Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Software assurance”

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 55 records · Page 3
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Fiscal Year 2024 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software

The continued goal of the ARC SQA project in the Advanced Reactor Technologies program of DOE is to resolve the QA gaps for the ARC software that limit, or prevent, commercialization of the software for industry users. This project started in earnest in fiscal year 2023 which saw the entire code system moved from a SVN repository to a GitLab repository and an associated software quality assurance plan (SQAP) developed and ratified. Most of the QA gaps in the ARC software were identified in collaboration with industry partners and work begin in fiscal year 2023 and continued in 2024. The primary documentation that is missing includes user manuals, user guides, software verification reports, and code coverage assessments. The SUMMAR manual was completed this fiscal year and work was started on creating manuals for SE2ANL, SE2RCT, and DASSH. Software verification work was carried out for DIF3D and REBUS in a previous program and the current fiscal year saw the completion of software verification reports for GAMSOR, GAMSRC, VARPOW, EvaluateFlux, and SUMMAR. The goal for the next fiscal year is to complete the PERSENT software verification work and begin planning the software verification work for DASSH, SE2ANL, and SE2RCT. The code coverage reports for DIF3D and MC2-3 were completed in the previous fiscal year and the goal is to generate code coverage reports for REBUS, GAMSOR, PERSENT, and DASSH in the coming fiscal year. A considerable amount of effort was spent in the current fiscal year working on the continuous integration capability for automated regression testing in GitLab. The first version of the testing was created in the previous fiscal year and applied to DIF3D and its utility programs. That testing was extended this year to cover GAMSOR, REBUS, and PERSENT. To accomplish this, the first version of the new testing methodology had to be updated to make a single output checking methodology viable for all of the ARC software. This will result in a single document to detail the automated regression testing methodology and minor documents to detail the tolerance settings that have been applied to the output for each ARC code. The previous methodology put into place with SVN would have required a separate document for each ARC code to detail the output checking methodology and the tolerance settings for the output from each code. Because some of our industry partners are providing funds to add new capabilities to the ARC software to meet their needs, all of which must be reviewed and approved by the SQA program funded by this project, a summary of that development work is detailed in this report. Overall progress on resolving the QA gaps has been good this year with the most impactful improvement for our industry partners in capability being the creation of a threaded version of DIF3D-VARIANT that allows the DIF3D, REBUS, and GAMSOR run times to be reduced by a factor of 4-6. The most impactful QA gap that was resolved was the software verification of GAMSRC and VARPOW.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software

The continued goal of the ARC SQA project in the Advanced Reactor Technologies program of DOE is to resolve the QA gaps for the ARC software that limit, or prevent, commercialization of the software for industry users. This project started in earnest in fiscal year 2023 which saw the entire code system moved from a SVN repository to a GitLab repository and an associated software quality assurance plan (SQAP) developed and ratified. Most of the QA gaps in the ARC software were identified in collaboration with industry partners and work begin in fiscal year 2023 and continued through 2024 and 2025. The continuous integration testing was extended to RCT, DASSH, and SE2ANL. Minor changes were required to the original continuous integration methodology to make this happen. When full confidence in the methodology is complete, a report will be created to detail the automated regression testing methodology and minor reports will be created to detail the tolerance settings that have been applied to the output for each ARC code. The primary documentation that is missing includes user manuals, user guides, software verification reports, and code coverage assessments. The DASSH, SE2ANL, and SE2RCT manuals were completed this fiscal year. A review of the SE2ANL software identified that it is unrealistic to include updated correlations or different geometry models and it was scheduled for deprecation in favor of DASSH. The SE2ANL manual is essential for SE2RCT as they are similar but quite different in purpose. The only piece of software missing a manual consistent with the source code is NUBOW-3D which is a focus of the coming year. The code coverage report for DIF3D was updated and code coverage reports were created for REBUS, RCT, PERSENT, GAMSRC, and DASSH. Minor coverage issues were identified for all of these pieces of software which did not prevent the work done to transition them to the OneAPI compiler. Because SE2ANL was scheduled for deprecation, it was not transitioned, but it was successfully tested with the OneAPI compiler. This leaves SE2RCT and NUBOW-3D as the only pieces of software not transitioned to OneAPI and further work is required to get SE2RCT to work properly. The SE2RCT software transition will begin early next year while the NUBOW-3D software requires a manual before it can begin. Software verification work has been completed for DIF3D, REBUS, GAMSOR, GAMSRC, VARPOW, EvaluateFlux, and SUMMAR. The PERSENT software verification work was completed this year which was somewhat delayed because of unexpected bugs in the software. The PERSENT manual was updated to detail some of the issues and discuss the bowing reactivity worth feature added in the previous fiscal year. The RCT, DASSH, SE2RCT, and NUBOW-3D software are the only maintained pieces of software without verification reports. The software verification work for DASSH will be a focus in the upcoming fiscal year and it is hoped that some of the test cases created can serve as verification tests for SE2RCT. The NUBOW-3D work will begin when the manual and requirements report are completed. Only minor industry partner software development funds were provided this year. The DASSH software was updated to handle general axial geometry for each assembly and the NUBOW-3D software was updated to incorporate a new input format and better output. Overall progress on resolving the QA gaps has been good this year.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2025

Fiscal Year 2025 Software Quality Assurance Activities for the ARC Software

The continued goal of the ARC SQA project in the Advanced Reactor Technologies program of DOE is to resolve the QA gaps for the ARC software that limit, or prevent, commercialization of the software for industry users. This project started in earnest in fiscal year 2023 which saw the entire code system moved from a SVN repository to a GitLab repository and an associated software quality assurance plan (SQAP) developed and ratified. Most of the QA gaps in the ARC software were identified in collaboration with industry partners and work begin in fiscal year 2023 and continued through 2024 and 2025. The continuous integration testing was extended to RCT, DASSH, and SE2ANL. Minor changes were required to the original continuous integration methodology to make this happen. When full confidence in the methodology is complete, a report will be created to detail the automated regression testing methodology and minor reports will be created to detail the tolerance settings that have been applied to the output for each ARC code. The primary documentation that is missing includes user manuals, user guides, software verification reports, and code coverage assessments. The DASSH, SE2ANL, and SE2RCT manuals were completed this fiscal year. A review of the SE2ANL software identified that it is unrealistic to include updated correlations or different geometry models and it was scheduled for deprecation in favor of DASSH. The SE2ANL manual is essential for SE2RCT as they are similar but quite different in purpose. The only piece of software missing a manual consistent with the source code is NUBOW-3D which is a focus of the coming year. The code coverage report for DIF3D was updated and code coverage reports were created for REBUS, RCT, PERSENT, GAMSRC, and DASSH. Minor coverage issues were identified for all of these pieces of software which did not prevent the work done to transition them to the OneAPI compiler. Because SE2ANL was scheduled for deprecation, it was not transitioned, but it was successfully tested with the OneAPI compiler. This leaves SE2RCT and NUBOW-3D as the only pieces of software not transitioned to OneAPI and further work is required to get SE2RCT to work properly. The SE2RCT software transition will begin early next year while the NUBOW-3D software requires a manual before it can begin. Software verification work has been completed for DIF3D, REBUS, GAMSOR, GAMSRC, VARPOW, EvaluateFlux, and SUMMAR. The PERSENT software verification work was completed this year which was somewhat delayed because of unexpected bugs in the software. The PERSENT manual was updated to detail some of the issues and discuss the bowing reactivity worth feature added in the previous fiscal year. The RCT, DASSH, SE2RCT, and NUBOW-3D software are the only maintained pieces of software without verification reports. The software verification work for DASSH will be a focus in the upcoming fiscal year and it is hoped that some of the test cases created can serve as verification tests for SE2RCT. The NUBOW-3D work will begin when the manual and requirements report are completed. Only minor industry partner software development funds were provided this year. The DASSH software was updated to handle general axial geometry for each assembly and the NUBOW-3D software was updated to incorporate a new input format and better output. Overall progress on resolving the QA gaps has been good this year.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC). Such complex systems with autonomous capabilities are often deployed with a Ground Control Software (GCS) component to enable remote operation. Whether the system is composed of a single unit or a fleet of units, deployed distributed or in remote environments, GCS acts as a window into the behavior of the deployed system. It receives telemetry from the system, issues commands to the system and provides various functionalities to visualize the system performance. We propose a dynamic assurance framework where the GCS acts as a relay between the autonomous system and its DAC. GCS can be used to measure both unit-specific as well as system-wide probabilistic quantifications using the incoming telemetry. We embed these quantifications throughout the DAC as variables that can be updated by external sources. We use the GCS to periodically update these variables, which allows us to continually evaluate the formally defined assurance case justifications. We demonstrate our dynamic assurance framework in the NASA Ames project Troupe1 that aims at developing a fleet of rovers capable of au- tonomously mapping their environment. The rovers work cooperatively, each collecting data for different parts of the environment. Each rover runs an identical core Flight System (cFS) [4] application. Troupe1 uses OpenC3 Cosmos [5] as the ground system, and AdvoCATE [3] to capture the system DAC. We show how we can measure both rover-specific and system-wide quantifications in Cosmos using its Ruby scripting editor and pass them into the DAC modelled in AdvoCATE. Then, we show how these incoming variables can be embedded in different parts of the DAC and how effects of their updates can be observed

Irfan Sljivo↗
NASA NTRS1989

The software product assurance metrics study: JPL's software systems quality and productivity

The findings are reported of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL)/Software Product Assurance (SPA) Metrics Study, conducted as part of a larger JPL effort to improve software quality and productivity. Until recently, no comprehensive data had been assembled on how JPL manages and develops software-intensive systems. The first objective was to collect data on software development from as many projects and for as many years as possible. Results from five projects are discussed. These results reflect 15 years of JPL software development, representing over 100 data points (systems and subsystems), over a third of a billion dollars, over four million lines of code and 28,000 person months. Analysis of this data provides a benchmark for gauging the effectiveness of past, present and future software development work. In addition, the study is meant to encourage projects to record existing metrics data and to gather future data. The SPA long term goal is to integrate the collection of historical data and ongoing project data with future project estimations.

Bush, Marilyn W.↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems through Ground Control Software∗

Assurance cases are being increasingly acknowledged as a way to build trust in complex systems with autonomous capabilities [1]. An assurance case is a comprehensive, defensible, and valid justification that a system will function as intended for the specific mission and operating environment. Such justifications for systems with autonomous capabilities are often based on various probabilistic quantifications [2]. Due to the dynamic nature of the environmental conditions in which these systems operate, as well as the changing nature of the autonomous systems themselves, these probabilistic quantifications cannot be simply estimated once during design time. Rather, they need to be continually evaluated during systems operations to ensure that the assurance case justifications are valid. We refer to the assurance case that combines both the static and dynamic elements as a Dynamic Assurance Case (DAC).

dynamic assurance case↗
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Dynamic Assurance of Autonomous Systems Through Ground Control Software

Assurance cases have emerged as a way to build trust in complex autonomous systems. Many assurance case justifications for such systems need to be constantly reevaluated based on the current system context and performance. Autonomous systems, especially those deployed in remote environments, often have a ground control system that enables monitoring and remote operations. In this paper, we propose a dynamic assurance framework that aims at connecting the assurance case with the ground control system. We use the ground control system to facilitate dynamic evaluation of quantitative assurance measures that support various justifications in the assurance case. We demonstrate the proposed dynamic assurance framework on the NASA Ames Research Center project Troupe. We use a combination of in-house and external tools to identify the assurance measures, formalize the related requirements, and generate monitors that feed the data to the external ground control system.

dynamic assurance case↗
NASA NTRS1991

Training, Quality Assurance Factors, and Tools Investigation: a Work Report and Suggestions on Software Quality Assurance

Previously, several research tasks have been conducted, some observations were obtained, and several possible suggestions have been contemplated involving software quality assurance engineering at NASA Johnson. These research tasks are briefly described. Also, a brief discussion is given on the role of software quality assurance in software engineering along with some observations and suggestions. A brief discussion on a training program for software quality assurance engineers is provided. A list of assurance factors as well as quality factors are also included. Finally, a process model which can be used for searching and collecting software quality assurance tools is presented.

Lee, Pen-Nan↗
NASA NTRS2004

Software for Optimizing Quality Assurance of Other Software

Software assurance is the planned and systematic set of activities that ensures that software processes and products conform to requirements, standards, and procedures. Examples of such activities are the following: code inspections, unit tests, design reviews, performance analyses, construction of traceability matrices, etc. In practice, software development projects have only limited resources (e.g., schedule, budget, and availability of personnel) to cover the entire development effort, of which assurance is but a part. Projects must therefore select judiciously from among the possible assurance activities. At its heart, this can be viewed as an optimization problem; namely, to determine the allocation of limited resources (time, money, and personnel) to minimize risk or, alternatively, to minimize the resources needed to reduce risk to an acceptable level. The end result of the work reported here is a means to optimize quality-assurance processes used in developing software.

Feather, Martin↗
NASA NTRS1990

Software Quality Assurance Audits Guidebooks

The growth in cost and importance of software to NASA has caused NASA to address the improvement of software development across the agency. One of the products of this program is a series of guidebooks that define a NASA concept of the assurance processes that are used in software development. The Software Assurance Guidebook, NASA-GB-A201, issued in September, 1989, provides an overall picture of the NASA concepts and practices in software assurance. Second level guidebooks focus on specific activities that fall within the software assurance discipline, and provide more detailed information for the manager and/or practitioner. This is the second level Software Quality Assurance Audits Guidebook that describes software quality assurance audits in a way that is compatible with practices at NASA Centers.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1990

Software quality assurance plan for GCS

The software quality assurance (SQA) function for the Guidance and Control Software (GCS) project which is part of a software error studies research program is described. The SQA plan outlines all of the procedures, controls, and audits to be carried out by the SQA organization to ensure adherence to the policies, procedures, and standards for the GCS project.

Duncan, Stephen E.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Software Quality Assurance Plan: Cardinal

The Cardinal Software Quality Assurance (SQA) Program aims to provide the controls and processes necessary to enable continuous, high-quality software development while meeting user and program sponsor requirements. This SQA Plan (SQAP) delineates the SQA Program framework for Cardinal by describing the Program activities, organization, and documentation, and by clearly defining the interconnection of all Program items. It should be noted that this SQAP is aligned with the current version of the Argonne Quality Assurance Program Plan, which was designed to align with DOE O 414.1D. This SQAP is also aligned with the revision 10 of the SQAP for MOOSE and MOOSE-based applications.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
DOE OSTI2025

Nuclear Materials Packaging, Transportation, and Systems Analysis Group Software Quality Assurance Plan: ANSYS Mechanical Finite Element Analysis Software Version 2023R1

ANSYS Inc. develops and markets engineering simulation software and services used in the aerospace, automotive, manufacturing, electronics, biomedical, energy, defense, and many other industries. ANSYS is dedicated to engineering simulation and is the world’s leading software provider. ANSYS was founded in 1970 and is headquartered in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania. ANSYS provides an engineering analysis tool combining structural, thermal, computational fluid dynamics, acoustic, and electromagnetic simulation capabilities. ANSYS has two main programs, which use the same solvers: (1) Mechanical APDL (ANSYS Design Parametric Language), a Fortran-based coding platform, and (2) ANSYS Workbench, which uses a graphical user interface to aid in finite element analysis implementation. This plan covers both APDL and Workbench. The ANSYS computer program is a large-scale, multipurpose finite element program that can be used to solve several classes of engineering analyses. The analysis capabilities of ANSYS include the ability to solve static and dynamic structural analyses, steady-state and transient heat transfer problems, mode-frequency and buckling eigenvalue problems, static or time-varying magnetic analyses, and various types of field and coupled-field applications. The program contains many special features that allow nonlinearities or secondary effects such as plasticity, large strain, hyperelasticity, creep, swelling, large deflections, contact, stress stiffening, temperature dependency, material anisotropy, and radiation to be included in the solution. As ANSYS has been developed, other special capabilities such as substructuring, submodeling, random vibration, kinetostatics, kinetodynamics, free convection fluid analysis, acoustics, magnetics, piezoelectrics, coupled-field analysis, and design optimization have been added to the program. These capabilities contribute further to making ANSYS a multipurpose analysis tool for varied engineering disciplines. The ANSYS program has been in commercial use for over 50 years and has been used extensively in the aerospace, automotive, construction, electronic, energy services, manufacturing, nuclear, plastics, oil, and steel industries. Additionally, many consulting firms and hundreds of universities have used ANSYS for analysis, research, and educational purposes. ANSYS is recognized worldwide as one of the most widely used and capable programs of its type. Ansys design analysis software is the first created within a quality system with ISO 9001 certification, the internationally accepted quality standard. Product development, testing, maintenance and support processes also meet the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's quality requirements, as they have for nearly four decades. The Quality Assurance Service Agreement is suitable for the customers working in the nuclear industry who need to meet specific federal regulations including 10CRF50 Appendix B and provisions of 10CFR21. ANSYS has retained its original International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001 accreditation certificate since1995-05-04, It’s current certificate is valid until 2027-05-29.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2024

ORNL Package Testing Program Software Quality Assurance Plan

The Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) Package Testing Program (PTP) uses commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) software in performing data collection of thermal test results for package designs that contain radioactive materials. Specifically, this software is used to collect temperature data from the furnace, packages, and ambient air to prepare and execute the thermal test specified in 10 CFR 71.73, “Thermal Test.” This software quality assurance (SQA) plan sets forth the guidelines, standards, and procedures that shall be used to provide SQA for PTP software applications. This is a living document that will be maintained for the lifecycle of the PTP program. The SQA plan follows the requirements set forth in ORNL Standards Based Management System (SBMS): Information Technology; Subject Area: Software Quality Assurance. When applicable to the requirements as described in ORNL SBMS, Software Quality Assurance, the software shall be listed in the ORNL Software Registration System (SRS). Exemptions to this SBMS are COTS and firmware that are not modified; spreadsheet applications and personal productivity tools that do not have a utility or safety application, research applications, legacy software, system software, vendor-supplied software used to interface with the vendor’s services, software used within the organization to facilitate processing or management of information, and software developed for applications not specific to the US Department of Energy (DOE).

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS1988

Modernization of software quality assurance

The customers satisfaction depends not only on functional performance, it also depends on the quality characteristics of the software products. An examination of this quality aspect of software products will provide a clear, well defined framework for quality assurance functions, which improve the life-cycle activities of software development. Software developers must be aware of the following aspects which have been expressed by many quality experts: quality cannot be added on; the level of quality built into a program is a function of the quality attributes employed during the development process; and finally, quality must be managed. These concepts have guided our development of the following definition for a Software Quality Assurance function: Software Quality Assurance is a formal, planned approach of actions designed to evaluate the degree of an identifiable set of quality attributes present in all software systems and their products. This paper is an explanation of how this definition was developed and how it is used.

Bhaumik, Gokul↗
NASA NTRS1985

Proceedings of Tenth Annual Software Engineering Workshop

Papers are presented on the following topics: measurement of software technology, recent studies of the Software Engineering Lab, software management tools, expert systems, error seeding as a program validation technique, software quality assurance, software engineering environments (including knowledge-based environments), the Distributed Computing Design System, and various Ada experiments.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2001

Requirements management at NASA

Requirements have always been acknowledged as the backbone of any system. However, in many past development efforts, requirements were paid little heed. At NASA, in recent years, the hue and cry for project development has been "Faster, Better, Cheaper and Safer". This has impacted the way we develop software; it has increased the risks to quality, safety and reliability. At NASA, the Software Assurance Technology Center (SATC) is working with projects to emphasize the criticality of requirements throughout development, not just in the initial phases. This emphasis is on requirements relationship to all aspects of quality, including reliability and safety. In this presentation, we will look at some of these relationships through the eyes of quality.

Requirement management↗