Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Resource management”

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 1,171 records · Page 65
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1984

The SIMRAND methodology - Simulation of Research and Development Projects

In research and development projects, a commonly occurring management decision is concerned with the optimum allocation of resources to achieve the project goals. Because of resource constraints, management has to make a decision regarding the set of proposed systems or tasks which should be undertaken. SIMRAND (Simulation of Research and Development Projects) is a methodology which was developed for aiding management in this decision. Attention is given to a problem description, aspects of model formulation, the reduction phase of the model solution, the simulation phase, and the evaluation phase. The implementation of the considered approach is illustrated with the aid of an example which involves a simplified network of the type used to determine the price of silicon solar cells.

Miles, R. F., Jr.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Amendment to Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Field Office, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on History Preservation Concerning Management of the Historic Properties of Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, New Mexico (AGREEMENT)

The Field Office has a cultural resources program manager. The LANL Management and Operating Contractor has a staff of cultural resource specialists who meet the qualifications set forth in the Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Professional Qualifications (36 CFR Part 61), or work under the supervision of individuals who meet these qualifications. Any future Management and Operating Contractor will have a staff of Secretary of the Interior-qualified cultural resource specialists.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2023

A Task Based Approach for Co-Scheduling Ensemble Workloads on Heterogeneous Nodes

Scientific workflows consist of multiple, connected applications, with data and results flowing from one to another in a pipeline. Traditionally, such workflows are executed in sequential order, storing intermediate data in storage disks. Co-scheduling application workflows concurrently on the same compute nodes would greatly reduce the cost of moving data to/from storage and allow real-time analysis of intermediate results. Nevertheless, most parallel programming runtimes do not allow seamless integration of various applications in a scientific workflow, in part due to the complexity of managing data and resources. The situation is even more complicated for heterogeneous systems. In this work we extend the Minos Computing Library (MCL) runtime to accelerate pipe-lined and parallel workloads where multiple applications are running in the same system. MCL’s asynchronous task library and runtime dynamically manages resources to allow co-scheduling of multiple processes sharing heterogeneous resources. In addition, we design a custom ex- tension of the Open Compute Language (OpenCL) to enable multiple processes to share device memory. We enable MCL to coordinate these shared buffers to allow for easy, fast data sharing between applications. Using malleable micro-benchmarks and two application workflows that combine scientific simulation and AI-based analysis, we show that our method outperforms traditional approaches.

Index Terms—Parallel systems, Scheduling and Task ↗
NASA NTRS1975

NASA Earth Resources Survey Symposium. Volume 1-A: Agriculture, environment

A number of papers dealing with the practical application of imagery obtained from remote sensors on LANDSAT satellites, the Skylab Earth resources experiment package, and aircraft to problems in agriculture and the environment were presented. Some of the more important topics that were covered included: range management and resources, environmental monitoring and management, crop growth and inventory, land management, multispectral band scanners, forest management, mapping, marshlands, strip mining, water quality and pollution, ecology.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1976

Radar systems for the water resources mission, volume 2

The application of synthetic aperture radar (SAR) in monitoring and managing earth resources was examined. The function of spaceborne radar is to provide maps and map imagery to be used for earth resource and oceanographic applications. Spaceborne radar has the capability of mapping the entire United States regardless of inclement weather; however, the imagery must have a high degree of resolution to be meaningful. Attaining this resolution is possible with the SAR system. Imagery of the required quality must first meet mission parameters in the following areas: antenna patterns, azimuth and range ambiguities, coverage, and angle of incidence.

Moore, R. K.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Performance Evaluation of Data-Enhanced Hierarchical Control for Grid Operations

This paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) simulation to evaluate the performance of voltage regulation of Data-Enhanced Hierarchical Control (DEHC). This DEHC uses an advanced distribution management system (ADMS) for grid operations to control legacy and grid-edge devices and coordinate with distributed energy management systems (DERMS) to manage high penetrations of photovoltaics (PV) on a utility distribution system. The HIL platform provides realistic laboratory testing, including accurate modeling (legacy devices, grid-edge devices, and PV) of the real-world distribution system from a utility partner, a real controller (ADMS), software controller DERMS, hardware grid-edge devices, and standard communications protocols. The test results demonstrate functionalities of the integrated platform and the performance of voltage regulation of the coordinated control systems. Based on laboratory testing, the utility can set up the same grid-automation system to manage DERs, legacy devices, and grid-edge devices to achieve their system-level control and operation objectives (e.g., voltage regulation), thus de-risking potential issues such as instability for field deployment.

41 EE - Solar Energy Technologies Office (EE-4S)↗
DOE OSTI2020

Performance Evaluation of Hierarchical Controls for Advanced Distribution Management System-Centered Grid Operations: Preprint

This paper presents a hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) platform to evaluate the performance of voltage regulation using an advanced distribution management system (ADMS) for grid operations to control legacy and grid-edge voltage control devices and coordinate with distributed energy management systems (DERMS) to manage high penetrations of photovoltaics (PV) on a utility distribution system. The HIL platform provides realistic laboratory testing, including accurate modeling (legacy devices, grid-edge devices, and PV) of the real-world distribution system from a utility partner, a real controller (ADMS), software controller DERMS, hardware grid-edge devices, and standard communications protocols. The test results show proper functionalities of the integrated platform and the performance of voltage regulation of the coordinated control systems. Based on laboratory testing, the utility can set up the same grid-automation system to manage DERs, legacy devices, and grid-edge devices to achieve their system-level control and operation objectives (e.g., voltage regulation), thus de-risking potential issues (e.g., instability) for field deployment.

ADMS↗
NASA NTRS2021

Indicators of Climate Change Impacts on the Water Cycle and Water Management

Managing water is a top social and economic responsibility and is expected to become even more critical as climate change, in addition to other human activities, alters water availability and quality. Robust indicators reflecting the effects of climate change on the U.S. and global water cycles are needed in order to appropriately manage water resources. Here, we describe a suite of seventeen water cycle and management indicators, which are based on synthesis of available datasets. These indicators include: average and heavy precipitation, standardized precipitation index, annual, 7-day low and 3-day high streamflow volume, streamflow timing, snow cover, snow water equivalent, groundwater level, lake water temperature, stream water temperature, dissolved oxygen, salinity, Palmer Drought Severity Index, water withdrawals and water use. We also identify three indicators that could be included in the suite of water cycle and management indicators with some additional, directed work: snowfall, evapotranspiration and soil moisture. Our conceptual framework focuses on known water cycle changes in addition to potential effects on management, and addresses water quantity and quality, as well as water use and related interactions with freshwater ecosystems, societal impacts, and management. Water cycle indicators are organized into three categories: (1) hydrologic processes, (2) water quality processes, and (3) water quality and quantity impacts. Indicators described here are recommended to serve as critical references for periodic climate assessments. As such, these indicators support analyses of the effects of global change on the natural environment, agriculture, energy, and water resources, among other sectors. Additionally, we identify research gaps and needs that can be addressed to advance the development of future indicators.

Christa D Peters-Lidard↗
NASA NTRS2017

Current Safety Nets Within the U.S. National Airspace System

There are over 70,000 flights managed per day in the National Airspace System, with approximately 7,000 aircraft in the air over the United States at any given time. Operators of each of these flights would prefer to fly a user-defined “4D” trajectory (4DT), which includes arrival and departure times; preferred gates and runways at the airport; efficient, wind-optimal routes for departure, cruise and arrival phase of flight; and fuel efficient altitude profiles. To demonstrate the magnitude of this achievement a single flight from Los Angeles to Baltimore, accesses over 35 shared or “constrained” resources that are managed by roughly 30 air traffic controllers (at towers, approach control and en route sectors); along with traffic managers at 12 facilities, using over 22 different, independent automation system (including TBFM, ERAM, STARS, ASDE-X, FSM, TSD, GPWS, TCAS, etc.). In addition, dispatchers, ramp controllers and others utilize even more systems to manage each flight’s access to operator-managed resources. Flying an ideal 4DT requires successful coordination of all flight constraints among all flights, facilities, operators, pilots and controllers. Additionally, when conditions in the NAS change, the trajectories of one or more aircraft may need to be revised to avoid loss of flight efficiency, predictability, separation or system throughput. The Aviation Safety Network has released the 2016 airliner accident statistics showing a very low total of 19 fatal airliner accidents, resulting in 325 fatalities1. Despite several high profile accidents, the year 2016 turned out to be a very safe year for commercial aviation, Aviation Safety Network data show. Over the year 2016 the Aviation Safety Network recorded a total of 19 fatal airliner accidents [1], resulting in 325 fatalities. This makes 2016 the second safest year ever, both by number of fatal accidents as well as in terms of fatalities. In 2015 ASN recorded 16 accidents while in 2013 a total of 265 lives were lost. How can we keep it that way and not upset the apple cart by premature insertion of innovative technologies, functions, and procedures? In aviation, safety nets function as the last system defense against incidents and accidents. Current ground-based and airborne safety nets are well established and development to make them more efficient and reliable continues. Additionally, future air traffic control safety nets may emerge from new operational concepts.

Smith, Brian E.↗
NASA NTRS1983

The planning and control of NASA programs and resources

The major management systems used to plan and control NASA programs and resources are described as well as their integration to form the agency's general management approach in carrying out its mission. Documents containing more detailed descriptions of the processes and techniques involved in the agency's major management systems are listed.

Source record↗
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 NTRS2020

Exploring Spatiotemporal Relations Between Soil Moisture, Precipitation, and Streamflow for a Large Set of Watersheds Using Google Earth Engine

An understanding of streamflow variability and its response to changes in climate conditions is essential for water resource planning and management practices that will help to mitigate the impacts of extreme events such as floods and droughts on agriculture and other human activities. This study investigated the relationship between precipitation, soil moisture, and streamflow over a wide range of watersheds across the United States using Google Earth Engine (GEE). The correlation analyses disclosed a strong association between precipitation, soil moisture, and streamflow, however, soil moisture was found to have a higher correlation with the streamflow relative to precipitation. Results indicated different strength of the association depends on the watershed classes and lag times assessments. The perennial watersheds showed higher coherence compared to intermittent watersheds. Previous month precipitation and soil moisture have a stronger influence on the current month streamflow, particularly in the snow-dominated watersheds. Monthly streamflow forecasting models were developed using an autoregressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) and support vector machine (SVM). The results showed that the SVM model generally performed better than the ARIMA model. Overall streamflow forecasting model performance varied considerably among watershed classes, and perennial watersheds tend to exhibit better predictably compared to intermittent watersheds due to lower streamflow variability. The SVM models with precipitation and streamflow inputs performed better than those with streamflow input only. Results indicated that the inclusion of antecedent root-zone soil moisture improved the streamflow forecasting in most of the watersheds, and the largest improvements occurred in the intermittent watersheds. In conclusion, this work demonstrated that knowing the relationship between precipitation, soil moisture, and streamflow in different watershed classes will enhance the understanding of the hydrologic process and can be effectively utilized in improving streamflow forecasting for better satellite-based water resource management strategies.

Nazmus Sazib↗
NASA NTRS1991

Demonstration of automated proximity and docking technologies

An autodock was demonstrated using straightforward techniques and real sensor hardware. A simulation testbed was established and validated. The sensor design was refined with improved optical performance and image processing noise mitigation techniques, and the sensor is ready for production from off-the-shelf components. The autonomous spacecraft architecture is defined. The areas of sensors, docking hardware, propulsion, and avionics are included in the design. The Guidance Navigation and Control architecture and requirements are developed. Modular structures suitable for automated control are used. The spacecraft system manager functions including configuration, resource, and redundancy management are defined. The requirements for autonomous spacecraft executive are defined. High level decisionmaking, mission planning, and mission contingency recovery are a part of this. The next step is to do flight demonstrations. After the presentation the following question was asked. How do you define validation? There are two components to validation definition: software simulation with formal and vigorous validation, and hardware and facility performance validated with respect to software already validated against analytical profile.

Anderson, Robert L.↗
NASA NTRS1986

Mature data transport and command management services for the Space Station

The duplex space/ground/space data services for the Space Station are described. The need to separate the uplink data service functions from the command functions is discussed. Command management is a process shared by an operation control center and a command management system and consists of four functions: (1) uplink data communications, (2) management of the on-board computer, (3) flight resource allocation and management, and (4) real command management. The new data service capabilities provided by microprocessors, ground and flight nodes, and closed loop and open loop capabilities are studied. The need for and functions of a flight resource allocation management service are examined. The system is designed so only users can access the system; the problems encountered with open loop uplink access are analyzed. The procedures for delivery of operational, verification, computer, and surveillance and monitoring data directly to users are reviewed.

Carper, R. D.↗