SEARCH · Engineering Papers
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.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site A2 were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site H were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
This dataset contains vertical profiling lidar data from WFIP3 CACO site. This is the Windcubev2-96 profiling lidar.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site RHOD were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from the SHIP scanning Doppler lidar were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at the BARG site were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site H were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site A1 were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses a modified version of the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
Wind profiles from ground-based Galion lidar at the RHOD site were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 seconds). The wind speed retrieval uses the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
The field profiling lidar #ZX300-1945 was deployed on the ground in an open field 880 m south of the NEON tower and tower profiling lidar (ZX300-1381). The zip files contain high frequency data. The excel files are 10-min averages.
Wind profiles from ground-based Doppler lidar at site A1 were calculated for each 6-beam profiling scan (one point every ~20 s). The wind speed retrieval uses a modified version of the Sathe et al., 2015, paper in the references.
This dataset contains data from a NOAA Radar Wind Profiler located on Nantucket island. Data can be found at https://psl.noaa.gov/data/obs/datadisplay/ with the following filters: Active Sites: nte Instrument: 915 MHz Wind Profiler Product: Radar 915MHz Sub-Hourly Weber Wuertz Wind
This dataset contains data from a NOAA Radar Wind Profiler located on Block island. Data can be found at https://psl.noaa.gov/data/obs/datadisplay/ with the following filters: Active Sites: bid Instrument: 915 MHz Wind Profiler Product: Radar 915MHz Sub-Hourly Weber Wuertz Wind
WINDPROF provides 10-minute wind and turbulence profiles, integrating Doppler lidars and anemometers during the AWAKEN campaign. Key data include wind speed, direction, vertical velocity, and turbulence parameters, with standardized quality control (e.g., instrument-specific thresholds and inter-instrument validation). Profiles are interpolated to a height grid (20 m spacing below 100 m; 30 m above) and include uncertainty estimates, offering reproducible methods for atmospheric research, model validation, and wind energy studies.
WINDPROF provides 10-minute wind and turbulence profiles, integrating Doppler lidars and anemometers during the AWAKEN campaign. Key data include wind speed, direction, vertical velocity, and turbulence parameters, with standardized quality control (e.g., instrument-specific thresholds and inter-instrument validation). Profiles are interpolated to a height grid (20 m spacing below 100 m; 30 m above) and include uncertainty estimates, offering reproducible methods for atmospheric research, model validation, and wind energy studies.
WINDPROF provides 10-minute wind and turbulence profiles, integrating Doppler lidars and anemometers during the AWAKEN campaign. Key data include wind speed, direction, vertical velocity, and turbulence parameters, with standardized quality control (e.g., instrument-specific thresholds and inter-instrument validation). Profiles are interpolated to a height grid (20 m spacing below 100 m; 30 m above) and include uncertainty estimates, offering reproducible methods for atmospheric research, model validation, and wind energy studies.
Samples were collected from a population of 1,089 black cottonwood genotypes (P. trichocarpa) assembled from native stands to encompass the central portion of the natural range of the species, stretching from 38.8° to 54.3° N Q13 latitude from California, USA, to British Columbia, Canada. Establishment of the common garden, growth conditions, and site maintenance have been described by Muchero et al (2015). In this study, leaf samples for ionomic profiling were collected from 4-year-old trees, during the growing season, in July 2012, from a field located in Clatskanie, Oregon, USA (46°6′11″N 123°12′13″W). The field site was located in a protected alluvial floodplain containing a uniform Wauna-Locoda silt loam soil area characterized by an acidic pH, in Columbia County, Oregon. A subset of 584 out of the 1,089 P. trichocarpa genotypes were represented in this sampling. These genotypes were randomly selected to represent the geographical distribution of the population. A single fully mature (LPI 7-9) leaf on the south side of the tree exposed to full sunlight conditions was removed from the tree within a 6-hour window centering on solar noon and immediately frozen under dry ice before processing. Leaf samples of 584 P. trichocarpa genotypes were finely ground to 40 mm particle size using a mortar and pestle, and ionomic composition was analyzed using ICP-MS. In total, 20 elements were profiled, including aluminum (Al27), arsenic (As75), boron (B11), cadmium (Cd111), calcium (Ca43), cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe57), magnesium (Mg25), manganese (Mn55), molybdenum (Mo), nickel (Ni60), phosphorus (P31), potassium (K39), rubidium (Rb85), selenium (Se82), sodium (Na23), strontium (Sr88), sulfur (S34), and zinc (Zn66), following a protocol established by Ziegler et al. (2013). For each sample, 75mg of powder was digested overnight in 2.5 mL HNO3 containing 20 parts per billion (ppb) indium as an internal standard, following the protocol described in Ziegler et al. (2013). Following a dilution, concentration of the 20 elements was measured using an Elan 6000 DRC-e mass spectrometer (Perkin-Elmer SCIEX) connected to a PFA microflow nebulizer (Elemental Scientific) and Apex HF desolvator (Elemental Scientific). One measurement per sample per genotype was done. For subsequent analyses, the quantifications were converted to total element concentration.
Simulated hourly electric vehicle charging profiles for light-duty household passenger vehicles in the contiguous United States, 2018-2050. Profiles are differentiated by scenario, county, household and vehicle types, and charging type. Data was produced in 2022 using the Transportation Energy & Mobility Pathway Options (TEMPO) model and published in demand-side grid (dsgrid) toolkit format. Data are available for three adoption scenarios: "AEO Reference Case", which is aligned with the U.S. EIA Annual Energy Outlook 2018 (linked below), "EFS High Electrification", which is aligned with the High Electrification scenario of the Electrification Futures Study (linked below), and "All EV Sales by 2035", which assumes that average passenger light-duty EV sales reach 50% in 2030 and 100% in 2035. The charging shapes are derived from two key assumptions of which data users should be aware: "ubiquitous charger access", meaning that drivers of vehicles are assumed to have access to a charger whenever a trip is not in progress, and "immediate charging", meaning that immediately after trip completion, vehicles are plugged in and charge until they are either fully recharged or taken on another trip. These assumptions result in a bounding case in which vehicles' state of charge is maximized at all times. This bounding case would minimize range anxiety, but is unrealistic from the point of view of both electric vehicle service equipment (EVSE) (i.e., charger) access, and plug-in behavior as it can result in dozens of charging sessions per week for battery electric vehicles (BEVs) that in reality are often only plugged in a few times per week.