Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “CHART”

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 487 records · Page 27
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-00: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG # 5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-01: Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-03: TPS Commissioning and QA: Incorporating the Entire Planning Process

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

WE-AB-201-04: The Recommendations of MPPG #5 and Practical Implementation Strategies

Treatment planning systems (TPS) are a cornerstone of modern radiation therapy. Errors in their commissioning or use can have a devastating impact on many patients. To support safe and high quality care, medical physicists must conduct efficient and proper commissioning, good clinical integration, and ongoing quality assurance (QA) of the TPS. AAPM Task Group 53 and related publications have served as seminal benchmarks for TPS commissioning and QA over the past two decades. Over the same time, continuing innovations have made the TPS even more complex and more central to the clinical process. Medical goals are now expressed in terms of the dose and margins around organs and tissues that are delineated from multiple imaging modalities (CT, MR and PET); and even temporally resolved (i.e., 4D) imaging. This information is passed on to optimization algorithms to establish accelerator movements that are programmed directly for IMRT, VMAT and stereotactic treatments. These advances have made commissioning and QA of the TPS much more challenging. This education session reviews up-to-date experience and guidance on this subject; including the recently published AAPM Medical Physics Practice Guideline (MPPG) #5 “Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams”. Treatment Planning System Commissioning and QA: Challenges and Opportunities (Greg Salomons) This session will provide some key background and review publications describing prominent incidents relating to TPS commissioning and QA. Traditional approaches have been hardware and feature oriented. They aim to establish a functional configuration and establish specifications for regular testing of features (like dose calculation) to assure stable operation and detect failures. With the advent of more complex systems, more patient-specific testing has also been adopted. A number of actual TPS defects will be presented along with heuristics for identifying similar defects in the future. Finally, the Gamma test has become a popular metric for reporting TPS Commissioning and QA results. It simplifies complex testing into a numerical index, but noisy data and casual application can make it misleading. A brief review of the issues around the use of the Gamma test will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: A process orientation and application of control charts (Michael Sharpe) A framework for commissioning a treatment planning system will be presented, focusing on preparations, practical aspects of configuration, priorities, specifications, and establishing performance. The complexity of the modern TPS make modular testing of features inadequate, and modern QA tools can provide “too much information” about the performance of techniques like IMRT and VMAT. We have adopted a process orientation and quality tools, like control charts, for ongoing TPS QA and assessment of patient-specific tests. The trending nature of these tools reveals the overall performance of the TPS system, and quantifies the variations that arise from individual plans, discrete calculations, and experimentation based on discrete measurements. Examples demonstrating application of these tools to TPS QA will be presented. TPS commissioning and QA: Incorporating the entire planning process (Sasa Mutic) The TPS and its features do not perform in isolation. Instead, the features and modules are key components in a complex process that begins with CT Simulation and extends to treatment delivery, along with image guidance and verification. Most importantly, the TPS is used by people working in a multi-disciplinary environment. It is very difficult to predict the outcomes of human interactions with software. Therefore, an interdisciplinary approach to training, commissioning and QA will be presented, along with an approach to the physics chart check and end-to-end testing as a tool for TPS QA. The role of standardization and automation in QA will also be discussed. The recommendations of MPPG #5 and practical implementation strategies (Jennifer Smilowitz) The recently published recommendations from Task Group No. 244, Medical Physics Practice Guideline on Commissioning and QA of Treatment Planning Dose Calculations: Megavoltage Photon and Electron Beams will be presented. The recommendations focus on the validation of commissioning data and dose calculations. Tolerance values for non-IMRT beam configurations are summarized based on established criteria and data collected by the IROC. More stringent evaluation criteria for IMRT dose calculations are suggested to test the limitations of the TPS dose algorithms for advanced delivery conditions. The MPPG encourages users to create a suite of validation tests for dose calculation for various conditions for static photon beams, heterogeneities, IMRT/VMAT and electron beams. This test suite is intended to be used for subsequent testing, including TPS software upgrades. In the past, the recommendations of some reports have not been widely implemented due to practical limitations. Implementation strategies, tools and processes developed by multiple centers for efficient and “do-able” MPPG #5 testing will be presented, as well as a discussion on the overall validation experience. Learning Objectives: Identify some of the key documents relevant for TPS commissioning and QA Understand strategies for testing TPS software Gain a practical knowledge of the Gamma test criteria Increase familiarity with the process of commissioning a TPS Learn about the use of Control Charts for TPS QA Review the role of the TPS in the overall planning process Increase awareness of the link between TPS QA and chart checking Gain an increased appreciation for the importance of interdisciplinary communication Understand the new recommendations from MPPG #5 on TPS Dose Algorithm Commissioning and QC/QA Learn practical implementation processes and tools for MPPG #5 validation recommendations.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2016

TU-FG-201-09: Predicting Accelerator Dysfunction

Purpose: To develop an integrated statistical process control (SPC) framework using digital performance and component data accumulated within the accelerator system that can detect dysfunction prior to unscheduled downtime. Methods: Seven digital accelerators were monitored for twelve to 18 months. The accelerators were operated in a ‘run to failure mode’ with the individual institutions determining when service would be initiated. Institutions were required to submit detailed service reports. Trajectory and text log files resulting from a robust daily VMAT QA delivery were decoded and evaluated using Individual and Moving Range (I/MR) control charts. The SPC evaluation was presented in a customized dashboard interface that allows the user to review 525 monitored parameters (480 MLC parameters). Chart limits were calculated using a hybrid technique that includes the standard SPC 3σ limits and an empirical factor based on the parameter/system specification. The individual (I) grand mean values and control limit ranges of the I/MR charts of all accelerators were compared using statistical (ranked analysis of variance (ANOVA)) and graphical analyses to determine consistency of operating parameters. Results: When an alarm or warning was directly connected to field service, process control charts predicted dysfunction consistently on beam generation related parameters (BGP)– RF Driver Voltage, Gun Grid Voltage, and Forward Power (W); beam uniformity parameters – angle and position steering coil currents; and Gantry position accuracy parameter: cross correlation max-value. Control charts for individual MLC – cross correlation max-value/position detected 50% to 60% of MLCs serviced prior to dysfunction or failure. In general, non-random changes were detected 5 to 80 days prior to a service intervention. The ANOVA comparison of BGP determined that each accelerator parameter operated at a distinct value. Conclusion: The SPC framework shows promise. Long term monitoring coordinated with service will be required to definitively determine the effectiveness of the model. Varian Medical System, Inc. provided funding in support of the research presented.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
NASA NTRS1987

Astrometric telescope facility. Preliminary systems definition study. Volume 3: Cost estimate

The results of the Astrometric Telescope Facility (ATF) Preliminary System Definition Study conducted in the period between March and September 1986 are described. The main body of the report consists primarily of the charts presented at the study final review which was held at NASA Ames Research Center on July 30 and 31, 1986. The charts have been revised to reflect the results of that review. Explanations for the charts are provided on the adjoining pages where required. Note that charts which have been changed or added since the review are dated 10/1/86; unchanged charts carry the review date 7/30/86. In addition, a narrative summary is presented of the study results and two appendices. The first appendix is a copy of the ATF Characteristics and Requirements Document generated as part of the study. The second appendix shows the inputs to the Space Station Mission Requirements Data Base submitted in May 1986. The report is issued in three volumes. Volume 1 contains an executive summary of the ATF mission, strawman design, and study results. Volume 2 contains the detailed study information. Volume 3 has the ATF cost estimate, and will have limited distribution.

Sobeck, Charlie↗
NASA NTRS1999

A Global Ocean Tide Model From TOPEX/POSEIDON Altimetry: GOT99.2

Goddard Ocean Tide model GOT99.2 is a new solution for the amplitudes and phases of the global oceanic tides, based on over six years of sea-surface height measurements by the TOPEX/POSEIDON satellite altimeter. Comparison with deep-ocean tide-gauge measurements show that this new tidal solution is an improvement over previous global models, with accuracies for the main semidiurnal lunar constituent M2 now below 1.5 cm (deep water only). The new solution benefits from use of prior hydrodynamic models, several in shallow and inland seas as well as the global finite-element model FES94.1. This report describes some of the data processing details involved in handling the altimetry, and it provides a comprehensive set of global cotidal charts of the resulting solutions. Various derived tidal charts are also provided, including tidal loading deformation charts, tidal gravimetric charts, and tidal current velocity (or transport) charts. Finally, low-degree spherical harmonic coefficients are computed by numerical quadrature and are tabulated for the major short-period tides; these are useful for a variety of geodetic and geophysical purposes, especially in combination with similar estimates from satellite laser ranging.

Ray, Richard D.↗
NASA NTRS1996

A Task-Analytic Approach to the Determination of Training Requirements for the Precision Descent

A task-analytic approach was used to evaluate the results from an experiment comparing two training methods for the "Precision Descent," a cockpit procedure designed to complement a new, computer-based air traffic control advisory system by allowing air traffic controllers to assign precise descent trajectories to aircraft. A task model was developed for the procedure using a methodology that represents four different categories of task-related knowledge: (1) ability to determine current flight goals; (2) ability to assess the current flight situation relative to those goals; (3) operational knowledge about flight-related tasks; and (4) knowledge about task selection. This model showed what knowledge experienced pilots already possessed, and how that knowledge was supplemented by training material provided in the two training conditions. All flight crews were given a "Precision Descent Chart" that explained the procedure's clearances and compliance requirements. This information enabled pilots to establish appropriate flight goals for the descent, and to monitor their compliance with those goals. In addition to this chart, half of the crews received a "Precision Descent Bulletin" containing technique recommendations for performing procedure-related tasks. The Bulletin's recommendations supported pilots in task selection and helped clarify the procedure's compliance requirements. Eight type-rated flight crews flew eight Precision Descents in a Boeing 747-400 simulator, with four crews in each of the two training conditions. Both conditions (Chart and Chart-with-Bulletin) relied exclusively on the use of those documents to introduce the procedure. No performance feedback was provided during the experiment. Preliminary result show better procedure compliance and higher acceptability ratings from flight crews in the Chart-with-Bulletin condition. These crews performed flight-related tasks less efficiently, however, using the simpler but less efficient methods suggested in the Bulletin. When a more efficient method was recognized, these crews tended to use the more efficient method in addition to the Bulletin's recommendation, instead of replacing it.

Smith, Nancy↗
DOE OSTI2024

Exploring Dynamic P-Q Capability and Abnormal Operations of Inverter-Based Resources

Nowadays, inverter-based resources are rapidly growing in electric power systems. On the other side, abnormal inverter operations are also occurring more often. Traditionally, inverter PQ capability charts are employed by electric utility companies to ensure safe and reliable operations of inverter-based resources. However, it is found in this paper that existing inverter PQ capability charts do not address the operating characteristics of an inverter correctly, which can result in irregular and unstable inverter operations. Here in this paper, a novel study is conducted to investigate inverter PQ capability charts, where constraints that are specific to an inverter are considered. It is found in this paper that the inverter PQ capability charts exhibit a unique dynamic nature under uncertain grid conditions. This dynamic nature has not been considered by the industry in managing, designing, and controlling an inverter as well as in developing international standards for inverter-based resources. Via both electromagnetic transient simulation and hardware experimental investigations, it is found that the dynamic PQ capability nature, together with the limitations of the existing control methods, are the underlying causes of many unusual inverter operations that have been reported in the literature.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2015

Entanglement negativity in the multiverse

We explore quantum entanglement between two causally disconnected regions in the multiverse. We first consider a free massive scalar field, and compute the entanglement negativity between two causally separated open charts in de Sitter space. The qualitative feature of it turns out to be in agreement with that of the entanglement entropy. We then introduce two observers who determine the entanglement between two causally disconnected de Sitter spaces. When one of the observers remains constrained to a region of the open chart in a de Sitter space, we find that the scale dependence enters into the entanglement. We show that a state which is initially maximally entangled becomes more entangled or less entangled on large scales depending on the mass of the scalar field and recovers the initial entanglement in the small scale limit. We argue that quantum entanglement may provide some evidence for the existence of the multiverse.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-D-BRD-06: Creating a Safety Net for a Fully Automated, Script Driven Electronic Medical Record

Purpose: Demonstrate the effectiveness of in-house software in ensuring EMR workflow efficiency and safety. Methods: A web-based dashboard system (WBDS) was developed to monitor clinical workflow in real time using web technology (WAMP) through ODBC (Open Database Connectivity). Within Mosaiq (Elekta Inc), operational workflow is driven and indicated by Quality Check Lists (QCLs), which is triggered by automation software IQ Scripts (Elekta Inc); QCLs rely on user completion to propagate. The WBDS retrieves data directly from the Mosaig SQL database and tracks clinical events in real time. For example, the necessity of a physics initial chart check can be determined by screening all patients on treatment who have received their first fraction and who have not yet had their first chart check. Monitoring similar “real” events with our in-house software creates a safety net as its propagation does not rely on individual users input. Results: The WBDS monitors the following: patient care workflow (initial consult to end of treatment), daily treatment consistency (scheduling, technique, charges), physics chart checks (initial, EOT, weekly), new starts, missing treatments (>3 warning/>5 fractions, action required), and machine overrides. The WBDS can be launched from any web browser which allows the end user complete transparency and timely information. Since the creation of the dashboards, workflow interruptions due to accidental deletion or completion of QCLs were eliminated. Additionally, all physics chart checks were completed timely. Prompt notifications of treatment record inconsistency and machine overrides have decreased the amount of time between occurrence and execution of corrective action. Conclusion: Our clinical workflow relies primarily on QCLs and IQ Scripts; however, this functionality is not the panacea of safety and efficiency. The WBDS creates a more thorough system of checks to provide a safer and near error-less working environment.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2016

SU-G-TeP4-08: Automating the Verification of Patient Treatment Parameters

Purpose: To automate the daily verification of each patient’s treatment by utilizing the trajectory log files (TLs) written by the Varian TrueBeam linear accelerator while reducing the number of false positives including jaw and gantry positioning errors, that are displayed in the Treatment History tab of Varian’s Chart QA module. Methods: Small deviations in treatment parameters are difficult to detect in weekly chart checks, but may be significant in reducing delivery errors, and would be critical if detected daily. Software was developed in house to read TLs. Multiple functions were implemented within the software that allow it to operate via a GUI to analyze TLs, or as a script to run on a regular basis. In order to determine tolerance levels for the scripted analysis, 15,241 TLs from seven TrueBeams were analyzed. The maximum error of each axis for each TL was written to a CSV file and statistically analyzed to determine the tolerance for each axis accessible in the TLs to flag for manual review. The software/scripts developed were tested by varying the tolerance values to ensure veracity. After tolerances were determined, multiple weeks of manual chart checks were performed simultaneously with the automated analysis to ensure validity. Results: The tolerance values for the major axis were determined to be, 0.025 degrees for the collimator, 1.0 degree for the gantry, 0.002cm for the y-jaws, 0.01cm for the x-jaws, and 0.5MU for the MU. The automated verification of treatment parameters has been in clinical use for 4 months. During that time, no errors in machine delivery of the patient treatments were found. Conclusion: The process detailed here is a viable and effective alternative to manually checking treatment parameters during weekly chart checks.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Fox Trails

1. This software utilizes python pandas to pull data from P6 databases or XER files. The software transforms the datasets into multiple main tables by joining, filtering, iteratively flattening hierarchical structured data, and pivoting datasets to give simple flat output tables. The activity table includes all of the information related to an activity including activity codes, global, EPS, and project codes, UDFs, and WBS information as separate columns. This includes the code id, code value and sequence number for all levels in hierarchical codes. The resource table is similar to the activity table and includes all of the information related to resources on activities including UPFs and resource codes. The resource time phased table takes the resource information and time phases it for the budget, forecast, late, and actual dates/units/costs that closely matches P6's user interface's values as it implements the resource curve and calendars. The wbs table contains the WBS structure broken out by levels and includes UDFs, codes, and notebook topics. The final P6 data table is the relationships table which simply contains the relationships. 2. When a user updates the tool with data (via giving it P6 project names with database username/password information or XER files) the system creates the data in #1, then creates a networkx graph with the activity data imbedded in the node data and the relationships added as edges. Each edge also has it's float calculated (working time distance between the predecessor and successor) and attached to the edge. Activities are also tagged as a potential start of a path based on their constraints, constraint dates, remaining start date, and activity status. When a user enters an activity ID into the UI, it runs a shortest path calculation on the network graph between each node tagged as potential start to the entered activity id based on the float tagged on the edge. Each path returned by the algorithm contains all of the nodes on the path in order, as well as the total float of the edges that make the path. This data is then collected and returned to the user in the form of a gantt chart with groupings for each path that includes the total float for each group. 3. Similar to 2, if the user passes through a reference dataset each activity set in the path is checked to see if it had a path in the reference dataset, if that path was the primary path between the start and end activities, and what has changed regarding logic and durations. These changes are color coded and summarized before sent to the user to be displayed by the UI for simple discovery. 4. Utilizing the data from #1, the user can submit desired grouping code(s) and filters to the system. The system will then pull the activities, resources, and relationships and create a gantt chart based on the groupings sent and filtered based on the filters sent. 5. The system will produce a gantt chart in a similar method to #4, but allows interactivity with the data. As the user interacts with the gantt chart, the software captures the changes and stores it with the user making the change so that project controls and implement those changes in P6.

Fox, Ben↗
DOE OSTI2020

Preliminary description of a new creep-fatigue design method that reduces over conservatism and simplifies the high temperature design process

The report provides the initial description of a new creep-fatigue design method for structural components in high temperature nuclear service. The new method is based on an integrated elastic-perfectly plastic (EPP) analysis and Simplified Model Test (SMT) approach that reduces over conservatism, improves the treatment of elastic follow up, and simplifies the design procedure, when compared with the current creep-fatigue design methods in ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. Developing the design charts for the EPP-SMT design method requires extrapolating SMT test data as a function of hold time and follow up factor. The report develops the preliminary design charts for Alloy 617 at temperatures between 800°C and 950°C by combining two extrapolation approaches developed in a previous work. The report also presents a comparative analysis between the EPP-SMT design method and the current ASME creep-fatigue design methods by evaluating design life of two sample geometries under different loading conditions. Results from the comparative analysis verify the EPP-SMT design charts but suggest the requirement of additional test data in the low strain range regime for improving the extrapolation procedure that will further reduce the over conservatism in the creep-fatigue damage evaluation. The report also concludes that the EPP-SMT design procedure can account for effect of primary load on creep-fatigue life by using a fixed, bounding value of follow up in constructing the design charts. The conclusions to this report describe the future work required to complete this new design method so it can be codified through a nuclear Code Case.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS1973

Evaluate the application of ERTS-A data for detecting and mapping snow cover

The author has identified the following significant results. It is concluded from data analysis that the amount of information in ERTS-1 imagery with practical application to snow mapping is substantial. For the Arizona and California test sites, it appears that the extent of the mountain snowpacks can be mapped from ERTS-1 data in more detail than is depicted in aerial survey snow charts. In the Salt-Verde watershed, the agreement between the percentage of the area snow covered as measured from the ERTS-1 data and from aerial survey charts is generally well within 10%. In nearly all of the areas in which greater discrepancies occur, the differences can be explained by changes in snow cover during the interval between the two observations. In the southern Sierra Nevada, the agreement between ERTS-1 data and aerial survey charts is of the order of 5% in all cases, except for the Kaweah Basin on one date. In addition to comparative analysis with aerial snow charts, the ERTS-1 data have also been compared with high altitude aircraft photography. The ERAP data have provided an excellent source of correlative information. The results of the comparative analysis indicate that although small details in the snow line that cannot be detected in the ERTS-1 data can be mapped from higher resolution aircraft data, the boundaries of snow cover can be mapped just as accurately from ERTS-1 data.

Barnes, J. C.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Spacesuit guidebook

This guidebook is designed to supplement the Spacesuit wall chart (WAL-114) published by the Education Affairs Division, January 1990. The wall chart depicts Astronaut Bruce McCandless on his historic first untethered spacewalk using the manned maneuvering unit. He flew on Shuttle mission 41-B, and ventured 100 meters for the Shuttle's cargo bay and returned safely. This guidebook explains in depth the elements depicted on the wall chart in see-through and cut-away perspectives. Together the wall chart and guidebook show as well as explain the inside workings of the spacesuit and its various components. Forty separate elements are identified with an accompanying numerical legend. Those elements are further explained in this guidebook along with their functions and how they work in relation to other elements. Additional chapters discuss essential components of the spacesuit such as the primary life support system and the manned maneuvering unit, and the method for donning the spacesuit.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1991

CRN5EXP: Expert system for statistical quality control

The purpose of the Expert System CRN5EXP is to assist in checking the quality of the coils at two very important mills: Hot Rolling and Cold Rolling in a steel plant. The system interprets the statistical quality control charts, diagnoses and predicts the quality of the steel. Measurements of process control variables are recorded in a database and sample statistics such as the mean and the range are computed and plotted on a control chart. The chart is analyzed through patterns using the C Language Integrated Production System (CLIPS) and a forward chaining technique to reach a conclusion about the causes of defects and to take management measures for the improvement of the quality control techniques. The Expert System combines the certainty factors associated with the process control variables to predict the quality of the steel. The paper presents the approach to extract data from the database, the reason to combine certainty factors, the architecture and the use of the Expert System. However, the interpretation of control charts patterns requires the human expert's knowledge and lends to Expert Systems rules.

Hentea, Mariana↗
NASA NTRS1947

A collection of the collapsed results of general tank tests of miscellaneous flying-boat-hull models

Presented here are the summary charts of the collapsed results of general tank tests of about 100 flying boat hull models. These summary charts are intended to be used as an engineering tool to enable a flying boat designer to grasp more quickly the significance of various hull form parameters as they influence his particular airplane. The form in which the charts are prepared is discussed in some detail in order to make them clearer to the designer. This is a data report, and no attempt has been made to produce conclusions or correlations of the usual sort. However, some generalizations are put forward on the various methods in which summary charts may be used.

Locke, F W S , Jr↗