Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “interoperability”

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

To Interoperability And Beyond: Interoperable Types Through the Promises of C and C++ and ABI Abuse [Slides]

This presentation presents a technique that allows passing of Fortran nested-type hierarchies interoperably to C++. The technique is motivated by the Eulerian Application Project’s need to port code from Fortran to C++ to utilize the Kokkos performance portability library. The resulting method allows hierarchies of types to become interoperable while at the same time transforming Fortran array members of the original Fortran type into Kokkos::Views in the resulting C++ type.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

A Multi-Site Networked Hardware-in-Loop Platform for Evaluation of Interoperability and Distributed Intelligence at Grid-Edge

Electric power systems have experienced large increases in the number of intelligent, connected and controllable devices being deployed, leading to a high degree of distributed intelligence at the grid-edge. These devices, both utility-owned and consumer-owned, include but are not limited to: renewable generation sources, energy storage, remote switches, voltage regulators, and smart controllable loads such as electric vehicles. These new devices provide significant potential for increased operational flexibility that can be leveraged to achieve system reconfiguration, resiliency improvements, power quality improvements, and distribution system automation. However, there are two significant challenges that must be addressed before these assets can be leveraged for operations: interoperability and system level validation prior to deployment. Because of the complexity of distributed control systems, and their interactions with legacy centralized controls, a purely simulations-based approach for pre-deployment validation is not sufficient. It requires hardware-in-loop testing to emulate the operational hardware devices and evaluate their performance. Additionally, securely integrating multiple test facilities at utility operators and vendors might enable rapid scale-up of evaluation platforms, and remove the need for multiple expensive standalone installations. Presented in this paper, is the development of a multi-site evaluation platform that employs Advanced Distribution Management Systems (ADMS), distributed control devices, real-time hardware-in-loop assets, secure communication links, and protocol adapters. This platform uses standards-based approaches and open-source tools, and hence can serve as a template for other researchers and institutions to implement their multi-site evaluation frameworks for pre-deployment testing.

Essakiappan, Somasundaram↗

Semantic Interoperability to Enable Smart, Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings

Achieving a widespread transition to grid-interactive, efficient buildings (GEBs) depends critically on there being sufficient interoperability among connected building systems. While many critical elements already exist at the technical interoperability level (TCP/IP, BACnet, etc.), a lack of interoperability in the semantic level hinders streamlined integration of interdependent applications. Semantics refers to expressing information about “things” in a way that can be consistently understood by applications. Key components of formalized semantics include identifying what a “thing” is (its “type”), defining general information about that “thing” (its characteristics or properties), and defining the appropriate relationships of that “thing” to other “things” (its function or role in a larger system). Although this might seem initially trivial, the success of smart building applications is highly dependent on maintaining consistent notions of the “things” being self-descriptive. Without semantic interoperability, it is technically difficult, labor-intensive, and cost-prohibitive to enable three key objectives of GEBs: optimizing performance, identifying faults, and delivering grid services. Industry, academia, and standards bodies have invested effort in developing information models to facilitate semantic interoperability, however, they have not been widely adopted across the U.S. commercial building portfolio. This paper will present a pathway to drive semantic interoperability through a three-pronged approach to be led by the DOE Building Technologies Office in partnership with NIST and multiple national laboratories comprising: 1) industry engagement and coordination across existing efforts; 2) a semantic interoperability standard that empowers building owners to identify and require interoperable attributes when procuring equipment and applications; 3) tools to assist in implementation and a test framework that can verify compliance of products with semantic interoperability specifications. This strategic approach is designed to accelerate the timeline for adoption of semantic interoperability standards. The intent is to reduce soft costs associated with implementing advanced controls, fault detection and diagnostics, and other smart building technologies as a necessary step in achieving an energy efficient smart grid future.

semantic interoperability, Semantic modeling, inte↗

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↗

Semantic Interoperability to Enable Smart, Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings

Achieving a widespread transition to grid-interactive, efficient buildings (GEBs) depends critically on there being sufficient interoperability among connected building systems. While many critical elements already exist at the technical interoperability level (TCP/IP, BACnet, etc.), a lack of interoperability in the semantic level hinders streamlined integration of interdependent applications. Semantics refers to expressing information about “things” in a way that can be consistently understood by applications. Key components of formalized semantics include identifying what a “thing” is (its “type”), defining general information about that “thing” (its characteristics or properties), and defining the appropriate relationships of that “thing” to other “things” (its function or role in a larger system). Although this might seem initially trivial, the success of smart building applications is highly dependent on maintaining consistent self-descriptive notions of the “things”. Without semantic interoperability, it is technically difficult, labor-intensive, and cost-prohibitive to enable three key objectives of GEBs: optimizing performance, automatically identifying and diagnosing faults, and delivering grid services. Industry, academia, and standards bodies have invested effort in developing information models to facilitate semantic interoperability, however, they have not been widely adopted across the U.S. commercial building portfolio. This paper will present a pathway to drive semantic interoperability through a three-pronged approach to be led by the DOE Building Technologies Office in partnership with NIST and multiple national laboratories comprising: 1) industry engagement and coordination across existing efforts; 2) a semantic interoperability standard that empowers building owners to identify and require interoperable attributes when procuring equipment and applications; 3) tools to assist in implementation and a test framework to verify compliance of products with semantic interoperability specifications. This approach is designed to accelerate the timeline for adoption of semantic interoperability specifications. The intent is to reduce soft costs associated with implementing advanced controls, fault detection and diagnostics, and other smart building technologies and use cases as a necessary step in achieving an energy efficient smart grid future.

30 DIRECT ENERGY CONVERSION↗

Semantic Interoperability to Enable Smart, Grid-Interactive Efficient Buildings

Achieving a widespread transition to grid-interactive, efficient buildings (GEBs) depends critically on there being sufficient interoperability among connected building systems. While many critical elements already exist at the technical interoperability level (TCP/IP, BACnet, etc.), a lack of interoperability in the semantic level hinders streamlined integration of interdependent applications. Semantics refers to expressing information about “things” in a way that can be consistently understood by applications. Key components of formalized semantics include identifying what a “thing” is (its “type”), defining general information about that “thing” (its characteristics or properties), and defining the appropriate relationships of that “thing” to other “things” (its function or role in a larger system). Although this might seem initially trivial, the success of smart building applications is highly dependent on maintaining consistent self-descriptive notions of the “things”. Without semantic interoperability, it is technically difficult, labor-intensive, and cost-prohibitive to enable three key objectives of GEBs: optimizing performance, automatically identifying and diagnosing faults, and delivering grid services. Industry, academia, and standards bodies have invested effort in developing information models to facilitate semantic interoperability, however, they have not been widely adopted across the U.S. commercial building portfolio. This paper will present a pathway to drive semantic interoperability through a three-pronged approach to be led by the DOE Building Technologies Office in partnership with NIST and multiple national laboratories comprising: 1) industry engagement and coordination across existing efforts; 2) a semantic interoperability standard that empowers building owners to identify and require interoperable attributes when procuring equipment and applications; 3) tools to assist in implementation and a test framework to verify compliance of products with semantic interoperability specifications. This approach is designed to accelerate the timeline for adoption of semantic interoperability specifications. The intent is to reduce soft costs associated with implementing advanced controls, fault detection and diagnostics, and other smart building technologies and use cases as a necessary step in achieving an energy efficient smart grid future.

Bergmann, Harry↗

Interoperability Maturity Roadmap Methodology, V1.3

The Interoperability Roadmap Methodology document supports the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium (GMLC) Interoperability Project’s efforts to advance interoperability as an essential component for the successful and more seamless integration of intelligent, communicating technologies into the electric power system. This proposed methodology supports the strategic approach to advance interoperability described in the GMLC Interoperability Project’s Interoperability Strategic Vision: Enabling an Interactive Grid. That document proposes engaging an ecosystem of businesses interested in integrating smart technology with the electric power system to develop an interoperability roadmap using a methodical approach. This roadmap methodology is to be applied to technology integration ecosystems (e.g., electric vehicles, photovoltaic inverters, or automated buildings), using tools that measure the state of interoperability today, to identify the gaps and challenges that can be overcome to improve interoperability, and thereby, simplify the integration process.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

Tool interoperability in SSE OI 2.0

This paper presents a review of the concept and implementation of tool interoperability in the Space Station Software Support Environment (SSE) OI 2.0. By first providing a description of SSE, the paper describes the problem at hand, that is; the nature of the SSE that gives rise to the requirement for interoperability--between SSE workstations and hence, between the tools which reside on the workstations. Specifically, word processor and graphic tool interoperability are discussed. The concept for interoperability that is implemented in OI 2.0 is described, as is an overview of the implementation strategy. Some of the significant challenges that the development team had to overcome to bring about interoperability are described, perhaps as a checklist, or warning, to others who would bring about tool interoperability. Lastly, plans to extend tool interoperability to a third class of tools in OI 3.0 are described.

Carmody, C. L.↗

Issues in Bi-Directional Interoperability between BIM and BEM

The state-of-the-art interoperability between Building Information Modeling (BIM) and Building Energy Modeling (BEM) is mainly one-way. BEM software like EnergyPlus takes design input from BIM and simulates the energy consumption of the building. BIM, however, is unable to leverage energy simulation results from BEM smoothly. This lack of bi-directional interoperability between BIM and BEM prevents buildings from seeking more energy-efficient design options and limits BIM applications in optimal generative design. In this research, the authors have conducted the following activities related to two-way interoperability between BIM and BEM: (1) surveyed its current status through literature review, (2) investigated barriers to the bi-directional interoperability, and (3) suggested possible approaches to enable bi-directional interoperability and research outlook in the field. As a result, the authors have identified three main barriers to BIM BEM interoperability, namely, inefficient collaboration, limited scope in information transformation, and lack of BEM to BIM transformation. Future directions are suggested to address these barriers.

building design↗

IEEE 1547-2018 Based Interoperable PV Inverter with Advanced Grid-Support Functions

Grid integration of photovoltaic (PV) inverters has been increasing in the past decade. As a result of the uncertainties introduced with high penetrations of PV, better monitoring and control of the PV inverters becomes crucial for improving overall system stability. This paper focuses on the communications capability of the inverter controller and on enabling interoperability. Multiple standards are available to enable interoperability in PV inverters. In this paper, an interoperable controller, enabled by Distributed Network Protocol 3 (DNP3) communications protocols, is developed for a grid-connected, three-phase PV inverter. The DNP3 server for the PV inverter is programmed on the real-time layer of the field-programmable gate array (FPGA)-based inverter controller. Set points for advanced inverter control functions, such as volt/VAr curves, ride-through curves, are sent from a DNP3 client, a simulated distribution management system application, to the PV inverter through DNP3. This communications capability of the inverter controller is validated using a controller-hardware-in-the-loop experimental setup. The code developed to achieve the interoperability is available in the public domain through open-source software licensing. This interoperability will enable smoother grid integration of smart PV inverters with advanced grid-support functions as well as allow better monitoring and control of PV inverters for grid stability.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗

A Deeper Dive Into the Meaning and Implications of Interoperability for LunaNet Communications and Navigation Services

As part of planning efforts for cislunar exploration and science missions, space agencies have been collaborating with each other to enable communications, networking, Position, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems to exchange information and provide services to spacecraft and space systems in transit, in orbit, and on the surface, thus helping each other to achieve their common goals. To achieve commonality and lower cost for mutual benefit, the strategy of interoperability is being adopted to help all the pieces fit together and function smoothly. Interoperability gives cislunar users the ability to operate in a collaborative environment similar to the terrestrial Internet, allowing them to share information, navigate safely despite increasing radio frequency congestion, and follow common processes and procedures for effective joint operations. Unlike prior government-dominated efforts, this ecosystem is expected to include commercial for-profit businesses, non-profit organizations, and academic institutions. Ultimately, the goal is to enable a cislunar ecosystem of service providers and users to contribute and/or utilize infrastructure and capabilities to accomplish mission objectives spanning the full range of human endeavours while supporting a variety of business models. This paper reports on the results of an effort to assist in efforts to frame the development of the international LunaNet architecture by providing a canonical definition of interoperability broad enough to meet these needs, examine architectural and operational implications of the definition, and explore interoperability strategies and tactics for deploying and evolving these services. It describes key systems-of-systems (SoS) (Network-of-Networks) interoperability concepts in the context of sustainment of the ecosystem over time as systems evolve in technologies, standards and Standards Development Organizations, component and subsystem upgrades, and user applications

LunaNet↗

Deeper Dive into Interoperability and Its Implications for LunaNet Communications and Navigation Services

The Artemis program being developed by United States’ (US) National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) is developing the capabilities to return humans to the Moon and establish an initial base camp and associated infrastructure with extensive contributions from international and commercial partners. In planning for cislunar exploration and science missions, space agencies are collaborating to enable communications, networking, and Positioning, Navigation, and Timing (PNT) systems—called LunaNet—to exchange information and provide services to cislunar spacecraft and space systems, thus helping each other to achieve their shared goals. To achieve commonality and lower cost for mutual benefit, the strategy of interoperability is being adopted to help fit all the pieces together and function smoothly. Facilitating interoperability should benefit lunar missions by providing the ability to operate in a collaborative environment similar to the terrestrial Internet. Interoperability allows them to share information, navigate safely despite increasing radio frequency congestion, and follow common processes and procedures for effective joint operations. Unlike prior government-dominated efforts, this ecosystem is expected to include and benefit for-profit (commercial) businesses, non-profit organizations, and academic institutions as active stakeholders. Ultimately, the goal is to enable a cislunar ecosystem of service providers and users to contribute to and/or utilize infrastructure and capabilities to achieve mission objectives that span the full range of human endeavors while supporting a variety of business models. This approach enables a Systems of Systems (SoS), such as a Network-of-Networks, to be sustainable in the context of the LunaNet ecosystem as systems evolve over time in technologies, standards, components, and user applications. This paper reports on the results of an effort to help frame the development of the international LunaNet architecture by providing a canonical definition of interoperability broad enough to meet these needs, examining architectural and operational implications of the definition, and exploring interoperability strategies and tactics to deploy and evolve the services proposed for cislunar exploration and science missions.

interoperability↗

Analysis of Magnetic Field Emissions and Shield Requirements for Interoperating High-Power EV Wireless Charging System

In this study, the magnetic field emission (MFE) is investigated for matching (identical primary and secondary couplers) and interoperating (different couplers) 11 kW wireless charging systems (WCS). The interoperating charging pads generate higher MFE than the matching charging-pads; hence, using interoperable couplers requires a more effective shielding. In this work, different shield topologies are investigated to suppress the MFE for interoperable conditions. Four 11 kW WCSs with the unipolar (uni) and bipolar (bi) transmitter (Tx) and receiver (Rx) pads has been investigated: 1) uniTx with uniRx, 2) uniTx with biRx, 3) biTx with uniRx, and 4) biTx with bi-Rx. The studied systems are designed for 11 kW WPT3 level with Z2 airgap class (140-150 mm) resembling the standard SAE-J2954. The WCSs are simulated in finite element analysis (FEA) and validated experimentally using a 11 kW biTx-biRx system. The experimental results match with the simulation results with <5% error. The FEA results show that a biTx needs a magnetic shield, and a uniTx needs an aluminum shield to meet the MFE under all interoperability and alignment conditions.

Mohammad, Mostak↗

Reference Interoperability Procurement Language

Achieving interoperability involves reaching agreement on common interfaces and promoting interoperability through performance specifications. Effective integration practices are a simple, effective, and direct way of addressing the challenge. By deciding on an integration approach with well-defined interfaces and selecting systems and devices that conform to that approach and choosing integrators that have experience implementing the chosen approach, many problems can be avoided. No integration effort is seamless but by specifying interoperability requirements during the procurement process typical problems from ad hoc approaches can be avoided or reduced. By continuing this approach to its conclusion at the end of the procurement process, these same interoperability requirements may lead themselves to specified performance criteria that can be used to measure interoperability during implementation. The contractual language may contain performance incentives and penalties tied to these requirements as appropriate.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Space Network Interoperability Panel (SNIP) study

The Space Network Interoperability Panel (SNIP) study is a tripartite study that involves the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the European Space Agency (ESA), and the National Space Development Agency (NASDA) of Japan. SNIP involves an ongoing interoperability study of the Data Relay Satellite (DRS) Systems of the three organizations. The study is broken down into two parts; Phase one deals with S-band (2 GHz) interoperability and Phase two deals with Ka-band (20/30 GHz) interoperability (in addition to S-band). In 1987 the SNIP formed a Working Group to define and study operations concepts and technical subjects to assure compatibility of the international data relay systems. Since that time a number of Panel and Working Group meetings have been held to continue the study. Interoperability is of interest to the three agencies because it offers a number of potential operation and economic benefits. This paper presents the history and status of the SNIP study.

Ryan, Thomas↗

Space Network Interoperability Panel (SNIP) study

The Space Network Interoperability Panel (SNIP) is described in terms of the panel's composition, purpose, history, and ongoing activities. SNIP is a consortium comprising NASA, ESA, and NASDA that is dedicated to the study of interoperability of the data-relay satellite (DRS) systems of the three groups. S-band and Ka-band interoperability are addressed by the SNIP study program by means of defining operations concepts, technical subjects, and other matters relevant to international DRS system compatibility. The potential users of the interoperability scheme are listed, cross-support techniques are described, and the load situations of the three agencies are characterized. A common 'interoperability frequency framework' is proposed, and both left-and right-hand circular polarization are incorporated to enhance flexibility and minimize interference. An operations concept is outlined based on these and other recommendations as developed by the international SNIP study.

Ryan, Thomas↗

NASA's Geospatial Interoperability Office(GIO)Program

NASA produces vast amounts of information about the Earth from satellites, supercomputer models, and other sources. These data are most useful when made easily accessible to NASA researchers and scientists, to NASA's partner Federal Agencies, and to society as a whole. A NASA goal is to apply its data for knowledge gain, decision support and understanding of Earth, and other planetary systems. The NASA Earth Science Enterprise (ESE) Geospatial Interoperability Office (GIO) Program leads the development, promotion and implementation of information technology standards that accelerate and expand the delivery of NASA's Earth system science research through integrated systems solutions. Our overarching goal is to make it easy for decision-makers, scientists and citizens to use NASA's science information. NASA's Federal partners currently participate with NASA and one another in the development and implementation of geospatial standards to ensure the most efficient and effective access to one another's data. Through the GIO, NASA participates with its Federal partners in implementing interoperability standards in support of E-Gov and the associated President's Management Agenda initiatives by collaborating on standards development. Through partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities the GIO works towards enhancing the ESE Applications Division in the area of National Applications and decision support systems. The GIO provides geospatial standards leadership within NASA, represents NASA on the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Coordination Working Group and chairs the FGDC's Geospatial Applications and Interoperability Working Group (GAI) and supports development and implementation efforts such as Earth Science Gateway (ESG), Space Time Tool Kit and Web Map Services (WMS) Global Mosaic. The GIO supports NASA in the collection and dissemination of geospatial interoperability standards needs and progress throughout the agency including areas such as ESE Applications, the SEEDS Working Groups, the Facilities Engineering Division (Code JX) and NASA's Chief Information Offices (CIO). With these agency level requirements GIO leads, brokers and facilitates efforts to, develop, implement, influence and fully participate in standards development internationally, federally and locally. The GIO also represents NASA in the OpenGIS Consortium and ISO TC211. The OGC has made considerable progress in regards to relations with other open standards bodies; namely ISO, W3C and OASIS. ISO TC211 is the Geographic and Geomatics Information technical committee that works towards standardization in the field of digital geographic information. The GIO focuses on seamless access to data, applications of data, and enabling technologies furthering the interoperability of distributed data. Through teaming within the Applications Directorate and partnerships with government, private industry, education and communities, GIO works towards the data application goals of NASA, the ESE Applications Directorate, and our Federal partners by managing projects in four categories: Geospatial Standards and Leadership, Geospatial One Stop, Standards Development and Implementation, and National and NASA Activities.

Weir, Patricia↗

Applying Registry Services to Spaceflight Technologies to Aid in the Assignment of Assigned Numbers to Disparate Systems and Their Technologies to Further Enable Interoperability

To date very little effort has been made to provide interoperability between various space agency projects. To effectively get to the Moon and beyond systems must interoperate. To provide interoperability, standardization and registries of various technologies will be required. These registries will be created as they relate to space flight. With the new NASA Moon/Mars initiative a requirement to standardize and control the naming conventions of very disparate systems and technologies are emerging. The need to provide numbering to the many processes, schemas, vehicles, robots, space suits and technologies (e.g. versions), to name a few, in the highly complex Constellation Initiative is imperative. The number of corporations, developer personnel, system interfaces, people interfaces will require standardization and registries on a scale not currently envisioned. It would only take one exception (stove piped system development) to weaken, if not, destroy interoperability. To start, a standardized registry process must be defined that allows many differing engineers, organizations and operators the ability to easily access disparate registry information across numerous technological and scientific disciplines. Once registries are standardized the need to provide registry support in terms of setup and operations, resolution of conflicts between registries and other issues will need to be addressed. Registries should not be confused with repositories. No end user data is "stored" in a registry nor is it a configuration control system. Once a registry standard is created and approved, the technologies that should be registered must be identified and prioritized. In this paper, we will identify and define a registry process that is compatible with the Constellation Initiative and other non related space activities and organizations. We will then identify and define the various technologies that should use a registry to provide interoperability. The first set of technologies will be those that are currently in need of expansion namely the assignment of satellite designations and the process which controls assignments. Second, we will analyze the technologies currently standardized under the Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems (CCSDS) banner. Third, we will analyze the current CCSDS working group and birds of a feather activities to ascertain registry requirements. Lastly, we will identify technologies that are either currently under the auspices of another

Bradford, Robert N.↗