Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Software Verification”

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.

1,706 records · Page 95

Comparison of 3-dimensional dose reconstruction system between fluence-based system and dose measurement-guided system

COMPASS system (IBA Dosimetry, Schwarzenbruck, Germany) and ArcCHECK with 3DVH software (Sun Nuclear Corp., Melbourne, FL) are commercial quasi-3-dimensional (3D) dosimetry arrays. Cross-validation to compare them under the same conditions, such as a treatment plan, allows for clear evaluation of such measurement devices. In this study, we evaluated the accuracy of reconstructed dose distributions from the COMPASS system and ArcCHECK with 3DVH software using Monte Carlo simulation (MC) for multi-leaf collimator (MLC) test patterns and clinical VMAT plans. In a phantom study, ArcCHECK 3DVH showed clear differences from COMPASS, measurement and MC due to the detector resolution and the dose reconstruction method. Especially, ArcCHECK 3DVH showed 7% difference from MC for the heterogeneous phantom. ArcCHECK 3DVH only corrects the 3D dose distribution of treatment planning system (TPS) using ArcCHECK measurement, and therefore the accuracy of ArcCHECK 3DVH depends on TPS. In contrast, COMPASS showed good agreement with MC for all cases. However, the COMPASS system requires many complicated installation procedures such as beam modeling, and appropriate commissioning is needed. In terms of clinical cases, there were no large differences for each QA device. The accuracy of the compass and ArcCHECK 3DVH systems for phantoms and clinical cases was compared. Both systems have advantages and disadvantages for clinical use, and consideration of the operating environment is important. The QA system selection is depending on the purpose and workflow in each hospital.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

Verification and Validation of the Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive Transportation (START) – 22323

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Integrated Waste Management is planning for the eventual transportation, storage, and disposal of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and high-level radioactive waste (HLW) from nuclear power plant and DOE sites. The Stakeholder Tool for Assessing Radioactive Transportation (START) is a web-based, geospatial decision-support tool developed for evaluating routing options and other aspects of transporting SNF and HLW, covering rail, truck, barge, and intermodal infrastructure and operations in the continental United States. The verification and validation (V&V) process is intended to independently assess START to provide confidence in the ability of START to accurately provide intended results. The V&V process checks the START tool using a variety of methods, ranging from independent hand calculations to comparison of START performance and results to those of other codes. The V&V activity was conducted independently from the START development team with opportunities to provide feedback and collaborate throughout the process. The V&V analyzed attributes of transportation routes produced by START, including route distance and both population and population density captured within buffer zones around routes. Population in the buffer zone, population density in the buffer zone, and route distance were all identified as crucial outputs of the START code and were subject to V&V tasks. Some of the improvements identified through the V&V process were standardizing the underlying population data in START, changing the projection of the population raster data, and changes to the methodology used for population density to improve its applicability for expected users. This collaboration also led to suggested improvements to some of the underlying shape file segments within START. A formal series of test routes went through the V&V process from START version 3.2.1 following the implementation of the recommended improvements to START. The V&V of the buffer zone population and distance reported in START were achieved by utilizing a custom workflow developed in QGIS. This platform was chosen because it is fully independent of START. The buffer zone population and route distances in START showed excellent agreement to independent V&V test results. Over 200 route test cases were run; in all cases, the percent difference in the population within the buffer zone was less than +/- 5%, and the majority of cases were below +/- 1%. These cases were also duplicated in ArcMap, which is Environmental Systems Research Institute’s (ESRI) GIS desktop application. The ArcMap results also show good agreement; however, they cannot be considered independent of START because START also uses ESRI software. The V&V tasks are currently addressing population density and estimated radiation dose in START as well as implementing further automation of the V&V process to allow larger suites of test routes to be run more easily and quickly by less experienced GIS users. These improvements to the V&V process will make it a valuable tool for the development team and the stakeholders so that each new iteration of START can easily be checked for quality and consistency. This paper and presentation will describe the V&V process, findings and implications, and ongoing V&V activities.

START, DOE, Transporation, dose, GIS↗

Impact of MODIS High-Resolution Sea-Surface Temperatures on WRF Forecasts at NWS Miami, FL

Over the past few years,studies at the Short-term Prediction Research and Transition (SPoRT) Center have suggested that the use of Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) composite sea-surface temperature (SST) products in regional weather forecast models can have a significant positive impact on short-term numerical weather prediction in coastal regions. The recent paper by LaCasse et al. (2007, Monthly Weather Review) highlights lower atmospheric differences in regional numerical simulations over the Florida offshore waters using 2-km SST composites derived from the MODIS instrument aboard the polar-orbiting Aqua and Terra Earth Observing System satellites. To help quantify the value of this impact on NWS Weather Forecast Offices (WFOs), the SPoRT Center and the NWS WFO at Miami, FL (MIA) are collaborating on a project to investigate the impact of using the high-resolution MODIS SST fields within the Weather Research and Forecasting (WRF) prediction system. The scientific hypothesis being tested is: More accurate specification of the lower-boundary forcing within WRF will result in improved land/sea fluxes and hence, more accurate evolution of coastal mesoscale circulations and the associated sensible weather elements. The NWS MIA is currently running the WRF system in real-time to support daily forecast operations, using the National Centers for Environmental Prediction Nonhydrostatic Mesoscale Model dynamical core within the NWS Science and Training Resource Center's Environmental Modeling System (EMS) software; The EMS is a standalone modeling system capable of downloading the necessary daily datasets, and initializing, running and displaying WRF forecasts in the NWS Advanced Weather Interactive Processing System (AWIPS) with little intervention required by forecasters. Twenty-seven hour forecasts are run daily with start times of 0300,0900, 1500, and 2100 UTC on a domain with 4-km grid spacing covering the southern half of Florida and the far western portions of the Bahamas, the Florida Keys, the Straights of Florida, and adjacent waters of the Gulf of Mexico and Atlantic Ocean. Each model run is initialized using the Local Analysis and Prediction System (LAPS) analyses available in AWIPS, invoking the diabatic. "hot-start" capability. In this WRF model "hot-start", the LAPS-analyzed cloud and precipitation features are converted into model microphysics fields with enhanced vertical velocity profiles, effectively reducing the model spin-up time required to predict precipitation systems. The SSTs are initialized with the NCEP Real-Time Global (RTG) analyses at l/12 degree resolution (approx. 9 km); however, the RTG product does not exhibit fine-scale details consistent with its grid resolution. SPoRT is conducting parallel WRF EMS runs identical to the operational runs at NWS MIA in every respect except for the use of MODIS SST composites in place of the RTG product as the initial and boundary conditions over water. The MODIS SST composites for initializing the SPoRT WRF runs are generated on a 2-km grid four times daily at 0400, 0700, 1600, and 1900 UTC, based on the times of the overhead passes of the Aqua and Terra satellites. The incorporation of the MODIS SST composites into the SPoRTWRF runs is staggered such that the 0400UTC composite initializes the 0900 UTC WRF, the 0700 UTC composite initializes the 1500 UTC WRF, the 1600 UTC composite initializes the 2100 UTC WRF, and the 1900 UTC composite initializes the 0300 UTC WRF. A comparison of the SPoRT and Miami forecasts is underway in 2007, and includes quantitative verification of near-surface temperature, dewpoint, and wind forecasts at surface observation locations. In addition, particular days of interest are being analyzed to determine the impact of the MODIS SST data on the development and evolution of predicted sea/land-breeze circulations, clouds, and precipitation. This paper will present verification results comparing the NWS MIA forecasts the SPoRT experimental WRF forecasts, and highlight any substantial differences noted in the predicted mesoscale phenomena.

Case, Jonathan L.↗

MO-B-BRD-02: 3D Printing in the Clinic

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRD-03: Principles, Pitfalls and Techniques of 3D Printing for Bolus and Compensators

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRD-04: Sterilization for 3D Printed Brachytherapy Applicators

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRD-00: Clinical Applications of 3D Printing

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRD-01: Creation of 3D Printed Phantoms for Clinical Radiation Therapy

This session is designed so that the learning objectives are practical. The intent is that the attendee may take home an understanding of not just the technology, but also the logistical steps necessary to execute these 3D printing techniques in the clinic. Four practical 3D printing topics will be discussed: (i) Creating bolus and compensators for photon machines; (ii) tools for proton therapy; (iii) clinical applications in imaging; (iv) custom phantom design for clinic and research use. The use of 3D printers within the radiation oncology setting is proving to be a useful tool for creating patient specific bolus and compensators with the added benefit of cost savings. Creating the proper protocol is essential to ensuring that the desired effect is achieved and modeled in the treatment planning system. The critical choice of printer material (since it determines the interaction with the radiation) will be discussed. Selection of 3D printer type, design methods, verification of dose calculation, and the printing process will be detailed to give the basis for establishing your own protocol for electron and photon fields. A practical discussion of likely obstacles that may be encountered will be included. The diversity of systems and techniques in proton facilities leads to different facilities having very different requirements for beam modifying hardware and quality assurance devices. Many departments find the need to design and fabricate facility-specific equipment, making 3D printing an attractive technology. 3D printer applications in proton therapy will be discussed, including beam filters and compensators, and the design of proton therapy specific quality assurance tools. Quality control specific to 3D printing in proton therapy will be addressed. Advantages and disadvantages of different printing technology for these applications will also be discussed. 3D printing applications using high-resolution radiology-based imaging data will be presented. This data is used to 3D print individualized physical models of patient’s unique anatomy for aid in planning complex and challenging surgical procedures. Methods, techniques and imaging requirements for 3D printing anatomic models from imaging data will be discussed. Specific applications currently being used in the radiology clinic will be detailed. Standardized phantoms for radiation therapy are abundant. However, custom phantom designs can be advantageous for both clinical tasks and research. 3D printing is a useful method of custom fabrication that allows one to construct custom objects relatively quickly. Possibilities for custom radiotherapy phantoms range from 3D printing a hollow shell and filling the shell with tissue equivalent materials to fully printing the entire phantom with materials that are tissue equivalent as well as suitable for 3D printing. A range of materials available for use in radiotherapy phantoms and in the case of phantoms for dosimetric measurements, this choice is critical. The necessary steps required will be discussed including: modalities of 3D model generation, 3D model requirements for 3D printing, generation of machine instructions from the 3D model, and 3D printing techniques, choice of phantoms material, and troubleshooting techniques for each step in the process. Case examples of 3D printed phantoms will be shown. Learning Objectives: Understand the types of 3D modeling software required to design your device, the file formats required for data transfer from design software to 3D printer, and general troubleshooting techniques for each step of the process. Learn the differences between materials and design for photons vs. electrons vs. protons. Understand the importance of material choice and design geometries for your custom phantoms. Learn specific steps of quality assurance and quality control for 3D printed beam filters and compensators for proton therapy. Learn of special 3D printing applications for imaging. Cunha: Research support from Phillips Healthcare.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

Discrete Event Simulation-Based Timeline Validation Using R2U2

The Gateway Vehicle Systems Manager (VSM), the top-level software control system in a distributed, hierarchical Autonomous System Management Architecture is, like most modern spacecraft software control systems, heavily data-driven. For example, schedules (timelines) will be developed on the ground and, due to the high degree of autonomy, contain complex procedures involving conditional branching, variable timing, and resource contention resolution. In order to verify that an uploaded timeline will function correctly, it is necessary to explore the feasible set of possible executions. While it is possible to test a timeline using a mission simulation, the complexity of the system and duration of a timeline limits the number of trials and therefore the test coverage. To address this problem, the VSM team is using a discrete event system model that can rapidly generate from a timeline sets of event sequences using Monte Carlo techniques. To achieve rapid and trustworthy checking of the event sequences, we use an offline version of the runtime model checking tool R2U2. This presentation describes the approach the VSM team is using to implement the discrete event simulation and evaluate event sequences using R2U2. The presentation will discuss: 1. Description of the timelines by VSM in the context of VSM operations 2. Expansion of a timeline into a sequence of atomic events 3. Adjustment, in the Monte Carlo environment, of an event sequence to account for uncertainty, external events, and failures 4. Definition of R2U2 input and mission-time linear temporal logic files 5. Generation and use of R2U2 verdict sequences 6. Lessons learned and future work

Verification↗

The Uniform Methods Project: Smart Thermostat Evaluation Protocol

A smart thermostat is an internet-connected device that controls home heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) equipment and can automatically adjust temperature set points to optimize performance and achieve energy savings. Smart thermostat features often include two way communication, occupancy detection (such as geofencing and occupancy sensors), schedule learning, and seasonal optimization algorithms. Smart thermostats can control most conventional HVAC systems, including central air conditioners, heat pumps, and forced air furnaces. Several types of residential utility programs offer smart thermostats as replacements measures. Working with smart thermostat vendors, utilities can offer separate optimization programs to produce energy savings beyond those achieved by installing a smart thermostat. From an evaluation perspective, smart thermostat programs have several noteworthy features. First, the energy savings from a smart thermostat may change over the life of the device. As a smart thermostat is connected to the internet, original equipment manufacturers can update the thermostat software to improve the thermostat's energy efficiency. Likewise, users can adjust the thermostat settings and schedules over time in response to changes in weather, thermal comfort, energy prices, or preferences for energy efficiency. Additionally, many thermostat manufacturers offer seasonal optimization programs that recommend changes or make minor, automated adjustments to the thermostat settings to improve energy efficiency. These opt-in programs are now standard offerings for many smart thermostat manufacturers and provided at no additional cost to users. The potential for software updates and continuous optimization and the evolving nature of user interactions mean future energy savings may differ from first-year savings and the energy savings of smart thermostats may need to be evaluated more than once. Second, smart thermostats often have small unit energy savings relative to a home's total energy consumption, especially in comparison to whole- home retrofit programs. This can make it difficult to detect the smart thermostat savings in billing or advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) meter consumption data. For example, as cooling loads in many regions average about 20% of annual electricity consumption, smart thermostat savings of 10% of cooling energy use would equate to a 2% reduction in home electricity consumption. Evaluators should use regression analysis of whole-home billing consumption or advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) meter consumption data to evaluate smart thermostat savings because, as explained at greater length below , these data are usually available to evaluators and regression can control for the impacts of weather and other potentially confounding factors on a home's energy consumption. Finally, as with other energy efficiency programs, participation in smart thermostat programs is self-selective. As discussed at greater length below , smart thermostat participants tend to be, among other things, younger, higher-income, and more likely to adopt electric vehicles (EVs) and internet connected devices than nonparticipants. These differences are often unobservable to the evaluator and correlated with a home's energy consumption, creating the potential for bias in estimating savings. Due to the small unit savings of thermostats, errors and biases from self-selection that may not be very consequential when evaluating a whole- home retrofits (e.g., ±2% of home electricity consumption) can have a major impact when evaluating the savings and cost-effectiveness of smart thermostat programs. A percentage point change in the estimated savings could affect the cost-effectiveness of a program. This means it is important for evaluators to assess and to minimize the potential for error from selection bias in estimating smart thermostat program savings. The Uniform Methods Project provides model protocols for determining energy savings and demand reductions that result from specific energy efficiency measures implemented through state and utility programs. In most cases, the measure protocols are based on a particular option identified by the International Performance Verification and Measurement Protocol ; however, this work provides a more detailed approach to implementing that option. Each chapter is written by technical experts in collaboration with their peers, reviewed by industry experts, and subject to public review and comment. The UMP protocols can be used by utilities, program administrators, public utility commissions, evaluators, and other stakeholders for both program planning and evaluation.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

MOOSE Framework Meshing Enhancements to Support Reactor Analysis

MOOSE-based physics codes require an input finite element mesh on which the physics solution is calculated, reported, and transferred to other physics codes. The use of difficult-touse, external licensed software is often required to generate high quality meshes for reactor geometries. High-fidelity geometry modeling also requires elaborate tracking of groups of elements for material property assignment and output reporting which can be considerably complex for the user to identify and maintain. Under the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program, several meshingrelated enhancements have been developed for the MOOSE framework to address user challenges in creating finite element meshes for advanced reactor geometries. MOOSE mesh generators have been developed to mesh hexagonal geometries (pins, ducted assemblies, and cores) commonly found in liquid-metal cooled fast reactor concepts. The mesh generator used for hexagonal pin cells is generic for regular polygons and therefore may also be used for Cartesian pin cells. Hexagonal pin cells can be stitched into ducted assemblies, and assemblies can be stitched together into a core. The user may specify region ids, region names, and other preferences on the mesh. This control is useful for later material mapping in the MOOSE-based physics codes input. A capability was also developed for meshing rotating control drums including determination of material volume fractions in each mesh element as a function of time. Control drum meshes may be stitched to other hexagonal assemblies to create a core configuration. Additional mesh generators were developed that wrap around the hexagonal meshing capabilities and utilize “extra element integer” ID values on each element. In regular Cartesian or hexagonal assemblies or cores, the bookkeeping of element groups for both material assignment and output reporting can now be automated through assignment of pin, assembly, core, axial and depletion id values stored as extra element integers. The extra element tags on the mesh greatly speed the reactor analyst’s efforts to map materials to meshes, track depletion zones, and parse output such as axial pin power distributions. At the highest level, pin, assembly, and core mesh generators (with this reactor terminology) have also been developed to easily generate regular Cartesian and hexagonal cores, including axial extrusion. These reactor geometry builders call upon the previously mentioned capabilities to produce analysis-ready 3D meshes including material assignments. Open source mesh triangulation capabilities were also investigated for integration into the MOOSE framework to address the need for meshing the core periphery region which extends from the irregular outer assembly border to a cylindrical boundary. Options are limited due to licensing constraints, and the recommendation is pursue building a native MOOSE Delaunay triangulator routine with full functionality. Finally, a series of verification problems were performed with NEAMS physics tools. All developed capabilities will be available in the new open-source “Reactor” module of the MOOSE framework, which is accessible to any MOOSE-based NEAMS physics tool.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Subtask 1.3 – Integrated Carbon Capture and Storage for North Dakota Ethanol Production

The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC), in partnership with Red Trail Energy, LLC (RTE), a North Dakota ethanol producer; the North Dakota Industrial Commission (NDIC) Renewable Energy Program (REP); and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), conducted a feasibility and implementation study for a commercial carbon capture and storage (CCS) effort. This subtask provided technical support and developed recommended practices of how small-scale industrial CO2 emitters (<1,000,000 tonnes of CO2 emitted annually) may economically deploy CCS. The 64-million-gallon dry mill RTE ethanol facility, emitting an average 180,000 tonnes of CO2 annually, was the subject of the case study. The positive outcome of this research, which shows technical and economic potential for ethanol–CCS in North Dakota, has resulted in RTE acquiring an approved Permit to Drill on December 2, 2019, for a stratigraphic test well in early 2020, a necessary step toward a North Dakota CO2 Storage Facility Permit (SFP) for the RTE CCS effort. Outcomes include 1) validating the Broom Creek Formation as a regional target for CCS, 2) determining the full carbon life cycle of an industrial fuel production facility with CCS, 3) developing a field implementation plan (FIP) for small-scale CCS, and 4) determining the validity and pathway for using CCS to meet low-carbon fuel (LCF) standards. The technical team included the EERC, RTE, Trimeric Corporation, Schlumberger Carbon Services, and Computer Modelling Group (CMG). Findings from activities conducted November 2016 – May 2020 are summarized as follows. Several key steps have been accomplished toward validating the Broom Creek Formation as a CO2 injection and storage target at the RTE CCS site, including verification of the presence and structure of sandstone layers that may comprise the potential CO2 storage reservoir and the several thousand feet of overlying confining zone. Work included site characterization using existing data, interpretation of seismic data within the study area, and geologic modeling simulation of CO2 injection. Interpreted results estimate 3000 feet of confining zone between the Broom Creek Formation (storage target) and the lowermost underground source of drinking water (e.g., the Fox Hills Formation). The thickness of the Broom Creek injection target varies 230–420 ft within the survey area. Results were used to inform the location of a stratigraphic test well and associated characterization test program. No impediments were identified within the targeted CO2 storage complex that would prevent the project from moving forward. A stratigraphic test well is the next step to validate these results and to acquire remaining data necessary to develop a North Dakota CO2 SFP application. The EERC generated full carbon life cycle estimates for CCS integration with the RTE ethanol facility. Results indicated that an average 40% reduction in CO2 emissions is possible through CCS implementation. Approximately half of the carbon in the overall life cycle for a dry mill ethanol plant is generated through the fermentation process and emitted to the atmosphere; this is the CO2 stream targeted for CCS. The remaining carbon is attributed to corn feedstock farming (diesel, fertilizer), energy for fuel processing (natural gas, electricity), and transportation (diesel) of the fuel product. Life cycle carbon estimates are also affected by the anticipated energy consumption of a potential capture facility, which depend on the type of CO2 product generated. For example, a 30%–40% net CO2 emission reduction is estimated if a liquefied CO2 facility were incorporated compared to a 40%–50% net CO2 reduction if a supercritical “injection-grade” CO2 product is generated; i.e., more energy is required to further refine the CO2 stream, affecting the full carbon life cycle estimates. A CCS FIP was developed and initiated at the RTE CCS site, resulting in the development of several guidance documents: a CO2 Capture Process Design Package, a North Dakota CO2 geologic Storage Permits Template, and a Public Outreach Package for CCS in North Dakota. General FIP components include CO2 capture system, pipeline and well designs; monitoring, verification, and accounting (MVA) plans; geologic characterization and testing programs; and permitting and outreach plans. Vendor bids were also acquired for the CO2 liquefaction facility. Near-surface characterization (groundwater and soil gas sampling) and geologic characterization (seismic survey) were initiated to inform development of a UIC Class VI-compliant MVA plan compliant with a North Dakota CO2 SFP. Designs (well and geologic testing) were completed for a stratigraphic test well compliant with a North Dakota CO2 SFP. In addition, the outreach plan was executed, including community open houses, meetings with city/county/state officials, and development of public materials. Although other entities continued to mature incentive programs in 2019–2020, California and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) currently provide the most advanced economic opportunities for CCS integrated with fuel production. The California Low-Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) adopted a CCS Protocol in January 2019, allowing submittal of a design-based pathway (DBP) application for an approved temporary (not certified) carbon intensity value for a fully engineered facility. An ethanol–CCS DBP application to the California LCFS Program (officially approved February 28, 2020) was developed to show that the RTE CCS effort meets LCFS requirements. The approved DBP provides confidence to advance the project and supports potential investments. Other entities continue to mature incentive programs. The IRS issued guidance in February 2020 that addresses the definition of beginning of construction and revenue procedure on partnerships for the Enhancement of Carbon Dioxide Sequestration Credit (a.k.a. Section 45Q) CCS tax credit program; the IRS anticipates issuing further guidance on issues such as secure geologic storage, utilization qualifications, and recapture of claimed credits. Maturing incentive programs coupled with workable permitting regulations provide confidence to advance CCS projects in North Dakota and support financial investment to proceed with designing, constructing, and implementing CCS projects at small-scale fuel production facilities. The largest hurdles for CCS implementation at small-scale industrial systems are often business/economic-related (i.e., not technical). Market uncertainty already exists for agriculture-based alternative fuels such as corn ethanol, for which production has increased by ~33%, and prices have correspondingly lowered since 2015. Passing the Section 45Q tax credit program improves economic feasibility for CCS but may require external investors for a small business to achieve maximum benefits. Public–private partnerships with NDIC and DOE have resulted in foundational technical and regulatory knowledge, growing stakeholder confidence, and a pathway to implementation that enables similar industrial CCS projects in the region to advance. This subtask was funded through the EERC–DOE Joint Program on Research and Development for Fossil Energy-Related Resources Cooperative Agreement No. DE-FE0024233. Nonfederal funding was provided by NDIC and RTE. The authors would also like to thank CMG, ESRI, IHS, Neuralog, and Schlumberger for allowing the use of their software packages in support of this work.

42 ENGINEERING↗

Improving public communication through environmental data transparency at Los Alamos National Laboratory - 15306

The Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) environmental data span a wide range of media, including air, soil, sediment, water, foodstuff, and biota as well as over 1000 analytes and time periods extending over 4 decades, resulting in over 14 million records to manage and analyze. At a time of budget cuts and rapid social and technological change, the public, regulatory and compliance agencies, and stakeholders demand accelerated data delivery and efficiency, information sharing, and transparency in the dissemination and handling of samples collected in and around LANL. Meeting these requirements, while constraining the associated costs can be challenging; however, LANL has achieved this by adopting a cloud-based database called the Environmental Information Management (EIM) system and its public database counterpart, IntellusNM (Intellus) (www.intellusnm.com). To be consistent with federal initiatives to move government computing into cloud-based services, LANL chose to partner with an existing cloud-based vendor, Locus Technologies, to implement a software-as-a-service model. As an additional cost-saving measure, local regulatory and compliance agencies collaborated with LANL to incorporate their data into EIM and Intellus database. By adopting a single platform cloud-based solution to replace 12 different pre-existing environmental data systems, LANL has streamlined environmental data processes, resulting in over $15 million cost savings through 2015. EIM, LANL's internal cloud database, provides a cradle-to-grave process for data handling. EIM supports LANL's entire data process from detailed sample planning, mobile data collection using iOS mobile devices, to automated bottle labeling, generation of chain of custody, analytical lab electronic data deliverable upload, auto data validation, sample tracking, and custom regulatory and compliance reports. EIM has functionality to assess data in various ways such as the ability to design new formatted reports, a free-form structured query language tool of the entire database, exceedance reports, calculation engine, charting, trends, and statistics. EIM also has interactive geographic information system layers and analyte concentration color contour mapping capabilities. Additionally, and of greater importance to LANL, EIM supports the ability for third-party landowners to review data before release to the public, thus ensuring transparency and confidence in LANL's stewardship of human health and the environment. Intellus, the database counterpart of EIM, is the publicly available view of the entire LANL database and requires no data feeds or transformations. Intellus allows user-friendly access to LANL's environmental data as it is collected, providing the public, scientists, remediation teams, regulators, and stakeholders within hours of receipt. Full transparency in giving the public access to environmental data information provides LANL's overall solution to environmental data management for the public. By making the data easy to obtain, search, and query for interested stakeholders, the system enables confidence in LANL's stewardship of the environment. Working together identifies key topics of improvements, develop strategies and help support innovation and substantial advances within LANL's environmental data management system. (authors)

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Commercial Building Technology Demonstration (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The background for this project was a unique and innovative concept that had been proposed and demonstrated by enVerid Systems, reducing the energy consumption in HVAC systems in commercial and public buildings by up to 50% at peak loads. The concept involves selective scrubbing of gas contaminants from indoor air as a practical substitute for outside air ventilation, the latter being the conventional practice today. This scrubbing enables recycling of most of the indoor air and significantly decreasing the amount of outside air, resulting in a reduced HVAC load and commensurate energy savings for the facility. Key to our approach is low cost scrubbing of all gas contaminants from indoor air using novel, efficient and regenerable sorbent materials. The total solution, labeled HLR (HVAC Load Reduction) is implemented by means of compact modules that can be retrofitted onto virtually any building, and utilizes novel sorbents that have been developed and brought to scale production by enVerid. Although the technology had been deployed and demonstrated, the US commercial building and HVAC markets, famously conservative with respect to innovation and new technologies, had yet to embrace the idea or the product. The overarching goal of the project was to help overcome market hesitancy and enable widespread adoption, by creating a critical mass of success stories across different regions and building types, all under oversight and verification of the DOE and NREL, to ensure credibility and accuracy. The project, overall, was a resounding success. Several installations were deployed and tested comprehensively for the impact on both energy consumption and indoor air quality, and results were not only excellent, but quantitatively in line with expectations. A total number of eight (8) installations were attempted, with 2 aborted due to building issues. Of the six successful installations, however, complete M&V was performed by NREL on 2 (Miami and NYC) and partial analysis on a third site (ArcBest), and these three, along with their results, were therefore presented from a financial and reporting standpoint. Although the number of case studies fell short of the original target of 10, we nevertheless had excellent demonstrations in vastly different climate zones: Southeast, Northeast and Midwest, and in very different building types. This included a modern high-rise office building in New York City and a University Campus health center in Miami, and a mid-rise high-density office in Arkansas. The cooling load reduction was shown to be significant, averaging 37% during the final cooling season in the Miami site. In the NYC site, the cooling energy savings were generally less, at around 12%, as expected. While this is a lower number for average/total savings, two comments are important to note: (i) the outside airflow (OA) reduction was not consistent during the data collection period, at least in part understating the attainable savings through incorrect measurement of the “high energy” reference state; and (ii) the peak impact in NYC is almost certainly as high as Miami, with critical ramifications for peak load reduction and equipment downsizing ability. Importantly, the measured energy savings in all locations were related to the outdoor climate conditions and the actual achievable reduction in outside air, very much in line with models and calculations; this leaves us with increased confidence in our understanding of the interaction between the technology and the building, and our ability to project the impact of this innovation in the future, through broad adoption. Simply put: the energy savings and load reduction impact of the HLR solution has been confirmed quantitatively. The results also confirmed the air quality objective. This may be even more significant, in that air quality is more complex and harder to measure and quantify, and the performance of the HLR as an air scrubber is the linchpin of the entire solution. In all sites, indoor air quality met or exceeded the required parameters, in terms of achieving the target (low) levels of indoor pollutants. Furthermore, the concentrations of outdoor sourced pollutants were markedly lower, as expected, mostly due to the reduction in outside air intake although in part also due to the scrubbing. The success was not immediate nor easy, and early challenges with the systems, especially (but not only) around controls and communication, caused delays in commissioning and undermined some of our M&V schedules. The good news is no fundamental issues were encountered and the number of such glitches was declining quickly by the end of the project. Other challenges had to do with coordinating the control of the building OA dampers, which the HLR needs to have in order to deliver the load reduction, but which the facility manager controls regularly and independently. This is not necessarily a problem for normal HLR operation but interferes with accurate M&V, where switching OA settings back and forth on a precise timetable is essential for clean data. The project provided valuable experience in retrofitting buildings that had been originally designed to operate with less recirculation and more outside air, and some key learnings related to the cyclical regeneration of the sorbents in the operational environment of the building. Some of these learnings gave already been incorporated into ongoing improvements in the design of the HLR module as well as the software that is used to control its operation. The cost and time of retrofit installations is much better understood; so is the test and balance procedure of the building that determines the available range of outside air reduction, which in turn determines the amount of load reduced. We had also implemented at least one annual cycle of sorbent cartridge replacement in the field, after which we tested the used sorbent to assess the rate of degradation of sorbent potency – an important factor affecting the long-term economics of HLR deployments. A notable shortfall of the project, other than the fact that the number of sites was below target, was that we had not (yet) completed testing to measure and verify (M&V) the winter energy savings. This is primarily due to late start on the NYC sites (Miami does not portend any heating savings associated with reduced outside air), combined with the issues of OA damper control. It is by no means suggested that such savings cannot be captured, only that the M&V with respect to winter in NYC has been incomplete. The value of this project and its interest to the general public are hard to overstate. The case studies created from Miami and especially from NYC have, without a doubt, opened up the interest of the broad HVAC industry to HLR in the past year. Major manufacturer reps have signed up to represent and promote the product, and dozens of top tier engineering consultants have introduced HLR as a base of design in upcoming construction and renovation projects – precisely the overarching goal of this project. These would not have happened without the highly visible installation in NYC and its ultimately satisfied customer. Furthermore, the DOE itself issued a report in late 2017 analyzing hundreds of candidate technologies for reducing energy consumption in HVAC; remarkably, the budding HLR solution ranked among the top 3(!); no doubt, its status as a viable and significant contender on this list is informed by the success of these demonstrations. And furthermore, in the wake of these demos, several major energy utilities, led by ConEdison in NYC, have endorsed the HLR solution and now routinely provide substantial cash rebates for customers choosing to incorporate the HLR in their buildings and reap the benefit of the reduced peak load as well as reduced cumulative energy demand. Last but not least, in January of 2019, as this report was being written, the HLR module won the AHR Expo Innovation Award for Green Buildings and, remarkably, the prestigious and only Product of the Year 2019, being selected by an independent professional panel of judges from AHR and ASHRAE. Given the confirmation of the enormous energy saving potential of HLR in widescale deployment, as well as ancillary but significant benefits in terms of equipment downsizing and indoor air quality, the benefit of this effort to the public speaks for itself. Accelerating adoption of HLR, without dependence on subsidies and driven by the private sector, is well under way. There is still much work to be done in terms of educating the HVAC and construction ecosystems and improving the product’s robustness and simplicity, to further facilitate the adoption of this technology and the capture of its potential value. But the American public will greatly benefit both directly and indirectly in the immediate future and beyond.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗