Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “resilient”

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 127 records · Page 7
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2022

Emerging signals of declining forest resilience under climate change

Forest ecosystems depend on their capacity to withstand and recover from natural and anthropogenic perturbations (that is, their resilience). Experimental evidence of sudden increases in tree mortality is raising concerns about variation in forest resilience, yet little is known about how it is evolving in response to climate change. Here we integrate satellite-based vegetation indices with machine learning to show how forest resilience, quantified in terms of critical slowing down indicators, has changed during the period 2000–2020. We show that tropical, arid and temperate forests are experiencing a significant decline in resilience, probably related to increased water limitations and climate variability. By contrast, boreal forests show divergent local patterns with an average increasing trend in resilience, probably benefiting from warming and CO 2 fertilization, which may outweigh the adverse effects of climate change. These patterns emerge consistently in both managed and intact forests, corroborating the existence of common large-scale climate drivers. Reductions in resilience are statistically linked to abrupt declines in forest primary productivity, occurring in response to slow drifting towards a critical resilience threshold. Approximately 23% of intact undisturbed forests, corresponding to 3.32 Pg C of gross primary productivity, have already reached a critical threshold and are experiencing a further degradation in resilience. Together, these signals reveal a widespread decline in the capacity of forests to withstand perturbation that should be accounted for in the design of land-based mitigation and adaptation plans

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Integrated Metrics for County-Level Resilience Ranking Using Entropy and TOPSIS

In the face of atypical weather events, power infrastructure failures, and limited resources for resilience investment, energy decision-makers need data-driven metrics to allocate resilience investments and maximize the reduction of power outage impacts. For state-level planning, for instance, ranking the resilience of each county is key to ensuring effective distribution of resources. In such cases, resilience for each spatial unit is multifaceted and is captured by a set of indicators (i.e., metrics) that can be combined into an overall score that reduces the complexity of power outage dynamics to a single decision metric. However, weighting of these indicators is often addressed by simplifying assumptions (i.e., equal weights) or semi-subjective methods that rely on user-defined weights that can introduce biases (e.g., weighted average score). Within the disaster risk reduction and resilience engineering community, a recurring challenge in multicriteria decision-making is the objective weighting of indicators for composite indices. To address this issue, we have leveraged a Technique for Order of Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) combined with an entropy-based weighting approach to calculated the integrated scores. This method objectively determines the importance of each metric, better discerns between spatial units (i.e., counties), and offers a more reliable ranking of counties according to their relative resilience attributes. By improving methods for integrating resilience indicators, our approach helps planners and decision-makers prioritize resources more effectively for more efficient resilience investments.

Bhusal, Narayan [Oak Ridge National Laboratory (OR↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going beyond reliability to robustness and resilience in space systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience, are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environments is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes are usually unanticipated. They often invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging events. These three are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems, the ability to perform after unanticipated events, would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness can be done by dealing with known sources of problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. Two contrasting approaches are reducing system complexity and adding supervisory control. The need for resilience has been claimed for decades but little has been accomplished. Systems designers assume that they understand requirements, technologies, designs, architectures, integration, testing, operations, and environments. The potential problems of changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns are ignored. Systems designers are typically overconfident and ignore the need for robustness and resilience.

Harry W Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Going Beyond Reliability to Robustness and Resilience in Space Life Support Systems

The words reliability, robustness, and resilience are often used interchangeably to describe tough and dependable systems but the distinctions between them suggest how to design more serviceable space systems. Reliability is simply the quality of consistently performing well. A system that dependably meets its design requirements in the specified environment is reliable. The designers may not consider themselves responsible for failures under unanticipated conditions. Robustness is the capability of performing without failure under a wide range of conditions, which can go beyond the expected range to include possible off-nominal conditions. Resilience is the ability to recover from or adapt to unanticipated damaging events, such as failures, accidents, external disruptions, and repurposing. Such changes can invalidate the usual operating assumptions and cause system failure. Reliability, robustness, and resilience describe dependable performance under increasingly difficult conditions, first the specified environment, then a wider possible environment, and finally unanticipated damaging conditions. These three qualities are increasingly desirable and increasingly difficult to achieve. Engineering for resilience would design systems that can ignore or repair failures, survive accidents, and recover from unanticipated disruptions. Increasing the resilience of space systems would greatly increase space crew safety. Improving reliability and robustness requires dealing with known problems, but improving resilience requires implementing a general approach to reducing the impact of unknown future events. The need for robustness and resilience has been stated for decades but little has been done. Systems designers often assume that they understand everything they need to know. The potential failures caused by changes, failures, accidents, unknown environments, and unknown unknowns can be ignored. Such overconfidence can lead to neglect of reliability, robustness, and resilience.

Harry W. Jones↗
NASA NTRS2022

Resiliency in Future Cislunar Space Architectures

This work introduces and explores the concept of resiliency as it relates to future cislunar space architectures by 1) citing examples of its growing demand across government; 2) describing potential characteristics of resilient systems; 3) introducing a framework for evaluating the linkages between resilient capabilities and visions for future cislunar architectures; and 4) exercising the framework to identify and evaluate resiliency-enabling technical capabilities for cislunar space architectures. We assert that resiliency can emerge from a layered approach of deliberately chosen capabilities with overlap and flexibility that, in aggerate, result in a resilient system. The challenge is to identify capabilities that contribute to resiliency and to accurately characterize their value. Resiliency is discussed through the lens of future architecture planning, outlining how the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) can benefit from a shift in approach when transitioning focus to the cislunar environment.

Jason Hay↗
DOE OSTI2022

Incorporating climate change into risk-informed resilience planning

In response to the development of portfolio-wide Climate Action Plans by federal agencies, federal sites are working to incorporate the impacts of climate change into their resilience assessments. However, it can be challenging to incorporate climate change scenarios into resilience assessments given the uncertainty inherent in climate change modeling. Incorporating these factors into a resilience plan requires an understanding of what the different climate scenarios mean, as well as how to estimate potential impacts of climate change on hazard occurrence on a regional, or even local, scale under different scenarios. We discuss approaches to incorporating this data into risk-informed resilience assessment processes, such as those implemented in the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program’s (FEMP) Technical Resilience Navigator (TRN) and the Sustainability Performance Division’s (SPD) Vulnerability Assessment and Resilience Plan (VARP) Risk Assessment Tool. We also describe the climate scenarios and the availability of hazard data for site resilience planning, based on modeling included in the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the National Climate Assessment (NCA), and state-level reports. We present examples from the TRN risk assessment and the VARP Risk Assessment Tool to illustrate how sensitivity analysis can be used to incorporate climate change projections into the resilience planning process.

Rabinowitz, Hannah S.↗
DOE OSTI2023

Methods for Analysis and Quantification of Power System Resilience

This paper summarizes the report prepared by an IEEE PES Task Force. Resilience is a fairly new technical concept for power systems, and it is important to precisely delineate this concept for actual applications. As a critical infrastructure, power systems have to be prepared to survive rare but extreme incidents (natural catastrophes, extreme weather events, physical/cyber-attacks, equipment failure cascades, etc.) to guarantee power supply to the electricity-dependent economy and society. Thus, resilience needs to be integrated into planning and operational assessment to design and operate adequately resilient power systems. Quantification of resilience as a key performance indicator is important, together with costs and reliability. Quantification can analyze existing power systems and identify resilience improvements in future power systems. Given that a 100% resilient system is not economic (or even technically achievable), the degree of resilience should be transparent and comprehensible. Several gaps are identified to indicate further needs for research and development.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Deep Reinforcement Learning for Resilient Power and Energy Systems: Progress, Prospects, and Future Avenues

In recent years, deep reinforcement learning (DRL) has garnered substantial attention in the context of enhancing resilience in power and energy systems. Resilience, characterized by the ability to withstand, absorb, and quickly recover from natural disasters and human-induced disruptions, has become paramount in ensuring the stability and dependability of critical infrastructure. This comprehensive review delves into the latest advancements and applications of DRL in enhancing the resilience of power and energy systems, highlighting significant contributions and key insights. The exploration commences with a concise elucidation of the fundamental principles of DRL, highlighting the intricate interplay among reinforcement learning (RL), deep learning, and the emergence of DRL. Furthermore, it categorizes and describes various DRL algorithms, laying a robust foundation for comprehending the applicability of DRL. The linkage between DRL and power system resilience is forged through a systematic classification of DRL applications into five pivotal dimensions: dynamic response, recovery and restoration, energy management and control, communications and cybersecurity, and resilience planning and metrics development. This structured categorization facilitates a methodical exploration of how DRL methodologies can effectively tackle critical challenges within the domain of power and energy system resilience. The review meticulously examines the inherent challenges and limitations entailed in integrating DRL into power and energy system resilience, shedding light on practical challenges and potential pitfalls. Additionally, it offers insights into promising avenues for future research, with the aim of inspiring innovative solutions and further progress in this vital domain.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Conceptualizing Energy Security and Resilience

Climate resilience and energy resilience are inextricably linked, since the transition to a safe and secure grid powered by renewables is central to both adaptation and mitigation efforts. As geopolitical tensions intensify and it becomes clear how integral supply chains are to our clean energy future, the term "energy security" has become a central concept, similar to resilience in the climate and energy lexicon. This project seeks to understand the role of energy system resilience within energy security. The key research questions are: "How are energy system resilience and energy security related?" and "What is the role of renewables within both security and resilience?" A strong conceptual understanding of these terms will set the stage for truly accelerating secure and resilient innovations at scale.

climate resilience↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hierarchical Resilience Planning for Networked Microgrids: A Case Study of Puerto Rico

Microgrids can be designed to enhance the energy resilience of communities and critical infrastructures, such as hospitals, data centers, and communication networks, which are vulnerable to frequent weather-related disruption. Coordinating multiple microgrids in a network can leverage the geographical diversity of load and generation resources while enabling resilient and cost-effective planning of the distribution system. Designing a networked microgrid is complex, involving intricate technical assessment, cost-benefit analysis, site-specific requirements, and the evaluation of existing resources. Therefore, this paper proposes a hierarchical resilience planning framework and performs an extensive techno-economic analysis for the design of a networked microgrid. Hierarchical resilience planning involves technology sizing at an individual community level to meet the critical load and satisfy resilience criteria, and resource optimization at networked microgrid level to provide a higher level of resilience and energy adequacy. A real-world case of Puerto Rico's cooperative microgrid “Microrred de la Montaña” is investigated considering localized electricity tariffs, site-specific demand profiles, solar generation, and existing hydro resources. Multiple optimization scenarios are developed based on the resiliency requirement to estimate the capacity of solar photovoltaic and battery energy storage (BES) to be installed at each substation. The results provide the optimal sizing for individual community and networked microgrid to withstand 1day and 3-day outages along with the criteria for critical load.

13 - HYDRO ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Quantitative resilience evaluation on recovery from emergency situations in nuclear power plants

Here, this paper mainly introduces how to develop a resilience evaluation model by quantifying the relationship between resilience and resilience components in regard to recovering from emergency situations in nuclear power plants (NPPs). It is an extension of the author’s previous researches. To develop the model, the first step was to analyze event reports published in Republic of Korea in terms of resilience factors from different safety perspectives. Second, statistical methods such as factor analysis, principal component analysis, and multivariate regression analysis were applied to the dataset to identify relations among resilience factors and develop a quantitative resilience evaluation model for recovery from emergency situations in NPPs. Third, the model was validated using the recent event report data released in Korea. Lastly, we present a discussion on how to apply the quantitative resilience evaluation model to results from stress tests performed in Korea.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Reinforcement Learning for feedback-enabled cyber resilience

The rapid growth in the number of devices and their connectivity has enlarged the attack surface and made cyber systems more vulnerable. As attackers become increasingly sophisticated and resourceful, mere reliance on traditional cyber protection, such as intrusion detection, firewalls, and encryption, is insufficient to secure the cyber systems. Cyber resilience provides a new security paradigm that complements inadequate protection with resilience mechanisms. A Cyber-Resilient Mechanism (CRM) adapts to the known or zero-day threats and uncertainties in real-time and strategically responds to them to maintain the critical functions of the cyber systems in the event of successful attacks. Feedback architectures play a pivotal role in enabling the online sensing, reasoning, and actuation process of the CRM. Reinforcement Learning (RL) is an important gathering of algorithms that epitomize the feedback architectures for cyber resilience. It allows the CRM to provide dynamic and sequential responses to attacks with limited or without prior knowledge of the environment and the attacker. In this work, we review the literature on RL for cyber resilience and discuss the cyber-resilient defenses against three major types of vulnerabilities, i.e., posture-related, information-related, and human-related vulnerabilities. Here we introduce moving target defense, defensive cyber deception, and assistive human security technologies as three application domains of CRMs to elaborate on their designs. The RL algorithms also have vulnerabilities themselves. We explain the major vulnerabilities of RL and present develop several attack models where the attacker target the information exchanged between the environment and the agent: the rewards, the state observations, and the action commands. We show that the attacker can trick the RL agent into learning a nefarious policy with minimum attacking effort. The paper introduces several defense methods to secure the RL-enabled systems from these attacks. However, there is still a lack of works that focuses on the defensive mechanisms for RL-enabled systems. Last but not least, we discuss the future challenges of RL for cyber security and resilience and emerging applications of RL-based CRMs.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2022

DINGO: Digital assistant to grid operators for resilience management of power distribution system

With increasing adverse weather events and disasters, enabling resiliency of the power distribution system (PDS) is becoming increasingly important. Here in this work, resiliency is defined as the systems ability to keep supplying critical loads even with multiple contingencies. Resiliency may depend on: (a) advanced tools to assist operators in situational awareness and decision making with the increasing volume of data generated by the PDS, (b) visualization and ease of interaction with system resources and information, especially during extreme events and resulting human operator stress, and (c) flexible resources and autonomous control. Operators and support engineers need to interact with the system for key information and take action under stress, given the requirement for decisions in a short time. Integrated technological solutions are prevailing steps to support the most appropriate decision during critical times to serve essential loads. In order to meet the required goals, a Real-time Resiliency Monitoring and Operational Decision Support (RT-RMOD) tool have been developed. It supports various functionalities, including real-time monitoring, resilience assessment, and proactive decision support. However, this work makes advanced feature additions to the tool by developing data-enabled resilience management algorithms for (i) outage detection and localization, (ii) Resiliency-metric driven restoration and reconfiguration, and (iii) NLP based digital assistant for operators called DINGO (DIgital assistaNt to Grid Operators) to interact with Advanced Distribution Management System (ADMS) and RT-RMOD. The developed algorithm was validated for multiple cases of weather events using a real-world, off-grid microgrid system modeled in a real-time simulator, sensor data, and software tools.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Defining weather scenarios for simulation-based assessment of thermal resilience of buildings under current and future climates: A case study in Brazil

In response to increasingly severe weather conditions, optimization of building performance and investment provides an opportunity to consider co-benefits of thermal resilience during energy efficiency retrofits. This work aims to assess thermal resilience of buildings using building performance simulation to evaluate the indoor overheating risk under nine weather scenarios, considering historical (2010s), mid-term future (2050s), and long-term future (2090s) typical meteorological years, and heat wave years. Such an analysis is based on resilience profiles that combine six integrated indicators. A case study with a district of 92 buildings in Brazil was conducted, and a combination of strategies to improve thermal resilience was identified. Results reflect the necessity of planning for resilience in the context of climate change. This is because strategies recommended under current conditions might not be ideal in the future. Therefore, an adaptable design should be prioritized. Cooling energy consumption could increase by 48 % by the 2050s, while excessive overheating issues could reach 37 % of the buildings. Simple passive strategies can significantly reduce the heat stress. A comprehensive thermal resilience analysis should ultimately be accompanied by a thorough reflection on the stakeholders’ objectives, available resources, and planning horizon, as well as the risks assumed for not being resilient.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2026

Integrating three plan evaluation approaches for coordinated heat resilience in cities across the Arizona urban corridor

Increasing heat poses a growing threat to cities worldwide due to both climate change and the urban heat island effect. While heat planning and governance are still emergent, research suggests that silos and conflicts within cities' networks of plans often impede heat resilience. Integrated heat resilience planning, therefore, requires a systematic and comprehensive analysis of the silos and conflicts relevant to heat resilience within networks of plans. This study is the first to combine three complementary plan evaluation methods to assess how cities' networks of plans address heat resilience. We applied 1) plan cross-referencing, 2) Plan Quality Evaluation for Heat Resilience, and 3) Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard™ (PIRS™) for Heat to 19 plans from seven Arizona cities. We find similarities and differences in how these cities' networks of plans address heat hazards. The plans have consistently high-quality participation and coordination principles but lack details on vulnerability and climate change uncertainty, suggesting a need to move beyond immediate heat risks. We also identify opportunities to diversify policy mechanisms, spatially target high heat risk areas, and enhance the connection between planning efforts. These results validate that plan elements are interlinked and the importance of integrative plan development processes to improve heat resilience.

Extreme heat↗
DOE OSTI2023

Multi-scenario Extreme Weather Simulator application to heat waves: Ko’olauloa community resilience hub

Heat waves are increasing in severity, duration, and frequency. The Multi-Scenario Extreme Weather Simulator (MEWS) models this using historical data, climate model outputs, and heat wave multipliers. In this study, MEWS is applied for planning of a community resilience hub in Hau'ula, Hawaii. The hub will have normal operations and resilience operations modes. Both these modes were modeled using EnergyPlus. The resilience operations mode includes cutting off air conditioning for many spaces to decrease power requirements during emergencies. Results were simulated for 300 future weather files generated by MEWS for 2020, 2040, 2060, and 2080. Shared socioeconomic pathways 2-4.5, 3-7.0 and 5-8.5 were used. The resilience operations mode results show two to six times increase of hours of exceedance beyond 32.2 °C from present conditions, depending on climate scenario and future year. The resulting decrease in thermal resilience enables an average decrease of energy use intensity of 26% with little sensitivity to climate change. The decreased thermal resilience predicted in the future is undesirable, but was not severe enough to require a more energy-intensive resilience mode. Instead, planning is needed to assure vulnerable individuals are given prioritized access to air-conditioned parts of the hub if worst-case heat waves occur.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2020

Optimal Operation for Resilient and Economic Modes in an Islanded Alaskan Grid

Legacy energy management systems for distribution system or microgrids are typically driven by economics. During extreme events, resiliency can be defined as ability of the system to keep supplying critical loads. Resilient operation during extreme events (e.g. avalanche in Alaska) may require decision variables to be different and conflicting with economic operation. Operational objectives are driven by a complex consideration of the economic, reliable and resilient operation of the system: economic and reliable in normal operating state and resilient during extreme events. Challenge is to move between economic and resilient operation in optimal manner and setting up problem formulation and constraints specially with Distributed Energy Resources (DERs). In this paper, we focus on striking a balance between optimal economic and resilient operation using novel formulation and developed tool called Resiliency Enabled Energy System Operation Toolbox (RE-ESOT). Simulation results are provided for a real islanded grid in Alaska with battery energy systems.

50 EE - Wind and Water Power Program - Water (EE-4↗