as entities) are landers, habitats, rovers, logistics carriers, and astronauts. Some examples of modeled transferable and consumable resources are power, water, oxygen, nitrogen, scientific samples, and food. These entities and resources are modeled in a collection of individual simulations called Federates. A coordinated collection of interoperable federates is called a Federation and when these federates are tied together in a coordinated simulation run, it is referred to as a Federation Execution. The federates communicate through HLA using data exchange formats defined by a collection of machine readable files called Federation Object Models (FOMs). These FOM files are based on extensions to the SpaceFOM. This enables the instantiation and sharing of objects and interactions between federates in the federation. These provide for entity and resource tracking, object transfer, and data collection. Federate interactions are used to trigger events and notify federates of entity or resource transfers. For the initial implementation, the constituent federates are Trick-based simulations that use TrickHLA to provide the required HLA-base interoperability. These Trick-based simulations provide the required modeling for the individual Artemis elements along with the associated element resources. These federates provide a means to explore traverses between surface elements and exploration sites as scheduled in a mission timeline and explore the affects traverse times have on the overall mission timeline. The mission time lines are modeled using a Trick input file event handling capabilities. Each timeline operation is handled as individual simulation events, and triggered based on previous event status, time of operation, and simulated task completions. In addition, the ABC Federation can be used to perform Monte Carlo analysis. The Monte Carlo tool can vary the inputs, timings, and malfunctions to show how various contingencies in the mission can affect the mission timeline.

Keaton Craig Dodd↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Replication of Segments of STS-94 as a Lunar Surface Mission

The Artemis program established the goal to land the first woman and first person of color on the Moon, but that is only the beginning of the program. Artemis plans to move towards a sustainable phase, with four crew living on the lunar surface for roughly 30-day annual missions, operating from a Pressurized Rover (PR) and a Surface Habitat (SH). The crew will split up – two living and operating from the PR and the others in the SH, perhaps swapping places halfway through the surface mission. There is a significant degree of maturity surrounding PR operations due to the NASA Desert Research and Technology Studies field tests from 2007-2011. However, there is a degree of uncertainty surrounding activity in the SH, with anecdotal speculation among some Artemis lunar surface engineers that the SH crew might not be fully utilized. Contrary to this belief, there is evidence in US human spaceflight history that the SH crew may instead be extremely busy. In particular, portions of the STS-94 Microgravity Science Lab mission demonstrate a science-based use case for crew activity in the SH. Fifteen Spacelab missions (not including STS-83, which was terminated early due to a fuel cell problem and reflown as STS-94) and eight Spacehab missions used the previously mentioned modules as science labs to expand the science capability of shuttle orbital missions, most flown prior to the assembly of the International Space Station. STS-94 is selected as an example of these flights. STS-94 was a 15.7-day mission with a 7-person crew. The crew operated in split 12-hour shifts, enabling 24-hour science operations. STS-94 used the space shuttle Columbia with the Spacelab module and Extended Duration Orbiter pallet in the cargo bay. The STS-94 physical science investigations were intended to explore various physical aspects of microgravity. These same investigations can be conducted on the Moon to explore 1/6 gravity. The Spacelab module was outfitted with several key facilities to enable this research: Large Isothermal Furnace, Combustion Module-1, Droplet Combustion Experiment, EXPRESS Rack, TEMPUS, Gravity Measurement Devices, and Middeck Glovebox. The current reference concept for the SH is a hybrid inflatable in a vertical orientation. Fairly typical of hybrid inflatables, the SH has an aluminum core pressurized section and a larger inflatable volume, in this case attaching to the top of the core. Two crew will live in the SH at a time, though four can briefly occupy the habitat, such as for contingency or handover activities. This paper will discuss use of the STS-94 physical science equipment in the SH and options for the architectural layout of a resulting physics laboratory. It will also discuss how this laboratory may accompany other science facilities such as biology, human research, and geology. The person hours used by the STS-94 crew to conduct physical science research will be estimated and then mapped to a two-person SH crew, making it possible to determine how many days are required in the SH to complete the lunar gravity physical science investigations at varying levels of crew availability.

STS-94↗
DOE OSTI2020

GIS-Based Modeling of Contaminated Soil Volumes at Multiple Sites in the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program - 20149

The remediation of hazardous, toxic, and radioactive waste (HTRW) sites produces cost-related risks associated with the estimation of contaminated soil or debris volumes. Historical risk-management techniques include cost contingencies to cover volume uncertainties that affect project budgeting and decision-making. The Buffalo District teamed with project partners to lessen volume uncertainty and reduce project risks at multiple HTRW sites managed under the Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP). Historical remedial investigations under FUSRAP commonly identified the presence of radiological material in site media, the associated human health risk, and then areas of remediation. To manage remedial execution and reduce risk, pre-design or remediation-phase sampling essentially 'chased' contamination, which was not conducive to efficient predictive budgeting derived from Feasibility Study (FS) cost analyses. The Buffalo District first optimized their approach to better understand volume uncertainty by utilizing the Argonne National Laboratory's Bayesian Approaches for Adaptive Spatial Sampling (BAASS) software [1]. BAASS processed soft data (e.g., gamma walk-over data) and spatial sampling data to estimate the lateral extent of contaminated soil irrespective of depth (i.e., gross contamination extent) and define areas of contaminant uncertainty. The software performed a binary transformation of contaminant concentrations at all sampling points based upon remedial action goals or a sum of ratios approach (i.e., clean, impacted, or range of impacts in soil). The model produced two-dimensional (horizontal) contaminant probability contours and statistical uncertainty in the sampling coverage and resulting contaminant extents. This method was translated vertically by partitioning the sampling data into depth brackets that produced a stacked representation of contaminant extents and uncertainty in the subsurface (i.e., similar to construction lifts). The results commonly led to a better understanding of project uncertainty and the need for sampling strategies that produce high-confidence soil volumes, which control costs. The BAASS-based delineations were eventually replaced by Empirical Bayesian Kriging (EBK) methods available in ArcGIS Spatial or 3D Analysts [2]. The EBK method calculates contaminant probability zones derived from user-controlled semivariograms of the spatial datasets. The resulting probability zones (e.g., 50% or 80% of contaminant probability) represent the two-dimensional surface delineation of the overall horizontal remedial area, similarly to BAASS. However, unlike BAASS, the vertical sampling data within these probability zones became vertical control points to contour a subterranean surface that connects subsurface points to the land-surface delineations of contamination. The resulting representation of horizontal and vertical impacts within an enclosed envelop (volume) of soil included uncertainty distributions that are used to plan uncertainty-reduction sampling. These data-driven and math-based models of three-dimensional sampling results produced well-bounded remedial volumes for project planning and better uncertainty predictions during project budgeting. The EBK method was applied to several FUSRAP sites managed by the Buffalo District and compared to less rigorously modeled sites previously remediated by the District. The comparison of modeled to actual remediated volumes provide a basis for validating the volume-estimation method. This comparison is important to ensure modeled volumes match physical boundaries of site remediation. FUSRAP sites with denser investigative sampling and lesser volume uncertainty proved useful in remedial planning and contracting. The Buffalo District noted that historical sites with sparser sampling arrays had greater disparity between estimated volumes and final remedial volumes. The benefit achieved over the cost of detailed soil sampling appears positive for FUSRAP projects, especially where impacts vary widely and appear unbounded by investigation-phase sampling. The subsequent Empirical Bayesian Kriging of contamination coupled with vertical contouring for soil estimations reduces uncertainty in soil volumes or indicates where sampling is required to reduce uncertainty, which together optimize remedial planning and budgeting. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS2010

Design and Implementation of the Automated Rendezvous Targeting Algorithms for Orion

The Orion vehicle will be designed to perform several rendezvous missions: rendezvous with the ISS in Low Earth Orbit (LEO), rendezvous with the EDS/Altair in LEO, a contingency rendezvous with the ascent stage of the Altair in Low Lunar Orbit (LLO) and a contingency rendezvous in LLO with the ascent and descent stage in the case of an aborted lunar landing. Therefore, it is not difficult to realize that each of these scenarios imposes different operational, timing, and performance constraints on the GNC system. To this end, a suite of on-board guidance and targeting algorithms have been designed to meet the requirement to perform the rendezvous independent of communications with the ground. This capability is particularly relevant for the lunar missions, some of which may occur on the far side of the moon. This paper will describe these algorithms which are designed to be structured and arranged in such a way so as to be flexible and able to safely perform a wide variety of rendezvous trajectories. The goal of the algorithms is not to merely fly one specific type of canned rendezvous profile. Conversely, it was designed from the start to be general enough such that any type of trajectory profile can be flown.(i.e. a coelliptic profile, a stable orbit rendezvous profile, and a expedited LLO rendezvous profile, etc) all using the same rendezvous suite of algorithms. Each of these profiles makes use of maneuver types which have been designed with dual goals of robustness and performance. They are designed to converge quickly under dispersed conditions and they are designed to perform many of the functions performed on the ground today. The targeting algorithms consist of a phasing maneuver (NC), an altitude adjust maneuver (NH), and plane change maneuver (NPC), a coelliptic maneuver (NSR), a Lambert targeted maneuver, and several multiple-burn targeted maneuvers which combine one of more of these algorithms. The derivation and implementation of each of these algorithms will be discussed in detail, as well and the Rendezvous Targeting "wrapper" which will sequentially tie them all together into a single onboard targeting tool which can produce a final integrated rendezvous trajectory. In a similar fashion, the various guidance modes available for flying out each of these maneuvers will be discussed as well. This paradigm of having the onboard guidance & targeting capability described above is different than the way the Space Shuttle has operated thus far. As a result, a discussion of these differences in terms of operations and ground and crew intervention will also be discussed. However, the general framework of how the mission designers on the ground first perform all mission design and planning functions, and then uplink that burn plan to the vehicle ensures that the ground will be involved to ensure safety and reliability. The only real difference is which of these functions will be done onboard vs. on the ground as done currently. Finally, this paper will describe the performance of each of these algorithms individually as well as the entire suite of algorithms as applied to the Orion ISS and EDS/Altair rendezvous missions in LEO. These algorithms have been incorporated in both a Linear Covariance environment and a Monte Carlo environment and the results of these dispersion analyses will be presented in the paper as well.

DSouza, Christopher↗
DOE OSTI2025

Application of Cyber-Informed Engineering for Protecting BESS

This white paper synthesizes an array of crucial grid services provided by BESS technology, assesses its architecture and communications, and presents a case study for analysis against the principles introduced by Cyber-Informed Engineering (CIE). Furthermore, in walking through the analysis, this paper presents a framework to evaluate risks and solutions when considering BESS components. Asset owners and buyers could perform this analysis to assess their BESS product implementations, alternative inverter-based resources (IBR), and energy management systems (EMS). Battery systems fulfill various roles contingent on the unique market demands and the specific challenges presented by regional grid infrastructures. These roles also vary due to the differing utility models for ownership and operation, which are adapted to meet regional and local capabilities and requirements. Concerns have been raised regarding the potential for adversaries to exploit knowledge of battery operational patterns to orchestrate decisive attacks. However, the security of operational data for these systems may not be the primary vulnerability, as much of this information is already well-understood within the community. Applying a modest degree of subject matter expertise can often yield valuable predictions regarding how a battery will respond under certain conditions, such as grid emergencies, high or low-temperature days, Public Safety Power Shutoff (PSPS) events, and outages. The operational characteristics of batteries are well-documented, and their capabilities, including the risks associated with misoperation and the resulting consequences, are published and understood within the industry. CIE practices represent the next step in gaining functional assurance and providing an acceptable level of risk, regardless of whether a battery vendor can support a trusted and validated supply chain. While this issue has exacerbated supply chain challenges, it is not an isolated condition. This foreign supply route is the primary source of BESS for the U.S. market. Significant efforts are underway through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL) to change that. Still, strategic short-term operational mitigations are needed to ensure the security of our operational technology (OT) systems, which are enhanced by instilling trust and are separate from vendors implementing CIE principles.

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
DOE OSTI2025

TRAILS Output Files

Overview This data repository contains ZIP files that store compressed versions of the output of running the WaterPaths utility planning and management tool in the DU Re-Evaluation mode (to download the tool, please see this GitHub repository). The tool was used to simulate the six-utility North Carolina Research Triangle problem. Details on the contents of each ZIP file can be seen below. Data details Temporal range: Weekly data for 2,344 weeks from 2015 to 2060 (45 years). Spatial range: Six water utilities in the North Carolina Research Triangle region (0: Chapel Hil/OWASA, 1: Durham, 2: Cary, 3: Raleigh, 4: Pittsboro, and 5: Chatham) File types: CSV and OUT Different solutions available The solution numbers correspond to the different pathway strategies (henceforth referred to as "solutions") discussed in paper's main and supporting text (abstract and link to the paper here). They are as follows: Sol92: The Durham-focused pathway strategy Sol132: The Raleigh-focused pathway strategy Sol140: The regionally-robust pathway strategy Objectives files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Objectives_RDMXX_solsXX_to_XX.csv files. Each CSV file will consist of a row representing all the objective values for that specific solution, while every six columns represents the reliability, restriction frequency, infrastructure net present value ($ mil), peak financial cost, worst-case cost, and unit cost ($ per MG; in that order) for each of the six utilities. There will be 1,000 such files, denoting the performance of the six utilities across the 1,000 deeply uncertain states of the world (DU SOWs). Pathway files These files can be accessed by unzipping solXX_objectives_pathways.zip that contains 1,000 Pathways_sXX_RDMXX.out file. Each OUT corresponds to the set of infrastructure being triggered in a specific DU SOW, and each file will have the name file will consist of four tab-delimited columns that are described as follows: Realization: The realization in which an infrastructure options being triggered utility: The utility currently triggering infrastructure week: The week in which a specific infrastructure option is being triggered infra.: The infrastructure option being triggered If the OUT file contains only the header line, no infrastructure was triggered for that specific DU SOW. Policies files These files can be obtained by unzipping Policies.zip. Each of the 1,000 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly water use restriction policies for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: 0rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 0 (values between 0 and 1) 1rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 1 (values between 0 and 1) 2rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 2 (values between 0 and 1) 3rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 3 (values between 0 and 1) 4rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 4 (values between 0 and 1) 5rest_m: restriction multiplier for utility 5 (values between 0 and 1) 0transf: transfer volume for utility 0 (in MGD) 1transf: transfer volume for utility 1 (in MGD) 2transf: transfer volume for utility 2 (in MGD) 3transf: transfer volume for utility 3 (in MGD) 4transf: transfer volume for utility 4 (in MGD) 5transf: transfer volume for utility 5 (in MGD) Water Sources files These files can be obtained by unzipping WaterSources_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each water source for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xvolume: available water volume from source X (in MGD) Xs_area: surface area of source X (in ACF) Xdemand: demand drawn from a water source from source X (in MGD) Xup_spill: upstream spillage from source X (in MGD) Xww_inflow: wastewater inflow from source X (in MGD) Xcatch_inflow: upstream catchment inflow to source X (in MGD) Xevap: evaporation multiplier for source X (values between 0 and 1) Xds_spill: downstream spillage from source X (in MGD) X_Y_alloc_cap: the allocated capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) X_Y_alloc_dem: the allocated demand from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Xtrmt_alloc_Y: the allocated treatment capacity from source X to utility Y (values between 0 and 1) Utilities files These files can be obtained by unzipping Utilities_subset.zip. Each of the 100 CSV files within the unzipped folder will contain weekly state variables at each utility for all 1,000 hydroclimatic realizations within a specific DU SOW. The column structure is as follows: Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xcapacity: total storage capacity of utility X (in MG) Xnet_inf: : net inflow for all storage infrastructure for utility X (in MGD) Xst_rof: short term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_stor_rof: short-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xst_trmt_rof: short-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_rof: long-term ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_stor_rof: long-term storage ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xlt_trmt_rof: long-term treatment ROF for utility X (values between 0 and 1) Xrest_demand: restricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunrest_demand: unrestricted demand for utility X (in MGD) Xunfulf_demand: unfulfilled demand for utility X (in MGD) Xwastewater: wastewater return for utility X (in MGD) Xtreat_capacity: total treatment capacity for utility X (in MG) Xcont_fund: reserve (contingency) fund balance for utility X Xins_pout: insurance payout for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xins_price: insurance price for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xinfra_npv: infrastructure net present value for utility ($mil) Xst_vol: total available storage volume of utility X (in MG) Xdebt_serv: debt service for utility X (usually once per year if the infrastructure is triggered; % annual volumetric revenue) Xstor_vol: total stored volume (in MGD) Xobs_ann_dem: observed annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xproj_dem: projected annual demand for utility X (in MGD) Xpv_debt_serv: present value of debt service payments for utility X (% annual volumetric revenue) Xgross_rev: gross revenue for utility X ($mil) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

Artificial Intelligence↗