Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Interoperability Maturity Model”

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.

Interoperability Maturity Model

This document presents the relevant concepts for specifying criteria that support a grid modernization strategic vision for interoperability. It focuses on the ways to assess levels of interoperability. The assessment of interoperability needs to clearly show the relationship to interoperability and provide the necessary data to create a roadmap for how to improve interoperability. A key point to understand is that interoperability has several crucial elements, any of which may have areas for improvement. To measure interoperability, it is helpful to focus on specific areas based on the objectives of the stakeholders that are initiating the desired interoperability advancement. The measurement tool for interoperability allows the measurement tool and the area to which it is being applied to be segmented and applied in various ways. The measurement tool is based on, and developed from, the GridWise® Architecture Council’s (GWAC’s) Beta release of its Interoperability Maturity Model (GWAC 2011). As such, it represents an evolution of that approach, so the working name used in this document is IMM.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Development of an Energy Services Interface for the EGoT

The Energy Services Interface (ESI) is a set of rules that ensure private, secure, and trustworthy information exchange between Grid Service Providers (GSPs) and utility customers. Large-scale adoption of Distributed Energy Resources (DERs) will be necessary for GSPs to dispatch effective grid services, and to stimulate technological innovations in DER and DERMS (DER Management Systems) technologies, as well as novel grid service programs. The ESI promotes these objectives by advancing a set of rules and interoperability requirements that define bi-directional, service-oriented, logical interfaces between GSPs and customers’ DERs, with expectations for privacy, security, and trust. The ESI rules and interoperability requirements establish boundaries between customers and GSPs that delineate the functions and responsibilities that must be implemented by the developers of Energy Grid of Things (EGoT) ecosystem products. These rules impose constraints on the implementation of a DERMS. The ESI interoperability requirements are based on the Interoperability Maturity Model (IMM), developed by the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium. By emphasizing private, secure, and trustworthy information exchange, and by mandating a service-oriented and interoperable architecture, the ESI promotes the development of an EGoT ecosystem that motivates customer participation and technological innovation. Interoperability will encourage innovation by reducing barriers to entry and increasing confidence of stakeholders. Customers will be willing to participate in DER service programs that establish trust and emphasize customer choice. Large-scale customer participation ensures GSPs have ample DER resources to provide grid services that have significant impact on grid reliability and reduce electricity cost for consumers. This in turn signals economic opportunities that encourage innovation, resulting in the development of a robust EGoT ecosystem.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Developing an Energy Service Interface Specification

Developing an Energy Service Interface (ESI) specification requires engaging a community of stakeholders including grid operators, Information and Communication Technology implementors, integrators, and finally standards bodies who will define an interface that respects and boundaries of ownership and roles of responsibility in order to activate millions of Distributed Energy Resource for the provision of grid services. By applying Interoperability Maturity Model Criteria and ESI principles to common grid-DER service use cases, the Grid Modernization Lab Consortium team will engage subject matter experts to develop a specification, with an eventual goal of informing development of ESI compliant profiles or standards. The ESI Specification is intended to specify the characteristics, attributes, or qualities that need to be addressed in ESI compliant standards or profiles. This includes addressing interoperability criteria and the service-performance style of the interface.

32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATI↗

PSU ESI Review

A guide to developing an Energy Service Interface (ESI) was created as part of the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium 2.5.2 ESI project. The approach applies device-agnostic and service-oriented ESI principles and leverages documents such as the Interoperability Maturity Model and Common Grid Service Definitions to provide a methodology to review, develop, and update standards and profiles to engage distributed energy resources (DER) to provide grid services. This document evaluates the ESI developed by Portland State University’s Power Engineering Group under the Electric Grid of Things project funded by the U.S. Department of Energy. The evaluation explores the compliance of this specific implementation with the GMLC ESI principles to provide an example of an ESI profile and gap analysis.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Virtual Synchronous Machine Grid-Forming Inverter Model Specification (REGFM_B1)

This report describes a generic virtual synchronous machine (VSM) grid-forming inverter (GFM) model - REGFM_B1. The initial model specification was proposed by Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), General Electric (GE), and Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI). Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy (SGRE) also provided inputs to the specification. The model specification has been revised multiple times based on the discussions between all the contributors listed in this report. This work was funded by the Universal Interoperability for Grid-Forming Inverters (UNIFI) Consortium. This generic model is developed to help the utility industry understand the concept of VSM GFMs. The model could be used to represent equipment for long-term planning studies where vendor-specific models are not available. As equipment mature and improve, generic models will be updated to capture the new functionalities of GFMs. It is not intended that these models will always remain representative of all future GFM technologies.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

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↗

Enabling the Broader Use of MOOSE for Nuclear Energy and Other Simulation

This Final Scientific and Technical Report summarizes work performed under the Phase IIA SBIR project “Enabling the Broader Use of MOOSE for Nuclear Energy and Other Simulation” (DE-SC0020906) from August 2023 through August 2025. The objective of the Phase IIA effort was to mature and harden capabilities developed during Phase II, with the goal of enabling practical interoperability between Coreform’s isogeometric analysis (IGA) technologies and the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE), while improving robustness, performance, and scalability for complex, nuclear-relevant geometries. Over the course of Phase IIA, the project established and validated an extraction-based interoperability pathway between Coreform tools and MOOSE. A combined mesh and matrix format was defined collaboratively with MOOSE developers and integrated into the solver, enabling standard MOOSE workflows to operate on data exported from Coreform’s IGA and Flex Representation Method (FRM) pipelines. Early demonstrations validated architectural compatibility using linear solid mechanics problems, while later efforts focused on benchmark testing and external use. By the end of the project period, engineers at BWXT were able to independently set up and execute a simulation using the Coreform–MOOSE workflow and provide direct feedback that informed further refinement. In parallel, substantial effort was devoted to improving the robustness of trimmed U-spline construction for complex CAD geometries. A growing test suite of nuclear-relevant models was compiled through collaboration with multiple stakeholders and used to drive extensive bug fixing and reliability improvements. These efforts resulted in improved robustness and performance, including the addition of fallback capabilities that enhance reliability when the underlying commercial CAD kernel fails. Performance-oriented work progressed later in the project, with the development and demonstration of methods to decompose complex geometries into structured subregions and updated data representations to support more efficient solver processing. Additionally, extensive enhancements to threadsafe parallel data structures and trimming operations established a foundation for scalable processing of large assemblies. Collaboration with Sandia National Laboratories on the SGM geometric modeling kernel advanced to a functioning interface test case, positioning the workflow for future kernel integration. Overall, the Phase IIA effort successfully transitioned the project from architectural proof-of-concept to externally exercised, solver-integrated capability, while clarifying remaining technical challenges related to standardization, performance optimization, and kernel integration.

42 ENGINEERING↗