SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “federated computing”

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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 163 records · Page 9

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program (FY 2019 Annual Summary of Completed Projects)

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory with distinctive capabilities in neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission to “ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available at the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) program at ORNL operates under the authority of the DOE Order 413.2C, “Laboratory Directed Research and Development,” which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. ORNL reports on the program status to DOE each year.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2021 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in neutron science, computing, advanced materials, nuclear science and technology, and other fields. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied R&D to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.”1 As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website.2 The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of the DOE Order 413.2C, “Laboratory Directed Research and Development,”3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the following goals: (1) maintain the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; (2) enhance the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; (3) foster creativity and stimulate exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; (4) serve as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and (5) support high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2021 and contains summaries of all LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Randomized Federated Learning Methods for Nonsmooth, Nonconvex, and Hierarchical Optimization (Final Technical Report)

This final technical report summarizes the outcomes of a DOE-funded project on federated scientific machine learning (FL) under nonsmooth, nonconvex, and hierarchical optimization settings. The project develops new mathematical models, algorithms, and theoretical guarantees for decentralized stochastic, bilevel, and minimax optimization problems arising in DOE mission-relevant applications. A unified framework of randomized and zeroth-order federated optimization methods is introduced, providing provable convergence, communication efficiency, and sample-complexity guarantees. The report documents algorithmic design, theoretical analysis, and empirical validation of the proposed federated learning methods. The project also contributes to workforce development through graduate training and dissemination of results via publications and seminars.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2023 Completed Projects Report

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of the DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development, which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2023 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2022, and September 30, 2023.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2024 Completed Projects Report

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development,3 which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and to enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory; • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions; • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology; • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D; and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2024 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2023, and September 30, 2024.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2025 Completed Projects

Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) is the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) largest multiprogram science, technology, and energy laboratory. It possesses distinctive capabilities in a variety of fields, such as neutron science, computing, advanced materials, and nuclear science and technology. Using these capabilities, ORNL conducts basic and applied research and development (R&D) to support DOE’s overarching mission “to ensure America’s security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions.” As a national resource, ORNL also applies its capabilities and skills to the specific needs of other federal agencies and customers through the DOE Strategic Partnership Projects (SPP) Program. Information about the laboratory and its programs is available on the ORNL website. The Laboratory Directed Research and Development (LDRD) Program at ORNL operates under the authority of DOE Order 413.2C, Laboratory Directed Research and Development, which establishes DOE’s requirements for the program while providing the laboratory director broad flexibility for program implementation. The LDRD Program funds are obtained through a charge to all laboratory programs. Although it represents a relatively small portion of the overall research budget, the LDRD Program plays an essential role in maintaining the laboratory’s ability to respond to national needs. The program allows ORNL to improve its distinctive capabilities and enhance its ability to conduct cutting-edge R&D. In accordance with the DOE order, R&D projects funded through the LDRD Program at ORNL support the goals of • maintaining the scientific and technical vitality of the laboratory, • enhancing the laboratory’s ability to address future DOE missions, • fostering creativity and stimulating exploration of forefront areas of science and technology, • serving as a proving ground for new concepts in R&D, and • supporting high-risk, potentially high-value R&D. This report provides an overview of the LDRD Program at ORNL in FY 2025 and contains summaries of all the LDRD research projects that concluded between October 1, 2024, and September 30, 2025.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Laboratory Directed Research and Development Program: FY 2025 Completed Projects

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

DOE OSTI2025

A2SD: Accelerating Scientific Innovation Through Autonomous Discovery Systems

The 2025 Advancing Autonomous Scientific Discovery (A2SD) workshop convened researchers from academia, national laboratories, and industry to explore the transformative role of autonomy in scientific discovery. The workshop highlighted a convergence of artificial intelligence, robotics, and computational workflows into autonomous systems capable of accelerating the scientific process. Presentations and discussions spanned autonomous experimentation, intelligent workflow orchestration, digital twins, and agent-based systems for managing complex research ecosystems. Key challenges discussed included interoperability across heterogeneous infrastructures, near real-time data management under FAIR principles, reproducibility, and the integration of human oversight. The workshop also emphasized the need for modular software interfaces, federated learning models, and education initiatives to support a next-generation scientific workforce.

Taufer, Michela [University of Tennessee, Knoxvill↗

DOE OSTI2020

Coordinative Entities: Forms of Organizing in Data Intensive Science

Scientific collaboration is a long-standing subject of CSCW scholarship that typically focuses on the development and use of computing systems to facilitate research. The research presented in this article investigates the sociality of science by identifying and describing particular, common forms of organizing that researchers in four different scientific realms employ to conduct work in both local contexts and as part of distributed, global projects. This paper introduces five prototypical forms of organizing we categorize as coordinative entities: the Principal Group, Intermittent Exchange, Sustained Aggregation, Federation, and Facility Organization. Coordinative entities as a categorization help specify, articulate, compare, and trace overlapping and evolving arrangements scientists use to facilitate data intensive research. We use this typology to unpack complexities of data intensive scientific collaboration in four cases, showing how scientists invoke different coordinative entities across three types of research activities: data collection, processing, and analysis. Finally, our contribution scrutinizes the sociality of scientific work to illustrate how these actors engage in relational work within and among diverse, dispersed forms of organizing across project, funding, and disciplinary boundaries.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Facility Cybersecurity Framework Best Practices

Federal facilities are increasingly adopting automation and connecting to the Internet creating an energy-internet-of-things environment that converges operational technology (OT) and information technology (IT). Today's buildings increasingly weave together networked sensors and cyber and physical systems that enable data to be collected, aggregated, exchanged, stored and monetized in new ways. Building technological advances have created new energy technology, services, markets and value creation opportunities (e.g. transactive energy, two-way grid communications, machine learning, and increased use of renewable and distributed energy resources). But as larger data sets are being exchanged at faster speeds between an increasing number of OT systems, it becomes more difficult to protect the security of the data lifecycle and the physical equipment it interacts with. These challenges are especially difficult to overcome because the economic and environmental gain (interoperability, big data, social networks and ubiquitous information sharing) are driving these prominent trends in the digital age. Often cybersecurity is an afterthought. The U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) funded the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) to develop various cybersecurity tools, trainings, and reports to aid federal facility managers – and other building owners and operators – in better applying frameworks and lessons learned from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Cybersecurity Framework (CSF), risk management framework (RMF), DOE’s cybersecurity capability maturity model (C2M2), and a wide variety of industry best practices and guidance documents (i.e., NIST 800 series, Department of Defense United Facilities Criteria). This set of tools, collectively known as the FEMP Facility-Related Control System Cyber Toolkit (FRCS Cyber Toolkit)2, is focused on cybersecurity concerns from facility-related control systems and other operational technology (OT), such as industrial control systems (ICS). The FRCS Cyber Toolkit can be applied across six of the sixteen critical infrastructure sectors designated by the Department of Homeland Security, including government facilities, healthcare and public health, commercial facilities (e.g., public assembly, offices, lodging), financial services (e.g., banking and insurance), emergency services (e.g., fire and police stations), and information technology. With increasingly converged IT and OT systems, it is crucial to address OT cybersecurity considerations and assess how the seam of these two systems could impact the overall cybersecurity posture of a facility. The objective of this report is to provide an overview of the best possible method to use FRCS Cyber Toolkit (section 2.0) and distilled cybersecurity best practices for the federal facilities to address growing non-linear cyber threats (section 3.0). Recommendations in this document are aggregated from several NIST and other documents (see Appendix A for additional details).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Assessment of the 3420 Building Filtered Exhaust Stack Sampling Probe Location: Stack Verification Following Fan and Air Blender Additions

The Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) 3420 Building, which is part of the Physical Sciences Facility (PSF), houses radiological capabilities that results in the requirement that emissions monitoring must be conducted for potential radionuclides in the exhaust air discharge of this building. The air monitoring system is required to conform to Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations part 61 (40 CFR 61) Subpart H, which in turns requires a sampling probe in the exhaust stream to conform to the criteria of American National Standards Institute / Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-2011, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from the Stack and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities. To support the air emissions permit for the 3420 Building on the PNNL campus, stack testing that used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) modeling as a surrogate stack and verification tests of velocity uniformity and flow angle on the retrofitted facility stack was performed. The ANSI/HPS N13.1-2011 criteria for the air monitoring probe location are that velocity uniformity, gaseous tracer uniformity, and particulate tracer uniformity must be less than or equal to 20%COV. Furthermore, no point in the sampling location may have a gaseous tracer concentration that varies from the mean concentration by more than 30%. Additionally, the flow angle at the sampling location must not be more than 20°. The CFD modeling of the stack, as reported by Recknagle et al. (2018) demonstrated that the stack meets the criteria at the probe location. The velocity uniformity and flow angle results from the 3420 stack verification tests, performed in October 2020, demonstrated that the CFD model results may be used to support the qualification of the stack sampling location. The measured velocity uniformity verification test result was 1.4%COV. This value is well within the uniformity criterion, which is that the velocity uniformity be =20%COV. Additionally, this value is well within the criterion that the actual stack measurement must be within 5% of the surrogate stack result of 2.1%COV when all four fans were operating. Additionally, the measured average flow angle at the 3420 stack monitor location was 15.5 degrees. Although this is higher than expected based on the CFD model, the result is =20 degrees, so the criterion is met. Based on these stack verification test results, the reconfigured 3420 Building filtered exhaust stack meets the qualification criteria given in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-2011 standard. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this and the CFD report (Recknagle et al., 2018) may require additional tests and additional analysis to determine compliance with the standard.

3420 Building↗

DOE OSTI2025

DeepLynx Ecosystem 2025

Poor data integration and governance continue to plague complex engineering projects, resulting in missed cost, schedule, and performance targets. Departments operate in isolated systems with manual data exchange, creating fragmented information that compounds errors and leads to significant delays and cost overruns. The DeepLynx ecosystem addresses these challenges through an open-source, modular data management platform that transforms fragmented project data into an integrated digital thread. Built on a federated microservice architecture, the ecosystem comprises seven specialized tools centered around DeepLynx Nexus, a unified data catalog with hierarchical organization and graph-based navigation capabilities. The ecosystem includes: DeepLynx Stream for real-time timeseries data ingestion from industrial sources; DeepLynx Ingest for governed data uploads with formal review workflows; DeepLynx Lattice for ontology-based entity and relationship extraction; DeepLynx Run for workflow orchestration and secure AI/ML compute; DeepLynx Visualize for 3D digital twin visualization; and DeepLynx Insight for AI-assisted document analysis with traceable, grounded responses. Deployable in cloud, on-premise, or hybrid environments using containerized Docker applications and Helm charts, the DeepLynx ecosystem provides flexible infrastructure that adapts to organizational requirements. By consolidating project data into a unified data lake with role-based access controls and OAuth2 authentication, DeepLynx enables digital thread and digital twin capabilities that improve decision-making, reduce risk, and support complex engineering workflows throughout the project lifecycle.

42 - ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of the performance of different culvert boundary conditions in 2D shallow flow models

Culverts allow roads to safely traverse small streams or drainage ditches, and their proper design is critical to ensure a safe and reliable transportation network. A correct modelization of these hydraulic structures becomes crucial in the assessment of flood footprints or discharge peak estimation in a risk evaluation plan. The question of how to include culverts comes up frequently when assembling a hydraulic model that requires the presence of as many singular elements as possible. In this work, three different culvert integrations with the surface domain are studied and compared in the context of a 2D shallow water (SW) model. All of them are based on the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) formulation for the culvert discharge estimation but differ in complexity and in the interaction with the numerical model for surface flow, some of them as internal boundary conditions. Several steady and unsteady validation test cases are presented and the numerical results are compared with the predictions from HEC-RAS 1D and HY-8 software. Furthermore, the culvert area, shape and their sensitivity to the 2D computational mesh is also analyzed.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE OSTI2025

Nuclear Materials Packaging, Transportation, and Systems Analysis Group Software Quality Assurance Plan: ANSYS Mechanical Finite Element Analysis Software Version 2023R1

ANSYS Inc. develops and markets engineering simulation software and services used in the aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics, biomedical, energy, defense, and many other industries. ANSYS is dedicated to engineering simulation and is the world’s leading software provider. ANSYS was founded in 1970 and is headquartered in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania. ANSYS provides an engineering analysis tool combining structural, thermal, computational fluid dynamics, acoustic, and electromagnetic simulation capabilities. ANSYS has two main programs, which use the same solvers: (1) Mechanical APDL (ANSYS Design Parametric Language), a Fortran-based coding platform, and (2) ANSYS Workbench, which uses a graphical user interface to aid in finite element analysis implementation. This plan covers both APDL and Workbench. The ANSYS computer program is a large-scale, multipurpose finite element program that can be used to solve several classes of engineering analyses. The analysis capabilities of ANSYS include the ability to solve static and dynamic structural analyses, steady-state and transient heat transfer problems, mode-frequency and buckling eigenvalue problems, static or time-varying magnetic analyses, and various types of field and coupled-field applications. The program contains many special features that allow nonlinearities or secondary effects such as plasticity, large strain, hyperelasticity, creep, swelling, large deflections, contact, stress stiffening, temperature dependency, material anisotropy, and radiation to be included in the solution. As ANSYS has been developed, other special capabilities such as substructuring, submodeling, random vibration, kinetostatics, kinetodynamics, free convection fluid analysis, acoustics, magnetics, piezoelectrics, coupled-field analysis, and design optimization have been added to the program. These capabilities contribute further to making ANSYS a multipurpose analysis tool for varied engineering disciplines. The ANSYS program has been in commercial use for over 50 years and has been used extensively in the aerospace, automotive, construction, electronic, energy services, manufacturing, nuclear, plastics, oil, and steel industries. Additionally, many consulting firms and hundreds of universities have used ANSYS for analysis, research, and educational purposes. ANSYS is recognized worldwide as one of the most widely used and capable programs of its type. Ansys design analysis software is the first created within a quality system with ISO 9001 certification, the internationally accepted quality standard. Product development, testing, maintenance and support processes also meet the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's quality requirements, as they have for nearly four decades. The Quality Assurance Service Agreement is suitable for the customers working in the nuclear industry who need to meet specific federal regulations including 10CRF50 Appendix B and provisions of 10CFR21. ANSYS has retained its original International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 accreditation certificate since1995-05-04, It’s current certificate is valid until 2027-05-29.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2022

A Study on Efficient Reinforcement Learning Through Knowledge Transfer

Although Reinforcement Learning (RL) algorithms have made impressive progress in learning complex tasks over the past years, there are still prevailing short-comings and challenges. Specifically, the sample-inefficiency and limited adaptation across tasks often make classic RL techniques impractical for real-world applications despite the gained representational power when combining deep neural networks with RL, known as Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL). Recently, a number of approaches to address those issues have emerged. Many of those solutions are based on smart DRL architectures that enhance single task algorithms with the capability to share knowledge between agents and across tasks by introducing Transfer Learning (TL) capabilities. Here this survey addresses strategies of knowledge transfer from simple parameter sharing to privacy preserving federated learning and aims at providing a general overview of the field of TL in the DRL domain, establishes a classification framework, and briefly describes representative works in the area.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

The INTERSECT Open Federated Architecture for the Laboratory of the Future

A federated instrument-to-edge-to-center architecture is needed to autonomously collect, transfer, store, process, curate, and archive scientific data and reduce human-in-the-loop needs with (a) common interfaces to leverage community and custom software, (b) pluggability to permit adaptable solutions, reuse, and digital twins, and (c) an open standard to enable adoption by science facilities world-wide. The Selfdriven Experiments for Science/Interconnected Science Ecosystem (INTERSECT) Open Architecture enables science breakthroughs using intelligent networked systems, instruments and facilities with autonomous experiments, “self-driving” laboratories, smart manufacturing and artificial intelligence (AI) driven design, discovery and evaluation. It creates an open federated architecture for the laboratory of the future using a novel approach, consisting of (1) science use case design patterns, (2) a system of systems architecture, and (3) a microservice architecture.

Engelmann, Christian↗

DOE OSTI2020

Accuracy of HVAC Load Predictions: Validation of EnergyPlus and DOE-2 using FLEXLAB Measurements

The aim of the project reported here was to better understand the level of accuracy of three building energy simulation (BES) engines (‘engines’) — EnergyPlus™, DOE-2.1e, and DOE-2.2 — by identifying and investigating significant deviations between the performance predicted by these engines and actual performance as measured in the FLEXLAB® test facility at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL). The specific test conditions included some of those prescribed in ANSI/ASHRAE Standard 140 - Standard Method of Test for the Evaluation of Building Energy Analysis Computer Programs. Detailed measurements of FLEXLAB performance, including indoor temperatures and heat fluxes and air-flow and water flow rates and temperatures in the Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) system, together with hourly weather data, were recorded and used in analyzing the simulation results from EnergyPlus v8.8, DOE-2.2 v3.65 and DOE-2.1e v127. These engines are commonly used in the United States for building energy code compliance, federal, state, and utility incentives programs, as well as energy efficient design of new buildings and energy retrofit of existing buildings. Seven conventional overhead mixing ventilation scenarios were tested and each engine was found to have a similar level of agreement with the measurements of space-level heating and sensible cooling loads. These results provide useful information regarding the accuracy of these engines in predicting the cooling and heating load elements of whole building energy performance. This information is intended for practitioners who are concerned about transitioning between simulation tools with different engines and for managers of utility programs leveraging these tools for evaluating and/or projecting measure savings to be incentivized under their programs. The results of the comparisons of simulated and measured performance indicate that the predictions from all three engines are not significantly different. The 24-hour average value of the absolute mean bias indicates the likely magnitude of the error in any particular case. The average mean bias is reduced by cancelation of overprediction in one case by underprediction in another. The daytime absolute mean biases, which may be more important for both energy performance and occupant comfort, are ~6%, presumably because of the greater complexity involved in simulating in the presence of solar radiation. EnergyPlus typically overpredicts the cooling load and/or underpredicts the heating load by ~1.5% and the DOE-2 engines typically underpredict the cooling load by approximately the same amount. The Root Mean Square Error is relatively more sensitive to shorter term variations in the difference between predicted and measured loads; the three engines have similar values, ~10%, suggesting that the uncertainties in their predictions of peak loads may also be similar in magnitude. The implication of these results is that users, both designers and program analysts, can use EnergyPlus, DOE-2.1e, or DOE-2.2 to model conventional commercial buildings equipped with overhead mixing ventilation with a similar level of confidence. Further work is required to better understand the variability in the level of agreement between the engine predictions and FLEXLAB measurements, where a particular engine will agree well with FLEXLAB in some cases and not so well in others and another engine will agree or disagree in different cases. As the sources of this variability are identified and eliminated or reduced significantly, it is recommended that the experimental capabilities and methods developed in the study reported here should be applied to validating heating and cooling load calculations for spaces with different types of furniture and miscellaneous loads. These methods should then be applied to low energy space conditioning systems in EnergyPlus including, in particular, radiant slab and radiant ceiling panel cooling and heating systems and ‘mixed mode’ systems that combine mechanical cooling and natural ventilation systems, focusing on controls, including control of thermal mass. The work reported here addresses the conventional method of heating and cooling occupied spaces; other methods, such as the use of radiant heating and cooling systems have the potential to provide equivalent occupant comfort, or better, with lower energy consumption. These systems are addressed more explicitly in EnergyPlus but there is a need for empirical validation to give users the same level of confidence in modeling these systems that they have, or should have, in modeling conventional systems, based on the results presented here.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

DOE OSTI2020

NESHAPs CY19 Report: Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2019

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC operates facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in which radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H, which regulates radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Specifically, NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem (100 μSv) to any member of the public. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, LLNL personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 4.0.1.17, to calculate the dose to the maximally exposed individual member of the public for the Livermore Site and Site 300. In 2019, LLNL maintained its compliance with 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. All radioactive air emissions resulted in calculated doses far below the annual 10 mrem (100 μSv) sitewide standard. The annual doses to the site-wide maximally exposed individual member of the public at the Livermore Site and Site 300 from planned and unplanned operations in 2019 are: Livermore Site: 4.3 x 10⁻³ mrem (4.3 x 10⁻² μSv); Site 300: 9.5 x 10⁻⁸ mrem (9.5 x 10⁻⁷ μSv).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗