Results for “testing data” — Page 3

DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE: Well 16A(78)-32/Well16B(78)-32 Circulation Test Data

This dataset encompasses the collected data and associated reports from the low-rate injection circulation test conducted on wells 16A(78)-32 and 16B(78)-32 in July 2023 at Utah FORGE. It includes comprehensive raw circulation data, captured by Pason and Schlumberger (SLB). The dataset details various parameters recorded during circulation testing such as produced fluid, injection pressure, injection rate, produced rate, temperature, downhole pressure difference, bottom hole pressure in the well, and surface treating pressure. Note that the Pason data is presented in Mountain Time, whereas the SLB data is in Pacific Time.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Utah FORGE: Direct Shear Test Data for Investigating Seismic Precursors to Shear Failure of Fractures

This dataset includes results of direct shear tests to investigate the mechanical and geophysical response of dry and saturated fractures in Indiana limestone and Sierra White granite. Direct shear tests were performed on tensile-induced fractures in Indiana limestone and Sierra White granite in a custom water-pressurized chamber. The provided Excel files include the representative seismic wave signals and the normalized wave amplitudes of ultrasonic wave transducers. A link to the published journal article presenting the data and describing the experiment in detail is provided as well.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2025

Modified 316H constitutive model updated with high temperature stress relaxation test data

This report describes the calibration of a new high temperature constitutive model for 316H stainless steel, suitable for use with the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Section III, Division 5, Class A rules for design by inelastic analysis. The model retains the same mathematical form used by the reference model included in Nonmandatory Appendix Z of the Code, but refits the model to an expanded dataset including all the data used to fit the original model plus seven new stress relaxation tests. The addition of these high temperature stress relaxation tests improves the model's accuracy in predicting relaxation at temperatures greater than 700 ⁰C, without compromising the accuracy of the model versus the original calibration data.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

DOE OSTI2023

PV Module BOM and Test Data

This dataset contains compiled results from annual PV Module Reliability Scorecards published by PV Evolution Labs – also known as PVEL. These scorecards show summary results of PV module testing performed by PVEL and name specific models of PV modules as "Top Performers" in various tests. Full details on testing, Top Performer status and other criteria for inclusion in Scorecards are documented in reports and online documentation available from https://www.modulescorecard.pvel.com. This dataset is not affiliated with PVEL and is intended only to simplify sorting and filtering Scorecard data and finding specific PV module models and Top Performer results. Note that data included in Scorecards has evolved over time, so not all data is available for all years, and testing protocols and Scorecard criteria have been changed over time.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Assessment of Accelerated Stress Testing Data for Silicon Photovoltaics Using Tensor Decomposition Methods

In this work, we examine the use of high-order tensor decompositions to analyze degradation pathways emerging from accelerated stress testing of silicon photovoltaic (PV) modules. Matrix-based decompositions are powerful tools for studying two-dimensional data arrays and form the foundation of a host of classical data analysis techniques. Tensors are high-order extrapolations of matrices that are able to account for more parameter dimensions, and a variety of tensor decomposition methods have been developed that similarly seek to extend insights from matrix decompositions to higher dimensions. Applying and interpreting tensor decomposition methods to sequences of PV module image data, we seek to uncover and isolate different degradation modes occurring from accelerated stress testing procedures. Further, we consider the contributions of different modes to PV module performance degradations.

data analysis↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence H - Raw Data

Sequences H, I, and J: Upwind Baseline (F), Upwind Low Pitch (F), Upwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of –30 to 180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and angles of ±10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence H, 0° for sequence I, and 6° for sequence J. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to –99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pretensioned to 40,000 N. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YS, followed by 000.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence I - Raw Data

Sequences H, I, and J: Upwind Baseline (F), Upwind Low Pitch (F), Upwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of –30° to 180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and angles of ±10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence H, 0° for sequence I, and 6° for sequence J. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to –99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pre-tensioned to 40,000 N. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YS, followed by 000.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence J - Raw Data

Sequences H, I, and J: Upwind Baseline (F), Upwind Low Pitch (F), Upwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of –30° to 180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and angles of ±10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence H, 0° for sequence I, and 6° for sequence J. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to –99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pre-tensioned to 40,000 N. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YS, followed by 000.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Compilation of Published Test Data for Cylindrical and Spherical Vessels under External Pressure

This dataset is a compilation of the results of previously-published failure tests of cylindrical and spherical pressure vessels, pipes, shells, and caps under external pressure. This data has been used for the article 'Simplified Formulas for External Pressure Design' by W. Kirkland and C. Bett, presented at the ASME Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference 2022. Paper number PVP2022-78354.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence B - Raw Data

Sequences B, C, and D: Downwind Baseline (F), Downwind Low Pitch (F), Downwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used a downwind, teetered turbine with a 3.4° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of ±180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and yaw angles of -20° to 10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence B, 0° for sequence C, and 6° for sequence D. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence C - Raw Data

Sequences B, C, and D: Downwind Baseline (F), Downwind Low Pitch (F), Downwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used a downwind, teetered turbine with a 3.4° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of ±180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and yaw angles of -20° to 10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence B, 0° for sequence C, and 6° for sequence D. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence D - Raw Data

Sequences B, C, and D: Downwind Baseline (F), Downwind Low Pitch (F), Downwind High Pitch (F) This test sequence used a downwind, teetered turbine with a 3.4° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of ±180° were achieved at low wind speeds, and yaw angles of -20° to 10° were achieved for high wind speeds. The blade tip pitch was 3° for sequence B, 0° for sequence C, and 6° for sequence D. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade and probe pressure measurements were collected.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence S - Raw Data

Sequences S, T, and U: Upwind, No Probes (F); Upwind 2° Pitch (F); Upwind 4° Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of 0° to 180° were achieved for Sequence S, but the yaw angle remained at 0° for Sequences T and U. The blade tip pitch was 3° for Sequence S, 2° for Sequence T, and 4° for Sequence U. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade pressure measurements were collected. The five-hole probes were removed and the plugs were installed. Plastic tape 0.03-mm-thick was used to smooth the interface between the plugs and the blade. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to -99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pre-tensioned to 40,000 N. During post-processing, the probe channels were set to read -99999.99. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s for the Sequence S configuration. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YSU, followed by 00.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence T - Raw Data

Sequences S, T, and U: Upwind, No Probes (F); Upwind 2° Pitch (F); Upwind 4° Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of 0° to 180° were achieved for Sequence S, but the yaw angle remained at 0° for Sequences T and U. The blade tip pitch was 3° for Sequence S, 2° for Sequence T, and 4° for Sequence U. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade pressure measurements were collected. The five-hole probes were removed and the plugs were installed. Plastic tape 0.03-mm-thick was used to smooth the interface between the plugs and the blade. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to -99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pre-tensioned to 40,000 N. During post-processing, the probe channels were set to read -99999.99. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s for the Sequence S configuration. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YSU, followed by 00.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

UAE6 - Wind Tunnel Tests Data - UAE6 - Sequence U - Raw Data

Sequences S, T, and U: Upwind, No Probes (F); Upwind 2° Pitch (F); Upwind 4° Pitch (F) This test sequence used an upwind, rigid turbine with a 0° cone angle. The wind speed ranged from 5 m/s to 25 m/s. Yaw angles of 0° to 180° were achieved for Sequence S, but the yaw angle remained at 0° for Sequences T and U. The blade tip pitch was 3° for Sequence S, 2° for Sequence T, and 4° for Sequence U. These three sequences were interleaved during testing because the pitch angle change was easily made by the turbine operator. The rotor rotated at 72 RPM. Blade pressure measurements were collected. The five-hole probes were removed and the plugs were installed. Plastic tape 0.03-mm-thick was used to smooth the interface between the plugs and the blade. The teeter dampers were replaced with rigid links, and these two channels were flagged as not applicable by setting the measured values in the data file to -99999.99 Nm. The teeter link load cell was pre-tensioned to 40,000 N. During post-processing, the probe channels were set to read -99999.99. In addition to the standard 30-second campaigns, yaw sweeps were done at 7 m/s and 10 m/s for the Sequence S configuration. These 6-minute campaigns were collected while the yaw drive rotated the turbine 360° at a rate of 1°/s. The file names for these campaigns use the letter designation, followed by two digits for wind speed, followed by YSU, followed by 00.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Numerically Testing Conceptual Models of the Utah FORGE Reservoir Using July 2023 Circulation Test Data

Over the past several years, many new data sets have become available regarding the characterization of the Utah FORGE reservoir. These include, but are not limited to, the stimulation of Well 16A, the drilling and completion of Well 16B, and interwell circulation confirmatory testing. As part of the characterization efforts, conceptual models of the reservoir are re-examined as new data become available. As part of the planning for FORGE activities, numerical models are often used to predict the reservoir response to the planned testing. Stochastic methods are often employed to bound uncertainty and allow for evaluation of comprehensive ranges of key reservoir parameters. For the most recent interwell circulation confirmatory testing (July 2023), a priori numerical model predictions did bound the observed behavior (Xinj et al., 2023), but key deviations from expected behavior prompted the FORGE team to reevaluate our conceptual model of the reservoir. In early October 2023, key members of the development, testing, and monitoring teams met for 2 days to review newly collected data and discuss ‘interesting’ or ‘key’ observations. From these discussions, 15 Key Observations were documented, with several significant ones being that the discrete fracture network developed from the 16A stimulation data may not be appropriate and that the early time pressure data obtained during the summer 2023 reservoir testing were best described using radial solutions. In July 2023, two campaigns of interwell confirmatory testing were conducted, the first set of tests occurred on July 4-5 and the second set on July 18-19. The second set of circulation tests conducted at the Utah FORGE site between the injection well 16A(78)-32 and production well 16B(78)-32 on July 18 and 19, 2023 are used to calibrate material properties in a thermal-hydraulic-mechanical (THM) simulation of the discrete fracture network connecting the wells. The spatially and temporally varying reservoir properties are calibrated to match the time dependent pressure and production profiles from the circulation tests. In future work, this calibrated model will be coupled to the native state THM model of the FORGE reservoir to predict surface deformation and strains resulting from pumping schedules.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Numerically Testing Conceptual Models of the Utah FORGE Reservoir Using July 2024 Circulation Test Data

Over the past several years, many new data sets have become available regarding the characterization of the Utah FORGE reservoir. These include, but are not limited to, the stimulation of Well 16A, the drilling and completion of Well 16B, and interwell circulation confirmatory testing. As part of the characterization efforts, conceptual models of the reservoir are re-examined as new data become available. As part of the planning for FORGE activities, numerical models are often used to predict the reservoir response to the planned testing. Stochastic methods are often employed to bound uncertainty and allow for evaluation of comprehensive ranges of key reservoir parameters. For the most recent interwell circulation confirmatory testing (July 2023), a priori numerical model predictions did bound the observed behavior (Xinj et al., 2023), but key deviations from expected behavior prompted the FORGE team to reevaluate our conceptual model of the reservoir. In early October 2023, key members of the development, testing, and monitoring teams met for 2 days to review newly collected data and discuss ‘interesting’ or ‘key’ observations. From these discussions, 15 Key Observations were documented, with several significant ones being that the discrete fracture network developed from the 16A stimulation data may not be appropriate and that the early time pressure data obtained during the summer 2023 reservoir testing were best described using radial solutions. In July 2023, two campaigns of interwell confirmatory testing were conducted, the first set of tests occurred on July 4-5 and the second set on July 18-19. The second set of circulation tests conducted at the Utah FORGE site between the injection well 16A(78)-32 and production well 16B(78)-32 on July 18 and 19, 2023 are used to calibrate material properties in a thermal-hydraulic-mechanical (THM) simulation of the discrete fracture network connecting the wells. The spatially and temporally varying reservoir properties are calibrated to match the time dependent pressure and production profiles from the circulation tests. In future work, this calibrated model will be coupled to the native state THM model of the FORGE reservoir to predict surface deformation and strains resulting from pumping schedules.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

L4-3 Developing DOE M441.1-1 Compliant Container Components: Filter Cup Experimental Fixture Test Data Verification

This document serves to provide technical documentation and justification for using the Filter Cup Experimental Fixture (FCEP) for filter efficiency and pressure drop testing in the Enhanced Filter Test System (EFTS). This document assumes that the reader has prior knowledge related to both of these systems, as well as the SAVY-4000® nuclear material container series filter technology.

42 ENGINEERING↗