Trusting Embedded Hardware and Software in Treaty Verification Systems.
Abstract not provided.
Brotz, Jay Kristoffer↗
SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “Software 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.
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↗
Verification of the PERSENT Software
Ongoing commercial design activities require a thorough verification of the Argonne Reactor Computation codes 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 code for its forward and adjoint flux solution. Previous work identified the PERSENT features required to be verified to support commercial design activities, features of which are generally applicable to hexagonal-Z fast reactor designs. The scope of this verification effort includes verifying PERSENT’s ability to correctly calculate four key quantities: perturbation worth distributions, kinetics parameters, sensitivity coefficients, and cross section uncertainty quantification. This manuscript provides the verification tasks and their results with respect to these quantities needed for commercial design activities. For the perturbation worth distributions, hand calculations are deployed to verify the PERSENT calculated results. Similarly, hand calculation of the PERSENT computed kinetics parameters is also used to verify the PERSENT results. In both of these, the input to PERSENT is manipulated to ensure the hand calculation exactly matches the equations PERSENT is calculating. The sensitivity coefficients involve calculating the derivatives of a parameter (such as reactivity worth), with respect to the cross section data. Direct finite difference calculations with DIF3D are used to verify the PERSENT calculated results. For the uncertainty quantification, manufactured input to PERSENT is used to allow an exact hand calculation to reproduce the PERSENT calculated results. The work detailed in this report verified that significant issues were identified for earlier versions of PERSENT for sensitivity coefficients which were corrected in this work and thus version 12.1.0 of PERSENT must be used to reproduce all of the verified work in this report.
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
A Formalization of Core Why3 in Coq
Intermediate verification languages like Why3 and Boogie have made it much easier to build program verifiers, transforming the process into a logic compilation problem rather than a proof automation one. Why3 in particular implements a rich logic for program specification with polymorphism, algebraic data types, recursive functions and predicates, and inductive predicates; it translates this logic to over a dozen solvers and proof assistants. Accordingly, it serves as a backend for many tools, including Frama-C, EasyCrypt, and GNATProve for Ada SPARK. But how can we be sure that these tools are correct? The alternate foundational approach, taken by tools like VST and CakeML, provides strong guarantees by implementing the entire toolchain in a proof assistant, but these tools are harder to build and cannot directly take advantage of SMT solver automation. As a first step toward enabling automated tools with similar foundational guarantees, we give a formal semantics in Coq for the logic fragment of Why3. We show that our semantics are useful by giving a correct-by-construction natural deduction proof system for this logic, using this proof system to verify parts of Why3's standard library, and proving sound two of Why3's transformations used to convert terms and formulas into the simpler logics supported by the backend solvers.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
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↗
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↗
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↗
Fiscal Year 2023 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software
The Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) software suite [1-17] has been developed by Argonne researchers for fast reactor design and analysis since the 1970s. With the ARC software suite, a user can quickly build a model of a proposed or existing fast spectrum reactor and carry out fuel cycle, nominal thermal analysis and flow requirements, and assess, as is appropriate, whether the core design and constraint system yield an acceptable mechanical behavior. For transient reactor analysis with SAS4A [18], the ARC software suite can be used to generate reactivity coefficients and kinetics parameters at any modeled fuel cycle time point which forms part of the input to SAS4A. The ARC suite was consistently being developed until the 1990s and followed a software QA program which was an appropriate standard for the time. In the 1990s, the DOE funding to fast reactor research and development was all but eliminated and the ARC software was put into maintenance mode. In the early 2000s, the software quality assurance (SQA) program for ARC was still in place to define an official version, but by 2005 it all but was abandoned as there were insufficient staff to fill the work roles. Since 2005, there has been a considerable increase in research and design work on fast spectrum reactors. The ARC software as a whole has since been exported to many universities and commercial companies and ANL support has been given to the various projects over the years [19-23]. Further, MC 2 -3, PERSENT, and DASSH were all developed after 2005 without any adherence to a software standard. In recent time, the DOE VTR project [22] paid for verification work to be done on the ARC software as part of the goal of making it NQA-1 complaint. The VTR project was not considered the appropriate pathway to fund and maintain a SQA program for the ARC software and while software developments (DASSH) were made and several manuals were updated and software verification work was carried out, the ARC software is not NQA-1 compliant. More recently the Advanced Reactor Development Program (ARDP [23]) has funded the creation of manuals for some ARC utility programs and funded additional software verification work on DIF3D [6, 7] and MC 2 -3 [2-5] for the purpose of commercial grade dedication. Because of the VTR and ARDP projects, software verification work was completed on MC 2 -3 and DIF3D, and detailed reports were created for each piece of software, which discuss the inputs and outputs from the codes that are covered by the verification work and link various analytic, code-to-code, and hand calculation based verification work presented in the report with verification test problems provided with the software. This is a key part of the commercial grade dedication work and constitutes the bulk of the cost to get the ARC software to commercial grade. The ARC software suite is a valuable asset as a fast reactor design and analysis tool set that has been reasonably well verified and validated with various fast reactor benchmark problems and experiments over decades. Some or all of the ARC software suite has been utilized for designing the IFR [20], PGSFR [21], VTR [22], and Natrium [23] reactors and we can expect it to continue to be used for advanced fast reactor design and/or confirmatory calculation purposes in the future. Due to increased interest by commercial companies and regulatory bodies, it is becoming more important to make the ARC software suite complete and ready-to-use in terms of its SQA pedigree and commercial grade dedication needs. This report discusses the achievements made towards building a new SQA program for the ARC software and dealing with outstanding identified QA gaps.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
Computational Analysis of Coupled Geoscience Processes in Fractured and Deformable Media
Prediction of flow, transport, and deformation in fractured and porous media is critical to improving our scientific understanding of coupled thermal-hydrological-mechanical processes related to subsurface energy storage and recovery, nonproliferation, and nuclear waste storage. Especially, earth rock response to changes in pressure and stress has remained a critically challenging task. In this work, we advance computational capabilities for coupled processes in fractured and porous media using Sandia Sierra Multiphysics software through verification and validation problems such as poro-elasticity, elasto-plasticity and thermo-poroelasticity. We apply Sierra software for geologic carbon storage, fluid injection/extraction, and enhanced geothermal systems. We also significantly improve machine learning approaches through latent space and self-supervised learning. Additionally, we develop new experimental technique for evaluating dynamics of compacted soils at an intermediate scale. Overall, this project will enable us to systematically measure and control the earth system response to changes in stress and pressure due to subsurface energy activities.
58 GEOSCIENCES↗
FPDetect: Efficient Reasoning About Stencil Programs Using Selective Direct Evaluation
We present FPDetect, a low-overhead approach for detecting logical errors and soft errors affecting stencil computations without generating false positives. We develop an offline analysis that tightly estimates the number of floating-point bits preserved across stencil applications. This estimate rigorously bounds the values expected in the data space of the computation. Violations of this bound can be attributed with certainty to errors. FPDetect helps synthesize error detectors customized for user-specified levels of accuracy and coverage. FPDetect also enables overhead reduction techniques based on deploying these detectors coarsely in space and time. Experimental evaluations demonstrate the practicality of our approach.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
Software Testing - Auditing Software Quality Assurance Plans
This report is an assurance plan for the software being audited for quality.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
The ERSDT Software Quality Assurance Plan Practices and Development Environment Setup for RASCAL 5
This document includes the information pertaining to the practices of the Emergency Response Software Development Team (ERSDT) for the RASCAL software project. The content includes information regarding: 1) Software Quality Assurance. 2) Project Management. 3) Configuration Management. 4) Development Standards. 5) Third-Party Software. 6) Verification and Validation. The information contained in this report is considered living documentation. The information contained in this report was assembled from multiple documents and content management systems.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
Verification and Validation Tests of the Gamma Library of the ARC Software Package (Rev.1)
As part of the verification and validation (V&V) efforts of the Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) software system to support the Versatile Test Reactor (VTR) project of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), work has been performed to verify and validate the gamma (or photon) library of the multigroup cross section generation code MC 2 -3 of the ARC system, which is the essential part of the coupled neutron and gamma heating calculations to determine the heat generation rate or power distribution in the core. This V&V study was carried out in three steps: 1) review of the procedures and utility programs for generating the MC 2 -3 gamma library, 2) verification tests of cross sections and KERMA factors by comparing the total heat generation rate of coupled neutron and gamma calculation with that obtained with reaction Q values under the assumption of local gamma energy deposition and by comparing the prompt heat generation rate with that calculated with the MCNP6.2 code, and 3) validation tests of cross sections and KERMA factors by analyzing the ZPPR-15D gamma dose data measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD).
22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
Multi-Rigor Agile Verification and Rapid Prototyping for Formally Verified Software
We propose a novel approach to developing formally verified systems through Multi-rigor Agile Verification. Multi-rigor Agile Verification is rooted in the hypothesis of Rigor Independence, that a system’s specification and verification architecture depend primarily on the system requirements to be verified, and they depend very little on the rigor level of the methods used to verify those requirements. Due to its iterative nature, Multi-rigor Agile Verification promises to mitigate many of the high upfront design costs experienced by formally verified systems and to deliver a better-architected, and thus better-trusted, system in the end. We then discuss the tooling needed to perform Multi-rigor Agile Verification and go in depth to build one of those tools, which directly generates executable prototype code from declarative formal specifications using the Maude rewrite-logic framework.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
SU-F-I-11: Software Development for 4D-CBCT Research of Real-Time-Image Gated Spot Scanning Proton Therapy
Purpose: To acquire correct information for inside the body in patient positioning of Real-time-image Gated spot scanning Proton Therapy (RGPT), utilization of tomographic image at exhale phase of patient respiration obtained from 4-dimensional Cone beam CT (4D-CBCT) has been desired. We developed software named “Image Analysis Platform” for 4D-CBCT researches which has technique to segment projection-images based on 3D marker position in the body. The 3D marker position can be obtained by using two axes CBCT system at Hokkaido University Hospital Proton Therapy Center. Performance verification of the software was implemented. Methods: The software calculates 3D marker position retrospectively by using matching positions on pair projection-images obtained by two axes fluoroscopy mode of CBCT system. Log data of 3D marker tracking are outputted after the tracking. By linking the Log data and gantry-angle file of projection-image, all projection-images are equally segmented to spatial five-phases according to marker 3D position of SI direction and saved to specified phase folder. Segmented projection-images are used for CBCT reconstruction of each phase. As performance verification of the software, test of segmented projection-images was implemented for sample CT phantom (Catphan) image acquired by two axes fluoroscopy mode of CBCT. Dummy marker was added on the images. Motion of the marker was modeled to move in 3D space. Motion type of marker is sin4 wave function has amplitude 10.0 mm/5.0 mm/0 mm, cycle 4 s/4 s/0 s for SI/AP/RL direction. Results: The marker was tracked within 0.58 mm accuracy in 3D for all images, and it was confirmed that all projection-images were segmented and saved to each phase folder correctly. Conclusion: We developed software for 4D-CBCT research which can segment projection-image based on 3D marker position. It will be helpful to create high quality of 4D-CBCT reconstruction image for RGPT.
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
Resilience Through Data-Driven, Intelligent Designed Control: A Formal Methods Approach
The PNNL and GTRI team developed a strategy to integrate temporal logic rule specification for detection of cyber-intrusion in the source code and control algorithms of CPS using advanced cyber-data. The GTRI team utilized its capabilities in rule synthesis and temporal logic specifications for software assurance and verification to detect and predict impact of cyber-intrusions and malware in the computational and control algorithms of cyber-physical systems. The team also developed a testing and verification approach that could be used to validate the suggested approach against a realistic use-case CPS showcasing improvements in system impact prediction performance. Temporal logic offers a compact expression of events in absolute and relative time and has a formalized translation to state machines. As such, temporal logic rules can feasibly be synthesized to any system as a rule engine, with the process being formally verified to be correct. The goal here is to utilize temporal logic rules to detect cyber-attacks and manipulations in the computational algorithms and provide real-time software assurance and verification guarantees.
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
SAS4A/SASSYS-1 Commercial Grade Dedication Example Report for a Generic Sodium Pool-Type Fast Reactor Application
In the U.S., a key component of the commercialization of advanced reactors is completion of a license application, which must ultimately be approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The approval of the license application by the NRC is contingent on satisfactory demonstration of the design basis and the response of the advanced reactor design to transient and accident scenarios using accepted codes and methods. This report describes the qualification and dedication requirements that the advanced reactor safety analysis system software SAS4A/SASSYS-1 are expected to need to fulfill to be used for sodium-cooled pool-type fast reactor licensing. The qualification and dedication requirements are identified through performance critical characteristics and evaluation model acceptance criteria representative of the advanced reactor design considered for licensing. This document captures, additionally, the verification process developed to demonstrate that the software fulfills the qualification and dedication requirements for a generic sodium-cooled pool-type fast reactor as part of the commercial grade dedication process. Like most software that has primarily existed in the research and development space, the most significant challenge facing SAS4A/SASSYS-1 for use in a licensing framework is the availability of a documentation basis describing the code pedigree. SAS4A/SASSYS-1 has been used for licensing of the fast flux test facility (FFTF) and the JOYO sodium-cooled fast reactor in Japan, as well as the design of the CRBR Plant. However, the historical verification and validation (V&V) activities supporting SAS4A/SASSYS-1 development do not align with modern software quality assurance (SQA) and V&V requirements. Two approaches to use of SAS4A/SASSYS-1 in a commercial licensing framework have been identified: commercial-grade dedication (CGD) and software qualification. The methods and requirements prescribed in the ASME NQA-1-2008/2009 Standard and Regulatory Guide 1.203 on the evaluation model development and assessment process (EMDAP) have been used as guidance to define the CGD and qualification processes, respectively. A qualification and dedication requirements matrix has been developed which utilizes fundamental software verification. In this process, software verification is defined as a software quality process aimed at defining software requirement specifications, developing software design documentation, and performing and documenting acceptance testing of the code against requirements. A key element of software qualification and dedication includes determination of software acceptance with respect to critical characteristics relevant to the functional requirements of the software. To assist with identification of cross-cutting transient phenomena and functional requirements, domestic SFR vendor designs have been reviewed to identify a reference SFR design. For this report, the reference design is defined as a pool-type reactor with metal alloy fuel, a liquid-metal intermediate heat transport system, and passive decay heat rejection systems. Given this reference, a series of high-level cross-cutting phenomena was identified for a general class of single-fault undercooling or reactivity insertion transients that scopes the design basis space, with the goal of assisting with prioritization of documentation development efforts for key transient models in SAS: 1) Reactivity feedback response prior to scram; 2) System-wide thermal inertia; 3) Transition in natural circulation flow regime in heat removal systems; 4) Decay heat generation; 5) Steady-state fuel characterization; 5) Clad/fuel behavior at elevated temperatures; 6) Point kinetics and decay heat; 7) Pump coastdown behavior; 8) Core flow redistribution in loss of forced convection; 9) Pool stratification. As a demonstration of CGD of SAS4A/SASSYS-1 for a sodium pool reactor, a software qualification and dedication gap analysis as it relates to code documentation has been performed. This effort leverages the framework established as part of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 SQA Program. This CGD demonstration provides a framework that vendors can build upon to demonstrate the applicability of the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 software for licensing a sodium-cooled pool-type fast reactor.
21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
Software Quality Assurance for EBR-II Fuels Irradiation and Physics Database (FIPD)
The Fuels Irradiation and Physics Database (FIPD) is an ongoing DOE project on archival of the EBR-II metal-alloy fuel irradiation experiments. As part of its use in support of license applications, the Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) was drafted and endorsed by NRC in an effort to demonstrate its compliance with regulatory expectations. Software Quality Assurance (SQA) for the physics portion of FIPD is intended to qualify the calculated quantities such as fuel and cladding temperatures, neutron fluence and axially varying burnup estimates for irradiated fuel elements. This report covers the initial evaluation of SQA status of three neutron physics and thermo-fluid codes (REBUS, RCT and SE2RCT) that form the basis of calculated quantities for as-irradiated characteristics of the tested metallic fuel elements. The report also introduces an SQA plan to address the identified deficiencies. The REBUS, RCT, and SE2RCT codes are all part of the Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) code system. There is considerable knowledge and experience on REBUS and RCT but relatively less on SE2RCT. During FY2021, efforts focused on an assessment of how the data in the EBR-II Physics and Analysis DataBase (PADB) is generated with SE2RCT and used in FIPD. Additional tasks included considerations of uncertainties for power estimates in REBUS and RCT calculations and their impact on the combined RCT methodology. The RCT software usage in FIPD was assessed this year and the input/output details studied. A “requirements” document was created that identifies the key features of the RCT software being used in FIPD that need to have SQA documentation. A brief discussion on the history of RCT and its input is included in this report along with the basic SQA roadmap laid out in the requirements document. The SE2RCT software usage in FIPD is still being studied noting that there is no current manual. As part of the work done this year, two bugs were identified in the SE2RCT software which have a minor impact on the accuracy of the results it produces. No requirements document has been created, but one identified feature of SE2RCT being used that needs verification was its fuel pin temperature calculation. The work completed this year confirms that the approximations which will be included in the software verification report for SE2RCT are accurate. In addition to software quality assurance work for RCT and SE2RCT, an automated verification framework is proposed to simplify the software quality assurance process. The purpose of this framework is to streamline code verification and documentation while minimizing repetitive tasks for code developers and reviewers. The reduction of repeated input (between reference solution, software, and documentation input) throughout the SQA process reduces potential for human errors during the preparation of the supporting software quality records. The automation of the verification and documentation process proposed for this project leverages the existing verification structure already in place for the SAS4A/SASSYS-1 code.
11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗