Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “model data volumes”

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 523 records · Page 29
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Airfoil Computational Fluid Dynamics - 9k shapes, 2 AoA's

This dataset contains aerodynamic quantities - including flow field values (momentum, energy, and vorticity) and summary values (coefficients of lift, drag, and momentum) - for 8,996 airfoil shapes, computed using the HAM2D CFD (computational fluid dynamics) model. The airfoil shapes were designed using the separable shape tensor parameterization that encodes two-dimensional shapes as elements of the Grassmann manifold. This data-driven approach learns two independent spaces of parameter from a collection of sample airfoils. The first captures large-scale, linear perturbations, and the second defines small-scale, higher-order perturbations. For this data, we used the G2Aero database of over 19,000 airfoil shapes to learn a parameter space that captured a wide array of shape characteristics. We fixed the linear deformations to be the mean over the database and sampled new shapes over a four-dimensional parameter space of higher-order perturbation. This sampling approaches allows for isolated analysis of non-linear airfoil shape deformations while holding other aspects (e.g., airfoil thickness) approximately constant. The aerodynamic quantities for the generated airfoil were obtained using the HAM2D code, which is a finite-volume Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) flow solver. We employ a fifth-order WENO scheme for spatial reconstruction with Roe's flux difference scheme for inviscid flux and second-order central differencing for viscous flux. A preconditioned GMRES method is applied for implicit integration. The Spalart-Allmaras 1-eq turbulence model is used for the turbulence closure, and the Medida-Baeder 2-eq transition model is applied to account for the effects of laminar turbulent transition. The airfoil grid is generated with a total of 400 points on the airfoil surface, the initial wall-normal spacing of y+ = 1, and an outer boundary located at 300 chord lengths away from the wall. The CFD simulations are performed at a freestream Mach number of 0.1, Reynolds number of 9M, and at two angles of attack, 4 deg. and 12 deg. The simulations were performed using the Bridges-2 system at the Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center in February 2023 as part of the INTEGRATE project funded by the Advanced Research Projects Agency - Energy in the U.S. Department of Energy. The data was collected, reformatted, and preprocessed for this OEDI submission in July 2023 under the Foundational AI for Wind Energy project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy Wind Energy Technologies Office. This dataset is intended to serve as a benchmark against which new artificial intelligence (AI) or machine learning (ML) tools may be tested. Baseline AI/ML methods for analyzing this dataset have been implemented, and a link to their repository containing those models has been provided. The .h5 data file structure can be found in the GitHub Repository resource under explore_airfoil_9k_data.ipynb.

9k↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data for Grogan et al. "Bringing Hydrologic Realism to Water Markets"

This data set provides model output and post-processing files required to reproduce the results, tables, and figures in the paper "Bringing Hydrologic Realism to Water Markets" by Grogan et al. (in review). Other input data used in this study includes: Lisk, M., Grogan, D., Zuidema, S., Caccese, R., Peklak, D., Zheng, J., Fisher-Vanden, K., Lammers, R., Olmstead, S., & Fowler, L. (2023). Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR) (Version v1) [Data set]. MSD-LIVE Data Repository. https://doi.org/10.57931/2205619 Two models were used in this study: (1) The University of New Hampshire Water Balance Model WBM, and (2) a Water Market Model. Market model code and model output post-processing code that make use of these data can be found here Model output files are: 1. WBM output files: scenario[x]_wbm_output.zip Where [x] is one of 1, 2, 2a, 3, and 3a Each zipped directory contains 7 gridded NetCDF files, each reporting the 10-year annual average value of a given variable, in units of average mm/day: File Name: wbm_indUseGross_yc.nc; Description: Water withdrawals by industry (part of the urban sector) File Name: wbm_domUseGross_yc.nc; Description: Water withdrawals by the domestic sector (part of the urban sector) File Name: wbm_irrigationGross_yc.nc; Description: Water withdrawals for agriculture File Name: wbm_irrigationExtra_yc.nc; Description: Water withdrawals from unsustainable groundwater for agriculture File Name: wbm_indUseEvap_yc.nc; Description: Consumptive water use by industry File Name: wbm_domUseEvap_yc.nc; Description: Consumptive water use by the domestic sector File Name: wbm_irrigationNet_yc.nc; Description: Consumptive water use by agriculture The file full_cell_area.nc gives the area of each grid cell in km2, which is used for converting water depth to water volume. 2. Water market model output & post processing output Folder: marketTrdSummaries/ Description: Files in this folder are used as input to code 1_WelfareCalculation_actual_trades.R. They summarize historical water right trade transactions in each state. File Name: welfare_gain_by_state_sector.csv; Description: Welfare gains by state and sector, as shown in Figure 3F. Used in code Figure3.R and produced (as a .xlsx file) by code 2_DemandCurves_simulated_trades.R File Name: welfare_data_actual.rdata; Description: welfare gains by WMA from actual historical trades, as shown in Figure 3A. This data is the output of code 1_WelfareCalculation_actual_trades.R File Name: welfare_summary_simulated.xlsx; Description: Welfare gains by state as simulated by the market model in Scenario 1. Produced by code 2_DemandCurves_simulated_trades.R, and used in code 4_WelfareCalculation.R. File Name: welfare_summary_cutoffs.xlsx; Description: Welfare gains by state as simulated by the market model in Scenario 2. Produced by code 3_DemandCurves_simulated_trades_cutoffs.R, and used in code 4_WelfareCalculation.R. File Name: welfare_summary_cutoffs_SGMS.xlsx; Description: Welfare gains by state as simulated by the market model in Scenario 2a. Produced by code 3_DemandCurves_simulated_trades_cutoffs.R, and used in code 4_WelfareCalculation.R. File Name: welfare_data_actual.rdata; Description: Spatial data, actual historical welfare gains by WMA as shown in Figure 3A. Produced by code 4_WelfareCalculation.R and used by code Figure3.R. File Name: welfare_data_simulated.rdata; Description: Spatial data, simulated Scenario 1 welfare gains by WMA as shown in Figure 3B. Produced by code 4_WelfareCalculation.R and used by code Figure3.R. File Name: welfare_data_simulated_cutoffs.rdata; Description: Spatial data, simulated Scenario 2 welfare gains by WMA. Produced by code 4_WelfareCalculation.R and used by code Figure3.R. File Name: welfare_data_simulated_cutoffs_SGMA.rdata; Description: Spatial data, simulated Scenario 2a welfare gains by WMA. Produced by code 4_WelfareCalculation.R and used by code Figure3.R. Additional files are provided for efficient reproduction of tables and figures. These include: File Name: wma_thresold_dates_Scenario2(a).csv; Description: Wet vs. paper right threshold dates for each WMA. Shown in Figure 2A,B. Produced and used by code calculate_thresolds_Figure2.R File Name: WWRTradeBounds (directory); Description: Trade boundary shapefile required to reproduce Figure 3A-D. Used in code Figure3.R File Name: welfare_region_totals.csv; Description: Welfare gains for the entire study region, as shown in Figure 3E. Used in code Figure3.R File Name: Welfare_gain_by_state_sector.csv; Description: Welfare gains by state and sector, as shown in Figure 3F. Used in code Figure3.R and produced (as a .xlsx file) by code 2_DemandCurves_simulated_trades.R File Name: WECC_MERIT_5min_v3b_mask.nc; Description: Gridded file that identified which land grid cells are in the WBM model domain, used for processing in code Figure4.py File Name: Table_1.csv; Description: All data in Table 1, reproducible from WBM output files using code table_1.R

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2022

Prospects and Limitations of Predicting Fuel Ignition Properties from Low-Temperature Speciation Data

Using chemical kinetic modeling and statistical analysis, we investigate the possibility of correlating key chemical “markers”–typically small molecules–formed during very lean (φ ~ 0.001) oxidation experiments with near-stoichiometric (φ ~ 1) fuel ignition properties. One goal of this work is to evaluate the feasibility of designing a fuel-screening platform, based on small laboratory reactors that operate at low temperatures and use minimal fuel volume. Buras et al. [Combust. Flame2020,216, 472–484] have shown that convolutional neural net (CNN) fitting can be used to correlate first-stage ignition delay times (IDTs) with OH/HO2 measurements during very lean oxidation in low-T flow reactors with better than factor-of-2 accuracy. In this work, we test the limits of applying this correlation-based approach to predict the low-temperature heat release (LTHR) and total IDT, including the sensitivity of total IDT to the equivalence ratio, φ. We demonstrate that first-stage IDT can be reliably correlated with very lean oxidation measurements using compressed sensing (CS), which is simpler to implement than CNN fitting. LTHR can also be predicted via CS analysis, although the correlation quality is somewhat lower than for first-stage IDT. In contrast, the accuracy of total IDT prediction at φ = 1 is significantly lower (within a factor of 4 or worse). Furthermore, these results can be rationalized by the fact that the first-stage IDT and LTHR are primarily determined by low-temperature chemistry, whereas total IDT depends on low-, intermediate-, and high-temperature chemistry. Oxidation reactions are most important at low temperatures, and therefore, measurements of universal molecular markers of oxidation do not capture the full chemical complexity required to accurately predict the total IDT even at a single equivalence ratio. As a result, we find that φ-sensitivity of ignition delay cannot be predicted at all using solely correlation with lean low-T chemical speciation measurements.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2023

Data reduction considerations for the burning velocity of spherical constant volume flames of R32 (CH 2 F 2 ) with air

Here, the present work explores data reduction techniques for the measurement of the laminar burning velocities of R32(CH 2 F 2 )-air mixtures using a constant volume combustion device, in which the pressure-time history is the only measured parameter. To allow clear assessment of the accuracy of the data reduction methods, the pressure-time histories used for analysis are synthetically generated via a detailed numerical simulation employing full kinetics and with and without an optically-thin radiation model. Various data reduction models are employed, including a two-zone model and two multi-zone models, and these are compared with the results from the burning velocity obtained from the output of the numerical simulation. The data reduction schemes are shown to be accurate if the same radiation model is employed in the data reduction as was used in the flame simulation to generate the pressure trace used for post-processing. If the incorrect radiation model is employed, however, the errors can be quite large. The effects of stretch, radiation, and different data post-processing methodologies are explored and the errors quantified. Stretch is shown to be important for the early stages and the selected data range that is used for extrapolation has a significant effect on the extrapolated burning velocity. However, with an appropriate choice of data considered for extrapolation, the prediction of the unstretched burning velocity can be quite accurate.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗
DOE OSTI2025

High temperature melting of dense molecular hydrogen from machine-learning interatomic potentials trained on quantum Monte Carlo

We present results and discuss methods for computing the melting temperature of dense molecular hydrogen using a machine learned model trained on quantum Monte Carlo data. In this newly trained model, we emphasize the importance of accurate total energies in the training. We integrate a two phase method for estimating the melting temperature with estimates from the Clausius–Clapeyron relation to provide a more accurate melting curve from the model. We make detailed predictions of the melting temperature, solid and liquid volumes, latent heat, and internal energy from 50 to 180 GPa for both classical hydrogen and quantum hydrogen. At pressures of roughly 173 GPa and 1635 K, we observe molecular dissociation in the liquid phase. Here, we compare with previous simulations and experimental measurements.

08 HYDROGEN↗
DOE OSTI2021

Noise suppression for MHD characterization with electron cyclotron emission imaging 1D technique

Significant noise suppression for magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) mode characterization in the spatial and spectral domain is achieved by processing two-dimensional (2D) electron cyclotron emission imaging (ECEI) data with a one-dimensional (1D) ECEI technique using a short time window ($1\;{\text{ms}}$). The technique is applied to detect toroidal Alfven eigenmodes (TAEs) in the temporal spectrum and fit their radial envelope using the data from the DIII-D tokamak W-band 2D ECEI system. Using the data length (time window) of only 1 ${\text{ms}}$, the 1D ECEI can clearly detect the TAEs (~100 ${\text{kHz}}$) on the spectrum, while similar spectrum quality requires ~10 ${\text{ms}}$ data length with the cross power spectrum between two midplane ECEI channels. The 1D ECEI technique also effectively avoids biased fitting when resolving the fine structure of the TAE's radial envelope. The radially spatial resolution of 1D ECEI is constrained by the finite ECE radiation volume of the ECEI receiver. Here, with forward radiation modeling, we find the DIII-D ECEI system can sensitively measure the even parity MHD activities, for which the mode width is >15 mm, and tearing modes (odd parity MHD activities), for which the island full width is >30 mm.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Memory and rejuvenation in glassy systems

Here, the memory effect in a single crystal spin glass (Cu 0.92 Mn 0.08 ) has been measured using 1 Hz ac susceptibility measurements over a reduced temperature range of 0.4 - 0.7 T g and a model of the memory effect has been developed. A double-waiting-time protocol is carried out where the spin glass is first allowed to age at a temperature below T g , T w$_{1}$ , followed by a second aging 4 K lower, T w$_{2}$ . The 4 K separation is sufficient to ensure rejuvenation has occurred. The model is based on calculating overlaps between the growth of the correlation lengths at the two temperatures. It accounts for the absolute magnitude of the memory effect as a function of both waiting times and temperatures. The data can be explained by the memory loss being a function of the relative change in the correlated volume at the first waiting temperature due to growth in the correlations at the second waiting temperature.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2021

DeepGhostBusters: Using Mask R-CNN to Detect and Mask Ghosting and Scattered-Light Artifacts from Optical Survey Images

Wide-field astronomical surveys are often affected by the presence of undesirable reflections (often known as "ghosting artifacts" or "ghosts") and scattered-light artifacts. The identification and mitigation of these artifacts is important for rigorous astronomical analyses of faint and low-surface-brightness systems. However, the identification of ghosts and scattered-light artifacts is challenging due to a) the complex morphology of these features and b) the large data volume of current and near-future surveys. In this work, we use images from the Dark Energy Survey (DES) to train, validate, and test a deep neural network (Mask R-CNN) to detect and localize ghosts and scattered-light artifacts. We find that the ability of the Mask R-CNN model to identify affected regions is superior to that of conventional algorithms and traditional convolutional neural networks methods. We propose that a multi-step pipeline combining Mask R-CNN segmentation with a classical CNN classifier provides a powerful technique for the automated detection of ghosting and scattered-light artifacts in current and near-future surveys.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2025

Real-fluid behavior in rapid compression machines: Does it matter?

Rapid compression machines (RCMs) have been extensively used to quantify fuel autoignition chemistry and validate chemical kinetic models at high-pressure conditions. Historically, the analyses of experimental and modeling RCM autoignition data have been conducted based on the adiabatic core hypothesis with ideal gas assumption, where real-fluid behavior has been completely overlooked, though this might be significant at common RCM test conditions. Here, this work presents a first-of-its-kind study that addresses two significant but overlooked questions for autoignition studies within RCMs in the fundamental combustion community: (i) experiment-wise, can unaccounted-for real-fluid behavior in RCMs affect the interpretation and analysis of RCM experimental data? and (ii) simulation-wise, can unaccounted-for real-fluid behavior in RCMs affect RCM autoignition modeling and the validation of chemical kinetic models? To this end, theories for real-fluid isentropic change are newly proposed and derived based on high-order Virial EoS, and are further incorporated into an effective-volume real-fluid autoignition modeling framework newly developed for RCMs. With detailed analyses, the strong real-fluid behavior in representative RCM tests is confirmed, which can greatly influence the interpretation of RCM autoignition experiments, particularly the determination of end-of-compression temperature and evolution of the adiabatic core in the reaction chamber. Furthermore, real-fluid RCM modeling results reveal that considerable error can be introduced into simulating RCM autoignition experiments when following the community-wide accepted effective-volume approach by assuming ideal-gas behavior, which can be as high as 64% in the simulated ignition delay time at compressed pressure of 125 bar and lead to contradictory validation results of chemical kinetic models. Therefore, we recommend the community to adopt frameworks with real-fluid behavior fully accounted for (e.g., the one developed in this study) to analyze and simulate past and future RCM experiments, so as to avoid misinterpretation of RCM autoignition experiments and eliminate the potential errors that can be introduced into the simulation results with the existing RCM modeling frameworks.

High-order Virial equation of state↗
DOE OSTI2020

Rapid Identification of X-ray Diffraction Patterns Based on Very Limited Data by Interpretable Convolutional Neural Networks

Large volumes of data from material characterizations call for rapid and automatic data analysis to accelerate materials discovery. Herein, we report a convolutional neural network (CNN) that was trained based on theoretical data and very limited experimental data for fast identification of experimental X-ray diffraction (XRD) patterns of metal–organic frameworks (MOFs). To augment the data for training the model, noise was extracted from experimental data and shuffled; then it was merged with the main peaks that were extracted from theoretical spectra to synthesize new spectra. For the first time, one-to-one material identification was achieved. Theoretical MOFs patterns (1012) were augmented to a whole data set of 72 864 samples. It was then randomly shuffled and split into training (58 292 samples) and validation (14 572 samples) data sets at a ratio of 4:1. For the task of discriminating, the optimized model showed the highest identification accuracy of 96.7% for the top 5 ranking on a test data set of 30 hold-out samples. Neighborhood component analysis (NCA) on the experimental XRD samples shows that the samples from the same material are clustered in groups in the NCA map. Analysis on the class activation maps of the last CNN layer further discloses the mechanism by which the CNN model successfully identifies individual MOFs from the XRD patterns. Furthermore, this CNN model trained by the data augmentation technique would not only open numerous potential applications for identifying XRD patterns for different materials, but also pave avenues to autonomously analyze data by other characterization tools such as FTIR, Raman, and NMR spectroscopies.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Future Atmospheric Rivers and Impacts on Precipitation: Overview of the ARTMIP Tier 2 High–Resolution Global Warming Experiment

Atmospheric rivers (ARs) are long, narrow synoptic scale weather features important for Earth’s hydrological cycle typically transporting water vapor poleward, delivering precipitation important for local climates. Understanding ARs in a warming climate is problematic because the AR response to climate change is tied to how the feature is defined. The Atmospheric River Tracking Method Intercomparison Project (ARTMIP) provides insights into this problem by comparing 16 atmospheric river detection tools (ARDTs) to a common data set consisting of high resolution climate change simulations from a global atmospheric general circulation model. ARDTs mostly show increases in frequency and intensity, but the scale of the response is largely dependent on algorithmic criteria. Across ARDTs, bulk characteristics suggest intensity and spatial footprint are inversely correlated, and most focus regions experience increases in precipitation volume coming from extreme ARs. The spread of the AR precipitation response under climate change is large and dependent on ARDT selection.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

Mesoscale Convective Systems in DYAMOND Global Convection‐Permitting Simulations

Abstract This study examines the deep convection populations and mesoscale convective systems (MCSs) simulated in the DYAMOND (DYnamics of the atmospheric general circulation modeled on non‐hydrostatic domains) winter project. A storm tracking algorithm is applied to six DYAMOND simulations and a global high‐resolution satellite cloud and precipitation data set for comparison. The simulated frequencies of tropical deep convection and organized convective systems vary widely among models and regions, although robust MCSs are generally underestimated. The diurnal cycles of MCS initiation and mature stages are well simulated, but the amplitudes are exaggerated over land. Most models capture the observed MCS lifetime, cloud shield area, rainfall volume and movement speed. However, cloud‐top height and convective rainfall intensity are consistently overestimated, and stratiform rainfall area and amount are consistently underestimated. Possible causes for the model differences compared to observations and implications for future model developments are discussed.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Portable Parallel Algorithms and Frameworks for Exascale Graph Analytics

Graphs (or networks) are a tool used to model the interactions among various entities. Efficiently processing large graphs has recently attracted significant attention due to the applications of graphs in various domains, such as biology, chemistry, and cyber-security. Analyzing the structure and properties of these graphs is an important component of many scientific computing pipelines. With the explosion in the volume of data, graphs have become very large and can contain hundreds of billions of vertices and trillions of edges. Therefore, it is crucial to develop high-performance methods to enable graph analysis to be done quickly and energy-efficiently. Furthermore, these solutions should be highly parallel in order to take advantage of modern parallel machines. However, designing efficient solutions is not enough. With the wide variety of computing environments available, each with different programmability and performance characteristics, it is necessary to develop solutions that are portable in terms of both performance (i.e., provide theoretical guarantees) and programmability (i.e., provide high level abstractions).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2026

High-Resolution Regional Atmosphere–Ocean–Wave Coupled Simulations of Hurricane Henri (2021)

To explore the integrated effects of ocean and ocean surface wave related physical processes on TC simulations, a set of three model simulations is performed. * In experiment 'A', the event is modeled using the Weather Research Forecasting (WRF) model alone with prescribed Sea Surface Temperature (SST) at 6-hour intervals. * In experiment ‘AO,’ WRF is coupled with the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM), enabling variable exchange between atmosphere and ocean, but without considering ocean surface wave-related physical processes. * In experiment ‘AOW’, WRF, FVCOM, and Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) exchange variables with each other every hour through the OASIS3-MCT Coupler to allow direct and indirect atmosphere-ocean-wave interactions. * Observational data are also included in this dataset (Dropsonde, HRD-Radar, NDBC_wave). All simulations are initialized at 18:00 UTC on August 19, 2021, within a domain encompassing the western North Atlantic Ocean. The atmospheric domain features a horizontal resolution of 3 km. The ocean domain, which covers a substantial portion of the WRF ocean domain, employs an unstructured triangular grid with resolutions ranging from 3 km near the coast to 9 km in the open ocean, effectively resolving the complex coastline of the U.S. Northeast Coast. Initial and boundary conditions for the atmosphere model are obtained from the 6-hourly 0.25° NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction) Global Forecast System (GFS; NCEP, 2015) data.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

High-Resolution Regional Atmosphere–Ocean–Wave Coupled Simulations of Hurricane Henri (2021)

To explore the integrated effects of ocean and ocean surface wave related physical processes on TC simulations, a set of three model simulations is performed. * In experiment 'A', the event is modeled using the Weather Research Forecasting (WRF) model alone with prescribed Sea Surface Temperature (SST) at 6-hour intervals. * In experiment ‘AO,’ WRF is coupled with the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM), enabling variable exchange between atmosphere and ocean, but without considering ocean surface wave-related physical processes. * In experiment ‘AOW’, WRF, FVCOM, and Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) exchange variables with each other every hour through the OASIS3-MCT Coupler to allow direct and indirect atmosphere-ocean-wave interactions. * Observational data are also included in this dataset (Dropsonde, HRD-Radar, NDBC_wave). All simulations are initialized at 18:00 UTC on August 19, 2021, within a domain encompassing the western North Atlantic Ocean. The atmospheric domain features a horizontal resolution of 3 km. The ocean domain, which covers a substantial portion of the WRF ocean domain, employs an unstructured triangular grid with resolutions ranging from 3 km near the coast to 9 km in the open ocean, effectively resolving the complex coastline of the U.S. Northeast Coast. Initial and boundary conditions for the atmosphere model are obtained from the 6-hourly 0.25° NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction) Global Forecast System (GFS; NCEP, 2015) data.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

High-Resolution Regional Atmosphere–Ocean–Wave Coupled Simulations of Hurricane Henri (2021)

To explore the integrated effects of ocean and ocean surface wave related physical processes on tropical cyclone simulations, a set of three model simulations is performed. * In experiment 'A', the event is modeled using the Weather Research Forecasting (WRF) model alone with prescribed Sea Surface Temperature (SST) at 6-hour intervals. * In experiment ‘AO,’ WRF is coupled with the Finite Volume Community Ocean Model (FVCOM), enabling variable exchange between atmosphere and ocean, but without considering ocean surface wave-related physical processes. * In experiment ‘AOW’, WRF, FVCOM, and Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) exchange variables with each other every hour through the OASIS3-MCT Coupler to allow direct and indirect atmosphere-ocean-wave interactions. * Observational data are also included in this dataset (Dropsonde, HRD-Radar, NDBC_wave). All simulations are initialized at 18:00 UTC on August 19, 2021, within a domain encompassing the western North Atlantic Ocean. The atmospheric domain features a horizontal resolution of 3 km. The ocean domain, which covers a substantial portion of the WRF ocean domain, employs an unstructured triangular grid with resolutions ranging from 3 km near the coast to 9 km in the open ocean, effectively resolving the complex coastline of the U.S. Northeast Coast. Initial and boundary conditions for the atmosphere model are obtained from the 6-hourly 0.25° NCEP (National Centers for Environmental Prediction) Global Forecast System (GFS; NCEP, 2015) data. These CSV files are derived from the NetCDF files in the c0 dataset. Unlike the original format, where geographic coordinates were stored in a separate file, each CSV now embeds the corresponding latitude and longitude values alongside the measured or simulated variables.

17 WIND ENERGY↗