Results for “code verification” — Page 34

DOE OSTI2021

MACCS (MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System) User Guide -- Version 4.0

The MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System (MACCS) is used by Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and various national and international organizations for probabilistic consequence analysis of nuclear power accidents. This User Guide is intended to assist analysts in understanding the MACCS/WinMACCS model and to provide information regarding the code. This user guide version describes MACCS Version 4.0. Features that have been added to MACCS in subsequent versions are described in separate documentation. This User Guide provides a brief description of the model history, explains how to set up and execute a problem, and informs the user of the definition of various input parameters and any constraints placed on those parameters. This report is part of a series of reports documenting MACCS. Other reports include the MACCS Theory Manual, MACCS Verification Report, Technical Bases for Consequence Analyses Using MACCS, as well as documentation for preprocessor codes including SecPop, MelMACCS, and COMIDA2.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2022

MACCS (MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System) User Guide Version 4.0, Revision 1

The MELCOR Accident Consequence Code System (MACCS) is used by Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and various national and international organizations for probabilistic consequence analysis of nuclear power accidents. This User Guide is intended to assist analysts in understanding the MACCS/WinMACCS model and to provide information regarding the code. This user guide version describes MACCS Version 4.0. Features that have been added to MACCS in subsequent versions are described in separate documentation. This User Guide provides a brief description of the model history, explains how to set up and execute a problem, and informs the user of the definition of various input parameters and any constraints placed on those parameters. This report is part of a series of reports documenting MACCS. Other reports include the MACCS Theory Manual, MACCS Verification Report, Technical Bases for Consequence Analyses Using MACCS, as well as documentation for preprocessor codes including SecPop, MelMACCS, and COMIDA2.

21 SPECIFIC NUCLEAR REACTORS AND ASSOCIATED PLANTS↗

DOE OSTI2020

Program Verification for Extreme-Scale Applications (Final Scientific/Technical Report)

The project seeks to develop tools and techniques to help software developers verify the correctness and accuracy of their code. The target domain is scientific software of the kind widely used and developed in the Department of Energy research community, with a particular focus on "extreme scale" programs - those that are expected to involve possibly millions of parallel threads of execution. The report covers the University of Delaware contribution to the collaborative project. The project had a number of successful outcomes, especially regarding the development and extension of the CIVL software verification framework. CIVL is a verification tool for C or Fortran programs that use MPI, OpenMP, CUDA, and/or Pthreads for parallelization. CIVL went through vast improvements and extensions, and was successfully applied to a number of challenging codes. It found a subtle bug in the Devito PDE framework. It was able to verify the functional correctness of a conjugate gradient solver using a novel probabilistic technique with vanishingly small chance of error. CIVL was used very successfully in verification competitions, and the CIVL solutions to the competition challenges were presented and published. CIVL was also used successfully by other researchers on a computational chemistry kernel.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2025

SAM Enhancements for Air-Ingress Event Modeling in HTGRs

The SAM code is under development and supported by DOE-NE’s Nuclear Energy Advanced Modeling and Simulation program as a modern system-level modeling and simulation tool for advanced non-light water reactor safety analyses. These advanced reactor concepts incorporate novel and improved approaches to achieve safety and economic feasibility. This report summarizes recent efforts and progress in addressing the code capability gaps in SAM for the modeling of the air-ingress phenomenon in High-Temperature Gas-Cooled Reactors (HTGRs). The capability enhancements implemented to the code include: a multi-component flow model to capture the air-helium mixture during air ingress, a 0-D graphite oxidation model to capture the reaction of graphite with oxygen in the air, and an isentropic critical flow model to more accurately predict the de-pressurization of the reactor system due to a small break in the primary loop. Verification cases and demonstrations are provided to showcase these capabilities in SAM. Existing gaps in the code’s capability are also identified.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2024

OC6 Phase IV: Validation of CFD Models for Stiesdal TetraSpar Floating Offshore Wind Platform

ABSTRACT With only a few floating offshore wind turbine (FOWT) farms deployed anywhere in the world, FOWT technology is still in its infancy, building on a modicum of real‐world experience to advance the nascent industry. To support further development, engineers rely heavily on modeling tools to accurately portray the behavior of these complex systems under realistic environmental conditions. This reliance creates a need for verification and validation of such tools to improve reliability of load and dynamic response prediction and analysis capabilities of FOWT systems. The Offshore Code Comparison Collaboration, Continued with Correlation and unCertainty (OC6) project was created under the framework of the International Energy Agency to address this need and considers a three‐sided verification and validation between engineering level models, computational fluid dynamics (CFD), and experimental results. In this paper, a novel floating offshore wind platform, the Stiesdal TetraSpar, is simulated using CFD under the load conditions defined by Phase IV of the OC6 project. The comparison of these CFD results against the experimental results demonstrated the ability to predict the platform response to waves when imposing the measured wave signals as input. Although validation versus experiment was largely successful, the damping behavior was impacted by uncertainties likely originating from the mooring system and sensor umbilical cable. This extensive comparison effort with multiple CFD practitioners offers insight into best practices to achieve reliable results.

17 WIND ENERGY↗

NASA NTRS2000

Experimental Results from the Thermal Energy Storage-2 (TES-2) Flight Experiment

Thermal Energy Storage-2 (TES-2) is a flight experiment that flew on the Space Shuttle Endeavour (STS-72), in January 1996. TES-2 originally flew with TES-1 as part of the OAST-2 Hitchhiker payload on the Space Shuttle Columbia (STS-62) in early 1994. The two experiments, TES-1 and TES-2 were identical except for the fluoride salts to be characterized. TES-1 provided data on lithium fluoride (LiF), TES-2 provided data on a fluoride eutectic (LiF/CaF2). Each experiment was a complex autonomous payload in a Get-Away-Special payload canister. TES-1 operated flawlessly for 22 hr. Results were reported in a paper entitled, Effect of Microgravity on Materials Undergoing Melting and Freezing-The TES Experiment, by David Namkoong et al. A software failure in TES-2 caused its shutdown after 4 sec of operation. TES-1 and 2 were the first experiments in a four experiment suite designed to provide data for understanding the long duration microgravity behavior of thermal energy storage salts that undergo repeated melting and freezing. Such data have never been obtained before and have direct application for the development of space-based solar dynamic (SD) power systems. These power systems will store energy in a thermal energy salt such as lithium fluoride or a eutectic of lithium fluoride/calcium difluoride. The stored energy is extracted during the shade portion of the orbit. This enables the solar dynamic power system to provide constant electrical power over the entire orbit. Analytical computer codes were developed for predicting performance of a space-based solar dynamic power system. Experimental verification of the analytical predictions were needed prior to using the analytical results for future space power design applications. The four TES flight experiments were to be used to obtain the needed experimental data. This paper will address the flight results from the first and second experiments, TES-1 and 2, in comparison to the predicted results from the Thermal Energy Storage Simulation (TESSIM) analytical computer code. An analysis of the TES-2 data was conducted by Cleveland State University Professor, Mounir Ibrahim. TESSIM validation was based on two types of results; temperature history of various points on the containment vessel and TES material distribution within the vessel upon return from flight. The TESSIM prediction showed close comparison with the flight data. Distribution of the TES material within the vessel was obtained by a tomography imaging process. The frozen TES material was concentrated toward the colder end of the canister. The TESSIM prediction indicated a similar pattern. With agreement between TESSIM and the flight data, a computerized representation was produced to show the movement and behavior of the void during the entire melting and freezing cycles.

Tolbert, Carol↗

DOE OSTI2025

Verification of the Uniformly-Ordered Binary Decision Algorithm in Correlated-Benchmark Whisper Calculations

Whisper is a nuclear criticality safety code package that aids analysts in validation exercises by computing upper subcritical limits (USL) for applications of interest. To obtain statistically meaningful, significant, and conservative USLs, the analyst must ensure that Whisper selects a sufficient number of benchmarks that are neutronically similar to the application. Many of the available benchmarks are correlated but are currently treated as independent, leading to an artificially small sample size, as their individual information contributions will be overestimated. To aid the analyst in obtaining a sufficient sample size, prior work [2] demonstrated application of the Uniformly-Ordered Binary Decision (UOBD) algorithm in adjusting benchmark weights to account for benchmark correlations. This work provides verification of the Whisper implementation and considers the impact of updated benchmark correlations compared to those available previously. We demonstrate that the UOBD algorithm performs as expected with an analytic example. With HEU-SOL-THERM-001 cases 1 through 10 as the applications, we compare the USLs computed with benchmark correlations available in the Whisper 1.1 release only to those computed with additional benchmark correlations from DICE 2023 and demonstrate substantive differences.

73 NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Verification of the Shafranov shift in free-boundary VMEC, DESC, and SPEC calculations with elliptical geometry

Here, given a set of current-carrying filaments that create a magnetic field with rotating elliptical flux surfaces, we present verification calculations using the VMEC, DESC, and SPEC free-boundary magnetohydrostatic equilibrium codes for both the “vacuum” equilibrium, for which there is no plasma pressure and no plasma currents, and for a non-zero pressure, zero toroidal current equilibrium. For the vacuum case, these codes are quantitatively compared to the magnetic field produced by the coils. For the non-zero pressure case, they are compared to each other. As the stepped pressure profile used in SPEC approaches the continuous profile used in VMEC and DESC, the SPEC magnetic axis approaches the VMEC and DESC axes. To within an error given by the difference between the pressure profiles, the VMEC, DESC, and SPEC calculations give the same pressure-induced geometric shift of the magnetic axis, known as the Shafranov shift.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗

DOE OSTI2020

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↗

DOE OSTI2020

Sierra/Aria 4.56 Verification Manual

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against 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 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↗

DOE OSTI2020

SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria Verification Manual - Version 4.58

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against 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 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↗

DOE OSTI2021

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↗

DOE OSTI2021

Sierra/Aria Verification Manual (V.5.0)

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against 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 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↗

DOE OSTI2020

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↗

DOE OSTI2021

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↗

DOE OSTI2021

CSRI Summer Proceedings 2021

The Computer Science Research Institute (CSRI) brings university faculty and students to Sandia National Laboratories for focused collaborative research on Department of Energy (DOE) computer and computational science problems. The institute provides an opportunity for university researches to learn about problems in computer and computational science at DOE laboratories, and help transfer results of their research to programs at the labs. Some specific CSRI research interest areas are: scalable solvers, optimization, algebraic preconditioners, graph-based, discrete, and combinatorial algorithms, uncertainty estimation, validation and verification methods, mesh generation, dynamic load-balancing, virus and other malicious-code defense, visualization, scalable cluster computers, beyond Moore’s Law computing, exascale computing tools and application design, reduced order and multiscale modeling, parallel input/output, and theoretical computer science. The CSRI Summer Program is organized by CSRI and includes a weekly seminar series and the publication of a summer proceedings.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

DOE OSTI2021

Sierra/Aria Verification Manual (V.5.2)

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against 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 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↗

DOE OSTI2022

SIERRA Multimechanics Module: Aria Verification Manual (V.5.4)

Presented in this document is a portion of the tests that exist in the Sierra Thermal/Fluids verification test suite. Each of these tests is run nightly with the Sierra/TF code suite and the results of the test checked under mesh refinement against 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 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↗