Disease Surveillance Tabletop Exercise Facilitator/Evaluator Checklist Yemen TTX 01/2014.
Abstract not provided.
Makvandi, Monear↗
SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “checklists”
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.
A Minimal Information Set To Enable Verifiable Theoretical Battery Research
Batteries are an enabling technology for addressing sustainability through the electrification of various forms of transportation (1) and grid storage. (2) Batteries are truly multi-scale, multi-physics devices, and accordingly various theoretical descriptions exist to understand their behavior (3-5) ranging from atomistic details to techno-economic trends. As we explore advanced battery chemistries (6,7) or previously inaccessible aspects of existing ones, (8-10) new theories are required to drive decisions. (11-13) The decisions are influenced by the limitations of the underlying theory. Advanced theories used to understand battery phenomena are complicated and require substantial effort to reproduce. However, such constraints should not limit the insights from these theories. We can strive to make the theoretical research verifiable such that any battery stakeholder can assess the veracity of new theories, sophisticated simulations or elaborate analyses. We distinguish verifiability, which amounts to “Can I trust the results, conclusions and insights and identify the context where they are relevant?”, from reproducibility, which ensures “Would I get the same results if I followed the same steps?” With this motivation, we propose a checklist to guide future reports of theoretical battery research in Table 1. We hereafter discuss our thoughts leading to this and how it helps to consistently document necessary details while allowing complete freedom for creativity of individual researchers. Given the differences between experimental and theoretical studies, the proposed checklist differs from its experimental counterparts. (14,15) This checklist covers all flavors of theoretical battery research, ranging from atomic/molecular calculations (16-19) to mesoscale (20,21) and continuum-scale interactions, (9,22) and techno-economic analysis. (23,24) Finally, as more and more experimental studies analyze raw data, (25) we feel this checklist would be broadly relevant.
25 ENERGY STORAGE↗
Causal Analysis Report for "Demolition of Historic and Yet-to-be-Determined Radar Towers at TTR Without Completing Required NEPA Process"
Two radar towers at the Tonopah Test Range (TTR), Contraves Towers 22-00 and 12-00, were torn down prior to completion of the required National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. National Technology and Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, (NTESS) submission of the NEPA checklist triggered a Sandia Field Office (SFO) review of the proposed work scope and was to include a required consultation between SFO and the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to assess any adverse effect(s) on historic properties or contributing element(s) to a historic district and, if so, determine a resolution. Following the consultation, SFO provides approval/denial of the proposed work detailed on the submitted NEPA checklist. Contraves Tower 22-00 is a historic structure, as formally determined by the SFO in consultation with the SHPO. The historical eligibility of Contraves Tower 12-00 is yet to be determined. On February 13, 2018, NTESS notified SFO that Contraves Tower 22-00 at TTR was torn down in May 2017 prior to completion of the required the NEPA process, including consultation with the SHPO. NTESS submitted two NEPA checklists to SFO in 2016 for the removal of several structures no longer required by NTESS. The first NEPA checklist listed three historic structures (one of which was Contraves Tower 22-00) and SFO determination on whether consultation with the SHPO is necessary as well as approval/denial of the NEPA checklist is pending. The second NEPA checklist listed five non-historic structures, one of which was Contraves Tower 12-00. SFO approved the NEPA checklist covering non historic structures except for the Contraves Tower 12-00, as the Contraves Tower 12-00 requires further consultation with the SHPO by SFO. Only after completion of the consultation would SFO determine approval/denial on the remaining property cited within the NEPA checklist. In late January 2018, NTESS personnel discovered that Contraves Tower 22-00 was no longer listed in the Facility Information Management System (FIMS). Upon further investigation, NTESS personnel verified that the Contraves Tower 22-00 had been removed in May 2017. During the initial extent of condition, it was discovered that Contraves Tower 12-00 had also been torn down in May 2017 as part of this same destruction and demolition (D&D) activity. Both Contraves Towers 22-00 and 12-00) had been torn down prior to completion of the NEPA process, including consultation with the SHPO.
29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
SU-E-T-138: Automated Chart Review Module Including Cross-Vendor Data Transfer Verification Developed for IHE-RO Initiative
Purpose: To follow the Integrating Healthcare Enterprise - Radiation Oncology (IHE-RO) initiative of proper cross-vendor technology integration, an automated chart checker (ACC) was developed. ACC compares extracted data from an approved patient plan in the Eclipse treatment planning system (TPS) against data existing in the Mosaiq treatment management system (TMS). ACC automatically analyzes these parameters using built-in quality checklists to provide further aid in chart review. Methods: Eclipse TPS data are obtained using Eclipse scripting API (ESAPI) while Mosaiq TMS data are obtained from a radiotherapy-treatment-planning (RTP) file. Using this information, ACC identifies TPS-TMS discrepancies in 18 primary beam parameters including MU, energy, jaw positions, gantry angle, table angle, accessories, and bolus for up to 31 beams. Next, approximately 40 items from traditional quality checklists are evaluated such as prescription consistency, DRR graticule placement, plan approval status, global max dose, and dose tracking coefficients. Parameters were artificially modified to determine if ACC would detect an error in data transfer and to test each component of quality checklists. Results: Using ESAPI scripting and RTP file-processing, ACC was able to properly aggregate data from TPS and TMS for up to 31 beams. Errors were artificially introduced into each plan parameter, and ACC was able to successfully detect all of them within seconds. Next, ACC was able to successfully detect mistakes in the chart by identifying deviations with its quality checklists, within seconds. Conclusion: ACC effectively addresses the potential issue of faulty cross-vendor data transfer, as described by IHE-RO. In addition, ACC was also able to detect deviations from its built-in quality checklists. ACC is already an invaluable tool for efficient and standardized chart review and will continue to improve as its incorporated checklists become more comprehensive.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Pilot factors guidelines for the operational inspection of navigation systems
A computerized human engineered inspection technique is developed for use by FAA inspectors in evaluating the pilot factors aspects of aircraft navigation systems. The short title for this project is Nav Handbook. A menu-driven checklist, computer program and data base (Human Factors Design Criteria) were developed and merged to form a self-contained, portable, human factors inspection checklist tool for use in a laboratory or field setting. The automated checklist is tailored for general aviation navigation systems and can be expanded for use with other aircraft systems, transports or military aircraft. The Nav Handbook inspection concept was demonstrated using a lap-top computer and an Omega/VLF CDU. The program generates standardized inspection reports. Automated checklists for LORAN/C and R NAV were also developed. A Nav Handbook User's Guide is included.
Sadler, J. F.↗
CSP-Plant Modeling Guidelines and Compliance of the System Advisor Model (SAM)
Accurately modeling risks, costs, and electricity output is essential to the financing and advancement of concentrating solar power projects. To address this need, a group of CSP experts created a guideline document, titled SolarPACES Guideline for Bankable STE Yield Assessment [1]. To make this information more accessible and allow stakeholders to test specific models against the recommendations, the guidelines have been condensed into a spreadsheet-based checklist. The checklist was applied to NREL's System Advisor Model (SAM) software, providing useful feedback to both the checklist group and the SAM development team. This study showed strong agreement between SAM and the guidelines, demonstrated the use of the guidelines in model validation, and resulted in several recommended improvements to SAM.
14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
SU-D-BRD-03: Improving Plan Quality with Automation of Treatment Plan Checks
Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of an automated plan check tool to improve first-time plan quality as well as standardize and document performance of physics plan checks. Methods: The Plan Checker Tool (PCT) uses the Eclipse Scripting API to check and compare data from the treatment planning system (TPS) and treatment management system (TMS). PCT was created to improve first-time plan quality, reduce patient delays, increase efficiency of our electronic workflow, and to standardize and partially automate plan checks in the TPS. A framework was developed which can be configured with different reference values and types of checks. One example is the prescribed dose check where PCT flags the user when the planned dose and the prescribed dose disagree. PCT includes a comprehensive checklist of automated and manual checks that are documented when performed by the user. A PDF report is created and automatically uploaded into the TMS. Prior to and during PCT development, errors caught during plan checks and also patient delays were tracked in order to prioritize which checks should be automated. The most common and significant errors were determined. Results: Nineteen of 33 checklist items were automated with data extracted with the PCT. These include checks for prescription, reference point and machine scheduling errors which are three of the top six causes of patient delays related to physics and dosimetry. Since the clinical roll-out, no delays have been due to errors that are automatically flagged by the PCT. Development continues to automate the remaining checks. Conclusion: With PCT, 57% of the physics plan checklist has been partially or fully automated. Treatment delays have declined since release of the PCT for clinical use. By tracking delays and errors, we have been able to measure the effectiveness of automating checks and are using this information to prioritize future development. This project was supported in part by P01CA059827.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
TU-C-201-00: Clinical Implementation of HDR Brachytherapy
Recent use of HDR has increased while planning has become more complex often necessitating 3D image-based planning. While many guidelines for the use of HDR exist, they have not kept pace with the increased complexity of 3D image-based planning. Furthermore, no comprehensive document exists to describe the wide variety of current HDR clinical indications. This educational session aims to summarize existing national and international guidelines for the safe implementation of an HDR program. A summary of HDR afterloaders available on the market and their existing applicators will be provided, with guidance on how to select the best fit for each institution’s needs. Finally, the use of checklists will be discussed as a means to implement a safe and efficient HDR program and as a method by which to verify the quality of an existing HDR program. This session will provide the perspective of expert HDR physicists as well as the perspective of a new HDR user. Learning Objectives: Summarize national and international safety and staffing guidelines for HDR implementation Discuss the process of afterloader and applicator selection for gynecologic, prostate, breast, interstitial, surface treatments Learn about the use of an audit checklist tool to measure of quality control of a new or existing HDR program Describe the evolving use of checklists within an HDR program.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
TU-C-201-01: Clinical Implementation of HDR: A New User’s Perspective
Recent use of HDR has increased while planning has become more complex often necessitating 3D image-based planning. While many guidelines for the use of HDR exist, they have not kept pace with the increased complexity of 3D image-based planning. Furthermore, no comprehensive document exists to describe the wide variety of current HDR clinical indications. This educational session aims to summarize existing national and international guidelines for the safe implementation of an HDR program. A summary of HDR afterloaders available on the market and their existing applicators will be provided, with guidance on how to select the best fit for each institution’s needs. Finally, the use of checklists will be discussed as a means to implement a safe and efficient HDR program and as a method by which to verify the quality of an existing HDR program. This session will provide the perspective of expert HDR physicists as well as the perspective of a new HDR user. Learning Objectives: Summarize national and international safety and staffing guidelines for HDR implementation Discuss the process of afterloader and applicator selection for gynecologic, prostate, breast, interstitial, surface treatments Learn about the use of an audit checklist tool to measure of quality control of a new or existing HDR program Describe the evolving use of checklists within an HDR program.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
TU-C-201-02: Clinical Implementation of HDR: Afterloader and Applicator Selection
Recent use of HDR has increased while planning has become more complex often necessitating 3D image-based planning. While many guidelines for the use of HDR exist, they have not kept pace with the increased complexity of 3D image-based planning. Furthermore, no comprehensive document exists to describe the wide variety of current HDR clinical indications. This educational session aims to summarize existing national and international guidelines for the safe implementation of an HDR program. A summary of HDR afterloaders available on the market and their existing applicators will be provided, with guidance on how to select the best fit for each institution’s needs. Finally, the use of checklists will be discussed as a means to implement a safe and efficient HDR program and as a method by which to verify the quality of an existing HDR program. This session will provide the perspective of expert HDR physicists as well as the perspective of a new HDR user. Learning Objectives: Summarize national and international safety and staffing guidelines for HDR implementation Discuss the process of afterloader and applicator selection for gynecologic, prostate, breast, interstitial, surface treatments Learn about the use of an audit checklist tool to measure of quality control of a new or existing HDR program Describe the evolving use of checklists within an HDR program.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy Challenge Home Program Certification of Production Builders
The purpose of this project was to evaluate integrated packages of advanced measures in individual test homes to assess their performance with respect to Building America Program goals, specifically compliance with the DOE Challenge Home Program. BSC consulted on the construction of five test houses by three Cold Climate production builders in three separate US cities. BSC worked with the builders to develop a design package tailored to the cost-related impacts for each builder. Therefore, the resulting design packages do vary from builder to builder. BSC provided support through this research project on the design, construction and performance testing of the five test homes. Overall, the builders have concluded that the energy related upgrades (either through the prescriptive or performance path) represent reasonable upgrades. The builders commented that while not every improvement in specification was cost effective (as in a reasonable payback period), many were improvements that could improve the marketability of the homes and serve to attract more energy efficiency discerning prospective homeowners. However, the builders did express reservations on the associated checklists and added certifications. An increase in administrative time was observed with all builders. The checklists and certifications also inherently increase cost due to: 1. Adding services to the scope of work for various trades, such as HERS Rater, HVAC contractor; 2. Increased material costs related to the checklists, especially the EPA Indoor airPLUS and EPA WaterSense(R) Efficient Hot Water Distribution requirement.
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy Challenge Home Program Certification of Production Builders
The purpose of this project was to evaluate integrated packages of advanced measures in individual test homes to assess their performance with respect to Building America program goals, specifically compliance with the DOE Challenge Home Program. BSC consulted on the construction of five test houses by three cold climate production builders in three U.S. cities and worked with the builders to develop a design package tailored to the cost-related impacts for each builder. Also, BSC provided support through performance testing of the five test homes. Overall, the builders have concluded that the energy related upgrades (either through the prescriptive or performance path) represent reasonable upgrades. The builders commented that while not every improvement in specification was cost effective (as in a reasonable payback period), many were improvements that could improve the marketability of the homes and serve to attract more energy efficiency discerning prospective homeowners. However, the builders did express reservations on the associated checklists and added certifications. An increase in administrative time was observed with all builders. The checklists and certifications also inherently increase cost due to: adding services to the scope of work for various trades, such as HERS Rater, HVAC contractor; and increased material costs related to the checklists, especially the EPA Indoor airPLUS and EPA WaterSense® Efficient Hot Water Distribution requirement.
32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
Evaluation of the U.S. Department of Energy Challenge Home Program Certification of Production Builders - Chicago, IL and Devens, MA
TO4 Task 3.1 - K Hovnanian Chicago, IL DOE Challenge Home Program Certified Home Constructed and Verified Specifications DOE Challenge Home Building envelope Ceiling R-49 blown fiberglass, Grade I Walls 2x4 framing @ 16 o.c. with R-13 fiberglass batts, Grade I and 1"" R-5 extruded polystyrene (XPS) insulating sheathing Frame Floors R-38 blown fiberglass, Grade I Basement Walls R-19 fiberglass batts draped full height, Grade I Basement Slab uninsulated Windows Above Grade: ENERGY STAR certified, U=0.29, SHGC=0.28 Basement: Non ENERGY STAR certified, U=0.29, SHGC=0.24 Infiltration 2 ACH 50 Mechanical systems Heat 95% AFUE sealed combustion natural gas furnace in conditioned space Goodman GMH950703BXAF Cooling 13 SEER split system Goodman GSX130301BC DHW AO Smith Vertex 100 0.96 EF natural gas tank water heater in 2nd floor utility closet Hot Water Distribution Redesigned trunk and branch Compliant with EPA WaterSense Efficient Distribution Requirements Ducts Located 100% in conditioned space via floor joists leak free to outside (5% or less) Ventilation Central Fan Integrated Supply (CFIS) ventilation with 6"" insulated outside air duct Fan Controller: Air Cycler FRV, with 6"" motorized damper 50 CFM outside air flow, 33% duty cycle (10 minutes on, 20 minutes off); ASHRAE 62.2-2010 compliance via an exhaust fan - Panasonic FV-08VQ5 WhisperCeiling Rerturn Pathways Active Return at Master Bedroom Transfer Grilles in Secondary Bedrooms Appliances, Lighting, MELs Lights 80% ENERGY STAR certified CFL Appliances ENERGY STAR certified refrigerator, dishwasher, and clothes washer; Natural gas range/oven and clothes dryer" STRUCTURE - Test House Lot 145 - 2013 DOE Challenge Test House Task 3.1 Bolingbrook, IL 60490 House is constructed and is DOE Challenge Verified by Don Nelson, a local rater. The purpose of this project was to evaluate integrated packages of advanced measures in individual test homes to assess their performance with respect to Building America Program goals, specifically compliance with the DOE Challenge Home Program. To that end, Building Science Corporation (BSC) consulted on the construction of five test houses by three cold climate production builders in three separate U.S. cities. (1) K. Hovnanian Homes, Chicago, Illinois (2) David Weekley Homes, Denver, Colorado (3) Transformations, Inc., Devens, Massachusetts. Overall, the builders have concluded that the energy related upgrades (either through the prescriptive or performance path) represent reasonable upgrades. The builders commented that while not every improvement in specification was cost effective (as in a reasonable payback period), many were improvements that could improve the marketability of the homes and serve to attract more energy efficiency discerning prospective homeowners. However, the builders did express reservations about the associated checklists and added certifications. An increase in administrative time was observed with all builders. The checklists and certifications also inherently increase cost due to: (1) Adding services to the scope of work for various trades, such as HERS Rater and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning contractor. (2) Increased material costs related to the checklists, especially the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Indoor airPLUS and WaterSense Efficient Hot Water Distribution requirement. Ceiling - 18" cellulose Walls - 12" open cell spray foam in double stud walls Foundation - R-10 under slab, 3 1/2" closed-cell spray foam at walls Windows - Harvey U=0.20, SHGC=0.22 Infiltration - 1.0 sq in per 100 sq ft Heating - Mini split heat pump, 10.6 HSPF, 23 SEER Cooling - Mini split heat pump, 10.6 HSPF, 23 SEER DHW - 0.97 EF instantaneous propane water heater Ventilation - bathroom exhaust fans as basic option, HRV upgrade option Adams Circle Devens MA 01434 Cavite Street Devens, MA 01434
Array↗
Ambulance Handbook
Johnson Space Center has devised a checklist for the skylab inflight medical support system that has been transferred for public emergencies. The checklist illustrates a procedure for diagnosis, treatment, and stabilization of a wide variety of emergencies. Handbook presents comprehensive ordered description of emergency medical equipment and its use in treating victims. Paramedics assigned to the Houston Fire Department are now using the checklist.
Source record↗
Are Current SEE Test Procedures Adequate for Modern Devices and Electronics Technologies?
Believe it or not, this has been a simplistic look at starting a checklist for SEE testing. Given a memory that has 68 operating modes, when a SEU occurs that changes the mode, just how do you determine what's going on? Laser and microbeam tests can help, but not easily for modern packaged devices. Expanding this approach to other more complex devices such as ADCs or processors as well as analog devices should be considered. The recommendation is to use the existing text standards as the starting point. Just make your own checklist for the device/technology/issues being considered. At HEART 2007, we presented some of the burgeoning challenges associated with single event effect(SEE) testing of modern commercial memories: a) Package, device complexity, test fixture, and data analysis issues were discussed; b) "Complete" SEE Characterization would take 15 years; c) Qualification test costs have a greater than 4 times increase over the last decade. In this talk, we continue to explore the roles of technology with an emphasis on the existing SEE Test Procedures and some of the concerns related to modern devices. The primary objective of the briefing is to provide some overarching guidance concerning the many considerations involved in the formulation of a SEE test plan provided in a " Checklist" format.we note that there is no such thing as a complete check list and that the best approach is to develop a flexible test plan that takes into account the device type and functions, the device technology, circuit and package design, and, of course, test facility and beam characteristics.
LaBel, Kenneth A.↗
Common Cause Failure Modeling in Space Launch Vehicles
Common Cause Failures (CCFs) are a known and documented phenomenon that defeats system redundancy. CCFs are a set of dependent type of failures that can be caused for example by system environments, manufacturing, transportation, storage, maintenance, and assembly. Since there are many factors that contribute to CCFs, they can be reduced, but are difficult to eliminate entirely. Furthermore, failure databases sometimes fail to differentiate between independent and dependent CCF. Because common cause failure data is limited in the aerospace industry, the Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA) Team at Bastion Technology Inc. is estimating CCF risk using generic data collected by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Consequently, common cause risk estimates based on this database, when applied to other industry applications, are highly uncertain. Therefore, it is important to account for a range of values for independent and CCF risk and to communicate the uncertainty to decision makers. There is an existing methodology for reducing CCF risk during design, which includes a checklist of 40+ factors grouped into eight categories. Using this checklist, an approach to produce a beta factor estimate is being investigated that quantitatively relates these factors. In this example, the checklist will be tailored to space launch vehicles, a quantitative approach will be described, and an example of the method will be presented.
Hark, Frank↗
Space Research Project Management Can Benefit from Engineering Technology Selection Methods
Many engineering methods have been developed to help management select technology for a system design or further research. The simplest way to compare technologies is to use a checklist containing all the more or less important selection criteria, so that nothing is overlooked. The criteria usually include cost, safety, reliability and maintainability, and potential problems such as noise generation and microgravity sensitivity. The next step typically is to weight and score all the criteria. The process of weighting and scoring is helpful in bringing out different priorities and reaching a shared point of view. Group technology selection methods are designed to highlight initial disagreements and produce a shared consensus. Often a frank discussion led by management rather than decision analysts can be more effective. The final selection depends on management and engineering judgment and may include programmatic and organizational factors that are beyond the engineering checklist. The objective of engineering technology selection methods is to provide engineering information to assist management in making sound decisions. Project management and technology selection are assumed to use rational engineering analytic methods, but they often do not. The reason is that human insight, intuition, and “gut feel,” rather than logic, more frequently determine our decisions. Project selection and management are strongly influenced by nonrational psychological influences, which can produce unjustified confidence and determination. Nevertheless, there is a strong need for space projects to do rational project analysis and selection. Demonstrating a rational spirit is necessary for a scientific and technical organization. Professional ethics at its best requires an open, honest, and fair process, without damaging politics. Rational analysis can help improve good projects and avoid selecting bad ones. A sanity check using rational analysis guided by a checklist can help avoid egregious and damaging errors.
Jones, Harry W.↗