Survey and Evaluate Uncertainty Quantification Methodologies

The Carbon Capture Simulation Initiative (CCSI) is a partnership among national laboratories, industry and academic institutions that will develop and deploy state-of-the-art computational modeling and simulation tools to accelerate the commercialization of carbon capture technologies from discovery to development, demonstration, and ultimately the widespread deployment to hundreds of power plants. The CCSI Toolset will provide end users in industry with a comprehensive, integrated suite of scientifically validated models with uncertainty quantification, optimization, risk analysis and decision making capabilities. The CCSI Toolset will incorporate commercial and open-source software currently in use by industry and will also develop new software tools as necessary to fill technology gaps identified during execution of the project. The CCSI Toolset will (1) enable promising concepts to be more quickly identified through rapid computational screening of devices and processes; (2) reduce the time to design and troubleshoot new devices and processes; (3) quantify the technical risk in taking technology from laboratory-scale to commercial-scale; and (4) stabilize deployment costs more quickly by replacing some of the physical operational tests with virtual power plant simulations. The goal of CCSI is to deliver a toolset that can simulate the scale-up of a broad set of new carbon capture technologies from laboratory scale to full commercial scale. To provide a framework around which the toolset can be developed and demonstrated, we will focus on three Industrial Challenge Problems (ICPs) related to carbon capture technologies relevant to U.S. pulverized coal (PC) power plants. Post combustion capture by solid sorbents is the technology focus of the initial ICP (referred to as ICP A). The goal of the uncertainty quantification (UQ) task (Task 6) is to provide a set of capabilities to the user community for the quantification of uncertainties associated with the carbon capture processes. As such, we will develop, as needed and beyond existing capabilities, a suite of robust and efficient computational tools for UQ to be integrated into a CCSI UQ software framework.

[1]  C. Tiedeman,et al.  Effective Groundwater Model Calibration: With Analysis of Data, Sensitivities, Predictions, and Uncertainty , 2007 .

[2]  M. D. McKay,et al.  Orthogonal arrays for computer experiments to assess important inputs , 2002 .

[3]  J. Charles Kerkering,et al.  Eliciting and Analyzing Expert Judgment, A Practical Guide , 2002, Technometrics.

[4]  Stephen C. Hora,et al.  Acquisition of Expert Judgment: Examples from Risk Assessment , 1992 .

[5]  James A. Bucklew,et al.  Introduction to Rare Event Simulation , 2010 .

[6]  R. Iman,et al.  A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlation among input variables , 1982 .

[7]  George Kuczera,et al.  Monte Carlo assessment of parameter uncertainty in conceptual catchment models: the Metropolis algorithm , 1998 .

[8]  R. A. Leibler,et al.  On Information and Sufficiency , 1951 .

[9]  Leslie M. Moore,et al.  Combined array experiment design , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[10]  Christoph W. Ueberhuber.  Numerical computation : methods, software, and analysis , 1997 .

[11]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Alternative representations of epistemic uncertainty , 2004, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[12]  David S. Riha,et al.  Variance Decomposition in the Presence of Epistemic and Aleatory Uncertainty , 2011 .

[13]  Wei Chen,et al.  Analytical Variance-Based Global Sensitivity Analysis in Simulation-Based Design Under Uncertainty , 2005 .

[14]  George Em Karniadakis,et al.  Sensitivity analysis and stochastic simulations of non‐equilibrium plasma flow , 2009 .

[15]  R. Srinivasan.  Importance Sampling: Applications in Communications and Detection , 2010 .

[16]  Brian J. Williams,et al.  Sensitivity analysis when model outputs are functions , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[17]  D. Xiu,et al.  Modeling uncertainty in flow simulations via generalized polynomial chaos , 2003 .

[18]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Sensitivity analysis in conjunction with evidence theory representations of epistemic uncertainty , 2006, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[19]  D. Xiu.  Numerical Methods for Stochastic Computations: A Spectral Method Approach , 2010 .

[20]  Harald Niederreiter,et al.  Random number generation and Quasi-Monte Carlo methods , 1992, CBMS-NSF regional conference series in applied mathematics.

[21]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Using Orthogonal Arrays in the Sensitivity Analysis of Computer Models , 2008, Technometrics.

[22]  R. Caflisch,et al.  Quasi-Monte Carlo integration , 1995 .

[23]  David W. Engel,et al.  An Iterative Uncertainty Assessment Technique for Environmental Modeling , 2004 .

[24]  Siuli Mukhopadhyay,et al.  Response surface methodology , 2010 .

[25]  Guang Lin,et al.  An efficient, high-order probabilistic collocation method on sparse grids for three-dimensional flow and solute transport in randomly heterogeneous porous media , 2009 .

[26]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Characterization of subjective uncertainty in the 1996 performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant , 2000, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[27]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Characterization of stochastic uncertainty in the 1996 performance assessment for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant , 2000, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[28]  Lih-Yuan Deng,et al.  Orthogonal Arrays: Theory and Applications , 1999, Technometrics.

[29]  Jason L. Loeppky,et al.  Batch sequential designs for computer experiments , 2010 .

[30]  D. Kavetski,et al.  Towards a Bayesian total error analysis of conceptual rainfall-runoff models: Characterising model error using storm-dependent parameters , 2006 .

[31]  H. Wozniakowski.  Average case complexity of multivariate integration , 1991 .

[32]  Guang Lin,et al.  Stochastic Computational Fluid Mechanics , 2007, Computing in Science & Engineering.

[33]  André I. Khuri,et al.  Response surface methodology , 2010 .

[34]  Jon C. Helton,et al.  Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis techniques for use in performance assessment for radioactive waste disposal , 1993 .

[35]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Sampling plans based on balanced incomplete block designs for evaluating the importance of computer model inputs , 2006 .

[36]  James E. Campbell,et al.  An Approach to Sensitivity Analysis of Computer Models: Part I—Introduction, Input Variable Selection and Preliminary Variable Assessment , 1981 .

[37]  Steffen Marburg,et al.  UNCERTAINTY QUANTIFICATION IN STOCHASTIC SYSTEMS USING POLYNOMIAL CHAOS EXPANSION , 2010 .

[38]  Eduard Hofer,et al.  An approximate epistemic uncertainty analysis approach in the presence of epistemic and aleatory uncertainties , 2002, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf..

[39]  G. Karniadakis,et al.  An adaptive multi-element generalized polynomial chaos method for stochastic differential equations , 2005 .