Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “parameters”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1984

Diurnal variability of regional cloud and clear-sky radiative parameters derived from GOES data. I - Analysis method. II - November 1978 cloud distributions. III - November 1978 radiative parameters

Cloud cover is one of the most important variables affecting the earth radiation budget (ERB) and, ultimately, the global climate. The present investigation is concerned with several aspects of the effects of extended cloudiness, taking into account hourly visible and infrared data from the Geostationary Operational Environmental Satelite (GOES). A methodology called the hybrid bispectral threshold method is developed to extract regional cloud amounts at three levels in the atmosphere, effective cloud-top temperatures, clear-sky temperature and cloud and clear-sky visible reflectance characteristics from GOES data. The diurnal variations are examined in low, middle, high, and total cloudiness determined with this methodology for November 1978. The bulk, broadband radiative properties of the resultant cloud and clear-sky data are estimated to determine the possible effect of the diurnal variability of regional cloudiness on the interpretation of ERB measurements.

Minnis, P.↗
NASA NTRS1991

Observation model and parameter partials for the JPL VLBI parameter estimation software MODEST/1991

A revision is presented of MASTERFIT-1987, which it supersedes. Changes during 1988 to 1991 included introduction of the octupole component of solid Earth tides, the NUVEL tectonic motion model, partial derivatives for the precession constant and source position rates, the option to correct for source structure, a refined model for antenna offsets, modeling the unique antenna at Richmond, FL, improved nutation series due to Zhu, Groten, and Reigber, and reintroduction of the old (Woolard) nutation series for simulation purposes. Text describing the relativistic transformations and gravitational contributions to the delay model was also revised in order to reflect the computer code more faithfully.

Sovers, O. J.↗
NASA NTRS2007

Lidar and Mission Parameter Trade Study of Space-Based Coherent Wind Measurement Centered on NASA's 2006 GWOS Wind Mission Study Parameters

The global measurement of vertical profiles of horizontal vector winds has been highly desired for many years by NASA, NOAA and the Integrated Program Office (IPO) implementing the National Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite Systems (NPOESS). Recently the global wind mission was one of 15 missions recommended to NASA by the first ever NRC Earth Sciences Decadal Survey. Since before 1978, the most promising method to make this space-based measurement has been pulsed Doppler lidar. The favored technology and technique has evolved over the years from obtaining line-of-sight (LOS) wind profiles from a single laser shot using pulsed CO2 gas laser technology to the current plans to use both a coherent-detection and direct-detection pulsed Doppler wind lidar systems with each lidar employing multiple shot accumulation to produce an LOS wind profile. The idea of using two lidars (hybrid concept) entails coherent detection using the NASA LaRC-developed pulsed 2-micron solid state laser technology, and direct detection using pulsed Nd:YAG laser technology tripled in frequency to 355 nm wavelength.

Kavaya, Michael J.↗
NASA NTRS2022

Making or Breaking a Rover: System Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2022

Making or Breaking a Rover- Systems Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗
DOE OSTI2023

FUN-BioCROP model with litter decomposition parameters derived from the LIDET dataset

This repository contains the code and data necessary to run the FUN-BioCROP (Fixation and Uptake of Nitrogen-Bioenergy Carbon, Rhizosphere, Organisms, and Protection) model with litter decomposition parameters derived from a modified Monte Carlo simulation that used the Long-term Intersite Decomposition Experiment Team dataset. Related publication:Juice, S.M., Ridgeway, J.R., Hartman, M.D., Parton, W.J., Berardi, D.M., Sulman, B.N., Allen, K.E., & Brzostek, E.R. Reparameterizing litter decomposition using a simplified Monte Carlo method improves litter decay simulated by a microbial model and alters bioenergy soil carbon estimates. Description of Files: FUNBioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd R code with FUN-BioCROP model that can be run with 10 different sets of parameters for litter decomposition (Baseline, LIDET, or eight other best parameter sets identified in the modified Monte Carlo simulation. CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R Code with CORPSE model functions, called by FUNBioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd Model Input Data: bulk.csv, bulk_till.csv, rhizo.csv, rhizo_till.csv, litter.csv Initial C and N (kg C or N/m2) pool values for each soil compartment, final values from spin up. All five files have the same columns: (Column - Description - Units) uFastC - Unprotected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uSlowC - Unprotected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 uNecroC - Unprotected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 pFastC - Protected fast decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pSlowC - Protected slow decomposing carbon - kg carbon/m2 pNecroC - Protected necromass carbon - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeC - Carbon in living microbial biomass - kg carbon/m2 uFastN - Unprotected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uSlowN - Unprotected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 uNecroN - Unprotected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pFastN - Protected fast decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pSlowN - Protected slow decomposing nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 pNecroN - Protected necromass nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 inorganicN - Inorganic nitrogen - kg nitrogen/m2 CO2 - Carbon in carbon dioxide - kg carbon/m2 livingMicrobeN - Nitrogen in living microbial biomass - kg nitrogen/m2 Model Input Data: FluxTower_AvgSoilT.csv: Average daily soil temperature (oC) at 10 cm depth at University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) Energy Farm flux tower from 7/2008-3/2016. (One year of averaged data) Model Input Data: FluxTower_AvgSoilVWC.csv: Average daily soil volumetric water content (VWC) at 10 cm depth at UIUC Energy Farm flux tower from 7/2008-3/2016. (One year of averaged data) Model Input Data: input_CCS_LIDET Study.csv: This file has daily data to run FUN-BioCROP (Column - Description - Units): yr - calendar year - year doy - day of year (1 to 365) (no leap year) - day anpp - aboveground NPP (DayCent) - kg C/m2/day bnpp - belowground NPP (DayCent) - kg C/m2/day aglivc - live aboveground biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 bglivcj - live juvenile fine root biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 bglivcm - live mature fine root biomass carbon (DayCent) - kg C/m2 aglivn - live aboveground biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 bglivnj - live juvenile fine root biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 bglivnm - live mature fine root biomass nitrogen (DayCent) - kg N/m2 nyr - simulation year - year cult - indicates a cultivation event (0 or 1) crop - indicates a new crop (0 or 1) fert - indicates a fertilizer event (0 or 1) frst - indicates the first day of the growing season (0 or 1) harv - indicates a harvest event (0 or 1) last - indicates the end of the growing season (0 or 1) croptype - crop type (0=none; 1=alfalfa; 2=corn; 3=grass clover pasture; 4=soybean; 5=wheat) cropsrl - crop specific root length - mm/g root cultrhizmix - fraction of rhizosphere mixed with bulk soil during cultivation (0.0-1.0) - fraction cultlitmix - fraction of litter mixed with bulk soil during cultivation (0.0-1.0) - fraction harvremov - fraction of above ground biomass removed during harvest (0.0-1.0) - fraction fertamt - fertilization amount - g N/m2 lifehist - plant life history (0 = annual, 1 = perennial) froot_turnover_c - amount of C in fine root turnover - kg C/m2 froot_turnover_n - amount of N in fine root turnover - kg N/m2 agrd_turnover_c - amount of C in aboveground biomass turnover - kg C/m2 agrd_turnover_n - amount of N in aboveground biomass turnover - kg N/m2 leaf_litter_fastfrac - Fast decomposing fraction of leaf litter (0.0-1.0) - fraction root_litter_fastfrac - Fast decomposing fraction of root litter (0.0-1.0) - fraction root_diameter - root diameter - mm root_length - root length - mm root/m2 rhizo_frac - fraction of total soil volume that is rhizosphere (0.0 - 1.0) - fraction date - date in format YYYY-MM-DD Instructions: Save the model code ("FUN-BioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd") and accompanything files (data streams and CORPSE function code) in the same folder. In model code "Chunk 3: Load CORPSE Data Streams" set the working directory (setwd) to the folder with the files saved in step #1. In "Chunk 5: Define LIDET parameter sets" select the litter decomposition parameter set to be used in the run, and comment out all other sets. If changing any parameter values, edit them in "Chunk 6: Load parameters." Run all chunks up to and including "Chunk 10: Prepare Data for Export." In "Chunk 11: Export Output Data" edit data frames for export and filenames, as necessary. "Chunk 12: Graph Total Soil C" makes a figure of C remaining over the model run period. Description of each model chunk (in file FUN-BioCROP_LIDET Study.Rmd): Chunk 1: Remove all functions, clear memory. Removes all functions from R environment, clears the memory. Chunk 2: Load Packages. Loads packages necessary to run the code. Chunk 3: Load CORPSE Data Streams. Sets the working directory and loads the data files necessary to run CORPSE. Chunk 4: Load CORPSE Functions. Loads the R script with CORPSE functions from the working directory, "CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R". Chunk 5: Define LIDET parameter sets. Has ten different parameter sets for litter decomposition tested in this study: Baseline parameters, LIDET parameters, and the other 8 best performing parameter sets identified in the modified Monte Carlo. To run the model, all but one parameter set must be commented out. Chunk 6: Load Parameters. Loads all fixed parameters to run the model. Data frame with definitions of parameters is in the CORPSE function script "CORPSE Functions_Bioenergy_V2.R" Chunk 7: Prepare Data Streams. Takes data streams loaded in Chunk 3 and puts them in the format necessary to run the model. The model is coded to run at least two sites at a time, so if only one site is being run it must be run in duplicate. Individual data tables of daily values are created in this chunk from the input data file. Chunk 8: Set Initial Conditions. Creates data tables of soil C and N pools for each soil compartment (rhizo_till, rhizo, bulk_till, bulk, litter) and loads initial values into the data tables. Creates lists for each soil compartment to hold model output. Chunk 9: Load FUN Data and Set Up Matrices. Uses DayCent data to calculate FUN input data: root and leaf N demand, total N demand, plant CN, leaf N available for retranslocation, and litter production. Creates matrices for FUN model outputs. Chunk 10: Run Model. Runs the model. Chunk 11: Prepare Data for Export. Combines data from each day saved as lists into data frames for each soil compartment. Adds values from all soil compartments together to calculate total soil values, creates separate data frames for each soil C and N pool (e.g., protected slow C) for the total soil value. Adds different C and N pools together to calculate total soil C and N for all layers. Creates data frame of ratio of protected to unprotected SOC. Organizes FUN data for export. Chunk 12: Export Results. Exports CSV files of model results to the working directory. Chunk 13: Graph Total Soil C. Makes figure of C remaining over time. Related Links: Original FUN-BioCROP model: https://github.com/BrzostekEcologyLab/FUN-BioCROP LIDET dataset: https://andlter.forestry.oregonstate.edu/data/abstract.aspx?dbcode=TD023

Juice, Stephanie↗
DOE OSTI2022

Modeling land use and land cover change: using a hindcast to estimate economic parameters in gcamland v2.0

Abstract. Future changes in land use and cover have important implications for agriculture, energy, water use, and climate. Estimates of future land use and land cover differ significantly across economic models as a result of differences in drivers, model structure, and model parameters; however, these models often rely on heuristics to determine model parameters. In this study, we demonstrate a more systematic and empirically based approach to estimating a few key parameters for an economic model of land use and land cover change, gcamland. Specifically, we generate a large set of model parameter perturbations for the selected parameters and run gcamland simulations with these parameter sets over the historical period in the United States to quantify land use and land cover, determine how well the model reproduces observations, and identify parameter combinations that best replicate observations, assuming other model parameters are fixed. We also test alternate methods for forming expectations about uncertain crop yields and prices, including adaptive, perfect, linear, and hybrid approaches. In particular, we estimate parameters for six parameters used in the formation of expectations and three of seven logit exponents for the USA only. We find that an adaptive expectation approach minimizes the error between simulated outputs and observations, with parameters that suggest that for most crops, landowners put a significant weight on previous information. Interestingly, for corn, where ethanol policies have led to a rapid growth in demand, the resulting parameters show that a larger weight is placed on more recent information. We examine the change in model parameters as the metric of model error changes, finding that the measure of model fitness affects the choice of parameter sets. Finally, we discuss how the methodology and results used in this study could be used for other regions or economic models to improve projections of future land use and land cover change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Uncertainty quantification and optimization of precipitating hydrometeor parameters for winter precipitation in a cloud microphysics scheme

The precipitating hydrometeor parameters used in cloud microphysics schemes carry inherent uncertainties. The quantification of these uncertainties, together with parameter optimization, can significantly improve precipitation forecasts. This study investigates the effects of 13 parameters in the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) Double-Moment 6-class (WDM6) microphysics scheme, which define the hydrometeor characteristics such as fall velocity–diameter and mass–diameter relationships, as well as the shape parameter of the drop size distribution for precipitating particles such as rain, snow, and graupel on simulated winter precipitation. A comparison between the model's pre-defined parameters and observations from the International Collaborative Experiments for the PyeongChang 2018 Olympic and Paralympic winter games (ICE-POP 2018) field campaign reveals that the fall velocity–diameter relationship for rain, the mass–diameter relationships for snow and graupel, and the shape parameters for all precipitating particles in the WDM6 scheme deviate from the median values observed by the two-dimensional video disdrometer (2DVD). To quantify parameter sensitivities, a perturbed parameter ensemble (PPE) of 256 simulations was conducted within parameter ranges constrained by 2DVD observations for three winter precipitation cases. Bayesian optimization was then applied to identify parameter sets that minimized the root mean square error (RMSE) for each case, achieving reductions of up to 30.2 %. These results demonstrate that ensemble-based uncertainty quantification and parameter optimization can help identify key parameters and provide a pathway to improving precipitation simulation performance. In addition, measurement sites can be strategically selected based on regions that show high sensitivity to variations in hydrometeor characteristic parameters.

Bayesian optimization↗
DOE OSTI2024

Using Parameter Sweep in WaterTAP to Analyze New Water Treatment Technologies

We describe a powerful and generalized parameter sweep tool in this report that was originally developed to analyze the performance of existing and novel water treatment models being developed in WaterTAP. Since WaterTAP is built upon IDAES and Pyomo, the parameter sweep tool can be used to systematically explore and debug the behavior of most Pyomo and IDAES numerical models. In order to enable meaningful analyses, the parameter sweep tool has been designed with the following features: 1) Model flexibility: The parameter sweep tool does not enforce any restrictions on the types of models that can be used with it. As long as a Pyomo model can be solved and the parameter is active and mutable, the tool only needs functions that describe how to run the model, the sweep parameters, and the output quantities of interest. 2) Flexible sampling: The parameter sweep tool has inbuilt functions to generate samples from a random distribution or a multidimensional Euclidean space. Furthermore, the users have to ability to supply samples generated from a tool of their choice. 3) Multiple sweep types: A user can choose from one of 3 types of parameter sweeps depending on their needs. 4) Detailed outputs: Outputs generated by the parameter sweep tool can be stored in detailed H5 file or user-friendly CSV files for post processing. 5) Parallel computing: The parameter sweep supports shared and distributed memory parallel computing to enable the use of high performance computers (HPC) for large-scale analyses. 6) Modular: The parameter sweep tool is self-contained and can easily be integrated within an outer-loop analysis or as desired by the user. 7) Ease of use: The tool is well documented and a simple sweep can be easily executed by following the online documentation in a few lines of code. We demonstrate the use of the parameter sweep tool on a simple water treatment system from the WaterTAP repository and show its parallel scaling performance on an Apple laptop and NREL's Eagle HPC. The parameter sweep tool is actively being used with models currently being developed within WaterTAP and we expect its use to grow beyond it to other IDAES and Pyomo models.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2021

Assessing dynamic vegetation model parameter uncertainty across Alaskan arctic tundra plant communities

Abstract As the Arctic region moves into uncharted territory under a warming climate, it is important to refine the terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) that help us understand and predict change. One fundamental uncertainty in TBMs relates to model parameters, configuration variables internal to the model whose value can be estimated from data. We incorporate a version of the Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (TEM) developed for arctic ecosystems into the Predictive Ecosystem Analyzer (PEcAn) framework. PEcAn treats model parameters as probability distributions, estimates parameters based on a synthesis of available field data, and then quantifies both model sensitivity and uncertainty to a given parameter or suite of parameters. We examined how variation in 21 parameters in the equation for gross primary production influenced model sensitivity and uncertainty in terms of two carbon fluxes (net primary productivity and heterotrophic respiration) and two carbon (C) pools (vegetation C and soil C). We set up different parameterizations of TEM across a range of tundra types (tussock tundra, heath tundra, wet sedge tundra, and shrub tundra) in northern Alaska, along a latitudinal transect extending from the coastal plain near Utqiaġvik to the southern foothills of the Brooks Range, to the Seward Peninsula. TEM was most sensitive to parameters related to the temperature regulation of photosynthesis. Model uncertainty was mostly due to parameters related to leaf area, temperature regulation of photosynthesis, and the stomatal responses to ambient light conditions. Our analysis also showed that sensitivity and uncertainty to a given parameter varied spatially. At some sites, model sensitivity and uncertainty tended to be connected to a wider range of parameters, underlining the importance of assessing tundra community processes across environmental gradients or geographic locations. Generally, across sites, the flux of net primary productivity (NPP) and pool of vegetation C had about equal uncertainty, while heterotrophic respiration had higher uncertainty than the pool of soil C. Our study illustrates the complexity inherent in evaluating parameter uncertainty across highly heterogeneous arctic tundra plant communities. It also provides a framework for iteratively testing how newly collected field data related to key parameters may result in more effective forecasting of Arctic change.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

A combined experimental and numerical approach that eliminates the non-uniqueness associated with the Johnson-Cook parameters obtained using inverse methods

Abstract Johnson-Cook constitutive model is a commonly used material model for machining simulations. The model includes five parameters that capture the initial yield stress, strain-hardening, strain-rate hardening, and thermal softening behavior of the material. These parameters are difficult to determine using experiments since the conditions observed during machining (such as high strain-rates of the order of $$10^5$$ 10 5 /sec - $$10^6$$ 10 6 /sec) are challenging to recreate in the laboratory. To address this problem, several researchers have recently proposed inverse approaches where a combination of experiments and analytical models are used to predict the Johnson-Cook parameters. The errors between the measured cutting forces, chip thicknesses and temperatures and those predicted by analytical models are minimized and the parameters are determined. In this work, it is shown that only two of the five Johnson-Cook parameters can be determined uniquely using inverse approaches. Two different algorithms, namely, Adaptive Memory Programming for Global Optimization (AMPGO) and Particle Swarm Optimization (PSO), are used for this purpose. The extended Oxley’s model is used as the analytical tool for optimization. For determining a parameter’s value, a large range for each parameter is provided as an input to the algorithms. The algorithms converge to several different sets of values for the five Johnson-Cook parameters when all the five parameters are considered as unknown in the optimization algorithm. All of these sets, however, yield the same chip shape and cutting forces in FEM simulations. Further analyses show that only the strain-rate and thermal softening parameters can be determined uniquely and the three parameters present in the strain-hardening term of the Johnson-Cook model cannot be determined uniquely using the inverse method. A combined experimental and numerical approach is proposed to eliminate this determine all parameters uniquely.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

A Spatially Explicit Individual-Based Modeling Approach to Evaluate the Cumulative Effects of Wind Energy Development on the Greater Sage-Grouse: Sensitivity Analysis and Validation of Key Parameters

To address the need for an approach to evaluate cumulative ecological impacts of wind energy development, particularly those on critical wildlife habitats and species, the authors developed a proof-of-concept, landscape-based, spatially explicit individual-based modeling (IBM) framework for populations of the greater sage-grouse (Centrocercus urophasianus) in Albany County, Wyoming, based on published and other available information on the life history of the species. This sage-grouse IBM estimates the spatial and temporal movements of sage-grouse based on modeled effects of habitat characteristics and developments on sage-grouse condition, survivorship, and reproduction. After completing the initial version of the model, we conducted a series of sensitivity analyses of key model parameters and validation of lek occurrences and spatial distributions to better understand performance of the model relative to observed values of important life history characteristics. The parameter sensitivity analysis was conducted as a series of one-factor-at-a-time tests in which the values of selected parameters were individually varied to evaluate the corresponding effects on model output. We examined the model’s response to changes in parameter values to gain insight into the overall robustness of the model, identify key driver parameters, and initiate qualitative validation. Five functions selected for sensitivity analyses were (1) the rate of change in body condition in relationship to habitat suitability index (HSI) of occupied habitat (condition change rate), (2) the effect of competition between individuals with overlapping home ranges expressed as a percentage reduction in HSI (competition factor), (3) value of condition at which survivorship probability is equal to zero (zero survivorship condition), (4) the relationship between female body condition and clutch size, and (5) the relationship between female body condition and nest success. We varied the parameter values to be tested for the sensitivity analysis around the original value used in the model (i.e., tested values were higher and lower than the model’s original value) to examine the effect of this variation on the predicted output of the model. Model outputs evaluated in the sensitivity analysis included (1) predicted age-class distribution (as measured by the percentage of immature individuals within the population); (2) predicted sex ratio; (3) predicted age-sex class distribution (percent of population in each of six age-sex classes, i.e., male and female juveniles, yearlings, and adults); (4) lifespan; (5) population size; and (6) spatial distribution. Of the five parameters analyzed, condition change rate, survivorship, clutch size, and nest success did not substantially affect any of the evaluated model outputs. For the predicted age-class distribution, the percentage of immature individuals predicted by the model for these four parameters ranged from 61.9% to 65.0%, which was reasonable with respect to the reference values of 51.4 to 57.8% in published studies. The ratio of females to males ranged from 1.09 to 1.14, which was comparable to the reference values of 1.2 to 3.0 presented in an existing study. The predicted mean lifespan ranged from 1.62 to 1.74 years, which appears to be reasonable with respect to the reference values of 0.9 to 1.1 years for sharp-tail grouse and greater prairie chickens presented by published studies. The predicted population size ranged from 1,877 to 3,140. This prediction would be reasonable with respect to our estimate of 5,000 yearlings and adults, which was based on the USFWS estimate for the state of Wyoming scaled to the number of leks in the county. The predicted spatial distribution was not substantially affected by the parameter values examined. In our sensitivity analyses, the only tested parameter that had a noticeable effect on model output was competition factor. Over the range of values tested for this parameter, predicted population size exhibited the largest range (from 1,833 to 4,737) of all parameters tested. As the competition factor increased, the predicted population size decreased. This reflects the effect competition had on the number of individuals that could co occur in high-quality habitat patches. Despite this apparently significant effect, the range of values appears to be reasonable with respect to our estimate of 5,000 yearlings and adults, which was based on the USFWS estimate for the state of Wyoming scaled to the number of leks in the county.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2023

Sensitivity analysis of numerical modeling input parameters on floating offshore wind turbine loads

Abstract. Floating wind turbines must withstand a unique and challenging set of loads from the wind and ocean environment. To de-risk development, accurate predictions of these loads are necessary. Uncertainty in modeling predictions leads to larger required safety factors, increasing project costs and the levelized cost of energy. Complex aero-hydro-elastic modeling tools use many input parameters to represent the wind, waves, current, aerodynamic loads, hydrodynamic loads, and structural properties. It is helpful to understand which of these parameters ultimately drives a design. In this work, an ultimate and fatigue-proxy load sensitivity analysis was performed with 35 different input parameters, using an elementary effects approach to identify the most influential parameters for a case study involving the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) 5 MW baseline wind turbine atop the OC4-DeepCwind semisubmersible during normal operation. The importance of each parameter was evaluated using 14 response quantities of interest across three operational wind speed conditions. The study concludes that turbulent wind velocity standard deviation is the parameter with the strongest sensitivity; this value is important not just for turbine loads, but also for the global system response. The system center of mass in the wind direction is found to have the highest impact on the system rotation and tower loads. The current velocity is found to be the most dominating parameter for the system global motion and consequently the mooring loads. All tested wind turbulence parameters in addition to the standard deviation are also found to be influential. Wave characteristics are influential for some fatigue-proxy loading but do not significantly impact the extreme ultimate loads in these operational load cases. The required number of random seeds for stochastic environmental conditions is considered to ensure that the sensitivities are due to the input parameters and not due to the seed. The required number of analysis points in the parameter space is identified so that the conclusions represent a global sensitivity. The results are specific to the platform, turbine, and choice of parameter ranges, but the demonstrated approach can be applied widely to guide focus in parameter uncertainty.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2003

Parameters Describing Earth Observing Remote Sensing Systems

The Earth science community needs to generate consistent and standard definitions for spatial, spectral, radiometric, and geometric properties describing passive electro-optical Earth observing sensors and their products. The parameters used to describe sensors and to describe their products are often confused. In some cases, parameters for a sensor and for its products are identical; in other cases, these parameters vary widely. Sensor parameters are bound by the fundamental performance of a system, while product parameters describe what is available to the end user. Products are often resampled, edge sharpened, pan-sharpened, or compressed, and can differ drastically from the intrinsic data acquired by the sensor. Because detailed sensor performance information may not be readily available to an international science community, standardization of product parameters is of primary performance. Spatial product parameters described include Modulation Transfer Function (MTF), point spread function, line spread function, edge response, stray light, edge sharpening, aliasing, ringing, and compression effects. Spectral product parameters discussed include full width half maximum, ripple, slope edge, and out-of-band rejection. Radiometric product properties discussed include relative and absolute radiometry, noise equivalent spectral radiance, noise equivalent temperature diffenence, and signal-to-noise ratio. Geometric product properties discussed include geopositional accuracy expressed as CE90, LE90, and root mean square error. Correlated properties discussed include such parameters as band-to-band registration, which is both a spectral and a spatial property. In addition, the proliferation of staring and pushbroom sensor architectures requires new parameters to describe artifacts that are different from traditional cross-track system artifacts. A better understanding of how various system parameters affect product performance is also needed to better ascertain the utility of existing datasets and products as well as to specify the performance of new sensors and products. Examples of simulations performed for the Landsat Data Continuity Mission illustrate how various parameters affect system and product performance. Specific examples include the effects of ground sample distance, MTF, and band-to-band registration on various products.

Zanoni, Vicki↗
NASA NTRS2009

Quantifying Parameter Sensitivity, Interaction and Transferability in Hydrologically Enhanced Versions of Noah-LSM over Transition Zones

We use sensitivity analysis to identify the parameters that are most responsible for shaping land surface model (LSM) simulations and to understand the complex interactions in three versions of the Noah LSM: the standard version (STD), a version enhanced with a simple groundwater module (GW), and version augmented by a dynamic phenology module (DV). We use warm season, high-frequency, near-surface states and turbulent fluxes collected over nine sites in the US Southern Great Plains. We quantify changes in the pattern of sensitive parameters, the amount and nature of the interaction between parameters, and the covariance structure of the distribution of behavioral parameter sets. Using Sobol s total and first-order sensitivity indexes, we show that very few parameters directly control the variance of the model output. Significant parameter interaction occurs so that not only the optimal parameter values differ between models, but the relationships between parameters change. GW decreases parameter interaction and appears to improve model realism, especially at wetter sites. DV increases parameter interaction and decreases identifiability, implying it is overparameterized and/or underconstrained. A case study at a wet site shows GW has two functional modes: one that mimics STD and a second in which GW improves model function by decoupling direct evaporation and baseflow. Unsupervised classification of the posterior distributions of behavioral parameter sets cannot group similar sites based solely on soil or vegetation type, helping to explain why transferability between sites and models is not straightforward. This evidence suggests a priori assignment of parameters should also consider climatic differences.

Rosero, Enrique↗
DOE OSTI2020

Parameter-dependent model-blending with multi-expert based machine learning and proxy sites

A parameter-based multi-model blending method and system are described. The method includes selecting a parameter of interest among parameters estimated by each of a set of individual models, running the set of individual models with a range of inputs to obtain a range of estimates of the parameters from each of the set of individual models, and identifying, for each of the set of individual models, critical parameters among the parameters estimated, the critical parameters exhibiting a specified correlation with an error in estimation of the parameter of interest. For each subspace of combinations of the critical parameters, obtaining a parameter-based blended model is based on blending the set of individual models in accordance with the subspace of the critical parameters, the subspace defining a sub-range for each of the critical parameters.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Parameter-dependent model-blending with multi-expert based machine learning and proxy sites

A parameter-based multi-model blending method and system are described. The method includes selecting a parameter of interest among parameters estimated by each of a set of individual models, running the set of individual models with a range of inputs to obtain a range of estimates of the parameters from each of the set of individual models, and identifying, for each of the set of individual models, critical parameters among the parameters estimated, the critical parameters exhibiting a specified correlation with an error in estimation of the parameter of interest. For each subspace of combinations of the critical parameters, obtaining a parameter-based blended model is based on blending the set of individual models in accordance with the subspace of the critical parameters, the subspace defining a sub-range for each of the critical parameters.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗