Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “compilation”

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 973 records · Page 54
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 4.56

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Sierra/Aria 4.56 Verification Manual

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles in Tunnels

There are numerous vehicles which utilize alternative fuels, or fuels that differ from typical hydrocarbons such as gasoline and diesel, throughout the world. Alternative vehicles include those running on the combustion of natural gas and propane as well as electrical drive vehicles utilizing batteries or hydrogen as energy storage. Because the number of alternative fuels vehicles is expected to increase significantly, it is important to analyze the hazards and risks involved with these new technologies with respect to the regulations related to specific transport infrastructure, such as bridges and tunnels. This report focuses on hazards presented by hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles that are different from traditional fuels. There are numerous scientific research and analysis publications on hydrogen hazards in tunnel scenarios; however, compiling the data to make conclusions can be a difficult process for tunnel owners and authorities having jurisdiction over tunnels. This report provides a summary of the available literature characterizing hazards presented by hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles, including light-duty, medium and heavy-duty, as well as buses. Research characterizing both worst-case and credible scenarios, as well as risk-based analysis, is summarized. Gaps in the research are identified to guide future research efforts to provide a complete analysis of the hazards and recommendations for the safe use of hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles in tunnels.

33 ADVANCED PROPULSION SYSTEMS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Cost of saving natural gas through efficiency programs funded by utility customers: 2012–2017

This study estimates the cost of saving a therm of natural gas from energy efficiency programs funded by utility customers during the period 2012 to 2017. Berkeley Lab researchers compiled and analyzed efficiency program data reported by investor-owned utilities and other program administrators in a dozen states representative of the four U.S. Census regions — Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Rhode Island and Utah. Depending on the year, the dataset accounts for about 50 percent to 70 percent of annual national spending on natural gas efficiency programs. The estimated cost of saving natural gas during the study period is $0.40 per therm. The analysis also includes estimates of the program administrator cost of saved energy for three core sectors for natural gas: commercial and industrial, residential, and low-income households. It aggregates these sectors to provide regional and national values. Our metrics include savings-weighted averages, unweighted medians, and interquartile ranges (25th and 75th percentiles) of the levelized program administrator cost of saving gas, in constant 2017 dollars. In addition, the study analyzes cost trends during the study period, finding that average program costs trended downward. The U.S. Department of Energy’s Building Technologies Office supported this work.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

The Rodinia Benchmark Suite in SYCL

As opposed to the Open Computing Language (OpenCL) programming model in which host and device codes are generally written in different programming languages, SYCL can combine host and device codes for an application in a type-safe way to improve development productivity and performance portability. Rodinia is a widely used benchmark suite for heterogeneous computing. Hence, we port the OpenCL implementations of the benchmark suite to SYCL manually. The SYCL benchmark suite is an opensource project for tracking the development of the mainstream SYCL compilers, and for developers and researchers interested in programming productivity, performance analysis, and portability across different computing platforms. We organize the remainder of the report as follows. Section II introduces the SYCL programming model, shows the major differences between an OpenCL program and a SYCL program, and gives a summary of the benchmark suite. In Section III, we describe our SYCL implementations in more details. We evaluate the SYCL benchmarks on the Intel® central processing units (CPUs) and graphics processing units (GPUs) in Section IV. Section V concludes the report.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

ASCR@40: Highlights and Impacts of ASCR’s Programs

A report compiled by the ASCAC Subcommittee on the 40-year history of ASCR for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research. The Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) sits within the Office of Science in the Department of Energy (DOE). Per their web pages, “the mission of the ASCR program is to discover, develop, and deploy computational and networking capabilities to analyze, model, simulate, and predict complex phenomena important to the DOE.” This succinct statement encompasses a wide range of responsibilities for computing and networking facilities; for procuring, deploying, and operating high performance computing, networking, and storage resources; for basic research in mathematics and computer science; for developing and sustaining a large body of software; and for partnering with organizations across the Office of Science and beyond. While its mission statement may seem very contemporary, the roots of ASCR are quite deep—long predating the creation of DOE. Applied mathematics and advanced computing were both elements of the Theoretical Division of the Manhattan Project. In the early 1950s, the Manhattan Project scientist and mathematician John von Neumann, then a commissioner for the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission), advocated for the creation of a Mathematics program to support the continued development and applications of digital computing. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) scientist John Pasta created such a program to fund researchers at universities and AEC laboratories. Under several organizational name changes, this program has persisted ever since, and would eventually grow to become ASCR.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Progress and Technology Assessment of Melt-Cast Ceramic Waste Forms

The Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) conducted research from FY2011 – FY2020 to develop ceramic waste forms to treat High-Level Waste (HLW) resulting from reprocessing of commercial Used Nuclear Fuel (UNF) as part of the Department of Energy (DOE) office of Nuclear Energy (NE) Fuel Cycle Technologies (FCT) research program. The objective of the research was to develop a reference ceramic waste form and process technology needed to immobilize the combined HLW raffinate stream, including undissolved solids and soluble technetium, and potentially the TRU waste stream resulting from reprocessing processes. This report compiles the relevant literature produced under, and pertinent to, the program objectives and provides a perspective on the technology development as well as prospects for future.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Domestic Supply Chain of Medical Consumables Needed During COVID-19 Pandemic

This report is an assessment of the availability, demand, and production capability of medical consumables needed to combat the COVID-19 pandemic. We focus here on the ability of the supply chain to increase production to meet demand during peak pandemic conditions. In addition, we report on domestic production efforts and supply chain issues, as well as the propensity of other countries to limit export of needed medical supplies to the United States. In brief, the domestic supply chain and production capability vary greatly depending on the consumable. Some consumables, such as N95 masks or face shields, can likely be nearly fully supplied by domestic production, while other consumables, such as gloves or surgical masks, have little domestic production and thus will depend on imports to meet demand. The assessment pulls primarily from published news sources and company press releases. As such, the demand and production numbers are not precisely known, and some degree of uncertainty exists in them. The total production capability is also often difficult to ascertain from these reports especially as other industries have begun to supplement existing supply chains. In addition, local conditions (including company financial decisions, local public health issues, and political aspects) can vary throughout the pandemic which will affect future production. The report also pulls from estimates of demand and domestic production of some consumables compiled by the White House COVID-19 Supply Chain Taskforce (SCTF) presented by Rear Admiral John Polowczyk before a June 9, 2020 hearing of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. These numbers, where applicable, are likely to be more accurate than those found in public news sources since they are more directly tied to private companies’ actual orders and actual production estimates, as opposed to publicly released estimates. Finally, we note that other issues with the supply chain, including the production of raw materials, increase demand due to industries that have not previously used PPE now using it, and increased domestic production from non-traditional suppliers, make complete picture of a rapidly changing supply chain difficult to obtain. This report attempts to produce an accurate image of the supply and estimated demand, as understood by the authors who are not experts in the medical supply chain.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

An Overview of the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Uncertainty Assessment Accident Progression Insights

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with Sandia National Laboratories (Sandia) have completed three uncertainty analyses (UAs) as part of the State-of-the-Art Reactor Consequence Analyses (SOARCA) program. The SOARCA UAs included an integrated evaluation of uncertainty in accident progression, radiological release, and offsite health consequence projections. The UA for Peach Bottom, a boiling-water reactor (BWR) with a Mark I containment located in the State of Pennsylvania, analyzed the unmitigated long-term station blackout SOARCA scenario. The UA for Sequoyah, a 4-loop Westinghouse pressurized-water reactor (PWR) located in the State of Tennessee, analyzed the unmitigated short-term station blackout SOARCA scenario, with a focus on issues unique to the ice condenser containment and the potential for early containment failure due to hydrogen deflagration. The UA for Surry, a 3-loop Westinghouse PWR with a sub-atmospheric large dry containment located in the State of Virginia, analyzed the unmitigated short-term station blackout SOARCA scenario including the potential for thermally-induced steam-generator tube rupture. These three UAs are currently documented in three NUREG/CR reports. This report provides input to planned NRC documentation on the insights and findings from the SOARCA UA program. The purpose of the summary report is to provide a useful reference for regulatory applications that require the evaluation of offsite consequence risk from beyond design basis event severe accidents. This report focuses on the accident progression and source term insights developed from the MELCOR analyses. MELCOR is the NRC's best-estimate, severe accident computer code used in the SOARCA UAs. In anticipation of the SOARCA UA insights work, NRC and Sandia benchmarked the response of the Peach Bottom model to selected reference calculations from the Peach Bottom SOARCA UA. Peach Bottom was the first SOARCA UA performed and was completed in 2015 using the MELCOR 1.8.6 code. The PWR SOARCA UAs evolved the original methodology and utilized the updated MELCOR 2.2 computer code. The Peach Bottom model has been systematically updated for other NRC research efforts and has been updated to MELCOR 2.2. computer code. The findings from the new reference calculations using the updated model with the MELCOR 2.2 code are also integrated into the report. A second objective is an assessment of the applicability of the results to the other nuclear reactors in the U.S. As the key findings are reviewed, judgments are presented on the applicability of the results to other U.S. nuclear power plants. An important objective of the SOARCA program relied on high- fidelity plant-specific modeling. However, the nature of the insights and conclusions allowed judgements to be made on the applicability of the various insights to the same general classification of plant (i.e., BWR or PWR) or the entire fleet of plants. Finally, the results from the SOARCA UA accident progression calculations contain a wealth of information not previously documented in the NUREG/CRs. This report includes new but related information that can be used to benchmark past or support future regulatory decisions related to severe accidents. The new work includes a benchmark of the NUREG-1465 licensing source term definitions, the variability of key accident progression events and timing to radionuclide release, and an improved understanding of the timing and source terms from consequential steam generator tube ruptures. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Sandia authors gratefully acknowledge the significant technical and programmatic contributions from the NRC SOARCA team which are reflected throughout the report. Dr. Tina Ghosh has been involved throughout the SOARCA UAs, providing the primary managerial and technical oversight. The long lists of NRC and Sandia contributors from the SOARCA UAs are cited in the three NUREG/CRs and are also gratefully acknowledged by the small team of authors compiling the results of their efforts. Significant technical contributions, advice, and reviews were provided by Dr. Hossein Esmaili, Dr. Alfred Hathaway, and Dr. Edward Fuller (retired) of the NRC. Dr. Randal Gauntt (retired), Mr. Patrick Mattie, Mr. Joseph Jones (retired), and Dr. Doug Osborn from Sandia are recognized as the SOARCA UA managers guiding the past efforts. There is a comparable list of project managers at the NRC including Ms. Patricia Santiago, Dr. Salman Haq, and Mr. Jon Barr. Sadly, we have lost Mr. Charlie Tinkler and Mr. Robert Prato, who were important contributors to the original SOARCA project. Finally, Mr. Kyle Ross and Mr. Mark Leonard have also retired but were significant technical contributors. Mr. Kyle Ross was the technical lead on all three SOARCA UAs and the original pressurized water reactor SOARCA study. Mr. Leonard was the technical lead on the original boiling water reactor SOARCA study and a key contributor to the first Peach Bottom SOARCA UA. iv

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors

The document compiles in a single volume the verification and validation works done for the PLTEMP/ANL code during the years of its development and improvement. The verification of sixteen capabilities of the PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3 code that were identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their thermal-hydraulic analysis are described and documented. Each chapter of the document deals with the verification or validation of a specific model. The model verification is usually done by comparing the code with hand calculation, Microsoft spreadsheet calculation, or Mathematica calculation. The model validation is done by comparing the code with experimental data or a widely tested code like the RELAP5 code. In addition, some PLTEMP/ANL verification works that are available in the open literature are simply referenced and not included in the document. PLTEMP/ANL has been used in conversion safety analysis reports of several US and foreign research reactors that have been licensed and converted. A list of such reactors is given.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of Methane Generation from the Thermolysis of Organics in Caustic Waste

Methane generation has been detected during thermolytic Hydrogen Generation Rate (HGR) testing of SRS tank waste and in simulant samples. Simulant testing has shown methane generation in the presence of trimethylsilanol (TMS) and radioactive sample testing has shown methane generation in presence of methylmercury, both of which are found within SRS waste tanks. The 2019 report Evaluation of the Current State of Knowledge for Thermolysis of Organics within SRS Waste Forming Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) reviewed historical data and assessed literature pertaining to thermolytic methane generation. That review recommended undertaking thermolysis studies on simulated waste to detect and quantify VOCs. The purpose of this assessment is to review chemistry and current knowledge of organics in SRS waste to recommend which organics in SRS waste tanks, if any, should be tested for thermolytic methane generation. An evaluation of observed methane generation rates has been performed to assess the implication for current CSTF controls. Based on the inputs used in this report, it was concluded that no methane generation data observed to date has challenged the existing 5% organic contribution to the Composite Lower Flammability Limit (CLFL) assumption in the CSTF tank farm at temperatures below 100 °C. Evidence shows that thermolytic pathways to methane generation become significant at temperatures >100 °C in caustic waste. Currently, the influences of thermolytic methane production on the flammability of vessels at >100 °C (e.g., evaporators) is unclear. It is recommended that testing should be undertaken using the HGR experimental approach for methane generation. The initial simulant testing should obtain quantitative methane generation rates at elevated temperatures for methylated siloxanes/silanes and methylmercury with the goal of determining the current mechanism for thermolytic methane generation seen in SRS tank waste. The results of this testing should then be compiled and analyzed to ascertain the risk of challenging the current projected organic contribution of 5% to the CLFL at elevated temperatures. Following this testing, an evaluation of possible flammable gas generation in the 2H and 3H Evaporators should be performed to assess the risk of methane generation at the high temperatures employed by the evaporators.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Energy Intensity Baselining and Tracking Guidance

Each company joining the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Better Buildings, Better Plants Program (Better Plants) commits to establishing an energy consumption and energy intensity (EI) baseline and to tracking its energy performance over a 10-year period against that baseline. The baseline must reflect a company’s energy consumption over a 12-month period, covering all its U.S.-based operations. Energy consumption is calculated by fuel type in terms of primary energy (also known as source energy). EI is broadly defined as the amount of energy consumed per unit of output produced. For this guidance document and for the program, the term energy performance represents an evaluation of a facility’s capacity to use energy efficiently. Metrics used to assess a facility’s energy performance can include EI, energy consumption, improvements in EI, etc. Establishing an energy baseline and tracking system is a critical first step in effectively managing energy use. Developing a baseline can help a company understand energy use within the corporation and give it a point of comparison to evaluate future efforts to improve energy performance. It can also support efforts to validate a company’s energy management activities, improve comparative analyses when using benchmarks, and help in predicting future energy needs. In addition, a company that normalizes its performance data can determine highly defensible measures of energy savings generated through implemented energy efficiency projects. Establishing a baseline and tracking energy performance is also a requirement for ISO 50001 certification. Although basic energy data can be collected through utility bills, most manufacturers will have to perform additional analyses to develop accurate and robust energy baselines and tracking systems. Energy is consumed in many ways within the manufacturing sector and can come from multiple sources. Energy is sometimes generated and sold to other parties or captured and reused on-site. External events can exert a significant impact on a facility or company’s energy use independent of any purposeful efforts to improve energy efficiency. Operational changes, such as production shifts—which may be inevitable for some companies over the 10-year period covered by the program—can also make a big difference in energy use. Since Better Plants asks companies to account for all their U.S.-based operations, mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures can also have significant implications for a company’s energy metrics. This document aims to demystify the sometimes complex baselining process. It devotes special attention to the task of normalizing and adjusting energy consumption to account for external factors, such as weather and production changes. A key recommendation is that companies use regression analysis to normalize their energy consumption data whenever possible. Regression analysis is a statistical technique that estimates the dependence of a variable (i.e., energy use in the context of Better Plants) on one or more independent variables such as ambient temperature, while controlling for the influence of other variables at the same time. A properly developed regression analysis can provide a reliable estimate of energy savings resulting from energy improvement strategies and projects by accounting for the effects of variables such as annual production levels and weather. DOE has developed a companion Energy Performance Indicator software tool (EnPI) to simplify the baselining process. This tool can run regression models, calculate changes in EI at the facility level, and automatically compile facility-level data into a corporate-wide metric. Note that although the relevant equations used to calculate EI are provided in this document, the EnPI tool will automatically perform most calculations for the user. Additionally, Better Plants Partners (Partners) can call on their Technical Account Manager (TAM) to help them establish a baseline and assist with the necessary calculations to track progress.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Survey of PFAS Treatment Technologies

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are a group of manufactured chemicals that have caught the attention of many governmental agencies and researchers. These chemicals are highly stable and possess hydrophobic properties that lead to the widespread use of PFAS in aqueous film forming foams, and household products such as carpets, paper and non-stick cookware (Prevedouros et al., 2006). Regulatory and health advisories have focused determining a lifetime drinking water health advisory of 70 ng/L for PFOA and PFOS (USEPA, 2016). Other PFASs may be present in the environment, along with PFOA and PFOS, due to product manufacturing processes (Prevedouros et al., 2006). A variety of proprietary AFFF formulations were manufactured and sold during different timeframes, thereby complicating the signature and distribution of PFASs in groundwater beneath former firefighting training areas (McGuire et al., 2014). PFOA and PFOS are stable chemicals that persistent in the environment and are difficult to remediate. The understanding of the physicochemical properties and fate and transport of PFASs in groundwater is growing but is still limited (USEPA, 2012). Many traditional approaches such as coagulation and conventional water treatment are ineffective in treating PFOA and PFOS. Selecting the most appropriate remedial strategy for PFOA and PFOS is therefore challenging. In this survey findings from the literature on PFASs removal using various technologies were compiled.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2020

Bioenergy Technologies Office 2019 R&D State of Technology

The U.S. Department of Energy’s Bioenergy Technologies Office funds research and development on technologies necessary for the deployment and production of cost-competitive bioenergy, primarily biofuels. Results of experimental efforts are periodically compiled and compared with benchmark technology designs to assess overall progress. This report provides a status of those R&D efforts at the end of 2019. This report first describes the approach for assessing progress followed by specific technology pathway configurations within which progress is charted. Each pathway configuration is described separately and the state of technology progress is presented for the combined pathway as well as for pathway components. Detailed component descriptions reference technology barriers and challenges that are detailed in the appendix.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Model of Operation-and-Maintenance Costs for Photovoltaic Systems

This article presents a method for calculating costs associated with operation and maintenance (O&M) of photovoltaic (PV) systems. It compiles details regarding the cost and frequency of multiple O&M services to estimate annual O&M costs ($\$$/year) for each year of an analysis period, the net present value ($\$$) of life cycle costs accumulated over the analysis period, and the reserve account amount ($\$$). Here we show that this method is an improvement over the previous averaged or levelized per-unit ($\$$/kW/year) valuations for estimating PV O&M costs, because it allows a detailed selection of services to perform based on system size, market served (e.g., residential, commercial, or utility), type and configuration of system components (e.g., micro-, string or central inverter) and site and environmental conditions (e.g., snow, pollen, bird populations). This model also distinguishes costs that vary from year to year and increase at different rates over time because of heuristic failure distributions (e.g. Weibull or Lognormal distribution) based on actuarial data for many of the services. This cost model was created by the PV O&M Working Group of researchers and industry, sponsored by DOE Solar Energy Technologies Office, and has been published in an on-line version hosted by SunSpec Alliance at apsuite.sunspec.org. A spreadsheet version is included with this paper as supplementary material.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2020

CTT: Tools for Fine Alignment of Flash X-ray Systems

The CTT code is a compilation of the python code that was prototyped in the interest of making a method for fine alignment of Flash X-ray Systems at the lab. It contains python code for interacting with LTT and running optimization loops using LTT simulations or ray tracing with RaySpace. It Includes classes for creating phantom objects and modular geometry objects in the simulations. It allows one to generate a random phantom that has been optimized to stay with a certain cubic volume and maximize the minimum distance between any two ball phantom centers in all projections. It was primarily made to work on ball phantoms which were simulated as Teflon spheres. It allows the alignment from some nominal position to some displaced position to simulate recovery of a real geometry from the nominal geometry of the system. Fine alignment can be done with the projections in LTT while a rough alignment is faster using rayspace. If rayspace works well for the use case it should be preferred since it is considerably faster and less resource intensive in general. Some Notes about using this code is that one will have to edit the imports for the files to get to the correct LTT path, LTT GUI path and to the CTT path when importing. This was made by using anaconda with python 3 on windows 10. The LTT code was stored in a anaconda environment which seemed to help the python find the LTT although it shouldn’t be necessary if you append the path in your code using sys.path.append(r'add the path you want here’). The sys.path.append method is a quick way to give your python code access to a given folder when running it (such as LTT or CTT). Note that since the code was originally made with paths for a specific machine that a new user will have to edit those paths to make it work in all the files that use the old paths. This is somewhat tedious but will be required to run the code on a new machine. The methodology used to run and make these notebooks starts with opening a command prompt as administrator in windows 10. After this one would activate the anaconda environment in the appropriate directory using “conda activate myenv” in the command prompt. After this open a jupyter-notebook using the keyword “jupyter-notebook". After that a notebook should open in a browser. Note that some libraries used may not come with anaconda so those may have to be installed. There shouldn’t be much though since the main things used are scipy, numpy, matplotlib, and LTT. LTTQuicksetup also requires some paths that will be specific to the computer so that should be changed as well.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for B-63 Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for REDOX Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗