SEARCH · Engineering Papers
Results for “Code”
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.
Code-to-code comparison of an explosively fired projectile
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
CRAB/MELCOR Code to Code Comparison
Overview of the development of a CRAB/MELCOR workflow for mechanistic source term analysis
Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes
The Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program. A 2016 study looked more broadly at overall code impacts and this report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. In 2021, DOE conducted an interim and limited update to its 2016 study to evaluate potential building code updates using the 2016 methodology. That interim update includes estimated savings resulting from updates to the model energy codes, including the ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2016 (ASHRAE 90.1-2016) and 2019 editions, as well as the 2018 and 2021 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). In 2023, DOE developed a fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2019 and 2021 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, annual floorspace additions, state code adoption dates, and emission factors, among others. This current version is another fully updated report that includes code updates (ASHRAE 90.1-2022 and 2024 IECC), as well as additional enhancements and updates, including updated energy prices, state code adoption dates, emission factors, and renewable energy contribution among others. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when the new code is implemented and builders, architects, and engineers are required to comply with the new provisions. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes and are considered in this assessment. Figure ES.1 schematically describes the analysis framework. Energy savings are expressed in terms of energy use intensity (EUI) in the figure.
Impacts of Model Building Energy Codes
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Building Energy Codes Program (BECP) periodically evaluates national and state-level impacts associated with energy codes in residential and commercial buildings. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), funded by DOE, conducted an assessment of the prospective impacts of national model building energy codes from 2010 through 2040. A previous PNNL study evaluated the impact of the Building Energy Codes Program; this study looked more broadly at overall code impacts. This report describes the methodology used for the assessment and presents the impacts in terms of energy savings, consumer cost savings, and reduced CO 2 emissions at the state level and at aggregated levels. This analysis does not represent all potential savings from energy codes in the U.S. because it excludes several states which have codes which are fundamentally different from the national model energy codes or which do not have state-wide codes. Energy codes follow a three-phase cycle that starts with the development of a new model code, proceeds with the adoption of the new code by states and local jurisdictions, and finishes when buildings comply with the code. The development of new model code editions creates the potential for increased energy savings. After a new model code is adopted, potential savings are realized in the field when new buildings (or additions and alterations) are constructed to comply with the new code. Delayed adoption of a model code and incomplete compliance with the code’s requirements erode potential savings. The contributions of all three phases are crucial to the overall impact of codes, and are considered in this assessment.
An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest (Final Technical Report)
The primary goal of the “An Energy Codes Gap Analysis Field Study in the Southwest” project was to improve housing through strengthened building energy code implementation in two states, Colorado and Nevada, leading to greater energy and utility bill savings for households. Colorado is a home rule state. Nevada adopts a statewide code, but cities and counties must also adopt the code, making the state function like a home rule state. To broaden the impact of the project, an additional goal was to share and amplify project experiences, findings, and lessons that can be applied in other states. To achieve these goals, the project’s key objectives were to examine how residential energy codes are implemented in partner states; to use these findings to strengthen codes implementation through enhanced education, training, and outreach; and to enhance energy code technical assistance capabilities in the two partner states. In both partner states, the project led to the creation of a quantitative baseline understanding of compliance with high-impact energy code requirements, such as foundation, wall, and ceiling R-value; window U-factor and SHGC; envelope air tightness; duct tightness; and high-efficiency lighting. It then applied this baseline information to directly inform training in geographic areas with high levels of building and construction activity. The project has placed Colorado and Nevada among 23 states across the country that have conducted a single-family residential field study based on the established U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) methodology since 2014. It has also helped each State Energy Office test models for partnership- and relationship-building among government agencies and key stakeholder groups, including the State Energy Office and relevant code administration and professional licensing agencies, building officials, designers, builders, trades and utilities. At the national level, the project helped educate and inform State and Territory Energy Offices on a replicable methodology to assess energy code construction practices, effective stakeholder engagement strategies, and tailored energy code education and training. These findings are particularly pertinent for home-rule states, such as Colorado and Nevada, which rely on local government awareness and action to advance and implement building energy codes. By raising awareness of code adoption and compliance, this project has helped to equip each partner state with data on code compliance, strategies, education, and partnership models to advance building energy codes. This in turn will have an important impact on new construction practices in Colorado and Nevada, leading to more energy efficient and affordable housing. Currently, more than 62 percent of Colorado’s population lives in one of the 55 jurisdictions that have adopted the 2021 IECC to date, while nearly 95 percent of the state's population lives in one of the 208 jurisdictions that have adopted a code at 2015 IECC levels or higher. In Nevada, the 2018 IECC was adopted by the Governor’s Office of Energy in July 2018. By July 2020, 47 percent of the adopted energy code in the state was 2018 IECC which covers 96.5 percent of Nevada’s population. The training materials funded by this project focus on the 2021 IECC and will continue to be relevant in the two states as additional jurisdictions update their building energy codes.
Engineering 3D Floquet Codes by Rewinding
Floquet codes are a novel class of quantum error-correcting codes with dynamically generated logical qubits arising from a periodic schedule of noncommuting measurements. We utilize the interpretation of measurements in terms of condensation of topological excitations and the rewinding of measurement sequences to engineer new examples of Floquet codes. In particular, rewinding is advantageous for obtaining a desired set of instantaneous stabilizer groups on both toric and planar layouts. Our first example is a Floquet code with instantaneous stabilizer codes that have the same topological order as the three-dimensional (3D) toric code(s). This Floquet code also exhibits a splitting of the topological order of the 3D toric code under the associated sequence of measurements, i.e., an instantaneous stabilizer group of a single copy of the 3D toric code in one round transforms into an instantaneous stabilizer group of two copies of the 3D toric code up to nonlocal stabilizers in the following round. We further construct boundaries for this 3D code and argue that stacking it with two copies of the 3D subsystem toric code allows for a transversal implementation of the logical non-Clifford controlled-controlled- Z gate. We also show that the coupled-layer construction of the X-cube Floquet code can be modified by a rewinding schedule such that each of the instantaneous stabilizer codes is finite depth equivalent to the X-cube model up to toric codes; the X-cube Floquet code exhibits a splitting of the X-cube model into a copy of the X-cube model and toric codes under the measurement sequence. Our final 3D example is a generalization of the 2D Floquet toric code on the honeycomb lattice to three dimensions, which has instantaneous stabilizer codes with the same topological order as the 3D fermionic toric code. Published by the American Physical Society2024
Energy Savings Analysis of the Proposed NYStretch-Energy Code 2018
This study was conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in support of the stretch energy code development led by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). In 2017 NYSERDA developed its 2016 Stretch Code Supplement to the 2016 New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code (hereinafter referred to as “NYStretch-Energy”). NYStretch-Energy is intended as a model energy code for statewide voluntary adoption that anticipates other code advancements culminating in the goal of a statewide Net Zero Energy Code by 2028. Since then, NYSERDA continues to develop the NYStretch-Energy Code 2018 edition. To support the effort, PNNL conducted energy simulation analysis to quantify the energy savings of proposed commercial provisions of the NYStretch-Energy Code (2018) in New York. The focus of this project is the 20% improvement over existing commercial model energy codes. A key requirement of the proposed stretch code is that it be ‘adoptable’ as an energy code, meaning that it must align with current code scope and limitations, and primarily impact building components that are currently regulated by local building departments. It is largely limited to prescriptive measures, which are what most building departments and design projects are most familiar with. This report describes a set of energy-efficiency measures (EEMs) that demonstrate 20% energy savings over ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) across a broad range of commercial building types and all three climate zones in New York. In collaboration with New Building Institute, the EEMs were developed from national model codes and standards, high-performance building codes and standards, regional energy codes, and measures being proposed as part of the on-going code development process. PNNL analyzed these measures using whole building energy models for selected prototype commercial buildings and multifamily buildings representing buildings in New York. Section 2 of this report describes the analysis methodology, including the building types and construction area weights update for this analysis, the baseline, and the method to conduct the energy saving analysis. Section 3 provides detailed specifications of the EEMs and bundles. Section 4 summarizes the results of individual EEMs and EEM bundles by building type, energy end-use and climate zone. Appendix A documents detailed descriptions of the selected prototype buildings. Appendix B provides energy end-use breakdown results by building type for both the baseline code and stretch code in all climate zones.
Local Truncation Error-Informed Code Verification
The method of manufactured solutions (MMS) has become increasingly popular in conducting code verification studies on predictive codes, such as nuclear power system codes and computational fluid dynamic codes. The reason for the popularity of this approach is that it can be used when an analytical solution is not available. Using MMS, code developers are able to verify that their code is free of coding errors that impact the observed order of accuracy. While MMS is still an excellent tool for code verification, it does not identify coding errors that are of the same order as the numerical method. This paper presents a method that combines MMS with modified equation analysis (MEA), which calculates the local truncation error (LTE) to identify coding error up to and including the order of the numerical method. This method is referred to as modified equation analysis methd of manufactured solutions (MEAMMS). MEAMMS is then applied to a custom-built code, which solves the shallow water equations, to test the performance of the code verification method. MEAMMS is able to detect all coding errors that impact the implementation of the numerical scheme. To show how MEAMMS is different than MMS, they are both applied to the same first-order numerical method test problem with a first-order coding error. When there are first-order coding errors, only MEAMMS is able to identify them. Finally, this shows that MEAMMS is able to identify a larger set of coding errors while still being able to identify the coding errors MMS is able to identify.
Final Energy Savings Analysis of the Proposed NYStretch-Energy Code 2018
This study was conducted by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) in support of the stretch energy code development led by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). In 2017 NYSERDA developed its 2016 Stretch Code Supplement to the 2016 New York State Energy Conservation Construction Code (hereinafter referred to as “NYStretch-Energy”). NYStretch-Energy is intended as a model energy code for statewide voluntary adoption that anticipates other code advancements culminating in the goal of a statewide Net Zero Energy Code by 2028. Since then, NYSERDA continues to develop the NYStretch-Energy Code 2018 edition (NYSERDA 2018). To support the effort, PNNL conducted energy simulation analysis to quantify the energy savings of proposed commercial provisions of the NYStretch-Energy Code 2018 in New York. The focus of this project is to significantly improve the energy efficiency over existing commercial model energy codes. A key requirement of the proposed stretch code is that it be ‘adoptable’ as an energy code, meaning that it must align with current code scope and limitations, and primarily impact building components that are currently regulated by local building departments. It is largely limited to prescriptive measures, which are what most building departments and design projects are most familiar with. This report describes a set of energy-efficiency measures (EEMs) that demonstrate significant energy savings over ANSI/ASHRAE/IES Standard 90.1-2013 (ASHRAE 2013) across a broad range of commercial building types and all three climate zones in New York. In collaboration with New Building Institute, the EEMs were developed from national model codes and standards, high-performance building codes and standards, regional energy codes, and measures being proposed as part of the on-going code development process. PNNL analyzed these measures using whole building energy models for selected prototype commercial buildings and multifamily buildings representing buildings in New York.
Fault Tolerant Decoding of QLDPC-GKP Codes with Circuit Level Soft Information
Concatenated bosonic-stabilizer codes have recently gained prominence as promising candidates for achieving low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum computing in the long term. In such systems, analog information obtained from the syndrome measurements of an inner bosonic code is used to inform decoding for an outer code layer consisting of a discrete-variable stabilizer code such as a surface code. The use of Quantum Low-Density Parity Check (QLDPC) codes as an outer code is of particular interest due to the significantly higher encoding rates offered by these code families, leading to a further reduction in overhead for large-scale quantum computing. Recent works have investigated the performance of QLDPC-GKP codes in detail, and the use of analog information from the inner code significantly boosts decoder performance. However, the noise models assumed in these works are typically limited to depolarizing or phenomenological noise. In this paper, we investigate the performance of QLDPC-GKP concatenated codes under circuit-level noise, based on a model introduced by Noh et al. in the context of the surface-GKP code. To demonstrate the performance boost from analog information, we investigate three scenarios: (a) decoding without soft information, (b) decoding with precomputed error probabilities but without real-time soft information, and (c) decoding with real-time soft information obtained from round-to-round decoding of the inner GKP code. Results show minimal improvement between (a) and (b), but a significant boost in (c), indicating that real-time soft information is critical for concatenated decoding under circuit-level noise. We also study the effect of measurement schedules with varying depths and show that using a schedule with minimum depth is essential for obtaining reliable soft information from the inner code.
A Review of the Evaluation of Building Energy Code Compliance in the United States
Building energy codes are essential tools for achieving energy efficiency in buildings. However, the full energy savings potential of these codes can only be realized if buildings are constructed in compliance with them. Therefore, evaluating building energy code compliance is crucial in bridging the gap between the energy efficiency requirements set by energy codes and the actualized energy savings achieved. An energy code compliance evaluation serves as a mechanism to assess construction practices, evaluate the effectiveness of code enforcement, identify gaps in compliance, and guide strategies for improvement through training and education. Conducting code compliance evaluation activities involves field studies that require careful design and significant resources. Historically, more emphasis has been placed on developing and adopting building energy codes, while efforts to evaluate compliance have been relatively limited and lacking consistent approaches. The passage of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), which mandated that states create plans for achieving 90% compliance within eight years, stimulated the need for an energy code compliance evaluation. As a result, federal, state, and local governments, and utilities have invested in the development of methodologies and tools for code compliance evaluation studies. This paper reviews the code compliance evaluation studies conducted in the United States over the past three decades. It describes and compares the methodologies and metrics used to assess building energy code compliance, summarizes the general elements and steps involved in the evaluation process, and discusses common issues in these studies. Over time, code compliance evaluation methodologies have evolved from isolated development within individual states, regions, and utilities, to widely accepted protocols applicable across different states and local jurisdictions. There has been a transition in compliance metrics, shifting from historical compliance rates to energy-consumption-oriented approaches.
Opening the Door to Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings with Energy Codes
Building codes represent standard design practice in the construction industry and must continually evolve to account for advancing technologies and innovative practices. Energy codes have historically focused on energy efficiency within buildings and across their systems. However, many of tomorrow's technologies go beyond efficiency and target increased flexibility. These demand flexibility (DF) measures can postpone or reduce building electric load based on price or other grid signals, and include smart appliances, connected lighting, and connected mechanical systems. Expanding codes to enable such grid-interactive efficient building (GEB) has the potential to influence their realization at scale, which will support renewable-energy grid-integration and building-sector decarbonization. However, considering DF measures in code development creates a new set of challenges for codes and the practices contained therein. This paper considers the role of building energy codes in enabling GEB. Specifically, it reviews the status of demand flexibility (DF) measures in current commercial building energy code. It examines the national model code development process and identifies components barring the consideration and inclusion of DF measures - including code scope, characterization and analysis of proposed new prescriptive measures, and accounting for time-of-day and geographic differences in their benefits. The paper presents findings from code development analyses that indicate the cost benefit of DF measures and the limitations associated with current code development conventions. To encourage building flexibility and improved energy resilience moving forward, recommendations are made for removing code development barriers and sanctioning DF measure consideration in future model codes.
Diablo Test Suite: Code Coverage Analysis
An analysis of the Diablo source code covered by its Software Quality Assurance test suite was performed. Intel’s code coverage tool was used to determine the percentage of covered files, blocks, and functions. Excluding non-functional legacy files and single use developer-only files, the code coverage tool showed that 55% of blocks, the most applicable metric and closest to lines of code, are covered. For a large software code, 70-80% coverage is generally considered a reasonable target.A significant percentage of the uncovered code can be categorized as features that are not practical to test, duplicate/unused legacy code, and niche features only used by select individuals. Additionally, large segments of code dedicated to debugging and error handling are untested, as the test problems do not error out. The remaining untested code can be considered general purpose for use by the analyst/user community. These untested general purpose features are identified in the document and should be prioritized when new testing is added. Suggestions for additional test problems that would have the biggest impact on increasing the code coverage metric are presented. Finally, it is important to note that the single biggest way to increase the overall coverage metric is to delete old and unused code. While admittedly tedious to perform, future code development would also benefit markedly from this. Deleting unused code would likely push the coverage metric north of 60%, which is not too far off the 70-80% target. Overall, the current test suite covers the majority of commonly used features in Diablo, but there remains significant room for improvement. These areas for improvement have been identified.
Recommendations for Minimum Required Error Codes for Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure
OCPP protocol manages the interaction between the EVSE and its respective back-end communication network. It plays a pivotal role in both error reporting and troubleshooting, carried out primarily through the CSMS. OCPP defines both standard error codes and a flexible framework for creating and communicating custom error codes. The OCPI protocol orchestrates the communication between different backhaul communication networks, incorporating the exchange of error codes. These error codes are instrumental in pinpointing and rectifying issues that can surface prior to, during, or after charging operations, fortifying the reliability and resilience of the EV charging infrastructure. The flexibility offered by the OCPP and OCPI frameworks through the introduction of custom error codes also creates its own set of challenges. While the integration of custom error codes allows for enhanced granularity, it also introduces inconsistencies and fragmentation within the overarching diagnostic reporting system. To address the challenges with custom error codes this report proposes a set of Minimum Required Error Codes (MRECs) for streamlined error reporting, interpretability, and diagnostics. Recommendations in this report are based on independent analysis of custom error codes from multiple stakeholders within the EV charging ecosystem. For better error resolution, this report also assigns one or more entities responsible for the resolution of every mentioned error code. Finally, a functional classification for each mentioned error code is also identified to describe the nature of the error. In summary, the purpose of this document is to simplify the troubleshooting process and increase charging reliability for all EV users. This report serves as a recommendation for industry stakeholders, encouraging a unified methodology to define, transmit, and interpret common error codes.
Approximate Bacon-Shor code and holography
We explicitly construct a class of holographic quantum error correction codes with non-trivial centers in the code subalgebra. Specifically, we use the Bacon-Shor codes and perfect tensors to construct a gauge code (or a stabilizer code with gauge-fixing), which we call the holographic hybrid code. This code admits a local log-depth encoding/decoding circuit, and can be represented as a holographic tensor network which satisfies an analog of the Ryu-Takayanagi formula and reproduces features of the sub-region duality. We then construct approximate versions of the holographic hybrid codes by “skewing” the code subspace, where the size of skewing is analogous to the size of the gravitational constant in holography. These approximate hybrid codes are not necessarily stabilizer codes, but they can be expressed as the superposition of holographic tensor networks that are stabilizer codes. For such constructions, different logical states, representing different bulk matter content, can “back-react” on the emergent geometry, resembling a key feature of gravity. The locality of the bulk degrees of freedom becomes subspace-dependent and approximate. Such subspace-dependence is manifest from the point of view of the “entanglement wedge” and bulk operator reconstruction from the boundary. Exact complementary error correction breaks down for certain bipartition of the boundary degrees of freedom; however, a limited, state-dependent form is preserved for particular subspaces. We also construct an example where the connected two-point correlation functions can have a power-law decay. Coupled with known constraints from holography, a weakly back-reacting bulk also forces these skewed tensor network models to the “large N limit” where they are built by concatenating a large N number of copies.
Dynamical logical qubits in the Bacon-Shor code
The Bacon-Shor code is a quantum error correcting subsystem code composed of weight-2 check operators that admits a single logical qubit, and has distance 𝑑 on a 𝑑×𝑑 square lattice. We show that when viewed as a Floquet code, by choosing an appropriate measurement schedule of the check operators, it can additionally host several dynamical logical qubits. Specifically, we identify a period-4 measurement schedule of the check operators that preserves logical information between the instantaneous stabilizer groups. Such a schedule not only measures the usual stabilizers of the Bacon-Shor code, but also measures and promotes gauge operators of the parent subsystem code to additional temporary stabilizers that protect the dynamical logical qubits against errors. We show that the code distance of these Floquet-Bacon-Shor codes scales as Θ(𝑑/√𝑘) on an 𝑛=𝑑×𝑑 lattice with 𝑘 dynamical logical qubits, along with the logical qubit of the parent subsystem code. Unlike the usual Bacon-Shor code, the Floquet-Bacon-Shor code family introduced here can therefore saturate the subsystem bound 𝑘𝑑=𝑂(𝑛). Moreover, several errors are shown to be self-corrected purely by the measurement schedule itself. This work provides insights into the design space for dynamical codes and expands the known approaches for constructing Floquet codes.
Managing code transformations for better performance portability
Code optimization is an intricate task that is getting more complex as computing systems evolve. Managing the program optimization process, including the implementation and evaluation of code variants, is tedious, inefficient, and errors are likely to be introduced in the process. Moreover, because each platform typically requires a different sequence of transformations to fully harness its computing power, the optimization process complexity grows as new platforms are adopted. To address these issues, systems and frameworks have been proposed to automate the code optimization process. They, however, have not been widely adopted and are primarily used by experts with deep knowledge about underlying architecture and compiler intricacies. This article describes the requirements that we believe necessary for making automatic performance tuning more broadly used, especially in complex, long-lived high-performance computing applications. Besides discussing limitations of current systems and strategies to overcome these, we describe the design of a system that is able to semi-automatically generate efficient platform-specific code. In the proposed system, the code optimization is programmer-guided, separately from application code, on an external file in what we call optimization programming. The language to program the optimization process is able to represent complex collections of transformations and, as a result, generate efficient platform-specific code. A database manages different optimized versions of code regions, providing a pragmatic approach to performance portability, and the framework itself has separate components, allowing the optimized code to be used on systems without installing all of the modules required for the code generation. We present experiments on two different platforms to illustrate the generation of efficient platform-specific code that performs comparable to hand-optimized, vendor-provided code.