Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “convergence analysis”

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.

689 records · Page 39

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

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

techno-economic analysis↗

DIF3D-VARIANT 12.0: Updates and New Features

The DIF3D code has been a workhorse of fast reactor analysis work at Argonne National Laboratory for over 40 years. In 1995, a transport option called VARIANT was added to DIF3D to improve the flux solutions for fast reactor problems which we term DIF3D-VARIANT today. DIF3D-VARIANT performs nodal neutron transport calculations using P N or SP N theory in Cartesian and hexagonal two- and three-dimensional geometries. The limited computing capabilities of the time restricted DIF3D-VARIANT to use at most a 6 th order spatial approximation combined with a P3 flux approximation and P1 scattering kernel for a 33 group structure on most studied reactor problems. Computer capabilities have increased steadily since 1995 and today much larger space-angle-energy approximations are possible. This manuscript serves as an update to the theory section of the original DIF3D-VARIANT manual and details more than twenty years of changes made to DIF3D to make version 12 which was released on November 1 st , 2024. The primary focus of the initial work was to extend the space-angle approximations available in DIF3D-VARIANT such that the error due to transport approximations could be better understood. This work was started and completed in 2002 and marked the official version 10. Unfortunately, those higher order approximations could not be used at that time due to the memory constraints of the BPOINTER part of DIF3D (limited to 2 GB). In version 11, completed in 2012, BPOINTER was circumvented in DIF3D-VARIANT for the largest arrays by introducing a Fortran 90 module called LMA (Large Memory Array). This seamlessly replaces all of the functionality of the BPOINTER concept, but it allows 64 bit addressing for every array such that they can be larger than 2 GB. It is now common for DIF3D-VARIANT jobs to consume 50 GB of memory on modern workstations when using high order space-angle approximations and a large number of groups. Many improvements were made to version 11 from 2012 to 2022 when work to create version 12 started. For version 12, several parts of DIF3D were updated to improve performance and thread parallelism was introduced to further reduce the runtime. Numerous minor bugs were discovered in DIF3D-VARIANT as part of the process of creating the perturbation and sensitivity code PERSENT. All of these algorithmic problems were identified in the transition from version 10 to version 11 which prevented DIF3D-VARIANT from running efficiently and reliably. Firstly, the coarse mesh rebalance scheme would routinely diverge and a study detailed in this report demonstrates how it was also typically not effective. This is not a failure of the coarse mesh rebalance methodology, but a failure of its implementation in DIF3D-VARIANT for hexagonal geometries. The fission source extrapolation algorithm was also found to be unreliable on larger group structure problems, leading to divergence in some cases and a negligible improvement in performance overall. Finally, the “Omega” acceleration applied to the partial current solver routine of DIF3D-VARIANT was found to cause DIF3D-VARIANT to converge to the wrong answer. To resolve these issues, both the coarse mesh rebalance and fission source extrapolation were permanently disabled in version 11. The Tchebychev acceleration was put in as a temporary reliable alternative but it is generally inferior to coarse mesh rebalance or coarse mesh finite difference. For the Omega acceleration, the factor was restricted to guarantee that it would not cause follow-on errors in PERSENT. Due to limited funding to support maintenance and development of DIF3D in the last 10 years, no effort was spent since to resolve the outer iteration acceleration. Except for the threading work, all of the changes discussed in this manuscript refer to changes made between version 10 and version 11. Performance comparisons are done to demonstrate the improvements from version 9 to version 12. As will be demonstrated, the updated versi

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Convergent Manufacturing of Large-Scale Components for Nuclear Applications, via Additive Manufacturing and Powder Metallurgy Hot Isostatic Pressing

Powder metallurgy (PM)–hot isostatic pressing (PM-HIP) has long been recognized as a powerful route for producing fully dense, near net shape metallic components. By consolidating powders under high temperature and pressure, HIP provides isotropic properties, uniform microstructures, and scalability to complex geometries that are vital for sectors such as aerospace, energy, and nuclear power. Yet despite these advantages, the technology has remained constrained by costly trial and error canister fabrication, limitations of conventional forging, and incomplete knowledge about how the canister design influences final part properties. Additive manufacturing (AM), by contrast, thrives on design freedom and geometric flexibility but struggles with speed, scalability, and cost when applied to very large structures. The research presented in this report investigated how a convergent manufacturing approach, combining AM with PM-HIP, can merge the strengths of both technologies, leveraging AM’s flexibility for canister design and HIP’s consolidation capability to deliver reliable, large, and complex parts. The work progressed through three case studies that built on one another in scale and complexity. Small cylindrical canisters fabricated by conventional methods, laser powder bed fusion, and directed energy deposition were filled with stainless steel powders and subjected to HIP. The resulting parts demonstrated near-full density and mechanical properties on par with wrought stainless steel, showing for the first time that AM canisters can be a direct substitute for conventional ones without sacrificing quality. The next step involved a medium-scale, noncentrosymmetric T-valve, which is an enclosed, multibranch geometry that tested the limits of AM + PM-HIP integration. The T-valve achieved predictable shrinkage and uniform densification, confirming feasibility for enclosed designs. However, this study also revealed oxide inclusions and interfacial challenges at the AM + HIP boundary, underscoring the critical importance of controlling interface chemistry and employing robust, in situ strategies, such as melt pool monitoring and thermal monitoring, coupled with nondestructive evaluation techniques such as x-ray computed tomography. Finally, the effort culminated in fabricating a large-scale impeller weighing nearly 2000 lb and spanning 5 ft in diameter. Produced via multirobot wire arc AM and hot isostatic pressed to near-full density, the impeller validated industrial-scale feasibility. Predictive models closely matched experimental shrinkage, tensile properties were spatially uniform across the component, and the AM + PM-HIP interface proved mechanically sound despite the presence of oxide-decorated prior particle boundaries. This large-scale demonstration is a major milestone, showing that hybrid AM + PM‑HIP can reliably deliver components at reactor-relevant scales. Collectively, these studies charted a logical pathway: small-scale work built scientific confidence, medium-scale work highlighted opportunities and challenges, and large-scale work proved industrial impact. The overarching conclusion of this report is that AM + PM-HIP should not be seen as a replacement for forging but as a complementary pathway that provides the US with flexibility, resilience, and new options for manufacturing nuclear-grade components. Looking ahead, several directions emerge as critical to sustaining progress. Predictive modeling must become faster, more accessible, and more accurate, with digital twins and machine learning reducing reliance on trial and error. Powders and alloys must be optimized for HIP, with improved cleanliness, reduced oxides, and tailored chemistries that enhance creep, fatigue, and irradiation resistance. Interfaces between AM and HIP regions must be better engineered through coatings, machining strategies, and surface treatments to mitigate oxide formation and ensure reliable bonding to explore opportunities for HIP of targeted compositional parts, as well as multimaterial HIP cladding applications. Monitoring and nondestructive evaluation need to expand, incorporating multimodal sensors, x-ray computed tomography, and real-time data integration through platforms such as Pelican. At the same time, the pathway to industrial adoption requires techno-economic analysis, machinability studies, and qualification frameworks aligned with industry and regulatory standards. Finally, workforce and academic engagement must be strengthened. Programs that train technicians and engineers for US Navy and US Department of Energy manufacturing challenges should be paired with academic partnerships to support fundamental research, with open sharing of non-export-controlled data to accelerate innovation and build the next generation of experts. In conclusion, this report demonstrates that hybrid AM + PM-HIP is scientifically viable and strategically important. By combining the design agility of AM with the consolidation strength of HIP and embedding modeling, monitoring, and workforce development, this approach provided a transformative new capability for US manufacturing. The path forward is clear: hybrid AM + PM-HIP is not just a promising research direction but is also potentially an industrially relevant pathway that can reshape how nuclear-grade components are designed, qualified, and deployed.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗

The Many-Body Expansion for Metals: II. Nonadditive Terms in Clusters Composed of Metals with n s 1 , n s 2 , and n s 2 p 1 Configurations

The many-body expansion (MBE) was applied to homometallic and heterometallic trimers of metals with ns 1 , ns 2 , and ns 2 p 1 configurations to investigate its convergence, the magnitude and nature (stabilizing/destabilizing) of the individual terms and seek an understanding of their variation across the different families of clusters. In particular, we examined the series of alkali metals (Li 3 , Na 3 , K 3 , Li 2 Na, LiNa 2 ), alkali metal borides (Li 2 B and LiB 2 ), and alkaline earth metals (Be 3 , Be 2 Mg, BeMg 3 , and Mg 3 ) trimers, as well as sodium clusters Na n , n = 2–5. Here, we found that there is no uniform contribution (stabilizing or destabilizing) across the series in the different families of trimers. For instance, the 2-B term stabilizes the ground states of the Na 3 (doublet), Na 4 (singlet), and Na 5 (doublet) clusters, and the 3-B term destabilizes them; however, the opposite holds for the quartet state of the Li 3 , Li 2 Na, LiNa 2 , and Na 3 clusters (destabilizing 2-B, stabilizing 3-B). Substituting Li with B in the quartet state of Li 3 results in a significant reduction of the 3-B term amounting to 16% (Li 2 B) and 5% (LiB 3 ) of the binding energy. On the contrary, the ground states of the alkaline earth metal clusters (Be 3 , Be 2 Mg, BeMg 3 , and Mg 3 ) are stabilized by the 3-B term, while the 2-B term destabilizes them. Overall, we find that the 3-B terms significantly stabilize the high-spin multiplicity states of the ns 1 configurations and the low-spin states of the ns 2 configurations. Finally, as the size of the metal increases, the contribution of the 3-B term to the binding energy decreases due to the longer metal–metal bond distances.

Alkali metals↗

Approaching hydro-equivalent ignition in laser direct-drive via target design optimization using novel statistical modeling

Laser direct-drive offers significant advantages in terms of target simplicity, improved energy coupling, and large fuel masses over indirect drive. However, performance degradations from hydrodynamic and laser-plasma instabilities seeded and driven by the direct illumination pose limitations on the parameter space available for achieving ignition. In this paper, new design improvements are identified to forge a path forward for a hydro-equivalent ignition demonstration. The first is related to a new formulation of the statistical model (SM) used to accurately predict target performance directly from input parameters such as laser pulse shape and target specifications. This new SM formulation provides direct guidance on target dimensions and laser beam-to-target radius to achieve the highest fusion yield on the OMEGA laser. The second improvement comes from cooling the deuterium–tritium (DT) ice layer below the triple point right before shot time leading to lower DT vapor densities and higher convergence. Guided by these design improvements, a Bayesian optimization algorithm was used to design an implosion that is predicted to closely approach a Lawson triple product that hydrodynamically scales to ignition if equivalent laser–target coupling is achieved at laser energies typical of the National Ignition Facility.

Deuterium↗