Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Verification and validation”

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 73 records · Page 4
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2017

Verification and Validation Process for Progressive Damage and Failure Analysis Methods in the NASA Advanced Composites Consortium

The Advanced Composites Consortium is a US Government/Industry partnership supporting technologies to enable timeline and cost reduction in the development of certified composite aerospace structures. A key component of the consortium's approach is the development and validation of improved progressive damage and failure analysis methods for composite structures. These methods will enable increased use of simulations in design trade studies and detailed design development, and thereby enable more targeted physical test programs to validate designs. To accomplish this goal with confidence, a rigorous verification and validation process was developed. The process was used to evaluate analysis methods and associated implementation requirements to ensure calculation accuracy and to gage predictability for composite failure modes of interest. This paper introduces the verification and validation process developed by the consortium during the Phase I effort of the Advanced Composites Project. Specific structural failure modes of interest are first identified, and a subset of standard composite test articles are proposed to interrogate a progressive damage analysis method's ability to predict each failure mode of interest. Test articles are designed to capture the underlying composite material constitutive response as well as the interaction of failure modes representing typical failure patterns observed in aerospace structures.

Wanthal, Steven↗
NASA NTRS2007

Survey of Product-line Verification and Validation Techniques

This report presents the results from the first task of the SARP Center Initiative, 'Product Line Verification of Safety-Critical Software.' Task 1 is a literature survey of available techniques for product line verification and validation. Section 1 of the report provides an introduction to product lines and motivates the survey of verification techniques. It describes what is reused in product-line engineering and explains the goal of verifiable conformance of the developed system to its product-line specifications. Section 2 of the report describes six lifecycle steps in product-line verification and validation. This description is based on, and refers to, the best practices extracted from the readings. It ends with a list of verification challenges for NASA product lines (2.7) and verification enablers for NASA product lines (2.8) derived from the survey. Section 3 provides resource lists of related conferences, workshops, industrial and defense industry experiences and case studies of product lines, and academic/industrial consortiums. Section 4 is a bibliography of papers and tutorials with annotated entries for relevant papers not previously discussed in sections 2 or 3.

testing↗
DOE OSTI2025

Verification and Validation of Open-Source Computational Fluid Dynamics Capabilities in MOOSE

The Multiphysics Object Oriented Simulation Environment (MOOSE) advances predictive modeling in nuclear research by simplifying the application design process and making modeling more efficient and accessible to researchers and the broader community. Because of MOOSE’s critical role in the scientific computation field, verification and validation are important to evaluate the reliability and credibility of MOOSE’s code, simulations, and models. To assess MOOSE’s Navier Stokes module and turbulence models, the following verification and validation University of Manchester ERCOFTAC cases were simulated in MOOSE, and the results were compared: Case 032 Turbulent Flow in a 2D Channel Case 079 Natural Convection in an Enclosed Cavity

46 - INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AN↗
NASA NTRS2018

Methodologies for Verification and Validation of Space Launch System (SLS) Structural Dynamic Models: Appendices

Verification and validation (V&V) is a highly challenging undertaking for SLS structural dynamics models due to the magnitude and complexity of SLS subassemblies and subassemblies. Responses to challenges associated with V&V of Space Launch System (SLS) structural dynamics models are presented in Volume I of this paper. Four methodologies addressing specific requirements for V&V are discussed. (1) Residual Mode Augmentation (RMA). (2) Modified Guyan Reduction (MGR) and Harmonic Reduction (HR, introduced in 1976). (3) Mode Consolidation (MC). Finally, (4) Experimental Mode Verification (EMV). This document contains the appendices to Volume I.

Coppolino, Robert N.↗
NASA NTRS2004

Autonomy software verification and validation might not be as hard as it seems

The verification and validation of autonomy software is widely believed to be a challenging unsolved problem. To a certain extent this is true, but in this paper I argue that the problem is not nearly as severe as seems to be widely perceived. many of the perceived hard problems in autonomy software V&V also exist for traditional software, and can be solved using many of the same methods and techniques used for traditional spacecraft software. In particular, the problem of intractably large state spaces exists for any non-trivial software system.

Gat, Erann↗
NASA NTRS2022

NASA Orbital Debris Engineering Model (ORDEM) 3.1: Model Verification and Validation

The NASA Orbital Debris Engineering Model (ORDEM) 3.1 Model Verification and Validation (V&V) document accompanies the delivery of the latest ORDEM 3.1 model (Vavrin & Manis, 2019) and provides a detailed description of the V&V activities used to verify that the model was built correctly and validate the model against independent, real world sources of data obtained from sampling the orbital debris environment. This ORDEM 3.1 Model V&V document, along with the related ORDEM 3.1 Model Process document – which covers details of the mathematical, statistical, and physical basis of the model – are intended to inform credibility assessments, risk analyses, uncertainty characterizations, and other applications derived from use of the model by the ORDEM 3.1 user community.

Timothy Kennedy↗
NASA NTRS2000

The NPARC Alliance Verification and Validation Archive

The NPARC Alliance (National Project for Applications oriented Research in CFD) maintains a publicly-available, web-based verification and validation archive as part of the development and support of the WIND CFD code. The verification and validation methods used for the cases attempt to follow the policies and guidelines of the ASME and AIAA. The emphasis is on air-breathing propulsion flow fields with Mach numbers ranging from low-subsonic to hypersonic.

Slater, John W.↗
NASA NTRS2014

Turbulence Modeling Verification and Validation

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) software that solves the Reynolds-averaged Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations has been in routine use for more than a quarter of a century. It is currently employed not only for basic research in fluid dynamics, but also for the analysis and design processes in many industries worldwide, including aerospace, automotive, power generation, chemical manufacturing, polymer processing, and petroleum exploration. A key feature of RANS CFD is the turbulence model. Because the RANS equations are unclosed, a model is necessary to describe the effects of the turbulence on the mean flow, through the Reynolds stress terms. The turbulence model is one of the largest sources of uncertainty in RANS CFD, and most models are known to be flawed in one way or another. Alternative methods such as direct numerical simulations (DNS) and large eddy simulations (LES) rely less on modeling and hence include more physics than RANS. In DNS all turbulent scales are resolved, and in LES the large scales are resolved and the effects of the smallest turbulence scales are modeled. However, both DNS and LES are too expensive for most routine industrial usage on today's computers. Hybrid RANS-LES, which blends RANS near walls with LES away from walls, helps to moderate the cost while still retaining some of the scale-resolving capability of LES, but for some applications it can still be too expensive. Even considering its associated uncertainties, RANS turbulence modeling has proved to be very useful for a wide variety of applications. For example, in the aerospace field, many RANS models are considered to be reliable for computing attached flows. However, existing turbulence models are known to be inaccurate for many flows involving separation. Research has been ongoing for decades in an attempt to improve turbulence models for separated and other nonequilibrium flows. When developing or improving turbulence models, both verification and validation are important steps in the process. Verification insures that the CFD code is solving the equations as intended (no errors in the implementation). This is typically done either through the method of manufactured solutions (MMS) or through careful step-by-step comparisons with other verified codes. After the verification step is concluded, validation is performed to document the ability of the turbulence model to represent different types of flow physics. Validation can involve a large number of test case comparisons with experiments, theory, or DNS. Organized workshops have proved to be valuable resources for the turbulence modeling community in its pursuit of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Workshop contributors using different CFD codes run the same cases, often according to strict guidelines, and compare results. Through these comparisons, it is often possible to (1) identify codes that have likely implementation errors, and (2) gain insight into the capabilities and shortcomings of different turbulence models to predict the flow physics associated with particular types of flows. These are valuable lessons because they help bring consistency to CFD codes by encouraging the correction of faulty programming and facilitating the adoption of better models. They also sometimes point to specific areas needed for improvement in the models. In this paper, several recent workshops are summarized primarily from the point of view of turbulence modeling verification and validation. Furthermore, the NASA Langley Turbulence Modeling Resource website is described. The purpose of this site is to provide a central location where RANS turbulence models are documented, and test cases, grids, and data are provided. The goal of this paper is to provide an abbreviated survey of turbulence modeling verification and validation efforts, summarize some of the outcomes, and give some ideas for future endeavors in this area.

Rumsey, Christopher L.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Cognitive Bias in the Verification and Validation of Space Flight Systems

Cognitive bias is generally recognized as playing a significant role in virtually all domains of human decision making. Insight into this role is informally built into many of the system engineering practices employed in the aerospace industry. The review process, for example, typically has features that help to counteract the effect of bias. This paper presents a discussion of how commonly recognized biases may affect the verification and validation process. Verifying and validating a system is arguably more challenging than development, both technically and cognitively. Whereas there may be a relatively limited number of options available for the design of a particular aspect of a system, there is a virtually unlimited number of potential verification scenarios that may be explored. The probability of any particular scenario occurring in operations is typically very difficult to estimate, which increases reliance on judgment that may be affected by bias. Implementing a verification activity often presents technical challenges that, if they can be overcome at all, often result in a departure from actual flight conditions (e.g., 1-g testing, simulation, time compression, artificial fault injection) that may raise additional questions about the meaningfulness of the results, and create opportunities for the introduction of additional biases. In addition to mitigating the biases it can introduce directly, the verification and validation process must also overcome the cumulative effect of biases introduced during all previous stages of development. A variety of cognitive biases will be described, with research results for illustration. A handful of case studies will be presented that show how cognitive bias may have affected the verification and validation process on recent JPL flight projects, identify areas of strength and weakness, and identify potential changes or additions to commonly used techniques that could provide a more robust verification and validation of future systems.

Larson, Steve↗
NASA NTRS2005

Development of Advanced Verification and Validation Procedures and Tools for the Certification of Learning Systems in Aerospace Applications

Adaptive control technologies that incorporate learning algorithms have been proposed to enable automatic flight control and vehicle recovery, autonomous flight, and to maintain vehicle performance in the face of unknown, changing, or poorly defined operating environments. In order for adaptive control systems to be used in safety-critical aerospace applications, they must be proven to be highly safe and reliable. Rigorous methods for adaptive software verification and validation must be developed to ensure that control system software failures will not occur. Of central importance in this regard is the need to establish reliable methods that guarantee convergent learning, rapid convergence (learning) rate, and algorithm stability. This paper presents the major problems of adaptive control systems that use learning to improve performance. The paper then presents the major procedures and tools presently developed or currently being developed to enable the verification, validation, and ultimate certification of these adaptive control systems. These technologies include the application of automated program analysis methods, techniques to improve the learning process, analytical methods to verify stability, methods to automatically synthesize code, simulation and test methods, and tools to provide on-line software assurance.

Jacklin, Stephen↗
NASA NTRS2005

Remote Sensing Product Verification and Validation at the NASA Stennis Space Center

Remote sensing data product verification and validation (V&V) is critical to successful science research and applications development. People who use remote sensing products to make policy, economic, or scientific decisions require confidence in and an understanding of the products' characteristics to make informed decisions about the products' use. NASA data products of coarse to moderate spatial resolution are validated by NASA science teams. NASA's Stennis Space Center (SSC) serves as the science validation team lead for validating commercial data products of moderate to high spatial resolution. At SSC, the Applications Research Toolbox simulates sensors and targets, and the Instrument Validation Laboratory validates critical sensors. The SSC V&V Site consists of radiometric tarps, a network of ground control points, a water surface temperature sensor, an atmospheric measurement system, painted concrete radial target and edge targets, and other instrumentation. NASA's Applied Sciences Directorate participates in the Joint Agency Commercial Imagery Evaluation (JACIE) team formed by NASA, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency to characterize commercial systems and imagery.

Stanley, Thomas M.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Partnership Center for High-Fidelity Boundary Plasma Simulation (Final Report)

Within the Partnership Center for High-Fidelity Boundary Plasma Simulation (HBPS), work at UT-Austin was aimed at improved verification, validation, and uncertainty quantification (VVUQ) for edge plasma simulations and on performing gyrokinetics simulations of pedestal instabilities and turbulence in order to expand foundational understanding of pedestal transport. Regarding VVUQ, the accomplishments can be summarized as follows. First, it was shown that the Moment Preserving Constrained Resampling technique, when applied periodically in particle-in-cell simulations in the XGC code, can dramatically improve the accuracy of the simulation at essentially equivalent computational cost. Second, a technique for estimating model correlations, which are required to solve the model selection and sample allocation problem in multifidelity UQ techniques, without sampling the highest fidelity, most computationally expensive model, was developed and demonstrated. Third, previously developed methods for estimating statistical and discretization errors were applied to numerical methods relevant to edge plasma simulations, namely in particle-in-cell-based approaches, and shown to work. Finally, benchmark studies for comparing gyrokinetic codes were developed and performed, leading to reasonable agreement between four commonly used codes. Regarding physics studies, gyrokinetic simulations to investigate microtearing modes in the DIII-D pedestal were performed using the GENE code.

70 PLASMA PHYSICS AND FUSION TECHNOLOGY↗
NASA NTRS1997

NASA software independent verification and validation (IV and V): An upfront approach to mission success

Software independent verification and validation (IV and V) implementation methods, specific approaches and accomplishments in the application of IV and V to NASA programs are discussed. Because software is mission critical, software assurance is a critical aspect of NASA's safety and mission assurance program. An overview of NASA's software IV and V facility is given.

Gregory, Frederick D.↗
DOE OSTI2025

The HTR-Proteus Benchmark: Analysis and Use as a Verification and Validation Case

This presentation outlines the evaluation and application of the HTR-Proteus benchmark as a verification and validation (V&V) case for advanced reactor modeling tools. The work supports the U.S. Department of Energy’s HALEU Availability Program (HAP) and the joint DOE/NRC DNCSH project, which aims to reduce criticality safety uncertainties in commercial-scale HALEU fuel cycle and transportation systems. The HTR-Proteus experiments, conducted at the Paul Scherrer Institute, provide high-fidelity data for TRISO-fueled, graphite-moderated pebble bed reactors with high neutron leakage—conditions relevant to HALEU transport scenarios. This study focuses on Cores 4.2 and 4.3 of the HTR-Proteus benchmark, analyzing key sources of uncertainty including pebble packing, TRISO particle positioning, and core height. Using Project Chrono for realistic pebble geometries and Serpent, SHIFT, and MCNP for neutronics simulations, the study quantifies the impact of these uncertainties on the effective multiplication factor (keff). Results show that a sample size of 110 pebble configurations is sufficient to converge keff, with ±30 pcm uncertainty due to packing randomness. TRISO positioning and core height variations also significantly influence keff, highlighting the importance of detailed modeling in V&V efforts. The benchmark serves as a valuable test case for validating the Griffin reactor physics code and improving confidence in HALEU system simulations.

73 - NUCLEAR PHYSICS AND RADIATION PHYSICS↗
NASA NTRS1990

Knowledge-based system verification and validation

The objective of this task is to develop and evaluate a methodology for verification and validation (V&V) of knowledge-based systems (KBS) for space station applications with high reliability requirements. The approach consists of three interrelated tasks. The first task is to evaluate the effectiveness of various validation methods for space station applications. The second task is to recommend requirements for KBS V&V for Space Station Freedom (SSF). The third task is to recommend modifications to the SSF to support the development of KBS using effectiveness software engineering and validation techniques. To accomplish the first task, three complementary techniques will be evaluated: (1) Sensitivity Analysis (Worchester Polytechnic Institute); (2) Formal Verification of Safety Properties (SRI International); and (3) Consistency and Completeness Checking (Lockheed AI Center). During FY89 and FY90, each contractor will independently demonstrate the user of his technique on the fault detection, isolation, and reconfiguration (FDIR) KBS or the manned maneuvering unit (MMU), a rule-based system implemented in LISP. During FY91, the application of each of the techniques to other knowledge representations and KBS architectures will be addressed. After evaluation of the results of the first task and examination of Space Station Freedom V&V requirements for conventional software, a comprehensive KBS V&V methodology will be developed and documented. Development of highly reliable KBS's cannot be accomplished without effective software engineering methods. Using the results of current in-house research to develop and assess software engineering methods for KBS's as well as assessment of techniques being developed elsewhere, an effective software engineering methodology for space station KBS's will be developed, and modification of the SSF to support these tools and methods will be addressed.

Johnson, Sally C.↗
NASA NTRS1988

Verification and validation of rulebased systems for Hubble Space Telescope ground support

As rulebase systems become more widely used in operational environments, the focus is on the problems and concerns of maintaining expert systems. In the conventional software model, the verification and validation of a system have two separate and distinct meanings. To validate a system means to demonstrate that the system does what is advertised. The verification process refers to investigating the actual code to identify inconsistencies and redundancies within the logic path. In current literature regarding maintaining rulebased systems, little distinction is made between these two terms. In fact, often the two terms are used interchangeably. Verification and validation of rulebased systems are discussed as separate but equally important aspects of the maintenance phase. Also described are some of the tools and methods that were developed at the Space Telescope Science Institute to aid in the maintenance of the rulebased system.

Vick, Shon↗
NASA NTRS2003

Validation and verification of deep-space missions

The growing technical complexity of and increased cost pressure on deep-space science missions poses challenges for the system engineering discipline of mission validation and verification. In the wake of several recent mission failures, the aerospace community is still searching for a stable middle ground between the highly-reliable yet cost-prohibitive approaches of the past and cheaper but excessively risky methods of project implementation.

system engineering validation verification↗
NASA NTRS2006

Verification and Validation in NASA-CUIP LOX/methane Injector Research Efforts

The NASA-CUIP program is supporting experimental and modeling/computational research efforts investigating wall heat flux characteristics of LOX/methane single-element injectors. A Verification and Validation (V&V) task has begun with the objective of quantifying the degree of accuracy of the models for wall heat flux distributions at specific sets of conditions. The V&V approach used is that being drafted as a standard by the ASME Performance Test Codes Committee, PTC 61: Verification and Validation in Computational Fluid Dynamics and Heat Transfer. The approach is based on well-established concepts from experimental uncertainty analysis. Initially the V&V and uncertainty estimation efforts will use data obtained previously in the same facility using oxygen/hydrogen in single-element injector testing. In this paper the V&V process, experimental facility, and computer code are described, and approaches to estimating the associated uncertainties are discussed.

Coleman, Hugh W.↗