SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Data is associated with Report "ResStock Communities LEAP Pilot Residential Housing Analysis - Detailed Methodology" by Lixi Liu, Jes Brossman, Yingli Lou technical report number NREL/TP-5500-88058. Results outline the potential impacts of the energy efficiency and electrification retrofit packages on communities’ housing stock.
Hermetically sealed electronic devices and methods for fabricating the hermetically sealed electronic devices are provided. The devices include a solder sealed vacuum housing. The solder seal is formed using a solder wick having an external solder reservoir. When the reservoir is filled with molten solder, the solder is drawn via capillary action into a precisely defined narrow gap between two components of the housing where it forms an airtight and vacuum-tight seal.
A just energy transition is an imperative of the Biden-Harris Administration, emphasizing the equitable distribution of benefits through energy-efficient and decarbonizing household technologies. Understanding the factors that increase a household's willingness to adopt these technologies helps policymakers implement more targeted and effective approaches. Our research addresses this by blending 550,000 housing stock types and energy simulation data with a nationally representative survey on residential technology adoption and decision-making (n=10,000). We identify energy equity gaps across tenure and income, highlighting disparities in energy burdens and insecurity. Findings show that households with prior modification experience are more willing to renovate, suggesting that small-scale retrofit programs could foster greater willingness. Energy secure but burdened homeowners are least willing to modify, highlighting the need to consider energy bill perceptions in policy design. Nearly half of US households that are energy burdened also face energy insecurity, with a significant gap in assistance for low-income households. We emphasize the need to understand household perceptions to improve policy. This research underscores the importance of understanding household behaviors to improve policy effectiveness, offering actionable insights for policymakers to promote equitable housing upgrades and advance a decarbonized future.
Social houses built after the Second World War to accommodate workers and low-income families represent one of the major energy consumers and greenhouse gas emitters in the residential sector. Plans for their renovation are underway in all European countries, and the process is more complicated for Italian cities due to the lack of space and the large number of historical buildings. This study addresses this challenge by proposing a methodology to renovate a low-income district in the city of Venice using CityBES to model and evaluate energy conservation measures. CityBES is a web-based tool that allows users to employ urban building energy modeling for large-scale energy and retrofit analyses of building stocks. In the case study conducted for Venice's Santa Marta district, due to the particular context, four common energy conservation measures covering both the building envelope and heat generation boilers have been applied. The evaluation of energy-saving performances at the district level showed that the four measures together achieved 67% energy savings, an abatement in energy cost equal to 67%, and annual carbon dioxide emissions reduction of 1.1 MtCO 2 . Furthermore, the case study demonstrates a method and workflow replicable for energy retrofit analysis of building stocks in other historical districts.
Multifamily affordable housing (MFAH) providers can identify and prioritize properties in their portfolios for which community solar development is feasible by following portfolio screening steps in a process outlined by NREL. Once MFAH providers have identified the most feasible sites, they can conduct more detailed analyses for a select number of sites to assess how distributed energy resources such as solar plus storage can help them meet their goals. The step is completed using NREL's REopt (https://reopt.nrel.gov/tool), a free techno-economic optimization model that determines DER sizes and dispatch strategies that minimize the life cycle cost of energy at a site. This presentation describes how to perform this step using REopt to help MFAH providers answer questions such as: What size solar PV system will result in the most energy bill savings at this site? What size solar-plus-storage system would be needed to power critical loads through a utility grid outage? What is the financial impact of rate switching, net metering, and/or meter aggregation? What percentage of the site's load can be offset with renewable energy? What are the emissions benefits of this renewable generation?
Community solar offers multiple benefits to providers and residents of multifamily affordable housing (MFAH), including access to affordable renewable energy for low- and moderate-income households, tax credits and other financial benefits for property owners, and increased community resilience when paired with energy storage. Even so, MFAH providers interested in realizing these benefits may need support to identify where to start or how to expand and accelerate solar deployment across their property portfolios once they have completed their first few installations. This fact sheet describes a portfolio screening approach for MFAH providers to evaluate their multi-state building portfolios for community solar project viability. The approach was developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory as part of its support for the National Community Solar Partnership (NCSP) MFAH Collaborative. By utilizing NREL's companion Policy Screening Workbook in conjunction with the web-based tools PVWatts® Calculator and REopt™ (Renewable Energy Integration and Optimization), MFAH providers can take a data-informed approach to identifying and prioritizing buildings in their portfolios that are most amenable to community solar development.
Community solar can offer immense benefits to multifamily affordable housing (MFAH) providers and low- and moderate-income (LMI) households through reduced electricity bills or enhanced services or building amenities. Although MFAH providers and households may wish to pursue the benefits of community solar, barriers exist. This issue brief summarizes the current MFAH market and challenges to community solar adoption, followed by a discussion of four community solar project models that address solar adoption barriers faced by MFAH providers and households.
Case study of a DOE 2021 Housing Innovation Award winning custom home in a cold climate that got a HERS 33 without PV, with 1,936 square feet, gable roof with asphalt shingles, attic insulated with 14 inches (R-49) of blown cellulose, and triple-pane windows.
Case study showing project and performance data and energy-efficiency measures of a winning entry in the Housing Innovation Awards of DOE's Building Technologies Office.
Case study showing project and performance data and energy-efficiency measures of a winning entry in the Housing Innovation Awards of DOE's Building Technologies Office.
According to recent studies and reports, in single-family houses (SFHs), air-sealing can significantly lower the thermal loads for space heating and cooling. Thus, air-sealing in SFHs could reduce the required size and cost of ground source heat pump (GSHP) systems for electrifying SFHs. Here, this study investigated the costs and benefits of integrating air-sealing with GSHPs for retrofitting existing SFHs when compared with air-source heat pumps. A whole building energy simulation tool integrated with an advanced design tool for modeling ground heat exchangers was used to calculate changes in required GSHP capacity, total borehole length, and building energy consumption with and without air-sealing in SFHs in 16 US climatic regions. The results from this study showed that reducing outdoor air infiltration from 0.8 air changes per hour (ACH) to the minimum ventilation requirement (0.35 ACH) can significantly reduce borehole length (up to 55 %), GSHP capacity (up to 48 %), and total heating electricity reduction, especially in cold climates (up to 44 %). The results also showed that for airtight homes (0.03 ACH infiltration) with a direct outdoor air system, the minimum required borehole length, GSHP capacity, and total heating electricity consumption can be reduced up to 70 %, 68 %, and 67 %, respectively, when compared with SFHs with 0.8 ACH infiltration. Moreover, the life cycle cost analysis showed that air-sealing in conjunction with a GSHP is more profitable than replacing the existing system with an air-source heat pump, even without any incentives for most climatic regions in the US (except for some hot regions).
The American radium dial worker (RDW) cohort of over 3200 persons is being revisited as part of the Million Person Study (MPS) to include a modern approach to RDW dosimetry. An exceptional source of data and contextualization in this project is an extensive collection of electronic records (digitized from existing microfilm and microfiche) housed at the United States Transuranium and Uranium Registries (USTUR). Although the type, extent, and quality (e.g. legibility) of record(s) varies between individuals, the remarkable occupational, medical and demographic data include in vivo radiation measurements (e.g. radon breath, whole body counts), autopsy results, medical records (including copies of radiographs), interviews over the years, and correspondence. Of particular dosimetric interest are the details of radiation measurements. For example, there are some instances where hand-written and transcribed values are both available, along with notes providing context for why a particular measurement in a series of measurements was chosen to assign an intake, or if there were concerns about a particular measurement. Born prior to 1935, RDW have nearly all passed away. Thus, the updated dosimetry, especially for the skeletal tissues, will allow the correlation of lifetime cumulative dose with radiation risk. Here we review typical information available in this collection of historical records and highlight some interesting finds. Additionally, we discuss the relevance to current and ongoing work related to updating the dosimetry of the RDW in the MPS, including providing an example of the usefulness of information contained in these records. The RDW cohort provides a unique historical perspective on occupational exposure to radium, making it a valuable dataset for understanding long-term health effects and improving current radiation protection standards.
Housing unit level demographic characteristics for SETX counties. Census years 2010 and 2020. These data are in beta testing stage, designed for use with the SETX-UIFL project. Contact Nathanael Rosenheim (nrosenheim@arch.tamu.edu) for more information. Papers using these data should include Nathanael Rosenheim in the development phase and co-authorship discussions.
The Single-Family and Manufactured Interactive 3D houses can be used as a self-guided learning tool by anyone interested in learning more about retrofit strategies of common weatherization measures. Alternatively, the tool can be used by training organizations for a more structured learning experience when paired with a learning activity or trainer-led demonstration.
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.
This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. 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.
Six different water samples from 241-17F and 241-49H pump house were analyzed for chemical and physical characteristics as part of efforts to understand recent mechanical seal failures associated with four new cooling water pumps. A focus of this work was characterization of any “as found” insoluble solids. The insoluble material found in the FCRW (F-Area caustic water treated with sodium chromate at 241-17F) sample are mostly magnetite (Fe3O4 or possibly equipment rust) and silica. It was found that 26% of measured FCRW particles have at least one dimension larger than 15 microns. The insoluble particles found in the source water, domestic water (FDW), are mostly kaolin (aluminosilicate) and some iron oxide. All found FDW particles were larger than 15 microns. The insoluble particles of the other source water, FArea well water (FWW), were mostly iron oxide with some trapped cations like calcium. Only 8% of found FWW particles were bigger than 15 microns.
In the last decades, the accessibility to digital fabrication technologies positioned composites as an affordable, structurally efficient and low-maintenance alternative to traditional mineral-based and high-energy materials. Of special interest are carbon nanotubes (CNT) and carbon foam (CFoam) from methane and coal pyrolysis respectively, as an environmentally friendly substitute to glass and carbon fiber. This paper presents the design of a principled single-family house, as a first case study to identify the constraints of such a material system, including technology gap, techno-economic and life cycle assessment, as well as building code requirements. In turn, the investigation proposes a suitable design-to-fabrication workflow, which potentially could bring CNT and CFoam materials to the construction of buildings.