Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Status”

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 1,207 records · Page 67
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Fuel Conversion Efforts at the High Flux Isotope Reactor – a 2020 Status Update

The High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) provides one of the world’s highest steady-state neutron fluxes in the world for neutron scattering experiments focused on impactful scientific discovery, as well as materials irradiation studies and production of medical, industrial, and research isotopes. Efforts are ongoing to convert HFIR from high-enriched uranium (HEU) to low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel while maintaining or enhancing current performance and safety margin, thus sustaining HFIR’s mission portfolio and reactor-based neutron science leadership. This paper presents a status update on the HFIR fuel conversion efforts.

Chandler, David↗
DOE OSTI2021

Summary Status of FY21 Regulatory Framework Development Activities and Associated Progress.

This report provides an end-of-year summary that reflects the progress and status of Idaho National Laboratory’s activities concerning advanced reactor regulatory framework development and implementation in the U.S. This work was done in FY 2021 and supported regulatory development for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Reactor Technologies Program. These activities are managed by Idaho National Laboratory on behalf of the U.S. DOE.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Status of LEU U-10Mo Monolithic Fuel Testing and Qualification Efforts to Support US High Performance Research Reactor Conversions

The US High Performance Research Reactor Project has begun a new phase of fuel testing and post irradiation examination (PIE) of plate-type low-enriched uranium (LEU) U-10Mo Monolithic fuel. The testing campaigns are intended to first confirm that the fuel performance behavior of commercially produced fuel matches that of the lab-scale fabricated fuel tested during development, followed by qualification of the U-10Mo monolithic fuel system through the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Planned tests include miniature-plate, full-size plate, and fuel element irradiations, during which fuel test specimens fabricated with qualified processes will be irradiated under conditions that bound the NRC-regulated reactors in order to demonstrate that the fuel meets the overarching fuel performance requirements of 1) maintaining mechanical integrity 2) maintaining geometric stability and 3) exhibiting stable and predictable behavior. The MP-1 test, with the objective of confirming fuel performance behavior, is currently undergoing irradiation in the Advanced Test Reactor and PIE in INL hot cells. Status of upcoming qualification and licensing test design activities and highlights of initial as-fabricated characterization and testing results from the MP-1 test will be provided.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2020 Data)

Green power refers to renewable electricity voluntarily purchased by retail electricity customers. Renewable energy sources for green power include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and small-scale hydropower. This report summarizes data on the various ways in which voluntary purchasers - including residential, commercial, and institutional customers - purchase green power. We summarize key historic trends in U.S. voluntary green power markets and the current status of green power sales through seven products: utility green pricing programs, utility renewable contracts, competitive suppliers, unbundled renewable energy certificates, community choice aggregations, and power purchase agreements. It includes discussion of how the voluntary market may impact the grid.

community choice aggregation↗
DOE OSTI2021

FY 2021 GIF-RSWG and WGSAR Status Report

This report provides an end of year summary that reflects the progress and status of United States activities supporting the Global International Forum’s Risk & Safety Working Group and the international regulators associated with the Working Group on the Safety of Advanced Reactors. This effort has commenced with the development of a technology neutral, risk-informed approach for the selection of licensing basis events and the assessment of defense in depth for Gen IV reactor technologies. These U.S. activities are being managed by Idaho National Laboratory on behalf of the U.S. Department of Energy.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Non-LWR Regulatory Framework FY20 Status Report

This report provides an end-of-year summary that reflects progress and status of INL’s activities concerning advanced reactor regulatory framework development and implementation in the U.S. This work was done in FY20 and supported regulatory development for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Advanced Reactor Technologies (ART) Program. These activities are managed by Idaho National Laboratory on behalf of the U.S. DOE.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2019

Current Status of the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return Program

In 1999, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), together with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the Russian Federation, agreed to start a new nuclear non-proliferation initiative to return Russian/Soviet-origin highly enriched uranium (HEU) back to its country of origin. Trilateral discussions among the U.S., the Russian Federation, and the IAEA identified more than 20 research reactors in 16 countries (Belarus, Bulgaria, China, Czech Republic, DPRK, Germany, Hungary, Kazakhstan, Latvia, Libya, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam) that had Russian/Soviet-origin HEU. In 2000, the IAEA Director General sent a letter to 16 countries asking for their willingness to return this spent HEU fuel to the Russian Federation. Fourteen countries responded positively to the Director General’s letter. The primary goal of the Russian Research Reactor Fuel Return (RRRFR) program, managed by DOE’s National Nuclear Security Administration, Office of Material Management and Minimization, is to advance nuclear nonproliferation objectives by encouraging eligible countries to convert their research reactors from HEU to low-enriched uranium (LEU) fuel and to eliminate stockpiles of HEU. In May 2004, the United States and the Russian Federation signed a Government-to-Government Agreement that established the legal framework necessary for cooperation between the United States and the Russian Federation for the return of research/test reactor fuel from eligible countries. To date, the RRRFR program has completed sixty-three successful operations to repatriate almost 2,300 kg of Russian-origin HEU fresh and spent fuel. All Russian-origin HEU has been completely removed from 12 countries: Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Georgia, Latvia, Libya, Poland, Romania, Serbia, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. At the present time Russian-origin HEU remains in Kazakhstan, Belarus, Germany, DPRK, and China. This paper describes the current status of the RRRFR program and preparations for upcoming HEU removal and down-blending activities.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Microneedle-based electrical impedance sensor to monitor plant water status in real time

A sensor uses microneedle electrodes and multi-frequency electrical impedance spectroscopy to monitor plant water status in real time. The microneedle can be between 10 and 1000 microns in length, enabling precise placement in a variety of plant tissues. The impedance behavior can distinguish electrical properties and physiological functions of different plant tissue types. Therefore, impedance measurements can be used to monitor water stress to prevent irreversible damage to a plant and to enable improvement of plant biomass or fruit yield.

Hanson, David T.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Status of the Fermilab Muon g - 2 Experiment

The muon anomalous magnetic moment, aµ = ( g - 2 )/2, is a low-energy observable which can be both measured and computed with very high precision, making it an excellent test of the Standard Model (SM) and a sensitive probe of new physics. Recent efforts improved the precision of both the theoretical prediction and the experimental measurement. On the theory side, the Muon g - 2 Theory Initiative, an international team of more than 130 physicists, reached in 2020 a consensus on the SM prediction for aµ. On the experimental side, the E989 Muon g - 2 Collaboration at Fermilab (FNAL) published in April 2021 a new measurement of aµ from the Run-1 dataset (2018) with 0.46 ppm precision, corroborating the previous Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) measurement and increasing the discrepancy with the SM value to 4.2 standard deviations. In this paper, I will discuss the experimental setup and report on the current status of the experiment.

Girotti, Paolo↗
DOE OSTI2022

Current Status of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Hands-On Criticality Safety Training

The U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) has conducted two-week Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Practitioner courses since 2011 to support the training and qualification of new NCS staff. The course was developed in accordance with the American National Standard Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) standard for NCS training and qualifications (ANSI/ANS-8.26-2007). In 2013, an NCS Manager’s course was developed for process supervisors, managers, regulators, and other professionals with NCS-related responsibilities. This course was revised in 2019 for Criticality Safety Officers (CSOs) based on an NCSP Criticality Safety Support Group tasking (2018-01). This course was piloted at the Nevada Field Office and the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) in June 2021. These courses consist of the following training components: classroom education, facility training, and hands-on subcritical and critical experiments training. The two-week Practitioner course offers a week of classroom training, with practical workshops and exercises focused on teaching students how to perform an NCS evaluation. The second week of training involves hands-on critical and subcritical experiments and measurements. The first week is offered in Las Vegas, Nevada, at the DOE Nevada Field Office or the National Atomic Testing Museum. Depending on the student’s clearance level, the second week is offered at Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) (uncleared and L-cleared students) or at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (Q-cleared students). The one-week Manager’s course is offered at SNL or NCERC, depending on clearance or interest, and includes classroom and hands- on critical and subcritical experiments and measurements. This paper provides an overview and status report for the DOE/NNSA NCSP training courses in NCS and to provide information about future course offerings. This paper discusses the challenges associated with executing the training courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2-week Practitioner and 1-week manager courses are currently offered twice per year and adjustments are made based upon demand.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety – Overview and Status

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (23 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in revision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Domestic and International Standards for Nuclear Criticality Safety - Overview & Status [Abstract]

The domestic and international consensus standards for nuclear criticality safety (NCS) have provided guidance for staff performing hands-on work in operations with fissionable materials. These consensus standards have contributed directly to the significant reduction in the rate of criticality accidents in process facilities since the 1940s. The last known criticality accident inside the United States was in 1978 (nearly 43 years ago) at the Idaho Chemical Processing Plant, and outside the United States, an accident occurred at Tokai-mura, Japan, in 1999 (22 years ago). The domestic consensus standards for NCS include the American Nuclear Society (ANS) standards. The ANS Standards Board, the NCS Consensus Committee, and the ANS-8 Subcommittee oversee the development and maintenance of these standards. There are currently eighteen standards in the ANS-8 series. Currently, there are six ANS-8 standards in re- vision mode and eleven in a maintenance mode with one new standard under development. The international consensus standards for NCS calculations, procedures, and practices are maintained and developed within the International Organization for Standardization, Technical Committee 85 on Nuclear Energy, Subcommittee 5 on Nuclear Fuel Technology, and Working Group 8, “Nuclear Criticality Safety.” Eleven standards are currently available, three standards are in revision mode, and two standards are development. This paper provides the NCS community with an overview and status report of domestic and international NCS consensus standards to stimulate interest and to support their continued development.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Current Status of the DOE/NNSA Nuclear Criticality Safety Program Hands-On Criticality Safety Training [Abstract]

The U.S. Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) Nuclear Criticality Safety Program (NCSP) has conducted two-week Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Practitioner courses since 2011 to support the training and qualification of new NCS staff. The course was developed in accordance with the American National Standard Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) standard for NCS training and qualifications (ANSI/ANS-8.26-2007). In 2013, an NCS Manager’s course was developed for process supervisors, managers, regulators, and other professionals with NCS-related responsibilities. This course was revised in 2019 for Criticality Safety Officers (CSOs) based on an NCSP Criticality Safety Support Group tasking (2018-01). This course was piloted at the Nevada Field Office and the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (NCERC) in June 2021. These courses consist of the following training components: classroom education, facility training, and hands-on subcritical and critical experiments training. The two-week Practitioner course offers a week of classroom training, with practical workshops and exercises focused on teaching students how to perform an NCS evaluation. The second week of training involves hands-on critical and subcritical experiments and measurements. The first week is offered in Las Vegas, Nevada, at the DOE Nevada Field Office or the National Atomic Testing Museum. Depending on the student’s clearance level, the second week is offered at Sandia National Laboratory (SNL) (uncleared and L-cleared students) or at the National Criticality Experiments Research Center (Q-cleared students). The one-week Manager’s course is offered at SNL or NCERC, depending on clearance or interest, and includes classroom and hands-on critical and subcritical experiments and measurements. This paper provides an overview and status report for the DOE/NNSA NCSP training courses in NCS and to provide information about future course offerings. This paper will also discuss the challenges associated with executing the training courses during the COVID-19 pandemic. The 2-week Practitioner and 1-week manager courses are currently offered twice per year and adjustments are made based upon demand.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Status and Trends in the Voluntary Market (2021 Data)

Green power refers to renewable electricity voluntarily purchased by retail electricity customers. Renewable energy sources for green power include solar, wind, biomass, geothermal, and small-scale hydropower. This report summarizes data on the various ways in which voluntary purchasers including residential, commercial, and institutional customers purchase green power. We summarize key historic trends in U.S. voluntary green power markets and the current status of green power sales through seven products: utility green pricing programs, utility renewable contracts, competitive suppliers, unbundled renewable energy certificates, community choice aggregations, and power purchase agreements. It includes discussion of how the voluntary market may impact the grid.

ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗