Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “STANDARDIZATION”

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 1,369 records · Page 76

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants – Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2017

Report submitted to regulators (State of Nevada and EPA Region IV). Required to document compliance with 40 CFR 61 Subpart H. The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. After 1962, testing was limited to underground detonations, which greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public. Since nuclear testing ended in 1992, radiation monitoring focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) (CFR 2010a) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/y) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was damaged in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by using environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and DOE 1995). This method was approved by the EPA in 2001 (EPA 2001a) and has been the method used to demonstrate compliance with the 40 CFR 61.92 dose standard since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations because no member of the public resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Level (CL) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2 (CFR 2010a). For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2017, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air from both current and past NNSS activities was well below the 10 mrem/y dose limit. This is demonstrated by air sampling data collected at the critical receptor air monitoring stations which had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from 0.2% to a maximum of 5.7% of the allowed NESHAP limit. Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88) was used to model dose to the offsite public from all 2017 NNSS radionuclide emissions. The model showed the maximally exposed individual to be on the adjacent U.S. Air Force Nevada Test and Training Range; this individual received a dose of 0.07 mrem/y. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.0000098 mrem/y, over six orders of magnitude lower than the 10 mrem/y limit.

07 ISOTOPE AND RADIATION SOURCES↗

NREL Comparison Between Absolute Cavity Pyrgeometers and Pyrgeometers Traceable to World Infrared Standard Group and the InfraRed Integrating Sphere

The comparison of the Absolute Cavity Pyrgeometers (ACPs) Comparison with a PIR Pyrgeometer Traceable to the World Infrared Standard Group (WISG) and a Kipp & Zonen (KZ) pyrgeometer traceable to the InfraRed Integrating Sphere Radiometer (IRIS) was held during the NREL Pyrheliometer Comparison (NPC-2018) from September 24 to October 5, 2018. Data from all instruments was collected during night time clear sky conditions only. The irradiance measured by the ACPs and the PIR pyrgeometer traceable to the WISG were collected every 10 seconds during the ACPs self-calibration and every 30 seconds during the measurement runs. The measurement runs were for two hours while the calibration runs were for 6 minutes. The irradiance measured by the Kipp & Zonen pyrgeometer was collected every 30 seconds. During the comparison the average (av) irradiance difference measured by three ACPs varied from 0.2 W/m 2 to -0.5 W/m 2 , with a standard deviation (sd) from 0.5 W/m 2 to 0.8 W/m 2 . The average irradiance difference measured by the three ACPs minus the irradiance measured by the PIR is 4.3 W/m 2 and sd 4.2 W/m 2 , and that of measured irradiance by the KZ is 2.3 W/m 2 and sd 3.5 W/m 2 .

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

2018 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook

This report summarizes the results of 30 plus forward-looking 'standard scenarios' of the U.S. power sector simulated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) using the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) and Distributed Generation (dGen) capacity expansion models. The annual Standard Scenarios, which are now in their fourth year, have been designed to capture a range of possible power system futures considering a variety of factors that impact power sector evolution.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants - Radionuclide Emissions (Calendar Year 2018)

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons.The release of radionuclides from NNSS activities has been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. After 1962, testing was limited to underground detonations, which greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public. Since the end of nuclear testing in 1992, radiation monitoring has focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of man-made radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61Subpart H) limits the release of radioactivity from a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/y) effective dose equivalent to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was damaged in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by reporting environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] and DOE 1995). This method was approved by the EPA in 2001 and has been the method used to demonstrate compliance with the 40 CFR 61.92 dose standard since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are actually pseudo-critical receptor stations because no member of the public resides at these onsite locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Level (CL) for Environmental Compliance listed in 40 CFR 61, Appendix E, Table 2. For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. In 2018, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air from both current and past NNSS activities was well below the 10 mrem/y dose limit. This is demonstrated by air sampling data collected at the critical receptor air monitoring stations which had average concentrations of radioactivity that were a fraction of the CL values. Concentrations ranged from 0.1% to a maximum of 5.2% of the allowed NESHAP limit. Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) was used to model dose to the offsite public from all 2018 NNSS radionuclide emissions. The model showed the maximally exposed individual to be on the northern end of Amargosa Valley; this individual received a potential dose of 0.07 mrem/y. The potential dose to the public from NLVF emissions was also very low at 0.000008 mrem/y, over six orders of magnitude lower than the 10 mrem/y limit.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

NREL Comparison of Absolute Cavity Pyrgeometers and Pyrgeometers Traceable to the World Infrared Standard Group and the Infrared Integrating Sphere: September 23-October 4, 2019

The comparison of the absolute cavity pyrgeometers (ACPs) with a precision infrared radiometer (PIR) pyrgeometer traceable to the World Infrared Standard Group (WISG) and a Kipp & Zonen (KZ) pyrgeometer traceable to WISG and the InfraRed Integrating Sphere Radiometer (IRIS) was held during the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) Pyrheliometer Comparison (NPC-2019) from September 23 to October 4, 2019. Data from all instruments was collected during nighttime clear sky conditions only. The irradiance measured by the ACPs, PIR, and CG4 pyrgeometers collected 30 seconds during the measurement runs. The measurement runs lasted for two hours, while the calibration runs lasted for 6 minutes. During the comparison, the average (av) irradiance difference measured by three ACPs varied from 0.2 W/m 2 to 0.8 W/m 2 , with a standard deviation (sd) from 0.4 W/m 2 to 0.8 W/m 2 . The average irradiance difference measured by the three ACPs minus the irradiance measured by the PIR was 7.1 W/m 2 and sd 1.0 W/m 2 , and the average irradiance difference measured by the KZ traceable to WISG was 8.1 W/m2 and sd 0.9 W/m 2 , and average irradiance difference measured by the KZ traceable to IRIS was 4.0 W/m2 and sd 0.9 W/m 2 .

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

2019 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook

This report summarizes the results of 36 forward-looking 'standard scenarios' of the U.S. power sector simulated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) using the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) and Distributed Generation (dGen) capacity expansion models. The annual Standard Scenarios, which are now in their fifth year, have been designed to capture a range of possible power system futures considering a variety of factors that impact power sector evolution.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Safety Codes and Standards Update (Winter 2019/2020)

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Model and Standard Operating Procedures Supporting Signal Variation Flow Graph Analysis

This document will describe the principles of the Signal Variation Flow Technique, and the uncertainty models generated using it. We focus on the capture of the variation between the ideal signal and the measured signal. The ideal signal is defined to represent the signal output of a system whose full state behavior is known, with no variation in environment or during operation, and whose photons trajectories are not modified by the object. A CT uncertainty analysis is the result of two main steps. First, the radiography regime extends from the source to the collected image, which is 2D in the case of standard CT. This maps all upstream uncertainties into the variation observed on the radiograph and captures all variation in the physical domain. Second, the reconstruction regime extends from the captured images to the reconstructed 3D image. This regime is purely in the mathematical domain and corrects reconstruction algorithm artifacts/anomalies. The present work focuses on building the model through the radiography regime. The reconstruction regime is expected to be largely a study of algorithmic sensitivity, requiring the definition of a range of standardized tests through which the algorithms would be run. Radiographic variation would then be mapped through reconstruction sensitivities to predict the signal variation in the final image. An incomplete list for the reconstructed image variation output basis includes voxel density, edge blur and length variation, in analogous fashion to the basis functions presented in this work. The signal variation occurs in several forms at the radiograph. These forms are gathered into a complete basis set of functions describing all variation on the radiograph. The scale of each basis function is calculated independently via a specific SVFG. This includes 0D pixel noise (0DI), 0D energy noise (0DE), 1D blur (1DB), 1D length (1DL) or 2D position (2DP). These models are orthogonal in that they each explore a space in the signal variation domain that cannot be reached by the other basis functions. The variation basis functions, and associated SVFG models are split by output dimensionality, a term loosely used for categorization, and explained further below.

42 ENGINEERING↗

2020 Standard Scenarios Report: A U.S. Electricity Sector Outlook

This report summarizes the results of 47 forward-looking 'standard scenarios' of the U.S. power sector simulated by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) using the Regional Energy Deployment System (ReEDS) and Distributed Generation (dGen) capacity expansion models. The annual Standard Scenarios, which are now in their sixth year, have been designed to capture a range of possible power system futures considering a variety of factors that impact power sector evolution.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Codes and Standards Update September 2018

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Codes and Standards Update December 2018

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Codes and Standards Update January 2019

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Codes and Standards Update March 2019

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap1 is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Codes and Standards Update October 2018

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

Codes and Standards Update November 2018

The goal of the DOE OE Energy Storage System Safety Roadmap is to foster confidence in the safety and reliability of energy storage systems. There are three interrelated objectives to support the realization of that goal: research, codes and standards (C/S) and communication/coordination. The objective focused on C/S is "To apply research and development to support efforts that refocused on ensuring that codes and standards are available to enable the safe implementation of energy storage systems in a comprehensive, non-discriminatory and science-based manner."

25 ENERGY STORAGE↗

End-Use Opportunity Analysis Based on Standard 90.1-2016

This report summarizes technical analysis conducted by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), assessing expected end-use energy consumption in commercial buildings, based on recent editions of the model energy code for the commercial sector, ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1, Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

A Detailed Vehicle Simulation Process to Support CAFE Standards for the MY 2024–2026 Analysis

In 1975, Congress passed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA), requiring standards for corporate average fuel economy (CAFE), and charging the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) with the establishment and enforcement of these standards. The Secretary of Transportation has delegated these responsibilities to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗