Results for “Testing” — Page 23

DOE OSTI2020

NDE Technology Engineering Program for Hanford DST Non-Visual Volumetric Inspection Technology: Phase II RAVIS Radiation Tolerance Test Report

This test report provides the results of radiation tolerance robustness testing that was performed on samples of robotic components and an ultrasonic guided wave air-slot sensor that represent components/sub-systems of the Robotic Air-slot Volumetric Inspection System (RAVIS) that has been engineered for volumetric inspection of Hanford tank bottom plates via under-tank refractory pad air-slots. The specific components tested for 1) functionality during active irradiation and 2) tolerance to cumulative radiation dose (until failure or upon reaching a cumulative dose test limit) were: • four samples each of a printed circuit board (PCB) and direct current (DC) motor, which are robotic components, and • 26 ultrasonic piezoelectric elements (samples) inside an air-slot sensor. The robotic components are part of the RAVIS air-slot inspection crawler drive control system that is responsible for remote communication with and actuation of the air-slot inspection crawler. The failure of either of these components during under-tank deployment would require manual retrieval via the crawler’s tether, which risks damage to the robot/refractory/tank. Preemptive replacement of the components at appropriately conservative dose/time intervals informed by failure dose would reduce the likelihood of under-tank failure. The components were included in radiation tolerance testing to quantify their failure doses to inform replacement intervals. The air-slot sensor is responsible for collecting ultrasonic inspection data (scan images) for the tank bottom plates during under-tank deployment. Compromised signal quality due to elevated noise levels caused by gamma radiation would compromise inspection performance. The air-slot sensor was included in radiation tolerance testing to quantify the impact of active irradiation on sensor signal quality. The irradiation and in-situ functional tests of the PCBs, DC motors and air-slot sensor took place in June and July 2020 at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Testing was performed at a gamma dose rate near 300 rad/hr., which, in the absence of under-tank dose rate data, has been conservatively estimated to be the upper-bound dose rate beneath the primary tanks at Hanford. Irradiation took place at elevated temperatures of 150-200°F to determine failure doses that reflect the compounding effects of gamma radiation and heat. The test results revealed: • The DC motors can tolerate being actively irradiated at the high dose rate at 200°F and can tolerate a cumulative dose of 300,000 rad, that which would be incurred after 5 years of service at the 300 rad/hr dose rate. The component therefore meets minimum and preferred radiation tolerance and lifecycle requirements for robotic components. • The air-slot sensor can tolerate being actively irradiated at the high dose rate at 150°F and can tolerate a cumulative dose of 60,000 rad, that which would be incurred after 1 year of service at the 300 rad/hr dose rate. The sensor therefore meets minimum radiation tolerance and lifecycle requirements. • The PCB can tolerate being actively irradiated at the high dose rate, but can only tolerate a cumulative dose of 19,000 rad at 150-200°F. The PCB does not meet minimum radiation tolerance and lifecycle requirements; however, because the component is considered replaceable, it can be replaced before a cumulative dose of 19,000 rad is reached, determined through either monitoring with a dosimeter or scheduled time intervals that are calculated based on conservative estimates of under-tank dose rates.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.4 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.6 Verification Tests Manual

Presented in this document is a small portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra / SolidMechanics (Sierra / SM) verfication 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verfied or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra / SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verfication tests exist in the Sierra / SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.8 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.10 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

42 ENGINEERING↗

DOE OSTI2022

Introducing the 9500 Node Distribution Test System to Support Advanced Power Applications: An Operations-Focused Approach

The 9500 Node Test System is a representative section of distribution power system model developed as a part of the GridAPPS-D™ project, an effort funded by DOE as a part of the Grid Modernization Lab Consortium (GMLC) program. The test system was developed to fulfill a growing need to represent the rapidly evolving state of electric distribution systems by combining elements of legacy infrastructure systems, modern feeder topologies, and an anticipated future with smart grid technologies. It also provides a network model capable of supporting the simulation of operational scenarios such as the ones in a utility distribution control center. This test system allows the evaluation of the performance of advanced power applications in real-time, such as one that simulates the operations of an Advanced Distribution Management Systems (ADMS), Distributed Energy Resource Management Systems (DERMS), etc. in a Distribution control center. This model is an extension of the widely used IEEE 8500 Node Test Feeder and is currently being validated to become an IEEE test case to help increase adoption and widespread usage among both academia and industry. It is a full-size model representative of a section of a utility’s distribution system with multiple feeders fed from different substations. The model includes multiple distribution circuits, a sub-transmission system, multiple substations, behind the meter customer rooftop photovoltaics (PV), and multiple utility-scale distributed energy resources. To enable accurate simulations of operational scenarios, the 9500 Node Test System is designed to support procedure-based operations, with the ability to realistically demonstrate switching operations, feeder reconfiguration, adjustment of volt-var control equipment, dispatch of distributed generation, and response to planned and unplanned outages. The 9500 Node Test System includes three radial distribution feeders with 12.3 MVA of average load, consisting of both medium voltage and low voltage equipment each supplied by a different distribution substation. The three distribution feeders are connected to each other through Normally-Open switches which can be closed when needed to simulate restoration scenarios due to a fault. One feeder represents today’s grid with low penetration of customer-side renewables. The second represents a potential future grid with microgrids and 100% renewable penetration. The third has no customer generation resources, a district steam plant, and a utility-scale solar farm. The three diverse circuits were created to allow the simulation of both today’s situation as well as potential future scenarios. All three feeders have customers connected by low-voltage secondary triplex lines. This test system meets all requirements outlined in the report for creating a simulation environment that would enable discussion between key technical stakeholders as well as having the potential to accelerate operational application development and their subsequent testing and integration. The new model is a possible representation of what we believe the distribution grid may look like in the future: a high penetration of renewables, reconfigurable radial and mesh topology, numerous DERs, islanded microgrids, and significantly increased data and measurement density. The system supports both the solution of existing and newer algorithms but also enables the evaluation of applications in a realistic operational environment defined by task oriented procedural steps that represent the interaction between the control center operator and field personnel.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗

DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Air-Purifying Respirator (APR) and Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on a Hanford AX Tank Farm Exhauster Slipstream Volume 1

Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) conducted tests of four types of chemical cartridges for air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance1 for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPCs) from vapors exiting the Hanford AX tank farm exhauster slipstream. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) considers cartridge testing to be a valid approach for establishing a cartridge service life. Testing is applied in situations where mixtures of COPCs exist, and where other approaches, such as manufacturer recommendations and modeling, are less reliable. The tests were designed and conducted to assure measurement and/or control of the key variables OSHA identified as important to estimate the cartridge service life, including temperature, humidity, COPC concentration, breathing rate, and cartridge adsorption capacity. Cartridge testing using vapors from a Hanford AX tank farm exhauster slipstream was conducted from August 25–27, 2017. Vapors from the exhauster slipstream were fed to two respirator cartridge test stands developed by WRPS in collaboration with HiLine Engineering (Richland, Washington). Four different cartridges were assessed. Multipurpose APR cartridges—SCOTT 7422-SD1 and SCOTT 7422-SC1 (SCOTT Safety, Monroe, North Carolina)—were assessed on separate days using an APR cartridge test stand. Multipurpose PAPR cartridges—MSA-TL (TL1) (MSA Safety Inc., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and 3M FR57 (TL2) (3M Company, Maplewood, Minnesota)—also were tested over the same two days using a separate PAPR cartridge test stand. Sample media (i.e., sorbent tubes) were used to collect samples of the vapor stream entering and exiting the respirator cartridges and were subsequently analyzed for COPC concentrations. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory was tasked with conducting an independent analysis of the analytical results and making recommendations based on the results for respiratory cartridge performance and service life. The key conclusions from the analysis are described below.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Analysis of Powered Air-Purifying Respirator (PAPR) Cartridge Performance Testing on Hanford Tanks SX-101 and SX-104: Volume 2 Raw Analytical Data

As the Tank Operations Contractor for U.S. Department of Energy operations at the Hanford site in Washington State, Washington River Protection Solutions (WRPS) is responsible for managing highly radioactive wastes stored in tanks at Hanford. WRPS tests of cartridges used in air-purifying respirators (APR) and powered air-purifying respirators (PAPR) commonly used at Hanford Tank Farms. The tests are conducted to determine the period of time the cartridges would provide adequate performance for APRs and PAPRs used to protect workers when exposed to a mixture of Chemicals of Potential Concern (COPC) from any vapors exiting headspaces in the storage tanks. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Standard 29 Code of the Federal Regulations (CFR) 1910.134(d)(3)(iii)(b)(2) specifies that for protection against gases and vapors, employers shall implement a schedule for cartridges to ensure that change-outs occur before the end of service life. The change schedule can be based on objective information or data that ensures cartridge change-outs occur before the end of their service life. The primary function of the WRPS Cartridge Test Program is to obtain objective data to determine service lives for the APR and PAPR cartridges used at Hanford Tank Farms. WRPS contracted with Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to analyze the test data and offer an independent analysis and any recommendations. This report summarizes data analysis of PAPR cartridge testing on headspace vapors from Hanford SX-101 and SX-104 single-shell tanks. Two different PAPR cartridges—one from MSA Safety Inc. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) and another from 3M (Maplewood, Minnesota)—were assessed on each tank headspace source on separate days. These data represent the first PAPR cartridge testing under the recent WRPS program, as testing to date had been focused on APR cartridges. Volume 1 of this report documents the testing, data analysis, results, conclusions, and recommendations resulting from the PAPR testing on SX-101 and SX-104 headspace vapors. Volume 2 provides an introduction to the raw data, including analytical laboratory analysis results that supported the analysis and conclusions documented in Volume 1.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

TESTING AND PROCESSING OF PRE-PRODUCTION 325 MHZ SINGLE SPOKE RESONATOR POWER COUPLERS FOR PIP-II PROJECT

Fundamental 325 MHz power couplers are designed, built and tested for SSR cavities in PIP-II project [1]. Couplers should work in CW mode at power level 7.5kW w/o beam and ~15 kW with the 2 mA beam. At pre-production stage we built and tested 6 couplers, produced by CPI (FNAL) and PMB (IJCLab) and 4 more couplers will be tested soon. Two of tested couplers had TiN coated ceramic window. In warm test stand two couplers were mounted on the coupling chamber and tested in SW regime at full reflection with phase controlled by position of short and reflection insert. Couplers were tested at pulse mode (up to 25kW) and cw mode (12kW) with HV bias or without bias. Test results demonstrated that 3.5 kV DC bias completely suppresses multipactor in coupler. Vacuum activity in coupler was controlled by e-pickups and build-in vacuum gauges, located near the vacuum side of window. Power processing without DC bias was done for several couplers with and without TiN coating on ceramic window. Test results are presented and discussing in paper.

72 PHYSICS OF ELEMENTARY PARTICLES AND FIELDS↗

DOE OSTI2023

Bench-Scale Testing of a High Efficiency, Ultra-Compact Process for Pre-Combustion CO 2 Capture (Final Report)

The overarching objective of this bench-scale study is to field-validate the technical feasibility of a membrane- and adsorption-enhanced water gas shift (WGS) reaction process that employs a carbon molecular sieve (CMS) membrane reactor (MR) followed by an adsorption reactor (AR) for pre-combustion CO 2 capture while demonstrating progress towards achievement of the overall performance goals of CO 2 capture with 95% CO 2 purity at a cost of electricity (COE) of 30% less than the baseline capture approaches. The main goal of this bench-scale project is to advance the proposed MR-AR transformative CO 2 capture technology to a sufficient maturity level so that our present industrial partners (M&PT and Worley) can potentially adapt the technology for further small pilot-scale testing. The project began at TRL 4, as the system prototype had already been validated in the laboratory on simulated syngas (as part of project DE-FE0026423). The project ended at TRL 5, via scaling-up of the prototype system and testing it on actual syngas at a host site (CAER at the University of Kentucky (UKy)). The project was carried-out in two different phases: In Phase I (during BP1 of the project), the team designed, constructed, and assembled the bench-scale experimental MR-AR system, prepared the membranes, adsorbents, and catalysts, tested the bench-scale unit with simulated syngas to validate functionality, and prepared a preliminary TEA of the technology. In Phase II (during BP2 of the project), the team installed the unit at the test site at the UKy site and completed all utility connections and hookups, field-tested the novel MR-AR process in the bench-scale system using real syngas, collected and analyzed experimental data, and completed a detailed TEA of the technology. A key aim of the project was to identify and address the technical and process risks and to generate information to advance the technology to the next stage of development. All project milestones and success criteria were met. Specifically, the team: (i) designed, constructed and assembled a bench scale system that handled 1 – 5 scfm syngas and tested its functionality with simulated syngas; (ii) prepared high performance CMS membrane tubes (ID: 3.5 mm, OD: 5.7 mm, 30” long) that meet the target H 2 permeance ( > 1 m 3 /(m 2 .hr.bar) or (> 370.3 GPU)) and a target H 2 /CO selectivity >80 at the relevant temperature (up to 300oC) and pressure conditions (up to 25 bar) with a <10% decline in performance over each 250 hr. testing period (iii) procured commercial sour-shift catalyst in sufficient quantity and prepared up to 10 kg of pelletized adsorbent for use at relevant conditions (250oC 2.5wt.% and target sorbent attrition rate < 0.2; (iv) installed the bench-scale unit at the test site (UKy) and tested the MR-AR technology using real syngas for over 250 hr. for both static and flow experiments; (v) updated the TEA analysis based on bench-scale data and met CO 2 capture goals of 95% CO 2 purity at a cost of electricity 30% less than baseline capture approaches. The CMS membranes, HTC adsorbents and catalysts employed all exhibited very robust and stable performance during the long-term run (over a >250 hr live syngas run). Furthermore, the proposed MR-AR IGCC system achieved a LCOE with a N 2 sale price of $\$$ 30/ton, with N 2 compression (no N 2 compression) of 101.2 $\$$/MWh (95.3 $\$$/MWh), which represents a 29.8% (33.9%) LCOE reduction in the baseline IGCC with carbon capture of 144.2 $\$$/MWh. The proposed MR-AR IGCC delivers a CO 2 capture cost of 44.8 $\$$/tonne (39.9 $\$$/tonne) vs 98.1 $\$$/tonne of the baseline capture case and a net power production of 586 MWe (623 MWe) vs 556 MWe of the baseline capture case.

01 COAL, LIGNITE, AND PEAT↗

DOE OSTI2023

Hardware-in-the-loop testing of a hydraulic wave energy power take-off system

This report describes testing conducted related to the development of a “hydrostatic power takeoff” (HPTO) system for a wave energy converter. Tests were conducted with an experimental electric motor rig to provide preliminary results and de-risk future testing. Efficiency mapping tests were conducted as well as hardware-in-the-loop (HIL) testing. The results of the efficiency mapping tests provide good insight into how to systematically perform efficiency mapping tests. The HIL testing indicates good overall performance of the system and provides a stepping stone towards more complete system tests in the future.

16 TIDAL AND WAVE POWER↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.20 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.18 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2023

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.16 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2024

Compositional Variation Tests on DuraMelter 100 with LAW Sub-Envelope C1 Feed (LAWC22) Glass in Support of the LAW Pilot Melter (Final Report)

The Vitreous State Laboratory at The Catholic University of America (VSL) is developing and testing glass formulations for RPP-WTP waste envelopes to provide data to meet the RPP-WTP contract requirements and to support system design activities. That work is based upon small-scale batch melts (“crucible melts”) using waste envelope simulants. Selected formulations have also been tested in small-scale continuously-fed joule-heated melters (DM10 and DM100 systems) and, ultimately, in the LAW Pilot Melter. Such melter tests provide information on key process factors such as feed processing behavior, dynamic effects during processing, sulfate incorporation, processing rates, off-gas amounts and compositions, foaming control, etc., that cannot be reliably obtained from crucible melts. This sequential scale-up approach in the vitrification testing program ensures that maximum benefit is obtained from the more costly pilot-scale tests and that the most effective use is made of that resource. The principal objective of the work described in this report was to collect the necessary small-scale melter test data with a LAW Sub-Envelope C1 waste simulant in order to support the next series of tests with the same melter feed on the LAW Pilot Melter. This work was conducted under a corresponding Test Specification and Test Plan.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.22 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

ORNL Package Testing Program Overview

When transporting radioactive or hazardous materials, safety and security are top priorities. Packaging and transportation regulations require reliable evidence that containers have passed rigorous performance tests to ensure that the public and the environment are protected from the hazardous nature of the cargo. Because of its long history in energy and security research, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) has needed to ship hazardous packages for the past 65 years. Since the 1940s, ORNL has made significant contributions to transportation regulations and has been at the forefront of regulatory testing development. Today, ORNL is a leader in standards development and testing of designs of radioactive material packages. ORNL plays a critical role in ensuring the safe transportation of radioactive materials across the United States by executing rigorous testing campaigns of packages that contain radioactive materials. Early testing activities focused on supporting the development of transportation regulations established by both the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the United States. Currently, all package testing activities are performed under the Package Testing Program (PTP) at the Package Evaluation Facility (PEF) located at the National Transportation Research Center (NTRC), which is about 10 miles from the main ORNL campus. The PTP develops and evaluates testing solutions, ensuring that they are safe efficient, and in compliance with regulatory requirements. The vision for the PTP is to be a world-class leader in the evaluation and testing of radioactive and hazardous material packages. The key elements necessary to fulfill this mission are an experienced and professional staff; state-of-the-art facilities, equipment, and instrumentation; and completion of challenging programs and projects important to package transportation. Collaborations with other internal and external organizations play a significant role in building stronger teams and achieving this vision. By adhering to and advancing regulatory standards, ORNL’s PTP supports development of safe and compliant packaging, safeguarding the transportation process from potential risks associated with radioactive material logistics.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗

DOE OSTI2026

Sierra/SolidMechanics 5.28 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. Mesh convergence is also checked on a nightly basis for several of these tests. This document can be used to confirm that a given code capability is verified or referenced as a compilation of example problems. Additional example problems are provided in the Sierra/SM Example Problems Manual. Note, many other verification tests exist in the Sierra/SM test suite, but have not yet been included in this manual.

96 KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT AND PRESERVATION↗