SEARCH · Search NASA
Results for “SQA”
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.
Software Quality Assurance for the MOOSE-Based Open-Source Multiphysics Code Cardinal - An Expanded CI Testing Suite
Cardinal is a wrapping of the GPU-oriented spectral element Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) code NekRS and the Monte Carlo particle transport code OpenMC within the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE). Cardinal provides high-resolution thermal-hydraulics and/or radiation transport feedback to MOOSE multiphysics simulations. Multiphysics feedback is implemented in a geometry-agnostic manner which eliminates the need for rigid one-to-one mappings. A generic data transfer implementation also allows NekRS and OpenMC to couple to any MOOSE application, enabling a broad set of multiphysics capabilities. Cardinal simulations can also leverage combinations of MPI, OpenMP, and GPU resources. Cardinal continuous development and improvement efforts have led to the software being considered as a high-fidelity design and licensing tool for key areas of nuclear reactor relevant physics, including neutron transport, fluid flow, heat transfer, and mechanical processes. The fast development and expansion of the software from a pure R&D framework towards its application in the nuclear industry and regulation require a focus on developing, enhancing and, maintaining Cardinal’s software quality through strict adherence to a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) framework and SQA program. To facilitate compliance with SQA standards, the Cardinal SQA Program has been initiated during Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23). During the development of the Cardinal SQA Program, multiple gaps have been identified. These gaps are primarily related to model verification and code pedigree as they relate to the use of Cardinal as a safety analysis tool. These gaps have been captured in a report published in 2023. A second report highlighted the progress made during Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) and described Argonne’s effort to document and integrate software verification within Cardinal’s software development process. This report documents a snapshot of the verification test cases currently available for Cardinal and NekRS in their assimilation into a Continuous Integration (CI) platform. Following the CI practice permits the integrating of source code changes frequently and ensuring that the integrated codebase clears the verification testing for the software. It should be noted that the SQA program itself, including the program plans, procedures, configuration management, and testing strategies, need to be developed in a future step of this task.
Progress Towards NQA-1 for Cardinal in FY25
Cardinal is a wrapping of the GPU-oriented spectral element Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) code NekRS and the Monte Carlo particle transport code OpenMC within the Multiphysics Object-Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE). Cardinal provides high-resolution thermal-hydraulics and/or radiation transport feedback to MOOSE multiphysics simulations. Multiphysics feedback is implemented in a geometry-agnostic manner which eliminates the need for rigid one-to-one mappings. A generic data transfer implementation also allows NekRS and OpenMC to couple to any MOOSE application, enabling a broad set of multiphysics capabilities. Cardinal simulations can also leverage combinations of MPI, OpenMP, and GPU resources. Cardinal continuous development and improvement efforts have led to the software being considered as a high-fidelity design and licensing tool for key areas of nuclear reactor relevant physics, including neutron transport, fluid flow, heat transfer, and mechanical processes. The fast development and expansion of the software from a pure R&D framework towards its application in the nuclear industry and regulation require a focus on developing, enhancing,and maintaining Cardinal’s software quality through strict adherence to a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) framework and SQA program. To facilitate compliance with SQA standards, the Cardinal SQA Program was initiated during Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23). During the development of the Cardinal SQA Program, multiple gaps have been identified. These gaps are primarily related to model verification and code pedigree as they relate to the use of Cardinal as an analysis tool. These gaps were captured in a report published in 2023. A second report highlighted the progress made during Fiscal Year 2024 (FY24) and described Argonne’s effort to document and integrate software verification within Cardinal’s software development process. This report documents the progress made towards NQA-1 for Cardinal in the Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25). All cases in the expanded Continuous Integration (CI) suite of NekRS are included in this report which test the solvers and modules available in NekRS exhaustively. The NekRS tests are integrated with the Cardinal CI suite and made available in publicly accessible Github documentation. Following the CI practice permits integrating of source code changes frequently and ensuring that the integrated codebase clears the verification testing for the software. Also in this report is a brief overview of the development of the Cardinal Software Quality Assurance Plan (SQAP) that was done in FY25, though it should be noted that the rest of the documentation for the SQA program needs to be developed in a future step of this task.
A Discussion of the Software Quality Assurance Role
The basic idea underlying this paper is that the conventional understanding of the role of a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) engineer is unduly limited. This is because few have asked who the customers of a SQA engineer are. Once you do this, you can better define what tasks a SQA engineer should perform, as well as identify the knowledge and skills that such a person should have. The consequence of doing this is that a SQA engineer can provide greater value to his or her customers. It is the position of this paper that a SQA engineer providing significant value to his or her customers must not only assume the role of an auditor, but also that of a software and systems engineer. This is because software engineers and their managers particularly value contributions that directly impact products and their development. These ideas are summarized as lessons learned, based on my experience at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL).
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.
SAM Software Quality Assurance Plan Implementation and NQA-1 Assessment
The System Analysis Module (SAM) is an advanced and modern system analysis tool being developed at Argonne National Laboratory under the U.S. DOE Office of Nuclear Energy’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation (NEAMS) program. As a modern-day software, SAM development included efforts to follow best practices in software development. These best practices include version control using git, independent reviews of development activities, and detailed descriptions of developments and bug fixes using the GitLab issue and merge request system. In Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23), the SAM development team set out to formalize a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) program that allowed industry partners to credit the informal steps being taken by the SAM development team to ensure the quality of the software. As part of formalizing an SQA program, a SQA Plan (SQAP) was developed, implemented, and assessed. The SAM SQAP targets compliance with NQA-1-2008/2009 Addenda. The SQAP builds on the MOOSE SQAP and the Argonne SSQAPP while accounting for the needs of the multi-organization SAM development team. Modifications to the SAM repository structure, including a new testing system, updated test cases, and the development of an internal website, facilitate the implementation of the SAM SQAP. The initial assessment of the SAM SQAP indicated that the SAM SQAP was adequately and effectively implemented and additional work was required to improve the compliance of the SAM SQAP with NQA-1 2008/2009 Addenda. Several improvements to the SQAP have already been drafted to address these assessments and future work is planned to further improve the SAM SQAP in support of end-user needs.
Software Quality Assurance, Software Requirements and Gap Analysis for the MOOSE-Based Open-Source Multiphysics Code Cardinal
Cardinal continuous development and improvement efforts have led to the software being considered as a high-fidelity design and licensing tool for key areas of nuclear reactor relevant physics, including neutron transport, fluid flow, heat transfer, and mechanical processes. The fast development and expansion of the software from a pure R&D framework towards its application in the nuclear industry and regulation require a focus on maintaining and enhancing Cardinal’s software quality through strict adherence to a Software Quality Assurance (SQA) framework. To facilitate compliance with SQA standards, the Cardinal SQA Program has been initiated during Fiscal Year 2023 (FY23).
ORNL Package Testing Program Software Quality Assurance Plan
The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Package Testing Program (PTP) uses commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software in performing data collection of thermal test results for package designs that contain radioactive materials. Specifically, this software is used to collect temperature data from the furnace, packages, and ambient air to prepare and execute the thermal test specified in 10 CFR 71.73, “Thermal Test.” This software quality assurance (SQA) plan sets forth the guidelines, standards, and procedures that shall be used to provide SQA for PTP software applications. This is a living document that will be maintained for the lifecycle of the PTP program. The SQA plan follows the requirements set forth in ORNL Standards Based Management System (SBMS): Information Technology; Subject Area: Software Quality Assurance. When applicable to the requirements as described in ORNL SBMS, Software Quality Assurance, the software shall be listed in the ORNL Software Registration System (SRS). Exemptions to this SBMS are COTS and firmware that are not modified; spreadsheet applications and personal productivity tools that do not have a utility or safety application, research applications, legacy software, system software, vendor-supplied software used to interface with the vendor’s services, software used within the organization to facilitate processing or management of information, and software developed for applications not specific to the US Department of Energy (DOE).
Software Quality Assurance Plan: Cardinal
The Cardinal Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Program aims to provide the controls and processes necessary to enable continuous, high-quality software development while meeting user and program sponsor requirements. This SQA Plan (SQAP) delineates the SQA Program framework for Cardinal by describing the Program activities, organization, and documentation, and by clearly defining the interconnection of all Program items. It should be noted that this SQAP is aligned with the current version of the Argonne Quality Assurance Program Plan, which was designed to align with DOE O 414.1D. This SQAP is also aligned with the revision 10 of the SQAP for MOOSE and MOOSE-based applications.
Software quality assurance plan for GCS
The software quality assurance (SQA) function for the Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project which is part of a software error studies research program is described. The SQA plan outlines all of the procedures, controls, and audits to be carried out by the SQA organization to ensure adherence to the policies, procedures, and standards for the GCS project.
A Reference Model for Software and System Inspections. White Paper
Software Quality Assurance (SQA) is an important component of the software development process. SQA processes provide assurance that the software products and processes in the project life cycle conform to their specified requirements by planning, enacting, and performing a set of activities to provide adequate confidence that quality is being built into the software. Typical techniques include: (1) Testing (2) Simulation (3) Model checking (4) Symbolic execution (5) Management reviews (6) Technical reviews (7) Inspections (8) Walk-throughs (9) Audits (10) Analysis (complexity analysis, control flow analysis, algorithmic analysis) (11) Formal method Our work over the last few years has resulted in substantial knowledge about SQA techniques, especially the areas of technical reviews and inspections. But can we apply the same QA techniques to the system development process? If yes, what kind of tailoring do we need before applying them in the system engineering context? If not, what types of QA techniques are actually used at system level? And, is there any room for improvement.) After a brief examination of the system engineering literature (especially focused on NASA and DoD guidance) we found that: (1) System and software development process interact with each other at different phases through development life cycle (2) Reviews are emphasized in both system and software development. (Figl.3). For some reviews (e.g. SRR, PDR, CDR), there are both system versions and software versions. (3) Analysis techniques are emphasized (e.g. Fault Tree Analysis, Preliminary Hazard Analysis) and some details are given about how to apply them. (4) Reviews are expected to use the outputs of the analysis techniques. In other words, these particular analyses are usually conducted in preparation for (before) reviews. The goal of our work is to explore the interaction between the Quality Assurance (QA) techniques at the system level and the software level.
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.
Fiscal Year 2024 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software
The continued goal of the ARC SQA project in the Advanced Reactor Technologies program of DOE is to resolve the QA gaps for the ARC software that limit, or prevent, commercialization of the software for industry users. This project started in earnest in fiscal year 2023 which saw the entire code system moved from a SVN repository to a GitLab repository and an associated software quality assurance plan (SQAP) developed and ratified. Most of the QA gaps in the ARC software were identified in collaboration with industry partners and work begin in fiscal year 2023 and continued in 2024. The primary documentation that is missing includes user manuals, user guides, software verification reports, and code coverage assessments. The SUMMAR manual was completed this fiscal year and work was started on creating manuals for SE2ANL, SE2RCT, and DASSH. Software verification work was carried out for DIF3D and REBUS in a previous program and the current fiscal year saw the completion of software verification reports for GAMSOR, GAMSRC, VARPOW, EvaluateFlux, and SUMMAR. The goal for the next fiscal year is to complete the PERSENT software verification work and begin planning the software verification work for DASSH, SE2ANL, and SE2RCT. The code coverage reports for DIF3D and MC2-3 were completed in the previous fiscal year and the goal is to generate code coverage reports for REBUS, GAMSOR, PERSENT, and DASSH in the coming fiscal year. A considerable amount of effort was spent in the current fiscal year working on the continuous integration capability for automated regression testing in GitLab. The first version of the testing was created in the previous fiscal year and applied to DIF3D and its utility programs. That testing was extended this year to cover GAMSOR, REBUS, and PERSENT. To accomplish this, the first version of the new testing methodology had to be updated to make a single output checking methodology viable for all of the ARC software. This will result in a single document to detail the automated regression testing methodology and minor documents to detail the tolerance settings that have been applied to the output for each ARC code. The previous methodology put into place with SVN would have required a separate document for each ARC code to detail the output checking methodology and the tolerance settings for the output from each code. Because some of our industry partners are providing funds to add new capabilities to the ARC software to meet their needs, all of which must be reviewed and approved by the SQA program funded by this project, a summary of that development work is detailed in this report. Overall progress on resolving the QA gaps has been good this year with the most impactful improvement for our industry partners in capability being the creation of a threaded version of DIF3D-VARIANT that allows the DIF3D, REBUS, and GAMSOR run times to be reduced by a factor of 4-6. The most impactful QA gap that was resolved was the software verification of GAMSRC and VARPOW.
Software Quality Assurance Metrics
Software Quality Assurance (SQA) is a planned and systematic set of activities that ensures conformance of software life cycle processes and products conform to requirements, standards and procedures. In software development, software quality means meeting requirements and a degree of excellence and refinement of a project or product. Software Quality is a set of attributes of a software product by which its quality is described and evaluated. The set of attributes includes functionality, reliability, usability, efficiency, maintainability, and portability. Software Metrics help us understand the technical process that is used to develop a product. The process is measured to improve it and the product is measured to increase quality throughout the life cycle of software. Software Metrics are measurements of the quality of software. Software is measured to indicate the quality of the product, to assess the productivity of the people who produce the product, to assess the benefits derived from new software engineering methods and tools, to form a baseline for estimation, and to help justify requests for new tools or additional training. Any part of the software development can be measured. If Software Metrics are implemented in software development, it can save time, money, and allow the organization to identify the caused of defects which have the greatest effect on software development. The summer of 2004, I worked with Cynthia Calhoun and Frank Robinson in the Software Assurance/Risk Management department. My task was to research and collect, compile, and analyze SQA Metrics that have been used in other projects that are not currently being used by the SA team and report them to the Software Assurance team to see if any metrics can be implemented in their software assurance life cycle process.
ORCA Software Quality Assurance Plan
This document summarizes the software quality assurance (SQA) planning activities conducted for the Optimization of Real-time Capacity Allocation (ORCA) plug-in. It outlines the approaches and document structures adopted to maintain high standards of software quality. It also gives examples of certain SQA documents.