Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “airborne wind energy siting”

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.

11 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Airborne Wind Energy

Airborne wind energy (AWE) is “the conversion of wind energy into electricity using tethered flying devices”. Pursuit of AWE and airborne wind energy systems began in 1980. Interest and investment in AWE have grown substantially in the last decade, with approximately 70 active research entities including over 20 technology developers globally. This report describes technical analyses of various aspects of AWE and insight gained from dedicated outreach provided to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Wind Energy Technologies Office to underpin its response to the congressional request in the Energy Act of 2020 for a report on the “potential for, and technical viability of, airborne wind energy systems to provide a significant source of energy in the United States.”

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2024

Unseen Winds: Harnessing High-Altitude Winds in the Southeast USA

This project aims to identify potential sites in the United States for further testing and development of airborne wind energy systems (AWES). Through industry questionnaires and interviews with AWES companies, the study assesses existing test sites' capabilities and gaps, leading to a three-tiered test site strategy: short-duration prototype demonstrations, long-duration technical assessments and power validations, and airspace interaction and deconfliction studies. Notably, the southeastern United States presents significant potential for AWES due to its lack of traditional wind turbines, which is attributed to low wind speeds at lower altitudes. However, wind conditions improve significantly at higher altitudes, making this region a promising candidate for AWES deployment. The project considers factors such as wind resources, infrastructure proximity, social acceptance, and environmental impacts to recommend sites that can support the unique needs of AWES manufacturers and facilitate their commercialization. Early findings suggest rural communities with low grid resiliency could benefit economically and technologically from hosting AWES test sites, especially with operator training centers and potential for long-term skilled employment in future disaster relief and other applications.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Proceedings of the 2021 Airborne Wind Energy Workshop

On March 2-3, 2021, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) conducted a virtual workshop to evaluate the status, potential development, and technical viability of AWE systems as a source of energy in the United States. Stakeholder input provided at the workshop will contribute to the report to Congress. This report summarizes key workshop findings, current technology research and development activities in the United States, and opportunities and potential modes of collaboration and coordination for future technology research and development activities. The workshop focused on U.S. stakeholders in AWE, with approximately 100 experts and industry stakeholders from AWE technology developers, operators, engineering firms, consultants, government, national laboratories, and university researchers. The workshop began with an explanation from DOE's Wind Energy Technologies Office (WETO) Technology Manager, Ben Hallissy, of the context and purpose of the workshop, including a request from Congress that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) deliver a "report on the potential for, and technical viability of, airborne wind energy systems to provide a significant source of energy in the United States, including a summary of research, development, demonstration, and commercialization needs, including an estimate of Federal funding requirements, to further examine and validate the technical and economic viability of airborne wind energy concepts over the 10-year period." The workshop began with brief introductions from attendees who explained their interest in AWE. Nicolas El Hayek of Planair summarized the proceedings from the AWE workshop held in September 2020 by the International Energy Agency (IEA) Wind Task 11. This was followed by a presentation by Roland Schmehl of TU-Delft summarizing European AWE R&D efforts. Chris Vermillion of North Carolina State University and Jason Jonkman of NREL presented an overview of U.S. R&D efforts. Then five panelists discussed AWE markets, sizes of AWE systems, challenges, and opportunities. Panelists included: Cristina Archer, professor at the College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment and associate director at the Center for Research in Wind (CReW) at the University of Delaware; Stephan Brabeck, chief technology officer at SkySails; Thierry Delahave, innovation and technology development lead at Saipem; Rob Creighton, founder and chief executive officer at WindLift; and David Schaefer, founder and chief executive officer at eWind Solutions. The second day of the workshop began with a brief overview of five key topics that are crucial to enabling AWE in the United States. These topics range from estimates of the U.S. wind resource, technical generation potential, economic analysis, environmental challenges, status of current technology and R&D activities, and needed activities to enable commercialization of AWE. This set the stage for a robust discussion in breakout groups where individuals could offer their opinions on the potential opportunities for AWE in the United States. The following topics were discussed in the breakout groups: resource potential and energy output, technical potential, social and environmental impacts, and permitting, techno-economic analysis and markets, technology assessment and upscaling and demonstration and commercialization needs. The second day concluded with reports by the NREL research team, communicating the key themes and outcomes from each of the breakout group discussions.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2026

Temperature profiling at the American WAKE ExperimeNt (AWAKEN): methodology and uncertainty quantification

We quantify the accuracy of the temperature profiling from ground-based spectral infrared radiance observations at the American WAKE ExperimeNt (AWAKEN). Results from pre-campaign tests and comparisons with in-situ ground-based and airborne sensors at AWAKEN indicate that temperature profiles agree satisfactorily with traditional instruments for wind energy applications. The bias is within a fraction of a degree and appears to be related to atmospheric stability. Root-mean-square differences from the reference instruments are always smaller than a degree and are often well described by the online uncertainty estimation product. Height-to-height and site-to-site temperature differences are in excellent agreement with in-situ observations, which justifies the use of temperature profilers to characterize static stability and spatial gradients of temperature.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants – Radionuclide Emissions Calendar Year 2020

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Field Office (NNSA/NFO) operates the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS) and the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF). From 1951 through 1992, the NNSS was the continental testing location for U.S. nuclear weapons. Radionuclides in air from NNSS activities have been monitored since the initiation of atmospheric testing. After 1962, testing was limited to underground detonations, which greatly reduced radiation exposure to the public. Since the end of nuclear testing in 1992, radiation monitoring has focused on detecting airborne radionuclides from historically contaminated soils because this sources dominates the potential offsite dose. These radionuclides are derived from re-suspension of soil (primarily by wind) and emission of tritium-contaminated soil moisture through evapotranspiration. Low amounts of legacy-related tritium are also emitted to air at the NLVF, an NNSS support complex in North Las Vegas. To protect the public from harmful levels of manmade radiation, the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), specifically the National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities (40 CFR 61, Subpart H, 2020) limits the release of radioactivity from a DOE facility to that which would cause 10 millirem per year (mrem/y) effective dose equivalent (EDE) to any member of the public. This limit does not include radiation unrelated to NNSS activities. Unrelated doses could come from naturally occurring radioactive elements, from sources such as medically or commercially used radionuclides, or from sources outside of the United States, such as Japan’s Fukushima nuclear power plant, which was damaged in 2011. NNSA/NFO demonstrates compliance with the NESHAP limit by reporting environmental measurements of radionuclide air concentrations at critical receptor locations on the NNSS. This alternative was proposed and formerly submitted to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2001 (EPA 2001a) and has been the method used to demonstrate compliance with the 40 CFR 61.92 dose standard since 2005. Six locations on the NNSS have been established to act as critical receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP limit. These locations are closer to radionuclide releases than where the public resides so they act as protective substitutes for public receptor locations. Compliance is demonstrated if the measured annual average concentration is less than the NESHAP Concentration Level (CL) for Environmental Compliance listed in Table 2 of 40 CFR 61, Appendix E. For multiple radionuclides, compliance is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. The EPAapproved air transport model, called the Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) is also used to calculate the effective dose equivalent to the maximally exposed individual from NNSS air emissions. CAP88-PC was also used to calculate the population dose, or the collective EDE (expressed as person-rem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [person-rem/y]) for all individuals combined who reside within 80 kilometers (km) of NNSS emission sources. In 2020, the potential dose from radiological emissions to air from both current and past NNSS activities was well below the 10 mrem/y dose limit. This is demonstrated by both the air sampling data collected at critical receptor air monitoring stations and CAP88-PC modeling. The average concentrations of radioactivity at air critical receptor stations ranged from 0.2% to a maximum of 4.2% of the allowed NESHAP limit. CAP88-PC modeling of all 2020 NNSS radionuclide emissions showed the maximally exposed individual to be in Amargosa Valley and this individual received a potential dose of 0.063 mrem/y. The collective dose was calculated to be 0.29 person-rem/year for the 521,300 people who lived within 80 km of NNSS emission sources.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗
DOE OSTI2022

The Application of a Genetic Algorithm to the Optimization of a Mesoscale Model for Emergency Response

Besides solving the equations of momentum, heat, and moisture transport on the model grid, mesoscale weather models must account for subgrid-scale processes that affect the resolved model variables. These are simulated with model parameterizations, which often rely on values preset by the user. Such “free” model parameters, along with others set to initialize the model, are often poorly constrained, requiring that a user select each from a range of plausible values. Finding the values to optimize any forecasting tool can be accomplished with a search algorithm, and one such process—the genetic algorithm (GA)—has become especially popular. As applied to modeling, GAs represent a Darwinian process: an ensemble of simulations is run with a different set of parameter values for each member, and the members subsequently judged to be most accurate are selected as “parents” who pass their parameters onto a new generation. At the U.S. Department of Energy’s Savannah River Site in South Carolina, we are applying a GA to the Regional Atmospheric Modeling System (RAMS) mesoscale weather model, which supplies input to a model to simulate the dispersion of an airborne contaminant as part of the site’s emergency response preparations. An ensemble of forecasts is run each day, weather data are used to “score” the individual members of the ensemble, and the parameters from the best members are used for the next day’s forecasts. As meteorological conditions change, the parameters change as well, maintaining a model configuration that is best adapted to atmospheric conditions. Significance Statement We wanted to develop a forecasting system by which a weather model is run over the Savannah River Site each day and repeatedly adjusted according to how well it performed the previous day. To run the model, a series of values (parameters) must be set to control how the model will calculate winds, temperatures, and other desired variables. Each day the model was run several times using different combinations of these parameters and later compared with observed meteorological conditions. Parameters that produced the most accurate forecasts were preferentially reused to create the forecasts for the next day. The process was tested for the summer of 2020 and exhibited lower errors than forecasts produced by the model using default values of the parameters.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Turbulent Parameters by airborne measurements over BNF in March 2025

The original data were collected during the AAF Engineering Flights (AEF2025) in the vicinity of the ARM Bankhead National Forest (BNF) Atmospheric Observatory (https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/bnf ) in northwestern Alabama in March 2025. The ARM Aerial Facility ArcticShark uncrewed aerial system (UAS, https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/aaf/uas) was based at the public-use airport of Posey Field, Alabama (FAA LID: 1M4, 34.28027778° N, 87.60055556° W, 283m MSL) from March 10 through March 24, 2025. The ArcticShark UAS performed nine flights, including eight research flights over the AMF3 (BNF Main Site) and Supplemental Facilities to measure atmospheric state, turbulence, surface IR temperature and imagery, and aerosol number concentration and size distribution. The current data set presents a collection of turbulent parameters in the atmospheric boundary layer or lower free troposphere based on airborne measurement throughout the field campaign. The primary instruments used to create the current data set were the Aircraft Integrated Meteorological Measurement System (AIMMS-30) and the fine-wire thermocouple probe.

Atmosphere↗
DOE OSTI2025

CHELAX-BNF: Turbulent Parameters by airborne measurements

The original data were collected on board the ARM Aerial Facility ArcticShark uncrewed aerial system (UAS; https://www.arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/aaf/uas ) during the “Characterizing HEterogeneous Land-Atmosphere eXchanges at BNF” field campaign (CHEAX-BNF; https://arm.gov/research/campaigns/aaf2025CHELAX-BNF ). The ARM Aerial Facility ArcticShark UAS was based at the public-use airport of Posey Field, AL (FAA LID: 1M4, 34.28027778° N, 87.60055556° W, 283m MSL) from May 28 through June 23, 2025. The ArcticShark UAS performed 5 flights, including 4 research flights over the BNF Main Site (ARM Mobile Facility 3, https://arm.gov/capabilities/observatories/amf ) and Supplemental Facilities to measure atmospheric state, turbulence, surface IR temperature and imagery, aerosol number concentration, and aerosol size distribution. The current data set presents a collection of turbulent parameters in the atmospheric boundary layer or lower free troposphere based on airborne measurement throughout the field campaign. The primary instruments used to create the current data set were the Aircraft Integrated Meteorological Measurement System (AIMMS-30) and the fine-wire thermocouple probe.

Aircraft Integrated Meteorological Measurement Sys↗
NASA NTRS2000

Lidar Remote Sensing for Industry and Environment Monitoring

Contents include the following: 1. Keynote paper: Overview of lidar technology for industrial and environmental monitoring in Japan. 2. lidar technology I: NASA's future active remote sensing mission for earth science. Geometrical detector consideration s in laser sensing application (invited paper). 3. Lidar technology II: High-power femtosecond light strings as novel atmospheric probes (invited paper). Design of a compact high-sensitivity aerosol profiling lidar. 4. Lasers for lidars: High-energy 2 microns laser for multiple lidar applications. New submount requirement of conductively cooled laser diodes for lidar applications. 5. Tropospheric aerosols and clouds I: Lidar monitoring of clouds and aerosols at the facility for atmospheric remote sensing (invited paper). Measurement of asian dust by using multiwavelength lidar. Global monitoring of clouds and aerosols using a network of micropulse lidar systems. 6. Troposphere aerosols and clouds II: Scanning lidar measurements of marine aerosol fields at a coastal site in Hawaii. 7. Tropospheric aerosols and clouds III: Formation of ice cloud from asian dust particles in the upper troposphere. Atmospheric boundary layer observation by ground-based lidar at KMITL, Thailand (13 deg N, 100 deg. E). 8. Boundary layer, urban pollution: Studies of the spatial correlation between urban aerosols and local traffic congestion using a slant angle scanning on the research vessel Mirai. 9. Middle atmosphere: Lidar-observed arctic PSC's over Svalbard (invited paper). Sodium temperature lidar measurements of the mesopause region over Syowa Station. 10. Differential absorption lidar (dIAL) and DOAS: Airborne UV DIAL measurements of ozone and aerosols (invited paper). Measurement of water vapor, surface ozone, and ethylene using differential absorption lidar. 12. Space lidar I: Lightweight lidar telescopes for space applications (invited paper). Coherent lidar development for Doppler wind measurement from the International Space Station. 13. Space lidar II: Using coherent Doppler lidar to estimate river discharge. 14. Poster session: Lidar technology, optics for lidar. Laser for lidar. Middle atmosphere observations. Tropospheric observations (aerosols, clouds). Boundary layer, urban pollution. Differential absorption lidar. Doppler lidar. and Space lidar.

Singh, Upendra N.↗
NASA NTRS1999

Aeolian Sand Transport in the Planetary Context: Respective Roles of Aerodynamic and Bed-Dilatancy Thresholds

The traditional view of aeolian sand transport generally estimates flux from the perspective of aerodynamic forces creating the airborne grain population, although it has been recognized that "reptation" causes a significant part of the total airborne flux; reptation involves both ballistic injection of grains into the air stream by the impact of saltating grains as well as the "nudging" of surface grains into a creeping motion. Whilst aerodynamic forces may initiate sand motion, it is proposed here that within a fully-matured grain cloud, flux is actually governed by two thresholds: an aerodynamic threshold, and a bed-dilatancy threshold. It is the latter which controls the reptation population, and its significance increases proportionally with transport energy. Because we only have experience with terrestrial sand transport, extrapolations of aeolian theory to Mars and Venus have adjusted only the aerodynamic factor, taking gravitational forces and atmospheric density as the prime variables in the aerodynamic equations, but neglecting reptation. The basis for our perspective on the importance of reptation and bed dilatancy is a set of experiments that were designed to simulate sand transport across the surface of a martian dune. Using a modified sporting crossbow in which a sand-impelling sabot replaced the bolt-firing mechanism, individual grains of sand were fired at loose sand targets with glancing angles typical of saltation impact; grains were projected at about 80 m/s to simulate velocities commensurate with those predicted for extreme martian aeolian conditions. The sabot impelling method permitted study of individual impacts without the masking effect of bed mobilization encountered in wind-tunnel studies. At these martian impact velocities, grains produced small craters formed by the ejection of several hundred grains from the bed. Unexpectedly, the craters were not elongated, despite glancing impact; the craters were very close to circular in planform. High-speed photography showed them to grow in both diameter and depth after the impactor had ricochetted from the crater site. The delayed response of the bed was "explosive" in nature, and created a miniature ejecta curtain spreading upward and outward for many centimeters for impact of 100-300 micron-diameter grains into similar material. Elastic energy deposited in the bed by the impacting grain creates a subsurface stress regime or "quasi-Boussinesq" compression field. Elastic recovery of the bed occurs by dilatancy; shear stresses suddenly convert the grains from closed to open packing, and grains are consequently able to eject themselves forcefully from the impact site. Random jostling of the grains causes radial homogenization of stress vectors and a resulting circular crater. There is a great temptation to draw parallels with cratering produced by meteorite impacts, but a rigorous search for common modelling ground between the two phenomena has not been conducted at this time. For every impact of an aerodynamically energized grain, there are several hundred grains ejected into the wind for the high-energy transport that might occur on Mars. Many of these grains will themselves become subject to the boundary layer's aerodynamic lift forces (their motion will not immediately die and add to the creep population), and these grains will become indistinguishable from those lifted entirely by aerodynamic forces. As each grain impacts the bed, it will eject even more grains into the flow. A cascading effect will take place, but because it must be finite in its growth, damping will occur as the number of grains set in motion causes mid-air collisions that prevent much of the impact energy from reaching the surface of the bed -thus creating a dynamic equilibrium in a high-density saltation cloud. It is apparent that for a given impact energy, the stress field permits a smaller volume of grains to convert to open packing as the size of the bed grains increases, or as the energy of the "percussive" grain decreases (by decrease in velocity or mass). Thus, the mass of the "repercussive" grain population that is ejected from the impact site becomes a function of the scale of the stress field in relation to the scale of the bed material (self-similarity being applicable if both bed size and energy are simultaneously adjusted). In other words, in a very high energy aeolian system where an aerodynamically raised grain can ballistically raise many more grains, the amount of material lifted into the wind becomes largely a function of a dilatancy threshold. If this threshold is exceeded, grains are repercussively injected into the saltation cloud. The "dilatancy threshold" may be defined in terms of the saltation percussive force required to convert the bed, through elastic response, from a closed to an open packing system. If open packing cannot be created, the grains cannot escape from the impact site, even though the elastic deformation and percussive force may be able to reorganize the grains with respect to one another. As the crossbow experiments showed, for an ever-increasing bed grain size, a point is reached when no material can be moved because the energy of the percussive grain is insufficient to dilate the relatively coarse bed. Although this seems to be stating the obvious -- that too little energy will not cause the bed to splash -- the consequences of exceeding the "splash threshold" by dilatancy are not so obvious for high-energy aeolian transport. It is noted that the force required to elastically dilate the bed has to overcome Coulombic grain attractions such as dipole-dipole coupling, dielectric, monopole, contact-induced dipole attractions, van der Waals forces, molecular monolayer capillary forces, as well as the mechanical interlocking frictional resistance of the grains. On Mars, it is predicted that the dilatancy threshold may be the prime control of grain flux. Additional information is contained in the original.

Marshall, J. R.↗