Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “time step”

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 613 records · Page 34

Improving the representation of shallow cumulus convection with the simplified-higher-order-closure–mass-flux (SHOC+MF v1.0) approach

Abstract. Parameterized boundary layer turbulence and moist convection remain some of the largest sources of uncertainty in general circulation models. High-resolution climate modeling aims to reduce that uncertainty by explicitly attempting to resolve deep moist convective motions. An example of such a model is the Simple Cloud-Resolving E3SM Atmosphere Model (SCREAM) with a target global resolution of 3.25 km, allowing for a more accurate representation of complex mesoscale deep convective dynamics. Yet, small-scale planetary boundary layer turbulence and shallow convection still need to be parameterized, which in SCREAM is accomplished through the turbulent-kinetic-energy-based (TKE-based) simplified higher-order closure (SHOC) – a simplified version of the assumed-double-Gaussian-PDF (probability density function) higher-order-closure method. In this paper, we implement a stochastic-multiplume mass-flux (MF) parameterization of dry and shallow convection in SCREAM to go beyond the limitations of double-Gaussian-PDF closures and couple it to SHOC (SHOC+MF). The new parameterization implemented in a single-column model type version of SCREAM produces results for two shallow cumulus convection cases (marine and continental shallow convection) that agree well with the reference data from large-eddy simulations, thus improving the general representation of the thermodynamic quantities and their turbulent fluxes as well as cloud macrophysics in the model. Furthermore, SHOC+MF parameterization shows weak sensitivity to the vertical grid resolution and model time step.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Numerical coupling of aerosol emissions, dry removal, and turbulent mixing in the E3SM Atmosphere Model version 1 (EAMv1) – Part 2: A semi-discrete error analysis framework for assessing coupling schemes

Abstract. Part 1 (Wan et al., 2024) of this study discusses the motivation and empirical evaluation of a revision to the aerosol-related numerical process coupling in the atmosphere component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model version 1 (EAMv1) to address the previously reported issue of strong sensitivity of the simulated dust aerosol lifetime and dry removal rate to the model's vertical resolution. This paper complements that empirical justification of the revised scheme with a mathematical justification leveraging a semi-discrete analysis framework for assessing the splitting error of process coupling methods. The framework distinguishes the error due to numerical splitting from the error due to the time integration method(s) used for each individual process. Such a distinction results in a framework that provides an intuitive understanding of the causes of the splitting error. The application of this framework to the dust life cycle in EAMv1 confirms (i) that the original EAMv1 scheme artificially strengthens the effect of dry removal processes and (ii) that the revised splitting reduces that artificial strengthening. While the error analysis framework is presented in the context of the dust life cycle in EAMv1, the framework can be broadly leveraged to evaluate process coupling schemes, both in other physical problems and for any number of processes. This framework will be particularly powerful when the various process implementations support a variety of time integration approaches. Whereas traditional local truncation error approaches require separate consideration of each combination of time integration methods, this framework enables evaluation of coupling schemes independent of particular time integration approaches for each process while still allowing for the incorporation of these specific time integration errors if so desired. The framework also explains how the splitting error terms result from (i) the integration of individual processes in isolation from other processes and (ii) the choices of input state and time step size for the isolated integration of processes. Such a perspective has the potential for the rapid development of alternative coupling approaches that utilize knowledge both about the desired accuracy and about the computational costs of individual processes.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

Energy-conserving physics for nonhydrostatic dynamics in mass coordinate models

Abstract. Motivated by reducing errors in the energy budget related to enthalpy fluxes within the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM), we study several physics–dynamics coupling approaches. Using idealized physics, a moist rising bubble test case, and the E3SM's nonhydrostatic dynamical core, we consider unapproximated and approximated thermodynamics applied at constant pressure or constant volume. With the standard dynamics and physics time-split implementation, we describe how the constant-pressure and constant-volume approaches use different mechanisms to transform physics tendencies into dynamical motion and show that only the constant-volume approach is consistent with the underlying equations. Using time step convergence studies, we show that the two approaches both converge but to slightly different solutions. We reproduce the large inconsistencies between the energy flux internal to the model and the energy flux of precipitation when using approximate thermodynamics, which can only be removed by considering variable latent heats, both when computing the latent heating from phase change and when applying this heating to update the temperature. Finally, we show that in the nonhydrostatic case, for physics applied at constant pressure, the general relation that enthalpy is locally conserved no longer holds. In this case, the conserved quantity is enthalpy plus an additional term proportional to the difference between hydrostatic pressure and full pressure.

58 GEOSCIENCES↗

ELM2.1-XGBfire1.0: improving wildfire prediction by integrating a machine learning fire model in a land surface model

Wildfires have shown increasing trends in both frequency and severity across the contiguous United States (CONUS). However, process-based fire models have difficulties in accurately simulating the burned area over the CONUS due to a simplification of the physical process and cannot capture the interplay among fire, ignition, climate, and human activities. The deficiency of burned area simulation deteriorates the description of fire impact on energy balance, water budget, and carbon fluxes in the Earth system models (ESMs). Alternatively, fire models based on machine learning (ML), which capture statistical relationships between the burned area and environmental factors, have shown promising burned area predictions and corresponding fire impact simulation. We develop a hybrid framework (ELM2.1-XGBFire1.0) that integrates an eXtreme Gradient Boosting (XGBoost) wildfire model with the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM) land model (ELM) version 2.1. A Fortran–C–Python deep learning bridge is adapted to support online communication between ELM and the ML fire model. Specifically, the burned area predicted by the ML-based wildfire model is directly passed to ELM to adjust the carbon pool and vegetation dynamics after disturbance, which are then used as predictors in the ML-based fire model in the next time step. Evaluated against the historical burned area from Global Fire Emissions Database 5 from 2001–2019, the ELM2.1-XGBFire1.0 outperforms process-based fire models in terms of spatial distribution and seasonal variations. The ELM2.1-XGBFire1.0 has proven to be a new tool for studying vegetation–fire interactions and, more importantly, enables seamless exploration of climate–fire feedback, working as an active component of E3SM.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

CaptureFOAM

CaptureFOAM provides utilities for fast and accurate direct air capture (DAC) contactor simulations, based on the OpenFOAM framework. At the core, CaptureFOAM is a suite of mass transfer and chemistry models built upon the OpenFOAM thin film model, which allows coarser mesh resolution and less constrictive time step requirements when compared to a traditional volume of fluid approach. This allows CaptureFOAM to conduct device-scale simulations for complex geometries including commercial packing materials and novel contactor shapes, matching experimental results in a wide variety of applications.

Kincaid, Kellis [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (OR↗

Warm boundary-layer cloud properties and cloud susceptibilities product at the ARM ENA observatory

Cloud liquid water path, albedo, and cloud fraction susceptibilities for marine warm boundary-layer clouds are quantified using the Meteosat retrieved cloud microphysical properties at the ARM Eastern North Atlantic (ENA) observatory in the Azores. The Meteosat cloud retrievals are based on the methods applied by the Clouds and the Earth’s Radiant Energy System (CERES) project, which are specifically tailored to support the ARM user facility over the ARM ground-based observation sites (enavisstpx2dm11minnisX1.c1). Cloud susceptibility is quantified as the slope between cloud properties and Nd within a 1-degree-by-1-degree grid box at each satellite time step using a least-square regression. To reduce uncertainties associated with the adiabatic assumption in the Nd retrieval, for each cloud object, we exclude cloudy pixels at the cloud edge, defined as those adjacent to cloud-free pixels. To minimize influence of cloud heterogeneity and co-variability on the retrieved cloud susceptibility, cloud properties are averaged to 0.25-degree resolution using the 3-km pixel-level retrieval, and the 1-degree cloud susceptibilities are estimated using the smoothed data. Cloud type classification is applied to distinct cloud object, labeling all contiguous cloudy pixels. Marine warm boundary-layer clouds are defined as clouds with 90% of cloud tops below 3km, and Meteosat retrieved cloud phase as liquid.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Particle_hygroscopicity_growth_factor_HFIMS_TRACER_2022_HOUSTON_IOP

This dataset contains high-temporal-resolution measurements of hygroscopic growth factors (GF), and instrument diagnostic/environmental parameters collected during the TRACER campaign using a coupled Differential Mobility Analyzer (DMA) and Fast Integrated Mobility Spectrometer (FIMS) system (HFIMS). The dataset consists of 49,645 time steps and covers 20 discrete growth factor bins (FIMS_GFbinc). The primary data product is the Probability Density Function (FIMS_cPDF), which characterizes aerosol hygroscopic growth behavior under controlled relative humidity conditions. Instrument operational parameters, including flow temperatures, relative humidities, pressures, and counts for both DMA and FIMS, are provided for quality assurance.

DMA_Dp_mean↗

Xanthos Output Dataset Under ISIMIP3b Selected CMIP6 Scenarios: 1850 - 2100 (Basin and Regional Scale)

Xanthos is an open-source hydrologic model, written in Python, designed to quantify and analyze global water availability. Xanthos simulates historical and future global water availability on a monthly time step at a spatial resolution of 0.5 geographic degrees. Xanthos was designed to be extensible and used by scientists that study global water supply and work with the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM). Xanthos Output Dataset This dataset includes Xanthos outputs forced by the ISIMIP3b bias-adjusted CMIP6 climate forcing (1850 - 2100). There are 30 scenarios consists of 10 CMIP6 GCMs and 3 SSP-RCP scenarios. (1) 10 CMIP6 GCMs: GFDL-ESM4, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL, CanESM5, CNRM-CM6-1, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3, and MIROC6 (2) 3 SSP-RCP Scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 The output variables in this dataset are aggregated to basin and regional scales. (1) Monthly runoff at basin scale (2) Annual accessible renewable water at basin scale (2) Annual actual hydropower production, hydropower potential, and exploitable hydropower potential at regional scale

Climate Change↗

CERF Visualization: Wind turbine siting in central California, USA from 2020-2050

CERF Visualization: Wind turbine siting in central California from 2020-2050 Visualization of CERF outputs for years 2020-2050 in 5-year time steps for a region in central California, USA. This visualization uses Google Earth Pro to zoom into the region of interest, show the layered application of wind suitability criteria, show the siting for each year in planform, and then zoom into to show functional wind turbines as they are added annually to the area of interest.

Energy↗

Xanthos Output Dataset Under ISIMIP3b Selected CMIP6 Scenarios: 1850 - 2100

Overview Xanthos is an open-source hydrologic model, written in Python, designed to quantify and analyze global water availability. Xanthos simulates historical and future global water availability on a monthly time step at a spatial resolution of 0.5 geographic degrees. Xanthos was designed to be extensible and used by scientists that study global water supply and work with the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM). Details This dataset includes Xanthos outputs forced by the ISIMIP3b bias-adjusted CMIP6 climate forcing (1850 - 2100). There are 30 scenarios consists of 10 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) General Circulation Models (GCM) and 3 Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP). Each folder is named as cmip6_{gcm}_{ensemble-member}_{ssp}. 10 CMIP6 GCMs: GFDL-ESM4, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL, CanESM5, CNRM-CM6-1, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3, and MIROC6 3 SSP-RCP Scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 The table below summarizes the details of output variables within each scenario folder. | Output Variable | File Short Name | Spatial Resolution | Unit | | ----------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | --------------------- | | Runoff | q | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Runoff | Basin_runoff | GCAM basin | km3/month | | Runoff | Country_runoff | Country | km3/month | | Runoff | GCAMRegion_runoff | GCAM region | km3/month | | Streamflow | avgchflow | 0.5x0.5 degree | m3/second | | Potential Evapotranspiration | pet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Actual Evapotranspiration | aet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Accessible Water | accessible_water | GCAM basin | km3/year | | Hydropower Generation | actual_hydro | GCAM region | EJ/year |

Climate Change↗

Xanthos Output Dataset Under ISIMIP3b Selected CMIP6 Scenarios: 1850 - 2100

Overview Xanthos is an open-source hydrologic model, written in Python, designed to quantify and analyze global water availability. Xanthos simulates historical and future global water availability on a monthly time step at a spatial resolution of 0.5 geographic degrees. Xanthos was designed to be extensible and used by scientists that study global water supply and work with the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM). Details This dataset includes Xanthos outputs forced by the ISIMIP3b bias-adjusted CMIP6 climate forcing (1850 - 2100). There are 30 scenarios consists of 10 Coupled Model Intercomparison Project phase 6 (CMIP6) General Circulation Models (GCM) and 3 Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP). Each folder is named as cmip6_{gcm}_{ensemble-member}_{ssp}. 10 CMIP6 GCMs: GFDL-ESM4, IPSL-CM6A-LR, MPI-ESM1-2-HR, MRI-ESM2-0, UKESM1-0-LL, CanESM5, CNRM-CM6-1, CNRM-ESM2-1, EC-Earth3, and MIROC6 3 SSP-RCP Scenarios: SSP1-2.6, SSP3-7.0, and SSP5-8.5 The table below summarizes the details of output variables within each scenario folder. | Output Variable | File Short Name | Spatial Resolution | Unit | | ----------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------- | -------------------------------- | --------------------- | | Runoff | q | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Runoff | Basin_runoff | GCAM basin | km3/month | | Runoff | Country_runoff | Country | km3/month | | Runoff | GCAMRegion_runoff | GCAM region | km3/month | | Streamflow | avgchflow | 0.5x0.5 degree | m3/second | | Potential Evapotranspiration | pet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Actual Evapotranspiration | aet | 0.5x0.5 degree | km3/month | | Accessible Water | accessible_water | GCAM basin | km3/year | | Hydropower Generation | actual_hydro | GCAM region | EJ/year |

Climate Change↗

CERF Visualization: Projected locations of new natural gas combined cycle power plants (with recirculating cooling) in Wyoming, USA (2020-2050)

Visualization of CERF outputs for years 2030-2050 in 5-year time steps for a region in Wyoming, USA. This visualization was built using a custom CesiumJS application. The region of interest was zoomed into and then the app shows the layered application of natural gas combined cycle power plants (with recirculating cooling) suitability criteria, show the siting for each year in planform, simulates the selection of a site using Net Locational Cost, and then zooms into to show a single functional gas plant and simulates its connection to the grid.

CERF↗

Baltimore Social-Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) Doppler Lidar & Derived Products

This repository contains all processed Doppler‐lidar outputs from the PSU lidar deployed for the Baltimore Social‐Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) project. Vertical Stare Scans (fixed‐beam, vertical profiling): 1 Hz backscatter intensity (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal‐to‐noise ratio (unitless), and Doppler vertical‐velocity (m s⁻¹) on ~30 m range gates, stored as CF-compliant NetCDF. Wind Profiles (horizontal‐wind retrieval): daily NetCDF outputs of retrieved horizontal wind speed (m s⁻¹) and direction (degrees), computed from the angled‐scan returns. Profile Statistics (summary statistics on the vertical velocity): 15 min windows (default) of mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis, high-frequency variance, etc., as a function of height; saved as CF-compliant NetCDF files. Boundary Layer Height (BLH) (fuzzy-logic output): 15 min BLH estimates (m), with lower/upper fuzzy bounds (m) and a quality flag (0–4) indicating data status (e.g., no data, good, below range, ran out of signal, cloud-topped). Cloud Base Height (Haar-gradient detection): 15 min estimates of cloud-base height (m) with a cloud-detection quality flag (0–3: none, low, moderate, high). All five product streams are organized by year and date under their own top-level folders (01_Vertical_Stare_Scans/ through 05_Cloud_Height/). Each folder contains a data_ /YYYY/ subdirectory with daily CF-compliant NetCDF outputs (96 windows per day at 15 min intervals). Global attributes in each file include creation history, version (2.0.0), institution, and source. Instrument & MeasurementsThe PSU Doppler Lidar samples aerosol backscatter (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal-to-noise ratio, and radial velocity at ~1 Hz. Vertical stare scans point the beam straight up; after collecting angled scans through multiple elevation angles, the "Wind Profiles" product contains the fully retrieved horizontal wind speed and direction. Data were collected continuously at ~30 m range resolution, with a typical height ceiling of ~12 km. How to Use Open any NetCDF with Python's xarray, MATLAB, or similar CF-compliant tools. Stare scans and angled-scan retrievals (Wind Profiles) are CF-compliant daily NetCDF files. Profile-Statistics, BLH, and Cloud Height files are daily 15 min summaries (96 time steps per file). Inspect the included variables (e.g., vertical_velocity_variance, wind_speed, BLH, cloud_base_height) for your analyses. Use the quality flags (BLH_flag, cloud_flag) to filter out poor-quality retrievals. For more information or questions about processing methods, please contact:Nicholas E. Prince ⟨nec5299@psu.edu⟩Penn State Department of Meteorology & Atmospheric Science

Air Quality↗

Xanthos-Lake Dataset

The Xanthos-Lake v1.0 dataset provides the input data, trained machine-learning models, and simulation outputs needed to characterize lake water balance, snow and ice conditions, and mixing-layer temperature within the Xanthos global hydrological modeling framework. The dataset supports lake representation across a wide range of lake sizes and hydroclimatic conditions by combining xLSIM, a basin-specific machine-learning emulator of lake snow, ice, ice-cover fraction, and mixing-layer temperature, with the Xanthos-Lake water-balance model. The archive contains NetCDF datasets used to train and evaluate xLSIM, trained model weights, processed meteorological and lake-property inputs, and basin- and lake-category-specific simulation outputs. These materials are organized into four primary data groups, described below. Snowice_model_inputs: Contains the NetCDF input data used to train xLSIM. The xLSIM machine-learning framework uses three lake-based datasets. The meteorological forcing dataset provides monthly relative humidity, specific humidity, surface wind speed, maximum and minimum air temperature, downward longwave and shortwave radiation, snowfall, surface air pressure, and total precipitation. Lake surface area is included as an additional static predictor. The target-state dataset provides lake ice thickness, snow depth, snow cover, and lake mixing-layer temperature, while a companion lake-surface dataset provides the lake ice-cover fraction. Before training, ice thickness and snow depth are converted from meters to centimeters, mixing-layer temperature is converted from kelvin to degrees Celsius and constrained to nonnegative values, and ice-cover fraction is converted from a fraction to a percentage. The predictor variables are normalized using statistics calculated across the selected lakes and time steps. Snowice_model_outputs: Contains the NetCDF outputs generated by xLSIM. For each basin, xLSIM produces a file containing observed and predicted lake-state variables for the training, validation, and testing periods. The modeled variables include lake ice thickness, snow depth, snow cover, mixing-layer temperature, and lake ice-cover fraction. For basins without a sufficiently persistent snow-and-ice signal, the emulator predicts only mixing-layer temperature. The outputs also include training and validation loss histories, the selected model configuration, identifiers of the lakes used in training, and SHAP-based feature-importance information at the global, lake, and seasonal-regime levels. The trained machine-learning model weights are provided separately within the dataset archive. Together, these files support model evaluation and subsequent coupling with the Xanthos-Lake water-balance framework. XanthosLAKES: Contains the NetCDF input data used by the Xanthos-Lake framework. Monthly meteorological inputs include relative and specific humidity, downward shortwave and longwave radiation, mean, maximum, and minimum air temperature, wind speed, precipitation, snowfall, and surface air pressure. Static lake-property datasets provide lake identifiers, geographic locations, surface area, volume, mean depth, elevation, drainage area, fetch, outlet-routing information, and associated Xanthos grid-cell attributes. Separate bathymetric datasets provide the coefficients of the area–depth and volume–depth relationships for each aggregated lake unit. GLEV-based records provide observed lake surface area and evaporation data used to initialize lake states, define reference conditions, and calibrate and evaluate the model. Xanthos-Lake Outputs: Contains the basin- and lake-category-specific NetCDF outputs generated by Xanthos-Lake. Monthly variables include lake surface area, storage volume, outlet discharge, evaporation rate, evaporation volume, lake–groundwater exchange, lake inflow, ice thickness, snow depth, snow-cover fraction, ice-cover fraction, and mixing-layer temperature. The files also contain lake-specific calibration and validation statistics, including normalized root-mean-square error, mean absolute error, Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency, Kling–Gupta efficiency, and percent bias. Stored calibrated and derived parameters include the weir discharge coefficient, fractional freeboard, groundwater exchange coefficient, reference water level, corresponding reference surface area and storage volume, weir-width adjustment factor, and the fraction of routed inflow entering the lake. Basin identifiers, lake category, simulation period, calibration and validation periods, and parameter-schema information are retained as NetCDF metadata.

Abeshu, Guta [Pacific Northwest National Laborator↗

Baltimore Social-Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) Doppler Lidar & Derived Products

This repository contains all processed Doppler‐lidar outputs from the PSU lidar deployed for the Baltimore Social‐Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) project. Vertical Stare Scans (fixed‐beam, vertical profiling): 1 Hz backscatter intensity (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal‐to‐noise ratio (unitless), and Doppler vertical‐velocity (m s⁻¹) on 30 m range gates (and 3 m range gates), stored as CF-compliant NetCDF. Wind Profiles (horizontal‐wind retrieval): daily NetCDF outputs of retrieved horizontal wind speed (m s⁻¹) and direction (degrees), computed from the angled‐scan returns. Profile Statistics (summary statistics on the vertical velocity): 15 min windows (default) of mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis, high-frequency variance, etc., as a function of height; saved as CF-compliant NetCDF files. Boundary Layer Height (BLH) (fuzzy-logic output): 15 min BLH estimates (m), with lower/upper fuzzy bounds (m) and a quality flag (0–4) indicating data status (e.g., no data, good, ran out of signal, below range, cloud-topped). Cloud Base Height (Haar-gradient detection): 10 min estimates of cloud-base height (m). All five product streams are organized by year and date under their own top-level folders (01_Vertical_Stare_Scans/ through 05_Cloud_Height/). Each folder contains a data_ /YYYY/ subdirectory with daily CF-compliant NetCDF outputs (96 windows per day at 15 min intervals). Global attributes in each file include creation history, version (3.0.0), institution, and source. Instrument & MeasurementsThe PSU Doppler Lidar samples aerosol backscatter (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal-to-noise ratio, and radial velocity at ~1 Hz. Vertical stare scans point the beam straight up; after collecting angled scans through multiple elevation angles, the "Wind Profiles" product contains the fully retrieved horizontal wind speed and direction. Data were collected continuously at ~30 m range resolution (and 3 m for the year of 2025), with a typical height ceiling of ~12 km. How to Use Open any NetCDF with Python's xarray, MATLAB, or similar CF-compliant tools. Stare scans and angled-scan retrievals (Wind Profiles) are CF-compliant daily NetCDF files. Profile-Statistics, BLH, and Cloud Height files are daily 15 min (10 min for Cloud Heights) summaries (96 time steps per file). Inspect the included variables (e.g., vertical_velocity_variance, wind_speed, BLH, cloud_base_height) for your analyses. Use the quality flags (BLH_flag, cloud_flag) to filter out poor-quality retrievals. For more information or questions about processing methods, please contact:Nicholas E. Prince ⟨nec5299@psu.edu⟩Penn State Department of Meteorology & Atmospheric Science

Air Quality↗

Baltimore Social-Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) Doppler Lidar & Derived Products

This repository contains all processed Doppler‐lidar outputs from the PSU lidar deployed for the Baltimore Social‐Environmental Collaborative (BSEC) project. Vertical Stare Scans (fixed‐beam, vertical profiling): 1 Hz backscatter intensity (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal‐to‐noise ratio (unitless), and Doppler vertical‐velocity (m s⁻¹) on 30 m range gates (and 3 m range gates), stored as CF-compliant NetCDF. Wind Profiles (horizontal‐wind retrieval): daily NetCDF outputs of retrieved horizontal wind speed (m s⁻¹) and direction (degrees), computed from the angled‐scan returns. Profile Statistics (summary statistics on the vertical velocity): 15 min windows (default) of mean, variance, skewness, kurtosis, high-frequency variance, etc., as a function of height; saved as CF-compliant NetCDF files. Boundary Layer Height (BLH) (fuzzy-logic output): 15 min BLH estimates (m), with lower/upper fuzzy bounds (m) and a quality flag (0–4) indicating data status (e.g., no data, good, ran out of signal, below range, cloud-topped). Cloud Base Height (Haar-gradient detection): 10 min estimates of cloud-base height (m). All five product streams are organized by year and date under their own top-level folders (01_Vertical_Stare_Scans/ through 05_Cloud_Height/). Each folder contains a data_ /YYYY/ subdirectory with daily CF-compliant NetCDF outputs (96 windows per day at 15 min intervals). Global attributes in each file include creation history, version (3.0.1), institution, and source. Instrument & MeasurementsThe PSU Doppler Lidar samples aerosol backscatter (m⁻¹ sr⁻¹), signal-to-noise ratio, and radial velocity at ~1 Hz. Vertical stare scans point the beam straight up; after collecting angled scans through multiple elevation angles, the "Wind Profiles" product contains the fully retrieved horizontal wind speed and direction. Data were collected continuously at ~30 m range resolution (and 3 m for the year of 2025), with a typical height ceiling of ~12 km. How to Use Open any NetCDF with Python's xarray, MATLAB, or similar CF-compliant tools. Stare scans and angled-scan retrievals (Wind Profiles) are CF-compliant daily NetCDF files. Profile-Statistics, BLH, and Cloud Height files are daily 15 min (10 min for Cloud Heights) summaries (96 time steps per file). Inspect the included variables (e.g., vertical_velocity_variance, wind_speed, BLH, cloud_base_height) for your analyses. Use the quality flags (BLH_flag, cloud_flag) to filter out poor-quality retrievals. For more information or questions about processing methods, please contact:Nicholas E. Prince ⟨nec5299@psu.edu⟩Penn State Department of Meteorology & Atmospheric Science

Air Quality↗

ResStock Measure Documentation: Residential Two-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (4.0 COP, 20.5 EER) With Envelope Improvements and Advanced Air Sealing

The goal of this work is to develop energy efficiency, demand flexibility, and other retrofit end-use load shapes (electricity, gas, propane, or fuel oil) that cover a majority of the high-impact, market-ready (or nearly market-ready) measures. "Measures" refers to retrofits that can be applied to buildings during modeling. An "end-use savings shape" is the difference in energy consumption between a baseline building and a building with an energy efficiency, demand flexibility, or other retrofit measure applied. It results in a time-series profile that is broken down by end use and fuel (electricity or on-site gas, propane, or fuel oil use) at each time step. ResStock is a highly granular, physics-based, bottom-up model that uses multiple data sources, statistical sampling methods, and advanced building energy simulations to estimate the annual subhourly energy consumption of the residential building stock across the United States. The baseline model intends to represent the U.S. residential building stock as it existed in 2018. Technical documentation for the inputs and assumptions in the baseline building stock model is available in Reyna et al. (2025). Calibration and validation of the baseline model results are available in the final technical report of the End-Use Load Profiles project (Wilson, et al. 2022). This document focuses on a single end-use savings shape measure: Residential Two-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (GHP) (4.0 COP, 20.5 EER) With Envelope Improvements. This measure combines a two-stage GHP with envelope improvements as a single package. As this package is a combination of two other measures, this document focused on documenting the results associated with this combination of technologies, with individual measure documents for two-stage GHPs and envelope improvements providing the information on the details of these measures. When the two technologies are combined, envelope improvements can modestly reduce energy consumption by a further 10%-15%, but also reduce the required size of the ground heat exchanger and heat pump by approximately 33% on average across all sites. The cost of installing envelope improvements in these homes is likely to be more than paid for by the reduction in equipment and drilling costs in these buildings for the majority of the stock.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

ResStock Measure Documentation: Residential Single-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (3.8 COP, 18.6 EER)

The goal of this work is to develop energy efficiency, demand flexibility, and other retrofit end-use load shapes (electricity, gas, propane, or fuel oil) that cover a majority of the high-impact, market-ready (or nearly market-ready) measures. "Measures" refers to retrofits that can be applied to buildings during modeling. An "end-use savings shape" is the difference in energy consumption between a baseline building and a building with an energy efficiency, demand flexibility, or other retrofit measure applied. It results in a time-series profile that is broken down by end use and fuel (electricity or on-site gas, propane, or fuel oil use) at each time step. ResStock is a highly granular, physics-based, bottom-up model that uses multiple data sources, statistical sampling methods, and advanced building energy simulations to estimate the annual subhourly energy consumption of the residential building stock across the United States. The baseline model intends to represent the U.S. residential building stock as it existed in 2018. Technical documentation for the inputs and assumptions in the baseline building stock model is available in Reyna et al. (2025). Calibration and validation of the baseline model results are available in the final technical report of the End-Use Load Profiles project (Wilson et al. 2022). This documentation focuses on a single end-use savings shape measure: Residential Single-Stage Geothermal Heat Pump (GHP).?Single-stage GHPs are able to reduce energy consumption by 31% for the entire stock. Additional results provided below detail how savings changes for sections of the housing stock with different base heating fuel and in different climate zones, as well as the savings potential by state for both heating and cooling. Utility bills and electric panel impacts are also shown and discussed.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗