Results for “compiler verification” — Page 7

DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for PFP Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for C-9 Pond Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for S Farms Area for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed "dry" in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chloiine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thmium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time struts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases ( eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user's guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User 's Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for B-3A/B Pond for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort; carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP) simulator officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the B-3A/B Ponds model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the B-3 A/B Ponds vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2020

Vadose Zone Model for SALDS for Composite Analysis

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site composite analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates for the plateau to river (P2R) model, version 8.3 (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP1) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP) is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the P2R model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m P2R grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain. The Hanford Site Central Plateau was subdivided into 26 individual vadose zone models, with 13 in the 200 East Area and 13 in the 200 West Area. Waste sites that have a completed performance assessment (PA) or past-leak analysis were not included as sources of radionuclides. Instead the vadose zone to groundwater transfer rates of the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility, Integrated Disposal Facility, US Ecology, and Waste Management Area C (WMA C) PAs and the past-leak analysis for WMA C were used as direct input to the P2R model. Each of the vadose zone models is documented in separate environmental calculation files (ECFs). This ECF describes the State-Approved Land Disposal Site (SALDS) model. The scope of this ECF is to document the development and results of the SALDS vadose zone model. CP-63515, Model Package Report: Central Plateau Vadose Zone Models, describes the approach, assumptions, process of determining the number of models required and domain of each model, input data, and processing common to all the models.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Site Composite Analysis: LLBG-200-W B Vadose Zone Model

The objectives of the vadose modeling for the updated Hanford Site Composite Analysis (CA) are to simulate the flow and transport of water and radionuclide releases from the surface to the water table and to provide radionuclide transfer rates to the CA saturated zone model (CP-57037, Model Package Report: Plateau to River Groundwater Model, Version 8.3). Water additions include natural recharge and water discharged to the ground as a result of industrial processes associated with Hanford Site operations. Contaminant sources include radionuclides in water discharged to the ground during operations and radionuclides disposed “dry” in solid waste burial grounds or other means. The following 16 radionuclides were selected for this modeling effort: carbon-14 (C-14), chlorine-36 (Cl-36), tritium (H-3), iodine-129 (I-129), neptunium-237 (Np-237), rhenium-187 (Re-187), strontium-90 (Sr-90), technetium-99 (Tc-99), uranium-232 (U-232), uranium-233 (U-233), uranium-234 (U-234), uranium-235 (U-235), uranium-236 (U-236), uranium-238 (U-238), radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-230 (Th-230). The simulation time starts in 1943 and ends at 12070, which is 10,000 years after assumed Hanford Site closure in 2070. The parallel version of the Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (STOMP 1 ) simulator, officially named the exascale Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases (eSTOMP), is used to simulate flow and transport for the vadose models. The documentation for the STOMP code is comprehensive. The theoretical and numerical approaches applied in the STOMP code are documented in a published theory guide (PNNL-12030, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 2.0 Theory Guide). The code has undergone a rigorous verification procedure against analytical solutions, laboratory-scale experiments, and field-scale demonstrations. The application guide (PNNL-11216, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Application Guide) provides instructive examples in the application of the code to classical groundwater problems. The user’s guide (PNNL-15782, STOMP: Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases Version 4.0: User’s Guide) describes the general use, input file formatting, compilation, and execution of the code. The primary output of the vadose zone modeling is radionuclide transfer rates to the groundwater for input into the saturated zone model. The rates will be summed over the 100 by 100 m saturated zone model grid cells that fall within the vadose zone model source domain.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

DOE OSTI2023

Code Coverage Status of ARC Code-DIF3D

The Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) software system supports users in their fast reactor design goals by providing neutronic, thermal-hydraulic, and structural analysis capabilities. DIF3D plays a pivotal role in the ARC system as the primary homogenized assembly neutronic calculation methodology for fast reactor problems. Over its 40 years history, ARC software usage with DIF3D has been applied to numerous fast and thermal spectrum reactor analysis projects with good to excellent comparison against experiments. With continued improvement of computation resources, many of the geometry modeling capabilities in DIF3D that were primarily used in low order schemes are not really needed anymore. Today, the diffusion and transport capabilities of DIF3D-VARIANT are primarily used in the reactor design process with some scattered usage of DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-Nodal. In recent work, the DIF3D software verification was completed for DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT on the geometry options used in the Versatile Test Reactor project. While we can be confident that these capabilities of DIF3D are well used and thus trusted, it does not demonstrate that all possible input options of DIF3D are actually working, but just those that were tested as part of VTR are and that they are correct. Thus, the purpose of the present work is to identify a set of test problems for DIF3D and assess the code coverage of DIF3D for those test problems. The goal is to document what parts of the existing DIF3D code are touched by the set of test problems and which are not. Because the verification work done on DIF3D-VARIANT and DIF3D-FD was focused on the most common uses of DIF3D for fast reactor analysis, the code coverage assessment of those capabilities is the highest priority. This will ensure that nothing is being missed by the existing verification test problems that DIF3D relies upon. The DIF3D-Nodal capability will also be inspected for code coverage as part of this work to further ensure that regular regression testing of DIF3D will trap any likely errors the end user might experience with the DIF3D software. The code coverage analysis of DIF3D was performed with the Code Coverage Tool of the Intel Fortran compiler which requires modifications to the compilation of DIF3D. The detailed coverage tables are given for each submodule of DIF3D separately, and for the submodules which are primarily developed for DIF3D, most of the source files could be at least partially touched. Most of the uncovered parts/files could be easily ignored, because they are either for error message and debugging output or obviously not needed by DIF3D. Out of the entire source codes of DIF3D, only a few uncovered modules deserve further investigation.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

DOE OSTI2025

Code Coverage Status of the ARC Code DIF3D

The Argonne Reactor Code (ARC) software system supports users in their fast reactor design goals by providing neutronic, thermal-hydraulic, and structural analysis capabilities. DIF3D plays a pivotal role in the ARC system as the primary homogenized assembly neutronic calculation methodology for fast reactor problems. Over its 40 years history, ARC software usage with DIF3D has been applied to numerous fast and thermal spectrum reactor analysis projects with good to excellent comparison against experiments. With continued improvement of computation resources, many of the geometry modeling capabilities in DIF3D that were primarily used in low order schemes are not really needed anymore. Today, the diffusion and transport capabilities of DIF3D-VARIANT are primarily used in the reactor design process with some scattered usage of DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-Nodal. In recent work, the DIF3D software verification was completed for DIF3D-FD and DIF3D-VARIANT on the geometry options used in the Versatile Test Reactor project. While we can be confident that these capabilities of DIF3D are well used and thus trusted, it does not demonstrate that all possible input options of DIF3D are actually working, but just those that were tested as part of VTR are and that they are correct. Thus, the purpose of the present work is to identify a set of test problems for DIF3D and assess the code coverage of DIF3D for those test problems. The goal is to document what parts of the existing DIF3D code are touched by the set of test problems and which are not. Because the verification work done on DIF3D-VARIANT and DIF3D-FD was focused on the most common uses of DIF3D for fast reactor analysis, the code coverage assessment of those capabilities is the highest priority. This will ensure that nothing is being missed by the existing verification test problems that DIF3D relies upon. The DIF3D-Nodal capability will also be inspected for code coverage as part of this work to further ensure that regular regression testing of DIF3D will trap any likely errors the end user might experience with the DIF3D software. The code coverage analysis of DIF3D was performed with the Code Coverage Tool of the Intel Fortran compiler which requires modifications to the compilation of DIF3D. The detailed coverage tables are given for each submodule of DIF3D separately, and for the submodules which are primarily developed for DIF3D, most of the source files could be at least partially touched. Most of the uncovered parts/files could be easily ignored, because they are either for error message and debugging output or obviously not needed by DIF3D. Out of the entire source codes of DIF3D, only a few uncovered modules deserve further investigation.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

NASA NTRS2002

Remote Sensing Information Science Research

This document is the final report summarizing research conducted by the Remote Sensing Research Unit, Department of Geography, University of California, Santa Barbara under National Aeronautics and Space Administration Research Grant NAG5-10457. This document describes work performed during the period of 1 March 2001 thorough 30 September 2002. This report includes a survey of research proposed and performed within RSRU and the UCSB Geography Department during the past 25 years. A broad suite of RSRU research conducted under NAG5-10457 is also described under themes of Applied Research Activities and Information Science Research. This research includes: 1. NASA ESA Research Grant Performance Metrics Reporting. 2. Global Data Set Thematic Accuracy Analysis. 3. ISCGM/Global Map Project Support. 4. Cooperative International Activities. 5. User Model Study of Global Environmental Data Sets. 6. Global Spatial Data Infrastructure. 7. CIESIN Collaboration. 8. On the Value of Coordinating Landsat Operations. 10. The California Marine Protected Areas Database: Compilation and Accuracy Issues. 11. Assessing Landslide Hazard Over a 130-Year Period for La Conchita, California Remote Sensing and Spatial Metrics for Applied Urban Area Analysis, including: (1) IKONOS Data Processing for Urban Analysis. (2) Image Segmentation and Object Oriented Classification. (3) Spectral Properties of Urban Materials. (4) Spatial Scale in Urban Mapping. (5) Variable Scale Spatial and Temporal Urban Growth Signatures. (6) Interpretation and Verification of SLEUTH Modeling Results. (7) Spatial Land Cover Pattern Analysis for Representing Urban Land Use and Socioeconomic Structures. 12. Colorado River Flood Plain Remote Sensing Study Support. 13. African Rainfall Modeling and Assessment. 14. Remote Sensing and GIS Integration.

Clarke, Keith C.↗

DOE OSTI2022

The eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey (eFEDS)

In 2019, the eROSITA telescope on board the Russian-German satellite Spectrum-Roentgen-Gamma (SRG) began to perform a deep all-sky X-ray survey with the aim of identifying ~100 000 clusters and groups over the course of four years. As part of its performance verification phase, a ~140 deg 2 survey, called eROSITA Final Equatorial-Depth Survey (eFEDS), was performed. With a depth typical of the all-sky survey after four years, it allows tests of tools and methods as well as improved predictions for the all-sky survey. As part of this effort, a catalog of 542 X-ray selected galaxy group and cluster candidates was compiled. Here, in this paper, we present the optical follow-up, with the aim of providing redshifts and cluster confirmation for the full sample. Furthermore, we aim to provide additional information on the dynamical state, richness, and optical center of the clusters. Finally, we aim to evaluate the impact of optical cluster confirmation on the purity and completeness of the X-ray selected sample. We used optical imaging data from the Hyper Suprime-Cam Subaru Strategic Program and from the Legacy Survey to identify optical counterparts to the X-ray detected cluster candidates. We make use of the multi-component matched filter cluster confirmation tool (MCMF), as well as of the optical cluster finder CAMIRA to derive cluster redshifts and richnesses. MCMF provided the probabilities with which an optical structure would be a chance superposition with the X-ray candidate. These probabilities were used to identify the best optical counterpart as well as to confirm an X-ray candidate as a cluster. The impact of this confirmation process on catalog purity and completeness was estimated using optical to X-ray scaling relations as well as simulations. The resulting catalog was furthermore matched with public group and cluster catalogs. Optical estimators of the cluster dynamical state were constructed based on density maps of the red-sequence galaxies at the cluster redshift. By providing redshift estimates for all 542 candidates, we construct an optically confirmed sample of 477 clusters and groups with a residual contamination of 6%. Of these, 470 (98.5%) are confirmed using MCMF, and 7 systems are added through cross-matching with spectroscopic group catalogs. Using observable-to-observable scaling and the applied confirmation threshold, we predict that 8 ± 2 real systems have been excluded with the MCMF cut required to build this low-contamination sample. This number agrees well with the 7 systems found through cross-matching that were not confirmed with MCMF. The predicted redshift and mass distribution of this catalog agree well with simulations. Thus, we expect that these 477 systems include >99% of all true clusters in the candidate list. Using an MCMF-independent method, we confirm that the catalog contamination of the confirmed subsample is 6 ± 3%. Application of the same method to the full candidate list yields 17 ± 3%, consistent with estimates coming from the fraction of confirmed systems of ~17% and with expectations from simulations of ~20%. We also present a sample of merging cluster candidates based on the derived estimators of the cluster dynamical state.

79 ASTRONOMY AND ASTROPHYSICS↗

DOE OSTI2024

Sierra/SD – Verification Test Manual – 5.18

Tests from the Sierra Structural Dynamics verification test suite are reviewed. Each is run nightly 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 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↗

NASA NTRS2012

Space Shuttle Program (SSP) Shock Test and Specification Experience for Reusable Flight Hardware Equipment

As commercial companies are nearing a preliminary design review level of design maturity, several companies are identifying the process for qualifying their multi-use electrical and mechanical components for various shock environments, including pyrotechnic, mortar firing, and water impact. The experience in quantifying the environments consists primarily of recommendations from Military Standard-1540, Product Verification Requirement for Launch, Upper Stage, and Space Vehicles. Therefore, the NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) formed a team of NASA shock experts to share the NASA experience with qualifying hardware for the Space Shuttle Program (SSP) and other applicable programs and projects. Several team teleconferences were held to discuss past experience and to share ideas of possible methods for qualifying components for multiple missions. This document contains the information compiled from the discussions

Larsen, Curtis E.↗

NASA NTRS1973

Environmental control system transducer development study

A failure evaluation of the transducers used in the environmental control systems of the Apollo command service module, lunar module, and portable life support system is presented in matrix form for several generic categories of transducers to enable identification of chronic failure modes. Transducer vendors were contacted and asked to supply detailed information. The evaluation data generated for each category of transducer were compiled and published in failure design evaluation reports. The evaluation reports also present a review of the failure and design data for the transducers and suggest both design criteria to improve reliability of the transducers and, where necessary, design concepts for required redesign of the transducers. Remedial designs were implemented on a family of pressure transducers and on the oxygen flow transducer. The design concepts were subjected to analysis, breadboard fabrication, and verification testing.

Brudnicki, M. J.↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Orion Backup Flight Software

Orion Backup Flight Software (BFS) is a joint NASA/Lockheed Martin effort designed to prevent the loss of the Orion crew. BFS will only take over in the event the primary flight software (PFSW) fails to operate properly due to either hardware or software failures. Since the PFSW runs identical software on identical hardware, it is conceivable that a single issue could simultaneously bring down all the PFSW. To minimize the likelihood BFS would be affected by the same issue, BFS was specifically designed to be as different as possible from PFSW: BFS runs on different hardware, a separate operating system, a different compiler, does not share software libraries, and is written by a different team of programmers. This presentation will provide a high-level overview of the Artemis missions and the Orion vehicle, as well as provide additional details of the BFS system (including how BFS is different than the PFSW). The overall BFS capability evolution and timeline (milestones reached as well as work remaining) through the Artemis III mission will be discussed. Additionally, the verification and validation plans for BFS will be presented, describing how we ensure that only validated configuration data is loaded onto the flight vehicle. Finally, the presentation will close with lessons learned and future plans for Orion BFS.

Orion↗

NASA NTRSDate not supplied

Orion Backup Flight Software (BFS)

Orion Backup Flight Software (BFS) is a joint NASA/Lockheed Martin effort designed to prevent the loss of the Orion crew. BFS will only take over in the event the primary flight software (PFSW) fails to operate properly due to either hardware or software failures. Since the PFSW runs identical software on identical hardware, it is conceivable that a single issue could simultaneously bring down all the PFSW. To minimize the likelihood BFS would be affected by the same issue, BFS was specifically designed to be as different as possible from PFSW: BFS runs on different hardware, a separate operating system, a different compiler, does not share software libraries, and is written by a different team of programmers. This presentation will provide a high-level overview of the Artemis missions and the Orion vehicle, as well as provide additional details of the BFS system (including how BFS is different than the PFSW). The overall BFS capability evolution and timeline (milestones reached as well as work remaining) through the Artemis III mission will be discussed. Additionally, the verification and validation plans for BFS will be presented, describing how we ensure that only validated configuration data is loaded onto the flight vehicle. Finally, the presentation will close with lessons learned and future plans for Orion BFS.

CFS↗

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 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↗