Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “scorecard”

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
NASA NTRS2009

Human-System Integration Scorecard Update to VB.Net

The purpose of this project was to create Human-System Integration (HSI) scorecard software, which could be utilized to validate that human factors have been considered early in hardware/system specifications and design. The HSI scorecard is partially based upon the revised Human Rating Requirements (HRR) intended for NASA's Constellation program. This software scorecard will allow for quick appraisal of HSI factors, by using visual aids to highlight low and rapidly changing scores. This project consisted of creating a user-friendly Visual Basic program that could be easily distributed and updated, to and by fellow colleagues. Updating the Microsoft Word version of the HSI scorecard to a computer application will allow for the addition of useful features, improved easy of use, and decreased completion time for user. One significant addition is the ability to create Microsoft Excel graphs automatically from scorecard data, to allow for clear presentation of problematic areas. The purpose of this paper is to describe the rational and benefits of creating the HSI scorecard software, the problems and goals of project, and future work that could be done.

Sanders, Blaze D.↗
NASA NTRS2009

Tool for Human-Systems Integration Assessment: HSI Scorecard

This paper describes the development and rationale for a human-systems integration (HSI) scorecard that can be used in reviews of vehicle specification and design. This tool can be used to assess whether specific HSI related criteria have been met as part of a project milestone or critical event, such as technical reviews, crew station reviews, mockup evaluations, or even review of major plans or processes. Examples of HSI related criteria include Human Performance Capabilities, Health Management, Human System Interfaces, Anthropometry and Biomechanics, and Natural and Induced Environments. The tool is not intended to evaluate requirements compliance and verification, but to review how well the human related systems have been considered for the specific event and to identify gaps and vulnerabilities from an HSI perspective. The scorecard offers common basis, and criteria for discussions among system managers, evaluators, and design engineers. Furthermore, the scorecard items highlight the main areas of system development that need to be followed during system lifecycle. The ratings provide a repeatable quantitative measure to what has been often seen as only subjective commentary. Thus, the scorecard is anticipated to be a useful HSI tool to communicate review results to the institutional and the project office management.

Whitmore, Nihriban↗
DOE OSTI2020

Strategic Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) Scorecard in QuickScore Training Tool (User Guide)

The Strategic Performance Evaluation Measurement Plan (PEMP) Scorecard, now housed in QuickScore, is an assurance and governance data scorecard which shows the health of the labs against the current fiscal year PEMP objectives. POC's for PEMP objective owners are requested to provide status of their PEMP objective, capture the top 6 cumulative accomplishments, top 6 issues, which include IFR issues and provide mitigation and or improvement action plans. Updated scorecards are used in OMR and BOM GS&S committee

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2022

Materials Scorecards, Phase 2: Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technology

This report presents updated material score cards with detailed justification of the proposed rating provided and quantifies the readiness of the advanced manufacturing of materials for nuclear applications. Based on an expanded literature review of available data, the scores in this report (Phase 2) have either been modified or remained constant as compared with Phase 1 scoring. The rating justification are provided for each scoring criteria whereas the maturity quantification of additively manufactured alloys and the knowledge gaps are discussed with reference traceability. This report focuses on the detailed justification and traceability for the adoption of additively manufactured 316SS, SS304, Alloy 800H, Graphite C/C, Alloy N, Silicon Carbide, HT9, Alloy 617, and Alloy 718. Significant variability in data and knowledge gaps exist among the identified materials. The scorecards are therefore based on published literature data, industry response to a survey, stakeholder input collected at workshops, and expert opinion. The interpretation and assessment were somewhat challenged as experimental process parameters and methodology varied and best judgment was exercised for score quantification. This assessment reflects the overall level of technical maturity for AM materials and their deployment in Gen-VI nuclear systems. These Phase 2 scorecards are likely to be revised based on additional input from stakeholders and as new research results become available.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2024

Generator Scorecard

Code built on Archive Walker. The Generator Scorecard analyzes power grid measurements to automate the process of evaluating the performance of generators. The tool includes three aspects: frequency response, voltage response, and voltage schedule tracking.

Follum, Jim↗
DOE OSTI2020

Development of Employee Health Services Scorecards and Dashboards for Sandia National Laboratories (SAND2020-2243 J)

The mission of Employee Health Services (EHS) at Sandia National Laboratories is to positively and efficiently impact the health of Sandia through patient-centered, cost-effective, community-connected care in support of its mission and people. We strive to continuously improve the delivery of health and wellness services. For the past few years, we have modeled our health programs around findings from the 2010 World Economics Forum (WEF): there are 8 top health risks and behaviors that drive 15 chronic conditions which account for 80% of the total health-care costs for all chronic illness worldwide. The WEF goes on to state that information and innovation are the keys to prevention, and EHS has decided to take a strong stand in both categories by utilizing health scorecards and department dashboards to visualize and share metrics with Sandia Leadership to foster improvements in employee wellness and optimize wellness offerings. Finally, these 2 types of information-sharing tools allow us to track the dollars spent and saved on our wellness programs, and show leadership where there is risk, where there is progress, and where there is need by providing current data that gives monthly, quarterly, and yearly feedback.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS2023

Requirements Engineering Scorecard and the Next-Generation Space Suit

The objective for a NASA contractor, the performing organization in this case study, is to provide engineering services to develop and deliver the next generation space suit to NASA, the customer in this case study. A case study with qualitative and quantitative analyses regarding a new process and approach to requirements engineering is described, with the intent that if utilized, these tools may have contributed to improvements across the project in terms of meeting cost, scope, budget and quality while appropriately accounting for risk management. The procedure entails a research method in which the current state of the project, current state of the art, and the identified systems engineering challenges are evaluated. Iterative models are tempered through development by continual improvements by engineering evaluation of engineers on the project. The current results have produced a prototype of a requirements engineering scorecard with implementations of FMEA and quantitative analysis to (i) identify root cause of underdeveloped requirements and (ii) project management impacts with regards to project risk. Forward work includes customer, performing organization, acceptance against applicable INCOSE community accepted practices.

INCOSE↗
DOE OSTI2021

Materials Scorecards, Phase 1: Advanced Materials and Manufacturing Technology

This report presents preliminary material score cards (Phase 1) based on a survey of industry experts and the limited literature available on the state of advanced manufacturing of materials for nuclear applications. Seven reactor types were considered, and the data is presented in tabular form. The caveat is that the scores are based on limited data and expert judgement. Considerable work remains to be done to prioritize materials for advanced manufacturing to support existing and advanced reactors. A central database of processing conditions, resulting microstructure, post processing, properties, and performance of these materials is needed to support the accelerated adoption of advanced manufacturing by the industry.

36 MATERIALS SCIENCE↗
DOE OSTI2017

2015 China Green Low-Carbon City scorecard

In China’s rapid urbanization and industrialization, cities are playing important roles in helping the country reach its climate change mitigation goal of peaking CO2 emissions around 2030, and improving environmental quality. During the 12th Five-Year Plan (12th FYP) period (2011–2015), Chinese cities set ambitious goals and implemented diverse policies aimed at transitioning to a greener economy. The Chinese central government also set targets on a number of indicators, such economic energy intensity and carbon intensity (e.g., CO2 per unit GDP), and air quality (e.g., PM2.5 concentration). These targets are helpful for tracking implementation of individual policies or progress at a sectoral level. However, a more comprehensive and integrated approach is needed to assess progress and capture the multi-dimensional aspects of Chinese cities’ transition to a greener economy, an approach that offers comparison with international best practices, as well as working with data availability in China’s statistical system. This paper presents the development of a China Green LowCarbon City Index2 (CGLCCI, or City Index) and its application to 115 Chinese cities – the largest assessment of Chinese cities to date. The GCLCCI includes 23 key indicators across seven categories: economy, energy, industry, buildings, transportation, environment and land use, and climate policy and outreach. This paper applied the CGLCCI to benchmark the green and low-carbon development status of 115 Chinese cities in the year 2015. Data for the analysis came from government and publicly available data sources. The CGLCCI methodology provides a standardized method to benchmark each indicator, calculate overall city scores, and rank the cities.3 The results showed that the low-carbon transition in Chinese cities is still in its early stages. Compared to the best practices benchmarks, the 2015 City Index scores ranged from a low of 28 to a high score of 70 in 2015 (maximum score is 100). This paper also presents three top-performing cities in different stages of development and discusses how their scores across the index categories. Creating a green low-carbon index that relies on publicly available data in China, and regularly evaluating city performance, can encourage Chinese cities to learn best practices from each other, and to strengthen their goals and implementation efforts toward a green low-carbon transition.

Zhang, Jingjing↗
DOE OSTI2013

First Steps Toward a Quality of Climate Finance Scorecard (QUODA-CF): Creating a Comparative Index to Assess International Climate Finance Contributions

Are climate finance contributor countries, multilateral aid agencies and specialized funds using widely accepted best practices in foreign assistance? How is it possible to measure and compare international climate finance contributions when there are as yet no established metrics or agreed definitions of the quality of climate finance? As a subjective metric, quality can mean different things to different stakeholders, while of donor countries, recipients and institutional actors may place quality across a broad spectrum of objectives. This subjectivity makes the assessment of the quality of climate finance contributions a useful and necessary exercise, but one that has many challenges. This work seeks to enhance the development of common definitions and metrics of the quality of climate finance, to understand what we can about those areas where climate finance information is available and shine a light on the areas where there is a severe dearth of data. Allowing for comparisons of the use of best practices across funding institutions in the climate sector could begin a process of benchmarking performance, fostering learning across institutions and driving improvements when incorporated in internal evaluation protocols of those institutions. In the medium term, this kind of benchmarking and transparency could support fundraising in contributor countries and help build trust with recipient countries. As a feasibility study, this paper attempts to outline the importance of assessing international climate finance contributions while describing the difficulties in arriving at universally agreed measurements and indicators for assessment. In many cases, data are neither readily available nor complete, and there is no consensus on what should be included. A number of indicators are proposed in this study as a starting point with which to analyze voluntary contributions, but in some cases their methodologies are not complete, and further research is required for a robust measurement tool to be created.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Stakeholder Transportation Scorecard: Reviewing Nevada's Recommendations for Enhancing the Safety and Security of Nuclear Waste Shipments - 13518

As a primary stakeholder in the Yucca Mountain program, the state of Nevada has spent three decades examining and considering national policy regarding spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste transportation. During this time, Nevada has identified 10 issues it believes are critical to ensuring the safety and security of any spent nuclear fuel transportation program, and achieving public acceptance. These recommendations are: 1) Ship the oldest fuel first; 2) Ship mostly by rail; 3) Use dual-purpose (transportable storage) casks; 4) Use dedicated trains for rail shipments; 5) Implement a full-scale cask testing program; 6) Utilize a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for the selection of a new rail spur to the proposed repository site; 7) Implement the Western Interstate Energy Board (WIEB) 'straw man' process for route selection; 8) Implement Section 180C assistance to affected States, Tribes and localities through rulemaking; 9) Adopt safety and security regulatory enhancements proposed states; and 10) Address stakeholder concerns about terrorism and sabotage. This paper describes Nevada's proposals in detail and examines their current status. The paper describes the various forums and methods by which Nevada has presented its arguments and sought to influence national policy. As of 2012, most of Nevada's recommendations have been adopted in one form or another, although not yet implemented. If implemented in a future nuclear waste program, the State of Nevada believes these recommendations would form the basis for a successful national transportation plan for shipments to a geologic repository and/or centralized interim storage facility. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

PV Module BOM and Test Data

This dataset contains compiled results from annual PV Module Reliability Scorecards published by PV Evolution Labs – also known as PVEL. These scorecards show summary results of PV module testing performed by PVEL and name specific models of PV modules as "Top Performers" in various tests. Full details on testing, Top Performer status and other criteria for inclusion in Scorecards are documented in reports and online documentation available from https://www.modulescorecard.pvel.com. This dataset is not affiliated with PVEL and is intended only to simplify sorting and filtering Scorecard data and finding specific PV module models and Top Performer results. Note that data included in Scorecards has evolved over time, so not all data is available for all years, and testing protocols and Scorecard criteria have been changed over time.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
NASA NTRS2004

Development of Risk Assessment Matrix for NASA Engineering and Safety Center

This paper describes a study, which had as its principal goal the development of a sufficiently detailed 5 x 5 Risk Matrix Scorecard. The purpose of this scorecard is to outline the criteria by which technical issues can be qualitatively and initially prioritized. The tool using this score card has been proposed to be one of the information resources the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) takes into consideration when making decisions with respect to incoming information on safety concerns across the entire NASA agency. The contents of this paper discuss in detail each element of the risk matrix scorecard, definitions for those elements and the rationale behind the development of those definitions. This scorecard development was performed in parallel with the tailoring of the existing Futron Corporation Integrated Risk Management Application (IRMA) software tool. IRMA was tailored to fit NESC needs for evaluating incoming safety concerns and was renamed NESC Assessment Risk Management Application (NAFMA) which is still in developmental phase.

Malone, Roy W., Jr.↗
DOE OSTI2014

U.S. Wind Energy Manufacturing and Supply Chain: A Competitiveness Analysis

The goal of the project was to develop a greater understanding of the key factors determining wind energy component manufacturing costs and pricing on a global basis in order to enhance the competitiveness of U.S. manufacturers, and to reduce installed systems cost. Multiple stakeholders including DOE, turbine OEMs, and large component manufactures will all benefit by better understanding the factors determining domestic competitiveness in the emerging offshore and next generation land-based wind industries. Major objectives of this project were to: 1. Carry out global cost and process comparisons for 5MW jacket foundations, blades, towers, and permanent magnet generators; 2. Assess U.S. manufacturers’ competitiveness and potential for cost reduction; 3. Facilitate informed decision-making on investments in U.S. manufacturing; 4. Develop an industry scorecard representing the readiness of the U.S. manufacturers’ to produce components for the next generations of wind turbines, nominally 3MW land-based and 5MW offshore; 5. Disseminate results through the GLWN Wind Supply Chain GIS Map, a free website that is the most comprehensive public database of U.S. wind energy suppliers; 6. Identify areas and develop recommendations to DOE on potential R&D areas to target for increasing domestic manufacturing competitiveness, per DOE’s Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative (CEMI). Lists of Deliverables 1. Cost Breakdown Competitive Analyses of four product categories: tower, jacket foundation, blade, and permanent magnet (PM) generator. The cost breakdown for each component includes a complete Bill of Materials with net weights; general process steps for labor; and burden adjusted by each manufacturer for their process categories of SGA (sales general and administrative), engineering, logistics cost to a common U.S. port, and profit. 2. Value Stream Map Competitiveness Analysis: A tool that illustrates both information and material flow from the point of getting a customer order at the manufacturing plant; to the orders being forwarded by the manufacturing plant to the material suppliers; to the material being received at the manufacturing plant and processed through the system; to the final product being shipped to the Customer. 3. Competitiveness Scorecard: GLWN developed a Wind Industry Supply Chain Scorecard that reflects U.S. component manufacturers’ readiness to supply the next generation wind turbines, 3MW and 5MW, for land-based and offshore applications. 4. Wind Supply Chain Database & Map: Expand the current GLWN GIS Wind Supply Chain Map to include offshore elements. This is an on-line, free access, wind supply chain map that provides a platform for identifying active and emerging suppliers for the land-based and offshore wind industry, including turbine component manufacturers and wind farm construction service suppliers.

17 WIND ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2015

Predicting chemically-induced skin reactions. Part I: QSAR models of skin sensitization and their application to identify potentially hazardous compounds

Repetitive exposure to a chemical agent can induce an immune reaction in inherently susceptible individuals that leads to skin sensitization. Although many chemicals have been reported as skin sensitizers, there have been very few rigorously validated QSAR models with defined applicability domains (AD) that were developed using a large group of chemically diverse compounds. In this study, we have aimed to compile, curate, and integrate the largest publicly available dataset related to chemically-induced skin sensitization, use this data to generate rigorously validated and QSAR models for skin sensitization, and employ these models as a virtual screening tool for identifying putative sensitizers among environmental chemicals. We followed best practices for model building and validation implemented with our predictive QSAR workflow using Random Forest modeling technique in combination with SiRMS and Dragon descriptors. The Correct Classification Rate (CCR) for QSAR models discriminating sensitizers from non-sensitizers was 71–88% when evaluated on several external validation sets, within a broad AD, with positive (for sensitizers) and negative (for non-sensitizers) predicted rates of 85% and 79% respectively. When compared to the skin sensitization module included in the OECD QSAR Toolbox as well as to the skin sensitization model in publicly available VEGA software, our models showed a significantly higher prediction accuracy for the same sets of external compounds as evaluated by Positive Predicted Rate, Negative Predicted Rate, and CCR. These models were applied to identify putative chemical hazards in the Scorecard database of possible skin or sense organ toxicants as primary candidates for experimental validation. - Highlights: • It was compiled the largest publicly-available skin sensitization dataset. • Predictive QSAR models were developed for skin sensitization. • Developed models have higher prediction accuracy than OECD QSAR Toolbox. • Putative chemical hazards in the Scorecard database were found using our models.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2024

Plan evaluation for heat resilience: complementary methods to comprehensively assess heat planning in Tempe and Tucson, Arizona

Abstract Escalating impacts from climate change and urban heat are increasing the urgency for communities to equitably plan for heat resilience. Cities in the desert Southwest are among the hottest and fastest warming in the U.S., placing them on the front lines of heat planning. Urban heat resilience requires an integrated planning approach that coordinates strategies across the network of plans that shape the built environment and risk patterns. To date, few studies have assessed cities’ progress on heat planning. This research is the first to combine two emerging plan evaluation approaches to examine how networks of plans shape urban heat resilience through case studies of Tempe and Tucson, Arizona. The first methodology, Plan Quality Evaluation for Heat Resilience, adapts existing plan quality assessment approaches to heat. We assess whether plans meet 56 criteria across seven principles of high-quality planning and the types of heat strategies included in the plans. The second methodology, the Plan Integration for Resilience Scorecard™ (PIRS™) for Heat, focuses on plan policies that could influence urban heat hazards. We categorize policies by policy tool and heat mitigation strategy and score them based on their heat impact. Scored policies are then mapped to evaluate their spatial distribution and the net effect of the plan network. The resulting PIRS™ for Heat scorecard is compared with heat vulnerability indicators to assess policy alignment with risks. We find that both cities are proactively planning for heat resilience using similar plan and strategy types, however, there are clear and consistent opportunities for improvement. Combining these complementary plan evaluation methods provides a more comprehensive understanding of how plans address heat and a generalizable approach that communities everywhere could use to identify opportunities for improved heat resilience planning.

Environmental Sciences & Ecology↗