Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “SCALE Code System”

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 703 records · Page 39
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Reactor Pressure Vessel Fracture Mechanics Development and Concrete Application Testing for Grizzly

The Grizzly code is being developed to address degradation issues in nuclear reactor structures and components. For light-water reactors, Grizzly currently has capabilities to simulate degradation processes and their effects on structural integrity in two key areas: reactor pressure vessels (RPVs) and reinforced concrete structures. This report documents improvements made to Grizzly’s ability to address both of these structural systems. For RPVs, the reduced-order models (ROMs) used in fracture mechanics calculations have been expanded to allow their application over a broader range of the parameter space than was permitted by the previous models. The ROMs currently used in Grizzly for the evaluation of flaws that are fully embedded within the RPV (as opposed to surface-breaking flaws) are based on a model that is known to be conservative, indicating higher stress intensity factors than would be obtained from direct simulations. A more accurate model that eliminates these excess conservatisms has been recently included in the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code but was not applicable for flaws near the RPV surface, which is where the most critical flaws are usually located. That model has recently been extended for increased applicability in this near-surface region. The ROMs for embedded flaws in the Grizzly code have been expanded to include these recent extensions, which permit their use in a much broader set of cases than previously possible. Direct 3D simulations have been used to check these ROMs and have shown good agreement in most cases, although there are still some cases that need further investigation. There are considerable benefits to using these these more accurate and less conservative ROMs for embedded flaws. On a benchmark probabilistic fracture mechanics problem tested here, the conditional probability of fracture initiation computed for a population of flaws in a single plate in an RPV decreased by over a factor of 3. To address aging in reinforced concrete structures, a capability to simulate multiple degradation mechanisms, including alkali-silica reaction and radiation-induced volumetric expansion has been developed in Grizzly over the past several years. This had previously been demonstrated on laboratory-scale specimens but not on full-scale nuclear concrete structures with reinforcement. To demonstrate the applicability of Grizzly to the analysis of large-scale structures of interest, a full 3D model of a representative reinforced concrete structure, including a complex arrangement of reinforcing bars, was developed and demonstrated in Grizzly.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Effects of Chlorine Capture and a Proposed Density Law on the Reactivity of Plutonium Solution Systems

During fissionable material processing, all normal and credible abnormal conditions must remain safely subcritical. Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) uses a number of methods to determine subcriticality, one of which is the use of neutron transport codes such as MCNP6. In order to create models for use with MCNP6, both the geometry and materials in fissionable material processes must be known, or assumptions must be made and quantified for the impact to bias. One of the systems with a significant amount of bias due to material modeling assumptions is in the area of aqueous plutonium processing. These solutions are typically plutonium nitrate solutions or plutonium chloride solutions, which are modeled as fictitious plutonium metal-water mixtures because little is known about the actual density of the solution and there is no current predictive capability approved for use at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) for modeling them. This research is currently underway to fill the gap and develop an algorithm for use with MCNP6 to model the density of plutonium chloride solutions. The method is to be validated with experimental data for density, and also validated with critical experiments using MCNP6. Note that the Chlorine Worth Study (CWS) was performed in December 2021 to help bridge the gap in chlorine data for critical experiments, and is currently awaiting International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) review. This study was performed by LANL at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). Additional information regarding this experiment may currently be found in LA-UR- 22-29180. Additionally, the Chemistry-Actinide Analytical Chemistry (C-AAC) at LANL has performed a number of solution density measurements for PuCl 3 -HC 1 -H 2 O, allowing for such data be used to create a semi-empirical density via the Pitzer method. The published dataset for the measurements is documented in LA-UR-22-25454. This method has already been tested successfully for aqueous plutonium nitrate solutions in SCALE. Current solution density measurements exist of plutonium concentrations of 0-~142g/L, all at 2M HC1, at temperatures 20-40°C. Additional data was taken for HC1-corrected density values, which essentially mimics the data for a pure PuCl x -water solution. The calculations in this report aim to support the current research by demonstrating the difference in system reactivity for the current modeling method when compared to the new proposed modeling with a density law implementation, which is being written as a Python tool to be used with MCNP6.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hyper-fidelity depletion coupled with discrete pebble motion in pebble bed reactors

Pebble bed reactors have raised new interest during the past decade due to their attractive characteristics. Therefore, accurate simulations must be performed to better understand these systems and ensure optimal and safe designs. Most current methods use lower fidelity approaches with representative unit-cells or macro-zones with uniform fluxes, which have accuracy and flexibility limitations. A novel hyper-fidelity method for pebble bed reactors depletion is presented and internally couples Serpent 2 and a pseudo-motion routine. Pseudo-motion is applied handling vertical shifts of compositions in a static pebble bed, random reinsertion of used pebbles, insertion of fresh pebbles and used pebbles discarding. Associated with individual depletion to correctly determine the flux spectrum and composition in each pebble, this hyper-fidelity approach paves the way towards more accurate depletion calculation in pebble bed reactors. Using this method, a demonstration is completed on a small-scale reactor. In this application, the core reaches equilibrium, and the following data is extracted: core-wise parameters evolution, pebble-wise spatial and statistical distribution. Discarded pebbles are analyzed, and relevant information is shown. This work proves the feasibility of hyper fidelity depletion with Serpent 2, and the range of use for this method: reactor design and analysis for equilibrium and slow transients, lower fidelity methods validation and feeding fuel performance, thermal-hydraulics, or waste management models. (authors)

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2023

SAM Code Development for Source Term Modeling in Fluoride-salt-cooled High-temperature Reactors

The SAM code is under development and supported by DOE-NE’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program as a modern system-level modeling and simulation tool for advanced non-light water reactor safety analyses. These advanced reactor concepts incorporate novel and improved approaches to achieve safety and economic feasibility. Many concepts leverage higher operating temperatures for improved efficiency with a variety of coolants and structural materials to support those needs. Such design choices may also pose unique radiological source term risks. There are continuous efforts to incorporate new physics and phenomena relevant to advanced reactor concepts, including capabilities to enable system-level source term modeling. The Pebble-Bed Fluoride-salt-cooled High-temperature Reactor (PB-FHR) is a promising candidate among advanced nuclear reactor concepts with its improved passive safety characteristics and high thermal efficiency. In addition to past efforts to support the development and utilization of SAM for PB-FHR safety analysis, the species transport modeling capabilities in SAM have been extended to simulate source term phenomena in concepts like the PB-FHR. The PB-FHR concept utilizes pebble-form TRISO fuel and FLiBe salt coolant to provide robust barriers to the release of almost all fission products and radiological source terms. However, tritium poses a unique radiological risk due to its significant production from neutron interactions with 6 Li and 9 Be in the FLiBe as well as its high mobility at elevated temperatures where it can permeate through structural metals. Secondly, the use of graphite at elevated temperatures poses the risk of oxidation damage to any structural components or fuel pebbles that are exposed to accidental air ingress. This report summarizes progress made in modeling these phenomena in SAM, which leverages the system-level multi-physics thermal hydraulic simulation to support an effective engineering-scale source term modeling capability. A tritium transport model is developed to simulate the various transport pathways in FHR and MSR concepts and is presented through verification and validation examples as well as demonstrations simulating experimental test loops and reference plant FHR models. A graphite oxidation model is also introduced to calculate local oxidation rates and is presented with initial validation results.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2026

qSIEVE: Efficient qLDPC Memory via Systolic Movement in Atom Arrays

As quantum machines have scaled up in their number of qubits, significant research has turned towards increasing their fidelity with quantum error correction codes. Although promising results have been shown with the surface code, which only requires near-neighbor connections between qubits, the high qubit overhead of such local codes promises to be problematic. Consequently, recent work has explored non-local quantum LDPC (qLDPC) codes, which have good asymptotic encoding rates. Despite theoretical progress, hardware implementations of these codes have been a longstanding challenge. At the experimental level, demonstrations of movement based communication on atom arrays suggest this is a powerful new primitive to achieve non-local connectivity. Leveraging this, we present a protocol for implementing non-local qLDPC codes in hardware. Our protocol, qSIEVE, is a co-design of such codes with movement in atom arrays. qSIEVE defines a restricted family of qLDPC codes that can be implemented efficiently with systolic movement. We then quantify the utility of qSIEVE in the context of a complete fault tolerant architecture. We compare the cost of implementing benchmark programs in a standard, surface code only architecture and a mixed architecture where data is stored in qLDPC memory with qSIEVE and loaded to surface codes for computation.

Quantum error correction↗
DOE OSTI2026

An end-to-end workflow for executing a classically bootstrapped variational quantum algorithm on an academic quantum computer

Academic quantum computing platforms often face unique challenges in executing quantum workloads due to fragmented software environments and limited engineering support. Unlike commercial ecosystems, academic devices typically evolve without full-stack integration in mind, making it difficult to run complex applications—such as variational quantum algorithms (VQA)—reliably and efficiently. Issues such as incompatible software layers and lack of automated job management significantly increase the overhead of theory-experiment collaboration. To address these challenges, we develop a modular, end-to-end workflow that decouples application-layer code from low-level hardware control, automates circuit submission and result collection, and supports fine-grained circuit-level job scheduling and recovery. The architecture employs a dual-end application programming interface (API) design, enabling robust operation across unstable or resource-constrained hardware backends. For practical use, the framework is lightweight and user-friendly, allowing rapid prototyping of full-stack workflows using basic Python tools. We validate this workflow on a high-fidelity trapped-ion quantum computer by demonstrating a variational quantum eigensolver (VQE) experiment with a classically bootstrapped ansatz initialization technique. The system successfully executed over 60,000 circuits across multiple molecular test cases with minimal human intervention, highlighting the framework’s effectiveness in enabling reproducible, resilient quantum experimentation in academic settings.

Clifford↗
DOE OSTI2024

Biogeochemistry simulations for the Salt Marsh Accretion Response to Temperature eXperiment (SMARTX)

Coastal ecosystems have been largely ignored in Earth system models but are important zones for carbon and nutrient processing. Interactions between water, microbes, soil, sediments, and vegetation are important for mechanistic representation of coastal processes and ecosystem function. To investigate the role of these feedbacks, we used a reactive transport model (PFLOTRAN) that has the capability to be connected to the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM). PFLOTRAN was used to incorporate redox reactions and track chemical species important for coastal ecosystems as well as define simple representations of vegetation dynamics. Our goal was to incorporate oxygen flux, salinity, pH, sulfur cycling, and methane production along with plant-mediated transport of gases and tidal flux. Using porewater profile and incubation data for model calibration and evaluation, we were able to create depth-resolved biogeochemical soil profiles for saltmarsh habitat and use this updated representation to simulate direct and indirect effects of elevated CO2 and temperature on subsurface biogeochemical cycling. We found that simply changing the partial pressure of CO2 or increasing temperature in the model did not fully reproduce observed changes in the porewater profile, but the inclusion of plant or microbial responses to CO2 and temperature manipulations was more accurate in representing porewater concentrations. This indicates the importance of characterizing tightly coupled vegetation-subsurface processes for developing predictive understanding and the need for measurement of plant-soil interactions on the same time scale to understand how hotspots or moments are generated.Included in this data package are PFLOTRAN input (PFLOTRAN input files and chemical database) files for simulating single column biogeochemistry, root, and tide interactions at the Global Change Research Wetland (Kirkpatrick Marsh; Edgewater, MD). The biogeochemical network includes soil organic matter decomposition, nitrogen, iron, and sulfur cycling, and methanogenesis. Reduced species can be oxidized and plant processes include oxygen and nutrient priming, methane release, and nutrient uptake.Inputs:TAI_database.dat - geochemical database for reactions, more information on database structure and variables can be found here https://www.pflotran.org/documentation/user_guide/cards/pages/geochemical_database.htmlswamp.in - input file for biogeochemical network in PFLOTRANswamp_eCO2.in - input file for biogeochemical network in PFLOTRAN with input gas partial pressures/concentrations adjusted for elevated CO2 treatmentsOutputs:swamp_obs_0.tec - hourly porewater concentrations from from multiple depths in the soil columnswamp_eCO2_obs_0.tec - hourly porewater concentrations from multiple depths in the soil column for elevated CO2 treatmentsPFLOTRAN code access: https://github.com/fmyuan/pflotran-elm-interface.git

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Environmental Flow Requirements from FERC Licenses Across the US

Environmental flow requirements included in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) hydropower licenses are important for balancing natural properties and benefits of river ecosystems (e.g., healthy species, recreation, water supply, flood control) supporting hydropower production. In some cases, environmental flow requirements may limit operational flexibility given current operational schemes and make a hydropower plant less able to provide power to the electric grid on demand. Hydropower plants may gain some flexibility as hydropower scheduling time periods are made to be more responsive to the short-term needs of an energy grid increasingly reliant on intermittent renewables. However, many flow requirements focus on the daily, monthly, or seasonal flow fluctuations which matches the time scale of most paradigms linking flow alterations to the health of river ecosystems. This dataset seeks to provide a greater understanding of how flexibility in environmental requirements can be leveraged to create positive outcomes for both the power system and the environment. It contains information on environmental flow requirements from the Protection, Mitigation, and Enhancement section of 50 randomly selected FERC licenses: 25 issued from 1998-2013 that were also included in the ORNL Mitigation Database (Schramm et al. 2015) and 25 issued from 2014-present. The information on environmental flow requirements was extracted from the PM&E section of 50 randomly selected FERC licenses: 25 issued from 1998-2013 that were also included in the ORNL Mitigation Database (Schramm et al. 2015) and 25 issued from 2014-present. The flow requirements were then categorized into flow augmentation categories based on whether the license stated a specific water management purpose for the given requirement called augmentation categories (i.e., fisheries or habitat, recreation or boating, industry, and general or unspecified; Table B). Requirements were also grouped into flow type categories (e.g., minimum flow rate, maximum flow rate, ramping rate). Additional information related to flow requirements such as the augmentation time-period and whether the flow rate was continuous (i.e., condition must be present at all-times) or instantaneous (i.e., condition present at a point in time) was also extracted from the licenses. Some licenses had specific flow requirements based on whether the project was in a wet, dry, or normal water year. If that information was presented in the license, it was also included in the data set. The location within the project was noted, hereafter, zone, in the dataset for flow requirements relating to specific areas of hydropower projects (Dam, Powerhouse, Bypass Reach). Maximum discharge capacities of hydropower facilities were also extracted from both the Existing Hydropower Assets (EHA) data set and the National Inventory of Dams (NID) databases. Each facility was coded with project identification codes from the EHA dataset to facilitate cross-referencing between datasets.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

High-Power Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Integration Platform (eCHIP): Design Guidelines and Specifications for DC Distribution-Based Charging Hub

Managed under U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-funded EVs@Scale Consortium, High-Power Electric Vehicle Charging Hub Integration Platform (eCHIP) project aims to design and develop a high-power, interoperable charging experimental platform to research, develop, and demonstrate the integration and control approaches for a DC distribution-based high-power charging (HPC) system. The eCHIP project addresses the crucial need to design and validate efficient, low-cost, reliable, and interoperable solutions for DC-coupled charging hub ('DC hub' for short). This report explains the design, development, and implementation process of the experimental platform for the DC hub. The utilization of DC distribution holds significant potential for enhancing the operation of an HPC station architecture. However, there are challenges establishing the DC hub, including interoperability, commoditization, distributed energy resource integration, stability, DC protection, and lack of common system level controllers. To address these challenges, a testing setup is required that accommodates commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products as well as novel, in-house designed solutions to evaluate different use cases at rated power and voltage levels.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

All Hands On Deck: Raising the Bar on Whole Building Performance-Based Code Compliance and Above-Code Programs

In 2019 a large-scale national effort was launched with support from U.S. Department of Energy, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (NEEA). The project aimed to develop a long-term vision and a roadmap for achieving a practical application of whole building performance-based code and above code program compliance in commercial buildings. The work was aided by engaging over 70 stakeholders across the country representing jurisdictions, above-code programs such as LEED and ENERGY STAR Multifamily Program, members of the ASHRAE Standard 90.1 and other Standard committees, IBPSA and software developers. The performance path requires whole building energy modeling and is gaining momentum. Many see it as the future of the commercial energy codes and the main pathway for achieving zero energy buildings. The paper describes the findings from a stakeholder survey funded by NEEA on the current state of performance-based path, its market penetration, trends, implementation practices and adoption challenges. It discusses the patterns revealed by experience of the states with decades-long history of performance-based compliance such as Florida and California and opportunities for taking advantage of the synergies between code and above-code programs. In addition, the paper provides an overview of the tools and resources developed as part of the effort including the compliance form for ASHRAE Standard 90.1 Section 11 and Appendix G, modeling submittal review manual, and modeler and reviewer qualification requirements. The tools and resources would help remove market barriers, deliver immediate benefits to jurisdictions and rating authorities, and achieve energy efficiency through whole-building performance path.

TSPR, Performance Based Complinace, Washington Sta↗
DOE OSTI2021

First Experiments and Radiographs on the MegaJOuLe Neutron Imaging Radiography (MJOLNIR) Dense Plasma Focus

We report a dense plasma focus (DPF) is a relatively compact coaxial plasma gun, which completes its discharge as a Z-pinch. These devices are designed to operate at a variety of scales to produce short (<100 ns) pulses of ions, X-rays, and/or neutrons. LLNL recently constructed and brought into operation a new device, the MegaJOuLe Neutron Imaging Radiography (MJOLNIR) DPF, which is designed for radiography and high-yield operations. This device has been commissioned and has achieved neutron yields of up to 3.8E11 neutrons/pulse at 2.5-MA peak current while operating at up to 1 MJ of stored energy in its original pulsed power configuration. MJOLNIR is equipped with a wide range of diagnostics, including nuclear activation detectors, neutron time-of-flight (nToF) detectors, a fast-framing camera, optical light gates, and a time-gated neutron and X-ray imager. LLNL also runs unique particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations of DPF discharges in the Chicago code and has gained significant insight into the various physical factors that influence neutron yield. MJOLNIR is one of the first DPFs whose design and continual upgrades are heavily influenced by model predictions. In this article, we describe insights from modeling, device operation, and recent results. Comparisons between modeling predictions and measurements, as well as X-ray and neutron images are presented.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Machine Learning Assisted Safety Modeling and Analysis of Advanced Reactors

With the advances in computational power and numerical methods, analysts can now rely on first-principle simulations to predict ultra-fine details in a variety of applications. Advances in machine learning (ML) have produced algorithms that can now learn high-level abstractions via hierarchical models. This project aims to leverage advances in ML techniques and the available high-resolution simulation data to develop a novel modeling and simulation (M\&S) methodology for reactor safety analysis. While application-agnostic ML techniques are available, complex physics constraints need to be incorporated into ML techniques to build ML-based closures for computationally efficient predictive simulations. This project intends to develop a physics-guided data-driven multi-scale methodology for M\&S of advanced reactors. The project focuses on thermal fluid (T/F) phenomena, which play major roles in advanced reactor safety. Specifically, we propose a data-driven coarse-mesh turbulence model based on local flow features for the transient analysis of thermal mixing and stratification in a sodium-cooled fast reactor (SFR). The model has a coarse-mesh setup to ensure computational efficiency, while it is trained by fine-mesh computational fluid dynamics (CFD) data with Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) turbulence model to ensure accuracy. Three different neural networks are developed and tested for loss-of-flow transients in the hot pool of SFR, i.e. the densely connected convolutional neural network (DCNN), long-short-term-memory network based on proper orthogonal decomposition (POD-LSTM), and the DCNN informed by LSTM (DCNN-LSTM). The performances of these three neural networks are evaluated based on baseline models. The DCNN-LSTM model has been chosen for further hyperparameter optimization. Furthermore, based on a simplified two-dimensional case, uncertainty quantification (UQ) of the developed ML-based closure are investigated with three methods, i.e. Monte Carlo dropout, deep ensemble, and Bayesian neural network. The developed ML-based turbulent viscosity closure relation based on deep ensemble is then integrated into the system analysis module SAM and serves as a term in the conservation equations. Such a SAM-ML based procedure guarantees that the obtained results are consistent with the physical constraints of the thermal-fluid system. The SAM-ML simulation on the same loss-of-flow transient showed comparable accuracy with the CFD simulation but with a much coarser mesh setup. Last but not least, the ML-based closure improvement with the support of higher-fidelity data from large eddy simulation (LES) is discussed. As a first step towards this direction, a baseline LES simulation is performed to obtain comparable data with RANS results. Based on the early results, future investigation on further improving the ML-based closure is discussed. We believe the developed approach that combines scientific machine learning with nuclear system analysis code can benefit the advanced reactor community as more accurate safety analyses will better characterize reactor safety margins and reduce licensing efforts.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

NRAP-Open-IAM: NRAP Open Source Integrated Assessment Model

Note: This is the last version (a2.6.1) of NRAP-Open-IAM released during NRAP Phase II in 2022. The latest version of NRAP-Open-IAM is available here: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/phase-iii-nrap-open-iam NRAP-Open-IAM is an open-source software product that enables quantification of containment effectiveness and leakage risk at storage sites in the context of system uncertainties and variability. NRAP-Open-IAM represents the next-generation in a line of systems-based computational models developed for quantitative geological carbon storage (GCS) risk assessment. The model comprises a set of reduced-order and analytical models of various components of the GCS system, potential leakage pathways, receptors of concern including impact to groundwater resources and the atmosphere, a framework to support stochastic simulation, time stepping, uncertainty quantification, other analytical functionality for scenario and risk-performance evaluation, and a basic graphical user interface to support scenario development, data input simulation definition, and basic post-processing and results display. As the NRAP Open-IAM functionality continues to evolve, we continue to add to its capability to develop quantitative, probabilistic, and time-dependent profiles of the evolution of risk at a GCS site and evaluate the influence of uncertain parameters on uncertainty in predicted risk. It can be used to quantify the dynamics of reservoir saturation plume and pressure-affected area, for evaluation of the area of potential groundwater impact (i.e., Area of Review) and monitoring requirements to support cost and regulatory analysis, and for consideration of different post-injection site care and closure scenarios. This submission contains the current version of NRAP-Open-IAM available for evaluation and testing. To use the NRAP-Open-IAM, download the source code (https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/4c24a3da-3b40-4ffe-9892-c807ae9f8760) then open the NRAP-Open-IAM user's guide (https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/8b27335a-343c-4836-b8a3-3ad0bdc9e669) to read more about the tool. Installation instructions for Windows, Mac, and Linux can be found in the "installers" folder of the extracted NRAP-Open-IAM folder and describe setup of environment (e.g., Python libraries) needed for proper work of the tool. Test of installation can be done by running "python openiam_setup_tests.py" in the "setup" folder. The installation test also runs a test suite to see if the NRAP-Open-IAM has been installed correctly. To run the test suite separately, run "python iam_test.py" in the "test" folder. User's guide: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/8b27335a-343c-4836-b8a3-3ad0bdc9e669 Developer's guide: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/3bc6ee7d-609d-4eb6-80ba-fa6130ee0313 Reservoir simulation data used in some examples distributed with NRAP-Open-IAM: - Kimberlina: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/eb62cece-61b2-4037-9b6d-32407dde2ab8 - Kimberlina (compartmentalized): https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/08f396c8-bc5f-44ad-a028-6e98a6ea6d70/resource/366f9530-3b32-4b84-affe-ab2df1d9a8b5 - FutureGen 2.0: https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/futuregen-2-0-1008-simulation-reservoir-lookup-table NRAP-Open-IAM GitLab repository: https://gitlab.com/NRAP/OpenIAM Related publications: - Bacon, D., Yonkofski, C., Brown, C., Demirkanli, D. and Whiting, J., 2019. Risk-based post injection site care and monitoring for commercial-scale carbon storage: Reevaluation of the FutureGen 2.0 site using NRAP-Open-IAM and DREAM. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 90: 102784. - Bacon, D. Demirkanli, D., and White, S., 2020. Probabilistic risk-based Area of Review (AoR) determination for a deep-saline carbon storage site. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 102: 103153. - Harp, D., Oldenburg, C., and Pawar, R., 2019. A metric for evaluating conformance robustness during geologic CO2 sequestration operations. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control 85: 100-108. - Lackey, G., Vasylkivska, V., Huerta, N., King, S., and Dilmore, R., 2019. Managing well leakage risks at a geologic carbon storage site with many wells, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 88 :182-194. - Vasylkivska, V., Dilmore, R., Lackey, G., Zhang, Y., King, S., Bacon, D., Chen, B., Mansoor, K., and Harp, D., 2021. NRAP-Open-IAM: A flexible open-source integrated assessment model for geologic carbon storage risk assessment and management, Environmental Modelling & Software, 143: 105114. Presentations: - Chen, B., Harp, D., and Pawar, R., A data assimilation approach (ES-MDA) coupling with NRAP-Open-IAM for quantifying uncertainty reduction in geological CO2 sequestration. AGUFM 2019: T44A-02. - Chen, B., and Harp, D., Improving risk analysis precision for geologic CO2 sequestration by quantifying the uncertainty reduction before and after acquiring monitoring data. 14th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 2018, pp. 21-26. - Harp, D., National Risk Assessment Partnership Task 2: Containment Assurance. No. LA-UR-19-28654, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States), 2019. - Vasylkivska, V., King, S., Bacon, D., Harp, D., Chen, B., Mansoor, K., Onishi, T., Yang, Y., Zhang, Y., and Keating, E., NRAP-Open-IAM: An open-source integrated assessment model, poster, Mastering the Subsurface Through Technology Innovation, Partnerships and Collaboration: Carbon Storage and Oil and Natural Gas Technologies Review Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, August 13-16, 2018. - Vasylkivska, V., Lackey, G., King, S., Wentworth, A., Huerta, N., Creason, C., DiGiulio, J., Yang, Y., and Dilmore, R., Long-term risk analysis of a geologic CO2 storage project during the post-injection period, SIAM Conference on Computational Science and Engineering, Spokane, WA, February 25-March 1, 2019. - Vasylkivska, V., Overview of the NRAP-Open-IAM tool for carbon storage (beta release), 2019 Annual NRAP Tool Users Meeting, Pittsburgh, PA, August 27, 2019. - Vasylkivska, V., Bacon, D., Chen, B., Dilmore, R., Harp, D., King, S., Lackey, G., Lindner, E., Liu, G., Mansoor, K. and Zhang, Y., NRAP-Open-IAM: A new, open-source code for integrated assessment of geologic carbon storage containment effectiveness and leakage risk, poster, American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting 2020 (virtual meeting), December 2020. - Vasylkivska, V., NRAP open-source integrated assessment model and relevant application, oral presentation, NRAP workshop "NRAP Tools for Geologic Carbon Storage Risk-Based Decision Making" held in conjunction with Groundwater Protection Council (GWPC) 2021 Annual Forum (virtual meeting), Salt Lake City, UT, September 2021. - Vasylkivska, V., NRAP-Open-IAM: open-source integrated assessment model, digital poster/demonstration, software demonstration session, 2022 Carbon Management Project Review Meeting, August 16, 2022

AoR↗
DOE OSTI2022

Innovative Method for Welding in Generation 3 CSP to Enable Reliable Manufacturing of Solar Receivers to withstand Daily Cycling at Temperatures Above 700°C (Final Technical Report)

Inconel® Alloy 740H® (alloy 740H) was the first age-hardenable nickel-based alloy approved by the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code for use in pressure-boundary applications. Over the past ~20 years the alloy has been optimized for weldability and high-temperature stability, approved for use in different applications. Development of a supply chain combined with the advantageous properties of the alloy (high-temperature creep strength, oxidation and corrosion resistance, etc.) have resulted in the alloy being applied to new high-temperature power cycle demonstration projects, and of particular interest are applications to concentrating solar power (CSP) to enable higher-efficiency Generation 3 CSP systems and the corresponding supercritical CO 2 (sCO 2 ) power cycle components (heat exchangers, piping, etc.). The high allowable stresses of alloy 740H also make it a desirable material for current Generation 2 CSP solar power receivers to improve cyclic capability and/or reduce receiver height. Recent experiences in demonstration projects utilizing alloy 740H identified cracking issues during welding and fabrication. In this project, a detailed study was done to confirm and clarify the Stress Relaxation Cracking (SRxC) mechanism, also known as stress relief cracking or strain-age cracking (SAC), during post-weld heat-treatment (PWHT). This involved detailed microscopy and advanced characterization to understand the root cause(s) of three failures obtained from industry. Based in-part on these findings, a targeted laboratory based SRxC test method was utilized to evaluate variables such as heat-to-heat variations, strain level, PWHT temperature, and starting material condition on three heats of alloy 740H. Industrial shop welding of cold-worked plates was also conducted. The research showed the following: SRxC was confirmed as the cracking mechanism for all field failures; Stress state (from residual stresses, constraint, deformation, and local stress concentrations) was playing a significant role in field failures and laboratory testing confirmed increasing susceptibility for all heats with increasing strain levels. High levels of microstructural strain were identified at crack initiation locations, in some cases leading to local recrystallization; Precipitate free zones (PFZs) at grain boundaries were found at relaxation cracks and crack initiation locations uniquely associated with SRxC in alloy 740H. Laboratory testing reproduced this microstructural feature which had only previously been reported in long-term creep testing of weldments. Advanced nano-scale characterization confirmed the presence of a moving boundary leading to coarsening of precipitates and PFZs where damage accumulated; The research suggested heat-to-heat variations due to local chemistry and processing may influence SRxC susceptibility, but more work is needed to fully clarify these effects. To disseminate the key learnings from this research to the scientific and engineering communities and alloy 740H end users, multiple technical publications and presentations were made, an industrial alloy 740H users meeting was held, and a new industry guideline specification document which can be directly implemented by end-users of alloy 740H was produced.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Adoption of Plug-in Electric Vehicles: Local Fuel Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions Across the U.S.

The dependence on gasoline-powered light-duty automobiles has made U.S. households vulnerable to the burden of fuel costs. Tailpipe emissions from these vehicles constitute 58% of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the U.S., which are damaging to the environment (EPA, 2023). The adoption of plug-in electric vehicles (PEVs) has been shown to effectively reduce fuel costs and GHG emissions. However, local effects on these benefits are not well understood by American consumers, potentially limiting adoption and therefore the realization of PEV benefits at scale (MacInnis & Krosnick, 2020; EY Americas, 2023). To fill this research gap, this study estimates the fuel cost savings and GHG emission reductions at the state and ZIP code levels by considering local fuel prices, vehicle class preference, average vehicle model year, fuel efficiencies, and driving intensities. The study's findings reveal that the adoption of PEVs can yield substantial benefits in terms of fuel cost savings and GHG emission reductions nationwide. Specifically, driving a battery electric vehicle (BEV) is estimated to result in annual savings of up to $\$2,200$, while driving a plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) can lead to savings up to $\$1,500$, when compared to an internal combustion engine vehicle (ICEV) of equivalent size. Moreover, using population-weighted averages by ZIP code, BEVs and PHEVs show the potential to save 400 and 200 grams of carbon dioxide equivalent per mile, respectively, compared to a representative ICEV of the same class. The magnitude of fuel cost savings and emissions reduction vary by region due to various factors. Generally, regions with high gasoline prices, low electricity prices, preferences for larger vehicles, and high driving intensities tend to see relatively large fuel savings. The emissions reductions are more pronounced in areas with clean grids where consumer preferences lie with large vehicles. This regional variability underscores the importance of considering local contextual factors when assessing the potential benefits of PEV adoption. In more than 99% of U.S. ZIP codes, PEVs result in overall savings in fuel use (and subsequent costs) and GHG emissions. While not a central focus of this analysis, reductions in GHG tailpipe emissions from PEV adoption would also come with reductions in criteria pollutant emissions, contributing to improved local air quality depending on the PEV penetration, population density, and electricity generation infrastructure in the locality.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Radiological Recovery Logistics Tool - 20161

Argonne is building and testing a tool, the Radiological Recovery Logistics Tool (RRLT), that can be used during the response and recovery from a radiological or nuclear incident to effectively allocate appropriate commercial and public works equipment to mitigate, remove, and contain radiological contamination. The requirements for this tool - as well as development of the resulting software - is overseen by a steering committee of stakeholders from DHS's National Urban Security Technology Laboratory (NUSTL), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). One essential requirement is for RRLT to support the efficient and appropriate allocation of resources for a radiological response. Subsequent discussions between ANL and stakeholders have solidified the nature of this support to include identification of the types of resources to be allocated. The study reported in this paper has both factored fundamental concepts and connections out of this identification process and created a Knowledge Base detailing support goals, response scenarios, and efficacy information on dozens of equipment types. In short, RRLT will dynamically apply these findings to situational conditions surrounding contamination incidents. RRLT's Domain, the model of elements, ideas and relationships with which the tool will work, draws concepts from technical reports and stakeholder vocabularies to connect response goals and scenarios to types of equipment that offer utility towards those goals in those scenarios. RRLT's Knowledge Base will contain details on dozens of equipment types and facilitate the operator's discovery and consumption of these details most pertinent to a dynamically selected subset of goals. The core of its Domain Model is based on a report authored by this team. This report [1] contains a comprehensive list of proposed equipment to accomplish various missions or scenarios that might arise after a large-scale radiological contamination incident in an urban environment or critical infrastructure. The report divides potential response and recovery efforts into five support goals: Survey and monitoring of the contaminated area; Mitigation of received dose to first responders: Decontamination (gross and final) of buildings, vehicles, roadways, parks, and other surfaces: Waste management of solid waste generated during recovery operations: and Containment of wastewater and other waste generated during the response and recovery phases. RRLT's development is driven by use cases. A use case is an intention with which a user approaches the software. Use cases are grouped into delivery increments to schedule development, testing, and presentation to stakeholders. This model partitions the system into seven increments: User Arrival and Authentication, Search and Navigation, Equipment Recommendation, Plan Management, Content Management, and Expanded Access. Once a user 15 authenticated, RRLT will present the user with a dashboard that allows them to explore or search RRLT's content. The dashboard will also include a 'Plan' panel for collecting decisions and relevant observations about an incident at hand to facilitate development of an equipment list. RRLT will offer three general modes of access to items in the knowledge base: - Keyword search for direct discovery of items, - Navigation along predetermined paths from recovery goal towards equipment types, and - Interactive guidance towards equipment types by an autonomous software agent: the Equipment Recommendation Wizard. This presentation will detail progress in the development of the RRLT and also discuss opportunities for those interested in providing feedback on its content and functionality. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

2D reactive transport model of shale chemical weathering and biogeochemical fluxes along a mountainous hillslope, East River Watershed, Colorado: Input files and simulation results

This data package contains input files and simulation results for a two-dimensional (2D) reactive transport model used to quantitatively analyze the coupled hydrological and biogeochemical processes governing shale weathering and associated biogeochemical fluxes under realistic environmental conditions in the high-elevation East River Watershed. These data support the conclusions presented in Stolze et al. (Water Resources Research, under review), "Model-based interpretation of solute exports and carbon partitioning during shale weathering in a mountainous hillslope". The model simulates atmospheric-subsurface gas exchange, subsurface water flow, and shale weathering processes under dynamic, year-scale conditions along a shale-underlain hillslope located in the East River watershed. The simulations were performed using the PFLOTRAN flow and reactive transport code and executed on the Perlmutter supercomputer to leverage its large-scale parallel computing capabilities. The data package contains two zipped folders, "model_input_files" and "simulation_results", and one readme.txt file. "model_input_files" contains the necessary input files to run the calibrated base-base model presented in Stolze et al. (Water Resources Research, under review). "simulation_results" contains a single hdf5 file ("Output_2D_hillslope_model.h5") which includes the results of simulation performed using the base-case model. This file can be opened with HDFView 3.1.4, Python, or MATLAB. "readme.txt" contains relevant information about the base-case model and provides guidelines on how to run the associated input files provided in the folder "model_input_files". Furthermore, readme.txt provides information regarding the model results provided in "Output_2D_hillslope_model.h5" such as matrix dimensionality and output units. Field datasets used to evaluate model performance were collected at three monitoring wells located along a hillslope transect (PLM1, PLM2, and PLM3). Dissolved ion concentration data were collected from November 2016 to October 2021 for Ca, Mg, DIC, Na, K, SO4 (Dong et al., 2025 - dic_npoc_data_2014_2024.zip - DOI:10.15485/1660459; Williams et al., 2025 - anion_data_2014_2024.zip - DOI:10.15485/1668054; Dong et al., 2025 - cation_data_2014_2024.zip - DOI:10.15485/1668055). Note that we used the files named er_PLM1_xx_yy, er_PLM2_xx_yy, and er_PLM3_xx_yy where xx stands for the name of the aqueous species and yy stands for the depth where the measurements were performed. Soil water content ([0 - 1] m) and water table depth were collected from November 2016 to October 2021 (Wan et al., 2024 - Dynamic_water_table__depthsFig2b.csv and Soil_water_content_Fig4e.csv - DOI:10.15485/2322567). Gaseous CO2 concentration were collected from October 2020 to December 2021(Wan et al., 2024 - Soil_CO2_concentrations_Fig4h.csv - DOI:10.15485/2322567) Gaseous CO2 flux from the subsurface to the atmosphere were collected in the vicinity of PLM2 from October 2019 to May 2022 (Wu et al., 2025). Soil microbial biomass concentration was measured from August 2016 to June 2017 (Sorensen et al., 2019 - 2017_East_River_Pumphouse_Microbial_Biomass__1_.csv - DOI:10.15485/1577267) All field data are published as CSV files compatible with Microsoft Excel, MATLAB, and Python, or as text files. The coordinates of the monitoring wells and the CO2(g) flux sensor in the coordinate system WGS84 are: -PLM1: [38.9197710 ; -106.9492750] -PLM2: [38.9201580 ; -106.9487170] -PLM3: [38.9207843 ; -106.9483668] -PLM4: 38.9210060 ; -106.9479528] -CO2(g) flux sensor: [38.9199180 ; -106.9489906] ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231. This research used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), a Department of Energy User Facility using NERSC award BER-ERCAP 23980, BER-ERCAP 28550, and BER-ERCAP 33789.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗