SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “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.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3

All sources NASA NTRS DOE OSTI

DOE OSTI2020

Sierra/SolidMechanics Verification Report

This document presents the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) verification plan. This plan centers on the tests in the Sierra/SM verification test suite, a subset of which are documented in the Sierra/SM Verification Tests Manual. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM code suite, and the results of the tests are checked against analytic solutions. For each of the tests presented in the Verification Tests Manual, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This verification plan discusses these various types of tests and what they mean for Sierra/SM verification. Many other activities also contribute to Sierra/SM quality. These address code and solution quality and range from low-level unit tests, run nightly, up to full-fidelity acceptance tests, used to verify release stability. This acceptance test suite checks that new versions of Sierra/SM continue to yield the same answers for high-resolution analyst problems. Further code quality measures include an extensive suite of intermediate-size regression tests and automated nightly code quality checks. While these additional activities do not fall under a strict definition of verification, they greatly add to the quality, stability, and reliability of Sierra/SM, and are discussed here as well.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

FY2021 Improvements to the New CTH Code Verification & Validation Test Suite

Over the past few years, the CTH multiphysics hydrocode has overhauled its software quality and testing processes, implementing current best practices in software quality and building a robust V&V test suite comprised of traditional hydrocode verification problems, including ASC Tri-Lab Test Suite and Enhanced Tri-Lab Test Suite problems, as well as validation problems for some of CTH’s most frequently used equations of state, materials models, and other key capabilities. Substantial progress towards building this new test suite was made in FY19 and FY20. In FY21, the test suite has been expanded to include verification and validation tests of the Steinberg-Guinan-Lund (ST) viscoplastic model and the Johnson Cook (JFRAC) fracture model. Additionally, two new verification tests were added, covering hydrodynamics and high explosive (HE) modeling capabilities: the Kidder Gaussian density problem and the Escape of HE Products (EHEP) problem from the Tri-Lab Test Suite. This report discusses each of these test problems in detail. Verification test results are compared to analytic solutions. Validation test results are compared to experimental data. Wherever possible, convergence or mesh refinement studies are included. Additionally, while implementing the Kidder verification problem, a bug was identified that affects the use of tables to initialize pressure or density in 1D or 2D calculations. A brief discussion of the bug and its fix is included. CTH demonstrates good performance overall on the new test suite problems. Simulation results showed good agreement with analytic solutions for the Kidder problem, with convergence rates ranging between 1.8 and sub-linear, and relatively good agreement for the EHEP problem, though convergence rates for pressure and density were nearly 0. The ST and JFRAC strain rate loading verification tests show good agreement with analytic solutions. Likewise, CTH simulation results show good agreement with experimental validation data, including Taylor rod impact testing, for the materials tested. Future V&V work will focus on adding 2D and 3D versions of existing verification tests as well as adding validation tests of other frequently used capabilities such as other fracture models.

42 ENGINEERING↗

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)

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Expanded verification and validation studies of hypersonic aerodynamics with multiple physics-fidelity models

Hypersonic aerothermodynamics is an important domain of modern multiphysics simulation. The Multi-Fidelity Toolkit is a simulation tool being developed at Sandia National Laboratories to predict aerodynamic properties for compressible flows from a range of physics fidelities and computational speeds. These models include the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, the Euler equations with momentum-energy integral technique (MEIT), and modified Newtonian aerodynamics with flat-plate boundary layer (MNA+FPBL) equations, and they can be invoked independently or coupled with hierarchical Kriging to interpolate between high-fidelity simulations using lower-fidelity data. However, as with any new simulation capability, verification and validation are necessary to gather credibility evidence. This work describes formal code- and solution-verification activities, as well as model validation with uncertainty considerations. Code verification activities on the MNA+FPBL model build on previous work by focusing on the viscous portion of the model. Viscous quantities of interest are compared against those from an analytical solution for flat-plate, inclined-plate, and cone geometries. The code verification methodology for the MEIT model is also presented. Test setup and results of code verification tests on the laminar and turbulent models within MEIT are shown. Solution-verification activities include grid-refinement studies on simulations that model the HIFiRE-1 wind tunnel experiments. These experiments are used for validation of all model fidelities. A thorough validation comparison with prediction error and uncertainty is also presented. Three additional HIFiRE-1 experimental runs are simulated in this study, and the solution verification and validation work examines the effects of the associated parameter changes on model performance. Finally, a study is presented that compares the computational costs and fidelities from each of the different models.

42 ENGINEERING↗

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↗

NASA NTRS1970

Study of techniques for redundancy verification without disrupting systems, phases 1-3

The problem of verifying the operational integrity of redundant equipment and the impact of a requirement for verification on such equipment are considered. Redundant circuits are examined and the characteristics which determine adaptability to verification are identified. Mutually exclusive and exhaustive categories for verification approaches are established. The range of applicability of these techniques is defined in terms of signal characteristics and redundancy features. Verification approaches are discussed and a methodology for the design of redundancy verification is developed. A case study is presented which involves the design of a verification system for a hypothetical communications system. Design criteria for redundant equipment are presented. Recommendations for the development of technological areas pertinent to the goal of increased verification capabilities are given.

Source record↗

NASA NTRS1993

Formal verification of algorithms for critical systems

We describe our experience with formal, machine-checked verification of algorithms for critical applications, concentrating on a Byzantine fault-tolerant algorithm for synchronizing the clocks in the replicated computers of a digital flight control system. First, we explain the problems encountered in unsynchronized systems and the necessity, and criticality, of fault-tolerant synchronization. We give an overview of one such algorithm, and of the arguments for its correctness. Next, we describe a verification of the algorithm that we performed using our EHDM system for formal specification and verification. We indicate the errors we found in the published analysis of the algorithm, and other benefits that we derived from the verification. Based on our experience, we derive some key requirements for a formal specification and verification system adequate to the task of verifying algorithms of the type considered. Finally, we summarize our conclusions regarding the benefits of formal verification in this domain, and the capabilities required of verification systems in order to realize those benefits.

Rushby, John M.↗

NASA NTRS1995

The formal verification used for the AAMP5 and AAMP-FV

The main goal of the project was two-fold: First, to investigate the feasibility of formally specifying and verifying a complex commercial microprocessor that was not expressly designed for formal verification. Second, to explore effective ways to transfer the technology to an industrial setting. The choice of the AAMP5 satisfied the first goal since the AAMP5 was not designed for formal verification, but to provide a more than threefold performance improvement while remaining object-code-compatible with the earlier AAMP2, which is used in numerous avionics applications, including the Boeing 737, 747, 757, and 767. To satisfy the technology transfer objective, we had to develop a suitable verification methodology and a formal infrastructure to make the technology usable by practicing engineers. This infrastructure includes techniques for decomposing the microcompressor verification problem into a st of verification conditions that the engineers can formulate and strategies to automate the proof of the verification conditions. The development of the infrastructure was one of the key accomplishments of the project. Most of the infrastructure and methodology are general enough to be reused for other microprocessors, certainly in the verification of another member of the AAMP family. This methodology was used to formally specify the entire microarchitecture and more than half of the instruction set and to verify a core set of eleven AAMP5 instructions representative of several instruction classes. However, the methodology and the formal machinery developed are adequate to cover most of the remaining AAMP5 instructions. Although PVS was the vehicle of the experiment, the methodology is applicable to other sufficiently powerful theorem provers.

Srivas, Mandayam↗

NASA NTRS2001

Requirements, Verification, and Compliance (RVC) Database Tool

This paper describes the development, design, and implementation of the Requirements, Verification, and Compliance (RVC) database used on the International Space Welding Experiment (ISWE) project managed at Marshall Space Flight Center. The RVC is a systems engineer's tool for automating and managing the following information: requirements; requirements traceability; verification requirements; verification planning; verification success criteria; and compliance status. This information normally contained within documents (e.g. specifications, plans) is contained in an electronic database that allows the project team members to access, query, and status the requirements, verification, and compliance information from their individual desktop computers. Using commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) database software that contains networking capabilities, the RVC was developed not only with cost savings in mind but primarily for the purpose of providing a more efficient and effective automated method of maintaining and distributing the systems engineering information. In addition, the RVC approach provides the systems engineer the capability to develop and tailor various reports containing the requirements, verification, and compliance information that meets the needs of the project team members. The automated approach of the RVC for capturing and distributing the information improves the productivity of the systems engineer by allowing that person to concentrate more on the job of developing good requirements and verification programs and not on the effort of being a "document developer".

Rainwater, Neil E., II↗

NASA NTRS1998

Evaluation of the 29-km Eta Model: Objective Verification at Three Selected Stations - Part 1

This paper describes an objective verification of the National Centers for Environmental Prediction (NCEP) 29-km eta model from May 1996 through January 1998. The evaluation was designed to assess the model's surface and upper-air point forecast accuracy at three selected locations during separate warm (May - August) and cool (October - January) season periods. In order to enhance sample sizes available for statistical calculations, the objective verification includes two consecutive warm and cool season periods. Systematic model deficiencies comprise the larger portion of the total error in most of the surface forecast variables that were evaluated. The error characteristics for both surface and upper-air forecasts vary widely by parameter, season, and station location. At upper levels, a few characteristic biases are identified. Overall however, the upper-level errors are more nonsystematic in nature and could be explained partly by observational measurement uncertainty. With a few exceptions, the upper-air results also indicate that 24-h model error growth is not statistically significant. In February and August 1997, NCEP implemented upgrades to the eta model's physical parameterizations that were designed to change some of the model's error characteristics near the surface. The results shown in this paper indicate that these upgrades led to identifiable and statistically significant changes in forecast accuracy for selected surface parameters. While some of the changes were expected, others were not consistent with the intent of the model updates and further emphasize the need for ongoing sensitivity studies and localized statistical verification efforts. Objective verification of point forecasts is a stringent measure of model performance, but when used alone, is not enough to quantify the overall value that model guidance may add to the forecast process. Therefore, results from a subjective verification of the meso-eta model over the Florida peninsula are discussed in the companion paper by Manobianco and Nutter. Overall verification results presented here and in part two should establish a reasonable benchmark from which model users and developers may pursue the ongoing eta model verification strategies in the future.

Nutter, Paul A.↗

NASA NTRS2008

Improved Verification for Aerospace Systems

Aerospace systems are subject to many stringent performance requirements to be verified with low risk. This report investigates verification planning using conditional approaches vice the standard classical statistical methods, and usage of historical surrogate data for requirement validation and in verification planning. The example used in this report to illustrate the results of these investigations is a proposed mission assurance requirement with the concomitant maximum acceptable verification risk for the NASA Constellation Program Orion Launch Abort System (LAS). This report demonstrates the following improvements: 1) verification planning using conditional approaches vice classical statistical methods results in plans that are more achievable and feasible; 2) historical surrogate data can be used to bound validation of performance requirements; and, 3) incorporation of historical surrogate data in verification planning using conditional approaches produces even less costly and more reasonable verification plans. The procedures presented in this report may produce similar improvements and cost savings in verification for any stringent performance requirement for an aerospace system.

Powell, Mark A.↗

DOE OSTI2021

Robust verification of stochastic simulation codes

We introduce a robust verification tool for computational codes, which we call Stochastic Robust Extrapolation based Error Quantification (StREEQ). Unlike the prevalent Grid Convergence Index (GCI) [1] method, our approach is suitable for both stochastic and deterministic computational codes and is generalizable to any number of discretization variables. Building on ideas introduced in the Robust Verification [2] approach, we estimate the converged solution and orders of convergence with uncertainty using multiple fits of a discretization error model. In contrast to Robust Verification, we perform these fits to many bootstrap samples yielding a larger set of predictions with smoother statistics. Here, bootstrap resampling is performed on the lack-of-fit errors for deterministic code responses, and directly on the noisy data set for stochastic responses. This approach lends a degree of robustness to the overall results, capable of yielding precise verification results for sufficiently resolved data sets, and appropriately expanding the uncertainty when the data set does not support a precise result. For stochastic responses, a credibility assessment is also performed to give the analyst an indication of the trustworthiness of the results. Furthermore, this approach is suitable for both code and solution verification, and is particularly useful for solution verification of high-consequence simulations..

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2020

Technical Cooperation on Verification and its Role in Trust Building

The purpose of this paper is twofold. First, it will demonstrate how technical cooperation on verification contributed to the softening of tensions and the improvement of trust between the United States and the Soviet Union. Because the scope of this endeavor is too broad to be adequately considered in the length of this work, the primary focus will be on the private and public partnerships on seismic and hydroacoustic test ban treaty verification that were forged between Soviet and American scientists from 1986-1988. In order to orient the analysis within the political-scientific landscape of the time, the discussion begins with a brief description of the arms control landscape in the early 1980s, including both the stances of the Reagan and Gorbachev administrations vis a vis nuclear test ban verification. The section concludes with an analysis of the two primary US-USSR collaborative projects in this key sphere – the test ban verification project conducted by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Soviet Academy of Sciences (SAS) and the Joint Verification Experiment (JVE) between the US and Soviet National Laboratories.

98 NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT, SAFEGUARDS, AND PHYSICAL P↗

NASA NTRS2007

Survey of Product-line Verification and Validation Techniques

This report presents the results from the first task of the SARP Center Initiative, 'Product Line Verification of Safety-Critical Software.' Task 1 is a literature survey of available techniques for product line verification and validation. Section 1 of the report provides an introduction to product lines and motivates the survey of verification techniques. It describes what is reused in product-line engineering and explains the goal of verifiable conformance of the developed system to its product-line specifications. Section 2 of the report describes six lifecycle steps in product-line verification and validation. This description is based on, and refers to, the best practices extracted from the readings. It ends with a list of verification challenges for NASA product lines (2.7) and verification enablers for NASA product lines (2.8) derived from the survey. Section 3 provides resource lists of related conferences, workshops, industrial and defense industry experiences and case studies of product lines, and academic/industrial consortiums. Section 4 is a bibliography of papers and tutorials with annotated entries for relevant papers not previously discussed in sections 2 or 3.

testing↗

NASA NTRS2013

Verification and Validation Studies for the LAVA CFD Solver

The verification and validation of the Launch Ascent and Vehicle Aerodynamics (LAVA) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) solver is presented. A modern strategy for verification and validation is described incorporating verification tests, validation benchmarks, continuous integration and version control methods for automated testing in a collaborative development environment. The purpose of the approach is to integrate the verification and validation process into the development of the solver and improve productivity. This paper uses the Method of Manufactured Solutions (MMS) for the verification of 2D Euler equations, 3D Navier-Stokes equations as well as turbulence models. A method for systematic refinement of unstructured grids is also presented. Verification using inviscid vortex propagation and flow over a flat plate is highlighted. Simulation results using laminar and turbulent flow past a NACA 0012 airfoil and ONERA M6 wing are validated against experimental and numerical data.

Validation↗

NASA NTRS2015

Survey of Verification and Validation Techniques for Small Satellite Software Development

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview of the current trends and practices in small-satellite software verification and validation. This document is not intended to promote a specific software assurance method. Rather, it seeks to present an unbiased survey of software assurance methods used to verify and validate small satellite software and to make mention of the benefits and value of each approach. These methods include simulation and testing, verification and validation with model-based design, formal methods, and fault-tolerant software design with run-time monitoring. Although the literature reveals that simulation and testing has by far the longest legacy, model-based design methods are proving to be useful for software verification and validation. Some work in formal methods, though not widely used for any satellites, may offer new ways to improve small satellite software verification and validation. These methods need to be further advanced to deal with the state explosion problem and to make them more usable by small-satellite software engineers to be regularly applied to software verification. Last, it is explained how run-time monitoring, combined with fault-tolerant software design methods, provides an important means to detect and correct software errors that escape the verification process or those errors that are produced after launch through the effects of ionizing radiation.

Small Satellite Technology↗

DOE OSTI2020

Improvements to the New CTH Code Verification & Validation Test Suite (FY2020)

The CTH multiphysics hydrocode, which is used for a wide range of important calculations, has undertaken in recent years to overhaul its software quality and testing processes. A key part of this effort entailed building a new, robust V&V test suite made up of traditional hydrocode verification problems, such as those listed in the ASC Tri-Lab Test Suite and the Enhanced Tri-Lab Test Suite, as well as validation problems for some of CTHs most frequently used equations of state, materials models, and other key capabilities. Substantial progress towards this goal was made in FY19. In FY20, this test suite has been expanded to include verification and validation tests of the Sesame and JWL equation of state models as well as the Mader verification problem from the Tri-Lab Test Suite and the Blake verification problem - a linear elastic analog to the Hunter problem from the Enhanced Tri-Lab Test Suite. This report documents CTH performance on the new test suite problems. Verification test results are compared to analytic solutions and, for most tests, convergence results are presented. Validation test results are compared to experimental data and mesh refinement studies are included. CTH performs well overall on the new test problems. Convergence rates for the Blake and Mader problems are comparable to those for similar ASC codes. The JWL and Sesame verification tests show good agreement with analytic solutions. Likewise, CTH simulation results show good agreement with experimental validation data for the Sesame and JWL equations of state for the materials tested. Future V&V work will focus on adding tests for other key capabilities like fracture and high explosive models.

71 CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM MECHANICS, GENERAL PHYSIC↗