Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “usability testing”

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.

525 records · Page 30

Multiphysics Modeling of Microreactors with NEAMS codes, and Validation Based on KRUSTY Reactivity Insertion

The NEAMS Multiphysics Applications team continues to assess code usability and functionality for microreactor design and safety analyses, while demonstrating that NEAMS tools capture both steady-state and transient behavior across distinct microreactor concepts. In FY2025, the team advanced full-core, high-fidelity, multiphysics models that solve more complex problems and strengthen verification/validation for several microreactor systems: heat-pipe microreactor (HPMR), gas-cooled microreactor (GCMR), and the KRUSTY experiment. These models employ the MOOSE MultiApp/Transfers architecture with Griffin for neutronics, BISON for heat conduction/thermomechanics, Sockeye for heat pipes, SAM/THM for coolant channels and loops, and SWIFT for hydride behavior, with meshes generated via the MOOSE Reactor Module. The graphite models available in the Grizzly code were also investigated for future analyses. For the HPMR, a Na-HPMR variant was constructed to align with recently validated heat-pipe experiments and Sockeye’s LCVF capability, enabling mechanistic heat-pipe transients and startup modeling. The Na-HPMR will serve as the primary model for HPMR investigations in upcoming tasks. The load-following and single heat-pipe failure scenarios (Griffin/BISON/Sockeye), which were previously modeled for the K-HPMR, were replicated for the Na-HPMR, showing strong negative temperature feedback and highly localized thermal effects, respectively, while the startup case captured vapor-front progression and heat-removal activation. Solid mechanics was added to the previously built K-HPMR full-core model in BISON, showing minimal impact on steady-state reactivity yet enabling stress-field predictions that prepare the path for full-core TRISO performance analyses. For the GCMR, automated steady-state and four transient scenarios were executed using Griffin/BISON/SAM/SWIFT. Results confirm robust inherent safety: power collapses promptly in loss-of-cooling events, the inlet-temperature drop settles to a new equilibrium, and a single-channel blockage yields only a ~30 K local fuel-temperature rise with <0.4% power decrease. SWIFT-predicted hydrogen redistribution affects reactivity during both steady-state and transient conditions, underscoring its importance. A Brayton-cycle balance of plant (BOP) model in SAM/THM demonstrated stable startup behavior, and xenon-driven reactivity during load following was analyzed. To improve TRISO-compact temperature fidelity, a fast multiscale Heat Source Decomposition (HSD) treatment was implemented. Against heterogeneous benchmarks, HSD reduces underprediction of kernel temperatures and lowers predicted peak powers in reactivity-insertion transients compared to previous homogenized models. KRUSTY warm-critical validation progressed from FY2024 baselines: the 15Ȼ insertion shows excellent agreement in peak power (~2% high) and temperature trends, and the 30Ȼ case was automated via a feedback controller that maintained power near 3 kW for ~150 s with close agreement to data. The successful modeling of the warm critical tests has laid a strong foundation for simulating more complex nuclear system tests in the years ahead. Throughout FY2025, developer feedback was provided (e.g., MOOSE batch mesh generation, distributed pre-split meshes, Griffin sweeper on displaced meshes), several new models were contributed to the Virtual Test Bed, and an OECD-NEA WPRS multiphysics benchmark based on the HPMR was initiated to enable broader cross-comparison and best-practice development with the nuclear community at large.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Uncrewed Lunar Surface Operations and Support Activities

Sustained human presence on the surface of the Moon and future missions to Mars require increased independence from surface crews and Earth-based mission control to operate efficiently, safely, and reliably. The time for surface crews to perform tasks will be limited. Extravehicular activities by surface personnel are burdensome and time-consuming, even when a continuous human presence on the surface occurs. Identifying and balancing human/automation roles and tasks and infusing automation and autonomy practices early in a system’s lifecycle will be essential to achieve mission objectives. Among these objectives are attaining a sustained human presence, improving performance and mission effectiveness, reducing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs, and ensuring operations that are robust to communication delays. To achieve these objectives, an operational shift toward increased automation and autonomy with less reliance on humans is needed. Uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities occur when surface crews are not present or are independent of surface crew timeline activities requiring no surface crew oversight or intervention. These uncrewed surface opportunities can also be planned to minimize crew workload that avoids routine maintenance and support tasks, thus maximizing crew exploration time. Uncrewed preparations such as staging and prepositioning equipment and materials before the crew arrives could improve crew task efficiency. Additional opportunities exist to conduct uncrewed science, exploration, and utilization. Uncrewed surface architecture functions can include science and exploration; habitation; launch and landing support; surface communication and navigation; surface power generation and distribution; human surface mobility; lifting, handling, manipulating; excavation, construction, and site preparation; logistics management; maintenance and repair; surface resource utilization; integrated site operations and shared support services (e.g., site scheduling/prioritization, dust mitigation/contamination control, and surface safety). Early robotic lunar surface campaigns will provide information on the availability of resources, such as oxygen and water, and demonstrate surface-based technologies. After the Artemis III human lunar return mission, a series of landers will deliver surface systems, cargo, supplies, science packages, spare parts, and commodities. A balance of crewed and uncrewed surface operations will enable a sustained lunar surface presence at the South Pole of the Moon at a site that will be known as the Artemis Base Camp (ABC). It is envisioned that base camp operations on and around the Moon will then help prepare for the mission durations and activities needed to support the first human mission to Mars. Before long-duration crew missions to the base camp can occur, the necessary surface infrastructure will be pre-deployed and verified operational. Surface assets will be teleoperated and remotely managed from Earth. Additionally, robotic and short-duration crewed missions to the ABC will ensure the site’s merit to achieve long-term science objectives, availability of usable resources, and that terrain, seasonal variations, and illumination conditions are acceptable. ABC will consist of different areas where specific functions and services are rendered, including: • Launch and Landing Area • Habitation Area • Power Production Area • Resource Areas Launch and Landing Area—The launch and landing area will support associated functions for the arrival and departure of vehicles, such as crewed landing and ascent and uncrewed cargo deliveries and offloading. It will evolve from an unimproved site at the beginning of the exploration campaign to a more sustainable landing and launch area that can support repeated arrivals and departures. Initial uncrewed Lunar Terrain Vehicle (LTV) surface operations may include emplacement of navigation beacons and communication equipment, real-time video and photography of landing/liftoff events, and element repositioning, such as portable utility power (PUP) (applicable for other landed assets at other areas). Site preparations, such as surface leveling, soil compaction, and berm/path construction, may be needed for a more sustainable launch and landing area capable of accommodating vehicles that are increasingly more reusable and reduce the effects of plume surface interactions and ejecta impacts on nearby surface assets. During the ABC missions, cargo and logistics will be delivered to the lunar surface via robotic cargo landers before the crew arrives. These shipments, which can arrive in pressurized logistics carriers, will deliver the logistics necessary to support a crewed mission and include items such as food, water, equipment spares, etc. Providing the capability to retrieve, offload, and transport the logistics closer to the ABC site before the arrival of the crew will increase the overall efficiency of crew operations once they arrive. In the sustained phase of exploration, other supporting services may be needed, such as lander propellant servicing, surface power services, commodity refreshes, and additional inspection, maintenance, and repair capabilities, to sustain a cadence of extended personnel stays and cargo arrivals and departures. Habitation Area—Uncrewed support to surface habitation could involve supporting activation and pre-entry operations of the habitat while the crew is in orbit at the Gateway outpost preparing for a surface landing. Surface Habitat (SH) uncrewed operations may include bringing the cabin environment to a habitable temperature and air mix and activating other critical crew support systems. Potential crop production uncrewed tasks in the SH could also include autonomous watering and tending. Additionally, when the crew departs, the SH enters dormancy for the long period of uncrewed operation. A logistical staging area could also be collocated near the SH. If so, staging operations for crew supplies, waste re-location, and recycling operations may be opportunities for uncrewed operations. Power Production Area—The Fission Surface Power (FSP) element and its supporting distribution equipment provide power to surface elements as needed across the ABC to supplement day-to-day operations and survive lunar nights. Uncrewed support of this power system includes any initial LTV-assisted deployments of cables and other distributed equipment, associated electrical connections, and system testing and activation operations. Robotically performing some inspections, maintenance, or repair tasks on the power distribution equipment could reduce the surface crew workload. Resource Area— Uncrewed resource prospecting, mapping, and characterizing possible resource sites is likely to be time-consuming and represents an opportunity for uncrewed operations between crewed missions. Uncrewed mobile equipment operations will be needed in the extreme environments of permanently shadowed locations where resource extractions occur. As In-Situ Resource Utilization (ISRU) pilot plant operations begin, uncrewed surface support activities with available mobile and portable assets (LTV, PUP, etc.) will better support these operations. Any produced commodities can be stored at a centralized storage location for future use. Also associated with these operations is the use of mobile robotic excavators for resource acquisition and robotic/autonomous regolith processing. The waste tailings generated during excavation and regolith processing would also need to be transported and deposited at a dedicated location. Surface assets will continue operating between crew visits to maintain surface capabilities, conduct lunar surface science, technology demonstrations, and public outreach opportunities. Additionally, certain sustaining tasks that would consume valuable crew time could be performed before crew arrival, or after their departure. This capability may offer more affordable options to construct, activate, test, and maintain a broad set of surface assets. Telerobotically operated human surface mobility systems, such as the LTV and Pressurized Rover (PR), can be utilized for various tasks. Surface environmental conditions pose a distinct challenge for all these activities. Surface illumination and localized shadows are one such factor. Night-survival operations could consist of thermal management, battery pre-charging, and load shedding. Some surface systems may hibernate through the night and then awake and continue nominal operations. Uncrewed mobile assets may use a more adaptive approach to optimize their power and operations; one method is to follow the sunlight. Night-survival operations may be initiated remotely by teleoperation, automated, or accomplished by supervised autonomous operation. The ability to pre-deploy and control remote assets in orbit or on Mars before the arrival of the mission crew is a key capability that can be simulated on the moon. The base camp provides a venue where these advanced operational concepts, technologies, and autonomous methods and techniques, including the incorporation of time delays to simulate Earth-Mars latency can be replicated to help buy down future Mars mission risks. This paper will examine the evolution of uncrewed lunar surface operations and support activities. It will also discuss the lunar surface environmental conditions (thermal, lighting, terrain, topography, communications) along with the challenges they pose on uncrewed surface operations, and the performance of these activities with limited to minimal human interaction and/or teleoperation. Since lunar missions include Mars mission analogs, such investigation provides the framework for future uncrewed Mars mission support.

Mark E Lewis↗

Data Curation for Machine Learning Applied to Geothermal Power Plant Operational Data for GOOML: Geothermal Operational Optimization with Machine Learning: Preprint

Geothermal Operational Optimization with Machine Learning (GOOML) is a transferable and extensible component-based geothermal asset modeling framework that considers complex steamfield relationships and identifies optimization prospects using a data-driven approach to physics-guided, data-centric machine learning. This framework has been used to develop digital twins that provide steamfield operators with operational environments to analyze and understand historical and forecasted power production, explore new steamfield configuration possibilities, and seek optimal asset management in real world applications. To create, test, and apply the GOOML framework, diverse time-series datasets spanning multiple years were sourced from various geothermal power plant components within several complex real-world geothermal operations. These operations are based in the United States and New Zealand and include a variety of technologies, end-uses and configurations, collectively covering nearly all relevant operating conditions for modern geothermal fields. Datasets were acquired from multiple sources to ensure that machine learning experiments generalized properly to various operating conditions. It was found that the data varied in quality, format, and completeness. To ensure consistency between the various datasets, a standardized data curation process was developed to reliably streamline data preparation. This paper will discuss best practices as learned from the GOOML data curation process which takes the following steps: 1) acquisition of large quantities of data from power plant operators, 2) digestion of data to gain an initial understanding of what is included, 3) data transformation, which includes converting the data into a standardized machine-readable format so that they can be visualized, quality checked, and cleaned, 4) quality assurance and quality control, involving identification of significant data gaps and apparent anomalies through mapping of data features to real world componentry via the GOOML historical model, followed by discussion with modelers and power plant operators to identify additional data needs and to resolve issues, 5) use in machine learning algorithms, and 6) repetition of steps one through five until all data needs are met and data are deemed suitable for producing trustworthy modeling results which may be disseminated, ideally along with the curated dataset. This iterative process is focused on improving the quality of the data rather than tuning machine learning model parameters and supports a shift towards data-centric AI as a means to improving real-world applicability of geothermal machine learning projects.

access↗