SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Industry Engagment”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

520 records · Page 29

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Gateway Program Safety and Mission Assurance IAASS Conference Keynote Presentation

This next wave of lunar exploration will be fundamentally different than the past. The goal today is long term human presence in Earth orbit, exploration around the Moon, exploration anywhere on the Moon, and challenging exploration missions beyond the Moon. Sustainability is the key to enabling human expansion across the solar system and bringing back to Earth new knowledge and opportunities, and requires the early engagement of scientific, international, and U.S. commercial interests, innovations, and new approaches. The Gateway’s agile acquisition strategy will shape the entire system life cycle, from design and analysis through production, verification, launch, logistics and operations. This strategy will encourage new ways of doing business to accommodate new techniques, technologies and approaches; improving affordability and maximizing Gateway utility. The full range of acquisition authorities and contracting mechanisms available to NASA will be considered and appropriately tailored in response to the unique demands of each procurement activity. Gateway will provide scientific and research benefits, in addition to providing a sustainable staging location for crewed lunar surface landings and technology demonstrations that help NASA develop the knowledge and technology needed for Mars missions. These payloads are expected to provide operational and scientific benefit for the duration of their stay on Gateway, as the hardware will provide data during the transit to the Gateway and while in lunar orbit as changes in solar activity occur over time. Gateway is designed to support a variety of utilization activities during both crewed and uncrewed periods and is planned for continuous operations throughout its lifetime. These operations include demonstrating key exploration capabilities in a relevant deep space environment, conducting science beyond the influence of Earth, and providing opportunities for Gateway partners and customers for deep space exploration. Located in cislunar orbit, the Gateway capabilities can be further leveraged to enhance lunar and Mars exploration. With the Gateway and other elements of the Artemis Program, NASA is encouraging new ways of doing business to accommodate new techniques, technologies and approaches, consider affordability, and encourage innovation from U.S. industry.

Terri Castillo↗

DOE OSTI2024

Marine Algae Industrialization Consortium (MAGIC): Combining biofuel and high-value bioproducts to meet the RFS

The Marine Algae Industrialization Consortium (MAGIC) was formed to address pressing challenges in the commercialization of microalgae as a source of biofuel. The “Marine Algae Industrialization Consortium (MAGIC): Combining biofuel and high-value bioproducts to meet the RFS” project formally addressed two US Department of Energy Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) goals: (1) Model the sustainable supply of 1 million metric tonnes ash free dry weight (AFDW) cultivated algal biomass and (2) Demonstrate valuable co-products produced along with biofuel intermediates to increase value of algal biomass by 30%. To achieve these goals, the project demonstrated and validated high-value co-products to drive down the cost of biofuel by increasing the value of algae “co-products” towards increasing the selling price of total algae biomass as one of the key drivers of economics and adoption. This was accomplished through five core, interdependent tasks including: (1) strain selection to identify and deliver strains for mass culture, (2) mass culture using a hybrid cultivation system and following key operating parameters for downstream applications to provide algae feedstock, (3) recovery and conversion to evaluate two alternative methods to separate dry algae biomass into oil and residuals for downstream testing, (4) product assessment to determine biofuel, aquafeed or poultry feed product efficacy using algae biomass fractions as well as to provide critical performance data for valuation and (5) commercialization to use technoeconomic and life cycle assessments (TEA/LCA) as iterative design and assessment tools including consideration of target markets, competitors, and distribution channels to guide product assessment, development and valuation. A total of 46 peer-review publications, many open-access, provide detail of much of the work carried out and the results of the tasks. Additional reports and presentations provide other technical and public engagement material. At a high level, using a variety of approaches, more than 1000 marine microalgae strains were evaluated to ultimately identify the seven winners that were down-selected to be grown in mass culture. Strain selection demonstrated that there were no ‘super strains’ and that each candidate had strengths and limitations for specific products, growth conditions or operational considerations. Mass culture growth of these seven strains at >5000 L / 29 m 2 scale found that four them were suitable for product assessment. More than 250 kg of biomass was produced across hundreds of pond runs along with thousands of cultivation entries on the growth and biomass characteristics as well as environmental parameters. In the process, dozens of standard operating procedures were generated as was custom software to process and analyze cultivation data. Recovery and conversion of algae biomass demonstrated that a hexane solvent based extraction protocol was most effective at recovering oil (biocrude) from algae and four strains were processed to produce oil and lipid extracted algae (residuals) for downstream testing. Membrane-based oil separation was less successful, but may still be applicable to other commercial applications in the future. Product testing demonstrated that algae biocrude is of high quality and hydrotreating generated numerous fractions of high quality composition for fuel and lubricate based applications. Aquafeed studies performed at a variety of scales showed that both whole and defatted (lipid extracted algae) microalgae were suitable as a feed ingredient, but that the specifics of the fed animal and biochemical composition of the algae are critical factors when determining formulation. Similarly, poultry studies on whole and defatted microalgae generally showed positive outcomes on animal growth and health, with some microalgae providing enhanced nutritional composition of the animal product. Economic and life cycle assessments covered a wide range of possible commercialization and sustainability scenarios. Replacement value, improved product value added, consumer values marketing added valuation and improved animal health were considered as alternatives for microalgae valuation. Using the open pond system, algae productivity was identified as the key driver of commercialization economics, but combination of co-products (e.g. animal feed) with biofuel production substantially increased the total selling price of algae. Modeled microalgae selling price exceeded $\$$1500/tonne and could generate competitive biofuel selling prices below $\$$5 gallon gas equivalents using realistic algal productivities. Short (process scale) and longer (decadal trends) sustainability assessments show that marine microalgae can enhance the sustainability of energy production and lead to other realized benefits in water, fertilizer and land use for other sectors (e.g. agriculture). This project successfully demonstrated all of the components of an end-to-end process from mass microalgae cultivation and dewatering, to recovery and conversion of algae biomass components, to final product demonstration and process valuation; the combined results provide a framework for future commercialization of algae based biofuels.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

NASA NTRS2021

GA-ASI Final Report and Program Wrap-up for NASA System Integration and Operationalization (SIO)

The NASA SIO demonstration flight of April 3, 2020 represents a successful culmination of 18 months of coordinated effort between GA-ASI, NASA, the FAA, Collins Aerospace, and Honeywell Aerospace to operate a Medium Altitude, Long Endurance (MALE) Unmanned Aircraft System (UAS) safely in the National Airspace System (NAS) using industry leading prototype technologies. The GA-ASI team consisted of technical experts, program managers, engineers, mechanics, flight technicians, flight crews, and numerous other subject matter experts. This final report describes the most significant and potentially impactful aspects of the planning, integration, test, and flight aspects of this effort. GA-ASI successfully integrated the key technologies needed for UAS to fly in the NAS onto our prototype SkyGuardian UAS, which was designed to meet the most stringent airworthiness standards applicable to an aircraft of its size category. A proven Detect and Avoid (DAA) system, developed by GA-ASI and utilizing Honeywell Aerospace technology was integrated onto SkyGuardian for the first time, along with datalink radios from Collins Aerospace that meet the new civil standard for Control and Non-Payload Communication (CNPC) links. GA-ASI also obtained approvals from the FAA and FCC to operate the reconfigured UAS. The SIO demonstration flight represented a commercial aerial surveying operation conducted at medium altitude (>10,000ft above mean sea level). The aircraft’s onboard sensors were used to capture photographic, infrared and radar imagery of public and commercial infrastructure and land, and to subsequently produce the types of data products that would provide business value to potential customers. These survey services would supplement or replace services currently provided by manned airplanes and helicopters, small drones or satellites. A “virtual” mission was also planned, to show what additional survey data could have been captured during the flight if additional sensors had been installed on the aircraft’s external hardpoints. This revision of the final report focuses on information of value to the wider UAS community, and avoids propriety data to facilitate broad dissemination. It also includes a description of GA-ASI’s engagement with the FAA following the SIO flight, which led to the award of an updated Special Airworthiness Certificate in the Experimental Category (SAC-EC) and a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (COA) allowing operation of the SkyGuardian UAS using its DAA system to satisfy right-of-way rules, instead of a chase plane. The associated operational limitations are described to illustrate the further steps that would be needed to remove those limitations for unhindered commercial operations.

Flight demonstration↗

DOE OSTI2023

Third-Party Aggregation Rulemaking in MISO and SPP Footprints

The report highlights key considerations for retail regulators in the footprints of the Southwest Power Pool (SPP) or Midcontinent Independent System Operator (MISO) in states that previously opted out of allowing third-party aggregation participation under FERC Order 719 and that may want to explore reversing the decision due to a changing policy environment under new FERC orders (i.e., 2222) and/or tightening resource adequacy constraints. Through a document review and a series of 27 interviews with regulators, aggregators, and other industry professionals, this document provides a high-level policy overview of the retail regulator’s role in a selection of processes, rules, and regulations to better understand how states have treated and/or integrated aggregators into wholesale markets. The report summarizes findings in two sections: General Findings and Specific Policy Findings. The General Findings offer high level takeaways such as the fact that 17 of the 20 states in MISO and SPP footprints opted out of third party aggregations following Order 719. Additionally, there is only one state that is fully restructured in the MISO and SPP footprints whereas the rest are vertically integrated, and the majority of third-party aggregations in the U.S. take place in restructured states outside of these footprints. Even so, third-party aggregations do take place in MISO and SPP albeit in small numbers and in an ad hoc regulatory environment. The specific policy findings delve deeper into specific examples of state actions on the topics of jurisdiction, registration and licensing, data governance, dual participation, and dispute resolution. Tables in each category organize state actions into Tiers I-III, which roughly correspond to the possible level of involvement or possible change necessary by state regulators and/or legislators to implement these actions. The tier level does not indicate any value judgement, as each state has respective regulatory limitations and each decision comes with various tradeoffs. One main tradeoff is between simplicity and quick implementation versus comprehensive and prolonged implementation. In many cases, actions in Tier I could be implemented without significant changes by relying on the use of existing processes for an aggregator context. On the other hand, many actions in Tier III are more narrowly designed to address aggregators specifically, but often require more significant changes including the involvement of additional parties through stakeholder engagement or legislative action. In some cases, these tiers are discrete. However, state regulators may also choose to progress through these various tiers sequentially as they phase in aggregators while learning from their experience. With the ability to stack bulk system level services, distributed energy resource aggregations in MISO and SPP could provide various private benefits (e.g., increased value streams to the owner) as well as societally beneficial grid services (e.g., peaking capacity, ancillary services, and other services that increase the grid’s overall operational efficiency). In deciding how to best to enable these benefits, states and retail regulators must weigh various tradeoffs if considering reversing a previous opt out.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA’s Safety, Reliability, and Mission Assurance Digital Future

The evolution from “document-centric” to “data-centric” and “model-centric” information leveraging structured data and model-based approaches is at the heart of digital engineering transformational efforts underway across industry and government. It is these approaches that pave the way for data lakes, Authoritative Sources of Truth (ASOTs), and systems- of-systems interoperability and the corresponding transformational benefits thereof. Such benefits include increased data availability, data access equity, data traceability, real-time analytics, batch analytics, and (most importantly) acceleration of the time-to-value and time-to-insights associated with engineering products and analyses. The longer-term benefits of reusability, customization and traceability are even more promising. For Safety and Mission Assurance (SMA), and Mission Success (SMS) activities; realization of such benefits is essential to provide engineers and analysts alike vital information when needed to support critical decision making throughout the entire life cycle. The SMA community often operate in parallel with engineering activities, for which information exchange with relevant context is paramount. Far too often, such information lags key decision points and/or is absent of the robust, integrated, knowledge needed, given inherent barriers associated with traditional document-centric means to data sharing, analysis, and reporting. This paper provides an overview of how NASA’s Office of Safety and Mission Assurance (OSMA) is evolving its policies, standards, guidance, and training to transform to eliminate such barriers, thus realizing the benefits emerging in this new digital era. A roadmap for achieving this digital future is presented along with key building blocks involving use and implementation of concepts such as: Objectives-Hierarchies, Objective-Driven Requirements, Accepted Standards, Safety and Assurance Cases, data digitization (i.e., ontologies, structured data, and model-centric data), FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, & Reusable) and/or FAIRUST (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable, Understandable, Secure, and Trusted) principles [1]. This paper also describes how OSMA, leveraging the Agency’s overall commitment to Digital Transformation (DT), is using the power of Policy, “Digital” Domain representation, Product Evolution, and Community Outreach and Engagement as part of a strategic vision and roadmap to evolve and transform its SMA organizations to become better able to serve its stakeholders and customers. Future publications will elaborate on these building blocks and deeper concepts.

Authoritative Source of Truth (ASOT),↗

DOE OSTI2021

Coal-dependent Communities in Transition: Identifying Best Practices to Ensure Equitable Outcomes

The U.S. coal industry is experiencing a sharp increase in the numbers of retired and/or decommissioned coal-fired power plants across the U.S. In the years between 2010-2019, around 102 gigawatts (GW) of coal-fired generating capacity has been announced to be decommissioned, representing more than 546 coal-fired power plant units, and an additional 17 GW is planned to be decommissioned by 2025. This change in the energy production landscape presents an impact on the social, environmental, and economic prospects of coal-dependent communities. This report examined the role of communities in the coal power plant decommissioning process and provided community-identified best practices to ensure an equitable process. The experiences of four coal-dependent communities—Wise County, VA, Muskegon, MI, Anderson County, TN, and Becker, MN—are presented as case studies to understand the impacts of the decommissioning process, and associated best practices, from the communities’ perspective. The report results highlight the need to recognize that the decommissioning decision-making process must be community-based to be equitable. Each community’s input is key to the transition away from coal power because there is no one-size-fits-all development plan. In other words, each community’s trajectory through the decommissioning process—from the retirement decision-making stage to the final site redevelopment phase—is unique because each community has distinct needs and wants from the energy transition. What is best for one community may not be suited for another. Ultimately, the framework for site development and community revitalization post-decommissioning cannot be universal because each community’s profile—from a social, cultural, and economic perspective—is different. Community impacts of power plant decommissioning are not limited to job and revenue losses. Communities are likely to be impacted culturally, socially, environmentally, and have long-term health-based impacts that should be acknowledged and addressed in post-retirement plans. Commonly identified decommissioning best practices include: Early and continued engagement throughout, with a number of mediums for communication and feedback (e.g., in-person sessions, virtual meetings, written comment opportunities); Early planning of post-decommissioning projects to replace lost jobs, revenue, and economic activity; Recognition (and mitigation, if possible) of social impacts on the community due to plant closure; Transparency throughout the process, with trusted information being provided about the decommissioning process and timeline; potential impacts on the workforce, economy, and environment; and the feasibility of alternative site uses; Identification of funding sources, technical experts, and/or strategic partnerships to support decommissioning and the affected communities upfront; and, Acknowledgment of communities as stakeholders who have a role in the conversation and right to determine their futures. Three key areas for assisting coal-dependent communities affected by the energy transition: Technical assistance: assessment of site feasibility for alternative uses or to repower with new technologies; Cross-partnership engagement and collaboration: facilitate knowledge-sharing of “lessons learned” about the decommissioning process between communities and provide guidance for decision-making processes; and, Financial assistance: access to grant and/or loan programs to assist with redevelopment survey, bolster community economic security through job creation, and cover environmental clean-up costs. Technical assistance, cross-partnership engagement, and financial aid can be mobilized to help communities throughout various stages of the decommissioning process, including the retirement decision, the site reclamation phase, and eventual revitalization of the site and surrounding community.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2020

Update on the United States Advanced Ultra-Supercritical Program with Full Scale Component Fabrication to Develop Utility Scale Power Plants with 760°C Steam Temperature

Following the successful completion of a 15-year effort to develop and test materials that would allow coal-fired power plants to be operated at advanced ultra-supercritical (A-USC) steam conditions, a United States-based consortium is presently engaged in Phase 2 of a project which includes an advanced manufacturing effort to complete US-based supply chain development for full commercial scale (800-850 MWe) A-USC components made of nickel-based alloys, components operating at up to 760°C. The project, funded under U.S. Department of Energy Award No. DE-FE0025064, falls under the US DOE overall goal to Develop cost-effective, reliable technologies to improve the efficiency of new and existing coal-fired power plants. A-USC steam cycles have the potential to improve cycle efficiency, reduce fuel costs, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Current development and demonstration efforts are focused on enabling the construction of A-USC plants, operating with steam temperatures as high as 1400°F (760°C) and steam pressures up to 5000 psi (35 MPa), which can potentially increase cycle efficiencies to 47% HHV (higher heating value), or approximately 50% LHV (lower heating value), and reduce CO 2 emissions by roughly 25%, compared to today’s U.S. fleet. A-USC technology provides a lower-cost method to reduce CO 2 emissions, compared to CO 2 capture technologies, while retaining a viable coal option for owners of coal generation assets. Among the specific goals of Phase 2 of the ComTest Project are to: validate that components made from advanced nickel-based alloys can operate and perform under A-USC conditions accelerate the development of a U.S.-based supply chain for the full complement of A-USC components close the remaining gaps and reduce the risks for manufacturing components from advanced materials for commercial demonstration fabricate full-scale versions of selected key components made of nickel-based alloys validate a qualified U.S. supply chain, to provide greater cost certainty for components obtain American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) code approval for new materials, components and processes Additional benefit: Manufacturing technology will be applicable to other advanced fossil energy high temperature cycles, and can support increased flexibility of existing power plants The ComTest project is managed by Energy Industries of Ohio, and technically directed by the Electric Power Research Institute, Inc., with General Electric designing the A-USC components. As stated earlier, the current phase of the effort is primarily funded by the U.S. Department of Energy, through the National Energy Technology Laboratory. This presentation outlines the motivation for the project, explains the project’s structure and schedule, and provides some of the technical details on the design of the ComTest components.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2020

Update on the United States Advanced Ultra-Supercritical Program with Full Scale Component Fabrication to Develop Utility Scale Power Plants with 760°C Steam Temperature

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

NASA NTRS2017

Automation of POST Cases via External Optimizer and "Artificial p2" Calculation

During early conceptual design of complex systems, speed and accuracy are often at odds with one another. While many characteristics of the design are fluctuating rapidly during this phase there is nonetheless a need to acquire accurate data from which to down-select designs as these decisions will have a large impact upon program life-cycle cost. Therefore enabling the conceptual designer to produce accurate data in a timely manner is tantamount to program viability. For conceptual design of launch vehicles, trajectory analysis and optimization is a large hurdle. Tools such as the industry standard Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories (POST) have traditionally required an expert in the loop for setting up inputs, running the program, and analyzing the output. The solution space for trajectory analysis is in general non-linear and multi-modal requiring an experienced analyst to weed out sub-optimal designs in pursuit of the global optimum. While an experienced analyst presented with a vehicle similar to one which they have already worked on can likely produce optimal performance figures in a timely manner, as soon as the "experienced" or "similar" adjectives are invalid the process can become lengthy. In addition, an experienced analyst working on a similar vehicle may go into the analysis with preconceived ideas about what the vehicle's trajectory should look like which can result in sub-optimal performance being recorded. Thus, in any case but the ideal either time or accuracy can be sacrificed. In the authors' previous work a tool called multiPOST was created which captures the heuristics of a human analyst over the process of executing trajectory analysis with POST. However without the instincts of a human in the loop, this method relied upon Monte Carlo simulation to find successful trajectories. Overall the method has mixed results, and in the context of optimizing multiple vehicles it is inefficient in comparison to the method presented POST's internal optimizer functions like any other gradient-based optimizer. It has a specified variable to optimize whose value is represented as optval, a set of dependent constraints to meet with associated forms and tolerances whose value is represented as p2, and a set of independent variables known as the u-vector to modify in pursuit of optimality. Each of these quantities are calculated or manipulated at a certain phase within the trajectory. The optimizer is further constrained by the requirement that the input u-vector must result in a trajectory which proceeds through each of the prescribed events in the input file. For example, if the input u-vector causes the vehicle to crash before it can achieve the orbital parameters required for a parking orbit, then the run will fail without engaging the optimizer, and a p2 value of exactly zero is returned. This poses a problem, as this "non-connecting" region of the u-vector space is far larger than the "connecting" region which returns a non-zero value of p2 and can be worked on by the internal optimizer. Finding this connecting region and more specifically the global optimum within this region has traditionally required the use of an expert analyst.

Dees, Patrick D.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Future Homes in Space: Development of Concepts for Exploration Space Habitats

NASA’s Artemis campaign seeks to return humans to the moon and establish a sustained presence on the lunar surface. This session will emphasize how habitation capabilities on the moon and in cislunar space can potentially contribute to the sustainability objectives of Artemis. Habitable elements represent opportunities to enable longer duration stays, increase the number of crew members present, enhance science and utilization activities, drive technology development for future Mars exploration, perform analog missions, and fuel economic opportunities for US industry. Panelists include Paul Kessler (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, deputy lead for lunar surface habitation); Andrew Choate (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Mars habitation lead); Krystofer Dudzinski (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, a space architect within the MSFC Advanced Concepts Office); and Larry Toups (retired from NASA Johnson Space Center, currently an adjunct professor at University of Houston in space architecture). The panel is moderated by Tracie Prater (NASA Marshall Space Flight Center, Habitation Systems Development Office). The panel will begin with an overview of the history of habitation concepts and an academic perspective on general considerations in space habitat design (Larry Toups). Paul Kessler and Andrew Choate will introduce NASA’s principle of “architecting from the right” to help define objectives for Artemis missions, needs/characteristics, use cases, and functions (as published in the agency’s Architecture Definition Document) and provide perspective on how this principle informs habitation concept development work. NASA panelists will discuss key engineering challenges identified for developing, deploying, and operating habitable assets on the lunar surface and/or in deep space. These may include dust mitigation, outfitting of inflatable softgoods (for concepts which may use softgoods as a primary structural material), survival in lunar darkness, human health and performance considerations, maintenance/repair/sparing, and autonomy. These identified challenges represent risks for habitation systems development and relate closely to capability gaps identified by the agency. While the work of NASA Marshall Space Flight Center’s habitation development office is primarily focused on habitats which are launched from earth pre-integrated (referred to as Class I in the framework previously developed by NASA space architects Kennedy/Cohen) or launched from earth and deployed at the point of use (Class II), there is also extensive work in NASA, academia, and companies on constructed habitats, which would be built on a planetary surface using indigenous resources (Class III habitats). Panelist Krystopher Dudzinski will discuss potential evolutionary pathways from Class I and Class II habitats to Class III habitats, unique and common architectural challenges within each habitat class, and key gaps in implementing Class III habitats from an architectural perspective. NASA panelists and the moderator will also provide an overview of partnership opportunities and avenues for further engagement to advance habitation systems for the SpaceCom audience. NASA is currently developing notional concepts for a lunar surface habitat and Mars transit habitat, which will be discussed during this panel session and used as examples. These concepts represent options for habitation system design and are a point of departure. They do not represent a final plan or formal recommendation on the part of the agency. Based on the most recent analysis cycle, NASA’s lunar surface habitat (SH) concept nominally supports two crew members for 30 days, with the capacity to support four crew during a surge period where crew will swap between the SH and another surface asset, such as a pressurized rover. This example design has a metallic airlock for ingress/egress and the upper portion is an inflatable material system which serves as the habitation module. The notional interior of the habitat is a three-deck layout/configuration which supports all crew mission functions, including exercise, stowage, extravehicular activity (EVA), sleep, hygiene waste collection, maintenance and repair, and meal preparation. Under analysis assumptions for habitation, the Mars Transit Habitat (TH) concept would support four crew on an up to 1,200 day Mars mission. One option for the concept is to initially dock Transit Habitat at Gateway, where it can be used to increase the duration of crew stays in cislunar space and perform shakedown and analog missions prior to a Mars departure. One challenge in longer duration missions which involve both surface exploration and transit is understanding crew adaptation when transitioning between partial gravity and microgravity environments. TH at Gateway offers an opportunity to study this transition and in doing so reduce risks associated with future Mars exploration. Like lunar SH, the most recent analysis cycle concept of a Mars TH is a hybrid structure design, with a metallic section supporting EVAs, axial/radial docking, and Safe Haven capabilities, and an inflatable softgoods structure for the primary habitation function. Interior layouts to optimize crew usability and livability are currently under trade. The panel will include presentation material, but also seeks to engage the audience in a highly interactive conversation regarding the potential role for habitation in future exploration initiatives. Potential topics for discussion include the influence of the crew experience on habitation systems design and livability/usability considerations, the benefits of space habitation development in terrestrial applications, and challenges and opportunities in “feeding forward” lunar surface habitation systems development to Mars exploration.

space habitats↗

NASA NTRS2017

Damage Simulation in Composite Materials: Why It Matters and What Is Happening Currently at NASA in This Area

Use of lightweight composite materials in space and aircraft structure designs is often challenging due to high costs associated with structural certification. Of primary concern in the use of composite structures is durability and damage tolerance. This concern is due to the inherent susceptibility of composite materials to both fabrication and service induced flaws. Due to a lack of general industry accepted analysis tools applicable to composites damage simulation, a certification procedure relies almost entirely on testing. It is this reliance on testing, especially compared to structures comprised of legacy metallic materials where damage simulation tools are available, that can drive costs for using composite materials in aerospace structures. The observation that use of composites can be expensive due to testing requirements is not new and as such, research on analysis tools for simulating damage in composite structures has been occurring for several decades. A convenient approach many researchers/model-developers in this area have taken is to select a specific problem relevant to aerospace structural certification and develop a model that is accurate within that scope. Some examples are open hole tension tests, compression after impact tests, low-velocity impact, damage tolerance of an embedded flaw, and fatigue crack growth to name a few. Based on the premise that running analyses is cheaper than running tests, one motivation that many researchers in this area have is that if generally applicable and reliable damage simulation tools were available the dependence on certification testing could be lessened thereby reducing overall design cost. It is generally accepted that simulation tools if applied in this manner would still need to be thoroughly validated and that composite testing will never be completely replaced by analysis. Research and development is currently occurring at NASA to create numerical damage simulation tools applicable to damage in composites. The Advanced Composites Project (ACP) at NASA Langley has supported the development of composites damage simulation tools in a consortium of aerospace companies with a goal of reducing the certification time of a commercial aircraft by 30%. And while the scope of ACP does not include spacecraft, much of the methodology and simulation capabilities can apply to spacecraft certification in the Space Launch System and Orion programs as well. Some specific applications of composite damage simulation models in a certification program are (1) evaluation of damage during service when maintenance may be difficult or impossible, (2) a tool for early design iterations, (3) gaining insight into a particular damage process and applying this insight towards a test coupon or structural design, and (4) analysis of damage scenarios that are difficult or impossible to recreate in a test. As analysis capabilities improve, these applications and more will become realized resulting in a reduction in cost for use of composites in aerospace vehicles. NASA is engaged in this process from both research and application perspectives. In addition to the background information discussed previously, this presentation covers a look at recent research at NASA in this area and some current/potential applications in the Orion program.

McElroy, Mack↗

DOE OSTI2025

Hestia-SWIFL: hourly anthropogenic fossil fuel CO2 and heat on the 2km WRF grid, version 1.1

The Hestia-SWIFL version 1.1 anthropogenic heat (AH) and fossil fuel CO2 (FFCO2) emissions data product represent emissions due to the combustion of fossil fuel and cement production within the state of Arizona from 2019 to 2022. This product was developed as part of the Southwest Urban Corridor Integrated Field Laboratory (SW-IFL) project, which aims to provide new knowledge and tools that address extreme heat, air quality, climate change and related urban environmental issues by integrating high-resolution observations, modeling, and civic engagement. The emissions are generated using a bottom-up/engineering approach and are tied to results generated by the Vulcan Project version 4, an effort to quantify space/time-resolved FFCO2 & AH emissions for the entire United States landscape. A large number of data sources are combined to best estimate the emissions at fine scales such as air quality emissions data, traffic flow data, building information, sociodemographic information, and fuel statistics. The AH product provides emissions for two emissions sources (transportation and point source emissions) in units of Watts per hour per square meter (W/m2) per year (annual files) or per hour (hourly files). The FFCO2 product provides emissions from nine individual emission sectors as well as the total, and in units of tons of carbon (tC) per grid cell per year or per hour. The output made available here places the native spatial resolution of the Hestia FFCO2 & AH emissions data product (points, lines, and polygons) into a regularized 2km x 2km grid at hourly and annual temporal resolutions, and stored in netCDF files. The exact spatial extent is defined by the ASU Weather Research Forecast (WRF) simulation grid. All data are processed using R/Python pm high-performance computing system. 2-27-2026 updates: Bugs in airport hourly profile (both AH and FFCO2) and building spatial patterns (FFCO2 only) were fixed. Hourly emissions are reprocessed for all years to reflect those changes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2020

2020 Exascale Computing Project Annual Meeting (Executive Summary Report)

The Exascale Computing Project (ECP) delivers specific applications, software products, and outcomes on DOE computing facilities. Integration across these elements for specific hardware technologies for exascale system instantiations is fundamental to ECP success. The outcome of the ECP is the delivery of a capable exascale computing ecosystem to provide breakthrough solutions addressing our most critical challenges in scientific discovery, energy assurance, economic competitiveness, and national security. This outcome is not a matter of ensuring more powerful computing systems. The ECP is designed to create more valuable and rapid insights from a wide variety of applications (“capable”), which requires a much higher level of inherent efficacy in all methods, software tools, and ECP-enabled computing technologies to be acquired by DOE laboratories (“ecosystem”). The ECP annual meeting provides a unique opportunity for the core technical expertise in the United States focused on achieving this next plateau of computational science and computing performance to engage in direct discussions on project execution. Face-to-face gatherings in technical communities like this are common and needed for the exchange of scientific ideas and technical performance. The ECP annual meeting stands apart from other technical conferences and meetings in the computing community as it is uniquely and solely focused on the execution of the ECP and the integration of technical activities leading to the creation of the exascale computing ecosystem for the future. The direct interaction of key critical technical staff, who are leaders in their respective fields, and the resulting give-and-take between software, applications, and hardware and the technical co-design therein, is unique and essential to the effective execution of the ECP. The first annual meeting was held in Knoxville, Tennessee, January 31 – February 2, 2017 and brought together, for the first time, a diverse collection of researchers from 16 DOE national laboratories as well as university computer and computational science researchers to discuss shared problems and joint solutions for the development of a capable exascale computing ecosystem. These interactions resulted in focused technical plans and an energized community centered on advances for ECP. The second annual meeting was held in Knoxville, Tennessee, February 5–9, 2018. It included 643 individual thought leaders and performers in application development, software research and deployment, and hardware research and integrators, all of whom are part of the multifaceted, billion dollar HPC community. This meeting provided a platform to discuss and disseminate numerous examples where researchers with common goals and synergistic solutions came together for the first time to deliver tangible results. Additionally, at the 2018 meeting, ECP researchers had the opportunity to digest all US HPC vendor R&D product roadmaps pointing to exascale – not only to learn how their research can play a role, but, more importantly, to influence those roadmaps to ensure successful delivery on DOE applications that will contribute to (if not solve) problems of national interest in national security, science, energy, and health, as well as growing security threats. The third annual meeting was held in Houston, Texas, January 14–17, 2019. With a 19% increase in the number of registrations (768 people), and the change in location, the third annual meeting was considered the most impactful of the three at the time. The new website provided a better platform for the dissemination of the content, the new venue as a meeting hotel instead of a conference center facilitated interactions and discussions after event hours, and the addition of an award-winning mobile event conference app (Whova) transformed dramatically the attendee experience at the event. This fourth annual meeting was held in Houston, Texas, February 3-7, 2020. This meeting had an increase in the number of attendees for a total of 824 people registered (782 attendees) and included numerous enhancements based on feedback and lessons learned from previous meetings, some of which are listed here: Improved quality of the sessions, their material and the whole program.; Had more industry participation and addition of external collaborators from overseas.; Published the full agenda earlier to better accommodate attendance and travel plans based on schedule.; Centralized all sessions in one venue.; Provided additional hotels and room blocks for the attendees.; Improved communication with the audience (links, material, directions, notifications, etc.) to go paperless.; Enhanced side meeting scheduling, management and user experience.; Made available additional space and tables for impromptu meetings and side discussions.; Improved IT and A/V solutions for speakers. In addition, our final survey captured the following points as opportunities for improvement in future meetings: consider a different meeting location that is more pedestrian friendly, reduce talks during working meals to allow more collaboration and informal time, adapt the agenda to acknowledge attendees from different timezones, consider recording some of the tutorials and/or sessions to share broadly with the HPC community, have a larger poster room, provide additional power strips, and improve the WiFi.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Siting bioenergy facilities in the United States: Measuring participation in decisions and distribution of effects

Scientists and stakeholders can inform the process of siting renewable energy facilities in ways that do not perpetuate socioeconomic disparities associated with fossil fuel industries or create new ones. Procedural justice indicators and distributional justice indicators that incorporate environmental, social, and economic objectives can be used to site energy facilities in ways that increase benefits and reduce negative impacts to disadvantaged and underserved populations. A generic list of potential energy justice indicators for siting bioenergy facilities was developed collaboratively between U.S. bioenergy researchers and diverse agriculture, energy, and energy and environmental justice stakeholders and experts. From this list smaller numbers of indicators can be selected or modified with communities for local siting of bioenergy facilities. Groups of indicators can be used to guide biorefinery or biopower siting and permitting decisions, e.g., to compare siting options, to draw early attention to key problems, or to track progress toward justice-related targets.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Report of the 2025 Workshop on Next-Generation Ecosystems for Scientific Computing: Harnessing Community, Software, and AI for Cross-Disciplinary Team Science

This report summarizes insights from the 2025 Workshop on Next-Generation Ecosystems for Scientific Computing: Harnessing Community, Software, and AI for Cross-Disciplinary Team Science, which convened more than 40 experts from national laboratories, academia, industry, and community organizations to chart a path toward more powerful, sustainable, and collaborative scientific software ecosystems. To address urgent challenges at the intersection of high-performance computing (HPC), AI, and scientific software, participants envisioned agile, robust ecosystems built through socio-technical co-design—the intentional integration of social and technical components as interdependent parts of a unified strategy. This approach combines advances in AI, HPC, and software with new models for cross-disciplinary collaboration, training, and workforce development. Key recommendations include building modular, trustworthy AI-enabled scientific software systems; enabling scientific teams to integrate AI systems into their workflows while preserving human creativity, trust, and scientific rigor; and creating innovative training pipelines that keep pace with rapid technological change. Pilot projects were identified as near-term catalysts, with initial priorities focused on hybrid AI/HPC infrastructure, cross-disciplinary collaboration and pedagogy, responsible AI guidelines, and prototyping of public-private partnerships. This report presents a vision of next-generation ecosystems for scientific computing where AI, software, hardware, and human expertise are interwoven to drive discovery, expand access, strengthen the workforce, and accelerate scientific progress.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

Circularity Futures Workshop Series: Summary Report

The aim of this report is to synthesize key feedback received from the three-part Circularity Futures workshop series held in Spring 2024. The workshop series was conducted by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) on behalf of U.S. Department of Energy, Office Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE), and was broken into three workshops: Workshop 1 - Circularity Analysis Needs and Priorities; Workshop 2 - Circularity Metrics and Indicators; and Workshop 3 - Circularity Data. Together, the workshops focused on identifying the existing priorities and gaps in the circularity modeling space, understanding different stakeholders' use and interpretation of circularity metrics and indicators, identifying common data gaps and data quality challenges, and assessing the robustness of available solutions. The workshop series brought a diverse group of stakeholders - including representatives from U.S. government offices, national labs, nonprofit organizations, industry, and academia - to collect first-hand feedback on needs, priorities, challenges and opportunities in the circularity modeling and analysis space. The workshop discussions highlighted numerous common needs, priorities and challenges among the interviewed groups. Several topics were frequently discussed, including: 1) Circularity as a pathway for sustainable economic growth: While circularity is generally defined in terms of resource conservation and reducing wasteful disposal of materials, participants agreed that circular strategies should serve broader economic, environmental, and social goals. It is therefore crucial for circularity analysis to look beyond waste reduction and instead evaluate a variety of impact metrics such as cost savings, job creation, air quality, and pollutant emissions. Mutli-criteria decision-making frameworks may be useful for making sense of disparate metrics and evaluating tradeoffs between impact categories.; 2) Economic and social factors are not well understood: Underdevelopment of existing end-of-life (EOL) management infrastructure, inconsistent standardization codes and policy space in reusing recycled content, and suboptimal collection and sorting strategies collectively contribute to uncertainty about the economic potential of circular pathways. The latter observation is consistent among all technologies but more emphasized for renewable energy systems. Social impacts of circularity practices are less understood and less researched than other sustainability aspects.; 3) Inconsistent methods for assessing emerging technologies: LCA and TEA results vary widely depending on the assumptions made with regards to market adoption of new technologies. Emerging technologies suffer limited availability of data needed to conduct a robust circularity analysis. Yet, understanding projected impacts of proposed nascent technology is a key need for different stakeholder groups.; and 4) Lack of temporally and geospatially explicit data: There is a need for open data that represents variations in circularity technologies over time and location. The lack thereof leads to aggregated and potentially misrepresented results in circularity analysis. Sensitivity analyses should be included to verify whether options perceived as more sustainable align with real-world practices.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗