Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “TECHNOLOGY READINESS ASSESSMENT”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2025

Technology readiness assessment of magnetohydrodynamic stability control

The technology readiness level scale is revised with clear definitions for magnetohydrodynamic stability control technologies for magnetic confinement fusion. The definitions are in the form of a sentence with three dimensions, which are the system complexity, the test environment, and the cost. A clear and simple definition is sought after to make an assessment based on the evidence which is agreeable to the fusion energy development community. A sample technology readiness assessment (TRA) for the electron cyclotron current drive-based control of neoclassical tearing mode for ST Advanced Reactor, using the proposed scale, reveals that the risk of a TRA being misinterpreted is high, which can only be avoided with an understanding of the procedure described in this paper.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2013

New Developments in the Technology Readiness Assessment Process in US DOE-EM - 13247

A Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) is a systematic, metric-based process and accompanying report that evaluates the maturity of the technologies used in systems; it is designed to measure technology maturity using the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the 1980's. More recently, DoD has adopted and provided systematic guidance for performing TRAs and determining TRLs. In 2007 the GAO recommended that the DOE adopt the NASA/DoD methodology for evaluating technology maturity. Earlier, in 2006-2007, DOE-EM had conducted pilot TRAs on a number of projects at Hanford and Savannah River. In March 2008, DOE-EM issued a process guide, which established TRAs as an integral part of DOE-EM's Project Management Critical Decision Process. Since the development of its detailed TRA guidance in 2008, DOE-EM has continued to accumulate experience in the conduct of TRAs and the process for evaluating technology maturity. DOE has developed guidance on TRAs applicable department-wide. DOE-EM's experience with the TRA process, the evaluations that led to recently developed proposed revisions to the DOE-EM TRA/TMP Guide; the content of the proposed changes that incorporate the above lessons learned and insights are described. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2018

Management of the Cs/Sr Capsule Project at the Hanford Site. Technology Readiness Assessment Report

The Federal Project Director (FPD) for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Richland Operations Office (RL) Waste Management and D&D Division (WMD) requested a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) for the Management of the Cesium/Strontium Capsule Storage Project (MCSCP) at the Waste Encapsulation and Storage Facility (WESF) on the Hanford Site in Washington State. The MCSCP CD-1 TRA was performed by a team selected in collaboration between the Office of Environmental Management (EM) Chief Engineer (EM-3.3) and RL, WMD FPD. The TRA Team included subject matter and technical experts having experience in cask storage, process engineering, and system design who were independent of the MCSCP, and the team was led by the Director of Operations and Processes from the EM Chief Engineer's Office (EM-3.32). Movement of the Cs/Sr capsules to dry storage, based on information from the conceptual design, involves (1) capsule packaging, (2) capsule transfer, and (3) capsule storage. The project has developed a conceptual process, described in 30059-R-02, "NAC Conceptual Design Report for the Management of the Cesium and Strontium Capsules Project", which identifies the five major activities in the process to complete the transfer from storage pool to pad-mounted cask storage. The process, shown schematically in Figure 1, is comprised of the following process steps: (1) loading capsules into the UCS; (2) UCS processing; (3) UCS insertion into the TSC Basket; (4) cask transport from WESF to CSA and (5) extended storage at the CSA.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

A NEA review on innovative structural materials solutions, including advanced manufacturing processes for nuclear applications based on technology readiness assessment

The Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) Expert Group on Innovative Structural Materials (EGISM) was established in 2008 under the guidance of the Nuclear Science Committee (NSC). Its objectives are to conduct joint and comparative studies to support the development, selection and characterisation of innovative structural materials that can be implemented in advanced nuclear fuel cycles, under long service lifetime and extreme conditions, such as high temperature, high dose/dose rate and corrosive chemical environments. In this context of growing interest and initiatives, the EGISM initiated at the beginning of 2018 an activity among its members to: Identify, in a non-exhaustive way, the currently existing programs on innovative materials and fabrication processes in NEA member countries and China; Establish a first cartography of the activities that are underway on these topics and identify common subjects and thematic; Propose a Technology Readiness Level scale to estimate the maturity of both innovative materials and fabrication processes; Carry out a reflection on what the enablers are to quickly climb this TRL scale, as well as the obstacles, in order to identify solutions to overcome them. This paper first gives definitions shared between the EGISM members on what are considered as advanced structural materials solutions. Next, some international initiatives for the accelerated development of high performance materials are presented both in non-nuclear and nuclear fields. Then, the methodology adopted for technology readiness assessment is explained. A non-exhaustive synthesis of the projects identified among the EGISM members on innovative structural materials and advanced manufacturing solutions such as additive manufacturing is presented. The TRL level of these projects is evaluated. A focus is also made on some of these projects to illustrate and explain the TRLs chosen as well as highlighting enablers or obstacles identified to climbing up the TRL scale.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2022

Comprehensive Technology Readiness Assessment Report for LL20-ML-AIT-NE-1-PD3TB

This document ensures that technologies relevant to LL20-ML-AIT-NE-1-PD3TB “AIT-NEO” have been demonstrated to work as intended and at the appropriate technology readiness level. This assessment is intended to offer management tools for understanding and mitigating programmatic risks associated with new technologies being developed under the AIT-NEO effort.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗
DOE OSTI2019

Delayed Gamma-ray Assay for Nuclear Materials Safeguards. Comprehensive Technology Readiness Assessment

Spectroscopic analysis of beta-delayed gamma-rays emitted from fission products following active interrogation was investigated as a non-destructive assay technique for detection and characterization of nuclear materials in shielded and complex configurations. This measurement technique is expected to be applicable to a variety of applications within the nuclear material safeguards, arms control, and emergency response areas, where active neutron interrogation is acceptable. Potential applications of the delayed gamma-ray assay in the nuclear material safeguards area include characterization of U and Pu isotopic content in spent and unirradiated nuclear fuel, enrichment measurements, verification of bulk material in containers, and the characterization of nuclear wastes. In the arms control area, this method can be used as a part of warhead dismantlement measurements to confirm separation of components, and may be applicable in warhead confirmation. In the context of emergency response, it can be used for detailed diagnostics of an unknown item. At present, the delayed gamma-ray assay technology reliably qualifies for the Technical Readiness Level 3 (TRL 3). The R&D work completed under this project has successfully demonstrated the empirical proof-of-concept for this active interrogation technology for a variety of measurement configurations, neutron sources, and nuclear material samples. A robust first-principles analytical signature modeling methodology was developed, experimentally validated, and can be easily extrapolated to a range of realistic measurement scenarios. Several response analysis methodologies have been implemented and deemed reliable for a variety of active interrogation applications in the areas of nuclear material safeguards, arms control, and emergency response. The initial readiness level before the start of this project was assessed at TRL 0, since only fragmentary records of the signature observations and speculative statements of the relevant non-destructive assay applications existed at that time. The delayed gamma-ray technology readiness can be easily advanced to TRL 4 in a short period, if a certain measurement application is specified and set for a demonstration in a laboratory environment. The critical hardware components of the delayed gamma-ray measurement technology (neutron generators, gamma-ray spectrometers) are readily available as COTS and can be configured for a specific deployment configuration. The primary risk of the delayed gamma-ray assay methodology is defined by the applicationspecific uncertainties. Evaluation of the system performance can be effectively completed once the expected measurement purpose, nuclear material characteristics, dimensions, and radiation exposure constraints are specified. A minor risk can be associated with the delayed gamma-ray response analysis techniques. Several approaches were proposed and demonstrated primarily using the modeled signatures. The observed performance may not be easily transferrable to the conditions of a real measurement setup, and some additional R&D may be required. Overall, the delayed gamma-ray assay technology can be recommended for follow-up demonstrations addressing relevant measurement applications in the areas of nuclear material safeguards, arms control, and emergency response.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Magnetic Microcalorimeter (MMC) Gamma-Ray Detectors with Ultra-High Energy Resolution. Comprehensive Technology Readiness Assessment

Magnetic Microcalorimeter (MMC) gamma ray detectors have demonstrated very high energy resolution of 38 eV FWHM for gamma ray energies below 100 keV. This is an order or magnitude better than conventional HPGe detector and can remove most line-overlap problems in NDA by gamma spectroscopy below ~130 keV. Unlike superconducting transition edge sensors (TESs), MMCs have a reproducible and almost perfectly linear response, which greatly simplifies adding spectra from different detector pixels and reduces systematic errors in quantitative assays. The instrument is currently at TRL-5 but could advance to TRL-6 by improving the signal processing software and using the system for the quantitative analysis of a safeguards sample provided by e.g. the IAEA. Making MMC detectors commercially viable and used more widely then depends on making the technology more reliable, specifically by increasing the device uniformity and yield, and by developing commercial software. This situation is often only half-jokingly referred to as the “valley of death” and could be addressed though the SBIR program. Our collaborators at STAR Cryoelectronics LLC are well qualified to further advance MMC development, and XIA LLC is well-positioned to develop the data acquisition system and write the software for MMC readout. In addition, the advance to TRL-6 would be desirable to increase the visibility and showcase the value of MMC spectrometers, e.g. by placing one of them into the Safeguards Analytical Laboratory (SAL) at the IAEA, whose NDA experts have recently started to show interest in cryogenic detector technology. As a result of this LCP, we also now have an instrument at LLNL that we will use for various applications of MMCs in nuclear safeguards and science. We are confident that as the number of high-profile results increases, so will the interest in and commercial viability of this technology.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Magnetic Microcalorimeter (MMC) Gamma-Ray Detectors with Ultra-High Energy Resolution. Comprehensive Technology Readiness Assessment

Magnetic Microcalorimeter (MMC) gamma ray detectors have demonstrated very high energy resolution of 38 eV FWHM for gamma ray energies below 100 keV. This is an order or magnitude better than conventional HPGe detector and can remove most line-overlap problems in NDA by gamma spectroscopy below ~130 keV. Unlike superconducting transition edge sensors (TESs), MMCs have a reproducible and almost perfectly linear response, which greatly simplifies adding spectra from different detector pixels and reduces systematic errors in quantitative assays. The instrument is currently at TRL-5 but could advance to TRL-6 by improving the signal processing software and using the system for the quantitative analysis of a safeguards sample provided by e.g. the IAEA. Making MMC detectors commercially viable and used more widely then depends on making the technology more reliable, specifically by increasing the device uniformity and yield, and by developing commercial software. This situation is often only half-jokingly referred to as the “valley of death” and could be addressed though the SBIR program. Our collaborators at STAR Cryoelectronics LLC are well qualified to further advance MMC development, and XIA LLC is well-positioned to develop the data acquisition system and write the software for MMC readout. In addition, the advance to TRL-6 would be desirable to increase the visibility and showcase the value of MMC spectrometers, e.g. by placing one of them into the Safeguards Analytical Laboratory (SAL) at the IAEA, whose NDA experts have recently started to show interest in cryogenic detector technology. As a result of this LCP, we also now have an instrument at LLNL that we will use for various applications of MMCs in nuclear safeguards and science. We are confident that as the number of high-profile results increases, so will the interest in and commercial viability of this technology.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2010

NGNP Risk Management through Assessing Technology Readiness

Throughout the Next Generation Nuclear Plant (NGNP) project life cycle, technical risks are identified, analyzed, and mitigated and decisions are made regarding the design and selection of plant and sub-system configurations, components and their fabrication materials, and operating conditions. Risk resolution and decision making are key elements that help achieve project completion within budget and schedule constraints and desired plant availability. To achieve this objective, a formal decision-making and risk management process was developed for NGNP, based on proven systems engineering principles that have guided aerospace and military applications.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation (ASI) Program Plan. Nuclear Energy Enabling Technologies (NEET)

The U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy (DOE-NE) sponsors a crosscutting technology development (CTD) program addressing common instrumentation & controls (I&C) needs in all DOE-NE sponsored programs. In 2012, DOE-NE initiated the Nuclear Energy Enabling Technology (NEET) Program to conduct research, development, and demonstration (RD&D) in crosscutting technologies that directly support and enable the development of existing, new and advanced reactor designs, and fuel cycle technologies. These technologies will advance the state of nuclear technology, improve its competitiveness, and promote continued contribution to meeting our Nation’s energy and environmental challenges. The NEET Program has spurred innovation in the field of sensors and instrumentation, advanced methods for manufacturing, and cyber security. The Advanced Sensors and Instrumentation (ASI) program is one element of the NEET CTD that has spurred innovation in the measurement science field by funding research on sensors, instrumentation and controls, communication, and advanced analytics that measure system parameters, gauge component control input, and provide power plant owners and operators critical awareness so they can plan and safely manage operational evolutions. The NEET ASI Program has carried out research and development (R&D) required to develop and deploy innovative and advanced sensors, and instrumentation and control capabilities for current and future nuclear energy systems, and to enable the advanced technologies essential to NE’s R&D efforts needed to realize mission goals. The concept of technology readiness assessment is helpful for the classification of instrumentation technology as part of the program strategy. A technology readiness assessment evaluates technology maturity using the Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale and was pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in the 1980s for space technology. It has recently been adopted to advance fuels and materials. The NEET ASI program objective is to mature instruments technology to TRL 6, which is “demonstration of the technology in relevant environment.” While there may be instances in which a different strategy is justified, the aim of the program is to respond to DOE program and stakeholder needs for nuclear instrumentation then hand off the technology after demonstration for integration in a more complex system, for example an irradiation test, experimental loop or a plant component such as the core, primary system or heat exchanger. A mechanism to continue some level of support from NEET ASI during and after the adoption (for example, to maintain fabrication and calibration capabilities) will be defined as the first example of technology hand off comes to fruition. In addition, several paths exist within DOE to complement NEET ASI activities to extend the maturity beyond TRL, for example through GAIN, technology commercialization funding, and small-business programs. Role of NEET ASI CINR projects in the TRL space, and integration with direct funded demonstration.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2013

Early Market TRL/MRL Analysis

he focus of this report is TRL/MRL analysis of hydrogen storage; it documents the methodology and results of an effort to identify hydrogen storage technologies’ technical and manufacturing readiness for early market motive and non-motive applications and to provide a path forward toward commercialization. Motive applications include materials handling equipment (MHE) and ground support equipment (GSE), such as forklifts, tow tractors, and specialty vehicles such as golf carts, lawn mowers and wheel chairs. Non-motive applications are portable, stationary or auxiliary power units (APUs) and include portable laptops, backup power, remote sensor power, and auxiliary power for recreational vehicles, hotels, hospitals, etc. Hydrogen storage technologies assessed include metal hydrides, chemical hydrides, sorbents, gaseous storage, and liquid storage. The assessments are based on a combination of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) and Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) designations that enable evaluation of hydrogen storage technologies at varying levels of development. The manufacturing status could be established from eight risk elements: Technical Maturity, Design, Materials, Cost & Funding, Process Capability, Personnel, Facilities and Manufacturing Planning. This approach provides a logical methodology and roadmap to enable the identification of hydrogen storage technologies, their advantages/disadvantages, gaps and R&D needs on an unbiased and transparent scale that is easily communicated to interagency partners. This technology readiness assessment (TRA) report documents the process used to conduct the TRA/MRA (technology and manufacturing readiness assessment), reports the TRL and MRL for each assessed technology and provides recommendations based on the findings. To investigate the state of the art and needs to mature the technologies, PNNL prepared a questionnaire to assign TRL and MRL for each hydrogen storage technology. The questionnaire was sent to identified hydrogen storage technology developers and manufacturers who were asked to perform a self-assessment. We included both domestic and international organizations including U.S. national laboratories, U.S. companies, European companies and Japanese companies. PNNL collected the data and performed an analysis to deduce the level of maturity and to provide program recommendations.

early market↗
DOE OSTI2011

Assessing Risk and Driving Risk Mitigation for First-of-a-Kind Advanced Reactors

Planning and decision making amidst programmatic and technological risks represent significant challenges for projects. This presentation addresses the four step risk-assessment process needed to determine clear path forward to mature needed technology and design, license, and construct advanced nuclear power plants, which have never been built before, including Small Modular Reactors. This four step process has been carefully applied to the Next Generation Nuclear Plant. STEP 1 - Risk Identification Risks are identified, collected, and categorized as technical risks, programmatic risks, and project risks, each of which result in cost and schedule impacts if realized. These include risks arising from the use of technologies not previously demonstrated in a relevant application. These risks include normal and accident scenarios which the SMR could experience including events that cause the disablement of engineered safety features (typically documented in Phenomena Identification Ranking Tables (PIRT) as produced with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission) and design needs which must be addressed to further detail the design. Product - Project Risk Register contained in a database with sorting, presentation, rollup, risk work off functionality similar to the NGNP Risk Management System . STEP 2 - Risk Quantification The risks contained in the risk register are then scored for probability of occurrence and severity of consequence, if realized. Here the scoring methodology is established and the basis for the scoring is well documented. Product - Quantified project risk register with documented basis for scoring. STEP 3 - Risk Handling Strategy Risks are mitigated by applying a systematic approach to maturing the technology through Research and Development, modeling, test, and design. A Technology Readiness Assessment is performed to determine baseline Technology Readiness Levels (TRL). Tasks needed to mature the technology are developed and documented in a roadmap. Product - Risk Handling Strategy. STEP 4 - Residual Risk Work off The risk handling strategy is entered into the Project Risk Allocation Tool (PRAT) to analyze each task for its ability to reduce risk. The result is risk-informed task prioritization. The risk handling strategy is captured in the Risk Management System, a relational database that provides conventional database utility, including data maintenance, archiving, configuration control, and query ability. The tool's Hierarchy Tree allows visualization and analyses of complex relationships between risks, risk mitigation tasks, design needs, and PIRTs. Product - Project Risk Allocation Tool and Risk Management System which depict project plan to reduce risk and current progress in doing so.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗