SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “field testing”
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.
Geomechanical considerations for the deep borehole field test.
Abstract not provided.
Part 2: Deep Borehole Disposal (DBD) and Deep Borehole Field Test (DBFT).
Abstract not provided.
The Defense Waste Management Program Group Hydro-Geologic Characterization Support to the Sandia Carlsbad Field Test Organization.
Abstract not provided.
Wind Turbine Impact on Radar: Overview of the Interagency Field Test and Evaluation Program.
Abstract not provided.
FIELD TEST OF A MACHINE LEARNING TECHNIQUE FOR SAFEGUARDS ASSESSMENT AT A FUEL FABRICATION FACILITY
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The Need for a Borehole Disposal Field Test for Operations and Emplacement.
Abstract not provided.
SRF Cavity Emulator for PIP-II LLRF Lab and Field Testing
There are many stages in the LLRF and RF system development process for any new accelerator that can take advantage of hardware emulation of the high-power RF system and RF cavities. LLRF development, bench testing, control system development and testing of installed systems must happen well before SRF cavities are available for test. The PIP-II Linac has three frequencies of SRF cavities, 162.5 MHz, 325 MHz and 650 MHz and a simple analog emulator design has been chosen that can meet the cavity bandwidth requirements, provide tuning errors to emulate Lorentz force detuning and microphonics for all cavity types. This emulator design utilizes a quartz crystal with a bandwidth of 65Hz at an IF of ~ 4 MHz, providing a Q of ~ 1.3 x 10^7 at 650MHz. This paper will discuss the design and test results of this emulator.
Investigation of Corrosion Protection of Natural Gas Pipeline Steel by Metallic Coatings: Field Test
AMPP Annual Conference + Expo 2023, Denver, CO, March 19-23, 2023
Field Test and Evaluation of Model Predictive Control in a Grid-Interactive Thermal Energy Storage Integrated Heat Pump System
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Field Testing of Safeguards Technologies in the Hot Fuel Examination Facility
Recent developments in nuclear fuel reprocessing techniques have yielded more efficient processes and fuel cycle options that strengthen the nuclear industry and production of clean energy. One such area of interest is pyroprocessing of used oxide fuel. However, with these advances in the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle, advances in safeguards instrumentation, measurements, and approaches are needed to ensure special nuclear material (SNM) is accounted for according to regulatory requirements. As a high-level overview of a nominal pyroprocessing approach, used oxide fuel from commercial light water reactors (LWR) is mechanically removed from the metallic cladding. Then the fuel is crushed and randomized representative samples are taken and sent to an analytical lab for analysis. The analytical results of the feed material are used for input accountancy into the rest of the process. The crushed oxide fuel is then moved to the oxide reduction (OR) furnace where it is reduced from an oxide to metallic form. The OR product is distilled to remove salt and then moved to an electrorefiner (ER), where it is immersed in a eutectic mixture of lithium chloride potassium chloride (LiCl-KCl) that typically ranges between 450-550 ?. Within the ER, the usable uranium is electrochemically transported through the molten salt from the anode to the cathode, and then subsequently removed as a relatively pure U product.. A simplified model of pyroprocessing techniques with added emphasis on the safeguards can be seen below in Fig. 1
Development of a Computer-based Benchmarking and Analytical Tool: Benchmarking and Energy & Water Savings Tool in Dairy Plants (BEST-Dairy) (Final Report)
The overall goal of the project is to develop a computer-based benchmarking and energy and water savings tool (BEST-Dairy) for use in the California dairy industry - including four dairy processes - cheese, fluid milk, butter, and milk powder. BEST-Dairy tool developed in this project provides three options for the user to benchmark each of the dairy product included in the tool, with each option differentiated based on specific detail level of process or plant, i.e., 1) plant level; 2) process-group level, and 3) process-step level. For each detail level, the tool accounts for differences in production and other variables affecting energy use in dairy processes. The dairy products include cheese, fluid milk, butter, milk powder, etc. The BEST-Dairy tool can be applied to a wide range of dairy facilities to provide energy and water savings estimates, which are based upon the comparisons with the best available reference cases that were established through reviewing information from international and national samples. We have performed and completed alpha- and beta-testing (field testing) of the BEST-Dairy tool, through which feedback from voluntary users in the U.S. dairy industry was gathered to validate and improve the tool's functionality. BEST-Dairy v1.2 was formally published in May 2011, and has been made available for free downloads from the internet (i.e., http://best-dairy.lbl.gov). A user's manual has been developed and published as the companion documentation for use with the BEST-Dairy tool. In addition, we also carried out technology transfer activities by engaging the dairy industry in the process of tool development and testing, including field testing, technical presentations, and technical assistance throughout the project. To date, users from more than ten countries in addition to those in the U.S. have downloaded the BEST-Dairy from the LBNL website. It is expected that the use of BEST-Dairy tool will advance understanding of energy and water usage in individual dairy plants, augment benchmarking activities in the market places, and facilitate implementation of efficiency measures and strategies to save energy and water usage in the dairy industry. Industrial adoption of this emerging tool and technology in the market is expected to benefit dairy plants, which are important customers of California utilities. Further demonstration of this benchmarking tool is recommended, for facilitating its commercialization and expansion in functions of the tool. Wider use of this BEST-Dairy tool and its continuous expansion (in functionality) will help to reduce the actual consumption of energy and water in the dairy industry sector. The outcomes comply very well with the goals set by the AB 1250 for PIER program.
Reverberant Acoustic Testing and Direct Field Acoustic Testing Acoustic Standing Waves and their Impact on Structural Responses
The aerospace industry has been using two methods of acoustic testing to qualify flight hardware: (1) Reverberant Acoustic Test (RAT), (2) Direct Field Acoustic Test (DFAT). The acoustic field obtained by RAT is generally understood and assumed to be diffuse, expect below Schroeder cut-of frequencies. DFAT method of testing has some distinct advantages over RAT, however the acoustic field characteristics can be strongly affected by test setup such as the speaker layouts, number and location of control microphones and control schemes. In this paper the following are discussed based on DEMO tests performed at APL and JPL: (1) Acoustic wave interference patterns and acoustic standing waves, (2) The structural responses in RAT and DFAT.
Inert and Adsorptive Tracer Tests for Field Measurement of Flow-Wetted Surface Area
Field tests in a discrete rock fracture validated a combined inert/adsorbing tracer test method to estimate the contact area between fluids circulating through a fracture and the bulk rock matrix (i.e., flow-wetted surface area, A). Tracer tests and heat injections occurred at a mesoscale well field in Altona, NY. A subhorizontal bedding plane fracture ~7.6 m below ground surface connects two wells separated by 14.1 m. Recovery of the adsorbing tracer cesium was roughly 72% less than the inert tracer iodide. Using an advection-dispersion-reaction model in one-dimension, the adsorbing/inert tracer method identified substantial flow channelization. These results are consistent with Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and thermal sensors. All characterization methods suggest circulating fluids were concentrated in a narrow, 1–2 m wide channel directly connecting the injection and production well. The inert/adsorbing tracer method identified two flow channels with areas of 28 and 80 m 2 . A one-dimensional heat transport model predicted production well temperature rises 20.5°C in 6 days, whereas measured temperature rise was 17.6°C. For comparison, two-dimensional heat transport through a fracture of uniform aperture (i.e., homogeneous permeability) predicted roughly 670 days until production well temperature would rise 17.6°C. This suggests that the use of a fracture of uniform aperture to predict heat transport may drastically overpredict the thermal performance of a geothermal system. In the context of commercial geothermal reservoirs, the results of this study suggest that combined inert/adsorbing tracer tests could predict production well thermal draw-down, leading to improved reservoir monitoring and management.