Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Control of Distributed Energy Resources”

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 901 records · Page 50
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

TaZr_BCC_SolidSolution_128atoms_VASP6

We performed density functional theory (DFT) calculations for body-centered-cubic (BCC) structures with 128 lattices sites of solid solution binary alloys tantalum-zirconium (Ta-Zr). The electronic structures of alloys have been calculated using Vienna Ab initio Simulation Package (VASP). Within this package the DFT approach is used to reduce many-body Schrodinger equation to set of single particle Kohn-Sham (KS) equations. The generalized electronic exchange-correlation functional is described by generalized gradient approximation with the Perdew-Burke-Ernzerhof parametrization. The electron-ion interactions is described by pseudopotentials developed within the plane-wave basis projector augmented-wave (PAW) approach \cite{PAW}. These pseudopotentials are available at the VASP portal (http://cms.mpi.univie.ac.at/vasp/). Our calculations have been run with the pseudopotentials treating s and p semi-core states as valence in case for the elements Ta and Zr. The electronic densities and potentials are expanded over plane-waves with energy cutoff of 350 eV. 2x2x2 k-mesh and normal precision were used. The alloys were modeled by supercell containing 128 randomly distributed atoms. At initial step the atoms occupy perfect bcc lattice cites. This initial structure was optimized until energy changes less than 1e-6 eV, while forces acting on atoms don't exceed 1e-2 eV/angstrom. The electron-ion interaction is described by PAW pseudopotentials. The calculations have been collected by sampling chemical compositions across the entire compositional range. The chemical compositions have been sampled by progressively changing the number of atoms per constituent by 4. For each chemical composition of binaries and ternaries, the first-principle calculations have been run for 100 randomized arrangements of the constituents on the BCC lattice sites. We collected data for a total of 3,100 randomized atomic structures over 31 chemical compositions. The calculations have been collected on NERSC-Perlmutter and OLCF-Summit using the VASP 6.3.2. The VASP calculations for every atomic structure have been performed in 2 main steps: 1. Starting from an ideal body-centered-cubic (BCC) structure, geometry optimization with low precision has been executed to perform a preliminary optimization of the atomic structure. The output for this calculations is available in the files 0.CONTCAR, 0.OUTCAR, rlx1.out. 2. Using the atomic structure resulting from the preliminary geometry optimization, a second geometry optimization has been performed using normal precision. The output for this calculations is available in the files CONTCAR, OUTCAR, rlx2.out, vaspout.h5, and vasprun.xml. Cases 1-10 have been run without generating the file 'vaspout.h5'. Every chemical composition sampled across the composition range in the dataset has its own directory. The convention used to name the directories for binary alloys is AXBY, where A and B refer to the constituents, whereas X and Y are positive integers that represent the number of atoms for each constituent and their values still sum up to 128. Each atomic structure associated with a specific chemical composition has its own sub-directory within the directory of the corresponding chemical composition. The sub-directories for each atomic structure for each chemical composition are named 'case-*', where * is a positive integer that spans all the values from 1 through 100, extremes included. The files contained in each sub-directory 'case-*' for each atomic structure are as follows: FILES contained in each subdirectory with name "case-N" where N ranges between 11 and 80, extremes included: 1. INCAR: input file that contains various parameters and settings for controlling the behavior of the electronic structure calculations 2. KPOINTS: input file that specifies the Bloch vectors (k points) used to sample the Brillouin zone 3. 0.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system 4. 0.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the first geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 5. 0.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the first geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 6. rlx1.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the first geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 7. POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system after the first geometry optimization has been run at low precision. This represents the input for the second geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 8. CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the second geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 9. OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the second geometry optimization has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 10. rlx2.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the second geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 11. vaspout.h5: hierarchical HDF5 file containing the inputs and outputs of a VASP calculation. To analyze the data in this file we recommend using py4vasp. This file is only produced if the VASP version used is compiled with HDF5 support 12. vasprun.xml: contains similar information to OUTCAR, but in an xml format. 13. CHGCAR: contains the charge density data of a system. This data is crucial for analyzing electronic structures, calculating electrostatic potential, and studying the distribution of charge in a crystal or molecular system FILES contained in each subdirectory with name "case-N" where N ranges between 1 and 10 and between 81 and 100, extremes included: 1. INCAR: input file that contains various parameters and settings for controlling the behavior of the electronic structure calculations 2. KPOINTS: input file that specifies the Bloch vectors (k points) used to sample the Brillouin zone 3. {ID}.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system at the beginning of ID execution of geometry optimization with PREC=LOW 4. {ID}.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters at the end of ID execution of geometry optimization with PREC=LOW in the INCAR file 5. {ID}.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the ID execution of geometry optimization that has been run with the precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 6. rlx1.{ID}.out: file with diagnostic information about the execution of the ID execution of the geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Low in the INCAR file 7. N{ID}.POSCAR: input file that defines the atomic structure of a system after the geometry optimization run at low precision. This represents the input for the ID execution of the second geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 8. N{ID}.CONTCAR: output file that provides the atomic positions and cell parameters after the ID execution of the geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 9. N{ID}.OUTCAR: output file that contains detailed information about the progress of a calculation after the ID execution of the geometry optimization run with the precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 10. rlx2.{ID}.out: file with diagnostic information about the ID execution of geometry optimization with precision variable set to PREC=Normal in the INCAR file 11. vaspout.h5: hierarchical HDF5 file containing the inputs and outputs of a VASP calculation. To analyze the data in this file we recommend using py4vasp. This file is only produced if the VASP version used is compiled with HDF5 support 12. vasprun.xml: contains similar information to OUTCAR, but in an xml format. 13. CHGCAR: contains the charge density data of a system. This data is crucial for analyzing electronic structures, calculating electrostatic potential, and studying the distribution of charge in a crystal or molecular system This research is sponsored by the Artificial Intelligence Initiative as part of the Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, for the US Department of Energy under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725. This work used resources of the Oak Ridge Leadership Computing Facility, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC05-00OR22725, under Directorate Discretionary awards MAT025 (Materials Science) and LRN026 (Machine Learning), and INCITE award MAT201. This work also used resources of the National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center, which is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231, under award ERCAP0025216. REFERENCES (1) Kresse, G. & Hafner, J. Ab initio molecular dynamics for liquid metals. Phys. review B 47, 558 (1993). (2) Kresse, G. & Hafner, J. Ab initio molecular-dynamics simulation of the liquid-metal–amorphous-semiconductor transition in germanium. Phys. Rev. B 49, 14251 (1994) (3) Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set. Comput. materials science 6, 15–50 (1996) (4) Kresse, G. & Furthmüller, J. Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a plane-wave basis set. Phys. review B 54, 11169 (1996) (5) Kresse, G. & Joubert, D. From ultrasoft pseudopotentials to the projector augmented-wave method. Phys. review b 59, 1758 (1999)

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2025

Elucidating Processes Controlling Arctic Atmospheric Aerosol Sources, Aging, and Mixing States (Final Report)

Atmospheric aerosols play critical roles in the Earth’s energy budget, directly by scattering or absorbing solar and terrestrial radiation and indirectly by serving as seeds (nuclei) for cloud droplet and ice crystal formation and by depositing on snow and ice surface, thereby changing the surface albedo. These effects are dependent on aerosol particle size and chemical composition and impact the hydrological cycle as well. This project provided single-particle size and chemical composition measurements across the entire annual cycle in the high Arctic and in the Alaskan Arctic during fall – winter, addressing the most significant gaps in Arctic aerosol observational data. These needs were based on recent rapid sea ice loss across the entire Arctic, as well as the major annual delays in sea ice freeze-up during fall in the Chukchi Sea and increased wintertime sea ice fracturing in the Beaufort Sea, both off the North Slope of Alaska. Two DOE Atmospheric Radiation Measurement (ARM) field campaigns were conducted for atmospheric aerosol sampling. The Aerosols during the Polar Utqiagvik Night (APUN – ‘snow on ground’ in Iñupiaq) ARM field campaign at Utqagivik, Alaska was conducted from Oct. 28 – Dec. 22, 2018. Aerosol sizing instrumentation and a single-particle mass spectrometer were successfully deployed for size-resolved number concentration measurements and measurements of individual particle size and chemical composition, respectively. These results show the influence of locally-produced sea spray aerosol, with high cloud-forming potential, due to delayed sea ice freeze-up in the fall. During the 2019‐2020 international Multidisciplinary drifting Observatory for the Study of Arctic Climate (MOSAiC) expedition, daily atmospheric aerosol particles were collected aboard the German icebreaker Polarstern in the Central Arctic from Nov. 2019 – Oct. 2020. Sea salt aerosol and marine organics were observed year-round during MOSAiC with varying morphologies and sources. These findings are important because most Arctic models do not include a sea spray aerosol source, despite this source increasing with declining sea ice extent. In addition to collecting new samples and data, this project also conducted further analysis of previously collected single-particle chemical composition measurements within the North Slope of Alaska oil fields and at Utqiaġvik, AK, during Aug. – Sep. 2015 and 2016 field campaigns. This work resulted in the discovery of chemical reactions of oil field combustion emissions occurring within fog droplets across the North Slope of Alaska and forming secondary aerosol, showing the impact of Arctic oil field emissions beyond black carbon aerosol and greenhouse gases. In addition, the distribution of chemical species across the aerosol population within the oil fields was quantified, using these data and a previously development framework. We also presented the first ambient evidence of the collision of two atmospheric particles resulting in formation of an organic-coated ammonium sulfate particle of marine origin, which has implications for cloud formation with declining sea ice extent. Overall, this project has elucidated connections between seawater biogeochemistry, resource extraction activities, atmospheric composition, clouds, and the energy budget of the Arctic region. The results of this project are expected to improve weather and sea ice forecasting for security and development in the Arctic and beyond.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Leveraging National Laboratory Assets to Address Stability Challenges due to Declining Grid Inertia Using Geographically Distributed Electrical–Thermal Co-Emulation

Due to increased penetration of low-inertia resources into the electric grid, challenges are increasing for maintaining wide-area system stability. Grid stability assessment requires a faithful representation of the multiple-physics interaction at the system level, and timescales of interaction varying in orders of magnitude, from microseconds to seconds to several minutes. Along with the simulation-based techniques, hardware-in-the-loop (HIL), controller HIL, and power HIL techniques have been developed to better understand the emergent behavior of the system with emerging technologies. US National Laboratories have played a vital role in research and development to understand the behavior of individual technologies and devices integrated to the electric grid. Each national laboratory forwards a technological and strategic initiative tied core and enabling capabilities. Due to strategic, efficiency, and economic reasons, not all the labs have assets to conduct research on all technologies concomitantly, so it becomes crucial to integrate the labs across geographies to understand the interplay of different technologies together at the system level. This approach avoids duplication of the assets at different lab facilities and helps understand the integrated system behavior of various technologies representative of actual grid conditions by connecting multiple national labs. This article talks about techniques of connecting three national laboratories to enable co-emulation of electrical–mechanical–thermal characteristics of devices and systems. Such an approach can be used to understand the dynamic and transient interaction of multi-physics in a system level, at-scale emulation using real-time simulation tools and techniques.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface, is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
DOE OSTI2020

Research Roadmap on Grid-Forming Inverters

This research roadmap is intended to fill the knowledge gap by providing a system view of grid-forming inverter-based resource controls and their impact on grid stability, which we believe is central to meeting some of the challenges to operating the future North American electric power system. This includes the roles and requirements of grid-forming inverter-based resources—including solar photovoltaics, wind generators, and energy storage. For this roadmap, we focus on a specific family of grid-forming inverter control approaches that do not rely on an external voltage source (i.e., no phase-locked loop) and that can share load without explicit communications. Although the roadmap is focused narrowly on system challenges for grid-forming controls and power system stability, including interactions with protection, we hope it serves as a foundational element for future system-of-systems roadmapping needed in a broader grid modernization effort with increasing deployments of inverter-based resources. The roadmap first introduces formal definitions for the grid stability topics and then describes the differences between grid-forming and traditional grid-following control approaches for inverter-based resources. The core of the roadmap consists of a review of current research and an outline of research needs related to five grid-forming inverter topics: frequency control, voltage control, system protection, fault ride-through and voltage recovery, and modeling and simulation. The review both delineates contemporary advances and highlights open research questions that must be addressed to enable the widespread adoption of inverter-based resources across the grid. Feedback from industry on these research questions is incorporated, including discussions during the Workshop on Grid-forming Inverters for Low-inertia Power Systems. The workshop included industry presentations and discussion of ongoing research, technology gaps, and piloting needs. This roadmap concludes by offering a multiyear perspective on the gradual field validation of grid-forming inverters. This perspective recognizes that the scale and scope of the types of power systems that inverters will be called on to provide grid-forming services will and should begin modestly. Specifically, this roadmap recognizes that inverter controls today are predominantly grid-following and that future power systems will involve a mix of inverter-based resources with both grid-following and grid-forming control capabilities. Growth over time will depend on how well grid-forming inverters perform and what advantages they bring as penetration levels (instantaneous and average) of inverter-based resources increases. This recognition, in turn, establishes a natural sequence of priorities for the research questions that must be addressed. Following this multiyear perspective, the roadmap offers short descriptions of two specific near-term research priorities: the review of regulatory and technical standards and the development of advanced modeling techniques. These priorities are foundational. We recommend immediate pursuit of them in parallel with and in direct support of the research outlined by our multiyear perspective.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

NASA's Habitation Development Status: Current Concepts and ISRU Opportunities

Introduction: The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is embarking on a bold journey to return humankind to the Moon and onward to Mars with innovative commercial, international, and academic partnerships [1]. Under the Artemis series of missions, NASA seeks to establish sustained human exploration of deep space through an objectives-based approach [2]. This approach drives the identification of needed system functionality and the current and future capabilities which will eventually allow humanity to sustainably live beyond Earth. Providing evolvable and scalable habitation is a cornerstone function that calls for the collection and integration of current, developmental, and future technologies that can meet near-term exploration needs while growing into long-term sustained presence. NASA is advancing in-space habitation through its Next Space Technologies for Exploration Partnerships (NextSTEP) model while designing lunar, Mars transit, and Mars surface habitat government reference concepts for Artemis missions. These efforts have unveiled possible near-term opportunities for the in-space resource utilization community if human habitation is considered a future customer of space resources. NextSTEP Habitation Development: NASA is closely working with commercial partners under its NextSTEP Appendix A model to advance habitation systems in the arena of inflatable and composite habitation structures. Such efforts promise efficiencies in volumetric packaging and overall spacecraft mass respectively. Recent testing by commercial partners have helped to quantify possible failure mechanisms for inflatable structures while advancing their technology towards eventual flight certification. The advancement of such Class II habitation structures, in which the habitat is only fully deployed once in-space or on a planetary surface [3], is critical to providing increased habitable volume for long-duration missions with no additional mass penalties. The progression of such technology is infused into NASA’s government reference concepts for notional deep space habitation concepts. Current Government Reference Concepts: To best inform the formulation of future collaborative solicitations, NASA employs the practice of internally developing reference concepts for future exploration elements. These concepts aid in identifying the functions and capabilities needed to complete NASA missions as well as feasible solutions within the timeframe needed. Government reference concepts for a lunar Surface Habitat, Mars Transit Habitat, and Mars Sur-face Habitat are continuously being developed and updated to better guide the Agency’s overall exploration architecture. Lunar Surface Habitat. As NASA returns to the Moon, it is evaluating possible lunar surface habitation concepts. The Surface Habitat (SH) reference concept entails a hybrid metallic-inflatable structure capable of initially housing two crew for surface stays of up to 30 days in duration [4]. While initial missions may span ~7 days in duration, consideration is being given to expanding SH’s capability to support a crew of four for up to 60 days over its 15-year design life [5]. Functionally, the SH serves as a ‘hub’ for all Artemis crewed surface operations, providing internal volume for maintenance, medical, logistics, science utilization, and extravehicular activity (EVA) support in addition to core habitation functionality such as environmental control and life support (ECLS) and power generation and distribution among many others. Additionally, NASA has entered a study agreement with the Italian Space Agency (Agenzia Spaziale Italiana – ASI) to investigation a possible Multi-Purpose Habitat (MPH) as an additional or augmenting habit-able element for the lunar surface [6]. Mars Transit Habitat. NASA’s current architectural concept for initial human missions to Mars entails the utilization of a transit habitat (TH) to transport a four-person crew to and from Mars orbit, departing from and returning to a lunar near-rectilinear halo orbit (NRHO), over the course of a ~1,200-day mission [5]. While holding a similar 15-year design lifetime, TH will also support a series of analog mission activities in NRHO to gradually test the systems and interaction with lunar surface elements, some of which may be adapted for Mars surface exploration. Holding similar functional capabilities as SH, TH is sized to support much longer durations in space and greater logistical independence. Mars Surface Habitat. NASA is still exploring the concept of operations for initial crewed missions to Mars. As such, the Mars Surface Habitat (MSH) concept is still in its infancy as options for mobile, pressurized habitation and stationary habitats are being explored. It is expected MSH will leverage heavily from the lunar SH and possible lunar pressurized rover, however the very different Martian environment will likely necessitate modifications. ISRU Opportunities: Despite the advancements under NASA’s NextSTEP habitation work and continually optimized reference concepts, NASA is facing near-term mass and power challenges that may create opportunities to the ISRU community by providing yet another possible customer for space resources. While NASA desires to use regenerative ECLS systems (ECLSS) for all habitation concepts, their operation comes with initial mass penalties and maintenance overheads when compared to simpler open-loop architectures. Because of this, NASA is currently pro-posing an open-loop, consumables-based architecture for its surface habitats to achieve initial launch and delivery lander mass targets while scarring for the in-corporation of regenerative ECLSS to meet longer mission durations and sustained presence. With such an architecture, oxygen and potable water are needed consumables, which initial ISRU systems may be able to provide in a pilot capacity. Although the TH is expecting to utilize regenerative ECLSS, advancements in lunar surface-based ISRU and possible re-supply of spacecraft in lunar or Mars orbit could significantly reduce the logistical need for ECLSS related spares on TH and possibly allow a similar open-loop and consumables-based architecture. Table 1 Notional ECLSS consumables per mission use for SH and TH [5]. SH (28-day) Open Loop: Water (kg) 288 | Oxygen (kg) 30 TH (1110-day) Closed-Loop: Water (kg) 182 | Oxygen (kg) 123 In addition to ECLSS mass concerns, the SH is facing challenges with energy storage to support operations over periods of darkness exceeding 100 hours. Both battery and fuel cell-based power architectures are being traded, opening options for external power generation and energy storage. One possibility is ISRU-produced H2 and O2 feeding external primary fuel cell systems which could supplement habitation power generation while reducing initial mass and volume until much more powerful fission power systems might be deployed. Conclusion: Significant advancements are being made in evolvable habitation concepts that span from near-term technologies, such as inflatable structures under NextSTEP, to potentially revolutionary capabilities like the lunar surface construction as funded through the Moon-to-Mars Planetary Autonomous Construction Technologies (MMPACT) project [7]. As NASA investigates both heritage capabilities and rap-idly advancing, disruptive technologies, there are likely many near-term opportunities for initial ISRU capabilities to significantly aid human habitation and increase self-sufficiency beyond Earth.

habitation↗
DOE OSTI2024

GeoThermalCloud: Cloud Fusion of Big Data and Multi-Physics Models using Machine Learning for Discovery, Exploration, and Development of Hidden Geothermal Resources

The primary goals of this project are exploring hidden geothermal resources in the U.S.A. and designing profitable enhanced geothermal systems (EGS). Many processes and parameters control geothermal exploration and energy production from geothermal fields. Diverse datasets (e.g., geology, geochemistry, geophysics, satellite, airborne geophysics) are available to help characterize subsurface geothermal conditions. Sparse and multi-scale characteristics of these datasets prohibit properly leveraging these datasets for geothermal exploration and profitable EGS design. Recent advancements in machine learning (ML) promise to resolve these issues. The tremendous challenges and risks of geothermal exploration and production bring the demand for novel ML methods and tools that can (1) analyze large field datasets, (2) assimilate model simulations (large inputs and outputs), (3) process sparse datasets, (4) perform transfer learning (between sites with different exploratory levels), (5) extract hidden geothermal signatures in the field and simulation data, (6) label geothermal resources and processes, (7) identify high-value data acquisition targets, and (8) guide geothermal exploration and production by selecting optimal exploration, production, and drilling strategies. To address these necessities, ML-based geothermal resources exploration and enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) design tools have been developed. The exploration tool is called GeoThermalCloud and EGS design tool is called GeoDT-ML. GeoThermalCloud (https://github.com/SmartTensors/GeoThermalCloud.jl) utilizes a LANL unsupervised ML platform called SmartTensors (https://tensors.lanl.gov/) to automate data analyses and interpretations by extracting hidden signatures to identify geothermal prospects. Also, it enables the identification of critical measurements needed to identify geothermal resource signatures. Alternatively, GeoDT-ML (https://github.com/SmartTensors/GeoThermalCloud.jl/tree/master/EGS) is an ML-based alternative to GeoDT (https://github.com/GeoDesignTool/GeoDT.git), a fast, simplified multi-physics solver to evaluate EGS project designs in uncertain geologic systems. GeoDT-ML leverages recent advances in deep learning and high-performance computing. It is a faster and simpler version of GeoDT. To make this project a success, we used capabilities of LANL, PNNL, Google, Stanford, and Julia Computing. We analyzed eight datasets of the U.S.A. using GeothermalCloud and demonstrated potential highly prospective geothermal resources and identified key factors defining highly prospective sites. The first data set includes 44 locations in southwest New Mexico and 18 geological, hydrogeological, geophysical, geothermal, geochemical attributes. We defined low- and medium-temperature hydrothermal systems and discovered a new highly prospective site. The second data set analyzed 18 shallow water chemistry attributes at 14,342 locations in the Great Basin. It demarcated modestly, moderately, and highly prospective sites including key attributes for each type of prospectivity. The third data set analyzed Utah FORGE data including satellite (InSAR), geophysical (gravity, seismic), geochemical, and geothermal attributes. Here, we performed prospectivity analysis to identify future drilling locations using geological, geochemical, and geophysical attributes. Maps of temperature at depth and heat flow are constructed based on the available data. Prospectivity maps were generated, and drilling locations were proposed for future geothermal field exploration. The fourth data set analyzed 21 attributes at 120 locations in Tularosa Basin, New Mexico; data comes from past play fairway analyses in this region. ML analyses identified geothermal signatures associated with modestly, moderately, and highly hydrothermal systems. We also defined dominant attributes and spatial distribution of the geothermal signatures. The fifth, sixth, seventh, and eighth datasets include Tohatchi Springs, New Mexico, Hawaii, Brady site, Nevada, and EGS Collab, respectively. Moreover, we coupled GeothermalCloud and magnetotellurics data to pinpoint drilling locations for developing geothermal projects in the Tularosa Basin, New Mexico. GeothermalCloud found potential prospective locations for geothermal resources near White Sands Missile Range and McGregor Range at Fort Bliss. Magnetotellurics data determined the potential depth (~1800m) of geothermal prospects at McGregor Range based on apparent resistivity structures/layers in the subsurface. The McGregor Range consists of three resistivity layers and two resistivity structures. Magnetotellurics data also helps identify that the western portion of the McGregor Range has thick and low-resistivity earth materials. The low resistivity to the west is most likely for a fault system. Assuming temperature is consistent with a geothermal reservoir, the west-central part of the McGregor Range has the highest geothermal potential because of the increase in porosity and associated permeability attributed to the interpreted fault system. Also, we devised a coupling strategy between a process model and GeothermalCloud to characterize hydrogeological conditions and geothermal conditions, respectively. The process model characterizes hydrogeological and geothermal conditions on highly prospective geothermal sites provided by GeothermalCloud. We developed a physics-informed neural network (PINN) version of the Burns equation that can be easily coupled with GeothermalCloud. Furthermore, we performed an optimal design decision maximizing the economic value of an EGS power plant. This study optimized the range of well spacing between injection and production wells maximizing net present value in dollars (NPV). For this task, we used the GeoDT to simulate the Utah FORGE EGS development cycle from the initial well design to the end of production. Next, we accomplished another crucial task, which is predicting permeability of geothermal reservoirs. Predicting permeability of geothermal reservoirs is a non-trivial task because of huge computational runtime of simulation and lack of measurements. To avoid these limitations, we used easy-to-measure chemical concentrations in the subsurface as measurement data and convolutional neural network based ML model of a high-fidelity model. Next, we predicted permeability using Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation. We found that Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation predicts permeability with a high certainty if the prediction zone in the simulation area has chemical concentration data. Finally, we analyzed the DOE funded INGENIOUS and GeoDAWN projects data. For discovering hidden geothermal systems in the Great Basin, the INGENIOUS project accumulated old data, collected new data, and released them in 2022. The dataset includes a total of 24 geological, geophysical, and geochemical attributes. Data resolution and scale significantly vary prohibiting an appropriate usage. To avoid such limitations, we brought all data in the same resolution and scale by applying the inverse distance weighting interpolation technique for predicting data in unsampled locations. Subsequently, we analyzed LiDAR data of the GeoDAWN project. We received data in tiles format. The DOE’s overarching goal is to use ML on LiDAR data for finding favorable geological structures (e.g., step up faults in Brady, Nevada). To serve the purpose, we need to label favorable geologic structures that correspond to LiDAR data. We wrote an algorithm to label the LiDAR data with the favorable geologic structures.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Impedance Scan of Inverter-Based Resources and Diesel Generator for Stability Analysis

Impedance-based methods are widely used for power system stability analysis with inverter-based resources (IBRs), e.g., assessing dynamic interactions between the power grid and an IBR, control interactions between multiple IBRs, and the sub-synchronous oscillation and damping phenomenon. Since it is difficult to get a numerical model 100% matching with the hardware IBR, using the hardware inverter directly to obtain its output impedance has become a prominent approach nowadays. Therefore, this article presents the impedance scan using hardware IBRs, and also a hardware diesel generator as it still stays with the grid before the grid completely goes to renewable. The devices under test (DuTs) for the impedance scan includes two 3-..phi.., 480 V, 60 Hz commercial grid-forming IBRs (one of 250 kVA and another of 125 kVA rating) in series with ..delta..-Y transformers, one 3-..phi.., 480 V, 60 Hz commercial grid-following IBR (of 125 kVA rating), and a 3-..phi.., 480 V, 60 Hz commercial diesel generator (of 187.5 kVA rating). Using voltage signals perturbed with sub-, inter-, and higher harmonic components, and measuring the current response, the positive-sequence impedances are computed via an offline-based post-analysis. Moreover, best-fit transfer functions are estimated that closely resemble the measured data points of the positive-sequence impedances. Based on the observations from various outcomes of the hardware experiments, this article also provides some fundamental insights on the equivalent positive-sequence impedance of a combination of multiple hardware components by comparing the estimated and the empirically computed impedances. A comparative insight on the damping capability of the DuTs using the positive-sequence impedances of the hardware is also discussed.

current measurement↗
DOE OSTI2020

Soft-Switching Solid-State Transformer With Reduced Conduction Loss

Solid-state transformers (SSTs) are a promising solution photovoltaic (PV), wind, traction, data center, battery energy storage system (BESS), and fast charging electric vehicle (EV) applications. The traditional SSTs are typically three-stage, i.e., hard-switching cascaded multilevel rectifiers and inverters with dual active bridge (DAB) converters, which leads to bulky passives, low efficiency, and high electromagnetic interference (EMI). This article proposes a new soft-switching solid-state transformer (S4T). The S4T has full-range zero-voltage switching (ZVS), electrolytic capacitor-less dc link, and controlled dv/dt, which reduces EMI. The S4T comprises two reverse-blocking current-source inverter (CSI) bridges, auxiliary branches for ZVS, and transformer magnetizing inductor as a reduced dc link with 60% ripple. Compared with the prior S4T, an effective change on the leakage inductance diode is made to reduce the number of the devices on the main power path by 20% for significant conduction loss saving and retain the same functionality of damping the resonance between the leakage and resonant capacitors and recycling trapped leakage energy. The conduction loss saving is crucial, being the dominating loss mechanism in SSTs. Importantly, the proposed single-stage SST not only holds the potential for high power density and high efficiency but also has full functionality, e.g., multiport dc loads integration, voltage regulation, and reactive power compensation, unlike the traditional single-stage matrix SST. The S4T can achieve single-stage isolated bidirectional dc–dc, ac–dc, dc–ac, or ac–ac conversion. It can also be configured input-series output-parallel (ISOP) in a modular way for medium-voltage (MV) grids. Hence, the S4T is a promising candidate for the SST. The full functionality, e.g., voltage buck–boost, multiport, etc., and the universality of the S4T for the dc–dc, dc–ac, and ac–ac conversion are verified through the simulations and experiments of two-port and three-port MV prototypes based on 3.3 kV SiC MOSFETs in dc–dc, dc–ac, and ac–ac modes at 2 kV.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Restoration Hydro: A Watershed Approach to Standard Modular New Hydropower

The objectives of FOA DE- FOA-0001836- “Standard Modular Hydropower” included designing a standardized, modular, and environmentally compatible hydropower schematic for implementation in greenfield sites that generate up to 10 MW of capacity. Utilizing funds competitively awarded under DOE’s Water Power Technologies Office, the Natel Energy team developed a concept for modular new stream reach (NSR) hydropower that incorporates multi species upstream and downstream fish passage, improved river channel connectivity, and recreational modules. The in-stream design of the collective modules minimized site specific design and maximized the opportunities for modularity. Financial data was also presented using actual costs from regional suppliers, with figures provided in 2022 dollars. While the project team did not address potential permitting process improvements, the site selection criteria did consider established barriers to hydropower development such as tribal and preserved lands, interconnection proximity, and endangered species to exclude or deprioritize. The project’s design schematic met the objectives of the FOA, and presented a unique solution that targets alluvial pockets as natural features for sustainable development. Natel’s concept also incorporated the company's fish-safe Restoration Hydro Turbine for safe downstream passage, while featuring a rock arch that integrates fish passage, water, recreation, and grade control modules (including sediment). Alignment with the Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) “Innovative Design Concepts for Standard Modular Hydropower and Pumped-Storage Hydropower” Program: According to the Hydropower Vision (DOE, 2016), approximately 16 GW of hydropower growth is possible with the development of technology solutions that balance efficiency, economics, and environmental sustainability. The desired outcome of the SMH program is transformational innovation specifically in the site identification, conceptual, and detailed design phases of technology development lifecycles (DOE, 2018). In developing the SMH design schematic, the team aimed to address the opportunities outlined in the Vision through an inverted design philosophy; rather than singularly prioritizing efficiency and power production, the team focused on integrating hydropower with restoration of degraded streams to optimal ecosystem function and provision of exceptional recreation value as design criteria. To achieve this, Restoration Hydro incorporates the principles of nature-based engineering (WWAP, 2018) and biomimicry (Biomimicry NL.) to strategically deploy complementary combinations of permanent, semi-permanent, and ephemeral low-head structures - such as natural and engineered log jams - that harness geomorphological and hydrological processes at the landscape-scale. Primary applications of Restoration Hydro include: 1) restoration of degraded watersheds’ natural ecological function and enhancement of hydrological connectivity; and 2) creation of associated co-benefits to hydro production, including increased groundwater recharge, improved sediment transport and management, improved water security and water quality. Restoration Hydro projects build upon proven watershed restoration engineering techniques by integrating hydropower turbines into low-head structures using innovative and evolving civil works concepts that facilitate fish and sediment passage, and in some cases create additional revenue-generating recreational opportunities. Powering low-head structures creates a directly monetizable layer of economic value in the form of flexible, reliable, renewable energy on top of the already high-value water, environmental and recreational benefits of watershed and river restoration. The approach aims to create a virtuous, self-reinforcing cycle whereby Restoration Hydro projects support the scaling of ecosystem restoration activities, creating a water-energy-carbon multiplier effect that, through the principles of adaptive change management: 1) improves the resilience of landscapes and downstream population centers for changing hydrological cycles; 2) creates a reliable energy resource that facilitates the integration of intermittent renewable power sources into grids; and 3) supports climate change mitigation through grid decarbonization and enhanced ecosystem carbon capture and retention.

13 HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

Oil and Natural Gas Development near and beneath Uranium Tailings Cells and Other Remediated Sites - 20358

DOE LM is responsible for maintaining remedies at more than 50 remediated sites that require active long-term surveillance and maintenance (LTS and M). Institutional controls (ICs) were established to limit human and environmental exposures to residual contamination by controlling land use, restricting access to potential hazards, and making the public aware of potential dangers from the residual contamination. ICs for each site were developed based on current and foreseeable conditions; however, these controls should evolve to mitigate potential human health and other environmental risks from unanticipated changes in activities or site conditions. Activities conducted beyond the DOE long-term care boundaries by non-DOE parties may impact the effectiveness of ICs or even the long-term stability of disposal cells and groundwater remedies. Several sites that LM manages or that will transfer to LM for LTS and M are in active oil and gas production basins. The sites are associated with uranium ore milling or nuclear test sites and have been remediated or are in the process of remediation and have no ongoing DOE mission. Particularly since 2005, hydraulic fracturing ('fracking') combined with directional drilling has dramatically increased oil and natural gas (oil/gas) production in the United States, now making it the number one hydrocarbon-producing country. Fracking has allowed production from shale and other rocks of low natural permeability that were historically not considered viable oil/gas resources. Also, because wellbores can now be drilled as many as 5 kilometers or more horizontally, hydrocarbons can be recovered from zones without having access to the surface above them. Drilling activity near Rulison, Colorado, the location of an underground nuclear detonation managed by LM, has raised public concerns that remnant radioactivity in the detonation zone could migrate to producing wells and enter the natural gas distribution system. At sites like the Falls City, Texas, Disposal site, transitioned to LM with a split estate, increased production in the region has resulted in wellbores beneath the long-term care boundary of the site. While the DOE license for Falls City was approved by the NRC in 1997 without the acquisition of the subsurface rights, NRC has raised concerns on whether this activity impacts the integrity of the cell and/or groundwater remedies. In Wyoming, LM is anticipating receiving the license for the Bear Creek site and manages the Spook site, both locations of uranium mill tailings disposal cells. These Wyoming sites are in an active region of major oil and gas development. This change in surrounding land use will require LM to work collaboratively with NRC to address these concerns. At several DOE sites radioactive waste, and often intermixed nonradioactive constituents, is permanently isolated in engineered disposal cells. At other sites, residual contamination can be present in groundwater, blast cavities, and infinite amounts within soil. Areas targeted for oil and gas development at the Texas and Wyoming sites range from depths of 2440 to 3350 meters (8000-11000 feet) below ground surface. When most site remedies were designed, oil and gas development was not considered to be an issue within the site boundary. With the more recent uses of directional drilling, fracking, and associated wastewater injections, the evaluative criteria for incoming sites and ICs for managing long-term protectiveness and regulatory compliance are changing. Although DOE surface ownership was previously thought to be a robust IC to prevent surface and subsurface development, particularly at disposal sites, that may no longer be the case. Whereas the subsurface development at Texas and Wyoming sites is currently occurring at thousands of meters beneath the surface, shallower and direct onsite development would be more of a concern for LM. The energy introduced when a well is hydraulically fractured causes microseismic events (magnitude -2 to 1.0) as the fractures propagate but does not directly cause seismic events (earthquakes) of sufficient magnitude to damage surface structures. Additionally, the extent of the hydraulic fractures is limited to the targeted depths, which are far below the surface. However, earthquakes of sufficient magnitude to damage surface structures have been attributed to the injection of wastewater into disposal wells. States that have experienced these effects have enacted regulations that limit the rate and pressures that wastewater can be injected into disposal wells. Items LM may consider are the need for monitoring the volume of water injected into nearby disposal wells and possibly installing seismic stations at sites most susceptible to damage. While the need to demonstrate that no impact from oil and gas extraction activities on a site groundwater remedy or disposal cells will vary from site to site, LM is assessing risk criteria for this activity. Though LM has not experienced an issue yet at a uranium tailings disposal site, it cannot assume that there will be none, and must address NRC concerns. LM is building on past experiences at other sites and beginning to form new processes with the hope that these concepts can be applied for other future sites. (authors)

04 OIL SHALES AND TAR SANDS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Nitrogen Deposition Weakens Soil Carbon Control of Nitrogen Dynamics Across the Contiguous United States

ABSTRACT Anthropogenic nitrogen (N) deposition is unequally distributed across space and time, with inputs to terrestrial ecosystems impacted by industry regulations and variations in human activity. Soil carbon (C) content normally controls the fraction of mineralized N that is nitrified ( ƒ nitrified ), affecting N bioavailability for plants and microbes. However, it is unknown whether N deposition has modified the relationships among soil C, net N mineralization, and net nitrification. To test whether N deposition alters the relationship between soil C and net N transformations, we collected soils from coniferous and deciduous forests, grasslands, and residential yards in 14 regions across the contiguous United States that vary in N deposition rates. We quantified rates of net nitrification and N mineralization, soil chemistry (soil C, N, and pH), and microbial biomass and function (as beta‐glucosidase (BG) and N ‐acetylglucosaminidase (NAG) activity) across these regions. Following expectations, soil C was a driver of ƒ nitrified across regions, whereby increasing soil C resulted in a decline in net nitrification and ƒ nitrified . The ƒ nitrified value increased with lower microbial enzymatic investment in N acquisition (increasing BG:NAG ratio) and lower active microbial biomass, providing some evidence that heterotrophic microbial N demand controls the ammonium pool for nitrifiers. However, higher total N deposition increased ƒ nitrified , including for high soil C sites predicted to have low ƒ nitrified , which decreased the role of soil C as a predictor of ƒ nitrified . Notably, the drop in contemporary atmospheric N deposition rates during the 2020 COVID‐19 pandemic did not weaken the effect of N deposition on relationships between soil C and ƒ nitrified . Our results suggest that N deposition can disrupt the relationship between soil C and net N transformations, with this change potentially explained by weaker microbial competition for N. Therefore, past N inputs and soil C should be used together to predict N dynamics across terrestrial ecosystems.

Nieland, Matthew A. [Stockbridge School of Agricul↗
DOE OSTI2024

BENEFIT with Northeastern University: HVAC Hardware-in-the-Loop Experimental Testing of a Heat Pump and Air Conditioner

This dataset includes HVAC Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL) experimental results for a single stage, SEER 16, HSPF 9.5, 3-ton single-speed air source heat pump with 15 kW of backup auxiliary heating tested in both cooling and heating mode, and a two stage, SEER 21, 2-ton central air conditioner tested in cooling mode for a set of outdoor temperatures and indoor setpoint temperatures. In addition to these tests, experimental tests focused on the operation of auxiliary heating for the heat pump for winter condition were also conducted. The laboratory experiments for transient testing of the heat pump and air conditioner were conducted using the two HIL systems in the Systems Performance Laboratory (SPL) at NREL’s Energy Systems Integration Facility (ESIF). Further information on laboratory design and capabilities of the SPL along with the architecture of HVAC HIL system can be found in: Sparn, B. F. 2018. Laboratory Resources and Techniques to Evaluate Smart Home Technology (No. NREL/CP-5500-71696). National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), Golden, CO (United States). https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy18osti/71696.pdf and the experimental setup and validation of HVAC HIL platform can be found in: Ramaraj, S. and Sparn, B. 2022. Validation of HVAC Hardware-In-the-Loop Simulation for Advanced Control Strategies in Smart Homes (No. NREL/CP-5500-82562). National Renewable Energy Lab (NREL), Golden, CO (United States). https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy22osti/82562.pdf. These experimental results can be used to validate how we currently model the cycling behavior of heat pumps and air conditioners. Additionally, many demand response programs implement heat pump and air conditioner control by changing the thermostat set point – these data may also be used to verify our models for heat pump and air conditioner demand response control are implemented correctly. The Test_Matrix file describes all the indoor and outdoor test conditions for heat pump and air conditioner and the file names of data sets include information about the test conditions. A wide range of outdoor air temperatures were chosen to accommodate summer and winter conditions. In addition to operating the HVAC equipment with different outdoor temperatures, we also operate the system with different indoor temperature set points to represent different grid signals or different operating conditions. For cooling conditions, the baseline set point is 72°F. To represent Load Up signals, the setpoint is changed to 68°F. The Load Shed set point is 76°F. For heating conditions, the baseline set point was assumed to be 68°F. The Load add set point is 72°F and the Load shed set point is 64°F. The starting indoor temperature for cooling conditions was set ~2°F above the indoor setpoint temperature so that the equipment turned on quickly. Similarly, the initial indoor temperature was set ~2°F lower than setpoint for heating mode tests to ensure that heating began quickly. The return air temperature was assumed to be equal to the indoor setpoint temperature in all cases. The experimental data are sampled at 1-second intervals. The data from ecobee thermostat at 5-minute interval are resampled and added to the corresponding file. The content of each data set is as follows: • T_Return (C): Measured return air temperature [C] • T_Return_SP (C): Return air temperature setpoint from E+ model, sent to HIL [C] • T_Supply (C): Measured supply air temperature at evaporator outlet [C] • T_Outdoor (C): Measured outdoor air temperature [C] • T_Outdoor_SP (C): Outdoor air temperature setpoint from weather file, sent to HIL [C] • T_Indoor (C): Measured indoor air temperature [C] • T_Indoor_SP (C): Indoor air temperature setpoint from E+ model, sent to HIL [C] • Outdoor Unit Power (W): Measured power of the outdoor unit [W] • Indoor Unit Power (W): Measured power of the indoor unit [W] • Evaporator Airflow Rate (CFM): Measured evaporator or indoor unit airflow rate sent to E+ model [CFM] • Cooling/Heating Capacity (kW): Calculated cooling/heating capacity sent to E+ model [kW] • T_SP_Thermostat (C): Thermostat cooling/heating setpoint temperature [C] • T_Indoor_Thermostat (C): Thermostat indoor air temperature [C]

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

A Sensitivity-driven Wide Area Protection (SWAP) Coordination Tool for High Penetration of Inverter-based Resources (IBR)

Traditionally, power system generation sources have been composed of synchronous generators, of which the fault current behavior is understood with minimal differences between generation size and types due to the physics of their construction. Present protection schemes and modeling methods are based upon these understood characteristics. Most renewable generation is composed of inverter-based resources (IBR), in which fault current is determined by switching control software and hardware limitations, each of which can vary between manufacturers and even between models of the same manufacturer. The resulting fault current is low in magnitude, low in negative-sequence current, unpredictable phase angles, and is a challenge to model. These characteristics also result in a challenge to traditional protection schemes and fault simulation software. To address several of these concerns, the project has the following goals: 1. Improve IBR models: Improve IBR models used in short circuit (SC) programs to accurately capture the response of IBRs at the bulk power system (BPS) level for fault and protection studies. 2. Develop automation tool: Develop an automation tool that allows engineers to identify protection coordination and sensitivity issues by performing SC and protection coordination studies in a high IBR-penetrated grid by applying variations to the IBR models, faults, contingencies, etc. 3. Develop schemes: Develop new protection mitigation solution schemes that complement the existing protection systems to ensure safe operation of the BPS with higher IBR penetration levels. The project team did not achieve this final goal, as the Department of Energy (DOE) stopped the project early due to changes in DOE funding priorities. The termination notice came at the beginning of the final project phase, while the team was identifying and beginning to investigate protection issues. It should be noted that the team discussed a 100% penetration scenario. However, this scenario would require the use of grid-forming IBR models that are not presently available. Since developing these models requires additional effort, the 100% penetration scenario was not pursued during this project. In the future, developing the methodology and models for the 100% scenario could benefit the industry.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Kimberlina 1.2 CCUS Geophysical Models and Synthetic Data Sets

This synthetic multi-scale and multi-physics data set was produced in collaboration with teams at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, National Energy Technology Laboratory, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Colorado School of Mines through the Science-informed Machine Learning for Accelerating Real-Time Decisions in Subsurface Applications (SMART) Initiative. Data are associated with the following publication: Alumbaugh, D., Gasperikova, E., Crandall, D., Commer, M., Feng, S., Harbert, W., Li, Y., Lin, Y., and Samarasinghe, S., “The Kimberlina Synthetic Geophysical Model and Data Set for CO2 Monitoring Investigations”, The Geoscience Data Journal, 2023, DOI: 10.1002/gdj3.191. The dataset uses the Kimberlina 1.2 CO2 reservoir flow model simulations based on a hypothetical CO2 storage site in California (Birkholzer et al., 2011; Wainwright et al., 2013). Geophysical properties models (P- and S-wave seismic velocities, saturated density, and electrical resistivity) were produced with an approach similar to that of Yang et al. (2019) and Gasperikova et al. (2022) for 100 Kimberlina 1.2 reservoir models. Links to individual resources are provided below: [CO2 Saturation Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-co2-saturation-models); Resistivity Models – [part 1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-1), [part 2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-2), and [part 3](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-resistivity-models-part-3); [Vp Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vp-velocity-models); [Vs Velocity Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-vs-velocity-models); [Density Models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-density-models). The 3D distributions of geophysical properties for the 33 time stamps of the SIM001 model were used to generate synthetic seismic, gravity, and electromagnetic (EM) responses for 33 times between zero and 200 years. Synthetic surface seismic data were generated using 2D and 3D finite-difference codes that simulate the acoustic wave equation (Moczo et al., 2007). 2D data were simulated for six point-pressure sources along a 2D line with 10 m receiver spacing and a time spacing of 0.0005 s. 3D simulations were completed for 25 surface pressure sources using a source separation of 1 km in both the x and y directions and a time spacing of 0.001 s. Links to individual resources are provided below: [2D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-velocity-models) and [2D surface seismic data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-2d-surface-seismic-data). [3D velocity models](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-velocity-models), and 3D seismic data [year0](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year0), [year1](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year1), [year2](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year2), [year5](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year5), [year10](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year10), [year15](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year15), [year20](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year20), [year25](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year25), [year30](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year30), [year35](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year35), [year40](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year40), [year45](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year45), [year49](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year49), [year50](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year50), [year51](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year51), [year52](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year52), [year55](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year55), [year60](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year60), [year65](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year65), [year70](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year70), [year75](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year75), [year80](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year80), [year85](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year85), [year90](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year90), [year95](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year95), [year100](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year100), [year110](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year110), [year120](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year120), [year130](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year130), [year140](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year140), [year150](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year150), [year175](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year175), [year200](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-seismic-data-year200). The Python scripts to read these models and data are provided [here](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-python-scripts). EM simulations used a borehole-to-surface survey configuration, with the source located near the reservoir level and receivers on the surface using the code developed by Commer and Newman (2008). Pseudo-2D data for the source at [2500 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz2500m) and [3025 m](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-pseudo-2d-csem-data-tz3025m), used a 2D inline receiver configuration to simulate a response over 3D resistivity models. The [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-3d-csem-data) contain electric fields generated by borehole sources at monitoring well locations and measured over a surface receiver grid. Vector gravity data, both on the surface and in boreholes, were simulated using a modeling code developed by Rim and Li (2015). The simulation scenarios were parallel to those used for the EM: [pseudo-2D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were calculated along the same lines and within the same boreholes, and [3D data](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-gravity-data) were simulated over 3D models on the surface and in three monitoring wells. A series of [synthetic well logs](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-well-logs) of CO2 saturation, acoustic velocity, density, and induction resistivity in the injection well and three monitoring wells are also provided at 0, 1, 2, 5, 10, 15, and 20 years after the initiation of injection. These were constructed by combining the low-frequency trend of the geophysical models with the high-frequency variations of actual well logs collected in the Kimberlina 1 well that was drilled at the proposed site. Measurements of permeability and pore connectivity were made on cores of Vedder Sandstone, which forms the primary reservoir unit: [CT micro scans](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-ct-micro-scans-of-vedder-formation) and [Industrial CT Images](https://edx.netl.doe.gov/dataset/kimberlina-1-2-ccus-geophysical-models-and-synthetic-data-sets-industrial-ct-images-vedder-formation). These measurements provide the range of scales in the otherwise synthetic data set to be as close to a real-world situation as possible. References: Birkholzer, J.T., Zhou, Q., Cortis, A. and Finsterle, S., 2011. A sensitivity study on regional pressure buildup from large-scale CO2 storage projects. Energy Procedia, 4, 4371-4378. Commer, M., and Newman, G.A., 2008. New advances in three-dimensional controlled-source electromagnetic inversion, Geophysical Journal International, 172, 513-535. Gasperikova, E., Appriou, D., Bonneville, A., Feng, Z., Huang, L., Gao, K., Yang, X., Daley, T., 2022, Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes, Int. J. Greenh. Gas Control, Volume 114, 103585, ISSN 1750-5836, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585. Moczo, P., J.O. Robertsson and L. Eisner, 2007, The finite-difference time-domain method for modeling of seismic wave propagation: Advances in geophysics, 48, 421-516. Rim, H., and Y. Li, 2015, Advantages of borehole vector gravity in density imaging, Geophysics, 80, G1-G13. Wainwright, H. M.; Finsterle, S.; Zhou, Q.; Birkholzer, J. T., 2013. Modeling the Performance of Large-Scale CO2 Storage Systems: A Comparison of Different Sensitivity Analysis Methods. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 17, 189205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.05.007, DOI: 10.18141/1603331. Yang, X., Buscheck, T.A., Mansoor, K., Wang, Z., Gao, K., Huang, L., Appriou, D., and Carroll, S.A., 2019. Assessment of geophysical monitoring methods for detection of brine and CO2 leakage in drinking water aquifers, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 90, 102803, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.

CCUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

VADER: A Tool for Criticality Safety Validation

The purpose of criticality safety is to prevent any inadvertent criticality from occurring during the handling or storage of fissile material. Calculations are frequently used to demonstrate that a sufficient subcritical margin exists. Validation is a key aspect of the evaluation process, establishing the suitability, accuracy, and associated uncertainty of the computational method and data to be used for the intended application. The validation process is performed by comparing the results of critical experiments with the calculated results from models of the experiments using the computational method to be validated. Laboratory critical experiments are controlled systems that achieve a k eff of approximately 1 in order to investigate the parameters at which such a critical condition is achieved. The validation parameters that are traditionally applied to safety analysis calculations are the bias and the bias uncertainty . The bias is the deviation of the average k eff of the validation suite from unity. The bias uncertainty accounts for the statistical uncertainty in the bias based on the standard deviation, sample size, and distribution of k eff values of the validation suite. The values of bias and bias uncertainty ensure that the systems predicted to be subcritical by the computational method will indeed be subcritical. The bias and bias uncertainty are often combined to determine an upper subcritical limit (USL) or computational margin that can then be applied to safety analysis calculations. Many methods have been developed by different organizations to calculate the bias and bias uncertainty for various types of criticality analyses. Each of these methods typically requires that the validity of various underpinning statistical assumptions be confirmed to demonstrate that the method is appropriate for the analysis of a given validation suite. An example of the validation decision making flow is shown in Fig.1. As shown in Fig. 1, the analyst performing the validation fits a trend line to the data and performs a test to determine if the trend was a statistically better representation of the data than if it were treated as an uncorrelated sample. If the trend line is a better representation of the data, then the analyst uses any one of a number of trending techniques to determine the bias and bias uncertainty. If a trend is not an appropriate representation of the data, then the analyst proceeds to perform a normality assessment for the data. If the normal assumption can be shown to be acceptable, then the analyst calculates the bias and bias uncertainty with the parametric technique. If the assumption of normality cannot be justified, then the nonparametric technique is used. Once the decision flow has been followed and the appropriate technique has been selected, the bias and bias uncertainty is typically combined with an administrative margin to determine a USL below which calculated values of k eff for safety analysis models can be considered subcritical. The calculations used in each decision are often performed with spreadsheets or with small programs available at various sites performing criticality analyses. Expertise in understanding and interpreting the results must be maintained to perform these calculations. This can often be an error-prone process. Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is currently developing the Validation and Data Evaluation Resource (VADER) to simplify and automate the criticality safety validation process and to provide a software quality assurance pedigree to the calculational methods used. This paper discusses the use of the Fulcrum user interface with VADER, the anticipated initial capabilities of VADER to perform validation analyses, and the output from the code.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Dynamic Building Load Control to Facilitate High Penetration of Solar Photovoltaic Generation (Final Technical Report)

Solar photovoltaic (PV) resources are the most common form of distributed generation in residential and commercial customer premises within electric distribution networks. A higher penetration of PV generation in distribution circuits will impose challenges on maintaining service voltages within the range of industry standards, power quality, and power flow. Buildings consume 74% of the electricity produced in the United States, and a significant portion of the building load is dispatchable, making them responsive to electrical grid needs. Oak Ridge National Laboratory—in collaboration with Southern Company; the University of Tennessee, Knoxville; and the Georgia Institute of Technology—is examining the PV integration issues in distribution-level electrical grids and developing integrated demand-side control and communication systems to enable responsive loads. The proposed responsive loads mechanism performs renewable generation following to increase the penetration of solar PV within each feeder. The specific objectives of this project are to (1) examine distribution-level PV integration scenarios to understand requirements, (2) undertake an end-to-end simulation-based design of a distributed control strategy of loads geographically near the PV generation asset to minimize the effect on the distribution feeder, (3) deploy and demonstrate the control technology developed in partnership with utilities, and (4) perform a scalability analysis at the utility scale. This 3-year integrated project aims to develop, demonstrate, and validate demand-side control technology to enable increased the penetration of renewables while mitigating challenges that arise due to their intermittency. Activities in Budget Period (BP) 1 focused on a literature review and the formal design of a control system for integrating local distribution with generation and loads. The team used modeling and simulation to evaluate the impact of varying buildings loads, variable PV generation, and power flow dynamics on the distribution circuit. The dynamic models developed in BP 1 were used in BP 2 to develop a model-based control design and a test bed. The test bed has enabled the simulation-based testing and comparison of different control designs and formulations applied to different configurations of the distribution grid, PVs, and building loads. The control approaches developed in BP 2 were implemented in BP 3 in the form of hardware deployed at the Central Baptist Church (CBC) in Knoxville, Tennessee, for testing and evaluation. The outcome of this project was the development and demonstration of open-source, low-cost, low-touch sensing and control retrofits to distributed PV generation and building loads that, in a coordinated fashion, provide the load-shaping response needed to integrate high levels of renewable penetration. This research addresses the target metrics by dynamically controlling a load with solar generation variability to minimize the extent of two-way power flow, enhance reliability, facilitate high PV penetration (>100% of peak load in a line segment), and generate scalable software and hardware solutions adaptable to any penetration levels. The research and development activities are focused and designed to be impactful within the relevant 2020 targets time frame.An accurate open-source integration simulation framework for end-to-end control design was developed and deployed at the CBC facility for testing and evaluation. This final report provides a detailed review of the technical results achieved during this 3-year integrated project. A novel spectral analysis of PV data is demonstrated to derive the requirements of the control design. A detailed simulation-based analysis of PV integration at increasing penetration levels is presented using 1 year of PV data to demonstrate the impact on the distribution circuits. Two different control strategies were developed and demonstrated via simulation to track variable PV generation with adaptive load dispatch. The report concludes with a summary of accomplishments and recommendations for a path forward.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗