Publications

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Code verification plays an important role in establishing the credibility of computational simulations by assessing the correctness of the implementation of the underlying numerical methods. In computational electromagnetics, the numerical solution to integral equations incurs multiple interacting sources of numerical error, as well as other challenges, which render traditional code-verification approaches ineffective. In this paper, we provide approaches to separately measure the numerical errors arising from these different error sources for the method-of-moments implementation of the combined-field integral equation. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches for cases with and without coding errors.

Hypersonic aerothermodynamics is an important domain of modern multiphysics simulation. The Multi-Fidelity Toolkit is a simulation tool being developed at Sandia National Laboratories to predict aerodynamic properties for compressible flows from a range of physics fidelities and computational speeds. These models include the Reynolds-averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, the Euler equations with momentum-energy integral technique (MEIT), and modified Newtonian aerodynamics with flat-plate boundary layer (MNA+FPBL) equations, and they can be invoked independently or coupled with hierarchical Kriging to interpolate between high-fidelity simulations using lower-fidelity data. However, as with any new simulation capability, verification and validation are necessary to gather credibility evidence. This work describes formal code- and solution-verification activities, as well as model validation with uncertainty considerations. Code verification activities on the MNA+FPBL model build on previous work by focusing on the viscous portion of the model. Viscous quantities of interest are compared against those from an analytical solution for flat-plate, inclined-plate, and cone geometries. The code verification methodology for the MEIT model is also presented. Test setup and results of code verification tests on the laminar and turbulent models within MEIT are shown. Solution-verification activities include grid-refinement studies on simulations that model the HIFiRE-1 wind tunnel experiments. These experiments are used for validation of all model fidelities. A thorough validation comparison with prediction error and uncertainty is also presented. Three additional HIFiRE-1 experimental runs are simulated in this study, and the solution verification and validation work examines the effects of the associated parameter changes on model performance. Finally, a study is presented that compares the computational costs and fidelities from each of the different models.

For computational physics simulations, code verification plays a major role in establishing the credibility of the results by assessing the correctness of the implementation of the underlying numerical methods. In computational electromagnetics, surface integral equations, such as the method-of-moments implementation of the magnetic-field integral equation, are frequently used to solve Maxwell's equations on the surfaces of electromagnetic scatterers. These electromagnetic surface integral equations yield many code-verification challenges due to the various sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. In this paper, we provide approaches to separately measure the numerical errors arising from these different error sources. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches for cases with and without coding errors.

For computational physics simulations, code verification plays a major role in establishing the credibility of the results by assessing the correctness of the implementation of the underlying numerical methods. In computational electromagnetics, surface integral equations, such as the method-of-moments implementation of the magnetic-field integral equation, are frequently used to solve Maxwell's equations on the surfaces of electromagnetic scatterers. These electromagnetic surface integral equations yield many code-verification challenges due to the various sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. In this paper, we provide approaches to separately measure the numerical errors arising from these different error sources. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches for cases with and without coding errors.

For computational physics simulations, code verification plays a major role in establishing the credibility of the results by assessing the correctness of the implementation of the underlying numerical methods. In computational electromagnetics, surface integral equations, such as the method-of-moments implementation of the magnetic-field integral equation, are frequently used to solve Maxwell's equations on the surfaces of electromagnetic scatterers. These electromagnetic surface integral equations yield many code-verification challenges due to the various sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. In this paper, we provide approaches to separately measure the numerical errors arising from these different error sources. We demonstrate the effectiveness of these approaches for cases with and without coding errors.

We report the method-of-moments implementation of the electric-field integral equation (EFIE) yields many code-verification challenges due to the various sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. Matters are further complicated by singular integrals, which arise from the presence of a Green's function. To address these singular integrals, an approach is presented in wherein both the solution and Green's function are manufactured. Because the arising equations are poorly conditioned, they are reformulated as a set of constraints for an optimization problem that selects the solution closest to the manufactured solution. In this paper, we demonstrate how, for such practically singular systems of equations, computing the truncation error by inserting the exact solution into the discretized equations cannot detect certain orders of coding errors. On the other hand, the discretization error from the optimal solution is a more sensitive metric that can detect orders less than those of the expected convergence rate.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

The Multi-Fidelity Toolkit (MFTK) is a simulation tool being developed at Sandia National Laboratories for aerodynamic predictions of compressible flows over a range of physics fidelities and computational speeds. These models include the Reynolds-Averaged-Navier-Stokes (RANS) equations, the Euler equations, and modified Newtonian aerodynamics (MNA) equations, and they can be invoked independently or coupled with hierarchical Kriging to interpolate between high-fidelity simulations using lower-fidelity data. However, as with any new simulation capability, verification and validation are necessary to gather credibility evidence. This work describes formal code- and solution-verification activities as well as model validation with uncertainty considerations. Code verification is performed on the MNA model by comparing with an analytical solution for flat-plate and inclined-plate geometries. Solution-verification activities include grid-refinement studies of HIFiRE-1 wind tunnel measurements, which are used for validation, for all model fidelities. A thorough treatment of the validation comparison with prediction error and validation uncertainty is also presented.

The Multi-Fidelity Toolkit (MFTK) is a simulation tool being developed at Sandia National Laboratories for aerodynamic predictions of compressible flows over a range of physics fidelities and computational speeds. These models include the Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, the Euler equations, and modified Newtonian aerodynamics (MNA) equations, and they can be invoked independently or coupled with hierarchical Kriging to interpolate between high-fidelity simulations using lower-fidelity data. However, as with any new simulation capability, verification and validation are necessary to gather credibility evidence. This work describes formal model validation with uncertainty considerations that leverages experimental data from the HIFiRE-1 wind tunnel tests. The geometry is a multi-conic shape that produces complex flow phenomena under hypersonic conditions. A thorough treatment of the validation comparison with prediction error and validation uncertainty is also presented.

The Multi-Fidelity Toolkit (MFTK) is a simulation tool being developed at Sandia National Laboratories for aerodynamic predictions of compressible flows over a range of physics fidelities and computational speeds. These models include the Reynolds-Averaged Navier–Stokes (RANS) equations, the Euler equations, and modified Newtonian aerodynamics (MNA) equations, and they can be invoked independently or coupled with hierarchical Kriging to interpolate between high-fidelity simulations using lower-fidelity data. However, as with any new simulation capability, verification and validation are necessary to gather credibility evidence. This work describes formal code-and solution-verification activities. Code verification is performed on the MNA model by comparing with an analytical solution for flat-plate and inclined-plate geometries. Solution-verification activities include grid-refinement studies of HIFiRE-1 wind tunnel measurements, which are used for validation, for all model fidelities.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Though the method-of-moments implementation of the electric-field integral equation plays an important role in computational electromagnetics, it provides many code-verification challenges due to the different sources of numerical error and their possible interactions. Matters are further complicated by singular integrals, which arise from the presence of a Green's function. In this report, we document our research to address these issues, as well as its implementation and testing in Gemma.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.

Abstract not provided.