Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “input”

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 1,531 records · Page 85
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2023

Effective sensor location for detection of change in structural dynamic response

This paper investigates the sensitivity of structural system response to the sensor location by investigating consequences of small changes in the location to the structural system response. The paper discusses how maximum observability (based on mode shape and the participation of that mode in the input provided) drives optimal location. The structural responses were investigated in terms of the g-rms response for various low-frequency inputs (pure sinusoids and real-life inputs such as an earthquake and trains). Results were then analyzed in the context of Modal Contributions Factors (MCF) and changes to the Force-to-response Transfer Functions (TRFs). A modal-matching process is first presented using a Matlab TM -based Finite Element Method (FEM) model of a cantilever beam and instrumentation to determine the location of a small mass based on three different criteria. Subsequently, the structural response is investigated using experiments and the FEM model. The accelerometer of small mass (at 1/3 height) was moved up or down to obtain changes in the structural response (TRF) to various realistic low-frequency inputs. Modal Contribution Factor (MCF) and derivative (slope) of the associated mode-shapes were correlated to the observed changes in TRFs. Results show how optimal sensor locations for detecting change in structural response can be based on the MCFs and the associated mode-shapes.

Woodall, J.↗
DOE OSTI2022

Dynamic responses of submerged components in advanced reactors: experimental and numerical studies

The seismic design of an advanced nuclear reactor must consider the interaction of vessel internal components with the surrounding coolant: fluid–structure interaction (FSI). Available analytical solutions for FSI of submerged components do not accommodate multiple-component, intense seismic inputs and complex reactor and internal geometries. Physical testing of reactor vessels and internals to inform seismic design is impractical and cost-prohibitive, leaving the use of verified and validated, robust numerical models as the only plausible option for analysis and design. Physical data that could be used for validating such numerical models for multi-component shaking are not available. This article describes an experimental program performed on a 6-degree-of-freedom earthquake simulator to generate data that could support validation of seismic FSI numerical models for submerged components in commercial finite element codes. A scaled model of a base-supported reactor vessel with simplified representations of submerged internals was tested to generate submerged-component response histories for a range of seismic inputs. The generated data were used to validate numerical models in the finite element code LS-DYNA. Numerical models were validated for calculation of hydrodynamic pressure responses on internals, in-water frequencies of internals, and acceleration responses of internals. The generated data and the analysis recommendations could aid engineering analysts designing submerged components and systems for seismic effects.

Engineering↗
DOE OSTI2021

Learning curves for drug response prediction in cancer cell lines

Motivated by the size and availability of cell line drug sensitivity data, researchers have been developing machine learning (ML) models for predicting drug response to advance cancer treatment. As drug sensitivity studies continue generating drug response data, a common question is whether the generalization performance of existing prediction models can be further improved with more training data. We utilize empirical learning curves for evaluating and comparing the data scaling properties of two neural networks (NNs) and two gradient boosting decision tree (GBDT) models trained on four cell line drug screening datasets. The learning curves are accurately fitted to a power law model, providing a framework for assessing the data scaling behavior of these models. The curves demonstrate that no single model dominates in terms of prediction performance across all datasets and training sizes, thus suggesting that the actual shape of these curves depends on the unique pair of an ML model and a dataset. The multi-input NN (mNN), in which gene expressions of cancer cells and molecular drug descriptors are input into separate subnetworks, outperforms a single-input NN (sNN), where the cell and drug features are concatenated for the input layer. In contrast, a GBDT with hyperparameter tuning exhibits superior performance as compared with both NNs at the lower range of training set sizes for two of the tested datasets, whereas the mNN consistently performs better at the higher range of training sizes. Moreover, the trajectory of the curves suggests that increasing the sample size is expected to further improve prediction scores of both NNs. These observations demonstrate the benefit of using learning curves to evaluate prediction models, providing a broader perspective on the overall data scaling characteristics. A fitted power law learning curve provides a forward-looking metric for analyzing prediction performance and can serve as a co-design tool to guide experimental biologists and computational scientists in the design of future experiments in prospective research studies.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data for KETCHUP: Parameterizing of Large-Scale Kinetic Models Using Multiple Datasets with Different Reference States

Repository for Kinetic Estimation Tool Capturing Heterogeneous Datasets Using Pyomo (KETCHUP), a flexible parameter estimation tool that leverages a primal-dual interior-point algorithm to solve a nonlinear programming (NLP) problem that identifies a set of parameters capable of recapitulating the steady-state fluxes and concentrations in wild-type and perturbed metabolic networks. KETCHUP can use K-FIT [2] input files. Example K-FIT input files are located in the K-FIT repository at https://github.com/maranasgroup/K-FIT.

Metabolomics↗
DOE OSTI2020

Description and Use of SCALE Sampler Parametric Capability for Engineering Analysis and Optimization

The Sampler sequence was introduced into the SCALE nuclear modeling and simulation suite in SCALE 6.2 to perform uncertainty quantification via random sampling of nuclear data, material number densities, and dimensions. Sampler was expanded with the introduction of a parametric capability in SCALE 6.2.2. This paper discusses input for the Sampler parametric sequence and presents two case studies of analyses performed using the sequence. These case studies include preconceptual design of a package for transporting high assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) oxide and scoping calculations to support subcritical limit development for a future update of the ANSI/ANS-8.1 (ANS-8.1) standard. The parametric capability within Sampler provides many benefits to analysts. For instance, parametric sweeps are frequently used to identify optimum parameter values as part of safety analysis or system design, but such sweeps can require substantial engineering time or may rely on custom-written scripts or scripts such as Write One, Run Many (or WORM) developed outside of any software quality assurance program. With the parametric capabilities in Sampler, however, a large number of inputs can be generated automatically without recourse to scripting by individual analysts. The parametric capability can also be used in lieu of the CSAS5S search sequence to identify optimum parameters more simply with straightforward inputs and outputs. Sampler can also be used to calculate input parameters from engineering specifications. For example, diameters can be converted to radii, or masses can be used to calculate number densities. Overall, the Sampler parametric capability provides a robust feature within SCALE, eliminating the need for user-developed scripting.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Brady Geodatabase for Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence

These files contain the geodatabases related to Brady's Geothermal Field. It includes all input and output files for the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence. Input and output files are sorted into three categories: raw data, pre-processed data, and analysis (post-processed data). In each of these categories there are six additional types of raster catalogs which are titled Radar, SWIR, Thermal, Geophysics, Geology, and Wells. These inputs and outputs were used with the Geothermal Exploration Artificial Intelligence to identify indicators of blind geothermal systems at the Brady Hot Springs Geothermal Site. The included zip file is a geodatabase to be used with ArcGIS and the tar file is an inclusive database that encompasses the inputs and outputs for the Brady Hot Springs Geothermal Site.

15 GEOTHERMAL ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2022

HERO WEC V1.0 - WEC-Sim Detailed Simulation Runs and Summary Data

Data sets from simulation runs include 144 wave cases that were run based on the WEC-Sim model (https://mhkdr.openei.org/submissions/483). The 144 wave cases represent waves with the following wave height and wave period ranges: - Significant Wave Height: 0.25 - 4.0m in 0.25m increments - Wave Period: 5 - 13 sec in 1 sec increments Each run was simulated using a Pierson-Moskowitz irregular wave spectrum with a 200 second ramp time and a total simulation time of 2,200 seconds. Summary data set includes a spreadsheet and image files with matrices that are associated with data from simulation runs. All matrices cover the same significant wave height and wave periods from the sim runs, in the same increments. The following matrices are included: - Mechanical Power Input: Absorbed power calculated using linear input velocity at PTO (power take-off) multiplied by winch tension. - Mechanical Power Output: The hydraulic power calculated at the pump output prior to the pressure relief valve dump. - Feed Pressure: Average pressure at RO (reverse osmosis) input prior to pre-filters - RO Power Input: The hydraulic power calculated at the RO system inlet, accounts for flow loss due to pressure relief valve - Water Production: Average clean water flow at RO output

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗
DOE OSTI2023

Model data for numerical evaluation of photosensitive tracers as a strategy for separating surface and subsurface transient storage in streams

This model-data archive pertains to a study aimed at the numerical evaluation of the photosensitive tracers as a potential strategy for separating the effects of surface and hyporheic storage zones (SSZs and HSZs, respectively). Separating effects of SSZ and HSZ are important for accurately representing stream function as HSZs and SSZs expose solutes to significantly different biogeochemical conditions. We perform numerical experiments using a multiscale reactive transport model for stream corridors implemented in ATS code, which allows for representing multiple storage zones with their respective travel time distributions and biogeochemistry. For each of the numerical experiment, we provide in this model-data archive python wrapper to drive ATS (forward_model.py), synthetic observation (synthetic_btc.py, BTC_observed.csv), forward model files including ATS input (multiscale_transport.tpl), PFLOTRAN inputs (reactions_channel.tpl, reactions_hz.tpl, reactions_sz.tpl), MCMC (mcmc_run.py), predictive uncertainty (pred_uncert.py, BTCs_simulated_day.csv, BTCs_simulated_night.csv), MCMC outputs (tracer_test_GR.npy, tracer_test_logps.npy, tracer_test_parameters.npy) and Jupyter notebook for post-processing and visualization (post-processing.ipynb). For the denitrification application, ATS input file (denitrification_multisubgrid.tpl), PFLOTRAN input files (denitrification_channel.in, denitrification_hz.in), predictive uncertainty (pred_uncert_denitrification.py, BTCs_simulated_DO.csv, BTCs_simulated_DOC.csv, BTCs_simulated_Nitrate.csv).

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2021

Model America: Data and Models for every U.S. Building

The 5-year goal of the “Model America” concept was to generate a model of every building in the United States. This data repository delivers on that goal with "Model America v1". Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has developed the Automatic Building Energy Modeling (AutoBEM) software suite to process multiple types of data, extract building-specific descriptors, generate building energy models, and simulate them on High Performance Computing (HPC) resources. For more information, see AutoBEM-related publications (bit.ly/AutoBEM). There were 125,715,609 buildings detected in the United States. Of this number, 122,146,671 (97.2%) buildings resulted in a successful generation and simulation of a building energy model. This dataset includes the full 125 million buildings. Future updates may include additional buildings, data improvements, or other algorithmic model enhancements in "Model America v2". This dataset contains OSM and IDF zip files for every U.S. county. Each zip file contains the generated buildings from that county. The .csv input data contains the following data fields: 1. ID - the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), generated using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework 2. Centroid - building center location in latitude/longitude (from Footprint2D) 3. Footprint2D - building polygon of 2D footprint (lat1/lon1_lat2/lon2_...) 4. State_abbr - state name 5. Area - estimate of total conditioned floor area (ft2) 6. Area2D - footprint area (ft2) 7. Height - building height (ft) 8. NumFloors - number of floors (above-grade) 9. WWR_surfaces - percent of each facade (pair of points from Footprint2D) covered by fenestration/windows (average 14.5% for residential, 40% for commercial buildings) 10. CZ - ASHRAE Climate Zone designation 11. BuildingType - DOE prototype building designation (IECC=residential) as implemented by OpenStudio-standards 12. Standard - building vintage This data is made free and openly available in hopes of stimulating any simulation-informed use case. Data is provided as-is with no warranties, express or implied, regarding fitness for a particular purpose. We wish to thank our sponsors which include Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD), U.S. Dept. of Energy’s (DOE) Building Technologies Office (BTO), Office of Electricity (OE), Biological and Environmental Research (BER), and National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Update (September 23, 2025): We corrected the ID field in all state-level.csv input files to ensure one-to-one consistency with the corresponding .osm and .idf output files. The schema and file structure are unchanged; only the values in the ID column were modified. No files were added or removed, and the .zip bundles (containing .osm / .idf) are unchanged. The corrected .csv inputs were re-extracted in March 2025 from the original data generated ~ 2021 (Theta supercomputer runs), and published here to align input IDs with model outputs. Update (September 6, 2026): The Model America dataset was updated to replace the previous building ID field with the Unique Building Identifier (UBID), using the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) BuildingID framework. UBIDs provide standardized, location-based identifiers for individual building footprints and improve interoperability with other building and geospatial datasets. The data files containing the previous building identifiers were updated to include UBIDs. This update standardizes building identification; the underlying Model America building characteristics and energy simulation results were not recomputed as part of this update.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Dataset: "Widespread Drought-driven Declines in Streamflows and Water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin (1998-2022)"

This data package contains the associated data and scripts for Nagamoto, E., Ombadi, M., Ciulla, F. et al. Widespread drought-driven declines in streamflows and water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin during 1998-2022. Commun Earth Environ 7, 734 (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-026-03890-5. This purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of the 21st century drought on water quantity and quality at catchments throughout the Upper Colorado River Basin (UCRB). We used stream flow, water temperature, specific conductance, air temperature, precipitation, and catchment attribute data for over 200 sites in the UCRB, collected from the National Water Information System using Basin3D (Varadharajan, 2023), GAGESII (Falcone, 2010), and the Google Earth Engine. We identified years of severe drought between 1998 and 2022 using the Standardized Precipitation Evaporation Index (SPEI), then calculated the relative change percentage of the stream flow, water temperature, and specific conductance from drought versus non-drought years. We used the attribute information from GAGESII to investigate what physical traits of catchments are associated streamflow vulnerability (greater relative change) or resilience to drought. We used land cover data from the National Land Cover Database (USGS, 2024) to assess any changes to physical attributes that may not be represented in the static attributes information in GAGESII. To increase data availability, we modeled stream temperature using methods from Willard, 2023. While the study period is water years 1998 to 2022, the raw water quantity and quality data extends to 1950 and the meteorological data extends to 1980. The data and code can be downloaded via the UCRB_drought.zip. Within the zip, the files are organized as follows: - INPUTS: Contains all input data used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb - OUTPUTS: Contains all intermediate data created from UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb as well as final products including the calculated Standardized Evapotranspiration Index (SPEI) - climatic_variables: The code used to collect meteorologic data from Google Earth Engine - feature_importance: The code used for the catchment attributes analysis - preprocessing: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb - pyeto: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb - calculations: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impacts.ipynb - plotting: Code used in UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impacts.ipynb - README.md - UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Preprocessing.ipynb: The code used to prep raw data for the analysis - UCRB_Drought_Workflow_Impact.ipynb: The code which uses the prepped raw data for analysis, and plots all figures - requirements_ucrb-drought_v2.yml: The requirements file to create a virtual environment and Jupyter Lab kernel to run the code The INPUTS folder is organized into the following major directories and sub-directories. The "RDC_WT_SC_RAW" folder contains raw data for streamflow, water temperature, and specific conductance in a ".h5" file. The "NLCD_RAW" folder contains ".csv" files with annual land cover percentages for counties within the UCRB. The "MET_RAW" folder contains a ".csv" file with monthly meteorological data (air temperature and precipitation) for the sites in the UCRB which was obtained from code in the climatic_variables folder. The "GAGESII" folder contains ".csv" files with physical catchment attribute variables for catchments across the country. The "WT_LSTM_data" folder contains ".csv" files with calculated WT (Willard, 2023) and the associated RMSEs. The "Upper_Colorado_River_Basin_Boundary" folder contains geographic data including a shapefile for plotting in the UCRB_Drought_Workflow.ipynb. The "RESERVOIRS_RAW" folder contains ".csv" files for each reservoir in the UCRB with daily reservoir storage. There are also two files in the INPUTS folder that have combined reservoir storage data and reservoir metadata. The OUTPUTS folder is organized into the following major directories and sub-directories. The "RDC_WT_SC_data" folder contains a folder "Water_year" with the associated cleaned data, metadata, and data availability information in ".csv" files, a folder "Median_Relchange" with the relative change comparing drought to non-drought years in ".csv" files, and a folder "Peak95_Min5_Relchange" that has ".csv" files for the relative change in peak (95th %) and minimum (5th %) variables. The "NLCD_data" folder contains the difference in land cover from the beginning to end of the study period and the percentage of the county that is within UCRB bounds can be found in Nagamoto et al (2025)). The "MET_data" folder contains separated monthly air temperature and precipitation data and the calculated PET in ".csv" files. The "SPEI_data" folder contains ".csv" files with calculated SPEI values (one restricted to the study period and the other with information from the entire MET data period). The "Paper_Tables" folder contains two ".csv" files containing site information and data availability and information about the GAGESII trait aggregated categories. The base directory includes the file “flmd.csv” for a list and description of all files and the file “dd.csv” for data dictionaries. Scripts for preprocessing, analysis, and figure generation are located in the associated GitHub repository found at [https://github.com/iNAIADS/drought-impacts/tree/develop/UCRB-drought]. UPDATE 1: Title and code file updated to match submitted manuscript 10-15-2025. UPDATE 2: Code and data files updated to match revised manuscript 3-4-2026. UPDATE 3: Code and data files updated to match revised manuscript 6-7-2026. ** NOTE: DD and FLMD have not been updated yet. UPDATE 4: Added associated Manuscript information and DD and FLMD have been updated. To cite this code, please use the following BibTeX: @misc{nagamoto2025drought, author = {Emily Nagamoto and Fabio Ciulla and Mohammad Ombadi and Jared Willard and Rosemary Carroll and Charuleka Varadharajan}, title = {Dataset: "Widespread Drought-driven Declines in Streamflows and Water quality in the Upper Colorado River Basin (1998-2022)"}, year = {2025}, doi = {10.15485/2551894}, publisher = {ESS-DIVE Repository}, url = {https://data.ess-dive.lbl.gov/datasets/doi:10.15485/2551894} }

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Integrating Characteristic Arctic Vegetation in a Land Surface Model Improves Representation of Carbon Dynamics Across a Tundra Landscape: Modeling Archive

This modeling archive is in support of the Next-Generation Ecosystem Experiments in the Arctic (NGEE Arctic) publication "Integrating Characteristic Arctic Vegetation in a Land Surface Model Improves Representation of Carbon Dynamics Across a Tundra Landscape", by Murphy et al. (2025). This archive contains model input files and outputs from landscape-scale simulations conducted using ELM, the land model component of the Department of Energy’s Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM), at the Council NGEE Arctic field site (Council Road mile marker 71) on Alaska’s Seward Peninsula. Input data and model output from two sets of ELM simulations are provided. The first set of simulations were conducted with the two default ELM Arctic plant functional types (PFTs; broadleaf deciduous boreal shrub and a C3 grass) and the second set of simulations were conducted with a set of nine Arctic-specific PFTs including nonvascular mosses and lichens, graminoids, forbs, evergreen dwarf shrubs, three height classes of deciduous shrubs (dwarf, low, and low to tall), and deciduous alder shrubs (Sulman et al., 2021). Parameter names and major parameter changes in the Arctic-specific PFT configuration are described in Sulman et al. (2021) and archived in the Sulman et al. (2021) dataset (see below). Simulations were spatially explicit, covering an approximately 6.4X3.3 km domain at the Council site with a spatial resolution of 100 m for a total of 2,112 simulated grid cells under each ELM PFT configuration. The modeling archive contains meteorological forcing (seven *.nc files and one *.txt file), a domain definition file (one *.nc files), land surface configuration files (two *.nc files), parameter files (two *.nc files), annual ELM output files spanning 1980-2014 (68 *.nc files), and a User’s Guide (*pdf file). Additional information on the provided files is in the “Modeling Archive Contents” section of the User’s Guide. Model outputs are aggregated to the column scale (i.e. PFT-specific outputs are not provided here).

Murphy, Bailey [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000203995221)↗
DOE OSTI2026

A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation: Model Archive

This dataset is a model archive of the paper A bespoke model of Arctic river basins based on hillslope delineation (in prep), which introduces a watershed decomposition and parameterization method for large scale permafrost hydrology simulation. With this dataset, this study aims to address the research question: whether a computationally efficient hillslope-based modeling framework can reliably simulate discharge at Arctic river-basin scales. This dataset contains model input and output data for five modeling scenarios at a study site located in the Sagavanirktok River basin. The five modeling scenarios include three modeling cases under temperate conditions using full 3D, decomposed 3D, and decomposed 2D modeling strategies; and two modeling cases under actual Arctic conditions with permafrost using full 3D and decomposed 2D modeling strategies. Simulations were performed using the Advanced Terrestrial Simulator (ATS, v1.6 for three temperate scenarios and v1.5 for two Arctic scenarios), a physics-rich integrated surface–subsurface hydrologic model with cryo-hydrology features. For the three temperate models, simulations were conducted for the period of 10/01/1993 - 09/30/2002; and for the two Arctic models, simulations were conducted for the period of 01/01/1994 - 12/31/2002. To facilitate reproducibility of simulations, all datasets are organized hierarchically. The dataset contains: (1) Mesh files (.exo) for full 3D model, decomposed 3D models, and decomposed 2D models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/mesh/. Mesh files can be visualized through Paraview or read by Python. (2) Climate forcings (.h5) for full 3D model and decomposed 3D/2D models are located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/daymet_onePiece/, and huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/vp_pr_revised_daymet_1980_2006_with_wind/ separately. Accessible by Python. (3) Raw measured gage discharge (.csv) from USGS, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/gaged_basin15906000_discharge_usgs/. Accessible by Python. (4) Delineated subdomain raster (.tif) and shape files (.shp), and the final parameterized results (.npy) for decomposed models, located in huc/190604020802_gauge15906000/data_preprocessed-meshing. Accessible by Python. (5) Temperate models are located in nonpermaf_huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes three cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_0*-hillslope_*), decomposed 3D models (inside model_1*-subcatchment_*), and full 3D model (inside model_2*-onepiece_*). Two step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_*1-*_spinup_steadystate and model_*2-*_spinup_cycle, separately, which are used to initialize real transient models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the real transient models are located in model_*3-*_transient/. Especially, for two example hillslope models (ID=-11 and 11), additional h5py files are included in model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope-11/, model_03-hillslope_transient/hillslope11, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment-11/, model_13-subcatchment_transient/subcatchment/11, respectively, which are used to plot the saturation figure (Figure 5) in the manuscript. Accessible by Python. (6) Arctic models are located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/, which includes two cases: decomposed 2D models (inside model_04-hillslope_transient), and full 3D model (inside model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra). Three step spin-up results (checkpoint_final.h5) are located in model_01-column_freezeup/, model_02-column_spinup/, model_03-hillslope_spinup/, respectively, which are used to initialize real 2D transient hillslope models. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of transient 2D hillslope models are located in model_04-hillslope_transient/. The input files (.xml) and output results (.dat) of the full 3D transient model is located in model_05-onepiece_transient_mannp1_ra/. The full 3D transient model is initialized by model_02-column_spinup/. Accessible by Python. (7) The MOSART routed discharge results (.csv) under Arctic conditions is located in huc190604020802_gauge15906000/MOSART/. Accessible by Python. (8) All Python codes (.py) used to parameterize full 3D model to decomposed 2D models are located in script/. These codes fit with watershed workflow (a watershed delineation tool) v1.4 under the branch gaob/v1.4 from https://github.com/gaobhub/watershed-workflow.git.

EARTH SCIENCE > CRYOSPHERE↗
DOE OSTI2026

Data and Scripts Associated with "Modeling Ecohydrological Responses of Vegetation to Urban Microclimates Using the E3SM Land Model"

This dataset supports the study of vegetation ecohydrological responses to urban microclimates using the land component of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (ELM) at four urban sites in Knoxville, Tennessee, USA. It includes the model inputs, simulation outputs, and associated scripts for running ELM simulations and analyzing the resulting data. The Model_Inputs folder includes static surface data, satellite-derived phenology (i.e., leaf area index), and atmospheric forcing data used to drive ELM simulations. Detailed descriptions of these datasets are provided in Section 2.3.2 of the associated manuscript. The Model_Outputs folder contains simulation results for the baseline, treatment, and ensemble experiments. Outputs from the baseline and treatment simulations are provided as raw ELM NetCDF files. Because the raw outputs from the 4,000-member ensemble are prohibitively large, the ensemble results are provided as summarized CSV files, which also serve as the source data for Figure 5 of the associated manuscript. The Scripts folder contains three components: E3SM, the core codebase of the Energy Exascale Earth System Model (E3SM); elm-olmt, the Offline Land Model Testbed (OLMT) used to perform the simulations; and knoxville_elm, which contains the analysis scripts used to process model outputs and generate the figures and results presented in the associated manuscript. Additional information is provided in Scripts_readme.txt within the Scripts directory.

Lu, Xiaoman [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000306698780)↗
DOE OSTI2020

LANL studies of ESD spark energy discharge through September 2019

Two concentric-sphere apparatuses were used to measure the energies deposited by electric sparks through air to calibrated loads. Both sets of spheres had clean, uninsulated metal surfaces. The 127-mm diameter pair of spheres had a gap of 10 mm and a capacitance of 52 pF. The maximum energy stored on these spheres was 12 mJ and the maximum energy delivered to the 50-mΩ load was 11 µJ, with or without inductance. This load energy amounted to 0.09% of the available input energy; the remainder of the input energy was expended in forming the spark. The second set of spheres was 330 mm in diameter with a gap of 14 mm and a capacitance of 240 pF. The maximum energy stored on these spheres was 71 mJ and the maximum energy delivered to the 50-mΩ load was 150 µJ without added inductance. This load energy was 0.27% of the input energy; again, the remainder of the input energy was expended in forming the spark. The inclusion of 250 nH and 500 nH inductances in the discharge path of the smaller spheres caused the current discharges to resonate, but had little effect on the maximum energies deposited in the loads. At the time of writing, inductances had not yet been added to the larger spheres. The magnitudes of the observed spark discharges were stochastic, so more than 1200 tests were required to develop the statistical bounds of the spark behavior, i.e., to estimate the worst case (highest likely) energy depositions in the loads. The action integrals of the current discharges $∫ i^2dt$ were found to be approximately independent of the load resistances for loads of less than ~1 Ω. Hence the energy deposition scaled with resistance as 207 µJ/Ω and 2.93 mJ/Ω for the two apparatuses.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2020

SAM Plug-in Development (Phase I Final Report)

The DOE Office of Nuclear Energy (NE) has created an extensive set of advanced modeling and simulation tools for nuclear engineering analysis. The advanced capabilities of these newer analysis codes require more in-depth training, skills, and knowledge in order to effectively utilize them for the design, analysis, and licensing of advanced nuclear systems and experiments. A high learning curve for inexperienced users may deter organizations from incorporating these tools into their internal processes. This project involved development of a plug-in to the Symbolic Nuclear Analysis Package (SNAP) for the System Analysis Module (SAM) tool. SAM is an advanced system analysis tool for reactor transient analyses being developed at Argonne National Laboratory under the U.S. DOE Office of Nuclear Energy’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. SAM utilizes an object-oriented application framework (MOOSE), and its underlying meshing and finite-element library (libMesh) and linear and non-linear solvers (PETSc), to leverage modern advanced software environments and numerical methods. SNAP provides a highly flexible framework for creating, modifying and documenting input for engineering analysis codes such as SAM as well as extensive functionality for submitting, monitoring, and interacting with the codes through an intuitive graphical user interface (GUI). The common user interface provided by SNAP minimizes the learning curve for engineers starting with a new analysis code and provides an intuitive framework for transitioning between different analysis codes. SNAP provides a powerful but intuitive interface to facilitate access to advanced modeling and simulation tools for inexperienced users. Unlike many “form based” GUI’s, SNAP maps each engineering code’s component input to an internal database which manages all component input parameters along with component interconnections. This level of abstraction permits SNAP to support several advanced capabilities such as renodalization, model validation and consistency checks, embedded documentation, model notebook generation, data ownership and reviewer tracking, and variable assignment for inputs to name a few. SNAP includes a built-in Python interpreter and is interfaced to several commercial and open source packages including CPython, MATLAB/OCTAVE, Microsoft Office, Open Office, and SANDIA’s DAKOTA package which provides Uncertainty Quantification analysis through the SNAP plug-ins. Phase I of this project involved development a fully functional basic SAM plug-in to SNAP. This plug-in provides the ability to import existing models, graphically construct, edit and submit models using SNAP’s extensive functionality.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for B-3A/B Pond for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the B-3A/B Ponds model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the B-3 A/B Ponds vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for SALDS for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP) is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the SALDS vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2020

KENO V.a Primer: Performing Calculations using SCALE’s Criticality Safety Analysis Sequence (CSAS5) with Fulcrum

The SCALE code system developed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory is widely used and accepted around the world for criticality safety analyses. The well-known KENO V.a three-dimensional Monte Carlo criticality computer code is one of the primary criticality safety analysis tools in SCALE. The KENO V.a primer is designed to help a new user understand and use the SCALE/KENO V.a Monte Carlo code for nuclear criticality safety analyses. It assumes that the user has a college education in a technical field. There is no assumption of familiarity with Monte Carlo codes in general or with SCALE/KENO V.a in particular. The primer is designed to teach by example, with each example illustrating two or three features of SCALE/KENO V.a that are useful in criticality analyses. The primer is based on SCALE 6.2 and 6.3, which includes the Fulcrum graphical user interface (GUI). Each example uses Fulcrum to provide the framework for preparing input data and viewing output results. Starting with a Quickstart section, the primer gives an overview of the basic requirements for SCALE/KENO V.a input and allows the user to quickly run a simple criticality problem with SCALE/KENO V.a. The sections that follow Quickstart include a list of basic objectives at the beginning that identifies the goal of the section and the individual SCALE/KENO V.a features that are covered in detail in the sample problems in that section. Upon completion of the primer, a new user should be comfortable using Fulcrum to set up criticality problems in SCALE/KENO V.a. The primer provides a starting point for the criticality safety analyst who uses SCALE/KENO V.a. Complete descriptions are provided in the SCALE/KENO V.a manual. Although the primer is self-contained, it is intended as a companion volume to the SCALE/KENO V.a training and documentation. The SCALE manual and training schedule are available at https://scale.ornl.gov. The primer provides specific examples of using SCALE/KENO V.a for criticality analyses; the SCALE/KENO V.a manual provides information on the use of SCALE/KENO V.a and all its modules. The primer also contains an appendix with sample input files. In addition, this primer, its errata and sample inputs are also available at https://code.ornl.gov/scale/primers/kenova.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗