skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: DYNA3D/ParaDyn Regression Test Suite Inventory

Abstract

The following table constitutes an initial assessment of feature coverage across the regression test suite used for DYNA3D and ParaDyn. It documents the regression test suite at the time of preliminary release 16.1 in September 2016. The columns of the table represent groupings of functionalities, e.g., material models. Each problem in the test suite is represented by a row in the table. All features exercised by the problem are denoted by a check mark (√) in the corresponding column. The definition of “feature” has not been subdivided to its smallest unit of user input, e.g., algorithmic parameters specific to a particular type of contact surface. This represents a judgment to provide code developers and users a reasonable impression of feature coverage without expanding the width of the table by several multiples. All regression testing is run in parallel, typically with eight processors, except problems involving features only available in serial mode. Many are strictly regression tests acting as a check that the codes continue to produce adequately repeatable results as development unfolds; compilers change and platforms are replaced. A subset of the tests represents true verification problems that have been checked against analytical or other benchmark solutions. Users are welcomedmore » to submit documented problems for inclusion in the test suite, especially if they are heavily exercising, and dependent upon, features that are currently underrepresented.« less

Authors:
 [1]
  1. Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Publication Date:
Research Org.:
Lawrence Livermore National Lab. (LLNL), Livermore, CA (United States)
Sponsoring Org.:
USDOE
OSTI Identifier:
1331455
Report Number(s):
LLNL-TR-704102
DOE Contract Number:
AC52-07NA27344
Resource Type:
Technical Report
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING

Citation Formats

Lin, Jerry I. DYNA3D/ParaDyn Regression Test Suite Inventory. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.2172/1331455.
Lin, Jerry I. DYNA3D/ParaDyn Regression Test Suite Inventory. United States. doi:10.2172/1331455.
Lin, Jerry I. 2016. "DYNA3D/ParaDyn Regression Test Suite Inventory". United States. doi:10.2172/1331455. https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1331455.
@article{osti_1331455,
title = {DYNA3D/ParaDyn Regression Test Suite Inventory},
author = {Lin, Jerry I.},
abstractNote = {The following table constitutes an initial assessment of feature coverage across the regression test suite used for DYNA3D and ParaDyn. It documents the regression test suite at the time of preliminary release 16.1 in September 2016. The columns of the table represent groupings of functionalities, e.g., material models. Each problem in the test suite is represented by a row in the table. All features exercised by the problem are denoted by a check mark (√) in the corresponding column. The definition of “feature” has not been subdivided to its smallest unit of user input, e.g., algorithmic parameters specific to a particular type of contact surface. This represents a judgment to provide code developers and users a reasonable impression of feature coverage without expanding the width of the table by several multiples. All regression testing is run in parallel, typically with eight processors, except problems involving features only available in serial mode. Many are strictly regression tests acting as a check that the codes continue to produce adequately repeatable results as development unfolds; compilers change and platforms are replaced. A subset of the tests represents true verification problems that have been checked against analytical or other benchmark solutions. Users are welcomed to submit documented problems for inclusion in the test suite, especially if they are heavily exercising, and dependent upon, features that are currently underrepresented.},
doi = {10.2172/1331455},
journal = {},
number = ,
volume = ,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 9
}

Technical Report:

Save / Share:
  • The following table constitutes an initial assessment of feature coverage across the regression test suite used for DYNA3D and ParaDyn. It documents the regression test suite at the time of production release 10.1 in September 2010. The columns of the table represent groupings of functionalities, e.g., material models. Each problem in the test suite is represented by a row in the table. All features exercised by the problem are denoted by a check mark in the corresponding column. The definition of ''feature'' has not been subdivided to its smallest unit of user input, e.g., algorithmic parameters specific to a particularmore » type of contact surface. This represents a judgment to provide code developers and users a reasonable impression of feature coverage without expanding the width of the table by several multiples. All regression testing is run in parallel, typically with eight processors. Many are strictly regression tests acting as a check that the codes continue to produce adequately repeatable results as development unfolds, compilers change and platforms are replaced. A subset of the tests represents true verification problems that have been checked against analytical or other benchmark solutions. Users are welcomed to submit documented problems for inclusion in the test suite, especially if they are heavily exercising, and dependent upon, features that are currently underrepresented.« less
  • This document describes the creation and implementation of a test suite for the Equationof- State models in the DYNA3D code. A customized input deck has been created for each model, as well as a script that extracts the relevant data from the high-speed edit file created by DYNA3D. Each equation-of-state model is broken apart and individual elements of the model are tested, as well as testing the entire model. The input deck for each model is described and the results of the tests are discussed. The intent of this work is to add this test suite to the validation suitemore » presently used for DYNA3D.« less
  • The Software Quality Assurance (SQA) regression test suite for DYNA3D (Zywicz and Lin, 2015) and ParaDyn (DeGroot, et al., 2015) currently contains approximately 600 problems divided into 21 suites, and is a required component of ParaDyn’s SQA plan (Ferencz and Oliver, 2013). The regression suite allows developers to ensure that software modifications do not unintentionally alter the code response. The entire regression suite is run prior to permanently incorporating any software modification or addition. When code modifications alter test problem results, the specific cause must be determined and fully understood before the software changes and revised test answers can bemore » incorporated. The regression suite is executed on LLNL platforms using a Python script and an associated data file. The user specifies the DYNA3D or ParaDyn executable, number of processors to use, test problems to run, and other options to the script. The data file details how each problem and its answer extraction scripts are executed. For each problem in the regression suite there exists an input deck, an eight-processor partition file, an answer file, and various extraction scripts. These scripts assemble a temporary answer file in a specific format from the simulation results. The temporary and stored answer files are compared to a specific level of numerical precision, and when differences are detected the test problem is flagged as failed. Presently, numerical results are stored and compared to 16 digits. At this accuracy level different processor types, compilers, number of partitions, etc. impact the results to various degrees. Thus, for consistency purposes the regression suite is run with ParaDyn using 8 processors on machines with a specific processor type (currently the Intel Xeon E5530 processor). For non-parallel regression problems, i.e., the two XFEM problems, DYNA3D is used instead. When environments or platforms change, executables using the current source code and the new resource are created and the regression suite is run. If differences in answers arise, the new answers are retained provided that the differences are inconsequential. This bootstrap approach allows the test suite answers to evolve in a controlled manner with a high level of confidence. Developers also run the entire regression suite with (serial) DYNA3D. While these results normally differ from the stored (parallel) answers, abnormal termination or wildly different values are strong indicators of potential issues.« less
  • A series of quasi-static regression/verification problems were developed for the triangular and quadrilateral shell element formulations contained in Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory's explicit finite element program DYNA3D. Each regression problem imposes both displacement- and force-type boundary conditions to probe the five independent nodal degrees of freedom employed in the targeted formulation. When applicable, the finite element results are compared with small-strain linear-elastic closed-form reference solutions to verify select aspects of the formulations implementation. Although all problems in the suite depict the same geometry, material behavior, and loading conditions, each problem represents a unique combination of shell formulation, stabilization method, andmore » integration rule. Collectively, the thirty-six new regression problems in the test suite cover nine different shell formulations, three hourglass stabilization methods, and three families of through-thickness integration rules.« less
  • Two verification problems were developed to test non-reflecting boundary segments in DYNA3D (Whirley and Engelmann, 1993). The problems simulate 1-D wave propagation in a semi-infinite rod using a finite length rod and non-reflecting boundary conditions. One problem examines pure pressure wave propagation, and the other problem explores pure shear wave propagation. In both problems the non-reflecting boundary segments yield results that differ only slightly (less than 6%) during a short duration from their corresponding theoretical solutions. The errors appear to be due to the inability to generate a true step-function compressive wave in the pressure wave propagation problem and duemore » to segment integration inaccuracies in the shear wave propagation problem. These problems serve as verification problems and as regression test problems for DYNA3D.« less