SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Los Alamos”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 775 records · Page 43

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

S/U Comparison Study with a Focus on USLs

Under a DOE Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) task involving Analytical Methods, three Laboratories collaborated in a comparison of results obtained from Sensitivity/Uncertainty (S/U) packages relevant to validation of transport codes. The task involves Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire (IRSN), Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), and Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) comparing results of MORET 5/MACSENS V3.0, MCNP6.2/Whisper-1.1, and SCALE 6.2.3/TSUNAMI/USLSTATS respectively. All Monte Carlo transport code results utilize ENDF/B-VII.1. Four cases from the International Handbook of Evaluated Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiments (ICSBEP Handbook) were selected as application models: HEU-MET-FAST-013-001, HEU-SOL-THERM 001-008, PU-MET-FAST-022-001, and PU-SOL-THERM 001-001. Ultimately, comparison is made between Upper Subcritical Limits (USLs) obtained using each code package for each application case. Since differences exist in whether packages take into account margin of subcriticality (MOS), the USL may be computed using bias and bias uncertainty, also known as the calculational margin (CM) in ANSI/ANS 8.24. Application of portions of MOS to the USL for nuclear data uncertainty of and potential code margin is referred to as USL herein. In either case, additional MOS is considered for actual application cases.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Critical Unresolved Region Integral Experiment Execution

Integral Experiments are a key aspect of validating nuclear data behavior and simulation capabilities. Further, integral experiments are the earliest form of validation of equations and codes. They have been used extensively since the 1940s. Today, simulation and predictive capabilities have improved greatly from 75 years ago, but nonetheless, integral experiments are still needed. As simulation capabilities improve, their uncertainties get much smaller. The current focus of many new experiments is understanding the intermediate energy range. The intermediate energy range does not have a wide application space and it can be challenging to design experiments that are sensitive to neutron energies in this region. The Zeus experiments evaluated highly enriched uranium (HEU) in the intermediate energy region. Building on the success and knowledge gained from the Zeus experiments, the Critical Unresolved Region Integral Experiment (CURIE) experiments were designed to evaluate HEU in the narrower unresolved resonance region (URR). These experiments were executed during June and July 2020 at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC). The National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC), operated by Los Alamos National Laboratory, is the only general purpose critical experiments facility in the United States of America. NCERC regularly designs and executes critical experiments and other measurements useful to a wide variety of fields including nuclear criticality safety, commercial nuclear energy, nonproliferation, and nuclear data.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Validation of MCNP Critical Benchmark Models of PU-MET-FAST-016

A new centralized repository of high-quality MCNP models of critical benchmark experiments is currently under development at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). The repository is the combined effort of the Nuclear Criticality Safety, Nuclear Data, and Monte Carlo code development/application organizations at LANL. The initial set of benchmark models in the repository are derived from the Whisper Suite provided with MCNP6.2 and are evaluated against the benchmark experiments described in the International Criticality Safety Benchmark Evaluation Project (ICSBEP) Handbook. The goal is to build a single LANL benchmark collection that is up to date with the latest ICSBEP revision, has a formal review and revision process, is contained in an open-source repository, and utilizes new Python tools for improved input and output file review. This paper describes the validation of the models associated with PU-MET-FAST-016, “Flooded 3X3X3 Arrays of 3-kg Plutonium (Pu) Metal Cylinders – Phase I”. In this critical experiment, twenty-seven 3-kg Pu metal cylinders with a height of 46.33 ± 0.15 mm and diameter of 65.25 ± 0.05 mm were arranged in a cubic array. The Pu cylinders were sealed in aluminum cans, and three cans were placed in each of nine perforated aluminum sleeves, as shown in Fig. 1. The nine sleeves were supported by an aluminum frame that allowed for control of the lateral spacing of the cylinders, both in the X and Y directions. The benchmark experiment measured thirteen configurations. Of these configurations, six were modeled using MCNP.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Investigation of Delayed Neutron Sensitivities for Several ICSBEP Benchmarks using MCNP

The effective delayed neutron (β$_{eff}$) is a very important parameter for reactor and criticality applications. This parameter is equal to the difference in reactivity between delayed critical ($k_{eff}$ = 1, which requires both prompt and delayed neutrons to achieve criticality) and prompt critical ($k_p$ = 1, which requires only prompt neutrons to achieve criticality). This is often referred to as the delayed critical "window" (the region of criticality between delayed and prompt critical). β$_{eff}$ is a reactor kinetics parameters and depends on the nuclides in the system that undergo fission as well as the spectral characteristics of the system. Measurements of β$_{eff}$ have been performed for many criticality experiments. The EUCLID (Experiments Underpinned by Computational Learning for Improvements in nuclear Data) project at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) aims to constrain nuclear data by using a suite of measurement types beyond $k_{eff}$. Our team has recently investigated the use of pulsed spheres for nuclear data validation. Several other measurement methods are also of interest, including β$_{eff}$ (investigated here) and reactivity coefficients (investigated in a separate work at this same meeting). One focus of our work is to determine if other methods are complimentary to the critical experiments already utilized for nuclear data validation. This is important because if a method has similar sensitivities then it will not be particularly useful for nuclear data validation as it will provide the same information as the critical experiments already being used. Here "similar" could refer to several characteristics, one being the shape of a sensitivity profile over energy. In the future, these methods will be utilized (with both existing and new experiments) in machine learning algorithms for nuclear validation, similar to what is currently done for criticality experiments. In order to use a measurement type for nuclear validation, it is necessary to obtain cross-section sensitivities for that parameter. This work looks at one approach to estimate β$_{eff}$ sensitivities by utilizing $k_{eff}$ sensitivities within Monte Carlo N-Particle ® Code Version 6.2. This is applied to several criticality benchmarks. Results are compared and the benefits and limitations of this approach are discussed.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2021

Sensitivity-based Similarity Metrics for New Experiment Design Optimization

The nuclear data used in advanced reactor simulations requires validation. Data from nuclear criticality experiments can provide this validation. New nuclear criticality experiment design requires extensive knowledge and expert judgement such that the experimental design parameters are selected in such a way to keep the experiment subcritical. To aide in this experimental design process, professionals can utilize sensitivity and uncertainty analysis. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis relies on matching new application experiments with currently existing benchmark experiments. Currently, there is functionality in the Whisper 1.1 software package to calculate a similarity metric based on neutron multiplication factor sensitivity coefficients between a new application designed by the user and existing International Criticality Safety Benchmark Experiment Project (ICSBEP) benchmarks. The Whisper 1.1 software package is included in Monte Carlo N-Particle ® Code Version 6.21 (MCNP ® 6.2). This work is geared toward expanding this capability to new similarity metrics based on beta-effective sensitivity coefficients and reactivity coefficient sensitivity coefficients. While the investigation of these sensitivity coefficients is presented in detail in separate works at this same conference, this work will be primarily focused on studying the similarity metrics in more detail. These similarity metrics will then be incorporated into the optimization algorithms used for experiment design in EUCLID (Experiments Underpinned by Computational Learning for Improvements in nuclear Data), which is a Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) project designed to constrain nuclear data of interest, such that adjustments can be made to possible inaccuracies. A more detailed optimization can be subsequently performed by breaking down these similarity metrics by isotope, reaction, and energy.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Incoherent range-based holography of far-distant objects using LIDAR

Los Alamos National Laboratory has developed an incoherent, long-range, sub-centimeter resolution (LIDAR) with which we achieve centimeter-scale reflection holography at extremely long ranges. The system consists of a pulsed laser and photon-counting receiver. This combination yields round-trip time of flight data to illuminate parts of the object of interest. The aggregation of these data for many LIDAR pulses yields a plot with a range on the X axis and reflectance on the Y axis, which we refer to as a range profile. Observing that the range profile is a projection of the reflection map of the object onto the view vector, we collect profiles from a variety of viewing angles and invert these data to form an image. We adapt imaging algorithms from the field of computer aided tomography to suit our application and present results from imaging demonstrations at a 10 km range.

Hoffmann, Mitchell P. (ORCID:0000000170551324)↗

DOE OSTI2023

Utah FORGE: Powder X-ray Diffraction Data from Well 16A(78)-32 Core

This dataset from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) consists of four raw X-ray diffraction (XRD) scans and preliminary results of quantitative XRD analysis. The scanned samples were prepared from four subcores, which came from various depths of the FORGE well 16A(78)-32 core. Desired core lengths were selected from available core photos (on GDR), provided by FORGE personnel, and subcored at LLNL. The XRD scans were collected in May 2023 at LLNL as pre-experimental characterization data for these subcores, which will be used in core-flooding experiments at LLNL and in triaxial direct shear experiments at Los Alamos National Laboratory as part of DOE Project 5-2428. XRD scans are in RAW file format (e.g., FORGE-5477-full.raw) and are suitable for viewing and analysis using open-source quantitative XRD software (e.g., Profex; www.profex-xrd.org ) and/or other proprietary instrument software.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗

DOE OSTI2024

Geochemistry, volumetric water content, and active layer depths from rainfall simulations at the Kougarok Fire Site, Seward Peninsula, Alaska, 2022

Rainfall frequency and intensity is expected to increase in the Arctic, with potential implications for permafrost thaw and geochemical fluxes in soils. To conduct controlled rainfall experiments at remote field sites in the Arctic, the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments Arctic Rainfall Simulator (NARS) was developed at Los Alamos National Laboratory as part of the NGEE Arctic project. To better understand how rainfall may affect interflow biogeochemistry and permafrost thaw, rainfall simulations were performed on the Seward Peninsula of Alaska during late September and early October 2022 at the Kougarok Fire Site near mile marker 86 of the Nome-Taylor Highway. Water samples were collected before, during, and after rainfall simulations until interflow had ceased. Additional data collected included soil pore water samples from macrorhizons, active layer depths, and volumetric water content at each of the experimental plots. This dataset contains one *.csv file of water sample properties, one *.csv file of thaw depths, one *.csv file of soil moisture measurements, and one *.kml file of the locations where samples were collected.The Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments: Arctic (NGEE Arctic), was a research effort to reduce uncertainty in Earth System Models by developing a predictive understanding of carbon-rich Arctic ecosystems and feedbacks to climate. NGEE Arctic was supported by the Department of Energy’s Office of Biological and Environmental Research.The NGEE Arctic project had two field research sites: 1) located within the Arctic polygonal tundra coastal region on the Barrow Environmental Observatory (BEO) and the North Slope near Utqiagvik (Barrow), Alaska and 2) multiple areas on the discontinuous permafrost region of the Seward Peninsula north of Nome, Alaska.Through observations, experiments, and synthesis with existing datasets, NGEE Arctic provided an enhanced knowledge base for multi-scale modeling and contributed to improved process representation at global pan-Arctic scales within the Department of Energy’s Earth system Model (the Energy Exascale Earth System Model, or E3SM), and specifically within the E3SM Land Model component (ELM).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2024

Soil Water Percolation Chemistry, April 2017 to March 2019, BR-Ma2, Manaus

Soil water percolation chemistry including major cations, anions and isotope geochemistry. Samples were collected from six passive wick flux meters across three topographic positions (valley, slope and plateau). Data has been processed to compute the monthly mean for each topographic position where two flux meters were installed at each topographic position. All samples were processed at the Geology, Geochemistry and Geomaterials Research Laboratory (GGRL) in Los Alamos, NM USA. The metadata tab included in the .csv has additional information on locations where the sensors were installed, and other installation/maintenance details. Contact ksolander@lanl.gov if you need to use this dataset for additional information.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2021

Kimberlina 1.2 Velocity Models and Seismic Data

Kimberlina 1.2 Velocity model and synthetic seismic data, produced in collaboration of teams at the National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory through the National Risk Assessment Partnership. Data is associated with the following publication: Zheng Zhou, Youzuo Lin, Zhongping Zhang, Yue Wu, Zan Wang, Robert Dilmore, and George Guthrie, "A Data-Driven CO2 Leakage Detection Using Seismic Data and Spatial-Temporal Densely Connected Convolutional Neural Networks," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Vol 90, 2019. The Kimberlina 1.2 Velocity models were produced by Zan Wang, Robert Dilmore, William Harbert, and Lianjie Huang at NETL. The following citations are directly related to the creation of the velocity models: Wang, Z. Harbert, W., Dilmore, R., Huang, L. Modeling of time-lapse seismic monitoring using CO2 leakage simulations for a model CO2 storage site with realistic geology: Application in assessment of early leak-detection capabilities. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. V. 76, September 2018, Pages 39-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.06.011 Wang, Z., Dilmore, R., Harbert, W. Inferring CO2 saturation from synthetic surface seismic and downhole monitoring data using machine learning for leakage detection at CO2 sequestration sites. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, V. 100, September 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103115 The velocity models were built based on the Kimberlina 1.2 aquifer impact data which is associated with the following publications: Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Yang, X., Wainwright, H., and Carroll, S. (2019). Downhole pressure and chemical monitoring for CO2 and brine leak detection in aquifers above a CO2 storage reservoir. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control. 91. 102812. 10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102812. Xianjin Yang, Thomas A. Buscheck, Kayyum Mansoor, Zan Wang, Kai Gao, Lianjie Huang, Delphine Appriou, Susan A. Carroll, Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Volume 90, 2019, 102803, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803 The synthetic seismic data was produced by Youzuo Lin and team at LANL, and are associated with the following citations: Jordan, P. D., and J. L. Wagoner. Characterizing Construction of Existing Wells to a CO2 Storage Target: The Kimberlina Site, California. Zheng Zhou, Youzuo Lin, Zhongping Zhang, Yue Wu, Zan Wang, Robert Dilmore, and George Guthrie, "A Data-Driven CO2 Leakage Detection Using Seismic Data and Spatial-Temporal Densely Connected Convolutional Neural Networks," International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, Vol 90, 2019.

CO2 Leakage↗

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

Improving Subsurface Stress Characterization for Carbon Dioxide Storage Projects

Researchers at New Mexico Tech, Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Sandia National Laboratory (SNL), and other collaborators are developing a methodology to improve characterization of stress in the subsurface by means of a model-based inversion of reservoir engineering data, time lapse seismic measurements, and microseismicity. Historically, various geophysical techniques have been used in efforts to understand the state of stress in the subsurface through direct and indirect imaging of stress sensitive features (faults and fractures) and observations of transient stress related observations (time variant elastic moduli and microseismicity). Standard direct and indirect techniques for seismic fault and fracture imaging suffer from detectability limits due to reliance on high data quality and multiplicity. Variations in effective elastic properties from inversion of high quality seismic (Vertical Seismic Profile (VSP)) data may be used to infer stress near the wellbore through integration with independent experimental characterization of the stress-velocity relationship. Given a sufficiently robust observation network, microseismic emissions may be inverted to characterize focal mechanisms which, together with supporting assumptions and constraints, inform estimates of in-situ stress. While each of these techniques contributes in part to the characterization of stress within limited spatial and temporal domains, no one method provides an unambiguous stress measurement or a predictive capability over a site scale spatial extent. Challenges associated with solution non-uniqueness, measurement ambiguity, and irregular sampling may be greatly minimized through combination of one or more of independent measurements within a common framework in which realistic geological, hydrodynamic, geomechanical, and seismological constituent process models may act as constraints.

02 PETROLEUM↗

DOE OSTI2019

DOE Data Day 2019 Report

The Department of Energy (DOE) has joined the larger scientific community in the promotion of data management as a means to higher quality, more efficient research and analysis, and as a critical component of data science. Tools and platforms to support data management and analysis are rapidly evolving and provide enormous opportunities. They also pose challenges that can be specific to DOE but are common across DOE mission areas and organizations. The DOE Data Day (D3) workshop was held on September 25–26, 2019, and organized by a team at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in an effort to gather the data management practitioners at the DOE labs together to share their work and results, facilitating knowledge transfers and best practices across project teams. Over 100 attendees participated from multiple national labs—LLNL, Sandia (SNL), Lawrence Berkeley (LBNL), Los Alamos (LANL), Oak Ridge (ORNL), Argonne (ANL), Pacific Northwest (PNNL), Stanford Linear Accelerator (SLAC)—along with Mission Support and Test Services (MSTS), National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), Pantex, National Security Complex (Y-12), National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), the DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI), and elsewhere in the DOE complex.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2019

Environmental Awareness Course 32461

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or the Laboratory) is committed to an environmental management strategy aimed at reducing the Laboratory's environmental impacts, while still maintaining or increasing operating efficiencies. This training is designed to help you understand the critical importance of environmental management to the continuing success of the Laboratory and your personal role in this essential endeavor.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2019

Technology Applicable to Remote Hazardous Constituents and Waste Stream Grouping

Originally, Rocky Flats transuranic (TRU) waste was managed from waste streams that were composed of similar chemical constituents and were generated from identical processes. Early waste processing at Idaho National Laboratory (INL) maintained the Rocky Flats record until INL began generating their own item description codes (IDCs). Ultimately TRU waste management at INL was driven to combine wastes from all IDCs that were assigned by Rocky Flats to a summary category group regardless of whether the chemical constituents in the waste were known or not. At this point, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) certified program requirements to process the TRU waste according to waste streams was nearly eliminated. In April 2018, operations in the Sludge Repackage Project (SRP) area were halted by a radiological materials release accident in which drums containing waste experienced a loss of containment after over-pressurization occurred. Four SRP drums, repackaged in the Accelerated Retrieval Project (ARP) V area, had an adverse, delayed chemical reaction event occur when prohibited materials from one container were mixed with chemically-incompatible materials from other containers in the repackaging process. This incident was the direct result of processing unknowns under a protocol where the components of the waste were added to incompatible materials resulting in a run-away reaction. After a Difficult Waste Team (DWT) and Los Alamos National Laboratory – Carlsbad Operations (LANL-CO) subject matter expert (SME) visit in September 2019, it was determined by the team that all of the work observed on the September visit was performed upstream of the certified program and that the Visual Examination (VE) and other methods typically used by the certified program were being used for Acceptable Knowledge (AK) augmentation. This augmentation was needed in order to determine what the constituents in the waste might be, and is based primarily on collections of VE results. The waste at INL that is being processed in what is considered to be the Priority 2 (yellow) and Priority 3 (red) lists either needs AK to be completed before certified characterization can occur or is waiting to be processed because the waste has been mixed with unknown wastes resulting in a lack of information that could have impact of the ability to certify and ship the waste to the WIPP.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

UNITY: Unified Memory and Storage Space

UNITY is a 36-month project focused on providing design and evaluate a new distributed storage paradigm that unifies the traditionally distinct application views of memory- and file-based data storage into a single scalable and resilient environment. The project is a collaboration among Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL, Lead institution), Los Alamos National Labs (LANL), and Georgia Tech (GT). The main contributions of the GT team have been around development of low level systems software for best leveraging the capabilities of new types of persistent memory technologies, and for development of methods for intelligent data management across memory/storage substrates with heterogeneous components. GT contributed the Phoenix library for optimized checkpoint/restart for HPC I/O for systems with non-volatile memory (NVM), the NVStream library for NVM-specialized streaming I/O for HPC workflows, the CoMerge, Mnemo and Kleio solutions for intelligent data management on NVM-based systems. These contributions result in significant improvements in both application performance and system efficiency.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2020

We Are Hiring

At Los Alamos you get an internship customized to your skill level. You receive technical mentoring and professional skill-building opportunities. This is all while working on exciting physics problems. The result? Valuable hands-on experience to help you make decisions about your future. Physics Division can help you expand your horizons, whether you are an undergraduate or graduate student seeking a one-of-a-kind summer internship experience or a post-bachelor’s or post-master’s student ready to hone your experimental research skills.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

Motorcycle Safety Committee [Slides]

This is a presentation to be sent to various DOE sites as a reference for LANL's Motorcycle Safety Committee and includes how to start and sustain a safety committee and organize events. Examples from LANL's program are included. Contacts from Los Alamos National Lab, Lawrence Livermore National Lab, and Idaho National Lab are provided.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗