Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “consistent scheme”

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 109 records · Page 6
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Accurate upwind methods for the Euler equations

A new class of piecewise linear methods for the numerical solution of the one-dimensional Euler equations of gas dynamics is presented. These methods are uniformly second-order accurate, and can be considered as extensions of Godunov's scheme. With an appropriate definition of monotonicity preservation for the case of linear convection, it can be shown that they preserve monotonicity. Similar to Van Leer's MUSCL scheme, they consist of two key steps: a reconstruction step followed by an upwind step. For the reconstruction step, a monotonicity constraint that preserves uniform second-order accuracy is introduced. Computational efficiency is enhanced by devising a criterion that detects the 'smooth' part of the data where the constraint is redundant. The concept and coding of the constraint are simplified by the use of the median function. A slope steepening technique, which has no effect at smooth regions and can resolve a contact discontinuity in four cells, is described. As for the upwind step, existing and new methods are applied in a manner slightly different from those in the literature. These methods are derived by approximating the Euler equations via linearization and diagonalization. At a 'smooth' interface, Harten, Lax, and Van Leer's one intermediate state model is employed. A modification for this model that can resolve contact discontinuities is presented. Near a discontinuity, either this modified model or a more accurate one, namely, Roe's flux-difference splitting. is used. The current presentation of Roe's method, via the conceptually simple flux-vector splitting, not only establishes a connection between the two splittings, but also leads to an admissibility correction with no conditional statement, and an efficient approximation to Osher's approximate Riemann solver. These reconstruction and upwind steps result in schemes that are uniformly second-order accurate and economical at smooth regions, and yield high resolution at discontinuities.

Huynh, Hung T.↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

A dataset within the Harmonized Database of Western U.S. Water Rights (HarDWR). For a detailed description of the database, please see the meta-record v2.0. Changelog v2.0 - Recalculated based on data sourced from WestDAAT - Changed using a Site ID column to identify unique records to using aa combination of Site ID and Allocation ID - Removed the Water Management Area (WMA) column from the harmonized records. The replacement is a separate file which stores the relationship between allocations and WMAs. This allows for allocations to contribute to water right amounts to multiple WMAs during the subsequent cumulative process. - Added a column describing a water rights legal status - Added "Unspecified" was a water source category - Added an acre-foot (AF) column - Added a column for the classification of the right's owner v1.02 - Added a .RData file to the dataset as a convenience for anyone exploring our code. This is an internal file, and the one referenced in analysis scripts as the data objects are already in R data objects. v1.01 - Updated the names of each file with an ID number less than 3 digits to include leading 0s v1.0 - Initial public release Description Here we present an updated database of Western U.S. water right records. This database provides consistent unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of seven broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of inter-sectoral water allocation changes though water markets (Grogan et al., *in review*). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, Water Balance Model (WBM), with a water rights module (Grogan et al., *in review*). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, water management in the U.S. West is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al., 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. West. We produced the water rights database presented here in four main steps: (1) data collection, (2) data quality control, (3) data harmonization, and (4) generation of cumulative water rights curves. Each of steps (1)-(3) had to be completed in order to produce (4), the final product that was used in the modeling exercise in Grogan et al. (*in review*). All data in each step is associated with a spatial unit called a Water Management Area (WMA), which is the unit of water right administration utilized by the state in which the right came from. Steps (2) and (3) required use to make assumptions and interpretation, and to remove records from the raw data collection. We describe each of these assumptions and interpretations below so that other researchers can choose to implement alternative assumptions an interpretation as fits their research aims. Motivation for Changing Data Sources The most significant change has been a switch from collecting the raw water rights directly from each state to using the water rights records presented in WestDAAT, a product of the Water Data Exchange (WaDE) Program under the Western States Water Council (WSWC). One of the main reasons for this is that each state of interest is a member of the WSWC, meaning that WaDE is partially funded by these states, as well as many universities. As WestDAAT is also a database with consistent categorization, it has allowed us to spend less time on data collection and quality control and more time on answering research questions. This has included records from water right sources we had previously not known about when creating v1.0 of this database. The only major downside to utilizing the WestDAAT records as our raw data is that further updates are tied to when WestDAAT is updated, as some states update their public water right records daily. However, as our focus is on cumulative water amounts at the regional scale, it is unlikely most records updates would have a significant effect on our results. The structure of WestDAAT led to several important changes to how HarWR is formatted. The most significant change is that WaDE has calculated a field known as `SiteUUID`, which is a unique identifier for the Point of Diversion (POD), or where the water is drawn from. This separate from `AllocationNativeID`, which is the identifier for the allocation of water, or the amount of water associated with the water right. It should be noted that it is possible for a single site to have multiple allocations associated with it and for an allocation to be able to be extracted from multiple sites. The site-allocation structure has allowed us to adapt a more consistent, and hopefully more realistic, approach in organizing the water right records than we had with HarDWR v1.0. This was incredibly helpful as the raw data from many states had multiple water uses within a single field within a single row of their raw data, and it was not always clear if the first water use was the most important, or simply first alphabetically. WestDAAT has already addressed this data quality issue. Furthermore, with v1.0, when there were multiple records with the same water right ID, we selected the largest volume or flow amount and disregarded the rest. As WestDAAT was already a common structure for disparate data formats, we were better able to identify sites with multiple allocations and, perhaps more importantly, allocations with multiple sites. This is particularly helpful when an allocation has sites which cross WMA boundaries, instead of just assigning the full water amount to a single WMA we are now able to divide the amount of water between the number of relevant WMAs. As it is now possible to identify allocations with water used in multiple WMAs, it is no longer practical to store this information within a single column. Instead the stAllocationToWMATab.csv file was created, which is an allocation by WMA matrix containing the percent Place of Use area overlap with each WMA. We then use this percentage to divide the allocation's flow amount between the given WMAs during the cumulation process to hopefully provide more realistic totals of water use in each area. However, not every state provides areas of water use, so like HarDWR v1.0, a hierarchical decision tree was used to assign each allocation to a WMA. First, if a WMA could be identified based on the allocation ID, then that WMA was used; typically, when available, this applied to the entire state and no further steps were needed. Second was the spatial analysis of Place of Use to WMAs. Third was a spatial analysis of the POD locations to WMAs, with the assumption that allocation's POD is within the WMA it should belong to; if an allocation still had multiple WMAs based on its POD locations, then the allocation's flow amount would be divided equally between all WMAs. The fourth, and final, process was to include water allocations which spatially fell outside of the state WMA boundaries. This could be due to several reasons, such as coordinate errors / imprecision in the POD location, imprecision in the WMA boundaries, or rights attached with features, such as a reservoir, which crosses state boundaries. To include these records, we decided for any POD which was within one kilometer of the state's edge would be assigned to the nearest WMA. Other Changes WestDAAT has Allowed In addition to a more nuanced and consistent method of assigning water right's data to WMAs, there are other benefits gained from using the WestDAAT dataset. Among those is a consistent categorization of a water right's legal status. In HarDWR v1.0, legal status was effectively ignored, which led to many valid concerns about the quality of the database related to the amounts of water the rights allowed to be claimed. The main issue was that rights with legal status' such as "application withdrawn", "non-active", or "cancelled" were included within HarDWR v1.0. These, and other water rights status' which were deemed to not be in use have been removed from this version of the database. Another major change has been the addition of the "unspecified water source category. This is water that can come from either surface water or groundwater, or the source of which is unknown. The addition of this source category brings the total number of categories to three. Due to reviewer feedback, we decided to add the acre-foot (AF) column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. We added the ownerClassification column so that the data may be more applicable to a wider audience. File Descriptions The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. In addition, each file begins with the state's name, in case the file is separate from its sub-directory for some reason. After the state name is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file described in detail. Note that st is a placeholder for the state's name. stFullRecords_HarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the complete water records for each state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state to which the allocations belong to. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. siteID - The site location ID for POD locations. A site may have multiple allocations, which are the actual amount of water which can be drawn. In a simplified hypothetical, a farm stead may have an allocation for "irrigation" and an allocation for "domestic" water use, but the water is drawn from the same pumping equipment. It should be noted that many of the site ID appear to have been added by WaDE, and therefore may not be recognized by a given state's water rights database. allocationID - The allocation ID for the water right. For most states this is the water right ID, and what is recommended to use should a right be looked up on a given state's water rights database. The water amounts associated with these IDs tend to be finer scaled than those associated with siteID. It should be noted that some allocations may be extracted from multiple sites, particularly for larger Places of Use. ownerClassification - A classification of the types of owners for water rights. The most common is `Private` which incorporates a wide range of entities. Several classifications would be grouped into a government category, most of which are for the U.S. Federal Government. These allocations could be listed as "Federal", "United States of America", or as the names of any number of federal agencies. The last major grouping of entities is for "Native American"s. priorityDate - The date we use as the water right priority date for our modeling analysis. This is the legal priority date when it is available. However, for some rights, specifically from California and New Mexico, we used a pseudo priority date (e.g. well completion date or start of well drilling date) when a legal priority date was not available. The most questionable dates come from New Mexico, where the only date associated with certain water right records was the date the allocation was recorded in the database. As the allocation record creation tended to be within a few months of the filing of the application of the water right, from manually double checking the water rights, and our analysis focuses on aggregating water rights on the timescale of years, we determined it was acceptable to use such dates to include as many records as possible. primaryBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category for the primary water use at the PoD site. allocationBeneficialUse - From the numerous state water use categories, WaDE categorized them into 21 categories for WestDAAT. This column is the original WaDE category

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2023

Interface flux recovery framework for constructing partitioned heterogeneous time-integration methods

A common approach for the development of partitioned schemes employing different time integrators on different subdomains is to lag the coupling terms in time. This can lead to accuracy issues, especially in multistage methods. Here, in this article, we present a novel framework for partitioned heterogeneous time-integration methods, which allows the coupling of arbitrary multistage and multistep methods without reducing their order of accuracy. At the core of our approach are accurate estimates of the interface flux obtained from the Schur complement of an auxiliary monolithic system. We use these estimates to construct a polynomial-in-time approximation of the interface flux over the current time coupling window. This approximation provides the interface boundary conditions necessary to decouple the subdomain problems at any point within the coupling window. In so doing our framework enables a flexible choice of time-integrators for the individual subproblems without compromising the time-accuracy at the coupled problem level. This feature is the main distinction between our framework and other approaches. To demonstrate the framework, we construct a family of partitioned heterogeneous time-integration methods, combining multistage and multistep methods, for a simplified tracer transport component of the coupled air-sea system in Earth system models. We report numerical tests evaluating accuracy and flux conservation for different pairs of time-integrators from the explicit Runge-Kutta and Adams-Moulton families.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

Anyon scattering from lightcone Hamiltonian: the singlet channel

We study U(N) Chern-Simons theory coupled to massive fundamental fermions in the lightcone Hamiltonian formalism. Focusing on the planar limit, we introduce a consistent regularization scheme, identify the counter terms needed to restore relativistic invariance, and formulate scattering theory in terms of unambiguously defined asymptotic states. We determine the 2 → 2 planar S-matrix element in the singlet channel by solving the Lippmann-Schwinger equation to all orders, establishing a result previously conjectured in the literature.

1/N expansion↗
DOE OSTI2020

Boundary-consistent B-spline filtering schemes and application to high-fidelity simulations of turbulence

A filtering operation, based on B-spline discretizations, is introduced to target weakly growing mesh-scale oscillations that can arise in high-fidelity turbulence simulations. This is a spectral regularization that can be described using the singular values of a banded matrix operator, with the filtering strength set by a scalar- or vector-valued penalty parameter. The penalty parameter can be specified though it can also be advantageously selected to minimize the generalized cross validation (GCV) measure of distance between the pre- and post-filtered solutions. Efficient algorithms are developed to compute both the scalar and vector penalty parameters. The B-spline filter has a sharper localization to high-wavenumber than compact or explicit filters of the same stencil width and is demonstrated for solutions of the Burgers' equation, decaying Burgers' turbulence, and compressible Navier–Stokes turbulent channel flow. Furthermore, these simulations confirm the scheme's numerical stability and ability to narrowly target the high wavenumber components of numerical solutions. An advantage over finite-difference filters is that these B-spline filters are stable on bounded domains and even preserve formal order of accuracy.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗
DOE OSTI2023

Mapping the Spatial Footprint of Sea Breeze Winds in the Southeastern United States

Abstract Sea breeze winds are observed at various locations worldwide, but the spatially continuous mapping of sea breeze winds is rare. We have developed a scheme to map the areas of the southeastern United States (SEUS) coast influenced by sea breeze winds using a range of surface re‐analysis data to identify their occurrence. Changes in wind direction and dew point temperature are both used to detect a potential sea breeze signature, which is then confirmed by cumuliform clouds seen in satellite images or coastal fronts shown as cohesive lines in radar reflectivity images. Filters are employed to remove onshore winds not induced by the temperature difference between land and sea. From March to September 2019, this scheme identified 134 days with sea breeze occurrence somewhere in the SEUS, a frequency of 63 percent. The number of sea breezes increased from March to July and then decreased to September. Deep inland propagation of sea breezes during this period left footprints in a band parallel to the coastline up to about 220 km inland, after which the sea breeze winds quickly diminished. Comparisons show that the findings using the scheme are consistent with site observations, theoretical estimates, and idealized and semi‐idealized numerical model simulations.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Qubit lattice algorithm simulations of the scattering of a bounded two dimensional electromagnetic pulse from an infinite planar dielectric interface

Qubit lattice algorithm (QLA) simulations are performed for a two-dimensional spatially bounded pulse propagating onto a plane interface between two dielectric slabs. QLA is an initial value scheme that consists of a sequence of unitary collision and streaming operators, with appropriate potential operators, that recover Maxwell equations in inhomogeneous dielectric media to the second order in the lattice discreteness. For the case of total internal reflection, there is transient energy transfer into the second medium due to the evanescent fields as the Poynting unit vector of the pulse is rotated from its incident to reflected direction. Because of the finite spatial extent of the pulse, a self-consistent Goos–Hanchen-type displacement along the interface is found without imposing any explicit interface boundary conditions on the fields. For normal incidence, the standard Fresnel coefficients are recovered for appropriately averaged QLA fields. Energy is conserved at all times to seven significant figures.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Tunable-fidelity wave functions for the ab initio description of scattering and reactions

Here, the no-core shell model (NCSM) is an ab initio method that solves the nuclear many-body problem by expanding the many-particle wave function into a (typically) harmonic oscillator basis and minimizing the energy to obtain the expansion coefficients. Extensions of the NCSM, such as its coupling with microscopic-cluster basis states, further allow for an ab initio treatment of light-ion nuclear reactions of interest for both astrophysics and nuclear technology applications. A downside of the method is the exponential scaling of the basis size with increasing number of nucleons and excitation quanta, which limits its applicability to mass A ≲ 16 nuclei, except for variants where the basis is further down-selected via some truncation scheme. We consider a basis selection method for the NCSM that was first introduced in the context of the large-scale shell model and captures the essential degrees of freedom of the nuclear wave function leading to a favorable complexity scaling for calculations and enabling ab initio reaction calculations in sd-shell nuclei. The particle configurations within the NCSM basis are ordered based on their contribution to the first moment of the Hamiltonian matrix that results from the projection onto the many-body basis. The truncation scheme then consists in retaining only the lowest-first-moment configurations, which typically contain only few many-body basis states (Slater determinants). As the energy threshold above which configurations are disregarded is increased, the size of the basis becomes an almost-continuous variable, allowing for tunable fidelity in the obtained wave functions. The resulting wave functions can then be used directly in ab initio reaction calculations. We present calculations for 7 Li and n + 12 C scattering using nucleon-nucleon interactions derived from chiral effective field theory and softened using the similarity renormalization group method. The obtained energy levels invariably demonstrate exponential convergence with the size of the basis, and we find improved convergence in scattering calculations. To demonstrate the possibilities enabled by the approach, we also present a first calculation for the scattering of neutrons from 24 Mg. The method presented in this work appears promising for future studies of nuclei with mass A > 16, opening multiple future research directions impacting both nuclear astrophysics and nuclear technology applications.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2024

Finite-temperature instantons from first principles

We derive the finite-temperature quantum-tunneling rate from first principles. The tunneling rate depends on both temperature and time. We demonstrate that the relevant instantons should, therefore, be defined on a Keldysh-Schwinger contour, and we discuss how the familiar Euclidean time result arises from the limit of large physical times. We identify distinct behavior in the high- and low-temperature limits, incorporating effects from background fields. We construct a consistent perturbative scheme that incorporates large finite-temperature effects. Published by the American Physical Society 2024

Steingasser, Thomas (ORCID:0000000217262117)↗
DOE OSTI2023

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a collection of objects stored within an RDate file, stateWaterRightsHarmonized.RData. Each object either describes how one should interact with the other objects, or contains the harmonized water rights data. Here is each object described in detail: states: A character vector containing the state names for those states in which data was collected for. More importantly, the index of the state name is also the index in which that state's data can be found in the various following list objects. For example, if California is the third index in this object, the data for California will also be in the third index for each accompanying list. rightsByState_ground: A list of data frames with the cleaned ground water rights collected from each state. The column headers for each data frame are: waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. allocatedFlow - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. rightsByState_surface: A list of the cleaned surface water rights collected from each state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. fullRightsRecs: A list of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, these lists are the merging of rightsByState_ground and rightsByState_surface by state. See rightsByState_ground for more details on how the data is formatted. projProj: The spatial projection used for map creation in the beginning of the project. Specifically, the World Geodetic System (WGS84) as a coordinate reference system (CRS) string in PROJ.4 format. wmaStateLabel: The name and/or abbreviation for what each state legally calls their WMAs. h2oUseByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed area(s) of use in this object. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to be included in this object. h2oDivByState: A list of spatial points data frames which identifies the location of the Point of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records have a listed Point of Diversion in this object. spatialWMAByState: A list of spatial polygon data frames which contain the spatial WMA boundaries for each state. The only data contained within the table are identifiers for each polygon. It is worth reiterating that Arizona is the only state in which the surface and groundwater WMA boundaries are not the same. wmaIDByState: A list which contains the unique ID values of the WMAs for each state. plottingDim: A character vector used to inform mapping functions for internal map making. Each state is classified as either "tall" or "wide", to maximize space on a typical 8x11 page.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

For a detailed description of the database of which this record is only one part, please see the HarDWR meta-record. Here we present a new dataset of western U.S. water rights records. This dataset provides consistent unique identifiers for each spatial unit of water management across the domain, unique identifiers for each water right record, and a consistent categorization scheme that puts each water right record into one of 7 broad use categories. These data were instrumental in conducting a study of the multi-sector dynamics of intersectoral water allocation changes through water markets (Grogan et al., in review). Specifically, the data were formatted for use as input to a process-based hydrologic model, WBM, with a water rights module (Grogan et al., in review). While this specific study motivated the development of the database presented here, U.S. west water management is a rich area of study (e.g., Anderson and Woosly, 2005; Tidwell, 2014; Null and Prudencio, 2016; Carney et al, 2021) so releasing this database publicly with documentation and usage notes will enable other researchers to do further work on water management in the U.S. west. The raw downloaded data for each state is described in Lisk et al. (in review), as well as here. The dataset is a series of various files organized by state sub-directories. The first two characters of each file name is the abbreviation for the state the in which the file contains data for. After the abbreviation is the text which describes the contents of the file. Here is each file type described in detail: XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv: A file of the combined groundwater and surface water records for each state. Essentially, this file is the merging of XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv and XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv by state. The column headers for each of this type of file are: state - The name of the state the data comes from. FIPS - The two digit numeric state ID code. waterRightID - The unique identifying ID of the water right, the same identifier as its state uses. priorityDate - The priority date associated with the right. origWaterUse - The original stated water use from the state. waterUse - The water use category under the unified use categories established here. source - Whether the right is for surface water or groundwater. basinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the WMA the record belongs to. CFS - The maximum flow of the allocation in cubic feet per second (ft3s-1). Arizona is unique among the states, as its surface and groundwater resources are managed with two different sets of boundaries. So, for Arizona, the basinNum column is missing and instead there are two columns: surBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the surface water WMA the record belongs to. grdBasinNum - The alpha-numeric identifier of the groundwater WMA the record belongs to. XXStatePOD.shp: A shapefile which identifies the location of the Points of Diversion for the state's water rights. It should be noted that not all water right records in XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv have coordinates, and therefore may be missing from this file. XXStatePOU.shp: A shapefile which contains the area(s) in which each water right is claimed to be used. Currently, only Idaho and Washington provided valid data to included within this file. XXGroundwaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized groundwater rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. XXSurfaceWaterHarmonizedRights.csv: A file which contains only harmonized surface water rights collected from each state. See XXFullHarmonizedRights.csv for more details on how the data is formatted. Additionally, one file, stateWMALabels.csv, is not stored within a sub-directory. While we have referred to the spatial boundaries that each state uses to manage its water resources as WMAs, this term is not shared across all states. This file lists the proper name for each boundary set, by state.

Economics↗
DOE OSTI2024

HarDWR - Harmonized Water Rights Records

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

Economics↗
NASA NTRS1975

Velocity autocorrelation functions in model liquid metals

Starting from interatomic potentials and static radial distribution functions, a self-consistent iteration scheme has been used to calculate velocity autocorrelation functions in liquid metals. The interatomic forces are treated directly. The calculation bypasses the details of the many-body dynamics and it is not necessary to introduce any additional parameters. Several simplifications may be used without introducing appreciable deviations. The results are in good agreement with computer experiments on liquid sodium at 383 K, suggesting that the velocity autocorrelation function may be a simpler quantity than previously supposed.

Tsang, T.↗
NASA NTRS1980

TAP 2: A finite element program for thermal analysis of convectively cooled structures

A finite element computer program (TAP 2) for steady-state and transient thermal analyses of convectively cooled structures is presented. The program has a finite element library of six elements: two conduction/convection elements to model heat transfer in a solid, two convection elements to model heat transfer in a fluid, and two integrated conduction/convection elements to represent combined heat transfer in tubular and plate/fin fluid passages. Nonlinear thermal analysis due to temperature-dependent thermal parameters is performed using the Newton-Raphson iteration method. Transient analyses are performed using an implicit Crank-Nicolson time integration scheme with consistent or lumped capacitance matrices as an option. Program output includes nodal temperatures and element heat fluxes. Pressure drops in fluid passages may be computed as an option. User instructions and sample problems are presented in appendixes.

Thornton, E. A.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Detection of interstellar CCD

The first detection of interstellar CCD has been obtained in the N = 3-2, J = 7/2-5/2 line at 216.3732 GHz towards the Kleinman-Low nebula. An abundance ratio CCD/CCH of 0.045 is found, indicating in this molecule a deuterium enhancement similar to that found for HNC, but an order of magnitude higher than for HCN. Negative results towards DR 21(OH), NGC 2264, L 134N, TM Cl, Rho OphB2, and IRC 10216 rule out a stronger D enhancement for CCD than for other deuterated molecules in these sources. Predictions of currently developed ion-molecule reaction schemes are consistent with the CCD line detected and the negative results.

Combes, F.↗
NASA NTRS1993

Building a generalized distributed system model

The key elements in the 1992-93 period of the project are the following: (1) extensive use of the simulator to implement and test - concurrency control algorithms, interactive user interface, and replica control algorithms; and (2) investigations into the applicability of data and process replication in real-time systems. In the 1993-94 period of the project, we intend to accomplish the following: (1) concentrate on efforts to investigate the effects of data and process replication on hard and soft real-time systems - especially we will concentrate on the impact of semantic-based consistency control schemes on a distributed real-time system in terms of improved reliability, improved availability, better resource utilization, and reduced missed task deadlines; and (2) use the prototype to verify the theoretically predicted performance of locking protocols, etc.

Mukkamala, R.↗
NASA NTRS1994

ERS-1 scatterometer measurements over the Southern Ocean

Backscatter cross section measurements from the ERS-1 Active Microwave Instrument (AMI) scatterometer were reprocessed to vector winds using the Freilich-Dunbar model function and a meteorologically aided ambiguity removal scheme. This consistent data set was used to examine the wind field over the Southern Ocean from 20 to 60 deg South. The large number of ERS-1 measurements allows relatively accurate calculation of annual mean wind, stress, and curl fields as well as overall statistics of the winds at mid to high southern latitudes. The long duration of the data time series allows preliminary examination of low frequency (semi annual) wind variability.

Freilich, M. H.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Impact of the 1997-1998 El Nino on Atmospheric Circulation

The 1997-1998 E1 Nino created significant anomalies in global circulation patterns. We monitored the E1 Nino event, using TOVS (TIROS Operational Vertical Sounder) data, as part of the Laboratory for Atmospheres TOVS Pathfinder Data Set. TOVS has flown on the NOAA operational polar orbiting satellites from November 1978 to present. We have analyzed data from NOAA 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14, covering January 1985 to the present, using a consistent processing scheme. The data set contains 2-4 times daily global fields of land/ocean surface skin temperature, atmospheric temperature-moisture profiles, cloud top pressure and fractional cloud cover, OLR and clear sky Outgoing Longwave Radiation (OLR), and precipitation estimate. We have generated anomalies of all fields compared to a 12 year climatology of our data set, covering the period 1985-1996. Anomalies during the current E1 Nino were compared to those of other E1 Nino-La Nina episodes since 1985, with particular attention paid to tropical anomalies of surface skin and air temperature, precipitation, upper tropospheric water vapor, OLR, and clear sky OLR. All the El Nino-La Nina events produce similar patterns, but the magnitude of the current anomalies in all fields is considerably greater than those during the previous weaker surface skin temperature anomaly episodes. Significant extra-tropical anomalies were found during the current E1 Nino as well.

Susskind, Joel↗