Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “technology readiness”

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 OSTI2013

Technology Readiness for the Smart Grid

Reluctance to adopt new technology into a utility application is understandable, given the critical nature of the infrastructure and the less-than-ideal experiences of some power companies. The authors of this paper have considered adapting the NASA approach of classifying technology readiness, but find it not quite appropriate because NASA was both the developer and the eventual user of the new technology it was evaluating, whereas a utility is ordinarily in the mode of a customer, acquiring a new product from a manufacturer. Instead of a generic scale of technology readiness, a scale of readiness is proposed specifically for the smart grid, based on the many standards that exist for the relevant technologies. In this paper we present an overall structure for organization those standards. The acceptance of new technology is organized into five SGL (Smart Grid Level) steps, numbered five through 9 to correspond approximately to the last five numbers of the NASA TRL scale. SGL 5 is a certification that the hardware and software of the technology is safe for the system into which is intended to be placed. SGL 6 is documentation that the system is safe for itself, and will have adequate reliability. It is thus clear that the steps differ from NASA’s TRL in that technology development is not required, the transition is more one of documenting already existing system readiness. Since SGL 6 describes a system that is safe for the power system and for itself, it should not be restricted from being in a pilot-scale study, and achieving SGL 7. A larger-scale demonstration in a realistic environment will demonstrate interoperability and achieve SGL 8. Only when systems are installed and operating, and when disposal plans are in place will the designation of fully operable at SGL 9 be granted.

Kirkham, Harold↗
DOE OSTI2019

A review of thermochemical upgrading of pyrolysis bio‐oil: Techno‐economic analysis, life cycle assessment, and technology readiness

Abstract Technologies for upgrading fast pyrolysis bio‐oil to drop‐in fuels and coproducts are under development and show promise for decarbonizing energy supply for transportation and chemicals markets. The successful commercialization of these fuels and the technologies deployed to produce them depend on production costs, scalability, and yield. To meet environmental regulations, pyrolysis‐based biofuels need to adhere to life cycle greenhouse gas intensity standards relative to their petroleum‐based counterparts. We review literature on fast pyrolysis bio‐oil upgrading and explore key metrics that influence their commercial viability through life cycle assessment (LCA) and techno‐economic analysis (TEA) methods together with technology readiness level (TRL) evaluation. We investigate the trade‐offs among economic, environmental, and technological metrics derived from these methods for individual technologies as a means of understanding their nearness to commercialization. Although the technologies reviewed have not attained commercial investment, some have been pilot tested. Predicting the projected performance at scale‐up through models can, with industrial experience, guide decision‐making to competitively meet energy policy goals. LCA and TEA methods that ensure consistent and reproducible models at a given TRL are needed to compare alternative technologies. This study highlights the importance of integrated analysis of multiple economic, environmental, and technological metrics for understanding performance prospects and barriers among early stage technologies.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗
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 OSTI2012

Development of Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Metrics and Risk Measures

This is an internal project milestone report to document the CCSI Element 7 team's progress on developing Technology Readiness Level (TRL) metrics and risk measures. In this report, we provide a brief overview of the current technology readiness assessment research, document the development of technology readiness levels (TRLs) specific to carbon capture technologies, describe the risk measures and uncertainty quantification approaches used in our research, and conclude by discussing the next steps that the CCSI Task 7 team aims to accomplish.

carbon capture simulation↗
DOE OSTI2014

Technology Readiness Levels for Advanced Nuclear Fuels and Materials Development

The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) process is used to quantitatively assess the maturity of a given technology. The TRL process has been developed and successfully used by the Department of Defense (DOD) for development and deployment of new technology and systems for defense applications. In addition, NASA has also successfully used the TRL process to develop and deploy new systems for space applications. Advanced nuclear fuels and materials development is a critical technology needed for closing the nuclear fuel cycle. Because the deployment of a new nuclear fuel forms requires a lengthy and expensive research, development, and demonstration program, applying the TRL concept to the advanced fuel development program is very useful as a management and tracking tool. This report provides definition of the technology readiness level assessment process as defined for use in assessing nuclear fuel technology development for the Advanced Fuel Campaign (AFC).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
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 OSTI2016

Technology readiness levels for advanced nuclear fuels and materials development

The Technology Readiness Level (TRL) process is used to quantitatively assess the maturity of a given technology. It was pioneered by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) in the 1980s to develop and deploy new systems for space applications. The process was subsequently adopted by the Department of Defense (DoD) to develop and deploy new technology and systems for defense applications as well as the Department of Energy (DOE) to evaluate the maturity of new technologies in major construction projects. Advanced nuclear fuels and materials development is a critical technology needed for improving the performance and safety of current and advanced reactors, and ultimately closing the nuclear fuel cycle. Because deployment of new nuclear fuel forms requires a lengthy and expensive research, development, and demonstration program, applying the TRL concept to the advanced fuel development program is very useful as a management, communication and tracking tool. Furthermore, this article provides examples regarding the methods by which TRLs are currently used to assess the maturity of nuclear fuels and materials under development in the DOE Fuel Cycle Research and Development (FCRD) Program within the Advanced Fuels Campaign (AFC).

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2012

Final Report on HOLODEC 2 Technology Readiness Level

During the period of this project, the Holographic Detector for Clouds 2 (HOLODEC 2) instrument has advanced from a laboratory-proven instrument with some initial field testing to a fully flight-tested instrument capable of providing useful cloud microphysics measurements. This can be summarized as 'Technology Readiness Level 8: Technology is proven to work - Actual technology completed and qualified through test and demonstration.' As part of this project, improvements and upgrades have been made to the optical system, the instrument power control system, the data acquisition computer, the instrument control software, the data reconstruction and analysis software, and some of the basic algorithms for estimating basic microphysical variables like droplet diameter. Near the end of the project, the instrument flew on several research flights as part of the IDEAS 2011 project, and a small sample of data from the project is included as an example. There is one caveat in the technology readiness level stated above: the upgrades to the instrument power system were made after the flight testing, so they are not fully field proven. We anticipate that there will be an opportunity to fly the instrument as part of the IDEAS project in fall 2012.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2019

A review of separation processes proposed for advanced fuel cycles based on technology readiness level assessments

The results of an international review of separation processes for spent nuclear fuel (SNF) recycling in future closed fuel cycles are reported. This study was made by the Expert Group on Fuel Recycling Chemistry (EGFRC) organised by the Nuclear Energy Agency (NEA) of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). A unique feature of this study was that processes were classified according to a hierarchy of separations aimed at different elements within spent fuel (uranium; uranium-plutonium co-recovery; minor actinides; high heat generating radionuclides) and also the Head-end processes, used to prepare the SNF for chemical separation, were included. Separation processes covered both wet (hydrometallurgical) and dry (pyro-chemical) processes. A bespoke methodology suitable for assessing the technological maturities of separation processes for SNF recycling was then designed based on the well-established Technology Readiness Level (TRL) scale but adapted for spent nuclear fuel separations. The innovative feature of this was the use of a matrix approach that enabled information on both the scale of testing and materials used in testing to be combined in the evaluation of the TRL. TRLs for the Head-end, hydrometallurgical and pyrochemical processes that had been reviewed by the study have been evaluated. It is clear that, whilst more R&D is needed in most cases to raise TRLs, suitable options exist to enable the recovery of all actinide elements plus the HHRs by wet or dry processes, even up to the extraordinarily difficult isolation of americium alone. The technology readiness levels (TRL) for most processes fall in the ‘proof of principle’ range with TRLs between 4 and 6, although this is an evaluation at the system level and some gaps in the individual process steps may still exist that strictly would reduce the overall TRL. That is, flowsheets have been proposed for processes and tested with active materials under increasingly relevant conditions, through to initial hot tests with small quantities of SNF. The results of this work were shown to be comparable to a parallel European study that evaluated TRLs for minor actinide partitioning processes.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
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 OSTI2011

Software Technology Readiness for the Smart Grid

Abstract Budget and schedule overruns in product development due to the use of immature technologies constitute an important matter for program managers. Moreover, unexpected lack of technology maturity is also a problem for buyers. Both sides of the situation would benefit from an unbiased measure of technology maturity. This paper presents the use of a software maturity metric called Technology Readiness Level (TRL), in the milieu of the smart grid. For most of the time they have been in existence, power utilities have been protected monopolies, guaranteed a return on investment on anything they could justify adding to the rate base. Such a situation did not encourage innovation, and instead led to widespread risk-avoidance behavior in many utilities. The situation changed at the end of the last century, with a series of regulatory measures, beginning with the Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act of 1978. However, some bad experiences have actually served to strengthen the resistance to innovation by some utilities. Some aspects of the smart grid, such as the addition of computer-based control to the power system, face an uphill battle. It is our position that the addition of TRLs to the decision-making process for smart grid power-system projects, will lead to an environment of more confident adoption.

technology maturity, software technology readiness↗
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 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 OSTI2015

NREL and Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) Support of Ocean Renewable Power Company's TidGen™ Power System Technology Readiness Advancement Initiative Project

This document summarizes the tasks identified for National Laboratory technical support of Ocean Renewable Power Corporation (ORPC) DOE grant awarded under the FY10 Industry Solicitation DE-FOA-0000293: Technology Readiness Advancement Initiative. The system ORPC will deploy in Cobscook Bay, ME is known as the TidGen™ Power System. The Turbine Generator Unit (TGU) each have a rated capacity of 150 to 175 kW, and they are mounted on bottom support frames and connected to an onshore substation using an underwater power and control cable. This system is designed for tidal energy applications in water depths from 60 to 150 feet. In funding provided separately by DOE, National Laboratory partners NREL and SNL will provide in-kind resources and technical expertise to help ensure that industry projects meet DOE WWPP (Wind and Water Power Program) objectives by reducing risk to these high value projects.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
DOE OSTI2021

Solar +: Clean Energy Strategies for the Sunshine State (Final Technical Report (FTR) of the Florida Alliance for Accelerating Solar and Storage Technology Readiness (FAASSTeR))

This reports on a four-year effort to provide foundational research, analysis, strategies and assistance to help Florida, and other states that might learn from this work, to grow solar energy in conjunction with other distributed energy resources by addressing and overcoming existing barriers, and in way that delivers increased value. The start of this effort coincided with an inflection point of sorts into a new dawn for solar energy in Florida, where the Sunshine state’s national ranking in total installed solar, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA), has rose from 13th to 4th. Florida has now become the national leader in annual utility-scale solar growth as dozens of large plants have come online. Also, during this time, Florida utilities have expressed a strong and growing interest in understanding the role of energy storage and how to best plan for and deploy this unique resource as part of strategies to grow solar. The utility-scale solar growth experienced has been fueled by the economics of solar cost-parity with natural gas combined cycle plants and Florida Public Service Commission’s (PSC) approval of cost-recovery for the Investor-Owned Utilities (IOU’s), primarily through the Solar Base Rate Adjustment (SoBRA) mechanism. This has led to gigawatts (GW’s) of rate-based solar capacity additions over several years, along with fairly significant amounts of energy storage. Meanwhile, municipal electric utilities, which, collectively, are the third largest source of power in the state, have been increasing solar considerably through power purchase agreements (PPA’s) and are on track to have close to 1 GW of grid-connected solar by 2024. Florida’s municipal utilities and the Florida Municipal Electric Association (FMEA) have been key partners in the Florida Alliance for Accelerating Solar and Storage Technology Readiness (FAASSTeR), formed to carry out this effort. The six largest of these have been Core Team utilities, engaging throughout the project in weekly calls, discussions, and project direction, participating in and hosting workshops and benefiting from technical assistance in several areas.

14 SOLAR ENERGY↗
DOE OSTI2013

Economic Incentives for Cybersecurity: Using Economics to Design Technologies Ready for Deployment

Cybersecurity practice lags behind cyber technology achievements. Solutions designed to address many problems may and do exist but frequently cannot be broadly deployed due to economic constraints. Whereas security economics focuses on the cost/benefit analysis and supply/demand, we believe that more sophisticated theoretical approaches, such as economic modeling, rarely utilized, would derive greater societal benefits. Unfortunately, today technologists pursuing interesting and elegant solutions have little knowledge of the feasibility for broad deployment of their results and cannot anticipate the influences of other technologies, existing infrastructure, and technology evolution, nor bring the solutions lifecycle into the equation. Additionally, potentially viable solutions are not adopted because the risk perceptions by potential providers and users far outweighs the economic incentives to support introduction/adoption of new best practices and technologies that are not well enough defined. In some cases, there is no alignment with redominant and future business models as well as regulatory and policy requirements. This paper provides an overview of the economics of security, reviewing work that helped to define economic models for the Internet economy from the 1990s. We bring forward examples of potential use of theoretical economics in defining metrics for emerging technology areas, positioning infrastructure investment, and building real-time response capability as part of software development. These diverse examples help us understand the gaps in current research. Filling these gaps will be instrumental for defining viable economic incentives, economic policies, regulations as well as early-stage technology development approaches, that can speed up commercialization and deployment of new technologies in cybersecurity.

Cyber Security↗