Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “STEP file”

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

Public Reference Data for Megawatt-Scale Hydrogen Electrolysis – Simulated Wind

The U.S. Department of Energy and the National Laboratory of the Rockies (NLR) demonstrate hydrogen electrolysis, hydrogen compression and storage, and variable hydrogen fuel cell power production using megawatt-scale equipment at NLR’s Flatirons Campus as part of the Advanced Research on Integrated Energy Systems (ARIES) initiative. This dataset represents part of that effort and is intended for academic, national laboratory, industrial, and other stakeholders to plan, design, and validate models of megawatt-scale hydrogen technologies and diverse energy infrastructure nationwide. These data provide a baseline for how existing hydrogen electrolysis technologies perform when coupled with various energy technologies. Future datasets will demonstrate how existing hydrogen fuel cell technologies can provide controllable, dispatchable, and variable power output for artificial intelligence (AI) data centers and other variable loads. This dataset entry describes hydrogen production using a single, simulated wind turbine. The electrolyzer is a 1.25-MW proton exchange membrane type MC250 system manufactured by Nel Hydrogen . While the unit supports up to 2.5 MW of electrolysis, NLR only has a single 1.25-MW electrolysis stack. For the simulated wind energy profiles, NLR used OpenFAST to simulate a 3.4-MW International Energy Agency (IEA) reference wind turbine. The hour-long wind energy profiles varied over wind turbulence intensity (Class A or Class C) and average wind speed (5, 7, or 9 m/s). To match the power limits of the 1.25-MW electrolyzer and 3.4-MW IEA wind turbine most effectively and to maximize the efficiency of hydrogen production at a given average wind speed, the profiles were sometimes scaled by two times. This means that, in some cases, the experimental setup assumed two 1.25-MW electrolyzers were coupled with the wind turbine, representing a total maximum electrolysis load of 2.5 MW. Finally, NLR experimented with two settings for the electrolyzer power supply minimum and maximum current ramp rates (gain and slew): 200 and 400 amperes per second. The simulated profiles were translated from power (kilowatts) to current (amperes) using a curve fit with calibration data and sent to the electrolyzer power supply at 1-Hz frequency. These datasets report relevant hydrogen balance-of-plant and system data, all captured at 1 Hz, including hydrogen mass production measured with an Emerson Coriolis flow meter. Each .zip file represents a single wind turbine electrolysis experiment and is formatted as follows: {technology}-{average wind speed}-{turbulence class}_{number of 1.25 MW electrolyzers connected}-{electrolyzer ramp rate in amperes/second} For instance, “windIEA3.4-5ms-C_2-400.zip” represents the hour-long experiment using the IEA 3.4-MW turbine, subjected to an average wind speed of 5 m/s and Class C wind turbulence, and connected to two 1.25-MW electrolyzers with the power supply set to a maximum current ramp rate (gain and slew) of 400 A/s. Each .zip folder contains the following files: A .csv file containing raw data. An .xlsx file explaining all the fields in the raw data. A .png plot showing the time series of hydrogen production in kilograms per hour, electrolysis power consumption, and input wind turbine power. An experiment labeled “characterization_200.zip” demonstrates the MC250 electrolyzer steady-state response with 30 minute load steps for a total duration of 5 hours. Finally, a .csv file is provided with all simulated wind experiments combined into one dataset labeled "combined_wind_experiments.csv". NLR also built an AI/machine-learning predictive model based on these datasets. The model ingests the electrolyzer current command in amperes, as well as various pressures and temperatures across the system, and predicts hydrogen output in kilograms per hour. The complete model can be found at https://huggingface.co/NatLabRockies/ptmelt-hydrogen-electrolysis .

08 HYDROGEN↗

Hot Droughts and Forest Tree Dynamics in the Amazon - Statistical Models, Scripts, Data, and Outputs

This package contains data, outputs, equations, and R scripts for analyses for manuscript entitled "Hot droughts in the Amazon: A window to a future hypertropical climate" by J. Chambers et al., in particular it contains statistical models and analyses for the INPA BIONTE tree mortality study. The Models folder contains details for all statistical models in PDF files. The Scripts folder contains the R scripts for Bayesian Hierarchical Models (two text files) and SEMs (one text file) are separate and reasonably annotated. All data associated with these scripts are in the data folder. The Data folder contains two of the three CSV files used for the analyses and are called by the R scripts. Two of them are part of published datasets (`BIONTE_mortality-rates.csv` from Lima et al. 2024, DOI:10.15486/ngt/1898910 and `SPEI.csv` from Pastorello et al. 2023 DOI:10.15486/ngt/1958257) and also provided in this package for convenience (please see the corresponding datasets for usage and citation terms). The third dataset (`BIONTE_gapfilled_wd.csv`) contains sensitive information and can be obtained by contacting the manuscript lead author. The Outputs folder contains the two output files that provide extra information about the analyses. The file `figuresFeb2025d.pdf` contains all the figures from the manuscript - captions are in the manuscript. The file `ChambersMS.pdf` contains primary results from Bayesian statistical models, regression analyses, and validation steps applied to the tree mortality data from the INPA experiments. The document includes visual summaries, model diagnostics, and leave-one-out (LOO) validation results. A breakdown of file contents can be found in the README file that is part of this package.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NLR Data Processing Pipeline for MADIS [SWR-26-050]

The NLR Data Processing Pipeline for MADIS software package is for downloading, processing, and performing QA/QC on MADIS data. Designed to handle the following steps: 1) Download all MADIS data as compressed netcdf files for a given time period. 2) Unpack netcdf files into timeseries csvs for each coordinate within the given bounding box. 3) Process the csvs to filter according to quality control checks and convert variables to correct units. 4) Write processed csvs to a single nc file.

Benton, Brandon [National Laboratory of the Rockie↗

Meteorological and Soil Data from Ecohydrology Sensor Towers at Pump House and Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado, 2019-2025

This data package includes hourly meteorological and soil sensor data at eight ecohydrology monitoring sites in East River Watershed, Colorado as part of the Watershed Function Scientific Focus Area (WFSFA) research led by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL). Four field sites were located on the hillslope of East River (ER) near Pump House (PH) at Mount Crested Butte (ER-PHS1 to 4), and the other four are in the Snodgrass Mountain (SG) area (SG-EHS5 to 8). In terms of vegetation cover, three sites are in montane grasslands (ER-PHS1, ER-PHS2, and SG-EHS5), three are below evergreen conifer canopy (ER-PHS3, SG-EHS6, and SG-EHS7), and two are below deciduous aspen canopy (ER-PHS4 and SG-EHS8). The monitoring period began in October 2019 at the East River sites, in October 2020 at SG-EHS5 and SG-EHS6, and in October 2021 at SG-EHS7 and SG-EHS8. In September 2024, all four East River sites were fully retired. The four Snodgrass Mountain sites remain active. Each site is equipped with a comprehensive suite of meteorological sensors on a tripod and soil sensors that measure weather, energy fluxes, and soil variables. This data package includes measurements from ten different types of sensors and up to thirteen individual sensors per site, including (1) a weather station (measurement height ranges from 2.8~3.8 meters (m) above ground), (2) a quantum sensor for photosynthetic active radiation (PAR) (2.4~3.3m), (3) a net radiometer (1.7~2.1m), (4) an infrared radiometer (1.6~2.2m), (5) a sonic distance sensor (1.5~1.9m), (6) a soil carbon dioxide (CO2) flux chamber (0m), (7) a soil heat flux plate (-0.05m below ground), (8) a soil oxygen sensor (-0.3m), (9) a soil water potential sensor (-0.3m), and (10) soil water content sensors at 3~4 depths (-1.15 ~ -0.1m). A total of twenty-three variables is reported in this data package, including (1) atmospheric variables: air temperature (TA), atmospheric pressure (PA), vapor pressure (VP), and vapor pressure deficit (VPD), (2) precipitation variables: rain precipitation (P) and snow depth (D_SNOW), (3) energy fluxes variables: four-component net radiation (NETRAD) (shortwave/longwave incoming/outgoing radiation, SW_IN, SW_OUT, LW_IN, LW_OUT), photosynthetic photon flux density (PPFD), and soil heat flux (G), (4) soil variables: soil water content (SWC), soil water potential (SWP), soil temperature (TS), soil bulk electrical conductivity (COND_SOIL), and soil gaseous oxygen concentration (O2_SOIL), (5) wind variables: two-dimensional wind speed (WS), gust speed (WS_MAX), and wind direction (WD), and (6) surface variables: surface infrared temperature (T_CANOPY) and soil CO2 flux (CO2_SOIL). Please see the Methods section for data processing and QA/QC steps taken to generate the hourly datasets. The following files are included in this data package (notes on version: v{x}-{y}, where x is the metadata version, and y is the data version, when applicable): (1) “metadata_site_v{x}-{y}.csv” - a site metadata file that summarizes location information of all sites, including site ID, description, coordinates, timeframe, elevation, and vegetation cover, (2) “metadata_instrument_v{x}-{y}.csv” - an instrument metadata file that summarizes sensor information of all sites, including sensor manufacturer and model, measurement height, and sampling and averaging interval of all variables, (3) "data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.csv" - eight data files that contain hourly data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (4) “/figure/data_{SITE_ID}_v{x}-{y}.png" - eight figures that help visualize data of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, (5) “/photo/*” - photos of each site indicated by {SITE_ID} in the filename, and (6) four file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (*_dd.csv) files that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. Notes: (1) Measurement height: Each variable name is followed by conventional positional qualifiers “H_V_R”, where H indicates the relative horizontal positions of that specific variable, V the vertical positions, and R the replicates. In this data package, only the vertical qualifier V varies, and V increases from the highest vertical position (V=1) to the lowest. Variables with the same qualifier are not necessarily measured by the same sensor, and the same variable with the same qualifier across different sites are not necessarily measured at the same height. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor information and measurement heights, and whether a variable is measured below the canopy. (2) Variable availability: Snow depth is not available at ER-PHS3 and SG-EHS7. SWC, soil temperature, and soil bulk EC at the deepest depth (<-1m) are not available at SG-EHS6 and SG-EHS7. The missing value code for numeric variables is -9999, except for SWP. For SWP, the missing value code is +9999, because SWP values are negative. (3) Sampling frequency: Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the increase of sampling frequency of some variables from 30-min to 1-min at ER-PHS1 to 4 in July 2020. (4) Sensors: While the methods of each sensor are not detailed, all sensors are commercially available, and their methods can be found in their manuals. Please refer to “metadata_instrument.csv” for the sensor manufacturer and model information. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Maps of ice wedge thermokarst pool expansion from twenty-seven circumpolar survey areas

This repository includes data and code to accompany the manuscript 'Topography controls variability in circumpolar permafrost thaw pond expansion' by Abolt et al. The data include satellite imagery and derived maps of thermokarst pools from twenty-seven survey areas in North America and Siberia. The code, written in MATLAB (R2021a), contains demonstrations of the workflow for generating the maps. The demonstrations include training a generalized UNet for mapping thermokarst pools using data from three survey areas, 'fine tuning' the UNet for use at a specific survey area using transfer learning, applying a trained UNet to infer thermokarst pool extent within satellite imagery, and performing histogram matching as a pre-processing step to improve satellite imagery contrast. Contains MATLAB script files and M files, TIF files, shape files, XML, Excel, TXT, and CSV files.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic) was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska. Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Documentation on How to Run the NEAMS Workbench GUI on Sawtooth

This document provides guidelines on how to run Moose-based applications from the NEAMS WorkbenchGUI on the HPC platform Sawtooth located at Idaho National Laboratory. The different steps are illustrated with a multi-app example modeling a sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR) taken from the virtual test bed (VTB) website. The workflow consists of four steps to demonstrate the capabilities of the NEAMS Workbench GUI, that covers log into Sawtooth, editing and validating input files, submission of the job to the queue and visualization of the numerical solution and the geometry. Each step is illustrated with figures in the text, and a demonstration video is also available.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

Site and endmember spectra of terrestrial vegetation and soils for the Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study, June-July 2025

This dataset provides site and endmember spectra collected during the 2025 Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) campaign. The site spectra were collected to help validate airborne hyperspectral data acquired by the National Ecological Observatory Network's aerial observation platform (NEON AOP). Endmember spectra were collected to augment existing spectral libraries with additional samples of bare surfaces and non-photosynthetic vegetation. All measurements were acquired with an Analytical Spectral Devices (ASD) FieldSpec4 Hi-Res NG (Next Generation) spectroradiometer, which records radiance at 1nm (nanometer) intervals from the ultraviolet to the short-wave infrared (350-2500 nm). The dataset includes spectra measured at meadow sites where the CHESS team also collected vegetation samples for trait analyses. The site spectra were collected with the ASD FieldSpec4 palm grip attachment using an 8° field-of-view foreoptic. Site spectra are integrated measurements of the entire surface within the foreoptic’s field of view. For site-level spectra, the sun is the illumination source. A Spectralon panel mounted on a tripod was used for instrument optimization and white reference measurements for all site spectra. Site spectra were acquired within two hours of solar noon and within 48 hours of a NEON AOP overflight. Site spectra are labeled by date, sampling area, and site number according to the naming conventions of the CHESS campaign’s data management plan. The dataset also contains endmember spectra in the following categories: photosynthetic vegetation (PV), non-photosynthetic vegetation (NPV), bare (soil/rock), and flowers. Endmember measurements were acquired using either the contact probe or the leaf clip attachments of the ASD FieldSpec4. In these configurations, the bulb inside the spectrometer provides the light source for the measurements. The spectrometer was optimized and white reference measurements were recorded using the circular white pucks attached to the contact probe and leaf clip. Because they do not rely on solar illumination, contact probe and leaf clip measurements were collected during a broader time frame than the palm grip site spectra. Some endmembers were measured at CHESS meadow sites, while others were collected within the larger sampling area or in nearby locations (e.g. Gothic Townsite) with similar characteristics. Radiance, reflectance, and metadata files are split into three subfolders according to measurement type: proximal/palm grip (prx), contact probe (cp), and leaf clip (lc). Radiance spectra are provided in ASD file format (.asd file extension). All ASD files can be opened using the provided scripts. Metadata is provided in two formats: CSV file format (no geolocation) and GEOJSON file format (includes geolocation for each spectra). The dataset includes a set of pre-processed reflectance spectra as CSV files (yyyymmdd_rfl.csv). The python scripts and jupyter notebook used to calculate reflectance spectra from the ASD radiance data is included here and was previously published at: https://doi.org/10.3334/ORNLDAAC/2446. There is also a folder of JPEG photographs corresponding to selected spectra. We include a protocol document with detailed steps for ASD FieldSpec4 assembly and operations. This data additionally contains a file level metadata (flmd.csv) and data dictionary (dd.csv) file. Geospatial information: Geospatial data for mapping measurement site locations are in the files CHESS_polygons_lai_UTM.geojson, CHESS_polygons_shrub_UTM.geojson, and CHESS_polygons_meadow_UTM.geojson in the companion geospatial package for the 2025 CHESS campaign, ‘CHESS 2025: Location data for field observations and sampling’ (Henderson et al., 2026). CHESS Project Description: The Colorado Headwaters Ecological Spectroscopy Study (CHESS) comprised a multi-week airborne remote sensing and field observation campaign in the Upper Gunnison Basin, Colorado, conducted in June and July of 2025. Airborne remote sensing was conducted by the National Ecological Observatory Network Airborne Observation Platform (NEON AOP), concurrent with a field campaign run by the Rocky Mountain Biological Laboratory (RMBL), the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) and SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory Watershed Function Science Focus Area (SFA), and NASA-JPL (Jet Propulsion Laboratory) Earth Surface Mineral Dust Source Investigation (EMIT) program. Between June 10 and July 18, 2025, the NEON AOP flight team collected high-resolution aerial imaging spectroscopy and Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data over three domains: the Upper East River (CRBU), Almont Triangle (ALMO), and the Upper Taylor Basin (UPTA). In coordination with the flights, a field campaign acquired ground-truth observations, including observations of vegetation composition, foliar traits, forest demography, and subsurface properties in 18 core sampling areas within the domains. Additional surface water observations were taken at over 380 point locations. All CHESS campaign datasets can be found within the CHESS ESS-DIVE data portal: https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/portals/chess. Funding Acknowledgment: This research was carried out at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, under a contract with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (80NM0018D0004) and was funded by EMIT Extended Mission Phase E Science.

2018 NEON and 2025 CHESS Campaigns↗

Hydropower Capital and O&M Costs: An Exploration of the FERC Form 1 Data

This report explores the potential for using responses from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC’s) “Electric Utility Annual Report,” also known as FERC Form 1, as a cost database for conventional and pumped storage hydropower (PSH). The report outlines the process used to compile an easy-to-access database from the original FERC Form 1 data and discusses the historical cost/performance data. The steps for developing the database include downloading the annual FoxPro files from the FERC website (FERC, 2020), reading them into an Excel format, and reconciling naming issues across years, repeated entries, and shared assets, among others. The cleaned and compiled Form 1 database is available on Oak Ridge National Laboratory’s (ORNL’s) HydroSource website. For this report, the compiled Form 1 database was linked to two other hydropower databases, the National Inventory of Dams and the ORNL Existing Hydropower Assets, that provide additional information on the characteristics and other features of plants in the Form 1 data. Explorations of the plant characteristics, performance, capital costs, and operation and maintenance (O&M) cost data in the combined database were presented separately for conventional hydropower and PSH projects. Form 1 has several advantages as a hydropower cost database. First, the cost data is reported directly by plant owners. Second, Form 1 provides cost breakdowns of capital and operating costs for large conventional and PSH plants enabling more detailed tracking of hydropower costs compared with typical total cost estimates. Third, although the Form 1 data is not reported by all operational hydropower plants in the United States, the available data represents a wide range of plant characteristics and a sizable proportion of the hydropower fleet (61% of PSH plants and 22% of conventional hydropower plants by capacity). The lower proportion of the conventional hydropower fleet is because Form 1 reporting requirements apply only to private utilities that meet given size thresholds, leaving out federally owned facilities and many smaller hydropower plants. Overall, the Form 1 cost database represents a unique, publicly available database on hydropower asset capital and O&M costs. This report leads to a compiled database for the reporting years 1994 to 2020 that helps resolve issues with accessibility and use of the FERC Form 1 data by hydropower plant owners, project developers, technology developers, and regulators.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗

Verification Problems for Smooth Step Amplitude Load Curves in DYNA3D/Paradyn

This report documents the addition of three new verification tests in the LOADCURVE directory of the DYNA3D/Paradyn Software Quality Assurance test suite. Each test consists of a single element, where the velocities of each node are specified by either the newly added smooth step tabular load curve or another load curve option. The first test assesses the initialization and interpolation of the newly inputted load curve option through tabulated abscissa-ordinate pairs of data. The second test uses the same set of abscissa-ordinate data points and applies offset and scaling parameters available within the load curve definition. The third test defines the smooth step load curve in an original input deck, and assesses its correct redefinition using a restart file. The simulation velocities are compared to their true values at discrete points in time, and each test is verified up to numerical precision. These results confirm that the smooth step load curve option is functioning correctly and as intended.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Substantial and overlooked greenhouse gas emissions from deep Arctic lake sediment - supporting data and code

This data package contains data, descriptions, and code-based analyses that were used to support conclusions drawn in “Substantial and overlooked greenhouse gas emissions from deep Arctic lake sediment”, by Freitas et al. (2025) (https://doi.org/10.1038/s41561-024-01614-y). The study evaluated greenhouse gas production along a deep sediment core (20 m) taken in 2018 from below Goldstream Lake, a field site approximately 15 km north of Fairbanks, Alaska.The file “ESSDive_NFreitas_2024_flmd.csv” includes an overview of all other csv files in this data package, namely: sediment descriptions (depth and type of sediment), sediment characterizations (bulk density, gravimetric water content, total carbon, etc.), calculated respiration and temperature sensitivity values associated with year-long incubations of the sediment core, and the R code used to process the dataset. Additional details regarding the content of these files and how the calculations were performed are described in the Methods section of this archive. The “data_dictionary_ESSDive_NFreitas_2024_dd.csv” is a data dictionary for all files included in the data package. Each row in the data dictionary represents a column name in a given file. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy's Office of Biological and Environmental Research. The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy's Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).Data package updates- August 2024: Title was updated, R code now includes a process for calculating potential production across the whole sediment column, the "sediment_column_production_potentials_ESSDive_NFreitas_2024.csv" is the associated data output file, and the file level metadata and data dictionaries were updated to reflect the contents of the additional csv file.- October 2024: Title was updated, and a statement was added to Step 2 of the Methods that describes that samples were collected (and exported) in a responsible manner and in accordance with relevant permits and local laws.- January 2025: Updated the associated manuscript details in the Abstract (manuscript title, publication date, DOI link) and in the Related References section (full citation).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Lattice dynamics of alpha-uranium measured on ARCS.

The combined inelastic neutron scattering data from ARCS for alpha-Uranium single crystal measured at 300K, 200K, 70K and 20K. The incident neutron energy was 30 meV. To obtain a significant four-dimensional Q-E volume, the crystal was measured in two scattering geometries, with the [001] and [011] directions oriented along the vertical rotations axis. For each geometry, the crystal was rotated in 1 degree steps with respect to the incident beam. All the individual angles data files at each temperature were merged and analyzed using SHIVER software package (https://neutrons.github.io/Shiver/). The files labeled a_U_HKL_20K_new.nxs, a_U_HKL_70K.nxs, a_U_HKL_200K.nxs and a_U_HKL_300K.nxs are for [011] oriented scattering at 20K, 70K, 200K, and 300K respectively. The files labeled a_U_HK0_70K.nxs, a_U_HK0_200K.nxs and a_U_HK0_300K.nxs are for [001] oriented scattering at temperatures 70K, 200K and 300K respectively.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

Creation of a Weather Drivers Test Suite for Inclusion in ASHRAE Standard 140

Weather conditions are an important boundary condition for building performance simulation (BPS) calculations. For existing test cases in ASHRAE Standard 140 "Method of Test for Evaluating Building Performance Simulation Software" (ANSI/ASHRAE 2020), it was assumed that the software being tested could adequately read and interpret the weather data in the provided standard weather files. As differences between the programs have been reduced and as more programs have shifted to sub-hourly time steps this assumption has become more stretched. To address these concerns a new test suite testing a program's ability to read and interpret the data from a standard weather file was developed. The purpose of the test suite is to test the use of the typical data used from standard weather files.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Constraints on Future Analysis Metadata Systems in High Energy Physics

In high energy physics (HEP), analysis metadata comes in many forms—from theoretical cross-sections, to calibration corrections, to details about file processing. Correctly applying metadata is a crucial and often time-consuming step in an analysis, but designing analysis metadata systems has historically received little direct attention. Among other considerations, an ideal metadata tool should be easy to use by new analysers, should scale to large data volumes and diverse processing paradigms, and should enable future analysis reinterpretation. This document, which is the product of community discussions organised by the HEP Software Foundation, categorises types of metadata by scope and format and gives examples of current metadata solutions. Important design considerations for metadata systems, including sociological factors, analysis preservation efforts, and technical factors, are discussed. A list of best practices and technical requirements for future analysis metadata systems is presented. These best practices could guide the development of a future cross-experimental effort for analysis metadata tools.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

200-IA-1 Operable Unit Human Health Risk and Kd Screen

The purpose of this environmental calculation file (ECF) is to provide the following: Document the data processing and data reduction steps taken to prepare the 200-IA-1 Operable Unit (OU) data set that will be used to calculate the sample-specific screening level human health risk evaluation; Document the data processing and data reduction steps taken to prepare the 200-IA-1 OU data set that will be used to identify analytes that could potentially impact groundwater in the future beneath the 200-IA-1 OU representative waste sites; Document the assumptions, equations, and methodologies used to calculate the screening levels for human health cancer risks and noncancer hazards for each representative waste site assigned to the 200-IA-1 OU. Individual measured soil concentrations from 0 to 4.6 m (15 ft) below ground surface (bgs) (shallow vadose zone) are used to calculate the total excess lifetime cancer risk (ELCR) and hazard index (HI) for the outdoor worker scenario to determine if there is a basis for remedial action. Individual measured soil concentrations from the ground surface to the groundwater table are used for the distribution coefficient (Kd) screen to identify analytes that could potentially impact groundwater in the future beneath the 200-IA-1 OU representative waste sites. This ECF supports DOE/RL-2020-51, 200-IA-1 OU Focused Feasibility Study, under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA). A risk characterization based upon the evaluation of the health risk estimates developed in this ECF will be presented in the focused feasibility study report.

63 RADIATION, THERMAL, AND OTHER ENVIRON. POLLUTAN↗

Gamma Source Verification for GAMSRC and GAMSOR

Nuclear reactors that rely upon the fission reaction have two modes of thermal energy deposition in the reactor system: neutron absorption and gamma absorption. The gamma rays are typically generated by neutron capture reactions or during the fission process which means the primary driver of energy production is of course the neutron interactions. The GAMSOR program was first built in the mid 1980s to properly account for the gamma heating in an operating reactor core on core internals. The GAMSOR code is sequence of DIF3D calculations to compute the neutron and gamma flux and combine them to define both the neutron and gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The goal of this manuscript is to present the software verification of GAMSOR. The first step of the GAMSOR sequence of calculations involves of a modified version of DIF3D (called DIF3D-GAMSOR) which generates a gamma source distribution for the follow-on DIF3D gamma transport calculation (step 2). This modified version of DIF3D increases the burden of maintenance and verification work on GAMSOR as one must reverify the DIF3D capabilities which is undesirable. Because the calculation of the gamma source is the only unique aspect of GAMSOR beyond the regular DIF3D capabilities, that part was put in a standalone code called GAMSRC such that one can use the verified DIF3D code in step 1 followed by GAMSRC to carry out the same GAMSOR calculation step. As a consequence, this manuscript is focused on verification of the gamma source files generated by GAMSRC. The verification of the modified version of DIF3D (DIF3D-GAMSOR) will be done less rigorously in that it will be verified that it produces the same output that GAMSRC does and thus GAMSRC is equivalent to GAMSOR on the problems studied here. Hand calculations and independent numerical calculations of the gamma source generation are used for the verification work. This work follows the same methodology of GAMSRC. As expected, the results agree well with those calculated by GAMSRC as will be shown.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Gamma Source Verification for GAMSRC and GAMSOR

Nuclear reactors that rely upon the fission reaction have two modes of thermal energy deposition in the reactor system: neutron absorption and gamma absorption. The gamma rays are typically generated by neutron capture reactions or during the fission process which means the primary driver of energy production is of course the neutron interactions. The GAMSOR program was first built in the mid 1980s to properly account for the gamma heating in an operating reactor core on core internals. The GAMSOR code is sequence of DIF3D calculations to compute the neutron and gamma flux and combine them to define both the neutron and gamma heating throughout the modeled domain. The goal of this manuscript is to present the software verification of GAMSOR. The first step of the GAMSOR sequence of calculations involves of a modified version of DIF3D (called DIF3D-GAMSOR) which generates a gamma source distribution for the follow-on DIF3D gamma transport calculation (step 2). This modified version of DIF3D increases the burden of maintenance and verification work on GAMSOR as one must reverify the DIF3D capabilities which is undesirable. Because the calculation of the gamma source is the only unique aspect of GAMSOR beyond the regular DIF3D capabilities, that part was put in a standalone code called GAMSRC such that one can use the verified DIF3D code in step 1 followed by GAMSRC to carry out the same GAMSOR calculation step. As a consequence, this manuscript is focused on verification of the gamma source files generated by GAMSRC. The verification of the modified version of DIF3D (DIF3D-GAMSOR) will be done less rigorously in that it will be verified that it produces the same output that GAMSRC does and thus GAMSRC is equivalent to GAMSOR on the problems studied here. Hand calculations and independent numerical calculations of the gamma source generation are used for the verification work. This work follows the same methodology of GAMSRC. As expected, the results agree well with those calculated by GAMSRC as will be shown.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation: Model Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation (in prep), which introduces a watershed decomposition and parameterization method for large scale permafrost hydrology simulation. With this dataset, this study aims to address the research question: whether a computationally efficient hillslope-based modeling framework can reliably simulate discharge at Arctic river-basin scales. This dataset contains model input and output data for five modeling scenarios at a study site located in the Sagavanirktok River basin. The five modeling scenarios include three modeling cases under temperate conditions using full 3D, decomposed 3D, and decomposed 2D modeling strategies; and two modeling cases under actual Arctic conditions with permafrost using full 3D and decomposed 2D modeling strategies. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.6 for three temperate scenarios and v1.5 for two Arctic scenarios), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model with cryo-hydrology features. For the three temperate models, simulations were conducted for the period of 10/01/1993 - 09/30/2002; and for the two Arctic models, simulations were conducted for the period of 01/01/1994 - 12/31/2002. To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized hierarchically. The dataset contains: (1) Mesh files (.exo) for full 3D model, decomposed 3D models, and decomposed 2D models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/mesh/. Mesh files can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python. (2) Climate forcings (.h5) for full 3D model and decomposed 3D/2D models are located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/daymet_onePiece/, and huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/vp_pr_revised_daymet_1980_2006_with_wind/ separately. Accessible by Python. (3) Raw measured gage discharge (.csv) from USGS, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/gaged_basin15906000_discharge_usgs/. Accessible by Python. (4) Delineated subdomain raster (.tif) and shape files (.shp), and the final parameterized results (.npy) for decomposed models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/data_preprocessed-meshing. Accessible by Python. (5) Temperate models are located in nonpermaf_huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes three cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_0*-hillslope_*), decomposed 3D models (inside model_1*-subcatchment_*), and full 3D model (inside model_2*-onepiece_*). Two step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_*1-*_spinup_steadystate and model_*2-*_spinup_cycle, separately, which are used to initialize real transient models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the real transient models are located in model_*3-*_transient/. Especially, for two example hillslope models (ID=-11 and 11), additional h5py files are included in model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope-11/, model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope11, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment-11/, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment/11, respectively, which are used to plot the saturation figure (Figure 5) in the manuscript. Accessible by Python. (6) Arctic models are located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes two cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_04-hillslope_transient), and full 3D model (inside model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra). Three step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_01-column_freezeup/, model_02-column_spinup/, model_03-hillslope_spinup/, respectively, which are used to initialize real 2D transient hillslope models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of transient 2D hillslope models are located in model_04-hillslope_transient/. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the full 3D transient model is located in model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra/. The full 3D transient model is initialized by model_02-column_spinup/. Accessible by Python. (7) The MOSART routed discharge results (.csv) under Arctic conditions is located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/MOSART/. Accessible by Python. (8) All Python codes (.py) used to parameterize full 3D model to decomposed 2D models are located in script/. These codes fit with watershed workflow (a watershed delineation tool) v1.4 under the branch gaob/v1.4 from https://github.com/gaobhub/watershed-workflow.git.

EARTH SCIENCE > CRYOSPHERE↗

Using active learning to improve quasar identification for the DESI spectra processing pipeline

The Dark Energy Spectroscopic Instrument (DESI) survey uses an automatic spectral classification pipeline to classify spectra. QuasarNET is a convolutional neural network used as part of this pipeline originally trained using data from the Baryon Oscillation Spectroscopic Survey (BOSS). In this paper we implement an active learning algorithm to optimally select spectra to use for training a new version of the QuasarNET weights file using only DESI data, with the goal of improving classification accuracy. This active learning algorithm includes a novel outlier rejection step using a Self-Organizing Map to ensure we label spectra representative of the larger quasar sample observed in DESI. We perform two iterations of the active learning pipeline, assembling a final dataset of 5600 labeled spectra, a small subset of the approximately 1.3 million quasar targets in DESI's Data Release 1. When splitting the spectra into training and validation subsets we achieve similar performance to the previously trained weights file in completeness and purity calculated on the validation dataset but do so with less than one tenth of the amount of training data. The new weights also more consistently classify objects in the same way when used on unlabeled data compared to the old weights file. In the process of improving QuasarNET's classification accuracy we discovered a systemic error in QuasarNET's redshift estimation and used our findings to improve our understanding of QuasarNET's redshifts.

Machine learning↗