Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “code verification, physics validation”

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 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2014

Turbulence Modeling Verification and Validation

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software that solves the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations has been in routine use for more than a quarter of a century. It is currently employed not only for basic research in fluid dynamics, but also for the analysis and design processes in many industries worldwide, including aerospace, automotive, power generation, chemical manufacturing, polymer processing, and petroleum exploration. A key feature of RANS CFD is the turbulence model. Because the RANS equations are unclosed, a model is necessary to describe the effects of the turbulence on the mean flow, through the Reynolds stress terms. The turbulence model is one of the largest sources of uncertainty in RANS CFD, and most models are known to be flawed in one way or another. Alternative methods such as direct numerical simulations (DNS) and large eddy simulations (LES) rely less on modeling and hence include more physics than RANS. In DNS all turbulent scales are resolved, and in LES the large scales are resolved and the effects of the smallest turbulence scales are modeled. However, both DNS and LES are too expensive for most routine industrial usage on today's computers. Hybrid RANS-LES, which blends RANS near walls with LES away from walls, helps to moderate the cost while still retaining some of the scale-resolving capability of LES, but for some applications it can still be too expensive. Even considering its associated uncertainties, RANS turbulence modeling has proved to be very useful for a wide variety of applications. For example, in the aerospace field, many RANS models are considered to be reliable for computing attached flows. However, existing turbulence models are known to be inaccurate for many flows involving separation. Research has been ongoing for decades in an attempt to improve turbulence models for separated and other nonequilibrium flows. When developing or improving turbulence models, both verification and validation are important steps in the process. Verification insures that the CFD code is solving the equations as intended (no errors in the implementation). This is typically done either through the method of manufactured solutions (MMS) or through careful step-by-step comparisons with other verified codes. After the verification step is concluded, validation is performed to document the ability of the turbulence model to represent different types of flow physics. Validation can involve a large number of test case comparisons with experiments, theory, or DNS. Organized workshops have proved to be valuable resources for the turbulence modeling community in its pursuit of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Workshop contributors using different CFD codes run the same cases, often according to strict guidelines, and compare results. Through these comparisons, it is often possible to (1) identify codes that have likely implementation errors, and (2) gain insight into the capabilities and shortcomings of different turbulence models to predict the flow physics associated with particular types of flows. These are valuable lessons because they help bring consistency to CFD codes by encouraging the correction of faulty programming and facilitating the adoption of better models. They also sometimes point to specific areas needed for improvement in the models. In this paper, several recent workshops are summarized primarily from the point of view of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Furthermore, the NASA Langley Turbulence Modeling Resource website is described. The purpose of this site is to provide a central location where RANS turbulence models are documented, and test cases, grids, and data are provided. The goal of this paper is to provide an abbreviated survey of turbulence modeling verification and validation efforts, summarize some of the outcomes, and give some ideas for future endeavors in this area.

Rumsey, Christopher L.↗
NASA NTRS2005

Verification, Validation, and Solution Quality in Computational Physics: CFD Methods Applied to Ice Sheet Physics

Procedures and methods for veri.cation of coding algebra and for validations of models and calculations used in the aerospace computational fluid dynamics (CFD) community would be ef.cacious if used by the glacier dynamics modeling community. This paper presents some of those methods, and how they might be applied to uncertainty management supporting code veri.cation and model validation for glacier dynamics. The similarities and differences between their use in CFD analysis and the proposed application of these methods to glacier modeling are discussed. After establishing sources of uncertainty and methods for code veri.cation, the paper looks at a representative sampling of veri.cation and validation efforts that are underway in the glacier modeling community, and establishes a context for these within an overall solution quality assessment. Finally, a vision of a new information architecture and interactive scienti.c interface is introduced and advocated.

Thompson, David E.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Trajectory-Centric CFD-RBD Framework for Advanced Multidisciplinary/Multiphysics Simulation

The desire to model increasingly complex unsteady flow phenomena drives coupling of physics-based disciplinary analysis tools, such as coupled aerodynamics-rigid body dynamics simulations. This paper documents the creation of a framework linking the six-degree-of-freedom trajectory propagator POST2 with NASA’s FUN3D computational fluid dynamics flow solver. Cross-code verification between the framework and a CFD-centric 6DOF code is performed using the Army-Navy Finner projectile experiencing unsteady accelerating flow. Free-flight simulations of an entry vehicle ballistic range test are validated against physical and computational experiments.

Zachary J Ernst↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Development of a Trajectory-Centric CFD-RBD Framework for Advanced Multidisciplinary/Multiphysics Simulation

The desire to model increasingly complex unsteady flow phenomena drives coupling of physics-based disciplinary analysis tools, such as coupled aerodynamics-rigid body dynamics simulations. This paper documents the creation of a framework linking the six-degree-of-freedom trajectory propagator POST2 with NASA’s FUN3D computational fluid dynamics flow solver. Cross-code verification between the framework and a CFD-centric 6DOF code is performed using the Army-Navy Finner projectile experiencing unsteady accelerating flow. Free-flight simulations of an entry vehicle ballistic range test are validated against physical and computational experiments.

Zachary J Ernst↗
NASA NTRS1988

Accuracy requirements and benchmark experiments for CFD validation

The role of experiment in the development of Computation Fluid Dynamics (CFD) for aerodynamic flow prediction is discussed. The CFD verification is a concept that depends on closely coordinated planning between computational and experimental disciplines. Because code applications are becoming more complex and their potential for design more feasible, it no longer suffices to use experimental data from surface or integral measurements alone to provide the required verification. Flow physics and modeling, flow field, and boundary condition measurements are emerging as critical data. Four types of experiments are introduced and examples given that meet the challenge of validation: flow physics experiments; flow modeling experiments; calibration experiments; and verification experiments. Measurement and accuracy requirements for each of these differ and are discussed. A comprehensive program of validation is described, some examples given, and it is concluded that the future prospects are encouraging.

Marvin, Joseph G.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Accuracy requirements and benchmark experiments for CFD validation

The role of experiment in the development of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) for aerodynamic flow prediction is discussed. The CFD verification is a concept that depends on closely coordinated planning between computational and experimental disciplines. Because code applications are becoming more complex and their potential for design more feasible, it no longer suffices to use experimental data from surface or integral measurements alone to provide the required verification. Flow physics and modeling, flow field, and boundary condition measurements are emerging as critical data. Four types of experiments are introduced and examples are given that meet the challenge of validation: flow physics experiments; flow modeling experiments; calibration experiments; and verification experiments. Measurement and accuracy requirements for each of these differ and are discussed. A comprehensive program of validation is described, some examples given, and it is concluded that the future prospects are encouraging.

Marvin, Joseph G.↗
NASA NTRS1998

Assessing the Effectiveness of Environmental Test Programs

NASA's Code QE Test Effectiveness Program is funding a series of applied research activities focused on utilizing the principles of physics and engineering of failure along with those of engineering economics to assess and improve the value added by various validation and verification activities, with the primary emphasis being on testing.

test↗
NASA NTRS2011

CFD Validation with Experiment and Verification with Physics of a Propellant Damping Device

This paper will document our effort in validating a coupled fluid-structure interaction CFD tool in predicting a damping device performance in the laboratory condition. Consistently good comparisons of "blind" CFD predictions against experimental data under various operation conditions, design parameters, and cryogenic environment will be presented. The power of the coupled CFD-structures interaction code in explaining some unexpected phenomena of the device observed during the technology development will be illustrated. The evolution of the damper device design inside the LOX tank will be used to demonstrate the contribution of the tool in understanding, optimization and implementation of LOX damper in Ares I vehicle. It is due to the present validation effort, the LOX damper technology has matured to TRL 5. The present effort has also contributed to the transition of the technology from an early conceptual observation to the baseline design of thrust oscillation mitigation for the Ares I within a 10 month period.

Yang, H. Q.↗
NASA NTRS1989

Initial Ada components evaluation

The SAIC has the responsibility for independent test and validation of the SSE. They have been using a mathematical functions library package implemented in Ada to test the SSE IV and V process. The library package consists of elementary mathematical functions and is both machine and accuracy independent. The SSE Ada components evaluation includes code complexity metrics based on Halstead's software science metrics and McCabe's measure of cyclomatic complexity. Halstead's metrics are based on the number of operators and operands on a logical unit of code and are compiled from the number of distinct operators, distinct operands, and total number of occurrences of operators and operands. These metrics give an indication of the physical size of a program in terms of operators and operands and are used diagnostically to point to potential problems. McCabe's Cyclomatic Complexity Metrics (CCM) are compiled from flow charts transformed to equivalent directed graphs. The CCM is a measure of the total number of linearly independent paths through the code's control structure. These metrics were computed for the Ada mathematical functions library using Software Automated Verification and Validation (SAVVAS), the SSE IV and V tool. A table with selected results was shown, indicating that most of these routines are of good quality. Thresholds for the Halstead measures indicate poor quality if the length metric exceeds 260 or difficulty is greater than 190. The McCabe CCM indicated a high quality of software products.

Moebes, Travis↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Modeling Radiation Sources for Experimental Validation

To build on previously completed experimental work, I have been working to implement a model of our lab’s Americium-Beryllium neutron source and Ludlum detection instruments computationally to provide secondary verification of our experimental results. This has been done using the radiation transport code MCNP6 (Monte Carlo N-Particle). I have developed files to calculate the mass ratio of various composite materials that we have exposed to the radiation source, as well as the components of the detection instruments and converted all of these into geometric coordinates that define the experimental setup. Identifying the proper energy distribution and detector efficiencies as well as the correct interpretation of the detector physics have proven to be the most difficult and time-consuming challenges of the work. It is currently too early for results based on the most updated and accurate models. With this experience, the next step is to develop another source model of a proton beam to simulate exposures on other composite targets. This will be developed based on existing experimental datasets, but not used to validate them. Each of these projects will further define the radiation shielding needs for humans in space radiation environments that astronauts will someday be exposed to beyond Low Earth Orbit.

Juliana Simon↗
NASA NTRS1996

Modern Experimental Techniques in Turbine Engine Testing

The paper describes application of two modern experimental techniques, thin-film thermocouples and pressure sensitive paint, to measurement in turbine engine components. A growing trend of using computational codes in turbomachinery design and development requires experimental techniques to refocus from overall performance testing to acquisition of detailed data on flow and heat transfer physics to validate these codes for design applications. The discussed experimental techniques satisfy this shift in focus. Both techniques are nonintrusive in practical terms. The thin-film thermocouple technique improves accuracy of surface temperature and heat transfer measurements. The pressure sensitive paint technique supplies areal surface pressure data rather than discrete point values only. The paper summarizes our experience with these techniques and suggests improvements to ease the application of these techniques for future turbomachinery research and code verifications.

Lepicovsky, J.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Quantification of Numerical Uncertainty via Nonlinear Dynamical Approach

Motivations (Ensure a Higher Level of Confidence in the Predictability & Reliability of Numerical Simulation for Multiscale Complex Nonlinear Fluid Problems) - The last two decades have been an era when computation is ahead of analysis & when very large scale practical computations are increasingly used in poorly understood multiscale complex nonlinear physical problems & non-traditional fields (Especially when computations offer the ONLY way of generating this type of data limited simulations). - At present some of the numerical uncertainties can be explained and minimized by traditional numerical analysis and standard CFD practices. However, such practices, usually based on linearized analysis, MIGHT NOT be sufficient for strongly nonlinear and/or stiff problems. - We need a good understanding of the nonlinear behavior of numerical schemes being used as an integral part of code verification, validation and certification.

HEC↗
NASA NTRS2011

Uncertainty Assessment of Hypersonic Aerothermodynamics Prediction Capability

The present paper provides the background of a focused effort to assess uncertainties in predictions of heat flux and pressure in hypersonic flight (airbreathing or atmospheric entry) using state-of-the-art aerothermodynamics codes. The assessment is performed for four mission relevant problems: (1) shock turbulent boundary layer interaction on a compression corner, (2) shock turbulent boundary layer interaction due a impinging shock, (3) high-mass Mars entry and aerocapture, and (4) high speed return to Earth. A validation based uncertainty assessment approach with reliance on subject matter expertise is used. A code verification exercise with code-to-code comparisons and comparisons against well established correlations is also included in this effort. A thorough review of the literature in search of validation experiments is performed, which identified a scarcity of ground based validation experiments at hypersonic conditions. In particular, a shortage of useable experimental data at flight like enthalpies and Reynolds numbers is found. The uncertainty was quantified using metrics that measured discrepancy between model predictions and experimental data. The discrepancy data is statistically analyzed and investigated for physics based trends in order to define a meaningful quantified uncertainty. The detailed uncertainty assessment of each mission relevant problem is found in the four companion papers.

Bose, Deepak↗
NASA NTRS2016

NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites: Tools for Software Based Validation and Verification of Small Satellites

The NASA Operational Simulator for Small Satellites (NOS3) is a suite of tools to aid in areas such as software development, integration test (IT), mission operations training, verification and validation (VV), and software systems check-out. NOS3 provides a software development environment, a multi-target build system, an operator interface-ground station, dynamics and environment simulations, and software-based hardware models. NOS3 enables the development of flight software (FSW) early in the project life cycle, when access to hardware is typically not available. For small satellites there are extensive lead times on many of the commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components as well as limited funding for engineering test units (ETU). Considering the difficulty of providing a hardware test-bed to each developer tester, hardware models are modeled based upon characteristic data or manufacturers data sheets for each individual component. The fidelity of each hardware models is such that FSW executes unaware that physical hardware is not present. This allows binaries to be compiled for both the simulation environment, and the flight computer, without changing the FSW source code. For hardware models that provide data dependent on the environment, such as a GPS receiver or magnetometer, an open-source tool from NASA GSFC (42 Spacecraft Simulation) is used to provide the necessary data. The underlying infrastructure used to transfer messages between FSW and the hardware models can also be used to monitor, intercept, and inject messages, which has proven to be beneficial for VV of larger missions such as James Webb Space Telescope (JWST). As hardware is procured, drivers can be added to the environment to enable hardware-in-the-loop (HWIL) testing. When strict time synchronization is not vital, any number of combinations of hardware components and software-based models can be tested. The open-source operator interface used in NOS3 is COSMOS from Ball Aerospace. For testing, plug-ins are implemented in COSMOS to control the NOS3 simulations, while the command and telemetry tools available in COSMOS are used to communicate with FSW. NOS3 is actively being used for FSW development and component testing of the Simulation-to-Flight 1 (STF-1) CubeSat. As NOS3 matures, hardware models have been added for common CubeSat components such as Novatel GPS receivers, ClydeSpace electrical power systems and batteries, ISISpace antenna systems, etc. In the future, NASA IVV plans to distribute NOS3 to other CubeSat developers and release the suite to the open-source community.

Verification↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Verification and Validation of Elastodynamic Simulation Software for Aerospace Research

Physics-based simulation of nondestructive evaluation (NDE) inspection can help to advance the inspectability and reliability of mechanical systems. However, NDE simulations applicable to non-idealized mechanical components often require large compute domains and long run times. This has prompted development of custom NDE simulation software tailored to high performance computing (HPC) hardware. Verification and validation (V&V) is an integral part of developing this software to ensure implementations are robust and applicable to inspection problems, producing tools and simulations suitable for computational NDE research. This presentation addresses factors common to V&V of several elastodynamic simulation codes applicable to ultrasonic NDE. Examples are drawn from in-house simulation software at NASA Langley Research Center, ranging from ensuring reliability in a 1D heterogeneous media wave equation solver to the V&V needs of 3D cluster-parallel elastodynamic software. Factors specific to a research environment are addressed, where individual simulation results can be as relevant as the software product itself. Distinct facets of V&V are discussed including testing to establish software reliability, employing systematic approaches for consistency with fundamental conservation laws, establishing the numerical stability of algorithms, and demonstrating concurrence with empirical data. This talk also addresses V&V practices for small groups of researchers. This includes establishing resources (e.g. time and personnel) for V&V during project planning to mitigate and control the risk of setbacks. Similarly, we identify ways for individual researchers to use V&V during simulation software development itself to both speed up the development process and reduce incurred technical debt.

NDE↗
NASA NTRS2008

Benchmark Analysis of Pion Contribution from Galactic Cosmic Rays

Shielding strategies for extended stays in space must include a comprehensive resolution of the secondary radiation environment inside the spacecraft induced by the primary, external radiation. The distribution of absorbed dose and dose equivalent is a function of the type, energy and population of these secondary products. A systematic verification and validation effort is underway for HZETRN, which is a space radiation transport code currently used by NASA. It performs neutron, proton and heavy ion transport explicitly, but it does not take into account the production and transport of mesons, photons and leptons. The question naturally arises as to what is the contribution of these particles to space radiation. The pion has a production kinetic energy threshold of about 280 MeV. The Galactic cosmic ray (GCR) spectra, coincidentally, reaches flux maxima in the hundreds of MeV range, corresponding to the pion production threshold. We present results from the Monte Carlo code MCNPX, showing the effect of lepton and meson physics when produced and transported explicitly in a GCR environment.

Aghara, Sukesh K.↗
NASA NTRS2017

Automated Analysis of Stateflow Models

Stateflow is a widely used modeling framework for embedded and cyber physical systems where control software interacts with physical processes. In this work, we present a framework a fully automated safety verification technique for Stateflow models. Our approach is two-folded: (i) we faithfully compile Stateflow models into hierarchical state machines, and (ii) we use automated logic-based verification engine to decide the validity of safety properties. The starting point of our approach is a denotational semantics of State flow. We propose a compilation process using continuation-passing style (CPS) denotational semantics. Our compilation technique preserves the structural and modal behavior of the system. The overall approach is implemented as an open source toolbox that can be integrated into the existing Mathworks Simulink Stateflow modeling framework. We present preliminary experimental evaluations that illustrate the effectiveness of our approach in code generation and safety verification of industrial scale Stateflow models.

Stateflow↗