Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Software Verification”

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 919 records · Page 51
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Recent Developments to the Porous Microstructure Analysis (PuMA) Software

The Porous Microstructure Analysis (PuMA) software is an open source framework for image-based simulation, primarily used to determine effective properties based on material microstructure. PuMA was originally developed for the study of NASA thermal protection materials; however, many of the solvers in PuMA have applicability to a broad range of materials science applications. PuMA version 3.2 computes material surface area, pore diameters, effective thermal conductivity, continuum and rarefied tortuosity, and permeability. For anisotropic materials, PuMA can estimate material orientation and compute anisotropic thermal conductivity and elasticity. In this talk, a brief overview of the PuMA software and underlying methods will be presented, as well as some recent and ongoing developments, including the use of immersed boundary methods for image-based simulation and the development of a new weave segmentation tool, called TomoSAM. Cut-Cell method for heat and mass transfer For simulations on complex microstructures, traditional unstructured meshing techniques often prove to be difficult and time-intensive. Voxel-based solvers, which represent the surface as a staircase structure, are relatively simple to implement but can lose accuracy when feature resolution is poor. In this work, we present a novel 3D cut-cell method for solving the variable coefficient Poisson equation on complex microstructures, suitable for the determination of effective thermal conductivity or tortuosity of a material. The method uses a Marching Cubes/Marching Squares surface reconstruction to create cut-cells and determine geometric quantities. A flux-correction method is extended to 3D, with least squares gradient reconstruction, to solve for the boundary fluxes in the cut-cells. Verification cases show the solver achieves globally 2nd order accuracy on complex microstructures. TomoSAM TomoSAM, a module of the PuMA software, has been developed as a plugin for 3D Slicer, a software platform used for 3D image processing and visualization. It utilizes the Segment Anything Model (SAM), a deep learning model capable of identifying objects and generating image masks based on minimal user input. This feature enables efficient segmentation of complex 3D datasets, particularly of woven materials, from tomography or similar imaging methods, reducing the need for manual segmentation.

Tomography↗
DOE OSTI2016

TU-FG-BRB-05: A 3 Dimensional Prompt Gamma Imaging System for Range Verification in Proton Radiotherapy

Purpose: To report on the initial developments of a clinical 3-dimensional (3D) prompt gamma (PG) imaging system for proton radiotherapy range verification. Methods: The new imaging system under development consists of a prototype Compton camera to measure PG emission during proton beam irradiation and software to reconstruct, display, and analyze 3D images of the PG emission. For initial test of the system, PGs were measured with a prototype CC during a 200 cGy dose delivery with clinical proton pencil beams (ranging from 100 MeV – 200 MeV) to a water phantom. Measurements were also carried out with the CC placed 15 cm from the phantom for a full range 150 MeV pencil beam and with its range shifted by 2 mm. Reconstructed images of the PG emission were displayed by the clinical PG imaging software and compared to the dose distributions of the proton beams calculated by a commercial treatment planning system. Results: Measurements made with the new PG imaging system showed that a 3D image could be reconstructed from PGs measured during the delivery of 200 cGy of dose, and that shifts in the Bragg peak range of as little as 2 mm could be detected. Conclusion: Initial tests of a new PG imaging system show its potential to provide 3D imaging and range verification for proton radiotherapy. Based on these results, we have begun work to improve the system with the goal that images can be produced from delivery of as little as 20 cGy so that the system could be used for in-vivo proton beam range verification on a daily basis.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-J-22: A Feasibility Study On KV-Based Whole Breast Radiation Patient Setup

Purpose: In room kilovoltage x-ray (kV) imaging provides higher contrast than Megavoltage (MV) imaging with faster acquisition time compared with on-board cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), thus improving patient setup accuracy and efficiency. In this study we evaluated the clinical feasibility of utilizing kV imaging for whole breast radiation patient setup. Methods: For six breast cancer patients with whole breast treatment plans using two opposed tangential fields, MV-based patient setup was conducted by aligning patient markers with in room lasers and MV portal images. Beam-eye viewed kV images were acquired using Varian OBI system after the set up process. In house software was developed to transfer MLC blocks information overlaying onto kV images to demonstrate the field shape for verification. KV-based patient digital shift was derived by performing rigid registration between kV image and the digitally reconstructed radiography (DRR) to align the bony structure. This digital shift between kV-based and MV-based setup was defined as setup deviation. Results: Six sets of kV images were acquired for breast patients. The mean setup deviation was 2.3mm, 2.2mm and 1.8mm for anterior-posterior, superior-inferior and left-right direction respectively. The average setup deviation magnitude was 4.3±1.7mm for six patients. Patient with large breast had a larger setup deviation (4.4–6.2mm). There was no strong correlation between MV-based shift and setup deviation. Conclusion: A preliminary clinical workflow for kV-based whole breast radiation setup was established and tested. We observed setup deviation of the magnitude below than 5mm. With the benefit of providing higher contrast and MLC block overlaid on the images for treatment field verification, it is feasible to use kV imaging for breast patient setup.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
DOE OSTI2015

SU-E-T-36: A GPU-Accelerated Monte-Carlo Dose Calculation Platform and Its Application Toward Validating a ViewRay Beam Model

Purpose: To build a fast, accurate and easily-deployable research platform for Monte-Carlo dose calculations. We port the dose calculation engine PENELOPE to C++, and accelerate calculations using GPU acceleration. Simulations of a Co-60 beam model provided by ViewRay demonstrate the capabilities of the platform. Methods: We built software that incorporates a beam model interface, CT-phantom model, GPU-accelerated PENELOPE engine, and GUI front-end. We rewrote the PENELOPE kernel in C++ (from Fortran) and accelerated the code on a GPU. We seamlessly integrated a Co-60 beam model (obtained from ViewRay) into our platform. Simulations of various field sizes and SSDs using a homogeneous water phantom generated PDDs, dose profiles, and output factors that were compared to experiment data. Results: With GPU acceleration using a dated graphics card (Nvidia Tesla C2050), a highly accurate simulation – including 100*100*100 grid, 3×3×3 mm3 voxels, <1% uncertainty, and 4.2×4.2 cm2 field size – runs 24 times faster (20 minutes versus 8 hours) than when parallelizing on 8 threads across a new CPU (Intel i7-4770). Simulated PDDs, profiles and output ratios for the commercial system agree well with experiment data measured using radiographic film or ionization chamber. Based on our analysis, this beam model is precise enough for general applications. Conclusions: Using a beam model for a Co-60 system provided by ViewRay, we evaluate a dose calculation platform that we developed. Comparison to measurements demonstrates the promise of our software for use as a research platform for dose calculations, with applications including quality assurance and treatment plan verification.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗
NASA NTRS1977

Development of the engineering design integration (EDIN) system: A computer aided design development

The EDIN (Engineering Design Integration) System which provides a collection of hardware and software, enabling the engineer to perform man-in-the-loop interactive evaluation of aerospace vehicle concepts, was considered. Study efforts were concentrated in the following areas: (1) integration of hardware with the Univac Exec 8 System; (2) development of interactive software for the EDIN System; (3) upgrading of the EDIN technology module library to an interactive status; (4) verification of the soundness of the developing EDIN System; (5) support of NASA in design analysis studies using the EDIN System; (6) provide training and documentation in the use of the EDIN System; and (7) provide an implementation plan for the next phase of development and recommendations for meeting long range objectives.

Glatt, C. R.↗
NASA NTRS2001

A Practical Tutorial on Modified Condition/Decision Coverage

This tutorial provides a practical approach to assessing modified condition/decision coverage (MC/DC) for aviation software products that must comply with regulatory guidance for DO-178B level A software. The tutorial's approach to MC/DC is a 5-step process that allows a certification authority or verification analyst to evaluate MC/DC claims without the aid of a coverage tool. In addition to the MC/DC approach, the tutorial addresses factors to consider in selecting and qualifying a structural coverage analysis tool, tips for reviewing life cycle data related to MC/DC, and pitfalls common to structural coverage analysis.

Hayhurst, Kelly J.↗
NASA NTRS2002

The New NASA Orbital Debris Engineering Model ORDEM2000

The NASA Orbital Debris Program Office at Johnson Space Center has developed a new computer-based orbital debris engineering model, ORDEM2000, which describes the orbital debris environment in the low Earth orbit region between 200 and 2000 km altitude. The model is appropriate for those engineering solutions requiring knowledge and estimates of the orbital debris environment (debris spatial density, flux, etc.). ORDEM2000 can also be used as a benchmark for ground-based debris measurements and observations. We incorporated a large set of observational data, covering the object size range from 10 mm to 10 m, into the ORDEM2000 debris database, utilizing a maximum likelihood estimator to convert observations into debris population probability distribution functions. These functions then form the basis of debris populations. We developed a finite element model to process the debris populations to form the debris environment. A more capable input and output structure and a user-friendly graphical user interface are also implemented in the model. ORDEM2000 has been subjected to a significant verification and validation effort. This document describes ORDEM2000, which supersedes the previous model, ORDEM96. The availability of new sensor and in situ data, as well as new analytical techniques, has enabled the construction of this new model. Section 1 describes the general requirements and scope of an engineering model. Data analyses and the theoretical formulation of the model are described in Sections 2 and 3. Section 4 describes the verification and validation effort and the sensitivity and uncertainty analyses. Finally, Section 5 describes the graphical user interface, software installation, and test cases for the user.

Liou, Jer-Chyi↗
NASA NTRS2022

Robotics Verification and Validation Strategies for Perseverance Rover Sampling and Caching

The Mars 2020 Sampling and Caching Subsystem(SCS) is the most complex robotic system ever fielded on a MarsRover. It includes a 5 degree-of-freedom Robotic Arm, coringdrill, gas Dust Removal Tool, interfaces for two turret-mountedinstruments, and an Adaptive Caching Assembly (ACA). TheACA is itself a complex robotic system, containing hardware tosupport docking and bit exchange, a 3 degree-of-freedomSample Handling Assembly for manipulating sample tubes,storage for several drill bits and sample tubes, and mechanismsto support observing and sealing samples collected by the drill.To successfully verify and validate the SCS hardware andsoftware and its integration with the Mars 2020 flight systemseveral key strategies were employed.The SCS Verification and Validation (V&V) program utilizedmultiple test venues with tiered levels of fidelity. These includedsimulation and visualization software environments, low fidelitydevelopment testbeds, testbeds with high fidelity SCS hardwareand commercial off-the shelf avionics, integrated systemtestbeds with flight-like avionics, and environmental testbedscapable of simulating Martian surface temperature andpressure. Multiple units of each SCS hardware componentmoved fluidly between test venues to accomplish myriadstandalone and coordinated test objectives. Test preparationand executions were performed by a diverse team of engineerswith training and technical ownership tailored for individualexperience and role. Despite significant differences between testvenues, the SCS V&V team established efficient and consistentprocesses and tools for procedure development, test execution,and data review that enabled personnel, as well as technicalproducts such as sequences and parameter configurations, toflow between venues effectively. A series of benchmark testsprovided evidence of performance consistency as elements weretransferred between venues and as system capability evolved.This paper provides an overview of the SCS V&V program andexplores several overarching strategies that enabled successfuloperation in the face of unprecedented complexity. Keyoutcomes of the SCS validation effort are summarized, alongwith lessons learned and beneficial integrations of validationtool and process innovations into Mars surface operations.

Brooks, Sawyer↗
NASA NTRS2022

Making or Breaking a Rover: System Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗
NASA NTRS2022

Making or Breaking a Rover- Systems Engineering Parameters On-Board the Mars 2020 Perseverance Rover

On February 18, 2021, Perseverance, NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory’s (JPL’s) Mars 2020 Rover, successfully landed on Mars with all systems nominal, despite the risk surrounding the over 200,000 internal flight parameters that had to be properly configured. The Perseverance team defines these parameters as software variables that are configurable, commandable and retrievable from Earth. In 2015, the Mars 2020 project leaders focused on improving systems engineering of parameters based on their experiences from parameter management on previous Mars rovers (Curiosity, Opportunity, Spirit, and Pathfinder) and parameter failures of past missions, such as the mission-ending parameter of the Mars Climate Orbiter. The new rigorous development process allowed for efficient certification and effective implementation of the parameters, allowing the rover to approach and land on the red planet (the most challenging phase of the mission) with zero parameter issues. Although successful, the Perseverance team learned many lessons for how to better manage parameters for the continued surface operations of the Mars 2020 mission and future missions. This paper will discuss eight parameter-management topics for the Perseverance Mission. The first is parameter definition: how we define parameters on our mission, where they are physically located on the vehicle, and why we have so many of them. The second topic is the updated parameter flight software module from Curiosity, including details on the 99% reduction in parameter commands, new bulk configuration capabilities, and improved parameter traceability. The third topic is parameter selection for different mission phases; this includes improving and tweaking our preferred parameter settings until they become certification candidates and managing parameter configurations based on test venue throughout the mission life cycle. The fourth topic is our flight certification process; this includes certification of flight values for four different epochs in the mission: Launch, Entry Decent and Landing (EDL) - 6days, Landing + 5 Sols (Martian Days, still on Cruise Flight Software), and once are on Surface Flight Software (FSW). The fifth topic covers in-flight command implementation, along with details on testing, validation, and verification of those commands. In the sixth section, we will explain our use of open-source management tools, including how we used GitHub for version control and management approvals. The seventh topic will describe the ground tools used in operations, including capabilities of the in-house built tool called Parasol. The eighth and final topic will dig into lessons learned for improving parameter management in the future of this mission and others.

Roth, Brian↗
DOE OSTI2022

Modelica-json: Transforming energy models to digitize the control delivery process

Building simulation models are typically not used to generate the documentation required for bidding and project delivery of commercial building systems, or for their semantic modeling and commissioning. This paper presents a software tool that aids in digitizing the control delivery process, spanning simulation during design to implementation and formal verification during commissioning. The tool can generate from Modelica models digital documentation of control sequences. This digital documentation, along with other project drawings and specifications can be used for project bidding. It can also be used for implementation of control sequences through machineto-machine translation to commercial legacy control products, for which we are currently developing the proposed ASHRAE Standard 231P based on the presented work. Moreover, as-installed control sequences can be formally verified against the design specification, and a semantic model in Brick can be exported to aid in configuration of building analytics and fault detection. The paper presents what we believe is the first translation of a Modelica-implemented control sequence to a native implementation on a commercial control platform, using the webCTRL product line from Automated Logic. The paper also shows how a webCTRL implementation can be formally verified against its Modelica specification. These use cases have all been demonstrated with a prototype implementation that is now being further developed.

Wetter, Michael↗
DOE OSTI2014

Absolute calibration of the Gamma Knife{sup ®} Perfexion™ and delivered dose verification using EPR/alanine dosimetry

Purpose: Elekta Leksell Gamma Knife{sup ®} (LGK) is a radiotherapy beam machine whose features are not compliant with the international calibration protocols for radiotherapy. In this scope, the Laboratoire National Henri Becquerel and the Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital decided to conceive a new LKG dose calibration method and to compare it with the currently used one. Furthermore, the accuracy of the dose delivered by the LGK machine was checked using an “end-to-end” test. This study also aims to compare doses delivered by the two latest software versions of the Gammaplan treatment planning system (TPS). Methods: The dosimetric method chosen is the electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) of alanine. Dose rate (calibration) verification was done without TPS using a spherical phantom. Absolute calibration was done with factors calculated by Monte Carlo simulation (MCNP-X). For “end-to-end” test, irradiations in an anthropomorphic head phantom, close to real treatment conditions, are done using the TPS in order to verify the delivered dose. Results: The comparison of the currently used calibration method with the new one revealed a deviation of +0.8% between the dose rates measured by ion chamber and EPR/alanine. For simple fields configuration (less than 16 mm diameter), the “end-to-end” tests showed out average deviations of −1.7% and −0.9% between the measured dose and the calculated dose by Gammaplan v9 and v10, respectively. Conclusions: This paper shows there is a good agreement between the new calibration method and the currently used one. There is also a good agreement between the calculated and delivered doses especially for Gammaplan v10.

62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
DOE OSTI2023

Requirements Description of EvaluateFlux

This report presents the modeling and simulation capabilities of Argonne National Laboratory’s EvaluateFlux code [1] that is used in present reactor analysis activities. These capabilities will then be used to establish the set of EvaluateFlux verification tasks necessary to verify EvaluateFlux for usage on commercial projects. A similar approach was taken for the PERSENT, REBUS and DIF3D software packages. The EvaluateFlux program is a post-processing utility program for DIF3D, specifically DIF3D-VARIANT. As covered in [1], the EvaluateFlux program was built to allow users to obtain flux and power traverses through the domain. Its primary purpose was to facilitate foil analysis by evaluating the flux solution from DIF3D-VARIANT and combining it with foil cross section data. The outputs from EvaluateFlux are contained in four possible output files: FluxAndRegionRR.out, IsotopeMicroRR.out, LabeledRegionRR.out, and IsotopeMacroRR.out. Each file is focused on using the flux evaluate and cross section data in a different manner and all are covered in this verification process.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗
DOE OSTI2014

NEAMS Software V&V Plan for the MARMOT Software

In order to ensure the accuracy and quality of the microstructure based materials models being developed in conjunction with MARMOT simulations, MARMOT must undergo exhaustive verification and validation. Only after this process can we confidently rely on the MARMOT code to predict the microstructure evolution within the fuel. Therefore, in this report we lay out a V&V plan for the MARMOT code, highlighting where existing data could be used and where new data is required.

11 NUCLEAR FUEL CYCLE AND FUEL MATERIALS↗
DOE OSTI2021

Verification Testing For Solid-Element Material Models 11-19 in DYNA3D/ParaDyn

This technical report documents the creation and implementation of verification tests for solid-element material models 11 through 19 available in DYNA3D/ParaDyn. The verification tests covered all aspects of each material model, except for the Weibull distribution functionality in material models 15 and 19. General test cases were created to verify the elastic and plastic behavior of the material models. Other additional tests were developed to examine the intricacies of each material model. Each test involved the use a kinematic load case and specification of material parameters necessary to activate corresponding features of the material model. The load cases prescribed the full time history of the kinematic motion for the solid elements, and these loads are independent of the material model or element formulation. When possible, closed form solutions were then derived for each verification test in a continuum setting. The DYNA3D simulations for each test were carried out over a unit time interval, t ϵ [0, 1], and the as implemented DYNA3D response was compared to the closed form solutions evaluated at discrete points in time. A relative error measure was determined for each test to justify the proper implementation of the material model. The relative errors comparing the DYNA3D solution to the analytical solution were, in general, on the order of machine precision except where noted. This signifies the proper implementation of solid-element material models 11-19. In the development of these verification tests, six bugs were found and fixed in the source code. Additionally, this work generated eighteen DYNA3D input decks and answer extraction scripts in the DYNA3D/ParaDyn Software Quality Assurance test suite, which are comprised of a total of 285 solid-element tests. Testing for each material model utilizes two input decks and answer extraction scripts, where one focuses on the linear elastic response and the other examines the inelastic and remaining functionalities of the material model. In total, this work added 285 individual verification test problems in the DYNA3D/ParaDyn test suite.

42 ENGINEERING↗