Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Description”

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 811 records · Page 45
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

CORPSE model with litter decomposition parameters derived from the LIDET dataset

This is a version of the CORPSE model (Carbon, Organisms, Rhizosphere and Protection in the Soil Environment, Sulman et al. 2014) that uses litter decomposition parameters derived from a modified Monte Carlo simulation using the LIDET litter decomposition dataset (Long-term Intersite Decomposition Experiment Team, Harmon 2013). The code also includes the Baseline parameters, and the eight other best parameter sets identified in a modified Monte Carlo simulation. 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:The folder "Input Files" contains one folder for each LIDET site with data necessary to run the model. Note that "(site)" in the filenames below indicates where the LIDET site code appears (see Table 1 for site codes). Data streams include: CORPSE_full_spinup_litter.csv, CORPSE_full_spinup_rhizo.csv, CORPSE_full_spinup_bulk.csv, litterbag_init_100g_6spp.csv: initial C and N (kg C or N/m2) pool values for each soil layer, the litterbag_init_100_6spp.csv file is for the litterbag layer and is the same file for all sites. All initial C and N 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 soilT (site) DOY274start.csv: Average daily soil temperature (oC) interpolated from previously calculated monthly values used in DayCent LIDET simulations (Bonan et al., 2013). soilT (site) DOY274start.csv: Average daily soil volumetric water content (VWC) scalar interpolated from previously calculated monthly values used in DayCent LIDET simulations (Bonan et al., 2013). litter production.csv: Average daily litter production values for each site, data sources listed in Table S3 of related publication. litter (site) CN.csv: C:N ratio for each species from LIDET dataset (Table 2, Harmon 2013). (site).csv: Table indicating number of observations for each species decomposed at each site. Instructions: Save the model code ("CORPSE_LIDET.R") and "Input Files" folder in the same folder. Also make a folder for the model output (e.g., "results_Baseline") in the same folder. Set the working directory (setwd) in the model code to the folder with the files saved in step #1. Select the parameter set to use for the litter and litterbag compartments, comment out all other parameter sets. Run code. Output will be saved in the folder made in step 1. Output destination can be changed as necessary in code section called "Running the model." Table 1 LIDET sites and site codes used in model files. Site Code - Site AND - H.J. Andrews Experimental Forest BNZ - Bonanza Creek Experimental Forest BSF - Blodgett Research Forest CDR - Cedar Creek Natural History Area CPR - Central Plains Experimental Range HBR - Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest HFR - Harvard Forest JUN - Juneau KBS - Kellogg Biological Station KNZ - Konza Prairie Research Natural Area NWT - Niwot Ridge/Green Lakes Valley OLY - Olympic National Park OLY Conifer forest SEV - Sevilleta National Wildlife Refuge SMR - Santa Margarita Ecological Reserve UFL - University of Florida VCR - Virginia Coast Reserve Table 2 LIDET species and species codes used in model files (6 common species). Species - Species Code Sugar maple (Acer saccharum) - ACSA Drypetes (Drypetes glauca) - DRGL Red pine (Pinus resinosa) - PIRE Chestnut oak (Quercus prinus) - QUPR Western redcedar (Thuja plicata) - THPL Wheat (Triticum aestivum) - TRAE References:Bonan, G. B., Hartman, M. D., Parton, W. J., & Wieder, W. R. (2013). Evaluating litter decomposition in earth system models with long-term litterbag experiments: an example using the Community Land Model version 4 (CLM4). Global Change Biology, 19(3), 957-974. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12031 Harmon, M. (2013). LTER Intersite Fine Litter Decomposition Experiment (LIDET), 1990 to 2002. Long-Term Ecological Research. Forest Science Data Bank, Corvallis, OR. [Data set]. Accessed http://andlter.forestry.oregonstate.edu/data/abstract.aspx?dbcode=TD023. https://doi.org/10.6073/pasta/f35f56bea52d78b6a1ecf1952b4889c5. Sulman, B. N., Phillips, R. P., Oishi, A. C., Shevliakova, E., & Pacala, S. W. (2014). Microbe-driven turnover offsets mineral-mediated storage of soil carbon under elevated CO2. Nature Climate Change, 4, 1099 - 1102. https://doi.org/10.1038/nclimate2436

Juice, Stephanie↗
DOE OSTI2021

Combined Mesonet and Tracker

Title: Combined Mesonet and Trackers (UNL Mobile Mesonets) Authors University of Nebraska PI: Adam Houston, UNL Professor (ahouston2@unl.edu) Mailing Address: 126 Bessey Hall P.O. Box 880340 Lincoln, NE 68588-0340 CoMeT Overview The University of Nebraska-Lincoln operates three Combined Mesonet and Tracker (CoMeTs). CoMeTs are Ford Explorers (model years 2015, 2017, and 2019) with forward-mounted suites of meteorological sensors and dual moonroofs, combining the capability of a mobile mesonet to collect near-surface observations with the capability of an unmanned aircraft systems (UAS) tracker vehicle, which enables an observer in the second row of seats to see the aircraft and maintain compliance with Federal Aviation Administration policies on UAS operation. The CoMeTs collect observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155A, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass (Barbieri et al. 2019). The HMP155A and 109SS-L thermistor are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). This list of sensors is also included in the CoMeT data file metadata. Manufacturer specifications for these instruments are given in Table 1 of Hanft and Houston (2018). The reported measured quantities are summarized below.CoMeT-3 was funded through an equipment allocation included in the NSF TORUS award (AGS-1824649). Instrument Description The specific sensors included on each CoMeT are summarized in the table at the end of this section. In general each CoMeT collects observations of slow temperature and humidity at ~2 m above ground level (AGL) using a Vaisala HMP155, fast temperature at ~2 m AGL using a Campbell Scientific 109SS-L thermistor, pressure at ~2.5 m AGL using a Vaisala PTB210 barometer with a Gill pressure port, wind speed and direction at ~3.25 m AGL using an R.M. Young 05103 propeller anemometer, position using a Garmin 19x HVS receiver, and vehicle heading using a KVH Industries C-100 fluxgate compass. The HMP155 and 109SS are shielded and aspirated within a U-tube (Waugh and Frederickson 2010; Houston et al. 2016). Fast temperature and corrected RH measurements (using sensors housed within the U-tube) have a time constant of 10-12 s based on data collected across a temperature and RH shock during the CLOUD-MAP 2017 calibration/validation tests on June 26, 2017. Vehicle speed was < 10 kts for this test. CoMeT-1 CoMeT-2 CoMeT-3 Slow Temperature Slow RH Vaisala HMP155A-L20-PT Part #: 22280-7 Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Vaisala HMP155E Part #: E1AA11A0B1A1A0A Fast temperature Campbell Scientific 109SS-L20-PT Part #: 21448-3 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-109 Campbell Scientific 109SS-L12-PW Part #: 21448-150 Pressure Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Vaisala PTB-210 Part #: A1A1B Gill Pressure Port Part #: 61002 Wind RM Young 05103-L20-PT Part #: 18435-310 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 RM Young 05103-L20-PW Part #: 18435-244 GPS Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Garmin GPS 19x HVS (NMEA 0183) Part #: 010-01010-00 Compass KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 KVH C-100 Part #: 01-0177-15 Logger Campbell Scientific CR6-NA-XT-SW Part #: 28385-9 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Campbell Scientific CR6-WIFI-XT-SW Part #: 28385-6 Data Collection and Real-Time Processing The reported measured quantities are summarized in the table below. Quantity Units Source Epoch time Seconds GPS Latitude and longitude Degrees GPS Altitude m GPS Pressure hPa PTB210 Temperature (fast) deg C 109SS-L Temperature (slow) deg C HMP155 RH (slow) % HMP155 Vehicle speed m/s GPS Vehicle heading deg C-100 and GPS In addition to the measured variables, several derived variables are calculated. Corrected/fast relative humidity (%) Relative humidity is adjusted to the fast temperature following Richardson et al. (1998) and Houston et al. (2016). Water vapor mixing ratio (g/kg) Dew point temperature (&deg;C) Potential temperature (Kelvin) Virtual potential temperature (Kelvin) Equivalent potential temperature (Kelvin) Regular intercomparisons between all three CoMeTs were performed during TORUS 2019. Comparisons were also conducted between CoMeT-1 and CoMeT-2 during LAPSE-RATE (2018) on 14 July. In these intercomparisons, the vehicles were parked adjacent to each other aligned perpendicular to (and facing into) the wind. To minimize engine heating effects, intercomparisons were only conducted when the wind speed was >10 kts. Data Format Original data files for each deployment are saved as text files and then converted to NetCDF. NetCDF versions have units that are CF compliant and may not match the original units in the txt files. The naming convention for the NetCDF files is as follows: UNL.CoMeT3.{deployment date YYYYMMDD}.{start time of observation collection in UTC HHMM}.L2.{post-processing codes}.cdf example: UNL.CoMeT3.20190627.1931.L2.g1.f1.cdf Post-processing codes are included to track modifications to the raw data. These codes are closely connected to error flags associated with each record. Each letter corresponds to a particular instrument: g: GPS p: Barometer tf: Fast temperature ts: Slow temperature rh: Relative humidity f: Compass w: Wind monitor a: All instruments Each number corresponds to a particular post-processing action described more below. Measured and derived variables are included in the following table. Variable Heading Standard Name Units time Time seconds since 00:00:00, 01-01-1970 Alt Altitude meters lat Latitude degrees north lon Longitude degrees east fast_temp Air Temperature kelvin slow_temp Air Temperature kelvin pressure Air Pressure pascals logger_RH Relative Humidity percent calc_corr_RH Relative Humidity percent wind_speed Wind Speed meters per second wind_dir Wind From Direction degrees vehicle_dir Vehicle Direction degrees dewpoint Dew Point Temperature kelvin mixing_ratio Humidity Mixing Ratio g/g theta Air Potential Temperature kelvin theta_v Virtual Potential Temperature kelvin theta_e Equivalent Potential Temperature Kelvin error_flag The error_flag variable is a string that matches the post-processing codes listed above. All instruments will have an associated code, but will have a &ldquo;0&rdquo; if the datum is unchanged from the initial processed value. Error Codes The following table summarizes the error codes for data collected before 2020: Error Code Relevant CoMeT Description g1 1,2,3 Exact correction. GPS position and time reprocessed from raw data g2 1 As far as we can tell this is an exact correction to an error in the GPS time. During the correct time periods the time suddenly went backwards ~250s and stayed at this offset for 750s when it corrected itself. The offset was applied to the &ldquo;time warp&rdquo; period. p1 2 Approximate correction. Hole in the pressure tube connecting the pressure port to the barometer. Resulted in erroneously low air pressure measurements when the vehicle was in motion. Derived variables recalculated (dew point temperature [e depends on qv and p], water vapor mixing ratio, potential temperature, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) a1 3 Exact correction. Missing data reprocessed from raw data a2 1 Bug fix to bias correction for ts1, ts2, and rh1: water vapor mixing ratio was off by a factor of 10 and virtual potential temperature was wrong because of this. f1 3 No correction, missing data. Fluxgate compass inoperable. Wind speed and direction calculated using GPS-derived vehicle heading instead. rh1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.7% removed from relative humidity. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts1 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +0.6 K removed from slow temperature. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) ts2 1 Approximate correction. Constant bias of +1.0 K removed. Derived variables recalculated (corrected/fast relative humidity, dew point temperature, water vapor mixing ratio, virtual potential temperature, equivalent potential temperature) References Bolton, D., 1980: The Computation of Equivalent Potential Temperature. Mon. Wea. Rev., 108, 1046&ndash;1053, https://doi.org/10.1175/1520-0493(1980)108<1046:TCOEPT>2.0.CO;2. Hanft, W., and A. L. Houston, 2018: An Observational and Modeling Study of Mesoscale Air Masses with High Theta-E. Mon. Wea. Rev., 146, 2503&ndash;2524, https://doi.org/10.1175/MWR-D-17-0389.1.Wexler Houston, A. L., R. J. Laurence III, T. W. Nichols, S. Waugh, B. Argrow, and C. L. Ziegler, 2016: Intercomparison of unmanned aircraft-borne and mobile mesonet atmospheric sensors. Journal of Atmospheric and Oceanic Technology. 33, 1569-1582, doi: 10.1175/JTECH-D-15-0178.1. Lowe, P. R., 1977: An Approximating Polynomial for the Computation of Saturation Vapor Pressure. J. Applied Meteorology, 16, 100&ndash;103. Richardson, S. J., S. E. Frederickson, F. V. Brock, and J. A. Brotzge, 1998: Combination temperature and relative humidity probes: Avoiding large air temperature errors and associated relative humidity errors. Preprints, 10th Symp. On Meteorological Observations and Instrumentation, Phoenix, AZ, Amer. Meteor. Soc., 278&ndash;283. Waugh, S., and S. E. Frederickson, 2010: An improved aspirated temperature system for mobile meteorological observations, especially in severe weather. 25th Conf. on Severe Local Storms, Denver, CO, Amer. Meteor. Soc., P5.2. [Available online at https://ams.confex.com/ams/25SLS/techprogram/paper_176205.htm.]

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2023

NCSU Flux Tower Data

NCSU Flux Tower Data Level b1: QC checks applied to measurements Data Format: CSV Description: See "instrument descripotion Site: Houston, TX; Tracking Aerosol Convection interactions ExpeRiment (HOU) Location: Houston, TX; AMF1 (main site for TRACER) Facility Code: M1 Category: Aerosol Properties Data Type: PI Data Source Instrument/Data: Sonic Anemometer, 3 Condensation Particle Counters, 1 SP2, 1 POPS Start Date: 2022-06-01 End Date: 2022-9-26 Contact PI: Markus Petters (mdpetter@ncsu.edu) Funding Source: DOE ASR award US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environment Research (grant no. DE-SC 0021074) Instrument description The NCSU flux tower was located next to the AMF sampling pad. The flux tower consisted of a 10 m telescoping tower. Mounted at the top of the tower was a sonic anemometer (RM Young 8000) and a Krypton Hygrometer. A sample line (¼” conductive tubing) and communication line was laid to a trailer located underneath and slightly adjacent to the tower. The sample line brought aerosol inside the trailer at 4.5 L min-1, where it was distributed between 3 CPCs (TSI 3776c, Dc ~ 2.5 nm, TSI 3771, Dc ~10nm, and TSI 3772, Dc ~40 nm) with different size cuts. Also sampling was a printed particle optical spectrometer (POPS) and a single particle soot photometer (SP2). Please contact mdpetter@ncsu.edu for further information.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hysteretic temperature sensitivity of wetland CH4 fluxes explained by substrate availability and microbial activity: Model Archive

This Modeling Archive is in support of an NGEE Arctic publication "Hysteretic temperature sensitivity of wetland CH4 fluxes explained by substrate availability and microbial activity" in the Journal Biogeosciences (https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-5849-2020), which includes the model data used in the publication. CH4 emissions from terrestrial systems are posited to increase, which can offset mitigation efforts and accelerate climate change. Yet, the accuracy of modeled CH4 emissions is sensitive to the prescribed CH4 production (or emission) temperature dependencies that are currently uncertain. Here, we use a comprehensive biogeochemistry model (ecosys) to investigate factors modulating CH4 production and emission rates across a permafrost thaw gradient encompassing a partly thawed bog and a fully thawed fen. We find that seasonally varying substrate availability drives lower and higher modeled methanogen biomass and activity, and thereby CH4 production, during the earlier and later periods of the thawed season, respectively. Package follows the Model data archiving guidelines with data in a *.zip file with three subfolders containing *.csv files and raw model output files; a data dictionary table (data_dictionary.csv) and two model output description tables (ecosys_plantspecies_output_notes.csv and ecosys_soil_ouput_notes.csv) to explain the format and meaning of individual output variables; and a user guide as a *.pdf. A detailed model description can be found in the supplement of (Grant, 2013). The ecosys source code is available at https://doi:10.5281/zenodo.3906642. 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 OSTI2020

Pairing Dynamics in Low-energy Nuclear Collisions

Superfluidity is a generic feature of various quantum systems at low temperatures and it is in particular important for the description of dynam- ics of low energy nuclear reactions. The Time-Dependent Density Func- tional Theory (TDDFT) is, to date, the only microscopic method which takes into account in a consistent way far-from-equilibrium dynamics of pairing field and single-particle degrees of freedom. Here, the local version of TDDFT, so-called TDSLDA, is particularly useful for the description of nuclear reactions and is well-suited for leadership class computers of hybrid (CPU+GPU) architecture. The preliminary results obtained for collisions involving both medium-mass and heavy nuclei at the energies around the Coulomb barrier are presented.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2023

Semi-classical Kinetic Theory for Massive Spin-half Fermions with Leading-order Spin Effects

We consider the quantum kinetic-theory description for interacting massive spin-half fermions using the Wigner function formalism. We derive a general kinetic theory description assuming that the spin effects appear at the classical and quantum level. To track the effect of such different contributions we use the semi-classical expansion method to obtain the generalized dynamical equations including spin, analogous to classical Boltzmann equation. This approach can be used to obtain a collision kernel involving local as well as non-local collisions among the microscopic constituent of the system and eventually, a framework of spin hydrodynamics ensuring the conservation of the energy-momentum tensor and total angular momentum tensor.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2024

Data for "Divergent urban land trajectories under alternative population projections within the shared socioeconomic pathways"

Datasets supporting findings and visualizations behind McManamay et al. (2024) Divergent urban land trajectories under alternative population projections within the shared socioeconomic pathways. Environmental Research Letters, DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/ad2eec Using a spatial modeling experiment at high resolution (1-km), this study compared how two alternative US population projections, varying in the spatially explicit nature of demographic patterns and migration, affect urban land dynamics simulated by the Spatially Explicit, Long-term, Empirical City development (SELECT) model for SSP2, SSP3, and SSP5. The numerical experiment, inputs and outputs are fully described in McManamay et al. (2024). The datasets summarize SELECT model simulations within urban areas and rural areas of the conterminous United States. For code to reproduce the results, please refer to https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/mcmanamay_etal_2024_erl Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details. Descriptions of the datasets are provided below. Dataset(s) Descriptions: Urban_Land_delta_UA_County.csv: Urban land area for original (default) population, updated population, and urban land delta (difference between the two) according to Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) and year. Urban land is summarized for U.S. counties (FIPS code) and urban areas (GEOID) as unique areas within various counties. JO_Gao_pop_ufdelta.csv: Comparison of population differences and urban land differences between the origial (default) and updated population projections. City_Case_studies.csv: Differences in urban land areas arising from different population projections summarized for selected cities (Atlanta, Los Angeles, Houston, and New York) and their surrounding rural areas UA_county_FID.zip: Zipped folder of .tiff file depicting unique combination of urban areas and US counties used for summarizing urban land differences in urban and rural areas based on different population projections. ULD_clusters.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting normalized changes in urban land delta (difference in urban land arising from population projections) and the respective Ward's hierarchical clusters, which group urban and rural areas based on similarities in temporal trends. Urban_Percent_change_2100.zip: Zipped folder of .csv files depicting percent changes in urban land area for year 2100 based on differences in the original (default) population and updated population. Each file is for SSPs and urban or rural areas.

Land↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two-digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use(s) from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to include within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state. For those whom may be interested in exploring our code more in depth, we are also making available an internal data file for convenience. The file is in .RData format and contains everything described above as well as some minor additional objects used within the code calculating the cumulative curves. For completeness, here is a detailed description of the various objects which can be found within the .RData file: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. rightsByState_surface: A list of data frames with the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv files. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. This object holds the the data that is exported to created the xxFullHarmonizedRights.csv files. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page. The code related to the creation of this dataset can be viewed within HarDWR GitHub Repository/dataHarmonization.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

Global Corn Heat Stress: Mean and SD of Degree Days Above 29°C based on NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 Climate Projections

Description This global dataset provides the estimated mean and standard deviation (SD) of corn heat stress (degree days above 29°C) for a set of climate models in NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 at 0.25-degree resolution. The NEX-GDDP-CMIP6 dataset is comprised of global downscaled climate scenarios derived from the General Circulation Model (GCM) runs conducted under the Coupled Model Intercomparison Project Phase 6 (CMIP6). The current dataset includes: Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Average Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- Historical Long-Term Standard Deviation of Degree Days Above 29°C- SSP245 The mean and SD are calculated over 1985-2014 for the historical period and over 2035-2064 for future projections. A full description of methods, including growing season, daily temperature distribution, and statistical coefficients, can be found in Haqiqi (2024). The source climate data are obtained from https://ds.nccs.nasa.gov/thredds2/catalog/catalog.html and are described in Thrasher et al (2022). The codes used to create this dataset are available at https://github.com/ihaqiqi/dd29c_nex_cmip6. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research Program, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling, MultiSector Dynamics under Cooperative Agreement DE-SC0022141. The data processing, computation, and storage were completed on Purdue Anvil supercomputer and cyberinfrastructure supported by the National Science Foundation HDR award # 2118329: "NSF Institute for Geospatial Understanding through an Integrative Discovery Environment (I-GUIDE)". References Haqiqi. I. (2024). Trade can buffer climate-induced risks and volatilities in crop supply. Environmental Research: Food Systems. https://doi.org/10.1088/2976-601X/ad7d12 Thrasher, B., Wang, W., Michaelis, A., Melton, F., Lee, T., & Nemani, R. (2022). NASA global daily downscaled projections, CMIP6. Scientific Data, 9(1), 262. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-022-01393-4

Climate Change↗
DOE OSTI2020

HarDWR - Water Management Area (WMA) Shapefiles

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - No changes v1.0 - Initial public release Description Borders of all Water Management Areas (WMAs) across the 11 western-most states of the coterminous United States are available filtered through a single source. The legal name for this set of boundaries varies state-by-state. The data is provided as two compressed shapefiles. One, stateWMAs, contains data for all 11 states. For 10 of those states, Arizona being the exception, the polygons represent the legal management boundaries used by those states to manage their surface and groundwater resources respectively. WMAs refer to the set of boundaries a particular state uses to manage its water resources. Each set of boundaries was collected from the states individually, and then merged into one spatial layer. The merging process included renaming some columns to enable merging with all other source layers, as well as removing columns deemed not required for followup analysis. The retained columns for each boundary are: basinNum - the state provided unique numerical ID; basinName - the state provided English name of the area, where applicable; state - the state name; and uniID - a unique identifier we created by concatenating the state name, and underscore, and the state numerical ID. Arizona is unique within this collection of states in that surface and groundwater resources are managed using two separate sets of boundaries. During our followup analysis (Grogan et al., in review) we decided to focus on one set of boundaries, those for surface water. This is due to the recommendation of our hydrologists that the surface water boundary set is a more realist representation of how water moves across the landscape, as a few of the groundwater boundaries are based on political and/or economic considerations. Therefore, the Arizona surface WMAs are included within stateWMAs. The Arizona groundwater WMAs are provided as a separate file, azGroundWMAs, as a companion to the first file for completeness and general reference. WMA spatial boundary data sources by state: Arizona: Arizona Surface Water Watersheds; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/surface-watershed/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 Arizona: Arizona Ground Water Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://gisdata2016-11-18t150447874z-azwater.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/groundwater-basin-2/explore?location=34.158174%2C-111.970823%2C7.50 California: California CalWater 2.2.1; Collected February, 2020; https://www.mlml.calstate.edu/mpsl-mlml/data-center/data-entry-tools/data-tools/gis-shapefile-layers/ Colorado: Colorado Water District Boundaries; Collected February, 2020; https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cdss/gis-data-category Idaho: Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) Administrative Basins; Collected November, 2015; https://data-idwr.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/fb0df7d688a04074bad92ca8ef74cc26_4/explore?location=45.018686%2C-113.862284%2C6.93 Montana: Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation (DNRC) Office of Information Technology (OIT) Nevada: Nevada State Engineer Admin Basin Boundaries; Collected April, 2020 https://ndwr.maps.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html?layers=1364d0c3a0284fa1bcd90f952b2b9f1c New Mexico: New Mexico Office of the State Engineer (OSE) Declared Groundwater Basins; Collected April, 2020 https://geospatialdata-ose.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/ose-declared-groundwater-basins/explore?location=34.179783%2C-105.996542%2C7.51 Oregon: Oregon Water Resources Department (OWRD) Administrative Basins; Collected February, 2020; https://www.oregon.gov/OWRD/access_Data/Pages/Data.aspx Utah: Utah Adjudication Books; Collected April, 2020; https://opendata.gis.utah.gov/datasets/utahDNR::utah-adjudication-books/explore?location=39.497165%2C-111.587782%2C-1.00 Washington: Washington Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA); Collected June, 2017; https://ecology.wa.gov/Research-Data/Data-resources/Geographic-Information-Systems-GIS/Data Wyoming: Wyoming State Engineer's Office Board of Control Water Districts; Collected June, 2019; Directly contacted Wyoming State Engineer's Office

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2025

CERF: IM3 Projected Western US Power Plant Locations

Overview The Capacity Expansion Regional Feasibility (CERF) model is an open-source geospatial python package that provides new power plant locations at a 1km resolution. The model ingests U.S. state or regional-scale electricity system capacity expansion plans, such as those produced by the Global Change Analysis Model (GCAM-USA), and identifies feasible, site-specific locations for individual new power plants (renewable and non-renewable). CERF combines high-resolution geospatial suitability analyses with an economic algorithm that selects individual plant siting locations based on grid interconnection costs and the locational marginal value of new generation. The model incorporates a wide range of dynamic constraints and opportunities, such as protected lands, population density, existing infrastructure, and water availability. This dataset provides CERF power plant siting results for IM3 Phase 2 simulations across eight different scenarios for the Western US through 2055. The scenarios include combinations of two Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSP3 and SSP5) with four high-resolution climate projections specific to the United States (see, https://tgw-data.msdlive.org/). These climate projections include "hotter" and "cooler" variants for two Representative Concentration Pathways (RCP4.5 and RCP8.5). The resulting eight simulations are: rcp45cooler_ssp3 rcp45cooler_ssp5 rcp45hotter_ssp3 rcp45hotter_ssp5 rcp85cooler_ssp3 rcp85cooler_ssp5 rcp85hotter_ssp3 rcp85hotter_ssp5 CERF siting results in this dataset correspond to capacity expansion plans in the GCAM-USA IM3 Phase 2 simulation data and are available for each of the above scenarios. Data Details Temporal Range: 2015-2055 in 5-year timesteps. Note that 2015 is the experiment base year and 2020 and beyond represent model simulation years. Spatial Range: Plant locations are provided for the eleven states in the Western US including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. Spatial Resolution: 1 km-squared, provided in x and y coordinates Geospatial Projection: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) File Type: csv The dataset contains subdirectories for each of the eight scenarios described in the overview. Each scenario folder contains two subfolders with the following information: 1. Power Plant Data This directory contains a single .csv file of power plant locations for both pre-existing (non-CERF sited plants in operation in 2015) and new (CERF-sited) power plants across the temporal range along with additional CERF model output parameters for CERF-sited plants. Plant with a siting year earlier than 2020 correspond to facilities that are operational leading into the first timestep CERF simulation. For a more detailed description of CERF model output parameters, see the CERF model documentation. Note that the cerf_plant_id parameter is unique within each scenario file but not across scenario files. Parameter Descriptions scenario - Name of scenario cerf_plant_id - Unique siting identifier cerf_sited - If True, indicates that plant was sited by CERF model. If False, indicates pre-existing facility region_name - Name of region (state) tech_id - Technology ID tech_name - Full generation technology name inclusive of cooling type (if applicable) and additional characteristics tech_simple - Simplified generation technology type unit_size_mw - Power plant unit size (MW) xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) index - Index position in the flattend 2D array buffer_in_km - Exclusion buffer around site (km) sited_year - Year of siting retirement_year - Year of retirement lmp_zone - Locational marginal price (LMP) zone ID locational_marginal_price_usd_per_mwh - Locational marginal price ($/MWh) generation_mwh_per_year - Generation output (MWh/yr) operating_cost_usd_per_year - Cost of plant operations ($/yr) net_operational_value - Net operational value based on LMP and and operating costs ($/yr) interconnection_cost - Cost of interconnection for transmission & gas pipeline (if applicable) net_locational_cost -- Difference of interconnection cost and operating value ($/yr) capacity_factor_fraction - Capacity factor (fraction) carbon_capture_rate_fraction - Carbon capture rate (fraction) fuel_co2_content_tons_per_btu - Fuel CO2 content (tons/Btu) fuel_price_usd_per_mmbtu - Fuel price ($/MMBtu) fuel_price_esc_rate_fraction - Fuel price escalation rate (fraction) heat_rate_btu_per_kWh - Heat rate (Btu/kWh) lifetime_yrs - Technology lifetime for annuity (years) operational_life_yrs - Operational lifetime for retirement (years) variable_om_usd_per_mwh - Variable operation and maintenance costs of yearly capacity use ($/MWh) variable_om_esc_rate_fraction - Variable operation and maintenance costs escalation rate (fraction) carbon_tax_usd_per_ton - Carbon tax ($/ton) carbon_tax_esc_rate_fraction - Carbon tax escalation rate (fraction) 2. Storage Data This directory contains information on new and pre-existing energy storage facilities operational in each timestep along with various storage operational parameters. The 2015 timestep provides pre-existing energy storage data and corresponds with facilities that are operational leading into the first model simulation timestep. Note that coordinates in the storage files correspond to the interconnection point on the grid (substation location), not individual energy storage locations. Energy storage is added in a cumulative process at each given interconnection point. That is, each individual file provides the total operational storage capacity interconnected to the specified substation for the given timestep, inclusive of previously installed storage at that location and new storage installed in that timestep at that location. Parameters scenario - Name of scenario timestep - Simulation timestep name - Unique storage identifier s_typ - Type of energy storage technology (battery or pumped storage hydro) s_node - Node ID of interconnecting substation xcoord - X coordinate in the default CRS (meters) ycoord - Y coordinate in the default CRS (meters) charge_rate - Maximum charge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) discharge_rate - Maximum discharge rate (power capacity) of storage system (MW) duration - Duration of storage system (hours) max_SoC - Allowed maximum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) min_SoC -Allowed minimum state of charge (energy capacity) of storage system (MWh) charge_eff - Efficiency of charge (fraction between 0 and 1) discharge_eff - Efficiency of discharge (fraction between 0 and 1) Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program.

CERF↗
DOE OSTI2025

Extending Shared Socioeconomic Pathways to Future Water Supply In-frastructure Scenarios: A Case Study of San Antonio, TX

Datasets supporting findings and visualization behind Okoye and McManamay (2025) Extending Shared Socioeconomic Pathways to Future Water Supply Infrastructure Scenarios: A Case Study of San Antonio, TX. Environmental Research Communications, DOI: 10.57931/2563186 These datasets contains the results of a site selection analysis for municipal water supply planning across multiple Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs 1–5) and hard scenario classification of water systems in San Antonio, TX. It includes data at the resolution of individual surface water supply sources (COMIDs) and integrates a wide range of hydrologic, socioeconomic, infrastructural, and scenario-based planning variables. Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details. Descriptions of the datasets are provided below. Dataset(s) Descriptions: Dataset_SSP1_SSP4.xlsx - Contains data used for site selection optimization under SSP1 to SSP4. This dataset was generated based on multi-indicator computations (e.g., WAI, WQI, ERI, WTC, WIC), scenario demand projections, and resource and spatial constraints, excluding new reservoir values. Dataset_SSP5.xlsx - Used for site optimization under SSP5. Unlike Dataset_SSP1_SSP4, this dataset includes new reservoir features with updated calculations of WAI, WTC, and WIC to reflect the added infrastructure and supply potential. hard_classification.xlsx - Provides the scenario classification output for each site. Includes both the initial scenario classification based on Euclidean Distance and adjusted classifications based on 30% change reduction BAU.zip - Zipped folder of .shp files showing spatially optimized water supply sites per SSP under the Business-As-Usual (BAU) water demand strategy LowGW.zip - Zipped folder of .shp files showing optimized site selections under the Low Groundwater strategy

geospatial↗
DOE OSTI2025

Applying a Multisector Scenario Framework to Evaluate Past and Future Public Surface Water Supply Infrastructure Strategies in Texas

Datasets supporting the index model and scenario analysis used in evaluating surface water supply strategies across different water system types in Texas. These data underpin the scenario development and application of five key indicators: Water Availability Index (WAI), Water Quality Index (WQI), Energy Requirement Index (ERI), Water Treatment Cost (WTC), and Water Infrastructure Cost (WIC). The datasets are organized by system type—stream reaches (flowlines), waterbodies, and reservoirs—and include both raw and standardized index values. The integrated datasets also provide scenario classifications (original and adjusted) based on infrastructure and planning priorities, enabling comparison across Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs). Additional strategy-level data are included to support evaluation of state-level new reservoir projects in relation to cost and availability tradeoffs. Please refer to the README file provided in Files for more details. Descriptions of the datasets are provided below. Dataset(s) Descriptions Folder: Index_model_database.zip Subfolder: Stream_reach.zip Fl_wf.csv, Fl_wq.csv, Fl_er.csv, Fl_wf_wtcUV.csv, Fl_wf_wtcnoUV.csv, Fl_allfac_wic1.csv, Fl_allfac_wic2.csvDatasets for computing WAI, WQI, ERI, WTC, and WIC for surface water systems classified as stream reaches (flowlines). Subfolder: Waterbody.zip Wb_wf.csv, Wb_wq.csv, Wb_er.csv, Wb_wf_wtcUV.csv, Wb_wf_wtcnoUV.csv, Wb_allfac_wic1.csv, Wb_allfac_wic2.csvEquivalent index model datasets for waterbodies, reflecting hydrologic and infrastructure attributes specific to impounded natural systems. Subfolder: Reservoir.zip Rs_wf.csv, Rs_wq.csv, Rs_er.csv, Rs_wf_wtcUV.csv, Rs_wf_wtcnoUV.csv, Rs_allfac_wic1.csv, Rs_allfac_wic2.csvIndex model datasets specific to regulated reservoir systems, incorporating both resource indicators and cost parameters. Folder: Integrated data.zip combined_merged_data.csv, combined_merged_data_scenario.csvDatasets integrating index model indicators (both raw and scaled) with scenario classifications, including adjustments reflecting SSP-aligned transitions and planning shifts. Folder: Additional data.zip wai_supplystrat_wic_merged.csvCurated dataset capturing proposed major reservoir-based municipal water supply strategies in Texas. Integrates site-level planning data with estimated capital infrastructure costs and water availability scores for comparative assessment.

geospatial↗
DOE OSTI2025

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300m of a federal airport runway Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds Developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2026

Package Data for CERF-Data Centers

This dataset contains sample input 100m resolution raster files for running the CERF-DC python package (see https://github.com/IMMM-SFA/cerf_data_centers) at the state level across the CONUS. Due to data availability constraints, some of the items included in this dataset are proxies or assumptions for siting factors used in the model. These are individually noted in the item descriptions and can be exchanged with more detailed information upon availability. Data Descriptions The following raster files are included in the data download: state_siting_region.tif — State areas identified by state FIPS code composite_siting_suitability.tif — Value of 1 indicates suitable siting location, 0 otherwise. The following areas are excluded from siting: Areas within 300 m of a federal airport runway or within an airport area boundary Waterbodies Areas with slope >16% Areas susceptible to sinkholes High coastal or inland flood risk areas Local, state, and federal parks, leisure areas, and cemeteries Areas >2 km away from electric substations Areas >5 km away from a municipal water supplier service area Areas >2 km away from high-speed fiber provider service territory USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) GAP status 1, 2, or 3 areas US National Parks Wetlands USFWS critical habitats BIA land areas Railroads, major roadways, and minor roadways Military areas and training grounds NLCD developed lands Areas >0.8 km (0.5 miles) from NLCD developed lands land_value_dollar_per_sqft.tif — USD per square foot (sqft) derived from USDA $/acre land cost personal_property_tax_rate.tif — Personal property tax rate by state. Uses an assumed 0.0125 personal property tax rate for states with personal property tax, 0 for states without personal property tax. real_property_tax_rate.tif — Real property tax rate. Based on county level residential real estate property tax rates. sales_tax_rate.tif — Sales tax rate by state. mechanical_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through mechanical processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. water_cooling_fraction.tif — Fraction of year (values between 0 and 1, inclusive) that the data center would be cooled through evaporative (water cooled) processes based on local water stress and humidity levels. distance_to_substation.tif — Distance to nearest substation in hundreds of meters (i.e., value of 1 equals a distance of 100m). Offshore areas have a value of 0. industrial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh industrial electricity rates. Represents the average industrial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. commercial_electricity_rates_dollar_per_kwh.tif — USD/kWh commercial electricity rates. Represents the average commercial rate across all utilities that operate within a given county. Values are derived from the US Utility Rate Database. data_center_market_locations.tif — Grid cells with positive values represent the centroid of existing data center market clusters. The value of non-zero grid cells represents the number of data centers in the market cluster. All other grid cells have a value of 0. Geospatial Metadata CRS: Albers Equal Area Conic (ESRI:102003) Extent: -2415585.0000000023283064,-1441981.2605773280374706 : 2384414.9999999976716936,1708018.7394226719625294 Dimensions: X: 48000 Y: 31500 Bands: 1 Origin: -2415585.0000000023283064,1708018.7394226719625294 Pixel Size: 100,-100 Acknowledgment IM3 is a multi-institutional effort led by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory and supported by the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Science as part of research in MultiSector Dynamics, Earth and Environmental Systems Modeling Program. License This data is made available under a CCBY4.0 License Disclaimer This material was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor the United States Department of Energy, nor the Contractor, nor any or their employees, nor any jurisdiction or organization that has cooperated in the development of these materials, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness or any information, apparatus, product, software, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or Battelle Memorial Institute. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. PACIFIC NORTHWEST NATIONAL LABORATORYoperated byBATTELLEfor theUNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF ENERGYunder Contract DE-AC05-76RL01830

Mongird, Kendall↗
DOE OSTI2020

A phase transition model and temporal logic specifications for smart energy systems - revisited

In this paper, we revisit the method of a phase transition model for representing hybrid systems and temporal logic specifications (TLSs) for specifying desired behaviors of systems, and discuss their usefulness for smart energy systems. On the one hand, the phase transition model incorporates the continuous model of the relay device action with a particular structural form that allows for the construction of a single, global differential-algebraic equation for hybrid systems (thus smoothed hybrid systems). On the other hand, the TLS allows sophisticated descriptions of control specifications addressing both magnitude and time simultaneously, which has recently been applied to the control strategy of several types of continuous and hybrid systems. We provide high-level descriptions of each of the two techniques and present simulation results in the context of smart energy systems.

Park, Byungkwon↗
DOE OSTI2021

Additive manufacturing system and method having toolpath analysis

An additive manufacturing (AM) system is disclosed for constructing a three dimensional (3D) part with optimized orthotropy. The system combines an electronic processor which calculates an optimal set of physically achievable toolpaths to meet a given design objective, and a 3D printing direct ink write machine capable of printing inks with reinforcing particles that result in orthotropic materials. The electronic processor may combine a Domain of Interest subsystem that transforms a mathematical description of a desired part orthotropy to a plurality of guidepaths, a toolpath generate subsystem that develops a plurality of physically realizable toolpaths from those guidepaths with a minimum number of starts and stops, a finite element subsystem that computes spatially varying material orthotropy from those toolpaths and then solves a boundary value problem to determine a figure of merit for the design, and an optimization subsystem that uses that figure of merit to update the mathematical description of the part orthotropy to iteratively develop an improved part. The optimization subsystem also includes convergence criteria to indicate when toolpaths have been achieved that yield a sufficiently optimal part has been achieved. The toolpath generate can then output the final toolpaths, which are converted to suitable code that controls the motion of the 3D printer toolhead and allows the optimized 3D part to be manufactured.

King, Michael J.↗
DOE OSTI2022

New opportunities for Insight into Emergence of Hadron Mass from Studies of Nucleon Resonance Electroexcitation

Understanding the emergence of hadron mass (EHM) represents one of the most challenging and still open problems in the Standard Model. Results of EHM studies from the nucleon resonance electroexcitation amplitudes (gvpN* electrocouplings) determined from exclusive meson electroproduction data measured with the CLAS detector will be presented in this talk. These CLAS data have provided the first and only available results on the evolution of the ?vpN* electrocouplings with photon virtuality Q2 up to 5 GeV2 for most nucleon resonances in the mass range up to 1.8 GeV. A successful description of the CLAS results on the Q2-evolution of the ?(1232)3/2+, N(1440)1/2+, and ?(1600)3/2+ electrocouplings achieved within the CSM approach by employing the same dressed quark mass function inferred from the QCD Lagrangian, which also provided a successful description of the pion elastic electromagnetic form factor and PDF, and nucleon elastic form factor, conclusively demonstrated the capability of gaining insight into EHM. The expected results from the CLAS12 detector on the Q2-evolution of the gvpN* electrocouplings for all prominent resonances in the mass range up to 2 GeV at the still almost unexplored range of Q2>5 GeV2 will allow us to place tight constraints on the dressed quark mass function in the range of quark momenta where the substantial part of hadron mass ~50% is expected to be generated. Consistent results on the momentum dependence of the dressed quark mass obtained from analyses of the ?vpN* electrocouplings of nucleon resonances of different structure will validate insight into EHM in a nearly model-independent way, allowing us to address key open problems in hadron physics on the emergence of hadron mass and nucleon resonance structure from QCD.

Mokeev, Viktor↗