Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Assessment”

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 541 records · Page 30
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Industrial Assessment Center – integration of education and practice. Final progress report

The goal of the DOE’s Industrial Assessment Center (IAC) program is twofold: first, to help US manufacturing competitiveness by providing assessments and recommendations for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) on energy efficiency, productivity, sustainability and competitiveness – including measuring the impacts of these recommendations on reducing greenhouse gas emissions; and second, to address a growing shortage of engineering professionals with applied energy and manufacturing-related skills by training a diverse cross-section of engineering students through hands-on involvement in these assessments. IUPUI has an IAC, which was established in 2011, in the Department of Mechanical and Energy Engineering, Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI. The IAC has won the awards twice. We have built the center that has the expertise and infrastructure for quality energy assessments to manufactures and commercial building owners and aligned our current research and teaching activities to the DOE’ training mission with programs to train the next generation of industrial energy efficiency experts, with theory and hands-on experience in conducting energy assessment for small and median manufacturing enterprises. We have made recommendations that have the potential to save about $20M annually. We also initiated research projects to meet DOE priorities, specifically in the areas of smart manufacturing and cybersecurity. On the energy assessment side, the Center has provided energy assessments to 144 qualified companies, primarily located in Indiana. On the training side, the center has trained students in various programs, such as the department’s Bachelor of Science (BS) programs in Mechanical Engineering (ME) and BS in Energy Engineering (EEN), both are ABET accredited engineering programs, as well as a graduate level Energy Management and Assessment certificate program. At the present, the center has trained 95 students, 43 or them received the DOE issued certificates. Research projects were developed within the center to advance energy efficiency related technologies, which provided excellent opportunities for our trainees. The center has also been building a professional network with utilities, Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP), government agencies, and manufacturing companies, to increase our client base and promote collaborations. The center received the 2019 Center of Excellence of the Year Award and three students received the “Outstanding Achievement in Energy Engineering by an IAC Student” awards in the past five years.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2019

Updated Verification and Validation Assessment for VERA

The Virtual Environment for Reactor Applications (VERA) code suite is assessed in terms of capability and credibility against the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) Verification and Validation Plan (presented herein) in the context of three selected challenge problems: CRUD-Induced Power Shift (CIPS), Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB), and Pellet-Clad Interaction (PCI). Capability refers to evidence of required functionality for capturing phenomena of interest while credibility refers to the evidence that provides confidence in the calculated results. For this assessment, each challenge problem defines a set of phenomenological requirements against which the VERA software is assessed. This approach, in turn, enables the focused assessment of only those capabilities relevant to the challenge problem. The evaluation of VERA against the challenge problem requirements represents a capability assessment. The mechanism for assessment is the Sandia-developed Predictive Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) that, for this assessment, evaluates VERA on 8 major criteria: (1) Representation and Geometric Fidelity, (2) Physics and Material Model Fidelity, (3) Software Quality Assurance and Engineering, (4) Code Verification, (5) Solution Verification, (6) Separate Effects Model Validation, (7) Integral Effects Model Validation, and (8) Uncertainty Quantification. For each attribute, a maturity score from zero to three is assigned in the context of each challenge problem. The evaluation of these eight elements constitutes the credibility assessment for VERA.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
NASA NTRS1972

The management of technology assessment

The total problem concept of technology assessment, involving a comprehensive information management activity with an objective orientation to the assessment function is discussed. A brief overview of the technology assessment function and some past experiences are given. Fragmentation of assessment systems, optimum social subsystem for examination in particular assessments, and adequacy of assessments are studied. The magnitude of the technology assessment function and the level of support required for the effective performance of this function are also discussed. One type of institutional arrangement which might produce a close approximation to the total problem assessment approach is suggested.

Mayo, L. H.↗
NASA NTRS1978

A review of NASA-sponsored technology assessment projects

Recent technology assessment studies sponsored by NASA are reviewed, and a summary of the technical results as well as a critique of the methodologies are presented. The reviews include Assessment of Lighter-Than-Air Technology, Technology Assessment of Portable Energy RDT&P, Technology Assessment of Future Intercity Passenger Transportation Systems, and Technology Assessment of Space Disposal of Radioactive Nuclear Waste. The use of workshops has been introduced as a unique element of some of these assessments. Also included in this report is a brief synopsis of a method of quantifying opinions obtained through such group interactions. Representative of the current technology assessments, these studies cover a broad range of socio-political factors and issues in greater depth than previously considered in NASA sponsored studies. In addition to the lessons learned through the conduct of these studies, a few suggestions for improving the effectiveness of future technology assessments are provided.

Mascy, A. C.↗
NASA NTRS2003

Transition from Research to Operations: Assessing Value of Experimental Forecast Products within the NWSFO Environment

The NASA Short-term Prediction Research and Transition (SPoRT) Center seeks to accelerate the infusion of NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) observations, data assimilation and modeling research into NWS forecast operations and decision-making. To meet long-term program expectations, it is not sufficient simply to give forecasters sophisticated workstations or new forecast products without fully assessing the ways in which they will be utilized. Close communication must be established between the research and operational communities so that developers have a complete understanding of user needs. In turn, forecasters must obtain a more comprehensive knowledge of the modeling and sensing tools available to them. A major goal of the SPoRT Program is to develop metrics and conduct assessment studies with NWS forecasters to evaluate the impacts and benefits of ESE experimental products on forecast skill. At a glance the task seems relatively straightforward. However, performing assessment of experimental products in an operational environment is demanding. Given the tremendous time constraints placed on NWS forecasters, it is imperative that forecaster input be obtained in a concise unobtrusive manor. Great care must also be taken to ensure that forecasters understand their participation will eventually benefit them and WFO operations in general. Two requirements of the assessment plan developed under the SPoRT activity are that it 1) Can be implemented within the WFO environment; and 2) Provide tangible results for BOTH the research and operational communities. Supplemental numerical quantitative precipitation forecasts (QPF) were chosen as the first experimental SPoRT product to be evaluated during a Pilot Assessment Program conducted 1 May 2003 within the Huntsville AL National Weather Service Forecast Office. Forecast time periods were broken up into six- hour bins ranging from zero to twenty-four hours. Data were made available for display in AWIPS on an operational basis so they could be efficiently incorporated into the forecast process. The methodology used to assess the value of experimental QPFs compared to available operational products is best described as a three-tier approach involving both forecasters and research scientists. Tier-one is a web-based survey completed by duty forecasters on the aviation and public desks. The survey compiles information on how the experimental product was used in the forecast decision making process. Up to 6 responses per twenty-four hours can be compiled during a precipitation event. Tier-two consists of an event post mortem and experimental product assessment performed daily by the NASA/NWS Liaison. Tier-three is a detailed breakdown/analysis of specific events targeted by either the NWS SO0 or SPoRT team members. The task is performed by both NWS and NASA research scientists and may be conducted once every couple of months. The findings from the Pilot Assessment Program will be reported at the meeting.

Lapenta, William M.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Nutritional Status Assessment (SMO 016E)

It has not been possible to assess nutritional status of crew members on the ISS during flight because blood and urine could not be collected during ISS missions. Postflight observations of alterations in nutritional status for several nutrients are troubling, and we require the ability to monitor the status of these nutrients during flight to determine if there is a specific impetus or timeframe for these changes. In addition to the monitoring of crew nutritional status during flight, in-flight sample collection would allow better assessment of countermeasure effectiveness. SMO 016E is also designed to expand the current medical requirement for nutritional assessment (MR016L) to include additional normative markers for assessing crew health and countermeasure effectiveness. Additional markers of bone metabolism will be measured to better monitor bone health and the effectiveness of countermeasures to prevent bone resorption. New markers of oxidative damage will be measured to better assess the type of oxidative insults that occur during space flight. The array of nutritional assessment parameters will be expanded to include parameters that will allow us to better understand changes in folate and vitamin B6 status, and related cardiovascular risk factors during and after flight. Additionally, stress hormones and hormones that affect bone and muscle metabolism will also be measured. This additional assessment will allow us to better monitor the health of crew members and make more accurate recommendations for their rehabilitation. Several nutritional assessment parameters are altered at landing, but it is not known how long these changes persist. We extended the current protocol to include an additional postflight blood and urine sample collection 30 days after landing. Data are being collected before, during, and after flight. These data will provide a complete survey of how nutritional status and related systems are affected by space flight. Analyzing the data will help us to define nutritional requirements for long-duration missions. This expanded set of measurements will also aid in the identification of nutritional countermeasures to counteract, for example, the deleterious effects of microgravity on bone and muscle and the effects of space radiation.

Smith, S. M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Microbial Risk Assessment

Historically, microbiological spaceflight requirements have been established in a subjective manner based upon expert opinion of both environmental and clinical monitoring results and the incidence of disease. The limited amount of data, especially from long-duration missions, has created very conservative requirements based primarily on the concentration of microorganisms. Periodic reevaluations of new data from later missions have allowed some relaxation of these stringent requirements. However, the requirements remain very conservative and subjective in nature, and the risk of crew illness due to infectious microorganisms is not well defined. The use of modeling techniques for microbial risk has been applied in the food and potable water industries and has exceptional potential for spaceflight applications. From a productivity standpoint, this type of modeling can (1) decrease unnecessary costs and resource usage and (2) prevent inadequate or inappropriate data for health assessment. In addition, a quantitative model has several advantages for risk management and communication. By identifying the variable components of the model and the knowledge associated with each component, this type of modeling can: (1) Systematically identify and close knowledge gaps, (2) Systematically identify acceptable and unacceptable risks, (3) Improve communication with stakeholders as to the reasons for resource use, and (4) Facilitate external scientific approval of the NASA requirements. The modeling of microbial risk involves the evaluation of several key factors including hazard identification, crew exposure assessment, dose-response assessment, and risk characterization. Many of these factors are similar to conditions found on Earth; however, the spaceflight environment is very specialized as the inhabitants live in a small, semi-closed environment that is often dependent on regenerative life support systems. To further complicate modeling efforts, microbial dose-response characteristics may be affected by a potentially dysfunctional crew immune system during a mission. In addition, microbial virulence has been shown to change under certain conditions during spaceflight, further complicating dose-response characterization. An initial study of the applicability of microbial risk assessment techniques was performed using Crew Health Care System (CHeCS) operational data from the International Space Station potable water systems. The risk of infection from potable water was selected as the flight systems and microbial ecology are well defined. This initial study confirmed the feasibility of using microbial risk assessment modeling for spaceflight systems. While no immediate threat was detected, the study identified several medically significant microorganisms that could pose a health risk if uncontrolled. The study also identified several specific knowledge gaps in making a risk assessment and noted that filling these knowledge gaps is essential as the risk estimates may change by orders of magnitude depending on the answers. The current phase of the microbial risk assessment studies focuses on the dose-response relationship of specific infectious agents, focusing on Salmonella enterica Typhimurium, Pseudomonas spp., and Escherichia coli, as their evaluation will provide a better baseline for determining the overall hazard characterization. The organisms were chosen as they either have been isolated on spacecraft or have an identified route of infection during a mission. The characterization will utilize dose-response models selected either from the peer-reviewed literature and/or by using statistical approaches. Development of these modeling and risk assessment techniques will help to optimize flight requirements and to protect the safety, health, and performance of the crew.

Ott, C. M.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Designing a Better Spacecraft: Assessing Flight Operability of Human Rated Spacecraft

The design of a human rated spacecraft is a complex and costly process requiring the integrated assessment of many individual criteria. Historically, it has been difficult to include in that integrated assessment the design s full impact on the flight operations community and its costs. The unique "operability requirements" have not been well understood, nor has there been a well-defined set of criteria for assessing operability. As a result, flight operations organizations and program managers are often faced with difficult and costly operations phase implementations. In response, the Mission Operations Directorate at NASA s Lyndon B. Johnson Space Center has established a formal technique to evaluate and communicate the operational characteristics of spacecraft system designs for the Constellation Program. This process is not intended to replace or replicate other critical assessments such as risk, reliability and safety assessments. Instead, this new technique adds to the assessment toolset a means to address the concerns and potential cost drivers that are unique to the operational phase of a program and the flight operations community. This paper describes the implementation and application of this "Spacecraft Flight Operability Assessment Scale" in supporting vehicle design efforts. The six key factors of flight operability are defined, with guiding principles and goals stated for each factor. A standardized rating technique provides feedback that is useful to both the operations and program management communities. Sample assessments of legacy spacecraft, including the Space Shuttle and International Space Station systems, are provided to provide real world examples of this technique s application.

Crocker, Alan R.↗
NASA NTRS2011

Risk Assessment Overview

Risk assessment is used in many industries to identify and manage risks. Initially developed for use on aeronautical and nuclear systems, risk assessment has been applied to transportation, chemical, computer, financial, and security systems among others. It is used to gain an understanding of the weaknesses or vulnerabilities in a system so modification can be made to increase operability, efficiency, and safety and to reduce failure and down-time. Risk assessment results are primary inputs to risk-informed decision making; where risk information including uncertainty is used along with other pertinent information to assist management in the decision-making process. Therefore, to be useful, a risk assessment must be directed at specific objectives. As the world embraces the globalization of trade and manufacturing, understanding the associated risk become important to decision making. Applying risk assessment techniques to a global system of development, manufacturing, and transportation can provide insight into how the system can fail, the likelihood of system failure and the consequences of system failure. The risk assessment can identify those elements that contribute most to risk and identify measures to prevent and mitigate failures, disruptions, and damaging outcomes. In addition, risk associated with public and environment impact can be identified. The risk insights gained can be applied to making decisions concerning suitable development and manufacturing locations, supply chains, and transportation strategies. While risk assessment has been mostly applied to mechanical and electrical systems, the concepts and techniques can be applied across other systems and activities. This paper provides a basic overview of the development of a risk assessment.

Prassinos, Peter G.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Mars Sample Return (MSR) Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) Assessment Study (MSAS)

NASA, in partnership with the European Space Agency (ESA), is seeking to return Martian geological and atmospheric samples to Earth for scientific study in the early 2030s. Due to the possibility that the samples could contain extraterrestrial life, Mars Sample Return (MSR) is classified as a Category V: Restricted Earth Return mission by the NASA Planetary Protection Office. As a result of this classification, a MSR Sample Receiving Facility (SRF) must not only provide a pristine environment to ensure samples are protected from terrestrial contamination for scientific investigations, it must also provide high-containment (biosafety level 4 [BSL-4]-equivalence) to isolate the samples from Earth’s biosphere until the samples are deemed safe for release and/or sterilized. The nominal utilization period for a SRF is anticipated to be 2-5 years and is intended to enable curation activities, biohazard assessment, select early science activities, and the rapid release of samples to the scientific community. However, to account for possible delays in schedule or the identification of extant life, this anticipated period of time must be flexible to accommodate schedule extensions and contingency plans. Due to requirements for high-level biological containment and cleanliness, a traditional receiving/curation facility cannot be utilized for MSR. Therefore, beginning in 2022, NASA Johnson Space Center is performing a MSR SRF Assessment Study (MSAS) to investigate the most optimal facility modality for a MSR SRF, as well as start to define programmatic early estimate of costs and schedules before the initial design phase begins. NASA is partnering with industry contractors (architectural and engineering firms with BSL-4 and cleanroom technology experience, as well as other contracted infrastructure and construction specialists) along with selected experts from NASA, ESA, existing U.S. BSL-4 facilities, and other U.S. government agencies, to carry out the assessment study. The MSAS should also aid in the future refinement of the science requirements (e.g., contamination control, equipment accommodations) before site-specific design would commence. As part of the MSAS, NASA is planning to assess an array of possibilities for a MSR SRF. One of the main considerations is the facility modality and whether an existing BSL-4 facility can be utilized (for some or all functions); or, if new constructure would be required, would a traditional fixed facility or a modular facility the best choice. MSAS will also investigate the ability of the modalities to accommodate two different facility capability endmembers: 1) a minimal facility focusing on biohazard assessment and curation tasks with a small footprint, and 2) an enhanced facility with additional capabilities to enable expedited processing and the completion of time-sensitive and (some) sterilization-sensitive science. The assessment is intended to generate information that will inform the selection of facility modalities for high-level conceptual design development. While the assessment study will focus on SRF requirements for accommodating curation, science, and sample safety assessment infrastructure, it will also consider an array of other factors, such as ease of access for international users, decommissioning, repurposing, future sale or lease following MSR’s use of the facility, and uncontained preparatory laboratory spaces. Upon completion of the study, the preferred modality and refined requirements would be utilized for site-specific design but will not be finalized until NASA’s completion of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process.

A.D. Harrington↗
NASA NTRS2024

Safe Exploration: Sensorimotor Assessments for Early Extravehicular Activities

BACKGROUND: Artemis missions will require a new level of crew autonomy around periods of gravitational transition, where sensorimotor disturbances are at their highest. There is a need to define performance thresholds for key sensorimotor assessments that indicate when performance in early extravehicular activities (EVAs) might be impacted or unsafe. This panel presentation will discuss the development of sensorimotor assessments for determining crew preparedness of early EVAs by utilizing a novel portable sensorimotor disorientation analog and other spaceflight analogs. OVERVIEW: To define performance thresholds, a proposed set of sensorimotor assessment tasks must be validated under various spaceflight analogs. A Sensorimotor Disorientation Analog (SDA) was developed that could induce varying levels of disorientation through combined vestibular (galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS)) and proprioceptive (weighted chest, ankles, and wrists) disruptions. The SDA was first pilot tested using subjective feedback from previously flown astronauts to determine the levels of disorientation that mimic motor performance immediately (R+0) and +24 hours (R+1) postflight. A second study was performed using healthy non-astronaut ground subjects to validate the SDA levels by comparing to astronaut postflight data. The validated SDA was utilized in a third study to map performance in the proposed set of sensorimotor assessment tasks to operational tasks. The assessment tasks were defined based on lessons learned from Apollo and subject matter experts (e.g., flight surgeons) to include the following: 1) aid in progressive adaptation to the novel gravitational environment; 2) provide opportunities to develop strategies to recover from off-nominal body positions; and 3) mimic operational tasks such that crew can self-assess their potential ability to complete their missions. This presentation will conclude with a discussion on future validation studies of the proposed assessment tasks using other spaceflight analogs such as centrifugation and gravity offload systems. DISCUSSION: Exploration class missions will require crew to be able to self-assess and treat their sensorimotor dysfunction after gravity transitions, and in off-nominal situations they may be required to perform provocative, challenging tasks soon after landing. This panel presentation will discuss current and ongoing research strategies to address the sensorimotor risk on safe exploration during Artemis missions.

Sarah Moudy↗
DOE OSTI2012

Data-Based Performance Assessments for the DOE Hydropower Advancement Project

The U. S. Department of Energy s Hydropower Advancement Project (HAP) was initiated to characterize and trend hydropower asset conditions across the U.S.A. s existing hydropower fleet and to identify and evaluate the upgrading opportunities. Although HAP includes both detailed performance assessments and condition assessments of existing hydropower plants, this paper focuses on the performance assessments. Plant performance assessments provide a set of statistics and indices that characterize the historical extent to which each plant has converted the potential energy at a site into electrical energy for the power system. The performance metrics enable benchmarking and trending of performance across many projects in a variety contexts (e.g., river systems, power systems, and water availability). During FY2011 and FY2012, assessments will be performed on ten plants, with an additional fifty plants scheduled for FY2013. This paper focuses on the performance assessments completed to date, details the performance assessment process, and describes results from the performance assessments.

March, Patrick↗
DOE OSTI2012

Cyber / Physical Security Vulnerability Assessment Integration

Abstract Both physical protection and cyber security domains offer solutions for the discovery of vulnerabilities through the use of various assessment processes and software tools. Each vulnerability assessment (VA) methodology provides the ability to identify and categorize vulnerabilities, and quantifies the risks within their own areas of expertise. Neither approach fully represents the true potential security risk to a site and/or a facility, nor comprehensively assesses the overall security posture. The technical approach to solving this problem was to identify methodologies and processes that blend the physical and cyber security assessments, and develop tools to accurately quantify the unaccounted for risk. SMEs from both the physical and the cyber security domains developed the blending methodologies, and cross trained each other on the various aspects of the physical and cyber security assessment processes. A local critical infrastructure entity volunteered to host a proof of concept physical/cyber security assessment, and the lessons learned have been leveraged by this effort. The four potential modes of attack an adversary can use in approaching a target are; Physical Only Attack, Cyber Only Attack, Physical Enabled Cyber Attack, and the Cyber Enabled Physical Attack. The Physical Only and the Cyber Only pathway analysis are two of the most widely analyzed attack modes. The pathway from an off-site location to the desired target location is dissected to ensure adversarial activity can be detected and neutralized by the protection strategy, prior to completion of a predefined task. This methodology typically explores a one way attack from the public space (or common area) inward towards the target. The Physical Enabled Cyber Attack and the Cyber Enabled Physical Attack are much more intricate. Both scenarios involve beginning in one domain to affect change in the other, then backing outward to take advantage of the reduced system effectiveness, before penetrating further into the defenses. The proper identification and assessment of the overlapping areas (and interaction between these areas) in the VA process is necessary to accurately assess the true risk.

Vulnerability Analysis, Risk Analysis, Cyber Secur↗
DOE OSTI2021

Bio-project “derisking” through development of systematic methodologies and frameworks for risk assessment

One of the primary hindrances to producing a viable, sustainable domestic biomass industry for renewable biofuels, bio-products and bio-power is the lack of understanding and quantification of the risks associated with both the biomass supply chain and preprocessing and conversion technologies. Currently a consistent method for assessing, comparing, and quantifying risks in biomass supply chains does not exist, creating a major investment barrier to bioenergy projects in the U.S. The lack of a standardized approach has resulted in bioenergy stakeholders independently using inconsistent approaches and evaluation criteria, leading to unreliable and incomparable assessments of risks and financing barriers to bio-project development. Along with the challenges of inconsistent risk assessment for supply chain risk, technology specific risks based on variability in biomass properties are not fully understood and can pose significant unforeseen challenges for bioenergy projects. In many cases these properties have not yet been identified and the impacts on the proposed technology and products unquantified. This is particularly challenging for emerging preprocessing and conversion technologies. Without a firm understanding of the preprocessing/conversion technology-specific critical properties, the risk of a proposed bio-project cannot be fully evaluated. To address inconsistent risk evaluation in the biomass supply chain supporting project financing, a Biomass Supply Chain Risk Standards (BSCRS) framework was developed. The BSCRS framework includes a comprehensive list of known and perceived risks (Risk Indicators) to the supply chain developed through 100’s of interviews with bioenergy industry experts spanning from feedstock growers and suppliers to representatives from the financial sector. These risks have been organized into a manageable hierarchy of Risk Categories and Risk Factors that can be practically assessed. This BSCRS framework also provides mitigation strategies for multiple Risk Indicators from best available industry practices and research findings. Additionally, a risk quantification methodology for each Risk Factor, Risk Category, and the bio-project as a whole was developed to enable capital markets to assess feedstock risk more efficiently and more accurately. Multiple case studies representing existing bio-projects have been used to evaluate and verify the BSCRS framework and scoring methodology. To address technological risk along with the supply chain risk captured in the developed BSCRS framework, this work also focuses on development of a systematic criticality assessment tool using well-accepted, quantitative risk analysis methods to evaluate bioenergy feedstock critical properties impacting system unit operations. The proposed Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) approach uses a team of subject area experts (SAEs) for each targeted unit operation within a system. Collectively, the team will develop and use a quantitative scoring system to assess the material attributes, process parameters, and quality attributes for key unit operations that have already been identified. The FMEA process generates Risk Priority Numbers (RPNs) for the various failures and predominant causes for each material/process unit/product combination resulting in a semi-quantitative, standardized methodology for assessing technological risk and biomass properties contributing to that risk.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Special Analyses for the Hanford Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment - 20102

In 2014, the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of River Protection and its contractors began to develop a performance assessment for the near-surface disposal of low-level and mixed low-level waste at the Hanford Site's Integrated Disposal Facility (IDF). The IDF is a doubly-lined landfill that was constructed between 2004 and 2006 to be the disposal facility for the vitrified low-activity waste that will be produced at the Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP). IDF is also expected to receive solid secondary waste produced at the WTP and other solid wastes from site activities. The IDF has been in a preoperational state awaiting authorization from DOE and a RCRA permit modification from the State of Washington Department of Ecology to receive waste. Both the Disposal Authorization Statement and permit modification require a performance assessment demonstrating that the system of engineered and natural features will limit releases of radionuclides and hazardous chemicals from the IDF and be protective of human health and the environment. The simulated duration is 10,000 years. Based on the analyses presented in the 2017 Integrated Disposal Facility Performance Assessment, DOE issued a conditional Operating Disposal Authorization Statement for the IDF in June 2018. The long-term performance of the IDF to be protective of human health and the environment was evaluated under the requirements of DOE Order 435.1, Radioactive Waste Management. Computer simulations were performed to evaluate whether or not the IDF would comply with DOE requirements. In the time that has passed since the performance assessment was approved by DOE, new information has been discovered that had not been considered in the performance assessment. Since this new information has not been evaluated, the potential impact of the changes have not been taken into consideration in DoE's disposal authorization. DOE and its contractors follow a change control process to screen and, when necessary, evaluate new information that could potentially impact the conclusions of the completed performance assessment. This paper will describe the change control process and provide two examples of evaluations performed following the change control process. The first example evaluates a new waste form for liquid secondary waste that was not evaluated in the performance assessment. In the performance assessment, liquid secondary waste was assumed to be solidified with grout. A new recommendation to dispose of the liquid secondary waste after drying it to a powder was evaluated. The second example evaluates inventory implications from changes to the flow sheet that estimates the feed composition to the low-activity waste vitrification facility. The changes result in higher strontium concentrations in the vitrified waste stream. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Understanding the Uncertainty in the Technical Performance Level Assessment for Wave Energy

In recent years, the design and development of wave energy converters (WECs) has been explored with intense interest, with highly varying design concepts emerging globally across both research enterprises and industry. The design space for WECs is vast - many concepts ranging in functionality, control systems, power development systems, materials, and scale have been ideated and prototyped, but WEC technology has yet to converge. One critical element of the technology trajectory that governs the speed of adoption is the performance of a WEC concept. In analogous but more-established industries (such as aerospace, and environmentally sustainable electronics design), performance assessment is a quantitative method, based on historical data, that is used as an iterative tool to improve the design of these systems early on in the design process. Though more nascent than these approaches, in wave energy R&D, WEC performance has been assessed using the Technology Performance Level (TPL) assessment, which provides designers with a quantitative score, situating a grid-scale WEC concept on a scale from 1-9 (1 being the lowest performance, and 9 being the highest, trending with the oft-used Technology Readiness Level, or TRL). The TPL assessment is designed to be used during design iteration, when a WEC concept is fully ideated, to enable designers to consider potential means of improving the downstream performance of the concept. One concern that may be slowing the adoption of TPL among WEC developers is the inherent uncertainty in the assessment, and how uncertainty in the individual questions asked as part of the assessment may contribute to perceived inaccuracies in the final score. In this work, we explore the uncertainty present in the assessment and quantify this uncertainty using both traditional mathematical operations and a Monte Carlo simulation. Results imply areas of improvement of the TPL assessment, where reducing uncertainty will be most helpful to end users, enabling both TPL practitioners and users to understand with more accuracy those design elements that can be improved to impact device performance most substantively.

techno-economic analysis↗
DOE OSTI2024

Digitalization mapping and assessment process supporting ION strategic transformation activities

The existing fleet of commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) are an important asset in the nation’s portfolio of electrical generating resources. Their continued safe and reliable operation are critical to providing a large source of carbon-free electricity to power the nation’s economy. The United States Department of Energy’s (DOE) Light Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Program develops the scientific bases, methods, and tools, for the continued safe and economical operation of the nation's commercial NPPs. The Plant Modernization Pathway within LWRS Program focuses on providing guidance to industry on the full-scale implementation of modernization solutions for NPPs that significantly reduce the technical and financial risks associated with modernization. This research is focused on helping the nuclear industry understand how to digitize and digitalize their NPPs so that they can design their modernization solutions to be scalable, sustainable, and integrated both laterally and horizontally within their organization. That is, this research creates a digital transformation in NPPs by reshaping cultural mindsets and by identifying business efficiencies. In partnership with industry, and using four previously established guiding principles for digitalization, this research supported NPP modernization through assessing readiness for digitalization as a means to achieve integrated operations for nuclear. Specifically, this research created an assessment to review an entire organization’s work processes to gather information about the digitalization health of the plant. The assessment tools were administered to plant employees, and the results were used to develop a digitalization plan. The survey assessment identified the optimal candidate processes that would most benefit from a digitalization initiative which were revealed through analytical frameworks. One analysis calculated mean digitalization health indicator scores for all endorsed activities which allowed the researchers to rank and color code the results for easy identification. Individual health indicator scores are also provided, should our industry partner wish to understand these findings according to their own organizational priorities, business considerations and desired end-state. The results were also analyzed from the perspective that organizations are comprised of different types of innovators (e.g., generators, optimizers, conceptualizers, and implementers), which differentially affects the organization’s ability to comprehend and adapt to change (i.e., opportunities to innovate). Understanding the relative composition of innovator types at an NPP allows them to gather insights into the strengths and weaknesses they have in innovating how work is performed. For the utility that partnered with this research team, the results showed that implementers make up the largest portion of respondents and conceptualizers the smallest portion. Knowing the proportion of innovator types gave this organization insights on how they can effectively implement their innovation solutions. Additionally, the results were analyzed from a technical, economic, and risk perspective to identify and quantify work reduction opportunities (WROs). Recognizing that not all cost-saving opportunities are the same, a Technical, Economic and Risk Assessment (TERA) was performed to evaluate WROs to identify areas of greatest potential and lowest risk. The key results from TERA included a digitalization opportunity score for each activity, and a calculation of potential cost savings. These two outputs formed the bases for calculating a priority index and rank for the activities/processes assessed. From the prioritization calculations, TERA can then help the utility 1) decide what digitalization priorities to invest money in implementing and then 2) calculates how much should be invested in the digitalization initiatives selected to achieve cost savings and/or an acceptable return on investment. Last, onsite interviews revealed several inefficiencies in the standard work processes that occur cross-departmentally that are due to the absence of digitized and digitalized processes. Examples of these include time spent scanning paper documents and then uploading the documents electronically, obtaining signatures, and searching for desired information. This represents a digital but not digitalized process. Over 15 opportunities to improve work processes were identified through this multi-method digitalization assessment. The various analytical assessments used (e.g., TERA, digitalization health indicator scores), as well as discussions with the utility partner, corroborated that all the opportunities identified had a strong potential to make work processes more efficient and to improve overall performance of the NPP.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Hazards and Probabilistic Risk Assessments of a Light-Water Reactor Coupled with Industrial Facilities

This report provides a roadmap and toolkit for site-specific risk assessments across a broad range of industrial customers co-located with nuclear power plants (NPPs). This report builds upon the body of work sponsored by the Department of Energy (DOE) Light-Water Reactor Sustainability (LWRS) Flexible Plant Operation and Generation Pathway that presented hazards assessment and generic probabilistic risk assessments (PRAs) for the addition of a heat extraction system (HES) to light-water reactors co-located with hydrogen production facilities. The report expands the hazards assessments to include other industrial facilities: an oil refinery, a methanol plant, a synthetic fuel (synfuel) plant, the production of synthetic gas (syngas) as part of the methanol and synfuel plants, and wood pulp and paper mills. All these facilities are specified through industrial process and requirements research performed by national laboratories, universities, and interaction with industry. Many of the processes used in this report are pre-conceptual designs to use for decarbonization of the current technology facilities. A process of failure modes and effects analysis (what can go wrong) and accidentology (what has historically gone wrong) was used to determine the hazards presented to the NPP by the addition of the HES and the industrial customer. Chemical properties of feedstocks and products are summarized as part of the hazards assessment. Example analysis procedures are provided for each of the hazard types identified. These deterministic analyses can be used to assess adherence to licensing criteria. They can also be used to meet other safety goals like protection of the public, workers, or industrial facility equipment. The probabilistic analysis consisted of three sizes of HESs modeled in a PRA to assess the impact on the initiating events (IE) and results of the PRA. The PRA results conclude that the resulting increases in IE frequencies are below the limits required for small changes to existing NPPs under 10 CFR 50.59.

08 HYDROGEN↗