SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “customize”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 541 records · Page 30

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2017

Solar Plus: A Holistic Approach to Distributed Solar PV

Solar 'plus' refers to an emerging approach to distributed solar photovoltaic (PV) deployment that uses energy storage and controllable devices to optimize customer economics. The solar plus approach increases customer system value through technologies such as electric batteries, smart domestic water heaters, smart air-conditioner (AC) units, and electric vehicles We use an NREL optimization model to explore the customer-side economics of solar plus under various utility rate structures and net metering rates. We explore optimal solar plus applications in five case studies with different net metering rates and rate structures. The model deploys different configurations of PV, batteries, smart domestic water heaters, and smart AC units in response to different rate structures and customer load profiles. The results indicate that solar plus improves the customer economics of PV and may mitigate some of the negative impacts of evolving rate structures on PV economics. Solar plus may become an increasingly viable model for optimizing PV customer economics in an evolving rate environment.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2017

Solar Plus: A Holistic Approach to Distributed Solar PV

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Global Value Chain and Manufacturing Analysis on Geothermal Power Plant Turbines

Currently, geothermal project developers customize the size of the power plant to fit the resource being developed. The turbine is designed and sized to optimize efficiency and resource utilization for electricity production; most often, other power plant components are then chosen to complement the turbine design. These custom turbine designs demand one-off manufacturing processes, which result in higher manufacturing setup costs, longer lead-times, and higher capital costs overall in comparison to larger-volume line manufacturing processes. In contrast, turbines produced in standard increments, manufactured in larger volumes, could result in lower costs per turbine. In this study, we developed a manufacturing cost model to identify requirements for equipment, facilities, raw materials, and labor. Then we used discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis to calculate the minimum sustainable price (MSP). We analyzed three different cases 1) 1 MWe geothermal ORC turboexpander 2) 5 MWe ORC turboexpander and 3) 20 MWe geothermal steam turbine, and calculated the cost of manufacturing the major components, such as the impellers/blades, shaft/rotor, nozzles, inlet guide lanes, disks, and casings. The results showed that MSP could highly vary between 893 /kW and 30 /kW based on turbine size, standardization and volume of manufacturing. The analysis also showed that the economy of scale applies both to the size of the turbine and the number manufactured in a single run. As an example, the unit price of a 5 MW standard design turbine could be 150 /W cheaper than the custom design. Sensitivity analysis indicated that these savings come largely from reduced labor costs for design and engineering and manufacturing setup. In addition to manufacturing cost savings, there is a delivery time saving up to 10 months, which could have a positive effect to construction financing operation time. Another advantage of these standard turbines is their adaptability to different geothermal systems by operating at off-design conditions. We also modeled off-design turbine efficiencies within the commercially-favorable operating range of a standard ORC compared to custom-designed ORC equipment. Than we used these performance calculations and power output capacities in a discounted cash flow (DCF) analysis of plant operations and financing, thereby creating representative techno economic models of a total geothermal power plant. I this scope we used NREL's System Advisor model (SAM) and performed DCF analysis of standard and custom design turbines using results from IPSEpro over range of temperatures of interest. In this scope 63 different off-design cases were analyzed. This helped us to answer the question; 'Can today's capital cost savings compensate the future revenue losses due to lower electricity generation?' The results showed that, the net capital cost savings for the modeled 5 MW case study may reach up to plus 1,298,672. Also, the difference between NPV of standard design and custom design turbine could reach up to 733,940. To sum up, when all the things mentioned above are taken into consideration, it can be said that, the standard turbines are competitive over a wide range of temperatures and flow rates and the give positive NPV differences for certain cases near their design point.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Solar Buyer's Markets: Unlocking Lower Photovoltaic and Battery Prices on Online Quote Platforms

In an online quote platform, a solar PV customer provides information about their home and desired system characteristics to a quote 'aggregator,' who conveys this information to a network of installers. Interested installers submit bids to the online quote platform, where the customer can then compare bids in a common format. In this report, we analyze the effects of quote platform use on PV prices using data from the Pick My Solar platform. The results of the our study corroborate results from a previous study based on a different quote platform, indicating that quote platforms are associated with reduced PV prices. By opting to use quote platforms rather than directly soliciting quotes from installers, PV customers might save roughly 20 cents/W - 40 cents/W, which is equivalent to 1,000-2,000 dollars in savings for a typical 5-kW residential PV system. For the first time, we also explore battery prices on quote platforms, and find evidence that quote platforms are associated with reduced battery prices. Despite the savings potential, only about 3 percent of residential PV sales currently occur through online platforms - though many more customers use platforms without adopting PV, and some customers may use platforms to learn about PV prices before accepting a quote received directly from an installer. Continued growth of platform use could yield PV price reductions for at least two reasons. First, it could push the average PV price point toward lower platform prices. Second, it could produce spillover effects by forcing reductions in quotes obtained outside of platforms. For instance, national-scale installers - which have not historically bid on quote platforms - may begin to offer lower prices if greater numbers of prospective customers begin to use the platforms.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2018

Evolving Grid Services, Products, and Market Opportunities for Regulated Electric Utilities

This report and policy brief focus on the more recent changes and evolutions in grid services, products, and market opportunities regulated electric utilities are offering to their customers, both traditional end-use electric customers as well as third-party party businesses. Drawing on a database of more than 50 recent examples, the most prevalent and significant evolutions are occurring in: residential retail rate design shifts toward voluntary and default time-of-use (TOU); changes to distributed generation (DG) compensation methodologies; utilization of customer and non-utility assets as non-wires alternatives (NWAs); and utility investments in electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure. Important and related themes emerge from this assessment of recent trends suggesting regulators and policymakers should formulate clear and consistent policy goals around the following two issues: 1. Opportunities increasing competition to serve the electricity needs of retail customers. Reforms that drive increases in NWAs and DG pit utility investments against customer investments and may erode the exclusivity of the utility franchise. In contrast, reforms to DG compensation, that may reduce the financial benefits of a customer’s investment, may maintain or strengthen the firmness of the utility franchise boundaries. 2.Opportunities driving greater innovation within and outside the electric industry. Electric utilities are innovating by developing novel NWA opportunities that can provide financial support for the broader adoption of DERs. There are also electric utility efforts to enable broader innovation in other industries, where utility investment in EV charging infrastructure could promote greater EV ownership and enable utility control of these resources to provide grid services.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2022

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) Study

The Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) study investigates the engineering and economic performance of a transactive energy retail market coordinating a high penetration of customer-side flexible energy assets. The study seeks to answer whether such an implementation is cost effective for customers, recovers sufficient revenue for DSOs, and is equally applicable and beneficial to a range of flexible asset types, renewable generation scenarios, and market assumptions. Using a highly interdisciplinary co-simulation and valuation framework, this assessment encompasses the entire electrical delivery system from bulk system generation and transmission, through the distribution system, to the modeling of individual customer buildings and flexible assets (including heating, ventilation, and air conditioning [HVAC] units, water heaters, batteries, and electric vehicles). The study exercises a transactive energy retail market coordination scheme designed to integrate with an existing day-ahead and real-time competitive wholesale electricity market. Software decision-making agents are designed for the retail market operator as well as various price-responsive flexible assets. The engineering and economic performance of the transactive energy scheme is studied for two separate flexible asset deployments: flexible loads (HVAC units and residential water heaters) and behind-the-meter batteries. The results of each transactive case are compared to a business-as-usual case. These cases are subject to two different renewable generation scenarios, a moderate renewable generation scenario, representative of current levels of renewable generation deployment, and a future high renewables scenario, including the increased deployment of rooftop solar photovoltaic and electric vehicles. The transactive coordination scheme is shown to produce effective and stable control and decrease peak loads 9–15%. The resulting annual demand flexibility provides net economic savings of $3.3–5.0B per year for a region the size of Texas. Detailed analysis shows that net benefits were seen for a range of distribution system operator, customer, and flexible asset types. Both participating customer (with transactive flexible assets) and nonparticipating customers (with nonflexible assets) see reductions in annual utility bills and net annual energy expenses in the range of 10–16%.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Distribution System Operator with Transactive (DSO+T) Study: Volume 1 (Main Report)

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Observation, Analysis, and Recommendations for ND Management Reviews (W88-0/Mk5 ALT 370 Program Report)

Progress and status reviews allow teams to provide updates and targeted information designed to inform the customer of progress and to help the customer understand current risks and challenges. Both presenters and the customer should have well-calibrated expectations for the level of content and information. However, what needs to be covered in systems-level management reviews can too often be poorly defined. These unclear expectations can lead teams to overpreparing or attempting to guess what information the customer considers as most critical. This aspect of the review process is stressful, disruptive, and bad for morale – and time spent overpreparing reports is time spent not focusing on the technical work necessary to stay on schedule. To define and address these issues, this report was designed to observe various aspects of development program coordination and review activities for NNSA and Navy customers, and then to conduct unbiased, independent Human Factors observation and analysis from an outside perspective. The report concludes with suggestions and recommendations for improving the efficiency of information flow related to reviews, with the goals of increasing productivity and benefitting both Sandia and the customer.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Savings in Action: Lessons from Observed and Modeled Residential Solar Plus Storage Systems

The electric grid is rapidly evolving as small-scale, demand-side resources play increasingly important roles in grid operations and decarbonization. Maximizing the potential of demand-side resources involves incentivizing electricity customers to use those resources in ways that benefit the broader electrical grid. These incentives depend largely on the electricity cost savings that customers can realize from demand-side resource adoption. Determining these potential cost savings is a complex task. Cost savings depend on numerous factors, including the characteristics of different technologies, the algorithms that control these devices, system performance, customer behavior, electricity rate structures, and climatic factors. Another challenge is that estimated cost savings are frequently based on modeled rather than observed system performance, particularly in the academic literature. In this study, we begin to fill the gap in empirical research of demand-side resources using data from a new construction residential community equipped with rooftop solar and storage (S+S) in Arizona. We use these data to analyze the factors that determine customer electricity cost savings and emissions impacts of S+S in the real world. We then compare these data to modeled system performance to understand how models deviate from real-world outcomes. Based on these findings, we explore ways to improve such models and, conversely, use modeled results to suggest improvements to actual S+S deployment. The results of these analyses can be summarized in four key findings: 1) rate structures play a central role in the grid and customer value of demand-side resources; 2) certain customers can benefit more from demand-side resource adoption than others; 3) modeled battery dispatch and sizing reveals opportunities for additional cost savings; and 4) optimal dispatches can reduce grid emissions while maximizing bill savings.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2022

Exceedance Probabilities and Recurrence Intervals for Extended Power Outages in the United States

Power outages cause significant economic and societal impacts. An increasing likelihood of extreme weather coupled with aging grid infrastructure is leading to a higher prevalence of extended power outages, which can leave customers without power for multiple days or even weeks. Planners at the facility, local, state, and federal levels are interested in resilience solutions to reduce the impacts of extended power outages. Resilience solutions—such as installing backup systems, integrating microgrid solutions, weatherizing buildings, and hardening distribution and transmission components—can reduce the consequences of extended power outages, but these solutions come with increased capital costs. Conducting cost-benefit analyses is important for determining which steps to take to mitigate the impact of power outages without investing in ineffective and cost-prohibitive resilience solutions. The expected benefits of resilience investments depend on the frequency of power outages of various durations, particularly extended outages lasting several hours, days, or weeks. A significant barrier to resilience planning is the lack of publicly available data on the frequency and duration of extended power outages. The absence of outage duration information severely limits the ability to conduct quantitative cost-benefit analyses of resilience investments. This report provides estimates of recurrence intervals and conditional exceedance probabilities for major power outages by U.S. region between 2015 and 2021. Additionally, we provide estimates for grid management, particularly outages caused by California’s public safety power shutoffs (PSPS), and for natural outages caused by major hurricanes. Outage recurrence intervals are the average number of years between outage events, and conditional exceedance probabilities are the likelihoods that a customer who experiences a major power outage will experience an outage exceeding a given duration. Major outage events are those that affect 10,000 or more customers, as defined by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Electric Emergency Incident and Disturbance Report, called OE-417 (DOE 2020). These results can be applied to determine the likelihood of experiencing long-duration outages, which can be integrated into cost-benefit analyses of resilience solutions and broader energy resilience studies. We developed a methodology to estimate customer outage durations for extended outage events using publicly available data on customer outages. Shorter-duration power outages are relatively common, with customers experiencing on average more than one power outage each year lasting fewer than 12 hours. An outage event lasting between 1 day and 1 week is expected to occur between once every 16 years and once every 42 years, depending on the region, with an average recurrence rate of once every 32 years across the contiguous United States.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

NASA NTRS1986

Prototyping and implementing flight qualifiable semicustom CMOS P-well bulk integrated circuits in the JPL environment

Presently, there are many difficulties associated with implementing application specific custom or semi-custom (standard cell based) integrated circuits (ICs) into JPL flight projects. One of the primary difficulties is developing prototype semi-custom integrated circuits for use and evaluation in engineering prototype flight hardware. The prototype semi-custom ICs must be extremely cost-effective and yet still representative of flight qualifiable versions of the design. A second difficulty is encountered in the transport of the design from engineering prototype quality to flight quality. Normally, flight quality integrated circuits have stringent quality standards, must be radiation resistant and should consume minimal power. It is often not necessary or cost effective, however, to impose such stringent quality standards on engineering models developed for systems analysis in controlled lab environments. This article presents work originally initiated for ground based applications that also addresses these two problems. Furthermore, this article suggests a method that has been shown successful in prototyping flight quality semi-custom ICs through the Metal Oxide Semiconductor Implementation Service (MOSIS) program run by the University of Southern California's Information Sciences Institute. The method has been used successfully to design and fabricate through the MOSIS three different semi-custom prototype CMOS p-well chips. The three designs make use of the work presented and were designed consistent with design techniques and structures that are flight qualifiable, allowing one hour transfer of the design from engineering model status to flight qualifiable foundry-ready status through methods outlined in this article.

Olson, E. M.↗

NASA NTRS2002

ISO 9000 and/or Systems Engineering Capability Maturity Model?

For businesses and organizations to remain competitive today they must have processes and systems in place that will allow them to first identify customer needs and then develop products/processes that will meet or exceed the customers needs and expectations. Customer needs, once identified, are normally stated as requirements. Designers can then develop products/processes that will meet these requirements. Several functions, such as quality management and systems engineering management are used to assist product development teams in the development process. Both functions exist in all organizations and both have a similar objective, which is to ensure that developed processes will meet customer requirements. Are efforts in these organizations being duplicated? Are both functions needed by organizations? What are the similarities and differences between the functions listed above? ISO 9000 is an international standard of goods and services. It sets broad requirements for the assurance of quality and for management's involvement. It requires organizations to document the processes and to follow these documented processes. ISO 9000 gives customers assurance that the suppliers have control of the process for product development. Systems engineering can broadly be defined as a discipline that seeks to ensure that all requirements for a system are satisfied throughout the life of the system by preserving their interrelationship. The key activities of systems engineering include requirements analysis, functional analysis/allocation, design synthesis and verification, and system analysis and control. The systems engineering process, when followed properly, will lead to higher quality products, lower cost products, and shorter development cycles. The System Engineering Capability Maturity Model (SE-CMM) will allow companies to measure their system engineering capability and continuously improve those capabilities. ISO 9000 and SE-CMM seem to have a similar objective, which is to document the organization's processes and certify to potential customers the capability of a supplier to control the processes that determine the quality of the product or services being produced. The remaining sections of this report examine the differences and similarities between ISO 9000 and SE-CMM and make recommendations for implementation.

Sampson E. Gholston↗

NASA NTRS1997

Steady-State Cycle Deck Launcher Developed for Numerical Propulsion System Simulation

One of the objectives of NASA's High Performance Computing and Communications Program's (HPCCP) Numerical Propulsion System Simulation (NPSS) is to reduce the time and cost of generating aerothermal numerical representations of engines, called customer decks. These customer decks, which are delivered to airframe companies by various U.S. engine companies, numerically characterize an engine's performance as defined by the particular U.S. airframe manufacturer. Until recently, all numerical models were provided with a Fortran-compatible interface in compliance with the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) document AS681F, and data communication was performed via a standard, labeled common structure in compliance with AS681F. Recently, the SAE committee began to develop a new standard: AS681G. AS681G addresses multiple language requirements for customer decks along with alternative data communication techniques. Along with the SAE committee, the NPSS Steady-State Cycle Deck project team developed a standard Application Program Interface (API) supported by a graphical user interface. This work will result in Aerospace Recommended Practice 4868 (ARP4868). The Steady-State Cycle Deck work was validated against the Energy Efficient Engine customer deck, which is publicly available. The Energy Efficient Engine wrapper was used not only to validate ARP4868 but also to demonstrate how to wrap an existing customer deck. The graphical user interface for the Steady-State Cycle Deck facilitates the use of the new standard and makes it easier to design and analyze a customer deck. This software was developed following I. Jacobson's Object-Oriented Design methodology and is implemented in C++. The AS681G standard will establish a common generic interface for U.S. engine companies and airframe manufacturers. This will lead to more accurate cycle models, quicker model generation, and faster validation leading to specifications. The standard will facilitate cooperative work between industry and NASA. The NPSS Steady-State Cycle Deck team released a batch version of the Steady-State Cycle Deck in March 1996. Version 1.1 was released in June 1996. During fiscal 1997, NPSS accepted enhancements and modifications to the Steady-State Cycle Deck launcher. Consistent with NPSS' commercialization plan, these modifications will be done by a third party that can provide long-term software support.

VanDrei, Donald E.↗

NASA NTRS2005

Six Lessons We Learned Applying Six Sigma

As Chief Financial Officer of Kennedy Space Center (KSC), I'm not only responsible for financial planning and accounting but also for building strong partnerships with the CFO customers, who include Space Shuttle and International Space Station operations as well all who manage the KSC Spaceport. My never ending goal is to design, manage and continuously improve our core business processes so that they deliver world class products and services to the CFO's customers. I became interested in Six Sigma as Christa Casleton (KSC's first Six Sigma Black belt) applied Six Sigma tools and methods to our Plan and Account for Travel Costs Process. Her analysis was fresh, innovative and thorough but, even more impressive, was her approach to ensure ongoing, continuous process improvement. Encouraged by the results, I launched two more process improvement initiatives aimed at applying Six Sigma principles to CFO processes that not only touch most of my employees but also have direct customer impact. As many of you know, Six Sigma is a measurement scale that compares the output of a process with customer requirements. That's straight forward, but demands that you not only understand your processes but also know your products and the critical customer requirements. The objective is to isolate and eliminate the causes of process variation so that the customer sees consistently high quality.

Carroll, Napoleon↗

NASA NTRS2014

Imagery Integration Team

The Human Exploration Science Office (KX) provides leadership for NASA's Imagery Integration (Integration 2) Team, an affiliation of experts in the use of engineering-class imagery intended to monitor the performance of launch vehicles and crewed spacecraft in flight. Typical engineering imagery assessments include studying and characterizing the liftoff and ascent debris environments; launch vehicle and propulsion element performance; in-flight activities; and entry, landing, and recovery operations. Integration 2 support has been provided not only for U.S. Government spaceflight (e.g., Space Shuttle, Ares I-X) but also for commercial launch providers, such as Space Exploration Technologies Corporation (SpaceX) and Orbital Sciences Corporation, servicing the International Space Station. The NASA Integration 2 Team is composed of imagery integration specialists from JSC, the Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and the Kennedy Space Center (KSC), who have access to a vast pool of experience and capabilities related to program integration, deployment and management of imagery assets, imagery data management, and photogrammetric analysis. The Integration 2 team is currently providing integration services to commercial demonstration flights, Exploration Flight Test-1 (EFT-1), and the Space Launch System (SLS)-based Exploration Missions (EM)-1 and EM-2. EM-2 will be the first attempt to fly a piloted mission with the Orion spacecraft. The Integration 2 Team provides the customer (both commercial and Government) with access to a wide array of imagery options - ground-based, airborne, seaborne, or vehicle-based - that are available through the Government and commercial vendors. The team guides the customer in assembling the appropriate complement of imagery acquisition assets at the customer's facilities, minimizing costs associated with market research and the risk of purchasing inadequate assets. The NASA Integration 2 capability simplifies the process of securing one-of-a-kind imagery assets and skill sets, such as ground-based fixed and tracking cameras, crew-in the-loop imaging applications, and the integration of custom or commercial-off-the-shelf sensors onboard spacecraft. For spaceflight applications, the Integration 2 Team leverages modeling, analytical, and scientific resources along with decades of experience and lessons learned to assist the customer in optimizing engineering imagery acquisition and management schemes for any phase of flight - launch, ascent, on-orbit, descent, and landing. The Integration 2 Team guides the customer in using NASA's world-class imagery analysis teams, which specialize in overcoming inherent challenges associated with spaceflight imagery sets. Precision motion tracking, two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) photogrammetry, image stabilization, 3D modeling of imagery data, lighting assessment, and vehicle fiducial marking assessments are available. During a mission or test, the Integration 2 Team provides oversight of imagery operations to verify fulfillment of imagery requirements. The team oversees the collection, screening, and analysis of imagery to build a set of imagery findings. It integrates and corroborates the imagery findings with other mission data sets, generating executive summaries to support time-critical mission decisions.

Calhoun, Tracy↗

NASA NTRS2016

Application of Design of Experiments and Surrogate Modeling within the NASA Advanced Concepts Office, Earth-to-Orbit Design Process

Decisions made during early conceptual design have a large impact upon the expected life-cycle cost (LCC) of a new program. It is widely accepted that up to 80% of such cost is committed during these early design phases.1 Therefore, to help minimize LCC, decisions made during conceptual design must be based upon as much information as possible. To aid in the decision making for new launch vehicle programs, the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides rapid turnaround pre-phase A and phase A concept definition studies. The ACO team utilizes a proven set of tools to provide customers with a full vehicle mass breakdown to tertiary subsystems, preliminary structural sizing based upon worst-case flight loads, and trajectory optimization to quantify integrated vehicle performance for a given mission.2 Although the team provides rapid turnaround for single vehicle concepts, the scope of the trade space can be limited due to analyst availability and the manpower requirements for manual execution of the analysis tools. In order to enable exploration of a broader design space, the ACO team has implemented an Advanced Design Methods (ADM) based approach. This approach applies the concepts of Design of Experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to more exhaustively explore the trade space and provide the customer with additional design information to inform decision making. This paper will first discuss the automation of the ACO tool set, which represents a majority of the development e ort. In order to t a surrogate model within tolerable error bounds a number of DOE cases are needed. This number will scale with the number of variable parameters desired and the complexity of the system's response to those variables. For all but the smallest design spaces, the number of cases required cannot be produced within an acceptable timeframe using a manual process. Therefore, automation of the tools was a key enabler for the successful application of an ADM approach to an ACO design study. Following the overview of the tool set automation, an example problem will be given to illustrate the implementation of the ADM approach. The example problem will first cover the inclusion of Ground Rules and Assumptions (GR&A) for a study. The GR&A are very important to the study as they determine the constraints within which a trade study can be conducted. These trades must ultimately reconcile with the customer's desired output and any anticipated \what if" questions. The example problem will then illustrate the setup and execution of a DOE through the automated ACO tools. This process is accomplished more efficiently in this work by splitting the tools into two separate environments. The first environment encompasses the structural optimization and mass estimation tools, while the second is focused on trajectory optimization. Surrogate models are t to the outputs of each environment and are integrated via connection of the surrogate equations. Throughout this process, checks are implemented to compare the output of the surrogates to the output of manually run cases to ensure that the error of the final surrogates is at an acceptable level. The conclusion of the example problem demonstrates the utility of the ADM based approach. Using surrogate models gives the ACO team the ability to visualize vehicle sensitivities to various design parameters and identify regions of interest within the design space. The ADM approach can thus be used to inform concept down selection and isolate promising vehicle configurations to be explored in more detail through the manual design process. In addition it provides the customer with an almost instantaneous turnaround on any \what if" questions that may arise within the bounds of the surrogate model. This approach ultimately expands the ability of the ACO team to provide its customer with broad and rapid turnaround trade studies for launch vehicle conceptual design. The ability to identify a selection of designs which can meet the customer requirements will have the potential to lower LCC of launch vehicle designs originating from ACO.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

NASA NTRS2016

Application of Design of Experiments and Surrogate Modeling within the NASA Advanced Concepts Office, Earth-to-Orbit Design Process

Decisions made during early conceptual design have a large impact upon the expected life-cycle cost (LCC) of a new program. It is widely accepted that up to 80% of such cost is committed during these early design phases. Therefore, to help minimize LCC, decisions made during conceptual design must be based upon as much information as possible. To aid in the decision making for new launch vehicle programs, the Advanced Concepts Office (ACO) at NASA Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC) provides rapid turnaround pre-phase A and phase A concept definition studies. The ACO team utilizes a proven set of tools to provide customers with a full vehicle mass breakdown to tertiary subsystems, preliminary structural sizing based upon worst-case flight loads, and trajectory optimization to quantify integrated vehicle performance for a given mission. Although the team provides rapid turnaround for single vehicle concepts, the scope of the trade space can be limited due to analyst availability and the manpower requirements for manual execution of the analysis tools. In order to enable exploration of a broader design space, the ACO team has implemented an advanced design methods (ADM) based approach. This approach applies the concepts of design of experiments (DOE) and surrogate modeling to more exhaustively explore the trade space and provide the customer with additional design information to inform decision making. This paper will first discuss the automation of the ACO tool set, which represents a majority of the development effort. In order to fit a surrogate model within tolerable error bounds a number of DOE cases are needed. This number will scale with the number of variable parameters desired and the complexity of the system's response to those variables. For all but the smallest design spaces, the number of cases required cannot be produced within an acceptable timeframe using a manual process. Therefore, automation of the tools was a key enabler for the successful application of an ADM approach to an ACO design study. Following the overview of the tool set automation, an example problem will be given to illustrate the implementation of the ADM approach. The example problem will first cover the inclusion of ground rules and assumptions (GR&A) for a study. The GR&A are very important to the study as they determine the constraints within which a trade study can be conducted. These trades must ultimately reconcile with the customer's desired output and any anticipated "what if" questions. The example problem will then illustrate the setup and execution of a DOE through the automated ACO tools. This process is accomplished more efficiently in this work by splitting the tools into two separate environments. The first environment encompasses the structural optimization and mass estimation tools, while the second is focused on trajectory optimization. Surrogate models are fit to the outputs of each environment and are "integrated" via connection of the surrogate equations. Throughout this process, checks are implemented to compare the output of the surrogates to the output of manually run cases to ensure that the error of the final surrogates is at an acceptable level. The conclusion of the example problem demonstrates the utility of the ADM based approach. Using surrogate models gives the ACO team the ability to visualize vehicle sensitivities to various design parameters and identify regions of interest within the design space. The ADM approach can thus be used to inform concept down selection and isolate promising vehicle configurations to be explored in more detail through the manual design process. In addition it provides the customer with an almost instantaneous turnaround on any ''what if" questions that may arise within the bounds of the surrogate model. This approach ultimately expands the ability of the ACO team to provide its customer with broad and rapid turnaround trade studies for launch vehicle conceptual design. The ability to identify a selection of designs which can meet the customer requirements will help ensure lower LCC of launch vehicle designs originating from ACO.

Zwack, Mathew R.↗

DOE OSTI2023

Accelerating Low-Income Financing and Transactions (LIFT) for Solar Access Everywhere (Final Technical Report)

The Accelerating Low-Income Financing and Transactions (LIFT) for Solar Access Everywhere project’s goal was to expand Low-to-Moderate Income (LMI) solar access for homeowners and renters. The LIFT project researched and gathered data on 453 LMI community solar project across the country. Following three years of research, the project delivered three groundbreaking research papers in June 2022, focused on 1) customer experience, 2) the growth of community solar programs, and 3) project-level financial best practices for serving LMI communities. These were followed by a user-friendly web-based Toolkit allowing users to interact with project data and key findings in November 2022. The customer experience research examined community solar subscribers’ primary motivations to join and remain satisfied with projects. Our research identified 453 projects across the country that dedicated some portion of the system capacity to LMI households. Seventeen of these projects participated in the LIFT customer experience research, allowing the project team to survey their customers and gain insight into how LMI subscribers feel about community solar and the programs that serve them. Subscribers in our sample indicated that the most critical issue that motivated them to participate in their program, however, was not savings but helping the environment. This was true for both LMI and non-LMI subscribers. Helping the environment was also the most important issue for LMI subscribers to measure how well their program was working for them. LIFT also explored how rapidly community solar has grown since its inception in 2006, publishing results in the Growth of U.S. Community Solar Serving LMI Households report. The results showed that community solar projects serving LMI households are one of the fastest growing segments of the solar industry. The report identifies and recommends ways developers should overcome real or perceived risks to LMI customer acquisition and subscriber management. Through the analysis of community solar project finance research, LIFT showed that most community solar projects serving LMI households are financed in the same ways mainstream community solar projects are financed. The value stacks and financial returns are no different, although LMI inclusion and participation rate varied across programs in our sample, ranging from between 10% and 100%. Based on the findings from the LIFT research, the team built a web-based user-friendly Toolkit, consisting of case studies, project finance best practices, and several tools built around the national dataset of 453 community solar projects that serve LMI households. These allow users to engage with the dataset in multiple ways; to explore the landscape of LMI community solar in the U.S., and to design community solar projects to optimize LMI inclusion, equity, and savings levels. The Toolkit also includes a library of LIFT-generated and LIFT-curated resources for users to learn more about how to best serve LMI communities through community solar. LIFT officially published the Toolkit on October 31, 2022, followed by a launch event (public webinar) on November 17, 2022. The core LIFT partners continue to engage in outreach and dissemination efforts to promote the LIFT Toolkit and research publications. Our driving motivation is to continue enabling solar developers to leverage the findings of this three-year research effort. By implication, the LIFT Toolkit is designed for use by utilities, energy service providers, and financiers or investors as a learning and decision-making tool to rapidly scale project models that optimize LMI inclusion and maximize real household savings.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗