Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “meter”

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 1,297 records · Page 72
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Guide to Flow Measurement for Electric Propulsion Systems

In electric propulsion (EP) systems, accurate measurement of the propellant mass flow rate of gas or liquid to the thruster and external cathode is a key input in the calculation of thruster efficiency and specific impulse. Although such measurements are often achieved with commercial mass flow controllers and meters integrated into propellant feed systems, the variability in potential propellant options and flow requirements amongst the spectrum of EP power regimes and devices complicates meter selection, integration, and operation. At the direction of the Committee on Standards for Electric Propulsion Testing, a guide was jointly developed by members of the electric propulsion community to establish a unified document that contains the working principles, methods of implementation and analysis, and calibration techniques and recommendations on the use of mass flow meters in laboratory and spacecraft electric propulsion systems. The guide is applicable to EP devices of all types and power levels ranging from microthrusters to high-power ion engines and Hall effect thrusters. The establishment of a community standard on mass flow metering will help ensure the selection of the proper meter for each application. It will also improve the quality of system performance estimates by providing comprehensive information on the physical phenomena and systematic errors that must be accounted for during the analysis of flow measurement data. This paper will outline the standard methods and recommended practices described in the guide titled "Flow Measurement for Electric Propulsion Systems."

spacecraft electric propulsion (EP) systems↗
DOE OSTI2023

Energy Data from Heat Pumps Installed in Juneau, AK

Heat pumps offer a great low carbon emission method to heat homes. Thermalize Juneau 2021 was a clean energy campaign that helped homeowners in Juneau, Alaska install heat pumps into their homes. Juneau is located near the climactic limit of many heat pumps, and we were interested in how well the heat pumps can function in cold climates. This was done by using Sense meters to remotely monitor the energy usage of 10 homes with heat pumps. The Sense meters are small devices that connect to the electrical panel and monitor the energy use of multiple appliances through machine learning. First, we recorded the energy usage of a heat pump in the lab using both the Sense meter and the existing lab datalogger. Both recorded very similar energy usage data which confirmed that the Sense meter can accurately measure the fluctuations in the heat pump energy use. Next, we looked at the energy data from the Sense meters in the homes with heat pumps and paired it with local weather data to see how well the heat pumps functioned in the cold weather.

Alaska↗
DOE OSTI2024

A Novel Authentication Management for the Data Security of Smart Grid

Bidirectional wireless communication is employed in various smart grid components such as smart meters and control and monitoring applications where security is vital. The Trusted Third Party (TTP) and wireless connectivity between the smart meter and the third party in the key management-based encryption techniques for the smart grid are expected to be totally trustworthy and dependable. In a wired/wireless medium, however, a man-in-the-middle may seek to disrupt, monitor and manipulate the network, or simply execute a replay attack, revealing its vulnerability. Recognizing this, this study presents a novel authentication management (model) comprised of two layer security schema. The first layer implements an efficient novel encryption method for secure data exchange between meters and control center with the help of two partially trusted simple servers (constitutes the TTP). In this setting, one server handles the data encryption between the meter and control center/central database, and the other server administers the random sequence of data transmission. The second layer monitors and verifies exchanged data packets among smart meters. It detects abnormal packets from suspicious sources. To implement this node-to-node authentication, One class support vector machine algorithm is proposed which takes advantages of the location information as well as the data transmission history (node identification, packet size, and data transmission frequency). This schema secures data communication, and imposes a comprehensive privacy throughout the system without considerably extending the complexity of the conventional key management scheme.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Pump House in East River Watershed, Colorado 2019-2024

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Pump House at Mount Crested Butte in the East River Watershed. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format ER-X-Y, where ER refers to East River, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, ER-PHS, ER-LMC, ER-LMF, and ER-SMN are associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and ER-RBTn (upslope n=1) are sampling transects during the 2019 Rootball Campaign. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Trail Creek in Taylor River Watershed, Colorado 2024-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors near Trail Creek. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format TR-X-Y, where TR refers to Trail Creek, X is the treatment block identifier, and Y is the location identifier. Specifically, TR-ASCC1 is the control treatment block under the Adaptive Silviculture for Climate Change (ASCC) project, and TR-ASCC2 is the clear-cut treatment block. TR-ASCC-EHSn is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and TR-ASCC-ERTn (upslope n=1) are ecohydrology sites along the electrical resistivity tomography transects. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv, and the data from the soil sensors will be included in a future data version when the observation period becomes sufficiently long for data analysis. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the two sampling methods – (1) intact cores or (2) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. The intact cores were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2026

Soil Water Retention and Hydraulic Conductivity Data and Model at Snodgrass Mountain in East River Watershed, Colorado 2020-2025

This data package includes soil water retention and hydraulic conductivity data and model fitting results from measurements of ex-situ soil samples and in-situ soil sensors at Snodgrass Mountain. Soil water retention curves (SWRC) characterize soil water content as a function of soil water potential. SWRC depends on soil texture and pore structure and can be used to describe the constraints on biogeochemical processes in terms of soil water availability. In this data package, the sample identification follows the format SG-X-Y, where SG refers to Snodgrass Mountain, X is the location identifier, and Y is the depth identifier at the same X (shallow Y=1). Specifically, SG-EHS is associated with ecohydrology sites under the East-Taylor Watershed Community Observatory Sites directory, and SG-ERTn (upslope n=1) are points along the Snodgrass electrical resistivity tomography transect not associated with the existing site names in the directory. The sample and location information can be found in metadata.csv. Sampling and Measurements Each sample falls into one of the three sampling methods – (1) intact cores, (2) repacked samples, or (3) soil sensors – and one of the two measurement methods – (a) laboratory or (b) in-situ. Both intact cores and repacked samples were measured using the laboratory methods, which include measurements of soil water potential (HYPROP & WP4C, METER), saturated (KSAT, METER) and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP). The in-situ method uses a pair of co-located soil sensors to measure volumetric water content (TEROS12, METER) and soil water potential (TEROS21, METER), and the hydraulic conductivity was not measured. In comparison, the laboratory methods progress from full saturation to dry conditions, and the in-situ method includes both dry-to-wet and wet-to-dry cycles. The sampling and measurement methods for each sample can be found in metadata.csv, and more information about the measurements is detailed in the Methods section below. Models Retention and hydraulic conductivity data were fitted with four van-Genuchten-type models (specified by “model_name” column in the files): (1) traditional constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained”), (2) traditional unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained”), (3) PDI-variant of the constrained van Genuchten model (“vG_constrained_PDI”), and (4) PDI-variant of the unconstrained van Genuchten model (“vG_unconstrained_PDI”). The difference between the constrained (1: n) and the unconstrained (2: n, m) van Genuchten models is the number of pore-size distribution parameters in the model equations, giving the unconstrained model more degrees of freedom when fitting the data. Between the traditional and the PDI-variant models, model fitting differs the most at the dry end of the measurements. The traditional models allow infinite suction at the residual water content (water content does not drop below residual water content), and the PDI-variant models enforce a soil water potential value of pF=6.8 (~ -630 MPa) at oven-dryness (water content reaches 0). The inclusion of the van-Genuchten-type models is due to their common application. If other retention models are required, users can access the data in data.csv for further data fitting. More information about the models can be found in the Methods section below. Fitting Tasks The model fitting can be categorized into three levels of tasks (specified by “fitting_task” column in the files). Level 1 (“fit_retention”) only includes retention data fitting (the only level available for the in-situ method). Level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, and the saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ks, a parameter of the hydraulic conductivity functions) is fixed by the measurements from KSAT. Level 3 (“fit_retention_conductivity_Ks”) also includes both retention and hydraulic conductivity data fitting, but Ks is a fitted parameter without the constraints from KSAT measurements. Among the same retention models (e.g. vG_constrained models of the same sample), level 1 should produce the best retention data fitting. Level 2 should have the highest misfit of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data, because the retention and hydraulic conductivity functions share common model parameters, and the unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (HYPROP) data fitting is subject to Ks measured independently by KSAT. Level 3 should have mid-level misfits of the retention and hydraulic conductivity data. While level 3 fits the hydraulic conductivity data better than level 2, the fitted Ks value might be unreasonable due to the lack of constraints at the wet end of the measurements. General recommendation when using this data package: (1) Choice of sampling methods: Intact cores and in-situ soil sensors could be prioritized because these sampling methods are less destructive. While the repacked samples were packed to the target bulk density (estimated post-sampling, when sample volume was known), these samples had altered pore structures. Nevertheless, intact cores might suffer from sample gaps that would lead to overestimation of Ks (sample gaps can be inferred from the “soil_sample_volume” column in metadata.csv when the value is < 249). In-situ method also has higher uncertainty in characterizing the wet end of the SWRC because of sensor limitations and the difficulty in reaching full saturation under natural conditions. (2) Choice of fitting tasks: When only retention data is needed, level 1 (“fit_retention”) should be prioritized. When both retention and hydraulic conductivity data are needed, level 2 (“fit_retention_conductivity”) could be prioritized. (3) Choice of models: This could depend on what the downstream models call for. If no specific model is required, model misfit could be used as a ranking criterion. Model misfit values in terms of RMSE can be found in model_parameters.csv. The following files are included in this data package: (1) metadata.csv – This file includes the general information of each sample, including location (description, geocoordinates, elevation), sampling and measurements details (method, depth, time or period, volume, instruments), and soil physical properties (bulk density, saturated hydraulic conductivity, only applicable to physical soil samples). (2) data.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity data of each sample. Column “instrument” specifies the instrument (HYPROP, WP4C, or TEROS) used to perform the measurements. (3) model_fit.csv – This file includes soil water potential, volumetric water content, and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity fitted from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the variable does not apply to that fitting task. (4) model_parameters.csv – This file includes the fitted model parameters, model misfits, and conventional water content thresholds (field capacity and wilting point) from the four models and three fitting tasks. Column “model_name” specifies the retention model used, and “fitting_task” specifies the level of data fitting. Missing values indicate that the parameter does not apply to that model and/or that fitting task. (5) data_Ks.csv – This file includes the saturated hydraulic conductivity measurements from KSAT. (6) /figure/*.png – This folder includes three quick visualizations of the data, retention model fitting results and misfits, and hydraulic conductivity model fitting results, misfits, and parameters. The model fitting results are separated by samples and fitting tasks and colored by models. Zoom-in required. (7) /hyprop/*.bdhx – This folder includes proprietary hyprop files that require the free Labros SoilView-Analysis (METER) to open. Users can explore data fitting using other retention models (i.e. Brooks-Corey, Fredlund-Xing, Kosugi, bimodal models). Be aware that Ks value is pre-entered under “Fitting tab, Conductivity functions parameters” for level 2 fitting. If the value is lost, please refer to metadata.csv under “Ks” column. (8) Six file-level metadata that summarize file, header, column, and variable information of all files. This work was supported by the Watershed Function Science Focus Area at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory funded by the US Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.

EARTH SCIENCE > LAND SURFACE > SOILS↗
DOE OSTI2023

SMART CarbonSAFE Model

The modeling work for this project built upon previous work done for the CarbonSAFE Rocky Mountain Phase I. A geologic and dynamic model was built in Petrel version 2019.3 for the area of the Colorado Plateau near Price, Utah. It is located at the north end of the San Rafael Swell in a natural gas field called Drunkards Wash. The model is 61.5 km east-west and 53 km north to south with 123x106x21 cells, giving a cell dimension of 50x50 m2. The 21 layers in the Z direction are of varying thickness depending on the formation. The Carmel, the seal layer, has 3 layers and is about 200 meters thick around the injection well. The Navajo Sandstone, the principal reservoir, has 5 layers and is about 100 meters thick. The Kayenta has 5 layers and is roughly 50 meters thick and the Wingate, a secondary reservoir, has 5 layers and is 120 meters thick. The base of the model is the Chinle Formation with 3 layers and about 120 meters of thickness..

Carbon Dioxide↗
DOE OSTI2021

AGGREGATE: dAta-driven modelinG preservinG contRollable dEr for outaGe mAnagemenT and rEsiliency (Final Report)

The AGGREGATE project team successfully developed and validated various modules for outage management. Brief summaries of each module are provided to showcase their strength for outage management and restoration for a distribution system with a high penetration of connected distribution energy resources (DERs). In recent years, inverter-based DERs have been widely deployed in distribution system. A most of behind-the-meter (BTM) solar power generation is not visible to the utility. The data-driven DER and load estimation modules are using machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI) to manage this issue, which provides an opportunity for distribution system operators (DSOs) to operate systems and make decisions in real-time for a distribution system with a high penetration of DERs deployed. Also, the estimated DER and true load can be further leveraged in network aggregation and cold-load pick up estimation for reducing the computing complexity and providing for fast restoration. After load demand and DER power generations have been estimated, the information will support topology and state estimation (SE). The topology estimation module demonstrated the viability of mixed integer linear programming (MILP) formulation to estimate the most likely operational radial topology and outage sections using power flow measurements, historical/estimated load and DERs data and smart meter ping measurements. Formulation includes continuous (power flow, load and DERs data) and binary measurements (smart meter ping measurements) in a single formulation. Errors in continuous data and binary data are modeled as normal distribution and Bernoulli distribution, respectively. In the future distribution grid, the power injection from controllable DERs will be essential for efficient and resilient grid operation. However, determining the optimal DER injections and restoration actions is dependent on knowledge of the system states. State estimation (SE), already the cornerstone of transmission energy management systems, will become commonplace in distribution management systems as more measurements become available from deployment of automated metering infrastructure (AMI). Observability analysis is the first step in SE, as it determines the sufficiency of the available measurements for accurately estimating the current system states. A new type of pseudo-measurement called a Correlational Measurement (CM) is introduced in this module, to enhance the observability of the system to enable more accurate SE. CMs encapsulate knowledge of correlation between demand patterns for similar classes of loads as well as injection patterns for same-technology renewable DERs. During grid contingency scenarios, DERs have been traditionally disconnected, without any fault ride-through capabilities. However, with new regulations and better technology, it is feasible for these resources to contribute to the grid’s restoration after an adverse event and hence enhance resilience. The controllability module proposes a two-step restoration scheme for the power system restoration process by leveraging additional degrees of freedom in power electronics interfaced DERs for mitigating voltage problems. In a resilience mode without the utility system, the distribution grid relies on DERs to serve critical load. In such a severe event with multiple faults on the distribution feeders, actuation of various protective devices (PDs) divides the distribution system into electrical islands. The undetected actuated PDs due to fault current contributions from DERs can delay the restoration process, thereby reducing the system resilience. The Advanced Outage Management (AOM) and the Advanced Feeder Restoration (AFR) modules developed in this project provide improved system resilience with multiple DERs. AOM identifies the faulted sections and actuated PDs in a distribution system with DERs by incorporating smart meter data. The most credible outage scenario including fault locations, PD actuations, and fault indicator (FI) failures is identified by a set of binary integer linear programming incorporating hypotheses. The AFR module serves to restore a distribution system with available energy resources taking into consideration the availability of utility sources and DERs. By partitioning the system into islands, critical load will be served with the available generation resources within islands based on the solution of a MILP. When the utility systems become available, the optimal path will be determined by a spanning tree search algorithm that reconnects these islands back to substations and restores the remaining load. The transmission and distribution (T&D) co-simulation module was used to validate the effect of a control action performed on the distribution side assets as it propagates to the transmission side. This ensures that the control action performed results in a feasible operating point on both the transmission and the distribution system. In addition to validation, the team used the T&D co-simulation module to demonstrate how distribution system assets can be used to mitigate issues on the transmission system. Specifically, the team demonstrated that appropriate switching operations on the distribution side can alleviate the line overload condition on the transmission side without causing new operational constraint violations.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2022

Assessment of the Electrical Substation-Grid Testbed with Inside/Outside Devices and Distributed Ledger Technology

The electrical substation-grid testbed was created to integrate the GOOSE and/or DNP (Distributed Network Protocol) messages with time synchronized sources and Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT). The objective was to study the impact of faults and cyber-events at an electrical substation with inside (protective relays) and outside (power meters) substation devices. The electrical substation-grid testbed was based on the design of a 34.5/ 12.47 kV electrical substation (sectionalized bus configuration) with two power transformers, connected to radial power lines and load feeders. The electrical substation-grid testbed was installed at 252 lab space (Advanced Power System Protection), Grid Research Integration and Deployment Center (GRID-C), Oak Ridge National Laboratory. This testbed was created for Task 5, DarkNet project. The electrical substation-grid testbed was created to simulate fault and/or cyber events that could potentially result in damage to the electrical infrastructure. In addition, tests were run that are usually not allowed to be performed in an operational electrical power grid, because these test scenarios could trip breakers and/or generate fault situations that could potentially damage equipment. The number of tests performed in the electrical substation-grid testbed were executed in a better way than in a real electrical substation and/or power grid, because multiple tests could be run in a short period of time, and complex permits, and safety/ schedule restrictions like in a real electrical substation environment were not needed. The electrical substation-grid testbed was created using real measurement, communication, and protection devices that are used by electrical utilities, to have same conditions that we could observe in a real power grid or electrical substation. The electrical substation-grid testbed was based on using a real time simulator and expansion box with amplifiers that were wired to electrical substation-grid devices. This hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) was provided by protective relays, power meters, ethernet switches, remote terminal units, synchronized timing network clock, DLT devices, workstations, and servers. This report includes the design, installation, and assessment of the electrical substation-grid testbed that was similar to an operational electrical substation, integrating the power system protection, communication, and control systems. The results for the electrical substation-grid testbed were based on:• verifying the analog signals for protective relays and power meters, • observing the synchronized time source frame at devices, • authenticating the GOOSE (IEC 61850) and DNP messages from power meters and protective relays, and • verifying the trip conditions of protective relays at fault tests with the power system fault event detection, using DLT devices. For future work, the electrical substation-grid testbed with protective relays and power meters, using DLT and synchronized time source from DarkNet, will be used to study the impact of cyber-events at inside and outside substation devices. Advanced algorithms for detecting cyber-events produced by non-desired protective relay settings will be studied, to improve the detection and reliability of protection, control, and communication systems at power grids.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2024

Performance Demonstration of an Occupancy Sensor-enabled Integrated Solution for Commercial Buildings

Traditionally, a single-loop fixed-gain controller is applied to supply fan (SF) and cooling coil (CC) valve controls while a fixed-damper position control is applied to outdoor air (OA) damper control at air handling units (AHUs) in commercial buildings. With the increasing application of occupancy sensors, the information generated by occupancy sensors is applied to not only reduce the electricity loads from lighting and controllable plug loads, but also reset OA intake and minimum supply airflow setpoints. Meanwhile, these intermittent operation actions greatly elevate the dynamics of AHU systems, which may introduce unstable SF and CC valve operations and inaccurate OA flow control at AHUs and consequently degrade maximum energy efficiency gains. With virtual fan and valve flow meter technologies, two advanced controls, including cascade control and gain scheduling control, can be implemented on both the SF and CC valve, and an advanced control using a virtual OA flow meter can be implemented on OA damper integrated with occupancy sensors. The goal of this project is to demonstrate the savings, cost, and performance of an integrated solution that integrates the three advanced HVAC controls with occupancy sensors to allow accurate and stable AHU operations in real buildings. The project objectives are to: 1) develop and validate an advance SF control algorithm; 2) develop and validate an advanced CC valve control algorithm; 3) validate an algorithm to implement a virtual OA flow meter; and 4) demonstrate the savings, cost, and performance of the integrated solution in real buildings. The technical approaches are to: 1) select a test system at the University of Oklahoma; 2) develop and implement the algorithms of advanced SF and CC valve controls and validate the performance; 3) develop and implement the advanced OA control using a virtual OA flow meter and validate the performance; 4) demonstrate the savings, cost, and performance of the proposed integrated solution with and without three advanced HVAC controls; and 5) disseminate the project results through publications and presentations. For the SF control, both the gain scheduling and cascade controls can improve the fan energy performance by reducing the fan power during the transient period and the fan control performance at lower speeds by reducing fan speed variation. Moreover, the gain scheduling control provides a simple and low-cost solution and is recommended. The fan power savings can reach 30% in a transient period. For the CC valve control, the gain scheduling control can considerably reduce the supply air temperature oscillation range and frequency under both higher and lower load conditions and the control valve response is much more stable. As a result, the gain scheduling control is recommended. The projected pump energy consumption can be reduced by 68.5%. With the developed virtual OA flow meter, the OA can be accurately controlled at its setpoint, which is determined based on the actual number of occupants in the building provided by occupancy sensors. The RMSE of the proposed OA control is 15.9 L/s. The energy data shows that the fan power and CC cooling energy were significantly reduced. On the other hand, the energy savings majorly results from the occupancy sensors and the energy savings by the advanced HVAC controls is minimal because that the controllers in the test AHU were tuned with very slow response. An annual technical savings potential is estimated as 0.5 quads in the commercial sector.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗
DOE OSTI2024

Global Geo-processed Data of Aquifer Properties by 0.5° Grid, Country and Water Basins

This repository of global hydrogeologic datasets contains aquifer properties on 0.5° scale, including depth to groundwater (Fan et al., 2013), aquifer thickness (de Graaf et al., 2015), WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011), recharge (Döll and Fiedler, 2008; Gleeson et al., 2016), lakes (Messager et al., 2016), porosity and permeability (Gleeson et al., 2014), digitized and geo-processed from their respective sources. Globally gridded aquifer properties could be used independently to estimate global groundwater availability or used as critical inputs to the superwell model to simulate groundwater extraction and provide estimates of pumped volumes and unit costs under user-specific scenarios. Key resources related to this data are: Niazi, H., Ferencz, S. B., Graham, N. T., Yoon, J., Wild, T. B., Hejazi, M., Watson, D. J., & Vernon, C. R. (2025). Long-term hydro-economic analysis tool for evaluating global groundwater cost and supply: Superwell v1.1. Geoscientific Model Development, 18(5), 1737-1767. https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1737-2025 superwell model repository which uses this data to simulate groundwater extraction and provides estimates of the global extractable volumes and unit-costs ($/km3) of accessible groundwater production under user-specified extraction scenarios. Repository Overview Main output: aquifer_properties_rec.csv contains all processed outputs, including aquifer properties like porosity, permeability, recharge, lake areas, aquifer thickness, and depth to groundwater. shapefiles.zip: contains all digitized GIS databases and shapefile for all aquifer properties prep_inputs.R and prep_inputs_recharge_lakes.R: R scripts that process the shapefiles to produce the aquifer_properties_rec.csv file plot_inputs.R: R script for plotting the maps and conducting preliminary analysis on the available groundwater volume basin_to_country_mapping.csv, basin_country_region_mapping.csv and continent_county_mapping.csv provide the mapping between continents, 32 energy-economic macro regions, countries, and water basins for post-processing aquifer_properties_rec.csv Maps: Each map visualizes the spatial distribution of one of the aquifer properties across the globe map_in_Porosity.png map_in_Permeability.png map_in_Aquifer_thickness.png map_in_Depth_to_water.png map_in_Recharge.png map_in_Grid_area_km.png map_in_Lake_area_km.png map_in_WHYClass.png Sample inputs sample_inputs.py: this script samples inputs from the aquifer_properties_rec dataset, ensuring the sampled and original inputs maintain the same distributions sampled_data_100.csv contains 100 sampled data points and sampled_data_100.png compares their distributions Dataset Overview The main outputs are consolidated in a comprehensive aquifer_properties_rec.csv file and include the following fields: GridCellID: Unique identifier for each (roughly 0.5°) grid cell Continent: Continent name Country: Country name GCAM_basin_ID: Identifier for GCAM hydrologic basin Basin_long_name: Full name of the basin WHYClass: Hydrogeologic classification based on WHYMap aquifer classes (Richts et al., 2011) Porosity: Soil porosity (%) (Gleeson et al., 2014) Permeability: Soil permeability (in square meters; Gleeson et al., 2014) Aquifer_thickness: Thickness of the aquifer (in meters; de Graaf et al., 2015) Depth_to_water: Depth to groundwater (in meters; Fan et al., 2013) Recharge: long-term annual averaged recharge rates (in m/yr; Döll and Fiedler, 2008; Gleeson et al., 2016) Grid_area: Area of the grid cell (in square meters) Lakes_area: Area of inland lakes (in square meters; Messager et al., 2016) Key References The datasets are digitized versions of global hydrogeologic properties from the following key literature sources: Depth to Groundwater: Fan, Y., Li, H., & Miguez-Macho, G. (2013). Global Patterns of Groundwater Table Depth. Science, 339(6122), 940-943. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1229881 Aquifer Thickness: de Graaf, I. E. M., Sutanudjaja, E. H., van Beek, L. P. H., & Bierkens, M. F. P. (2015). A high-resolution global-scale groundwater model. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 19(2), 823-837. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-19-823-2015 Porosity and Permeability: Gleeson, T., Moosdorf, N., Hartmann, J., & van Beek, L. P. H. (2014). A glimpse beneath earth's surface: GLobal HYdrogeology MaPS (GLHYMPS) of permeability and porosity. Geophysical Research Letters, 41(11), 3891-3898. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014GL059856 Aquifer classes: Richts, A., Struckmeier, W. F., & Zaepke, M. (2011). WHYMAP and the Groundwater Resources Map of the World 1:25,000,000. In J. A. A. Jones (Ed.), Sustaining Groundwater Resources: A Critical Element in the Global Water Crisis (pp. 159-173). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3426-7_10 Recharge: Döll, P., & Fiedler, K. (2008). Global-scale modeling of groundwater recharge. Hydrol. Earth Syst. Sci., 12(3), 863-885. https://doi.org/10.5194/hess-12-863-2008; Gleeson, T., Befus, K. M., Jasechko, S., Luijendijk, E., & Cardenas, M. B. (2016). The global volume and distribution of modern groundwater. Nature Geoscience, 9(2), 161-167. https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo2590 Inland Lakes: Messager, M. L., Lehner, B., Grill, G., Nedeva, I., & Schmitt, O. (2016). Estimating the volume and age of water stored in global lakes using a geo-statistical approach. Nature Communications, 7(1), 13603. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms13603 Cite as Niazi, H., Watson, D., Hejazi, M., Yonkofski, C., Ferencz, S., Vernon, C., Graham, N., Wild, T., & Yoon, J. (2024). Global Geo-processed Data of Aquifer Properties by 0.5° Grid, Country and Water Basins. MultiSector Dynamics-Living, Intuitive, Value-adding, Environment. https://doi.org/10.57931/2484226 Contact Reach out to Hassan Niazi or open an issue in the superwell repository for questions or suggestions.

aquifer thickness↗
NASA NTRS1972

Use of a spacecraft borne altimeter for determining the mean sea surface and the geopotential

An experiment is proposed to test a first generation spacecraft-borne radar altimeter's capability to measure the topography of the sea surface. The initial radar altimeter will have an instrumental error of one meter and an overall accuracy to two to five meters. This instrument will thus improve the accuracy of the geoid from the present 10 to 20 meters to better than 5 meters. In order to detect storm surges, tidal forces, and ocean currents, an altimeter with an overall accuracy of at least ?1 meter will be required. The overall accuracy of the initial radar altimeter will thus primarily provide geodetic information and possible oceanographic information such as sea state.

Kahn, W. D.↗
NASA NTRS1972

Apollo 14 active seismic experiment.

Explosion seismic refraction data indicate that the lunar near-surface rocks at the Apollo 14 site consist of a regolith 8.5 meters thick and characterized by a compressional wave velocity of 104 meters per second. The regolith is underlain by a layer with a compressional wave velocity of 299 meters per second. The thickness of this layer, which we interpret to be the Fra Mauro Formation, is between 16 and 76 meters. The layer immediately beneath this has a velocity greater than 370 meters per second. We found no evidence of permafrost.

Watkins, J. S.↗
NASA NTRS1975

A study of orbit determination accuracies for future earth observatory missions

It is anticipated that global orbital accuracies of 10 meters will be required for future earth observatory missions. Results are presented of a study of the LANDSAT-1 orbit to determine position accuracies obtainable today so as to assess what future advancements are necessary to meet a 10-meter goal. Accuracies of 50 meters were determined to be achievable now from two-day tracking arcs. One-half-day arcs yield accuracies of about 30 meters. The dominant error source was found to be geopotential model uncertainty. All other systematic errors produced less than 10 meters total position error.

Bryant, W. C., Jr.↗
NASA NTRS1977

AAFE large deployable antenna development program: Executive summary

The large deployable antenna development program sponsored by the Advanced Applications Flight Experiments of the Langley Research Center is summarized. Projected user requirements for large diameter deployable reflector antennas were reviewed. Trade-off studies for the selection of a design concept for 10-meter diameter reflectors were made. A hoop/column concept was selected as the baseline concept. Parametric data are presented for 15-meter, 30-meter, and 100-meter diameters. A 1.82-meter diameter engineering model which demonstrated the feasiblity of the concept is described.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1984

Geometric modeling of large space antenna deployment

A dynamic visualization of large antenna deployment was created to be used as a precursor to further analysis of the structure as it is being deployed. The configuration chosen for this investigation was a box-truss structure consisting of a large reflector 60 meters wide by 120 meters long with a 120-meter mast. The entire space structure is folded and compressed into a container 17.8 meters long by 3.75 meters in diameter for transportation to orbit by the Space Transportation System (STS). A geometric model of this structure was created using an interactive solid modeling package. The building blocks of the structure are boxes and cylinders which are put together to form elements connected by joints and hinges. The elements, joints, and hinges make up the box-truss structure. The geometric model was then passed to the MOVIE.BYU software package. The "utility" module of this program was used to manipulate the elements of the structure to represent 13 different stages of deployment. The "animate" command was then used to create a smooth sequence between stages. Each step in the sequence was recorded on magnetic tape and a short movie was produced.

Nazemetz, J.↗
NASA NTRS1985

State-of-charge coulometer

A coulometer for accurately measuring the state-of-charge of an open-cell battery utilizing an aqueous electrolyte, includes a current meter for measuring the battery/discharge current and a flow meter for measuring the rate at which the battery produces gas during charge and discharge. Coupled to the flow meter is gas analyzer which measures the oxygen fraction of the battery gas. The outputs of the current meter, flow meter, and gas analyzer are coupled to a programmed microcomputer which includes a CPU and program and data memories. The microcomputer calculates that fraction of charge and discharge current consumed in the generation of gas so that the actual state-of-charge can be determined. The state-of-charge is then shown on a visual display.

Rowlette, J. J.↗
NASA NTRS1987

Aircraft control position indicator

An aircraft control position indicator was provided that displayed the degree of deflection of the primary flight control surfaces and the manner in which the aircraft responded. The display included a vertical elevator dot/bar graph meter display for indication whether the aircraft will pitch up or down, a horizontal aileron dot/bar graph meter display for indicating whether the aircraft will roll to the left or to the right, and a horizontal dot/bar graph meter display for indicating whether the aircraft will turn left or right. The vertical and horizontal display or displays intersect to form an up/down, left/right type display. Internal electronic display driver means received signals from transducers measuring the control surface deflections and determined the position of the meter indicators on each dot/bar graph meter display. The device allows readability at a glance, easy visual perception in sunlight or shade, near-zero lag in displaying flight control position, and is not affected by gravitational or centrifugal forces.

Dennis, Dale V.↗