Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “GLOSSARY”

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.

45 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Education for PV Modeling Professionals: Observations from the 2025 PVPMC Workshop

We surveyed professionals in the photovoltaic industry to understand interests in education and training for performance modeling of solar power systems. We found that most professionals are self-taught and rely on a variety of public sources of technical materials. Available formal education, such as courses or certification programs, either lacks detail or is focused on software user training. Responses indicate several opportunities to create public resources that would benefit professional learning for solar power system modeling: • Create a glossary of terms and common variable names. • Develop guidance on uncertainty analysis in the context of solar power systems modeling. • Assemble a catalog of available educational materials and data sources.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2016

DMTN-015: Flavors of Coadds

A glossary of different kinds of coadded images, with brief descriptions of the algorithms behind them.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2015

Optimizing Geothermal Drilling: Oil and Gas Technology Transfer

There is a significant amount of financial risk associated with geothermal drilling; however, there are opportunities to improve upon current practices and technologies used. The scope of this drilling operational study included 21 geothermal wells and 21 oil and gas wells. The goal was to determine a 'perfect well' using historical data to compare the best oil and gas well to the best geothermal well. Unfortunately, limitations encountered in the study included missing data (bit records, mud information, etc.), poor data collection, and difficult to ascertain handwriting. An online software database was used to format drilling data to IADC coded daily drilling reports and generate analysis figures. Six major issues have been found in geothermal drilling operations. These problems include lost circulation, rig/equipment selection, cementing, penetration rate, drilling program, and time management. As a result of these issues, geothermal drilling averages 56.4 days longer than drilling comparable oil and gas wells in the wells in this study. Roughly $13.9 million would be lost due to non-productive time in the 21 geothermal wells and only $1.3 million in the oil and gas wells, assuming a cost of $50,000 per day. Comparable events such as drilling the same sized hole, tripping in/out, cementing, and running the same size casing took substantially less time in the oil and gas wells. Geothermal wells were drilled using older and/or less advanced technology to depths less than 10,000 feet, while oil and gas wells reached 12,500 feet faster with purpose built rigs. A new approach is now underway that will optimize drilling programs throughout the drilling industry. It is the use of Mechanical Specific Energy (MSE) as a tool to realize efficient drilling processes. However, a work-flow must also be established in order for there to be an efficient drilling program. Potential improvements for current geothermal operations are: the use of electronic records, real time services, and official glossary terms to describe rig operations, and advanced drilling rigs/technology.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Optimizing Geothermal Drilling: Oil and Gas Technology Transfer

There is a significant amount of financial risk associated with geothermal drilling. This study of drilling operations seeks opportunities to improve upon current practices and technologies. The scope of this study included analyzing 21 geothermal wells and 21 oil and gas wells. The goal was to determine a 'Perfect Well' using historical data to compare the best oil and gas well to the best geothermal well. Unfortunately, limitations encountered in the study included missing data (bit records, mud information, etc.) and poor data collection practices An online software database was used to format drilling data to IADC coded daily drilling reports and generate figures for analysis. Six major issues have been found in geothermal drilling operations. These problems include lost circulation, rig/ equipment selection, cementing, penetration rate, drilling program, and time management. As a result of these issues, geothermal drilling averaged 56.4 days longer than drilling comparable oil and gas wells in the wells in this study. Roughly $13.9 million was spent on non-productive time in the 21 geothermal wells, compared with only $1.3 million in the oil and gas wells, assuming a cost of $50,000 per day. Comparable events such as drilling the same sized hole, tripping in/out, cementing, and running the same size casing took substantially less time in the oil and gas wells. Geothermal wells were drilled using older and/or less advanced technology to depths less than 10,000 feet, while oil and gas wells reached 12,500 feet faster with purpose built rigs. A new approach is now underway that will optimize drilling programs throughout the drilling industry using Mechanical Specific Energy (MSE) as a tool to realize efficient drilling processes. Potential improvements for current geothermal operations are: the use of electronic records, real time services, and official glossary terms to describe rig operations, and advanced drilling rigs/technology.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

The Difficulty of Defining the Terms Credible and Unlikely for Nuclear Criticality Safety Purposes

During the last revision of the ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014, extensive efforts were made by the working group (ANS-8.1) to ensure the statements in the standard clearly reflected their intent This effort involved the review of each requirement and recommendation in the standard. In some cases, definitions were added to the standard glossary to minimize ambiguity in the standard (e.g., “process conditions” or “parameter”). The working group also considered adding definitions for the words “credible” and “unlikely” because definitions had been provided to the nuclear criticality safety (NCS) community from the US Department of Energy that caused confusion at some sites. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission document intends for licensees to provide appropriate definitions for these words in their site license. The purpose of this paper is to discuss why the working group ultimately decided not to include definitions for credible and unlikely in the 2014 revision of ANS-8.1

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2018

To the 'Safety related?' Question: What is Related to Safety? - 18430

Most, if not all, national programs for radioactive waste management (RWM) pledge their overall commitment to safety or - in the case of radioactive waste disposal - to long-term safety. Therefore, it may be somewhat surprising to find that the term 'safety' is hardly defined in these programs. The same holds for some of the core international guidance literature on the deep geological repository (DGR) 'safety case' concept. With respect to stakeholder concern over the safety of geological disposal, it seems, however, advisable to seek common ground in the understanding of the idea of 'safety'. In this paper, we review and discuss the most relevant international guidance literature's provision (or non-provision) of definitions of 'safety' in the context of radioactive waste disposal. Against this background, we develop a tentative, practical, glossary-style definition of 'safety' in the DGR context. As a seed of discussion, it may help to eventually expose possible mismatches in the base assumptions of safety experts and other stakeholders. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2017

The Difficulty of Defining the Terms 'Credible' and 'Unlikely' for Nuclear Criticality Safety Purposes

During the last revision of the ANSI/ANS-8.1-2014, extensive efforts were made by the working group (ANS- 8.1) to ensure the statements in the standard clearly reflected their intent. This effort involved the review of each requirement and recommendation in the standard. In some cases, definitions were added to the standard glossary to minimize ambiguity in the standard (e.g., 'process conditions' or 'parameter'). The working group also considered adding definitions for the words 'credible' and 'unlikely' because definitions had been provided to the nuclear criticality safety (NCS) community from the US Department of Energy that caused confusion at some sites. A Nuclear Regulatory Commission document intends for licensees to provide appropriate definitions for these words in their site license. The purpose of this paper is to discuss why the working group ultimately decided not to include definitions for credible and unlikely in the 2014 revision of ANS-8.1.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2024

ANS-8 Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Standards - Current Initiatives

The nuclear criticality safety (NCS) consensus standards are developed as using rigorous procedures of the Standards Board of the American Nuclear Society. These procedures have been accredited by the American National Standards Institute, Inc., as meeting the criteria for American National Standards. The Nuclear Criticality Safety Consensus Committee (NCSCC) that approved all 18 NCS consensus standards is balanced to ensure that competent, concerned, and varied interests have had an opportunity to participate. The ANS-8 subcommittee (ANS-8) consists of 17 NCS experts with many years of experience as end users of ANS standards who serve on standard working groups to develop and maintain standards. ANS-8 ensures that the technical content of the standards is adequate for NCS community use. Attempts are made to ensure that ANS-8 consists of NCS professionals with a diverse range of experience such that all standards are applicable to as many sites as possible. ANS-8 is a very active subcommittee, and some active projects in progress are discussed in this paper: basis statement development for all standards, development of a glossary for consistency of definitions across all ANS-8 standards, and Considering the Criticality Safety Support Group (CSSG) Recommendation 2016-04 to the ANS Standards Board for changes in several ANS-8 standards.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2025

Integrated Methane Monitoring Platform Extension, Volume I: Final Technical Report

The IMMPE project, DE-FE0032284, was to enhance methane monitoring technologies and their applications across various natural gas asset classes. The scope included deploying advanced methane detection and monitoring technologies to identify and mitigate fugitive methane emissions, measuring emission rates, and assessing impacts. The findings included the successful mitigation of identified emissions and quantification of emission rates. A key outcome was the development of a comprehensive template and summary of recommendations for methane emissions monitoring, which is replicable for both upstream and downstream applications. Furthermore, the project emphasized the importance of education by providing training opportunities for technicians and regulators, thereby fostering awareness and promoting the adoption of cost-effective methane emissions monitoring and management techniques.

02 PETROLEUM↗