Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Peer to Peer”

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 55 records · Page 3

2023 Project Peer Review Report

The Bioenergy Technologies Office (BETO) within the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy supports the research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) of technologies aimed at mobilizing domestic renewable carbon resources for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions across the U.S. economy. BETO systematically prioritizes RD&D into technology opportunities across a range of emerging scientific breakthroughs and technology readiness levels in the subprogram areas illustrated in Figure 1. This approach supports a diverse portfolio while developing the most promising and widely applicable technologies, testing technologies as integrated processes, and demonstrating integrated processes to support scale-up. These technologies will use a broad variety of renewable carbon resources to produce increasing volumes of biofuels and bioproducts. More information on BETO’s mission, goals, and strategic approaches can be found in the Bioenergy Technologies Office Multi-Year Program Plan. The biennial Peer Review process enables external stakeholders to provide feedback on the responsible use of taxpayer funding and develop recommendations for the most efficient and effective ways to accelerate the development of a bioenergy industry. This report includes the results of the Project Peer Review meeting held on April 3–7, 2023, in Denver, Colorado.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2021 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 7-11, 2021

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the fiscal year 2021 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held virtually June 7-11, 2021. In response to direction from various stakeholders, including the National Academies, this review process provides project- and program-level evaluations of DOE-funded research, development, demonstration, and analysis of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

AMR↗

U.S. Department of Energy Hydrogen Program: 2023 Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Report; June 6-9, 2023

This document summarizes peer review comments and scores for the fiscal year 2023 U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hydrogen Program Annual Merit Review and Peer Evaluation Meeting (AMR), held June 6-9, 2023. This review process provides project- and program-level evaluations of DOE-funded research, development, demonstration, and analysis of hydrogen and fuel cell technologies.

AMR↗

Community Resilience Indicator Analysis: Commonly Used Indicators from Peer-Reviewed Research (Updated for Research Published 2003-2021)

In 2017, FEMA’s National Integration Center (NIC) Technical Assistance (TA) Branch identified a need to establish a data-driven basis for prioritizing locations for TA investment and guiding local emergency management planning. To achieve this goal, FEMA tasked Argonne National Laboratory (Argonne) with identifying commonly used indicators of community resilience across the landscape of published peer-reviewed research. FEMA and Argonne completed the first Community Resilience Indicator Analysis (CRIA) in 2018 and repeated the process in 2022. The CRIA process begins with a literature review and cataloguing of published peer-reviewed assessment methodologies on social vulnerability and community resilience. The literature review findings are then filtered by inclusion criteria established by the CRIA research team to ensure the methodologies are: (1) Quantitative, (2) Data and methodology are publicly available, (3) Calculated at the county level or lower, (4) Examine generalized hazard risk (rather than a singular hazard), and (5) Focused on pre-disaster community conditions. After this, the research team identifies the commonly used indicators across these methodologies and selects the best data source for each indicator. Finally, the research team bins the data for visual display, conducts a correlation analysis and creates a composite index, the FEMA Community Resilience Index (FEMA CRI). In 2018, the CRIA identified eight resilience and vulnerability assessment methodologies and 20 commonly used indicators (indicators used in three or more of the eight methodologies). The FEMA CRI in 2018 was created from these 20 indicators and was produced for at the county level. The 2022 CRIA updated the literature review to expand the list of methodologies examined and followed the same process, resulting in an analysis of 14 methodologies published between 2003 and 2021 and 22 indicators identified as commonly used (indicators used in five or more of the 14 methodologies). In 2022, the research team produced the FEMA CRI at the county and the census tract levels. To make the CRIA data more accessible and more actionable, each individual indicator and the FEMA CRI is binned and included in FEMA’s Resilience Analysis and Planning Tool (RAPT). RAPT enables emergency managers and community partners to quickly visualize relative differences in potential resilience by county, tribe and census tract. By reviewing the data for each of these 22 indicators individually, emergency managers can gain insights for targeted outreach strategies, planning, mitigation investments and response and recovery operations. Communities, regional governments and others can use this data to better understand potential challenges to resilience. As the social science field of examining and validating indicators of resilience evolves, FEMA will update RAPT to provide emergency managers and community partners with additional data and tools to inform planning, mitigation, response and recovery. It is important to understand that the role of the emergency manager is not to change or to “improve” the data, but to plan appropriately for the community characteristics reflected in the data. These datasets are community characteristics that researchers have identified as important considerations for resilience. For example, people with disabilities may have greater challenges to be resilient to disasters. If a community has a high population of people with disabilities, the emergency manager(s) may need to create tailored preparedness outreach programs and strategies to ensure those residents have support if evacuation is necessary. Rather than label these indicators as an absolute measure of resilience, FEMA considers “potential challenges to resilience” a better frame to understand these indicators. Everyone is vulnerable to disasters. While scholars theorize that certain characteristics may make an individual or a household more socially vulnerable, the data does not reflect measures that individuals and/or communities have taken to address potential challenges, such as emergency management planning and outreach or household preparedness measures. To aid emergency managers in understanding how to use these indicators, calling them potential challenges to resilience supports a more positive and strategic application of the data in all phases of emergency management.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Eight Ways Agrivoltaics Installations Can Impact Communities: Insights from the Energy to Communities Peer-Learning Cohort

From July to December of 2024, the National Laboratory of the Rockies partnered with World Resources Institute to run a peer-learning cohort for local governments and community-based organizations on "Implementing an Agrivoltaics Project." This cohort effort, funded by the U.S. Department of Energy's Energy to Communities program, provided 15 organizations with expert presentations, peer-learning opportunities, and technical assistance related to agrivoltaics project development. Pulling from cohort discussions, this document shares a summary of the benefits that agrivoltaics projects can provide to surrounding communities.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

Case Study of "Engineering Peer Meetings" in JPL's ST-6 Project

This design process error-proofing case study describes a design review practice implemented by a project manager at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. There are many types of reviews at NASA: required and not, formalized and informal, programmatic and technical. Standing project formal reviews such as the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) are a required part of every project and mission development. However, the engineering peer reviews that support teams technical work on such projects are often informal, ad hoc, and inconsistent across the organization. This case study discusses issues and innovations identified by a project manager at JPL and implemented in "engineering peer meetings" for his group.

Tumer, Irem Y.↗

Case Study of 'Engineering Peer Meetings' in JPL's ST-6 Project

This design process error-proofing case study describes a design review practice implemented by a project manager at NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory. There are many types of reviews at NASA: required and not, formalized and informal, programmatic and technical. Standing project formal reviews such as the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and Critical Design Review (CDR) are a required part of every project and mission development. However, the engineering peer reviews that support teams technical work on such projects are often informal, ad hoc, and inconsistent across the organization. This case study discusses issues and innovations identified by a project manager at JPL and implemented in 'engineering peer meetings' for his group.

Chao, Lawrence P.↗

The JSC Engineering Directorate Product Peer Review Process

The JSC Engineering Directorate has developed a Product Peer Review process in support of NASA policies for project management and systems engineering. The process complies with the requirements of NPR 7120.5, NPR 7123.1 and NPR 7150.2 and follows the guidance in NASA/SP-2007-6105. This presentation will give an overview of the process followed by a brief demonstration of an actual peer review, with audience participation.

Jenks, Kenneth C.↗

Independent Peer Review of Communications, Navigation, and Networking re-Configurable Testbed (CoNNeCT) Project Antenna Pointing Subsystem (APS) Integrated Gimbal Assembly (IGA) Structural Analysis

Glenn Research Center Chief Engineer's Office requested an independent review of the structural analysis and modeling of the Communications, Navigation, and Networking re-Configurable Testbed (CoNNeCT) Project Antenna Pointing Subsystem (APS) Integrated Gimbal Assembly (IGA) to be conducted by the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC). At this time, the IGA had completed its critical design review (CDR). The assessment was to be a peer review of the NEi-NASTRAN1 model of the APS Antenna, and not a peer review of the design and the analysis that had been completed by the GRC team for CDR. Thus, only a limited amount of information was provided on the structural analysis. However, the NESC team had difficulty separating analysis concerns from modeling issues. The team studied the NASTRAN model, but did not fully investigate how the model was used by the CoNNeCT Project and how the Project was interpreting the results. The team's findings, observations, and NESC recommendations are contained in this report.

Raju, Ivatury S.↗

In-Suit Light Exercise (ISLE) Prebreathe Protocol Peer Review Assessment

The performance of extravehicular activity (EVA) by National Aeronautics and Space Administration astronauts involves the risk of decompression sickness. This risk has been mitigated by the use of oxygen "prebreathe" to effectively wash out tissue nitrogen prior to each EVA. Now that the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) is being retired, high-pressure oxygen will become a limited resource. The In-Suit Light Exercise (ISLE) Prebreathe Protocol offers several potential benefits including its potential to save 6 pounds of oxygen per EVA. At the request of the NASA Engineering and Safety Center, the peer review convened on October 14, 2010. The major recommendation of the Review Committee was that the ISLE protocol was acceptable for operational use as a prebreathe option prior to EVA. The results from the peer review are contained in this document.

Brady, Timothy K.↗

Appreciation of the 2015 JGR Space Physics Peer Reviewers

The Editors of the Journal of Geophysical Research Space Physics are deeply indebted to the many people among the research community that serve this journal through peer review. The journal could not exist without the time and effort invested by the community through this voluntary activity, providing expert evaluations and thoughtful assessments of the work of others. In 2015, the journal had 1506 scientists contribute to the process with at least one peer review, for a total of 3575 reviews completed, including additional reviews of resubmitted manuscripts. There were 277 reviewers that contributed four or more reports in 2015. The average number of reviews per referee in 2015 was, therefore, 2.4. Note that the total number of manuscript final decisions (i.e., accept or reject) for Journal of Geophysical Research (JGR) Space Physics was 1147 in 2015. Of this, 774 were accepted and 373 were declined, for an acceptance rate of 67% last year. If the 1334 "revision" decisions are included in the tally, then the total number of decisions made in 2015 was 2481. Working out the arithmetic, it means that on average, a manuscript gets about 1.2 revision decisions before a final accept-or-reject decision. This explains the ~3.1 average number of reviews per manuscript throughout each paper's lifetime in the submission-revision editorial process. We are pleased and happy that the research community is willing and able to devote their resources toward this service endeavor. We appreciate each and every one of you that helped maintain the high quality of papers in JGR Space Physics last year. We look forward to another excellent year working with all of you through the year ahead.

Liemohn, Michael W.↗

BETO 2021 Peer Review - Task X- Project Management

This presentation serves as the peer review requirement for FCIC Task X. It covers structure, approach, impact, and accomplishments. The project will be scored by a peer review panel based on the presentation.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Lessons Learned from the Clean Energy to Communities (C2C) Peer-Learning Cohort on Planning and Funding for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Deployment

From June to December 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) partnered with World Resources Institute (WRI) to run a peer-learning cohort for local governments on Planning and Funding for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure Deployment. This cohort effort, funded by DOE's Clean Energy to Communities Program, paired 15 local and regional governments with Clean Cities and Communities coalitions to translate cohort learnings to local context and conduct activities that brought participants closer developing of public electric vehicle charging infrastructure plans. This document shares key takeaways, lessons learned, and resources from the six-month cohort.

ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗

Thank You to Our Peer Reviewers in 2025

Peer reviewing is the foundation of modern scholarship, with external specialists being asked to fairly check and evaluate submitted work. This difficult and often time‐consuming activity is performed voluntarily, with the understanding that one's own scholarship shall benefit down the line from a careful analysis of its assumption, results, accuracy, and yes, language, as we are now evaluating someone else's work. At Space Weather, we pride ourselves on a fair but quick review process yielding high‐quality articles with a time from submission to first decision of less than 2 months. This would not be possible without the hard work of all our reviewers. Once a year, we take the occasion to name these reviewers to thank them for their service to the journal and the community.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Lessons Learned from the Energy to Communities (E2C) Peer-Learning Cohort on Engaging with Electric Utilities for Successful Local Partnerships

NLR designed and led a six-month peer-learning cohort from July through December 2025 on “Engaging With Electric Utilities for Successful Local Partnerships” as part of the U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy to Communities (E2C) program. Representatives from 15 local and regional governments from across the United States participated in monthly workshops covering best practices for engaging with their utilities to advance their own energy goals. This document shares key takeaways, lessons learned, and resources from the cohort that may be useful to local governments, regional governments, or Tribes.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Fusion Safety Program Peer Review (August 31 and September 1, 1999) [Slides]

The Fusion Safety Program Peer Review conference, held on August 31 and September 1, 1999, focuses on advancing the understanding and management of radioactive and hazardous materials within deuterium-tritium (D-T) fusion machines. The conference aims to investigate the behavior of significant sources of radioactive materials, such as activation products, dust, tritium, and beryllium. Additionally, it seeks to comprehend how various energy sources in fusion facilities—such as magnets, plasma, decay heat, and chemical reactions—can mobilize these materials. A key objective of the conference is to develop integrated, state-of-the-art analytic tools to demonstrate the safety and environmental potential of fusion technology. Furthermore, the conference assesses and evaluates safety and environmental issues associated with emerging fusion concepts, including those in the ARIES, ALPS, APEX, and IFE projects. This comprehensive approach aims to ensure the safe and sustainable advancement of fusion energy.

70 - PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Managerial leadership assessment - Personality correlates of and sex differences in ratings by leaders, peers, and followers

A performance appraisal was conducted at a Fortune 500 airline. Evaluations of each manager were taken from his or her management, peers and subordinates. These ratings were related to personality clusters revealing patterns for males similar to those found between personality and performance in pilot populations. A case is made that piloting aircraft requires similar skills to managing other complex enterprises and that similar profiles predict success in each.

Gibson, Robert H.↗