Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “verifications”

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 415 records · Page 23
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2013

Code Verification and Confidence-Building

This document described the current status of verification and confidence building activities for the four simulation codes used for groundwater flow and transport simulations in the NRAP project. This is meant to be a ‘living document’ which will evolve as the verification suites expand and the models are tested against new field and laboratory experiments. Documenting these activities will enable the simulation teams at different laboratories to share verification problems, to benchmark against other codes. It will also help stakeholders understand the testing process and to gain confidence in model results.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2014

A Zero Knowledge Protocol For Nuclear Warhead Verification

The verification of nuclear warheads for arms control faces a paradox: International inspectors must gain high confidence in the authenticity of submitted items while learning nothing about them. Conventional inspection systems featuring ''information barriers'', designed to hide measurments stored in electronic systems, are at risk of tampering and snooping. Here we show the viability of fundamentally new approach to nuclear warhead verification that incorporates a zero-knowledge protocol, designed such that sensitive information is never measured so does not need to be hidden. We interrogate submitted items with energetic neutrons, making in effect, differential measurements of neutron transmission and emission. Calculations of diversion scenarios show that a high degree of discrimination can be achieved while revealing zero information. Timely demonstration of the viability of such an approach could be critical for the nexxt round of arms-control negotiations, which will likely require verification of individual warheads, rather than whole delivery systems.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2011

Nuclear Data Verification and Standardization

The objective of this interagency program is to provide accurate neutron interaction verification and standardization data for the U.S. Department of Energy Division of Nuclear Physics programs which include astrophysics, radioactive beam studies, and heavy-ion reactions. The measurements made in this program are also useful to other programs that indirectly use the unique properties of the neutron for diagnostic and analytical purposes. These include homeland security, personnel health and safety, nuclear waste disposal, treaty verification, national defense, and nuclear based energy production. The work includes the verification of reference standard cross sections and related neutron data employing the unique facilities and capabilities at NIST and other laboratories as required; leadership and participation in international intercomparisons and collaborations; and the preservation of standard reference deposits. An essential element of the program is critical evaluation of neutron interaction data standards including international coordinations. Data testing of critical data for important applications is included. The program is jointly supported by the Department of Energy and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2014

Verification and validation plan for the SFR system analysis module

This report documents the Verification and Validation (V&V) Plan for software verification and validation of the SFR System Analysis Module (SAM), developed at Argonne National Laboratory for sodium fast reactor whole-plant transient analysis. SAM is developed under the DOE NEAMS program and is part of the Reactor Product Line toolkit. The SAM code, the phenomena and computational models of interest, the software quality assurance, and the verification and validation requirements and plans are discussed in this report.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2017

Verification of EPA's " Preliminary remediation goals for radionuclides" (PRG) electronic calculator

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requested an external, independent verification study of their “Preliminary Remediation Goals for Radionuclides” (PRG) electronic calculator. The calculator provides information on establishing PRGs for radionuclides at Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) sites with radioactive contamination (Verification Study Charge, Background). These risk-based PRGs set concentration limits using carcinogenic toxicity values under specific exposure conditions (PRG User’s Guide, Section 1). The purpose of this verification study is to ascertain that the computer codes has no inherit numerical problems with obtaining solutions as well as to ensure that the equations are programmed correctly.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2017

A Systematic Method for Verification and Validation of Gyrokinetic Microstability Codes

My original proposal for the period Feb. 15, 2014 through Feb. 14, 2017 called for an integrated validation and verification effort carried out by myself with collaborators. The validation component would require experimental profile and power-balance analysis. In addition, it would require running the gyrokinetic codes varying the input profiles within experimental uncertainties to seek agreement with experiment before discounting a code as invalidated. Therefore, validation would require a major increase of effort over my previous grant periods which covered only code verification (code benchmarking). Consequently, I had requested full-time funding. Instead, I am being funded at somewhat less than half time (5 calendar months per year). As a consequence, I decided to forego the validation component and to only continue the verification efforts.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
DOE OSTI2017

Initial Verification and Validation Assessment for VERA

The Virtual Environment for Reactor Applications (VERA) code suite is assessed in terms of capability and credibility against the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) Verification and Validation Plan (presented herein) in the context of three selected challenge problems: CRUD-Induced Power Shift (CIPS), Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB), and Pellet-Clad Interaction (PCI). Capability refers to evidence of required functionality for capturing phenomena of interest while capability refers to the evidence that provides confidence in the calculated results. For this assessment, each challenge problem defines a set of phenomenological requirements against which the VERA software is assessed. This approach, in turn, enables the focused assessment of only those capabilities relevant to the challenge problem. The evaluation of VERA against the challenge problem requirements represents a capability assessment. The mechanism for assessment is the Sandia-developed Predictive Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) that, for this assessment, evaluates VERA on 8 major criteria: (1) Representation and Geometric Fidelity, (2) Physics and Material Model Fidelity, (3) Software Quality Assurance and Engineering, (4) Code Verification, (5) Solution Verification, (6) Separate Effects Model Validation, (7) Integral Effects Model Validation, and (8) Uncertainty Quantification. For each attribute, a maturity score from zero to three is assigned in the context of each challenge problem. The evaluation of these eight elements constitutes the credibility assessment for VERA.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗
DOE OSTI2016

CASL Verification and Validation Plan

This report documents the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of LWRs (CASL) verification and validation plan. The document builds upon input from CASL subject matter experts, most notably the CASL Challenge Problem Product Integrators, CASL Focus Area leaders, and CASL code development and assessment teams. This document will be a living document that will track progress on CASL to do verification and validation for both the CASL codes (including MPACT, CTF, BISON, MAMBA) and for the CASL challenge problems (CIPS, PCI, DNB). The CASL codes and the CASL challenge problems are at differing levels of maturity with respect to validation and verification. The gap analysis will summarize additional work that needs to be done. Additional VVUQ work will be done as resources permit. This report is prepared for the Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) CASL program in support of milestone CASL.P13.02.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Verification of Vessel Fluence and Excore Modeling with VERA

This document outlines the completion of the L2:RTM.P17.01 milestone to deliver and report verification of vessel fluence and excore modeling capabilities in VERA to Advanced Modeling Applications (AMA). It gives details on the unit testing and initial verification of vessel fluence and excore detector calculations performed with VERA, as well as the plotting capabilities in VERAView. This capability is now ready for further testing and verification and validation by AMA.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Updated Verification and Validation Assessment for VERA

The Virtual Environment for Reactor Applications (VERA) code suite is assessed in terms of capability and credibility against the Consortium for Advanced Simulation of Light Water Reactors (CASL) Verification and Validation Plan (presented herein) in the context of three selected challenge problems: CRUD-Induced Power Shift (CIPS), Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB), and Pellet-Clad Interaction (PCI). Capability refers to evidence of required functionality for capturing phenomena of interest while credibility refers to the evidence that provides confidence in the calculated results. For this assessment, each challenge problem defines a set of phenomenological requirements against which the VERA software is assessed. This approach, in turn, enables the focused assessment of only those capabilities relevant to the challenge problem. The evaluation of VERA against the challenge problem requirements represents a capability assessment. The mechanism for assessment is the Sandia-developed Predictive Capability Maturity Model (PCMM) that, for this assessment, evaluates VERA on 8 major criteria: (1) Representation and Geometric Fidelity, (2) Physics and Material Model Fidelity, (3) Software Quality Assurance and Engineering, (4) Code Verification, (5) Solution Verification, (6) Separate Effects Model Validation, (7) Integral Effects Model Validation, and (8) Uncertainty Quantification. For each attribute, a maturity score from zero to three is assigned in the context of each challenge problem. The evaluation of these eight elements constitutes the credibility assessment for VERA.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Verification and Validation of the PLTEMP/ANL Code for Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Experimental and Test Reactors

This report documents the verification and validation (V&V) of the PLTEMP/ANL Version 4.3 code. A brief description of the code and its history are given in Section 1.1. Section 1.2 provides an overview of PLTEMP/ANL verification and validation work done to date. Section 1.3 lists some publications by other authors on PLTEMP/ANL verification and validation. Section 1.4 describes a UNIX script developed to routinely verify the code after a code modification. The V&V work documented in this report was performed over several years, as code development progressed. In each verification/validation testing discussion, the version of PLTEMP/ANL which was initially used for the V&V work is referenced, but all of the testing presented in this report is applicable to current release version 4.3 of the code.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2018

Sierra Structural Dynamics Code Verification Plan

Verification and validation (V&V) of scientific computing programs are important at San- dia National Laboratories (SNL) due to the expanding role of computational simulation in managing the United States nuclear stockpile. This document presents the verification plan for the Sierra Structural Dynamics application. This verification plan includes code devel- opment practices, structure of test suites, and additional quality assurance practices used by the Sierra/SD team.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2019

Reporting Verification of BOP Shear Ram Capability: Requirements and Good Practices on Reporting Blowout Preventer (BOP) Shear Ram Capability for Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Operations

The Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) Well Control Rule (Subpart G)1 became effective on July 28, 2016. This rule is part of the BSEE regulations pertaining to well control equipment used for oil and gas operations on the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf (OCS). More recently BSEE issue a proposed rule to amend portions of the 2016 well control rule. This proposed rule (now implemented) appeared in the Federal Register on May 18, 2018. This report was prepared late in the public comment period for the current rule and intended is a sample of desirable documentation of blind shear ram shear testing and associated regulatory requirements either in place or anticipated at the time of preparation. In accordance with this original rule and the proposed revisions, BSEE requests specific information regarding the capabilities of blind shear rams (BSR) in the Blowout Preventer (BOP). This information is required prior to beginning any operation involving the use of any BOP. More specifically, Title 30 CFR 250.732(b) of these regulations requires documentation of shear testing demonstrating the shearing and sealing capabilities of the BOP BSR. Such documentation is consistent with and complementary to other documentation verifying the designs of individual well control components and the overall BOP system. Verification demonstrates performance and reliability of the equipment based on a testing process that is repeatable and reproducible.2 This document, an annotated outline of verification documentation, arises from the combination of regulations and good practices concerning how to report BOP shear ram tests and third-party verification of BSR capability to support BSEE’s regulatory role.

03 NATURAL GAS↗
DOE OSTI2020

Verification and Validation of MFiX-PIC

This work is aimed at verification and validation (V&V) of particle-in-cell (PIC) approach in the National Energy Technology Laboratory’s (NETL) Multiphase Flow with Interphase eXchanges (MFiX-PIC) which was officially released in April 2019. Under verification, the results from MFiX-PIC are compared with exact or analytical solutions, while experimental results are used for benchmarking under validation. The test suite consists of the following cases: Terminal velocity. Particle advection in time-varying flow field. Particle settling in a dense medium. Evaporation. Rayleigh-Taylor instability. Minimum fluidization. Mini-circulating fluidized bed. The cases reported in a format consistent with the existing Verification and Validation Manual (Musser et al., 2018) explore a wide range of flow velocities and concentration regimes. Only one case considered in this work verifies the implementation of heat and mass transfer routines in MFiX-PIC, while a few other studies are currently underway to further expand the validation space in reacting flows. This study highlights the need for a rigorous analysis to objectively quantify the effect of model parameters. In addition, there is a scarcity of high-quality experimental data in the literature suitable for validating PIC methodology. Future efforts would include performing experiments which provide results for a valuable database. While designing such experiments, particle count should be significant to have sufficient particles per parcel while maintaining an optimal parcel to cell volume ratio. Also, datasets should have objectively assessed experimental uncertainty whereby confidence interval in those measurements become more explicit.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2020

Shell Element Material Model Verification Problems for DYNA3D: Part II

A suite of supplementary shell element material model verification tests were developed for the explicit finite element program DYNA3D, in continuation of the work performed in LLNL-TR-792469 (Shell Element Material Model Verification Problems for DYNA3D). The testing procedure developed in the preceding report is extended, and used to verify all remaining untested shell model features and inputs. A collection of 78 feature-specific verification tests are proposed, some of which are applicable to multiple material models, though many are specialized to a particular model. The collective suite of tests cover all 27 currently available material models in DYNA3D. In the course of developing the proposed test suite, 24 separate shell model-related issues were identified and have subsequently been resolved.

42 ENGINEERING↗
DOE OSTI2021

24.1.3.1 - Verification of Spent Fuel Inside Dry Storage Casks by Fast/Epi-thermal Neutron Mapping

Development of a spent-fuel verification method based upon positional measurement of fast neutrons emitted from the top surface of the dry storage casks. A proof-of-principle field test on a partially loaded spent-fuel cask will be conducted by measuring the fast neutron flux on the top of the cask as a function of position using a single detector. If a useful verification signature is demonstrated, a multi-detector scanning array will be built and tested in FY2021 to demonstrate a practical rapid verification system in FY2022.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2022

Verification and Validation of a Modified Numerical Algorithm for Simulation of Transient Unconfined Groundwater Flow

This report extends verification and validation testing of the NUFT package of codes (Nitao 2000a,b) to the US1P module of code designed for simulation of single-phase mixed or “coupled” saturated and unsaturated (or “variably saturated”) groundwater flow. Importantly, the verification and validation testing of US1P in this report includes performance evaluation of a modified numerical algorithm that was not included in prior quality assurance (QA) of the NUFT package by Carle et al. (2014) for Underground Test Area (UGTA) project activities, which are directed at assessment of radionuclide contamination in groundwater sourced from underground nuclear test locations at the Nevada National Security Site (NNSS). An immediate purpose of this report is to provide QA for ongoing large-scale, three-dimensional (3-D) groundwater flow modeling of transient water levels associated with longterm water supply pumping and underground nuclear testing at the NNSS (Jackson and Fenelon, 2018; Jackson et al., 2021). For UGTA activities, the QA refers to the standards of ASTM (1996) for verification and validation testing of groundwater modeling codes.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2022

Verification of Spent Fuel Inside Dry Storage Casks Using Neutron Mapping (2022 Midyear Report)

Development of a spent-fuel verification method based upon positional measurement of fast neutrons emitted from the top surface of the dry storage casks. A proof-of-principle field test on a partially loaded spent-fuel cask will be conducted by measuring the fast neutron flux on the top of the cask as a function of position using a single detector. If a useful verification signature is demonstrated, a multi-detector scanning array will be built and tested to demonstrate a practical rapid verification system.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗