Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “requirements verification”

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 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2020

Involute Working Group – Validation of CFD Turbulence Models for Steady-State Safety Analysis

There are three research reactors in the world having fuel plates curved as circle-involute (a spiral generated around a circle): The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) High Flux Isotope Reactor (HFIR) located in Tennessee, U.S.A. [ORNL, 2018]; The Laue-Langevin Institute (ILL) High Flux Reactor (RHF) located in Grenoble, France [ILL, 2018]; and, The Technical University of Munich (TUM) Research Neutron Source Heinz Maier-Leibnitz (FRM II) located in Garching, Germany [TUM, 2018]. All three reactors are currently using Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU, 235U/U ≥ 20 wt. %) as fuel and all three are actively engaged in activities to convert to Low Enriched Uranium (LEU, 235U/U < 20 wt. %) fuel. More information on these reactors can be found in Section two. For various reasons, these reactors have expressed interest in using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) tools to perform their Steady-State Thermal-Hydraulic (SSTH) safety calculations. Using CFD tools for SSTH analysis represents generally a significant departure from traditional methods and requires thorough verification and validation (V&V) to be accepted by regulators. This is why Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) and the involute reactors formed an informal group to help each other in this endeavor. This so-called Involute Working Group (IWG) aims at supporting the qualification of CFD tools for SSTH safety calculations. Activities include benchmarking, code-to-code comparison, Verification and Validation (V&V) as well as technical support. More information on the IWG and the reasons why involute-plate reactors are interested in CFD can be found in Section three. The present study aims at testing three turbulence models commonly implemented in commercial software (namely K-Epsilon, K-Omega and Reynolds-Stress) and assessing their relevance for involute-plate reactor application. An experiment performed by Gambill and Bundy in 1961 was performed to measure heat transfer coefficients in conditions prototypic of the HFIR reactor [Gambill, 1961]. More details on this experiment are provided in Section four. Based on the information available, CFD models of this experiment have been created and the experimental results have been compared to the ones obtained with these CFD models. CFD models and the results of this comparison are provided in Section five.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Involute Working Group – FSI Analysis of Fuel Plates Using Finite Volume and Finite Element Methods

The three involute plate research reactors RHF, HFIR, and FRM II have expressed an interest in using computational software to carry their steady-state safety analysis. Since these tools represent a significant departure from the methods used currently (one-dimensional), the acceptability of the new approach by regulators requires thorough verification and validation of these tools. Therefore, Argonne National Laboratory and the three involute-plate reactors formed an informal group called the Involute Working Group aiming at qualifying computational tools to perform steady-state safety analysis. The present report focuses on a comparison of finite volume and finite element methods to model solids in fluid-structure interaction problems with the goal to estimate the coolant flow-induced fuel plate deflections obtained with the two methods. The finite volume method will be obsoleted in STARCCM+ by the end of 2021, nevertheless, this evaluation is important because the method was used by ANL researchers to model the response of the fuel plates, despite its drawbacks, which are discussed in the report. It was essential to check how those estimates compare to the results obtained with the finite element method that is considered superior for structural analysis. Various geometries, i.e., flat, cylindrical and circle-involute fuel plates, as well as coolant flow speed, were considered. The comparison shows that, independently of the plate geometry, the finite volume method significantly underestimates the deflection as compared to finite element method for coarser meshes. When the discretization is developed as a result of a mesh sensitivity study using finite element method, the result obtained using finite volume method can be a few times smaller than the corresponding finite element method solution. A code-to-code comparison , between STAR-CCM+ and LS-DYNA was included in the analysis. Within the LS-DYNA models, two types of finite element formulations were used: solid and shell finite elements. Mesh sensitivity study showed that both approaches converge to a similar value that was obtained with STAR-CCM+ finite element solver. The evaluation of the computational solvers was extended by adding two benchmark cases from the STAR-CCM+ Verification Suite and presented in the Appendix A. The selected cases are: (1) bending of a cantilever beam under external load, and (2) cylindrical shell deformation analysis, known in the literature as ‘Scordelis-Lo roof’. The problems were solved with finite volume, and finite element methods, and the results confirmed the previously discussed findings. The analysis shows that the finite element solver is superior to the finite volume solver in terms of representation of model geometry and estimating the structural behavior of fuel plates. Depending on the ratio of the load to the flexibility of the plate, the finite volume solver can greatly under- or overestimate the structural response if a very carefully selected mesh is not used.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Developing a Prototype Methodology to Rank CO2-EOR Wells and Assess Their Reuse Potential for Geologic Carbon Sequestration

This study presents a prototype methodology for evaluating the reuse potential of Class II CO₂-enhanced oil recovery (CO₂-EOR) wells as Class VI wells for geologic carbon sequestration. The approach focuses on assessing wellbore construction materials—casing, cement, tubing, and packers—based on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Class VI well conversion guidelines. Utilizing Python scripts and JSON representations, the methodology automates checks on digitized Texas Railroad Commission (TRRC) data to rank wells based on regulatory and integrity criteria. Key factors include casing integrity, cementing techniques, tubing compatibility, and packer selection. Due to limitations in digitized data, manual verification is required for certain sections. Future enhancements include incorporating non-digitized data via web scraping and machine learning. This research provides a practical framework for well owners and regulators, supporting informed decision-making for sustainable CO₂ storage.

carbon sequestration↗
DOE OSTI2022

Assessing the Impact of Increased Verification Measurements of Category III/IV Material Receipts

Revisions to the US Department of Energy (DOE) regulations for material control and accountability are expected to dramatically increase the number of verification measurements required upon receipt of nuclear material transfers. Material categories and types that were not routinely quantitatively measured upon receipt (Category III and IV) have been added to the more detailed regulations on shipments and receipts of nuclear materials. In anticipation of this change to the regulations, this project was initiated to identify measurement needs in the DOE complex with respect to performing these additional quantitative measurements. The results of surveying multiple DOE facilities to understand the scope of the impact and the potential measurement capability needs are presented.

Bean, Robert↗
DOE OSTI2020

When Every Drum is a Win - Tackling a Thirty-Five Thousand Drum Legacy - 20064

Cameco Corporation's (Cameco) Port Hope Conversion Facility (PHCF) was previously owned by the federal Crown Corporation, Eldorado Nuclear, which held a significant inventory of legacy waste material at the time Cameco was formed in 1988. As a result, Cameco was granted an allocation of 150,000 cubic metres of space in the Long-Term Waste Management Facility (LTWMF) located in the Municipality of Port Hope (MPH), which opened to the receipt of Cameco material in June 2018. Cameco is currently undertaking a major site cleanup and renewal of its Port Hope Conversion Facility (PHCF) which is known as the Vision in Motion (VIM) project. Over its operating history, Eldorado accumulated an inventory of over 35,000 drums of accumulated waste that was primarily stored at two offside warehouse locations. In 2017 and 2018, the project focused on repackaging two well characterized legacy wastes (magnesium fluoride slag and depleted uranium titanium oxide) from one of the two offsite locations. At the conclusion of this work, approximately 15,000 drums of these wastes had been repackaged and disposed of at the LTWMF. There remained approximately 1000 drums from this location that either could not be repackaged safely or were different waste types and required further verification and/or processing. The buildings at this location were scheduled for demolition in early 2019, which triggered the development of a process for triaging legacy drums in August 2018, which allowed for preparation and shipment of approximately half of these drums to the LTWMF by March 2019, with the remainder moved to the second offsite warehouse location in February 2019 for further characterization which is ongoing. This paper will discuss key lessons learned as the drummed legacy waste disposal inventory has been reduced to approximately half of the initial inventory. This will include the development of an alternate packaging process; prioritization of characterization activities and selection of techniques where minimal inventory information is available; determination of next step(s) for each drum as it is assessed; key safety considerations; and how to make inroads into an overwhelming task while under public and regulatory scrutiny. In a relatively short period of time, significant progress has been made to organize and gather information about the legacy waste, update the inventory records and determine the most appropriate pathways (i.e. LTWMF disposal, disposal at another appropriate facility, site storage until future processing and/or disposal). Since 2017 the volume of the decades-old legacy waste inventory has decreased significantly. With the majority of the known materials safely disposed of at the LTWMF, every drum removed from the endless rows of 20,000 pyramidally-stacked waste drums with limited history that is safely characterized, prepared and shipped is considered a win. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2024

Verification of the PERSENT Software

Ongoing commercial design activities require a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes to be performed. DIF3D is central to this system and substantial work has been done to verify its accuracy on several identified commercial needs. This manuscript details the verification work done on PERSENT which relies upon the DIF3D for its forward and adjoint flux solution.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Verification of the REBUS Software

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. REBUS is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the Triangular-Z and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of REBUS to be verified. Previous work identified the REBUS features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying REBUS’s ability to correctly intepret the user input model, verifying that the features identified yield the intended results, and verifying the correctness of the REBUS output tables. The REBUS software verification relies heavily upon the accuracy of the embedded DIF3D software, the verification of which was completed and documented elsewhere. Given that DIF3D produces an accurate solution, the primary focus of the verification in the REBUS software is to ensure that it properly uses the DIF3D solution and that the depletion system (Bateman equations) are correctly implemented. This manuscript reiterates the verification tasks and displays results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Analytic solutions of the Batemen equations are displayed and the results calculated with REBUS are displayed demonstrating the accuracy. Since coupled Bateman and neutron diffusion/transport solutions are extremely difficult to obtain, much of the focus is placed on how REBUS uses a given DIF3D solution assuming the accuracy of the DIF3D solution. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to the design usage of REBUS, and thus REBUS version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. It is important to note that several outputs of REBUS are identified to be inaccurate, such as burnup in MWD/MT. Most of the relevant ones for VTR are generally accurate with 10-20% errors which is not impactful as all regular REBUS users are aware of this issue and know how to hand calculate the results. The REBUS manual further makes it clear that these values are consistent with the methodology being used by REBUS and thus the “errors” are more of an inconsistent definition with respect to what a user would expect given a definition in literature. Other issues that were identified included unclear documentation and software bugs all of which were inconsequential to the final results.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2022

A Knowledge-based Framework for Building Energy Model Performance Verification

Building energy modeling (BEM) has been widely used by researchers, regulators, and engineers to quantify building energy performance. Quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC) of the model's performance are essential parts of such analysis. Currently, QA/QC is done in a manual and ad-hoc manner, which is tedious, error-prone, and time-consuming when QA/QC a large number of models. To solve these challenges, we propose a a dAta-driveN buIlding perforMance verificATion framEwork (ANIMATE), which conducts automated output-based verification of building operations requirements (especially for time-series output-based verification of control requirements). While this framework was developed for verifying energy model performance, it can be extended for other applications such as BEM software testing and performance verification of real buildings in the field.

Chen, Yan↗
DOE OSTI2020

Verification of the DIF3D Software to Support Fast Reactor Analysis

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the 3D Cartesian, triangular-Z, and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of DIF3D be verified. Previous work identified the DIF3D features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying DIF3D’s ability to correctly translate the user’s model in to DIF3D’s preferred format, verifying that options planned for use have the desired effect, and verifying the correctness of the eigenvalue, fixed-source, forward, and adjoint solvers in DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Since analytic solutions of the neutron diffusion and transport equations are either limited in scope or not possible, multiple tiers of problems unique to each solver and geometry type were implemented. Each of these tiers tests features independent and complementary arguments for why the separate testing of functionalities is acceptable. Finally, this separate testing was also supplemented with a high-level integral check of each the diffusion and transport capabilities and applicable geometries. To accommodate cases which an analytic solution is not feasible, MCNP6.2 was relied upon to provide a higher-order reference solution. This therefore required that the capabilities within MCNP6.2 which were relied upon for this work are also verified in this work. No MCNP discrepancies were noted in this effort. Note that the MCNP6.2 verification included in this work does not stand as a full verification of MCNP6.2, but merely verifies the features used in verifying DIF3D. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to design usage of DIF3D, and thus DIF3D version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. The types of issues that were identified were predominantly in the areas of: unclear documentation, software bugs which were inconsequential to final results, editing options which were ignored in favor of printing more information than requested, bugs in the outputs of intermediate results, or secondary output binary file information which was not present. While not a bug, this verification report also identified that the algorithm used to evaluate the peak fast flux in a nodal transport solution can be quite unreliable due to the polynomial order used and the location of the peak within the mesh. The authors of the report therefore recommend the usage of the EvaluateFlux software (distributed with ARC) as a more robust alternative.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Verification of the DIF3D Software to Support Fast Reactor Analysis

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the 3D Cartesian, triangular-Z, and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of DIF3D be verified. Previous work identified the DIF3D features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying DIF3D’s ability to correctly translate the user’s model in to DIF3D’s preferred format, verifying that options planned for use have the desired effect, and verifying the correctness of the eigenvalue, fixed-source, forward, and adjoint solvers in DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Since analytic solutions of the neutron diffusion and transport equations are either limited in scope or not possible, multiple tiers of problems unique to each solver and geometry type were implemented. Each of these tiers tests features independent and complementary arguments for why the separate testing of functionalities is acceptable. Finally, this separate testing was also supplemented with a high-level integral check of each the diffusion and transport capabilities and applicable geometries. To accommodate cases which an analytic solution is not feasible, MCNP6.2 was relied upon to provide a higher-order reference solution. This therefore required that the capabilities within MCNP6.2 which were relied upon for this work are also verified in this work. No MCNP discrepancies were noted in this effort. Note that the MCNP6.2 verification included in this work does not stand as a full verification of MCNP6.2, but merely verifies the features used in verifying DIF3D. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to design usage of DIF3D, and thus DIF3D version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. As some additional changes have been made to the ARC software since this point all versions between release 3012 and 3266 can be considered verified as version 3253 was used for all updates in this revision. The types of issues that were identified were predominantly in the areas of: unclear documentation, software bugs which were inconsequential to final results, editing options which were ignored in favor of printing more information than requested, bugs in the outputs of intermediate results, or secondary output binary file information which was not present. While not a bug, this verification report also identified that the algorithm used to evaluate the peak fast flux in a nodal transport solution can be quite unreliable due to the methodology used and the location of the peak within the mesh. The authors of the report therefore recommend the usage of the EvaluateFlux software (distributed with ARC) as a more robust alternative noting that DIF3D will properly notify the user when the peaking values it is providing are potentially incorrect.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2023

Verification of the DIF3D Software to Support Fast Reactor Analysis (Rev. 3)

Ongoing design activities at Argonne National Laboratory are requiring a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes be performed. DIF3D is central to this system. The driver for this effort requires the 3D Cartesian, triangular-Z, and hexagonal-Z core geometry options of DIF3D be verified. Previous work identified the DIF3D features required to be verified to support current design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying DIF3D’s ability to correctly translate the user’s model in to DIF3D’s preferred format, verifying that options planned for use have the desired effect, and verifying the correctness of the eigenvalue, fixed-source, forward, and adjoint solvers in DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to the features needed for current design activities. Since analytic solutions of the neutron diffusion and transport equations are either limited in scope or not possible, multiple tiers of problems unique to each solver and geometry type were implemented. Each of these tiers tests features independent and complementary arguments for why the separate testing of functionalities is acceptable. Finally, this separate testing was also supplemented with a high-level integral check of each the diffusion and transport capabilities and applicable geometries. To accommodate cases which an analytic solution is not feasible, MCNP6.2 was relied upon to provide a higher-order reference solution. This therefore required that the capabilities within MCNP6.2 which were relied upon for this work are also verified in this work. No MCNP discrepancies were noted in this effort. Note that the MCNP6.2 verification included in this work does not stand as a full verification of MCNP6.2, but merely verifies the features used in verifying DIF3D. The verification effort identified no issues that are debilitating or otherwise impactful to design usage of DIF3D, and thus DIF3D version 11.0, release 3012 is considered verified. As some additional changes have been made to the ARC software since this point all versions between release 3012 and 3266 can be considered verified as version 3253 was used for all updates in this revision. The types of issues that were identified were predominantly in the areas of: unclear documentation, software bugs which were inconsequential to final results, editing options which were ignored in favor of printing more information than requested, bugs in the outputs of intermediate results, or secondary output binary file information which was not present. While not a bug, this verification report also identified that the algorithm used to evaluate the peak fast flux in a nodal transport solution can be quite unreliable due to the methodology used and the location of the peak within the mesh. The authors of the report therefore recommend the usage of the EvaluateFlux software (distributed with ARC) as a more robust alternative noting that DIF3D will properly notify the user when the peaking values it is providing are potentially incorrect.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Modeling and verification of dynamic field ionization for laser-target interactions

Integrating field ionization models into kinetic plasma simulations is required for a variety of applications, especially when field strengths vary from low to high regimes, such as in laser-target interactions. The introduction of new physics models into kinetic codes requires a rigorous verification of their accuracy through well-defined verification problems. In this work, the field ionization model that has been included in the kinetic plasma code VPIC is presented, along with the detailed approach adopted for its integration. This model includes a comprehensive range of field ionization mechanisms: multiphoton ionization, tunneling ionization, and barrier suppression ionization. New verification problems employed to evaluate the ionization model's fidelity are outlined, and the simulation parameters that affect the accuracy of simulation results are explored. Additionally, this work addresses the impact of field ionization on computational performance.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2021

Transition to Online Cable Insulation Condition Monitoring

Nuclear power plant cables were originally qualified for 40 year life and generally have not required specific test verification to assure service availability through the initial plant qualification period. However, license renewals to 60 and 80 years of operation require a cable aging management program that depends on some form of test and verification to assure fitness for service. Environmental stress (temperature, radiation, chemicals, water, and mechanical) varies dramatically within a nuclear power plant and, in some cases, cables have degraded and required repair or replacement before their qualified end-of-life period. In other cases, cable conditions have been mild and dependable cable performance confirmed to extend well beyond the initial qualified life. Most offline performance-based testing requires cables to be de-coupled and de-energized for specially trained technicians to perform testing. These offline tests constitute an expensive operational burden that limits the economic viability of nuclear power plants. Although initial investment may be higher, new online test practices are emerging as options or complements to offline testing that avoid or minimize the regularly scheduled offline test burden. These online methods include electrical and fiber-optic partial discharge measurement, spread spectrum time or frequency domain reflectometry, distributed temperature profile measurements, and local interdigital capacitance measurement of insulation characteristics. Introduction of these methods must be supported by research to confirm efficacy plus either publicly financed or market driven investment to support the start-up expense of cost-effective instrumentation to monitor cable condition and assure reliable operation. This work summarizes various online cable assessment technologies plus introduces a new cable motor test bed to assess some of these technologies in a controlled test environment.

Glass, Samuel W.↗
DOE OSTI2020

Independent Verification Plan for Clearance of Real Property of the Operation Roller Coaster Sites

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is pursuing release of the Operation Roller Coaster sites under DOE O 458.1, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.” The requirements for clearance and release of property under DOE O 458.1 are implemented when DOE intends to facilitate transfer of responsibility or control of real property from DOE. DOE O 458.1 prescribes that all radiological monitoring or surveys performed in support of clearance of property must use methods such as the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) method or other methods approved by DOE. DOE O 458.1 requires an Independent Verification for the clearance of real property. This Independent Verification Plan outlines the process for validating the method and implementation of the MARRSIM process for release of the Operation Roller Coaster sites.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2021

Verification of Maximal Oxygen Uptake in Active Military Personnel During Treadmill Running

Figueiredo, PS, Looney, DP, Pryor, JL, Doughty, EM, McClung, HL, Vangala, SV, Santee, WR, Beidleman, BA, and Potter, AW. Verification of maximal oxygen uptake in active military personnel during treadmill running. J Strength Cond Res 36(4): 1053–1058, 2022—It is unclear whether verification tests are required to confirm “true” maximal oxygen uptake ($\dot{V}_{o2}$max) in modern warfighter populations. Our study investigated the prevalence of $\dot{V}_{o2}$max attainment in U.S. Army soldiers performing a traditional incremental running test. In addition, we examined the utility of supramaximal verification testing as well as repeated trials for familiarization for accurate $\dot{V}_{o2}$max assessment. Sixteen U.S. Army soldiers (1 woman, 15men; age, 21±2 years; height, 1.73±0.06m; body mass, 71.6±10.1 kg) completed 2 laboratory visits, each with an incremental running test (modified Astrand protocol) and a verification test (110% maximal incremental test speed) on a motorized treadmill. We evaluated $\dot{V}_{o2}$max attainment during incremental testing by testing for the definitive $\dot{V}_{o2}$ plateau using a linear least-squares regression approach. Peak oxygen uptake ($\dot{V}_{o2}$peak) was considered statistically equivalent between tests if the 90% confidence interval around the mean difference was within 62.1 ml·kg -1 ·min -1 . Oxygen uptake plateaus were identified in 14 of 16 volunteers for visit 1 (87.5%) and all 16 volunteers for visit 2 (100%). Peak oxygen uptake was not statistically equivalent, apparent from the mean difference in $\dot{V}_{o2}$peak measures between the incremental test and verification test on visit 1 (2.3 ml·kg -1 ·min -1 , [1.3–3.2]) or visit 2 (1.1 ml·kg -1 ·min -1 [0.2–2.1]). Interestingly, $\dot{V}_{o2}$peak was equivalent, apparent from the mean difference in $\dot{V}_{o2}$peak measures between visits for the incremental tests (0.0ml·kg -1 ·min -1 [-0.8to 0.9]) but not the verification tests (-1.2 ml·kg -1 ·min -1 [-2.2 to -0.2]). Modern U.S. Army soldiers can attain $\dot{V}_{o2}$max by performing a modified Astrand treadmill running test. Additional familiarization and verification tests for confirming $\dot{V}_{o2}$max in healthy active military personnel may be unnecessary.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2025

Using a Large Language Model as a Building Block to Generate Usable Validation and Verification Suite for OpenMP

In the HPC area, both hardware and software move quickly. Often new hardware is developed and deployed, the corresponding software stack, including compilers and other tools, are under active development while leading edge software developers are working to port and tune their applications, all at the same time. While the software ecosystem is in flux, one of the key challenges for users is obtaining insight into the state of implementation of key features in the programming languages and models their applications are using – whether they have been implemented, and whether the implementation conforms to the specification, especially for newly implemented features (less tested by widespread use). OpenMP is one of the most prominent shared memory programming models used for on-node programming in HPC. With the shift towards accelerators (such as GPUs and FPGAs) and heterogeneous programming OpenMP features are getting more complex. It is natural to ask whether generative AI approaches, and large language models (LLMs) in particular, can help in producing validation and verification test suites to allow users better and faster insights into the availability and correctness of OpenMP features of interest. In this work, we explore the use of ChatGPT-4 to generate a suite of tests for OpenMP features. We have chosen a set of directives and clauses, a total of 78 combinations, which first appeared in OpenMP 3.0 (released in May 2008) but are also relevant for accelerators. We prompted ChatGPT to generate tests in the C and Fortran languages, for both host (CPU) and device (accelerator). On the Summit super-computer using the GNU implementation, we found that, of the 78 generated tests 67 C tests and 43 Fortran tests compiled successfully and fewer than those executed to completion. On further analysis we show that not all generated tests are valid. We document the process, results, and provide detailed analysis regarding the quality of tests generated. With the aim of providing input to a production quality validation and verification suite, we manually implement the corrections required to make the tests valid according to the current OpenMP specification. We quantify this effort as small, medium, or large, and record the lines of code changed to correct the invalid tests. With the corrected tests we validate recent implementations from HPE, AMD, and GNU on the Frontier supercomputer. Our experiment and subsequent analysis show that although LLMs are capable of producing HPC specific codes, they are limited by their understanding of the deeper semantics and restrictions of programming models such as OpenMP. Unsurprisingly more commonly used features have better support, while some OpenMP 3.0 directives such as sections and tasking are not universally supported on accelerators. We demonstrate that successful compilation and execution to completion are inadequate metrics for evaluating generated code and that, at this time, commodity LLMs require expert intervention for code verification. This points to gaps in the training data that is currently available for HPC. We demonstrate that with "small" effort 37% of generated invalid C tests and 63% of generated invalid Fortran tests could be corrected. This improves productivity of test generation as we circumvent writing from scratch and the common programming errors associated with it.

Pophale, Swaroop [ORNL] (ORCID:0000000185446367)↗
DOE OSTI2025

Distinguishing fissile uranium isotopes using an active well neutron coincidence counter

Proposed thorium-based nuclear fuel cycles are likely to require quantification and verification of 233 U within nuclear material. Because of their similar fission cross sections, active neutron nondestructive assay (NDA) systems may respond similarly to 233 U and 235 U. Traditional safeguards equipment has been optimized for 235 U and 238 U quantification associated with conventional uranium/plutonium fuel cycles and may not be directly applicable to 233 U quantification when mixed with other actinides. This work used models of the large volume active well coincidence counter (LV-AWCC) at Oak Ridge National Laboratory to evaluate the performance of this neutron NDA system to differentiate fissile uranium isotopes. The models were developed to simulate NDA system performance in response to a number of triangular radiation signature training device sources within the central cavity or well. This work predicted that the LV-AWCC can effectively differentiate 233 U from 235 U in certain modes of operation. In active mode, the LV-AWCC with the cadmium liner results in different doubles count rates between the fissile isotopes for a given fissile uranium mass. Without the cadmium liner, the uranium isotopes provide a statistically indistinguishable doubles count rate response for the fissile masses considered in this work (up to approximately 150 g). The cadmium liner serves to harden the neutron interrogation spectrum, which better exploits the notable difference in the 233 U and 235 U fission cross sections at approximately 1 eV. In passive mode, the two fissile isotopes exhibit different doubles and singles count rates regardless of liner presence because the passive source strength of 233 U is approximately 2 orders of magnitude stronger than that of 235 U due to the shorter half-life and correspondingly higher (α, n) yield. We conclude that using neutron interrogation in the LV-AWCC, two measurements are needed to quantify 233 U content in mixed uranium items. The first measurement is used to determine the total fissile uranium mass using a mode that cannot distinguish fissile isotopes (i.e., where a similar response is observed for both fissile uranium isotopes such as active doubles without cadmium or using a thermal neutron interrogation source). In conclusion, the second measurement is used to determine the 233 U content by using a differentiating technique (e.g., passive doubles, passive doubles to singles ratio, active doubles with cadmium).

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
DOE OSTI2021

Fully Implicit Monte Carlo (FIMC) (September 2019-September 2020 Progress Report)

This research is focused on applying the NLem method to the full thermal radiative transfer (TRT) equations in the context of a Monte Carlo solution strategy. A framework has been developed for obtaining a solution to the TRT equations using the nonlinear elimination method (NLem) method. Current efforts are focused of the development and verification of the required Monte Carlo algorithm, diffusion algorithm, and material energy solver. Once all three pieces have been verified, the algorithms will then be coupled into a fully functioning method for applying NLem to the TRT equations.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗