Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “code comparisons”

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.

923 records · Page 52

An independent analysis of bias sources and variability in wind plant pre-construction energy yield estimation methods

The wind resource assessment community has long had the goal of reducing the bias between wind plant pre-construction energy yield assessment (EYA) and the observed annual energy production (AEP). This comparison is typically made between the 50% probability of exceedance (P50) value of the EYA and the long-term corrected operational AEP (hereafter OA P50), and is known as the P50 bias. The industry has critically lacked an independent analysis of bias reduction investigated across multiple consultants to identify the greatest sources of uncertainty and variance in the EYA process and the best opportunities for uncertainty reduction. The present study addresses this gap by benchmarking consultant methodologies against each other and against operational data at a scale not seen before in industry collaborations. We consider data from 10 wind plants and evaluate discrepancies between eight consultancies in the steps taken from estimates of gross to net energy. Consultants tend to overestimate the gross energy produced at the turbines and then compensate by further overestimating downstream losses, leading to a mean P50 bias near zero, still with significant variability among the individual wind plants. Within our data sample, we find that consultant estimates of all loss categories, except environmental losses, tend to reduce the project-to-project variability of the P50 bias. The disagreement between consultants, however, remains flat throughout the addition of losses. Finally, we find that differences in consultants’ estimates of project performance can lead to differences up to $10/MWh in the levelized cost of energy for a wind plant.

Todd, Austin C.↗

Genomic and phenotypic characterization of multidrug-resistant Salmonella enterica serovar Reading isolates involved in a turkey-associated foodborne outbreak

Salmonella is a global bacterial foodborne pathogen associated with a variety of contaminated food products. Poultry products are a common source of Salmonella -associated foodborne illness, and an estimated 7% of human illnesses in the United States are attributed to turkey products. From November 2017 to March 2019, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported a turkey-associated outbreak of multidrug-resistant (MDR; resistant to ≥3 antimicrobial classes) Salmonella enterica serovar Reading ( S . Reading) linked to 358 human infections in 42 US states and Canada. Since S . Reading was seldom linked to human illness prior to this outbreak, the current study compared genomic sequences of S . Reading isolates prior to the outbreak (pre-outbreak) to isolates identified during the outbreak period, focusing on genes that were different between the two groups but common within a group. Following whole-genome sequence analysis of five pre-outbreak and five outbreak-associated turkey/turkey product isolates of S . Reading, 37 genes located within two distinct chromosomal regions were identified only in the pre-outbreak isolates: (1) an ~5 kb region containing four protein-coding genes including uidA which encodes beta-glucuronidase, pgdA encoding peptidoglycan deacetylase, and two hypothetical proteins and (2) an ~28 kb region comprised of 32 phage-like genes and the xerC gene, which encodes tyrosine recombinase (frequently associated with phage genes). The five outbreak isolates also had a deletional event within the cirA gene, introducing a translational frame shift and premature stop codon. The cirA gene encodes a protein with dual receptor functions: a siderophore receptor for transport of dihydroxybenzoylserine as well as a colicin Ia/b receptor. Significant differences for the identified genetic variations were also detected in 75 S . Reading human isolates. Of the 41 S . Reading isolates collected before or in 2017, 81 and 90% of the isolates contained the uidA and pgdA genes, respectively, but only 24% of the isolates collected after 2017 harbored the uidA and pgdA genes. The truncation event within the cirA gene was also significantly higher in isolates collected after 2017 (74%) compared to before or in 2017 (5%). Phenotypic analysis of the S . Reading isolates for colicin and cefiderocol sensitivities (CirA) and β-methyl-D-glucuronic acid utilization (UidA and accessory proteins) supported the genomic data. Overall, a similar genome reduction pattern was generally observed in both the turkey and human isolates of S . Reading during the outbreak period, and the genetic differences were present in genes that could potentially promote pathogen dissemination due to variation in Salmonella colonization, fitness, and/or virulence.

59 BASIC BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES↗

Multiphysics Modeling of Microreactors with NEAMS codes, and Validation Based on KRUSTY Reactivity Insertion

The NEAMS Multiphysics Applications team continues to assess code usability and functionality for microreactor design and safety analyses, while demonstrating that NEAMS tools capture both steady-state and transient behavior across distinct microreactor concepts. In FY2025, the team advanced full-core, high-fidelity, multiphysics models that solve more complex problems and strengthen verification/validation for several microreactor systems: heat-pipe microreactor (HPMR), gas-cooled microreactor (GCMR), and the KRUSTY experiment. These models employ the MOOSE MultiApp/Transfers architecture with Griffin for neutronics, BISON for heat conduction/thermomechanics, Sockeye for heat pipes, SAM/THM for coolant channels and loops, and SWIFT for hydride behavior, with meshes generated via the MOOSE Reactor Module. The graphite models available in the Grizzly code were also investigated for future analyses. For the HPMR, a Na-HPMR variant was constructed to align with recently validated heat-pipe experiments and Sockeye’s LCVF capability, enabling mechanistic heat-pipe transients and startup modeling. The Na-HPMR will serve as the primary model for HPMR investigations in upcoming tasks. The load-following and single heat-pipe failure scenarios (Griffin/BISON/Sockeye), which were previously modeled for the K-HPMR, were replicated for the Na-HPMR, showing strong negative temperature feedback and highly localized thermal effects, respectively, while the startup case captured vapor-front progression and heat-removal activation. Solid mechanics was added to the previously built K-HPMR full-core model in BISON, showing minimal impact on steady-state reactivity yet enabling stress-field predictions that prepare the path for full-core TRISO performance analyses. For the GCMR, automated steady-state and four transient scenarios were executed using Griffin/BISON/SAM/SWIFT. Results confirm robust inherent safety: power collapses promptly in loss-of-cooling events, the inlet-temperature drop settles to a new equilibrium, and a single-channel blockage yields only a ~30 K local fuel-temperature rise with <0.4% power decrease. SWIFT-predicted hydrogen redistribution affects reactivity during both steady-state and transient conditions, underscoring its importance. A Brayton-cycle balance of plant (BOP) model in SAM/THM demonstrated stable startup behavior, and xenon-driven reactivity during load following was analyzed. To improve TRISO-compact temperature fidelity, a fast multiscale Heat Source Decomposition (HSD) treatment was implemented. Against heterogeneous benchmarks, HSD reduces underprediction of kernel temperatures and lowers predicted peak powers in reactivity-insertion transients compared to previous homogenized models. KRUSTY warm-critical validation progressed from FY2024 baselines: the 15Ȼ insertion shows excellent agreement in peak power (~2% high) and temperature trends, and the 30Ȼ case was automated via a feedback controller that maintained power near 3 kW for ~150 s with close agreement to data. The successful modeling of the warm critical tests has laid a strong foundation for simulating more complex nuclear system tests in the years ahead. Throughout FY2025, developer feedback was provided (e.g., MOOSE batch mesh generation, distributed pre-split meshes, Griffin sweeper on displaced meshes), several new models were contributed to the Virtual Test Bed, and an OECD-NEA WPRS multiphysics benchmark based on the HPMR was initiated to enable broader cross-comparison and best-practice development with the nuclear community at large.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

A Comparison of RESRAD and GoldSim Models for Assessing Radiological Dose for a RCRA Landfill - 20418

US Ecology Idaho (USEI) operates a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Subtitle C, Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal (TSD) Facility on a 640-acre property in Owyhee County, Idaho. USEI accepts a wide variety of RCRA-exempt low activity radioactive wastes, including naturally occurring radioactive material (NORM) and technologically enhanced NORM (TENORM) (USEI 2009). The performance of the landfill with regard to radiological operating permit requirements was previously assessed using a model constructed with the residual radioactivity (RESRAD) computer program, developed by Argonne National Laboratory for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). RESRAD supports the evaluation of several environmental transport pathways related to a radionuclide-contaminated soil source term, but it was not conceived as a model for the evaluation of landfill radiological performance. A more comprehensive and realistic model is desired in order to better support submissions to both the State of Idaho's Department of Environmental Quality as well as the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. A Performance Assessment (PA) computer model was developed using GoldSim software for the USEI RCRA Subtitle C landfill. The RESRAD computer model was specifically developed for calculating soil cleanup criteria and radiological dose and cancer risk from residual radioactive material in soil. To evaluate site-specific conditions, users may select from among a number of available environmental transport and exposure pathways and modify 'default' parameter values. In GoldSim, a user must construct the model 'from scratch.' However, this modeling is facilitated by a number of specialized elements available in GoldSim to support a radiological mass transport model. These include elements for defining radiological decay and ingrowth, container failure and radiological release, advective and diffusive transport, and other processes. Advantages afforded by the use of RESRAD for modeling radiological dose for a RCRA Subtitle C landfill include ease of use and reasonable flexibility in specifying site-specific conditions. GoldSim allows for considerably more flexibility and site-specificity than RESRAD, including evaluation of potentially relevant environmental transport processes not supported in RESRAD. The probabilistic modeling capabilities of GoldSim also far exceed those of RESRAD. The pros and cons of RESRAD and GoldSim for this modeling problem are explored with a focus on identifying approaches and critical factors in identifying the appropriate platform. The capabilities of RESRAD and GoldSim for mathematically modeling the disposal system will be contrasted and compared. For example, the existing RESRAD radiological safety assessment evaluated potentially complete exposure pathways related to infiltration to groundwater and upwards diffusion of radon. Additional transport pathways identified in the USEI Idaho facility Conceptual Site Model include deposition of radon decay products in cover material, root uptake of radionuclides in disposed wastes by native plants, and mixing of cover material by burrowing animals. Results of the two models and how the different transport and dose pathways affect results will be discussed. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Predictive performance of multi-model ensemble forecasts of COVID-19 across European nations

Background: Short-term forecasts of infectious disease burden can contribute to situational awareness and aid capacity planning. Based on best practice in other fields and recent insights in infectious disease epidemiology, one can maximise the predictive performance of such forecasts if multiple models are combined into an ensemble. Here, we report on the performance of ensembles in predicting COVID-19 cases and deaths across Europe between 08 March 2021 and 07 March 2022. Methods: We used open-source tools to develop a public European COVID-19 Forecast Hub. We invited groups globally to contribute weekly forecasts for COVID-19 cases and deaths reported by a standardised source for 32 countries over the next 1–4 weeks. Teams submitted forecasts from March 2021 using standardised quantiles of the predictive distribution. Each week we created an ensemble forecast, where each predictive quantile was calculated as the equally-weighted average (initially the mean and then from 26th July the median) of all individual models’ predictive quantiles. We measured the performance of each model using the relative Weighted Interval Score (WIS), comparing models’ forecast accuracy relative to all other models. We retrospectively explored alternative methods for ensemble forecasts, including weighted averages based on models’ past predictive performance. Results: Over 52 weeks, we collected forecasts from 48 unique models. We evaluated 29 models’ forecast scores in comparison to the ensemble model. We found a weekly ensemble had a consistently strong performance across countries over time. Across all horizons and locations, the ensemble performed better on relative WIS than 83% of participating models’ forecasts of incident cases (with a total N=886 predictions from 23 unique models), and 91% of participating models’ forecasts of deaths (N=763 predictions from 20 models). Across a 1–4 week time horizon, ensemble performance declined with longer forecast periods when forecasting cases, but remained stable over 4 weeks for incident death forecasts. In every forecast across 32 countries, the ensemble outperformed most contributing models when forecasting either cases or deaths, frequently outperforming all of its individual component models. Among several choices of ensemble methods we found that the most influential and best choice was to use a median average of models instead of using the mean, regardless of methods of weighting component forecast models. Conclusions: Our results support the use of combining forecasts from individual models into an ensemble in order to improve predictive performance across epidemiological targets and populations during infectious disease epidemics. Our findings further suggest that median ensemble methods yield better predictive performance more than ones based on means. Our findings also highlight that forecast consumers should place more weight on incident death forecasts than incident case forecasts at forecast horizons greater than 2 weeks. Funding: AA, BH, BL, LWa, MMa, PP, SV funded by National Institutes of Health (NIH) Grant 1R01GM109718, NSF BIG DATA Grant IIS-1633028, NSF Grant No.: OAC-1916805, NSF Expeditions in Computing Grant CCF-1918656, CCF-1917819, NSF RAPID CNS-2028004, NSF RAPID OAC-2027541, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 75D30119C05935, a grant from Google, University of Virginia Strategic Investment Fund award number SIF160, Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under Contract No. HDTRA1-19-D-0007, and respectively Virginia Dept of Health Grant VDH-21-501-0141, VDH-21-501-0143, VDH-21-501-0147, VDH-21-501-0145, VDH-21-501-0146, VDH-21-501-0142, VDH-21-501-0148. AF, AMa, GL funded by SMIGE - Modelli statistici inferenziali per governare l'epidemia, FISR 2020-Covid-19 I Fase, FISR2020IP-00156, Codice Progetto: PRJ-0695. AM, BK, FD, FR, JK, JN, JZ, KN, MG, MR, MS, RB funded by Ministry of Science and Higher Education of Poland with grant 28/WFSN/2021 to the University of Warsaw. BRe, CPe, JLAz funded by Ministerio de Sanidad/ISCIII. BT, PG funded by PERISCOPE European H2020 project, contract number 101016233. CP, DL, EA, MC, SA funded by European Commission - Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology through the contract LC-01485746, and Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovacion y Universidades and FEDER, with the project PGC2018-095456-B-I00. DE., MGu funded by Spanish Ministry of Health / REACT-UE (FEDER). DO, GF, IMi, LC funded by Laboratory Directed Research and Development program of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) under project number 20200700ER. DS, ELR, GG, NGR, NW, YW funded by National Institutes of General Medical Sciences (R35GM119582; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or the National Institutes of Health). FB, FP funded by InPresa, Lombardy Region, Italy. HG, KS funded by European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. IV funded by Agencia de Qualitat i Avaluacio Sanitaries de Catalunya (AQuAS) through contract 2021-021OE. JDe, SMo, VP funded by Netzwerk Universitatsmedizin (NUM) project egePan (01KX2021). JPB, SH, TH funded by Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF; grant 05M18SIA). KH, MSc, YKh funded by Project SaxoCOV, funded by the German Free State of Saxony. Presentation of data, model results and simulations also funded by the NFDI4Health Task Force COVID-19 ( https://www.nfdi4health.de/task-force-covid-19-2 ) within the framework of a DFG-project (LO-342/17-1). LP, VE funded by Mathematical and Statistical modelling project (MUNI/A/1615/2020), Online platform for real-time monitoring, analysis and management of epidemic situations (MUNI/11/02202001/2020); VE also supported by RECETOX research infrastructure (Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic: LM2018121), the CETOCOEN EXCELLENCE (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/17-043/0009632), RECETOX RI project (CZ.02.1.01/0.0/0.0/16-013/0001761). NIB funded by Health Protection Research Unit (grant code NIHR200908). SAb, SF funded by Wellcome Trust (210758/Z/18/Z).

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗