Search

Control rod calibration experiment results for the Oregon State TRIGA® Reactor (OSTR) immediately following LEU conversion in 2008, and MCNP® 5 predicted rod worths from the 2008 LEU Conversion Safety Analysis Report (CSAR) are discussed. The reactivity worth of the four OSTR control rods is measured using the rod-pull method. Reactor power and period measurements in this method rely on the fission chamber power detector on the north side of the reflector. It is proposed that the location of the fission chamber and the neutron flux distribution in the core may result in an inaccurate reactor period measurement due to the asymmetry of the neutron flux distribution in the OSTR core. The asymmetry of the flux is believed to be more pronounced during super-criticality, resulting in errors in the time-of-power-rise measurements. As a result, control rod calibration experiments may under-predict or over-predict the reactivity worth of certain control rods. A time-independent Monte–Carlo method for the quantification of these effects is presented. Thermal flux maps at the core axial mid-plane are obtained from the model to inform discrepancies between predicted and observed results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large quantities of real-time particle data are becoming available from low-cost particle monitors. However, it is crucial to determine the quality of these measurements. The largest network of monitors in the United States is maintained by the PurpleAir company, which offers two monitors: PA-I and PA-II. PA-I monitors have a single sensor (PMS1003) and PA-II monitors employ two independent PMS5003 sensors. We determine a new calibration factor for the PA-I monitor and revise a previously published calibration algorithm for PA-II monitors (ALT-CF3). From the PurpleAir API site, we downloaded 83 million hourly average PM2.5 values in the PurpleAir database from Washington, Oregon, and California between 1 January 2017 and 8 September 2021. Daily outdoor PM2.5 means from 194 PA-II monitors were compared to daily means from 47 nearby Federal regulatory sites using gravimetric Federal Reference Methods (FRM). We find a revised calibration factor of 3.4 for the PA-II monitors. For the PA-I monitors, we determined a new calibration factor (also 3.4) by comparing 26 outdoor PA-I sites to 117 nearby outdoor PA-II sites. These results show that PurpleAir PM2.5 measurements can agree well with regulatory monitors when an optimum calibration factor is found. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Airborne laser scanning (ALS) acquisitions provide piecemeal coverage across the western US, as collections are organized by local managers of individual project areas. In this study, we analyze different factors that can contribute to developing a regional strategy to use information from completed ALS data acquisitions and develop maps of multiple forest attributes in new ALS project areas in a rapid manner. This study is located in Oregon, USA, and analyzes six forest structural attributes for differences between: (1) synthetic (i.e., not-calibrated), and calibrated predictions, (2) parametric linear and semiparametric models, and (3) models developed with predictors computed for point clouds enclosed in the areas where field measurements were taken, i.e., "point-cloud predictors", and models developed using predictors extracted from pre-rasterized layers, i.e., "rasterized predictors". Forest structural attributes under consideration are aboveground biomass, downed woody biomass, canopy bulk density, canopy height, canopy base height, and canopy fuel load. Results from our study indicate that semiparametric models perform better than parametric models if no calibration is performed. However, the effect of the calibration is substantial in reducing the bias of parametric models but minimal for the semiparametric models and, once calibrations are performed, differences between parametric and semiparametric models become negligible for all responses. In addition, minimal differences between models using point-cloud predictors and models using rasterized predictors were found. We conclude that the approach that applies semiparametric models and rasterized predictors, which represents the easiest workflow and leads to the most rapid results, is justified with little loss in accuracy or precision even if no calibration is performed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]