Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Split representation”

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.

40 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Advanced Finite-Volume Numerics and Source Term Assumptions for Kernel and G-Equation Modelling of Propane/Air Flames

Here G-Equation models represent propagating flame fronts with an implicit two-dimensional surface representation (level-set). Level-set methods are fast, as transport source terms for the implicit surface can be solved with finite-volume operators on the finite-volume domain, without having to build the actual surface. However, they include approximations whose practical effects are not properly understood. In this study, we improved the numerics of the FRESCO CFD code’s G-Equation solver and developed a new method to simulate kernel growth using signed distance functions and the analytical sphere-mesh overlap. We analyzed their role for simulating propane/air flames, using three well-established constant-volume configurations: a one-dimensional, freely propagating laminar flame; a disc-shaped, constant-volume swirl combustor; and torch-jet flame development through an orifice from a two-chamber device. We tested the explicit (sub-cycled) vs. implicit formulation for the standard transport operators (advection, diffusion, compressibility). In addition to the accurate flame swept-volume method for chemistry and species source term, we developed a more accurate estimator for the burnt/unburnt split cell composition. Then, we developed a signed-distance-function (SDF) based method which provides a more stable reinitialization of the level-set field at every time-step. We found that simplifying assumptions common to several G-Equation implementations, for straightforward terms such as compressibility and advection, lead to large errors in predicting the propagation of even laminar flames, with deviations up to ~300% in simulated vs. formulated flame speed. Conversely, the enhanced numerics enabled through the SDF field reinitialization and improved chemistry source term improve simulation stability and smooth flame propagation even with significantly larger solver time-steps.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2024

Shrub Seedling Experiment: Environmental Conditions, Vegetation Composition, and Seedling Recruitment, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2018-2019

In June 2018, a manipulative seed-addition experiment was established at the Council Mile Marker 71 (CN_MM71), Quartz Creek Burn Area (Kougarok Mile Marker 86), and Quartz Creek Unburned (Kougarok Mile Marker 80) sites on the Seward Peninsula, Alaska. At each site, 5 replicate blocks were established in disturbed and intact upland tussock tundra (a total of 40 plots). Disturbed plots at Council were located on thermo-erosional (thermokarst) slopes, while disturbed plots in Quartz Creek were in burned areas affected by the Mingvk Lake fire in 2015. Using a split-plot design, an additional manual disturbance treatment (scraping to remove the surface bryophyte layer) was implemented across all blocks in June 2018. Seeds of five erect, deciduous shrubs were broadcast seeded into each plot in June 2018, and seedlings were censused in August 2018 and August 2019. The dataset includes ancillary measurements of plot-level environmental conditions (soil temperature, moisture, chemistry, thaw depth, microtopography, substrate thickness) and vegetation composition (NDVI and estimated percent cover by species and plant functional type). Dataset contains 10 csv data files (five data files with corresponding data dictionaries and one file-level metadata file) and one pdf user guide. The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was 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↗
DOE OSTI2024

FORCE Update 2024

The Framework for Optimization of Resources and Economics (FORCE) tool suite is the U.S. Department of Energy’s Nuclear Integrated Energy Systems (IES) Program flagship tool suite for technoeconomic IES analysis of IES. This tool suite is useful for analysis designed to evaluate and improve the technoeconomics of energy production systems, particularly for systems including nuclear technology. In this report, we document the development activity for the FORCE tool suite to extend its capabilities as performed during fiscal year 2024. In addition to reliability and accessibility, capability is one of the three standards guiding the development of the FORCE tool suite and the software codes that are its constituent parts. Extending the capabilities of the FORCE tool suite allows analysis both within the IES program as well as industry, university, and laboratory partners to perform analysis with more accuracy, insight, and impactful narrative. Four areas of capability development were the focus of activity this year: economic parameter uncertainty quantification, multiresolution analysis, components-to-optimization workflow automation, and statespace construction workflows for real-time optimal control. In economic parameter uncertainty quantification, the ability of HERON to capture risk due to scenarios (weather and energy demand uncertainty) was expanded to also include uncertainties in financial parameters such as capital cost or operation and maintenance costs. By including these sources of uncertainty, which are sometimes very large compared with scenario uncertainty, HERON is better able to capture the risk posed by investment in various IES technology. Because of this, analysts can also consider the reduction in risks that can be realized by choice of some technologies. In multiresolution analysis, development activity extended on work completed previously. In fiscal year 2023, methods for decomposing time series signals, such as demand, solar and wind availability, and price profiles, were analyzed and down-selected to those most effective at splitting signals into different resolutions. These resolutions allow considering the influence of different energy demand and supply behaviors across different time scales. For example, energy demand might be divided into seasonal, weekly, and hourly profiles. In fiscal year 2024, this preliminary work was extended and implemented within the Risk Analysis Virtual Environment (RAVEN) risk and uncertainty analysis platform, which is used throughout the FORCE framework. This development of the “multi-resolution time series analysis” (MR-TSA) module in RAVEN allows training synthetic history generators on complex time series. These synthetic history generators can then be used in HERON for generating scenarios that represent possible market and weather scenarios that can be analyzed on different time scales. We envision completing this work in the future, implementing multiresolution dispatch optimization strategies that can make the most beneficial use of these stratified time histories. In components-to-optimization workflow development, workflows for translating user inputs of components into algorithms for algebraic optimization were selected and implemented. Similar algorithms within the Holistic Energy Resource Optimization Network (HERON) were separated from the main code base of HERON and gathered with the components-to-optimization workflows in the new Dispatch Optimization Variable Engine (DOVE) software library. This modularization allows FORCE users to analyze dispatch optimization and energy system duty cycles independently of HERON, which previously was a burdensome task. Additionally, these dispatch optimization algorithms, set up in an independent library, can now be used across all software applications within FORCE, especially including the real-time optimal control software Optimization of Real-time Capacity Allocation (ORCA). Allowing FORCE software to share dispatch optimization algorithms within a single library allows for improved software maintenance and reliability. In statespace characterization workflow development, alternative workflows for optimizing dispatch with additional technical accuracy was the focus, particularly to improve the real-time optimization decision making in ORCA. Using algorithms and workflows initially developed for the Feasible Actuator Range Modifier (FARM), workflows for determining the statespace representation of IES were identified and demonstrated. The resulting dispatch optimization required a more robust optimization algorithm than that originally used in HERON (and moved to DOVE), which required adding an alternate workflow to DOVE that can more accurately match the behavior of physical systems using a partial differential equation representation. In conclusion, capability developments in the FORCE tool suite in fiscal year 2024 have improved the ability of the FORCE tool suite to perform

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Raw Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. In order to hold a water right in the western United States, an entity, (e.g., an individual, corporation, municipality, sovereign government, or non-profit) must register a physical document with the state's water regulatory agency. State water agencies each maintain their own database containing all registered water right documents within the state, along with relevant metadata such as the point of diversion and place of use of the water. All western U.S. states have digitized their individual water rights databases, along with the geospatial data describing the spatial units where water rights are managed. Each state maintains and provides their own water rights data in accordance with individual state regulations and standards. We collected water rights databases from 11 western United States states either by downloading them from publicly accessible web portals, or by contacting state water management representatives; detailed descriptions of where and when the data was collected is provided in the README.txt, as well as Lisk et al.(in review). This collection of data are those raw water rights. Each state formats their data differently, meaning that file types, field availability, and names vary from state to state. Note, the data provided here reflects the state of the water rights databases at the time we collected the data; updates have likely occurred in many states. Some pieces of information are common among all states. These are: priority date, volume or flow of water allowed by the right, stated water use of the right, and some means of identifying the geography and source of the water pertaining to the right - typically the coordinates of the Point of Diversion (PoD) of a waterbody or well. Arizona regulates water in a different way than the other 10 states. Outside of some relatively small critical agricultural areas called Active Management Areas (AMAs), Arizona does not maintain any water rights. However, the state does require registration of surface and groundwater pumping devices, which includes disclosing the mechanical specifics of the devices. We used these records as a proxy for water rights. Each state, and their respective water right authorities, have made their water right records available for non-commercial reference uses. In addition, the states make no guarantees as to the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of their respective databases, let alone the modifications which we, the authors of this paper, have made to the collected records. None of the states should be held liable for using this data outside of its intended use. In addition, the following states have requested specifically worded disclaimers to be included with their data. Colorado: "The data made available here has been modified for use from its original source, which is the State of Colorado. THE STATE OF COLORADO MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTY AS TO THE COMPLETENESS, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, OR CONTENT OF ANY DATA MADE AVAILABLE THROUGH THIS SITE. THE STATE OF COLORADO EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, WHETHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. The data is subject to change as modifications and updates are complete. It is understood that the information contained in the Web feed is being used at one's own risk." Montana: "The Montana State Library provides this product/service for informational purposes only. The Library did not produce it for, nor is it suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Consumers of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the viability of the information for their purposes. The Library provides these data in good faith but does not represent or warrant its accuracy, adequacy, or completeness. In no event shall the Library be liable for any incorrect results or analysis; any direct, indirect, special, or consequential damages to any party; or any lost profits arising out of or in connection with the use or the inability to use the data or the services provided. The Library makes these data and services available as a convenience to the public, and for no other purpose. The Library reserves the right to change or revise published data and/or services at any time." Oregon: "This product is for informational purposes and may not have been prepared for, or be suitable for legal, engineering, or surveying purposes. Users of this information should review or consult the primary data and information sources to ascertain the usability of the information." The available data is provided as a series of compressed files, which each containing the full data collected from each state. Some of the files have been renamed, to more easily know which state the data belongs to. The file renaming was also required as some files from different states had the same name. In other cases, the data for a state has been placed in a folder indicating which state it belongs to - as the state organized its data by selected subregions. Below is a brief description of the format of the collected data from each state. ArizonaRights_StatementOfClaimants: A folder containing a database of interconnected CSV files. The soc_erd.pdf file contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with SOC_MAIN.csv in the center of the page. ArizonaRights_SurfaceWaterRightsData: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 10 associated CSVs. SurfaceWater.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with ADWR_SW_APPL_REGRY.csv. ArizonaRights_Well55Registry: A folder containing a database of a single Shapefile and 59 associated CSVs. Wells55.pdf contains a visual flowchart of how the various files are connected, beginning with WellRegistry.shp. CaliforniaRights_eWRIMS_directDatabase: A folder containing a collection of four "series" Microsoft Excel files, as either XLS or XLSX. The four "series": byCounty, byEntity (what type of legal entity holds the right), byUse (stated water use), and byWatershed, are various methods by which the California water rights are organized within the state's database. However, it was observed that by only collecting a single series, not all water rights were being provided. So, essentially, the majority of records within each "series" are copies of each other, with each "series" containing some unique records. ColoradoRights_NetAmounts: A folder containing 78 CSV files, with one file per Colorado Water District. IdahoRights_PointOfDiversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Idaho. IdahoRights_PlaceOfUse: A Shapefile containing the Place of Use polygons for the entire state of Idaho. MontanaRights_WaterRights: A Geodatabase file containing the Points of Diversion and Places of Use for the entire state of Montana. The name of the Points of Diversion Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WRDIV", and the name of the Places of Use Feature Layer is "WRPOU". NevadaRights_POD_Sites: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Nevada. NewMexicoRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of New Mexico. OregonRights_state_shp: A folder containing 36 Shapefiles and are split between "pod" (Point of Diversion) and "pou" (Place of Use) for each water management basin within Oregon. In other words, each basin has one "pod" file and one "pou" file. The "pod" files are point shapes, and the "pou" files are polygons. UtahRights_Points_of_Diversion: A Shapefile containing the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Utah. WashingtonRights_WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD: A Geodatabase file containing both the Points of Diversion for the entire state of Washington. The name of the Feature Layer within the Geodatabase is "WaterDiversions_ECY_NHD". WyomingRights: A folder containing four subdirectories, one for each Wyoming Water Division. Each Division directory includes a varying number of subdirectories for each Wyoming Water District. Each District folder contains two copies of the Point of Diversion records for that area, with one copying being in CSV and one copy in Microsoft Excel XLS format.

Lisk, Matthew↗