Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “solution verification”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

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

At least 271 records · Page 15

DAKOTA (Design Analysis Kit for Optimization and Terascale) v.6.16

Sandia's Dakota software supports science and engineering transformation through advanced exploration of simulations. Specifically, Dakota manages and analyzes ensembles of simulations to provide broader and deeper perspective for analysts and decision makers. This enables them to: (1) enhance understanding of risk, (2) improve products, and (3) assess simulation credibility. In its simplest mode, Dakota can automate typical parameter variation studies through a generic interface to a computational model. Dakota also delivers advanced parametric analysis techniques enabling design exploration, optimization, model calibration, risk analysis, and quantification of margins and uncertainty with such models. It directly supports verification and validation activities. The algorithms implemented in Dakota aim to address challenges in performing these analyses with complex science and engineering models from desktop to high performance computers. Sandia National Laboratories is a multimission laboratory managed and operated by National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Honeywell International Inc., for the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration under contract DE-NA0003525 SAND2021-10468 O

Adams, BrianM.↗

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 4.56

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD – Verification Test Manual – 5.0

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD–Verification Test Manual - 4.58

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 5.2

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 5.4

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 5.6

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD - Verification Test Manual - 5.8

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Sierra/SD: Verification Test Manual - 5.10

This document presents tests from the Sierra Structural Mechanics verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/SD code suite and the results of the test checked versus the correct analytic result. For each of the tests presented in this document the test setup, derivation of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SD code results to the analytic solution is provided. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Evaluation of 3D Simulation Capabilities within xRAGE using a Suite of Test Problems

This presentation describes a 3D verification and validation suite for xRAGE. Three verification test problems for hydrodynamics are presented: the Kidder ball problem, the Verney shell problem, and a 5-material compression problem. There is excellent agreement between 2D and 3D XRAGE simulation results for these problems, and between the xRAGE results and the benchmark solutions. In addition, two 3D ICF test problems are presented, based on an OMEGA direct drive capsule experiment, and on a NIF indirect drive capsule experiment. These two ICF test problems are used to evaluate two hydrodynamic methods within xRAGE. In addition to hydrodynamics the simulations also include three temperature plasma physics, thermal conduction and radiation diffusion. When simulating either capsule in 3D the newer unsplit hydrodynamic method in xRAGE produces more vorticity relative to the older default method. For the indirect drive capsule the 3D simulations are in reasonable agreement with the experimental values of ion temperature and neutron production. Unstable 3D vortex rings are present near the DT ice/carbon interface which enhance the confinement of the DT ice.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

Sierra/SolidMechanics Verification Tests Manual (V.5.24)

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics(Sierra/SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM codesuite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of thetests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, andcomparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided. Mesh convergenceis also check

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

PARET/ANL (V.7.7) Verification and Validation Report

This report documents the software testing which has been performed for the PARET/ANL version 7.7 software. The software testing is based on code capabilities identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their safety analyses. The verification and validation procedures have been performed and documented to address the steady-state capabilities of the software, as described in Chapter 2, and the transient capabilities, as described in Chapter 3. Testing based on the comparison between PARET/ANL calculations and analytical solutions, hand calculations, or other code calculations of the test cases confirms that all the identified capabilities of the software were implemented correctly. In addition, results from code comparisons against SPERT-I and SPERT-IV experiments for various flow rates are reported for the peak power, energy release and cladding surface temperature. The comparisons showed overall good agreement for the peak power and conservative predictions of the cladding surface temperature

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

TEAMER Technical Support of Ramboll's for Numerical Modeling of WECs to Support OES Task 10: Cooperative Research and Development (Final Report)

National Technology & Engineering Solutions of Sandia, LLC (NTESS) in collaboration with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and with guidance from Ramboll, will perform fluid dynamics simulations to support of The Ocean Energy Systems (OES) Energy Technology Collaboration Program Task 10 Wave Energy Converters (WEC) Modelling Verification and Validation effort. Specific numerical simulations include the fixed device wave impingement studies to benchmark the performance of simulation techniques against physical testing results.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

PARET/ANL v7.7 Verification and Validation Report

This report documents the software testing which has been performed for the PARET/ANL version 7.7 software. The software testing is based on code capabilities identified by research reactor analysts as frequently used in their safety analyses. The verification and validation procedures have been performed and documented to address the steady-state capabilities of the software, as described in Chapter 2, and the transient capabilities, as described in Chapter 3. Testing based on the comparison between PARET/ANL calculations and analytical solutions, hand calculations, or other code calculations of the test cases confirms that all the identified capabilities of the software were implemented correctly. In addition, results from code comparisons against SPERT-I and SPERT-IV experiments for various flow rates are reported for the peak power, energy release and cladding surface temperature. The comparisons showed overall good agreement for the peak power and conservative predictions of the cladding surface temperature.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

Skill of Mesoscale Models in Forecasting Springtime Macrophysical Cloud Properties at the Savannah River Site in the Southeastern US

Predicting boundary layer clouds is important for the accurate modeling of pollutant dispersion. Higher resolution mesoscale models would be expected to produce better forecasts of cloud properties that affect dispersion. Using ceilometer observations, we assess the skill of two operational mesoscale models (RAMS and WRF) to forecast cloud base altitude and cloud fraction at the Savannah River Site in the southeastern US during the springtime. Verifications were performed at small spatial and temporal scales necessary for dispersion modeling. Both models were unreliable with a 50% (RAMS) and a 46% (WRF) rate of predicting clouds observed by the ceilometer which led to low cloud fraction predictions. Results indicated that WRF better predicted daytime cloud bases from convection that occurred frequently later in the period and RAMS better predicted nighttime cloud bases. Using root mean squared error (RMSE) to score the forecast periods also highlighted this diurnal dichotomy, with WRF scores better during the day and RAMS scores better at night. Analysis of forecast errors revealed divergent model cloud base biases—WRF low and RAMS high. A hybrid solution which weighs more heavily the RAMS nighttime forecasts and WRF daytime forecasts will likely provide the best prediction of cloud properties for dispersion.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

DOE Hanford Tank Side Cesium Removal System (TSCR) Update: Fabrication and Factory Acceptance Testing - 20300

The Tank Side Cesium Removal (TSCR) System is a modular, quickly-deployable, and passively safe system for efficiently removing solids and cesium from alkaline liquid waste raffinate created by fuel processing on the Hanford site. This paper provides an overview of the project with particular emphasis on completion of fabrication and factory acceptance testing (FAT). All TSCR System components are inside three enclosures known as the Process Enclosure, Ancillary Enclosure, and Control Enclosure. The Process Enclosure is seismic design category II (SDC-II) and built to withstand the rigors of transportation and lifting, high winds, volcanic ash fall, and heavy precipitation (snow) over a temperature range of -25 to 115 deg. F. The Process Enclosure and Control Enclosure were fabricated in AVANTech's Columbia, SC facility, while the Ancillary Enclosure was fabricated in AVANTech's Richland, WA facility. The design and preliminary documented safety analysis were completed in December 2019, with all work being performed in accordance with ASME NQA-1 quality assurance requirements. The Process Enclosure, Ion Exchange Columns (IXCs), and several other TSCR components have a nuclear safety function and are designated as safety significant structures, systems, and components (SS-SSCs). The NQA-1 Commercial Grade Dedication (CGD) process was used to identify critical characteristics in order to accept materials and items used for fabrication of several safety significant TSCR components. This paper also addresses unique aspects and challenges of implementing CGD in DOE facilities and systems. After fabrication and preliminary testing, the Process and Control Enclosures were shipped to AVANTech's Richland facility where the complete TSCR System was setup and connected in a represented layout and configuration that will be used on the Hanford site. Test tanks and pumps were put in place and connected to the TSCR Process Enclosure in a manner that mimicked interfacing Double Shell Tanks in the 241-AP Tank Farm. The TSCR System was then tested/operated under conditions equivalent to those planned for onsite operation. Testing was separated into five separate phases as defined below: - Phase 1: Confirmation of TSCR System readiness for the FAT; - Phase 2: Verification of TSCR System operation under standard conditions; - Phase 3: Demonstration of TSCR System operation under non-standard conditions; - Phase 4: Demonstration of ion exchange media removal from an IXC; and - Phase 5: Completion of TSCR System lift plans and site mobilization. The Hanford Tank Operations Contractor, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS), participated in all phases of testing. Testing at AVANTech's Richland Facility allowed WRPS personnel to familiarize themselves with TSCR operations in a radiologically clean facility prior to onsite mobilization. Engineering and operations personnel gained valuable experience that allowed them to better refine onsite operational protocols and procedures - including handling and movement of IXCs with a forklift. This paper describes the technologies used by the TSCR System as well as how these technologies are deployed and operated to advance the Hanford mission of safely, efficiently, and effectively treating tank waste. It also provides detailed information on fabrication and FAT, including operational data from simulated tank waste runs. A project schedule for WRPS' planned construction acceptance testing, operational acceptance testing, and actual tank waste treatment is provided. This presentation should be of great interest to parties responsible for the design, testing, and mobilization of modular NQA-1 technologies for the treatment of raffinate and similar liquid wastes containing high concentrations of radioactive cesium. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.26 Verification Tests Manual

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra/SolidMechanics (Sierra/SM) verification test suite. Most of these tests are run nightly with the Sierra/SM code suite, and the results of the test are checked versus the correct analytical result. For each of the tests presented in this document, the test setup, a description of the analytic solution, and comparison of the Sierra/SM code results to the analytic solution is provided.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

The Henkin-McGill critical temperature test for explosives revisited: An overview of historical and modern method development

Many overarching standards, regulations, or other requirements necessitate that the critical temperature (T crit ) of an energetic material be known or estimate prior to operations such as heating. However, they rarely, if ever, provide a specific method for doing so. While other methods exist to calculate T crit , such as the Frank-Kamenetskii equation, computer simulation, etc., these cannot be readily utilized for energetics that are physical mixtures (i.e. most pyrotechnics) or materials where detailed material properties required for such calculations are lacking. Here, in this study, a COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) SBAT (Simulated Bulk Auto-ignition Test) apparatus is modified to perform Henkin cookoff tests. This creates a simple, efficient, and cost-effective solution to estimate required T crit values for energetic materials. After a historical overview of the evolution of the Henkin test, several common energetic materials (PETN, RDX, etc.) for which T crit has been readily calculated, and historical data is available, were analyzed for comparison and verification purposes. This was followed by a variety of pyrotechnic mixtures and other materials to where calculation methods cannot be readily used. The modified apparatus, as well as an updated sample shell sealing method, produced results that aligned well with historical data. It also produced reasonable T crit estimates for those materials where the Frank-Kamenetskii equation cannot be applied.

37 INORGANIC, ORGANIC, PHYSICAL, AND ANALYTICAL CH↗