Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

James Warner

Publications and source records attributed to James Warner.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Optimization of a Solver for Computational Materials and Structures Problems on NVIDIA Volta and AMD Instinct GPUs

The Scalable Implementation of Finite Elements by NASA (ScIFEN) is a software package developed to solve complex computational materials and structures problems using the finite element method (FEM). In this paper, we describe optimization techniques to speed up the linear solver computation that occurs within the ScIFEN application. We consider GPUs from two different vendors, NVIDIA and AMD as our target platforms for optimization and highlight differences in performance and optimization techniques. The NVIDIA GPU Volta V100 is used in the Summit system deployed at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, and the new exascale system, Frontier, will be using AMD Radeon Instinct GPU. We evaluated the performance of various optimization techniques on test matrices, ranging in size from100K to 4M, that are representative of ScIFEN applications. The linear solver computation is memory-bound on both GPUs. Our experiments show that on the NVIDIA GPU we obtained up to79%of the theoretical peak bandwidth, while the AMD GPU achieved 59%. Overall, the NVIDIA V100 GPU outperforms the AMD MI 25 GPU1. We observed an overall speedup of up to37X on an NVIDIA V100 compared to an Intel Skylake 12-coremachine. The solver for a 4M degree of freedom system took under 2.5 seconds.

Mohammad Zubair↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

TPSAS-NF1676L-35322-DND

This talk discusses emerging methods that seek to fuse and integrate physics-based modeling with machine learning. With the recent rise of machine learning and artificial intelligence, there has been a huge surge in data-driven approaches to solve computational science and engineering problems. However, neglecting a priori knowledge of established physical laws and relying solely on data-driven methods can yield unreliable, less interpretable, and/or non-physical results, especially when data is sparse or predictions are required outside of the training data domain. This two part talk presents two distinct approaches for accelerating predictions with machine learning that are grounded and constrained by relevant physics and their application to problems at NASA.

Julian Cuevas Paniagua↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Trajectory Simulation Using Multi Model Monte Carlo with Python (MXMCPy)

EDL (Entry, Descent and Landing) is the process from a vehicle approaching a surface to landing on it, such as a Mars rover approaching the planet before landing. POST2 (Program to Optimize Simulated Trajectories 2) is Langley’s primary EDL simulation tool and is used NASA-wide for simulations. POST2 can generate highly accurate results by running a precise, but time consuming, Monte Carlo (MC) simulation hundreds or thousands of times. Though POST2 can produce highly accurate results, it can take unrealistic time spans to generate these results, which has created a need to speed up the simulations. The new NASA software MXMCPy offers various ways to speed up the simulations while getting just as precise results. Instead of running high-precision POST2 simulations many times for traditional MC, MXMCPy can run fewer high-precision POST2 simulations and many less precise POST2 simulations and merge the results. MXMCPy contains 30+ different methods which will each suggest different allocations between model precision levels, which result in results of varying precision based on the POST2 simulation. I created Python and Bash code to automate the 5 steps of MXMCPy’s application to POST2. I also tested the precision of traditional Monte Carlo simulations to MXMCPy aided simulations and found that MXMCPy can achieve substantially more precise solutions at the same computer runtime. I learned Test Driven Development (TDD), a software programming workflow which involves writing computer-automated tests before writing the code which is being tested. These tests are ran every time the code is changed and they can find glitches in the code much quicker than a human can. This programming workflow saved me a lot of time because the automated tests could tell me exactly where the code had stopped working. I plan on using this software development method for future academic and professional software projects. I have greatly enjoyed my work at NASA, so I have been applying to NASA internships and Pathways positions. In addition, I plan on applying what I have learned about Test Driven Development to my computer science courses next semester

James Warner↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Improving Multi-Model Trajectory Simulation Estimators using Model Selection and Tuning

Multi-model Monte Carlo methods have been demonstrated to be an efficient and accurate alternative to standard Monte Carlo (MC) in the model-based propagation of uncertainty in entry, descent, and landing (EDL) applications. These multi-model MC methods fuse predictions from low-fidelity models with the high-fidelity EDL model of interest to produce unbiased statistics with a fraction of the computational cost. The accuracy and efficiency of the multi-model MC methods are dependent upon the magnitude of correlations of the low-fidelity models with the high-fidelity model, but also upon the correlation amongst the low-fidelity models, and their relative computational cost. Because of this layer of complexity, the question of how to optimally select the set of low-fidelity models has remained open. In this work, methods for optimal model construction and tuning are investigated as a means to increase the speed and precision of trajectory simulation for EDL. Specifically, the focus is on the inclusion of low-fidelity model tuning within the sample allocation optimization that accompanies multi-model MC methods. Preliminary results indicate that low-fidelity model tuning can significantly improve efficiency and precision of trajectory simulations and provide an increased edge to multi-model MC methods when compared to standard MC. The challenges and potential benefits to exploring a fully iterative and comprehensive optimization strategy in future work are highlighted.

uncertainty quantification↗