Vol_3_OSC_Acceptance_Test_Report_900RPT2250_RevA.pdf

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

900RPT2250A DISTRIBUTION 21.2

VOLUME 3

Special Report

Optical Signatures Code

Volume 3

Acceptance Test Report for OSC 21.2

October 2013

SPONSORED BY THE MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY

NOTICE – The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this document are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of Defense position, policy, or decision unless designated by other official documentation.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D – Distribution authorized to Department of Defense Agencies and U.S. DoD contractors; Critical Technology, Export Controlled; 30 November 2015. Other requests for this document shall be referred to MDA/ESP (Attn: Mark Underwood or active program COTR), 5224 Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 or higher DoD authority.

WARNING – This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C. sec 2751 et seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, Title 50, U.S.C., App. 2401 et seq.

Violations of these export laws are subject to severe criminal penalties.

Disseminate in accordance with the provisions of DoD Directive 5230.25.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE – For classified documents follow the procedures in DoD 5200.22-M, Industrial Security Manual, Section 11-19 ORD or 5200.1-R, Information Security Program Regulation Chapter IX. For unclassified, limited documents destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

NOTICE – This document contains information that may be exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

i

NOTICE

This document contains information that may be exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Per Department of Defense (DoD) Manual 5200.01, Volume 4, February 24, 2012, Objective

Simulation Framework (OSF) documents, including this document, are considered to be

Unclassified but For Official Use Only (FOUO) and exempt from the Freedom of Information

Act (FOIA) as a result of compilation. The OSF software and documentation are considered export controlled. Though no discrete portion of this document is considered to be export controlled, the information that may be extracted from this document as a whole is considered to be export controlled and therefore may be exempt from FOIA and is considered FOUO.

ii

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

Form Approved OMB

No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing date sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

31 October 2013 Special Report

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

Optical Signatures Code Volume 3 – Acceptance Test Report for OSC 21.2 Contract No.:

HQ0147-11-D-0015

Task Order 9

CDRL A033A

6. AUTHOR(S)

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT

NUMBER

900RPT2250A

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY

REPORT NUMBER

Missile Defense Agency

MDA/ESP

5224 Martin Road

Redstone Arsenal, Alabama 35898

Attention: Mark Underwood

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b DISTRIBUTION CODE

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D – Distribution authorized to Department of

Defense Agencies and U.S. DoD contractors; Critical Technology, Export

Controlled; 30 November 2015. Other requests for this document shall be referred to MDA/ESP (Attn: Mark Underwood or active program COTR), 5224

Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 or higher DoD authority.

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

This report summarizes the results of acceptance testing performed prior to the distribution of OSC 21.2. The standard OSC example cases, validation test cases, 9 input files that are model specific, 5 “baseline” variation input files, and 76 new inputs that exercise most of the options in OSC, especially new capabilities (115 input files in all) were run using the delivered versions of OSC 20.4, OSC 21.1, and OSC 21.2. Output from each version is shown with plots of signature, temperature, or sensor response comparisons (as applicable). Any necessary code changes are also described.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15 NUMBER OF PAGES

OSC, WinOSC, OPTISIG, PIXEL8, trajectory, flowfield, subsonic, supersonic, hypersonic, thermal response, earthshine, albedo, ablation, radiation, convection, reflection, BRDF, optical signature, sensor, visible, infrared, SWIR, MWIR, LWIR, missile, reentry vehicle, RV, countermeasures, wake

16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF

REPORT

18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THE

PAGE

19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF

ABSTRACT

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED UL

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18

298-102 iii

SPECIAL REPORT

900RPT2250A

Optical Signatures Code

Volume 3

Acceptance Test Report for OSC 21.2

October 2013

NOTICE – The views, opinions, and/or findings contained in this document are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of Defense position, policy, or decision unless designated by other official documentation.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT D – Distribution authorized to Department of Defense Agencies and U.S. DoD contractors; Critical Technology, Export Controlled; 30 November 2015. Other requests for this document shall be referred to MDA/ESP (Attn: Mark Underwood or active program COTR), 5224 Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898 or higher DoD authority.

WARNING – This document contains technical data whose export is restricted by the Arms Export Control Act (Title 22, U.S.C. sec 2751 et seq.) or the Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended, Title 50, U.S.C., App. 2401 et seq.

Violations of these export laws are subject to severe criminal penalties.

Disseminate in accordance with the provisions of DoD Directive 5230.25.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE – For classified documents follow the procedures in DoD 5200.22-M, Industrial Security Manual, Section 11-19 ORD or 5200.1-R, Information Security Program Regulation Chapter IX. For unclassified, limited documents destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

NOTICE – This document contains information that may be exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

Prepared For

Missile Defense Agency

Restone Arsenal, Alabama

Under Contract Number HQ0147-11-D-0015

Task Order 9

Prepared By iv

DOCUMENT CHANGE LOG

Revision Date Pages Affected Description

Initial 31 October

All

This document was prepared and released in accordance with CDRL A039.

A 27 June 2016 Cover and pages i-iv

Updated distribution markings, task order number, sponsor, and added notation referring to published addenda to Volume 3.

IMPORTANT

Only the cover and control markings for this OSC 21.2 report were updated for distribution with the OSC 21.2.3 package. The report content was not edited. Refer to the following addenda to Volume 3 for test results for OSC 21.2.x versions released after October 2013:

Test Report: OSC 21.2.1, 900RPT2937, 8 August 2014

Test Report: OSC 21.2.2, 900RPT3669A, 22 June 2015

Test Report: OSC 21.2.3, 900RPT4993, 19 July 2016

This report will be revised and re-issued at the next major release.

v

ABSTRACT

This report summarizes the results of acceptance testing performed prior to the distribution of OSC 21.2. During acceptance testing for OSC 21.0, eighty-seven OSC inputs were run using the delivered versions of OSC 20.3 (in FORTRAN 77), the upgraded version of 20.3

(August 08), the source code for OSC 21 (in FORTRAN 77 and in FORTRAN 95). (FORTRAN

95 is used generically here to refer to the new standards that have been adopted since

FORTRAN 77, e.g., F95, F2003, F2008.) Seventeen inputs were added for OSC 21.1 acceptance testing and another eleven were added for testing with the source code intended for OSC 21.2. These inputs include test cases from the first acceptance testing

(ten standard OSC example cases, validation test cases, nine model specific input files, four

“baseline” variations that exercise fin, curved-base, Monte Carlo and many frusta capabilities). As capabilities have been augmented, corresponding test cases have been developed. Twenty-eight input cases have been added for testing new or modified capabilities in OSC 21.1 and OSC 21.2. There are now 115 inputs for acceptance testing. All test case inputs have been run with OSC 21.2 and where possible, compared with OSC 21.1 and earlier versions. 113 test cases have been plotted. Test cases that were not plotted were compared using file comparison tools against previous temperature and/or signature output as applicable. Necessary code changes are also described.

APPROVED BY:

vi

FOREWORD

OSC 21.2 was prepared as part of the Operation, Maintenance, and Sustainment of the

Hardbody Toolset of the MDA Electro-Optical/Infrared (EO/IR) Toolkit for Contract Number

HQ0147-11-D-0015, under the technical direction of Cliff Burson (MDA DE/S ESP) for the

Missile Defense Agency. The following people assisted in the programming, beta testing, and writing of this manual: Jeffery L. King, John W. Robinson, Diane H. Hochmuth, Angelina M.

Moore, Theresa Drouin, and Philip K. Smith.

vii

Table of Contents

1. Introduction and Results ................................................................................................................. 1-1

2. Input Streams Failing First Iteration of OSC 21.2 Acceptance Testing ........................................ 2-1

3. Input Streams Failing Second Iteration of OSC 21.2 Acceptance Testing ................................... 3-1

4. Inputs Always Passing Acceptance Testing of OSC 21.2 ............................................................... 4-1

5. Conclusions ...................................................................................................................................... 5-1

6. References ....................................................................................................................................... 6-1 viii

List of Tables

Table 1-1: OSC 21.2 Acceptance Test Case Input Names, Options Exercised (6 Pages) ................. 1-4

Table 1-2: Pass/Fail Results for All Iterations (3 Pages) ............................................................ 1-10

Table 2-1: Pass/Fail Results for First Iteration (5 Pages) ............................................................. 2-2

Table 3-1: Pass/Fail Results for Second Iteration (5 Pages) ........................................................ 3-1

Table 4-1: Summary of All Iteration Results (4 Pages) ................................................................. 4-2 ix

List of Figures

Figure 1-1: First Iteration – Concerns Noted (8 pages) .............................................................. 1-20

Figure 1-2: Last Iteration – Concerns Noted (10 pages) ............................................................ 1-30

Figure 2-1: F678 Code Fragment Showing Absorptivity Usage and Heat Equation ......................... 2-7

Figure 2-2: First Iteration Signatures for OSCE08 ........................................................................ 2-7

Figure 2-3: First Iteration Signatures for BASMFRST.................................................................... 2-8

Figure 2-4: OSCE08 and BASMFRST Second Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 2-9

Figure 2-5: AWMALTA8 First and Second Iteration Signature Results ......................................... 2-10

Figure 2-6: BASELINE First and Second Iteration Signature Results ........................................... 2-11

Figure 2-7: BASEMUL First and Second Iteration Signature Results ........................................... 2-12

Figure 2-8: BASEVANC First and Second Iteration Signature Results .......................................... 2-13

Figure 2-9: BWALL07_0 First and Second Iteration Signature Results ........................................ 2-14

Figure 2-10: BWALL07_A First and Second Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 2-15

Figure 2-11: BWALL07_B First and Second Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 2-16

Figure 2-12: EZBALLT3 First and Second Iteration Signature Results ......................................... 2-17

Figure 2-13: EZ_DEBRIS First and Second Iteration Signature Results ....................................... 2-18

Figure 2-14: PIPE10_TC First and Second Iteration Signature Results ........................................ 2-19

Figure 2-15: PIPE_EZ First and Second Iteration Signature Results ............................................ 2-20

Figure 2-16: TCPLE08 First and Second Iteration Signature Results........................................... 2-21

Figure 2-17: BLKRLR_S1 First and Second Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 2-22

Figure 2-18: BLKRLR_Z0 First and Second Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 2-23

Figure 2-19: V2_A4, V2_COMBO, V2DOF6 First and Second Iteration Signature Results, 50-100

Seconds ................................................................................................................................. 2-24

Figure 2-20: PLMJLK_FLAT_SEP6 Bands 1 and 2 First Iteration Signature Results ..................... 2-25

Figure 2-21: MSLWIF07 First Iteration Signature Results .......................................................... 2-26

Figure 2-22: Gaussian Reflection Analysis Results .................................................................... 2-27

Figure 2-23: Modifications for OSC 21.1 to Create Special Test Version ..................................... 2-28

Figure 2-24: BIDEX1, First Iteration Signatures Compared with Special Version of OSC 21.1 ....... 2-29 x

Figure 2-25: MSR_SPHERE, First Iteration Signature Comparison with Special OSC 21.1 ............ 2-30

Figure 2-26: OSCE03, First Iteration Signature Comparison with Special OSC 21.1 ..................... 2-31

Figure 2-27: PLMJLK_FLAT_SEP6, First Iteration Signature Comparison with Special OSC 21.1 ... 2-32

Figure 2-28: SISMODEX1, First Iteration Signature Comparison with Special OSC 21.1 ............... 2-33

Figure 2-29: VASHAD01-10, First Iteration Signature Comparison with Special OSC 21.1 ............ 2-34

Figure 3-1: PLMJLK_FLAT_SEP6 Bands 1, 2 Second Iteration Signature Results........................... 3-6

Figure 3-2: MSLWIF07 Second Iteration Signature Results .......................................................... 3-7

Figure 3-3: Gas Coefficient Change in F678 for OSC 21.2 ........................................................... 3-7

Figure 3-4:PLMJLK_FLAT_SEP6 Bands 1, 2 Signatures with Restored Gas Coefficients ................. 3-8

Figure 3-5: Reinstated Emissivity Test for F678 .......................................................................... 3-9

Figure 3-6: MSLWIF07 Signatures with Restored Emissivity Test ................................................. 3-9

Figure 3-7: Updated BASELINE Signatures of NSOLAB, IEMOFT Variations .................................. 3-10

Figure 3-8: Updated Logic for NSOLAB Zero/Non-zero Situation ................................................. 3-11

Figure 3-9: Revised BASELINE Signatures for NSOLAB, IEMOFT Variations ................................. 3-12

Figure 3-10: Revised AWMALTA8 Signatures and Averaged Temperatures ................................. 3-12

Figure 3-11: MSSL_ADD_FN_S0 and MSSL_ADD_FN_S1 Signature Comparisons ...................... 3-13

Figure 3-12: MSSL_NZV_FN_S0 and MSSL_NZV_FN_S1 Signature Comparisons ....................... 3-13

Figure 3-13: MSSL_NZ_FN_S0 and MSSL_NZ_FN_S1 Signature Comparisons ........................... 3-14

Figure 3-14: MSSL_WF_FN_S0 and MSSL_WF_FN_S1 Signature Comparisons .......................... 3-14

Figure 4-1: ABLT234 First and Third Iteration Signature Results .................................................. 4-5

Figure 4-2: ANSSGMTEST Second and Third Iteration Signature Results ...................................... 4-6

Figure 4-3: AOAFINS First and Third Iteration Signature Results ................................................... 4-7

Figure 4-4: BASEXOND First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-8

Figure 4-5: BATBALL First and Third Iteration Signature Results ................................................... 4-9

Figure 4-6: BIDEX2 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ................................................ 4-10

Figure 4-7: BLKRLR_00, BLKRLR_01 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ..................... 4-11

Figure 4-8: BLKRLR_S0 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ......................................... 4-12

Figure 4-9: EMSTMP0 First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-13 xi

Figure 4-10: EMSTMP1 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................ 4-14

Figure 4-11: EMSTMP2 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ......................................... 4-15

Figure 4-12: EXO3FLXS – Example of Effect of New Capability ................................................... 4-16

Figure 4-13: EZBALL-DRF, -F, -FRD Signature Comparisons ....................................................... 4-16

Figure 4-14: FLATLIN1 First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-17

Figure 4-15: LXONDTOR – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ........................................ 4-18

Figure 4-16: MSLASC07 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ........................................ 4-19

Figure 4-17: MSR_CUBE – First and Third Iteration Signature Results ........................................ 4-20

Figure 4-18: Signature Comparisons of Z0 Versions of MSSL_ ADD, NZ[V], WIFF ........................ 4-21

Figure 4-19: NEWCHMP – First and Third Iteration of Signature Results ..................................... 4-22

Figure 4-20: NXEHDEF First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-23

Figure 4-21: NXEHTRN First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-24

Figure 4-22: OSCE01 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-25

Figure 4-23: OSCE02 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-26

Figure 4-24: OSCE04 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-27

Figure 4-25: OSCE04 First and Third Iteration Signal-to-Noise Ratio Results ............................... 4-28

Figure 4-26: OSCE05 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-29

Figure 4-27: OSCE05 First and Third Iteration Signal-to-Noise Ratio Results ............................... 4-30

Figure 4-28: OSCE06 First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Visible Band ........................... 4-31

Figure 4-29: OSCE06 First and Third Iteration Signature Results, All Bands ................................ 4-32

Figure 4-30: OSCE07 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-33

Figure 4-31: OSCE09 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-34

Figure 4-32: OSCE10 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-35

Figure 4-33: PIPE_XO3 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-36

Figure 4-34: PRECREP First and Third Iteration Signature Results.............................................. 4-37

Figure 4-35: REP-ACT First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................... 4-38

Figure 4-36: RESPON9 First and Third Iteration Filtered Signature Results ................................. 4-39

Figure 4-37: SISMODEX1 First and Third Iteration Signal-to-Noise Ratio Results ......................... 4-40 xii

Figure 4-38: SISMODEX2 First and Third Iteration Signal-to-Noise Ratio Results ......................... 4-41

Figure 4-39: TCPLE10 First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-42

Figure 4-40: TLTHNOZ First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-43

Figure 4-41: TMPUATST First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................ 4-44

Figure 4-42:ULTIMD07 First and Third Iteration Reentry Signature Results................................. 4-45

Figure 4-43: ULTIME07 First and Third Iteration Reentry Signature Results ................................ 4-46

Figure 4-44: VATRM13 First and Third Iteration Temperature Results ........................................ 4-47

Figure 4-45: VATRM1X First and Third Iteration Temperature Results ........................................ 4-48

Figure 4-46: VATRM23 First and Third Iteration Temperature Results ........................................ 4-49

Figure 4-47: VATRM2X First and Third Iteration Temperature Results ........................................ 4-50

Figure 4-48: VATRM33 First and Third Iteration Temperature Results ........................................ 4-51

Figure 4-49: VB3AAAA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Visible Band .......................... 4-52

Figure 4-50: VB3AAAA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Bands 2-4 ............................. 4-53

Figure 4-51: VB3APPO First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Visible Band ......................... 4-54

Figure 4-52: VB3APPO First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Bands 2-4 ............................ 4-55

Figure 4-53: VB3NXEH First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-56

Figure 4-54: VBDAAAB First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-57

Figure 4-55: VBDAHAA First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-58

Figure 4-56: VBDPR3B First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-59

Figure 4-57: VBXAAAA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Visible Band .......................... 4-60

Figure 4-58: VBXAAAA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Bands 2-4 ............................. 4-61

Figure 4-59: VBXAAOA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Visible Band .......................... 4-62

Figure 4-60: VBXAAOA First and Third Iteration Signature Results, Bands 2-4 ............................. 4-63

Figure 4-61: VBXQALF First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-64

Figure 4-62: WAG6M2 First and Third Iteration Signature Results .............................................. 4-65

Figure 4-63: WAGGING First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-66

Figure 4-64: WAKE_EX First and Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................. 4-67

Figure 4-65: WAKE_EX First and Third Iteration Cumulative Wake Signatures ............................. 4-68 xiii

Figure 4-66: WIND1 First and Third Iteration Signature Results ................................................. 4-69

Figure 4-67: XBALLIS First and Third Iteration Altitude, Velocity Results ..................................... 4-70

Figure 4-68: XBALLIS First and Third Iteration Angle Comparison Results ................................... 4-71

Figure 4-69: SOLABRV VARIANTS - Third Iteration Signature Results .......................................... 4-72

Figure 4-70: SOLABRV, NSOLAB=0 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results......................... 4-73

Figure 4-71: SOLABRV, NSOLAB=5 – First and Third Iteration Signature Results......................... 4-73

Figure 4-72: TMPUA vs. OSCE01, Third Iteration Signature Results ............................................ 4-74

Figure 4-73: V2_A4, V2_combo, V2DOF6 Third Iteration Signature, Aspect Comparisons ............ 4-75

Figure 4-74: Hollow Pipe (PIPE*.INP) Third Iteration Signature Results....................................... 4-76

Figure 4-75: ULTIME07, ULTIMD07 Third Iteration Signature, Aspect Comparisons ..................... 4-77

Figure 5-1: OSC 21.2 Source Code Changes Required for Acceptance, Absorptivity in Heat Flux .... 5-2

Figure 5-2: OSC 21.2 Source Code Changes Required for Acceptance, Pyrolysis Gas Coefficients .. 5-3

Figure 5-3: OSC 21.2 Source Code Changes Required for Acceptance, Too Low Emissivity after

Ablation ................................................................................................................................... 5-4

1-1

1. Introduction and Results

The Optical Signatures Code (OSC) consists of a series of computer models that simulate different types of visible and infrared (IR) optics-related phenomenology for Ballistic Missile

Defense (BMD) applications. The software has various program options, one of which is referred to as BASIC and is described in Reference 1 (OSC BASIC Option Reference Manual).

This option can call up to 16 different programs, individually or in sequence, to calculate target and/or sensor trajectories; in-depth temperatures and mass ablation rates; optical signatures of hardbodies, other objects, and chaff; reentry wakes; optical effects of various atmospheric backgrounds; and sensor performance parameters.

A set of 115 input cases that include as a subset the 78 input cases described in Reference

2 (OSC Volume 2 - BASIC Option Example Cases), were used to compare OSC 21.2 with OSC

21.1, OSC 20.4 (in FORTRAN 77), and OSC 21.0 (in FORTRAN 95). These cases include the ten standard BASIC Option examples that use all the available models linked by the BASIC

Option and 15 runs selected from the Validation and Verification Matrix (Reference 3, distributed with OSC XVI) that provide stressing cases for the commonly used thermal response and signature algorithms. The input file names were related to their positions in the Validation and Verification matrix. One of these inputs from the Validation and

Verification Matrix form the VASHAD set of ten inputs simulating two plates/planes sliding past one another; each position uses a unique input file. Another four of these inputs consist of the “baseline” missile and variations that have jet vanes, more than four frusta, and test the OSC Monte Carlo option. Five other inputs test specific models on OSC: BALLIS, BIDIRC, and SISMOD. The remaining inputs have been developed over time to test various options available in OSC, such as curved bases, ablating through three or more materials, EZFLOW, active track, and temperature dependent emissivity. Three inputs have also been added to test the user-imposed (internal) thermal boundary condition options available in

RVTEMP/F678, and one input has been added that uses the new front face (external) flux option, interior incident fluxes, and plume-induced flow separation. These last four inputs were either not run on OSC 20.2 and OSC 20.3 or the inputs were changed because they cannot properly access these new options in the older versions. Additional inputs were added to test thermocouple placement, the hollow pipe option, temperature iteration looping between DIPREF and F678, angle of attack effects on fins and base heating. Twenty-two inputs were added to test combinations of NSOLAB (zero and non-zero) and IEMOFT

(zero and non-zero); some were primarily added to insure station-counting was correct. Table

1-1 lists all 115 inputs and summarizes the options each input exercises.

Many of the legacy input files were changed as part of OSC 20.3 acceptance testing.

Originally, a large number of these inputs took advantage of the namelist variable defaults, thus the input did not include specified values for many variables in several namelist inputs.

1-2

This can be confusing for novice users, so we modified the inputs accordingly and inserted the explicit data corresponding to the implicit (default) values in the affected namelists.

Several input files were changed to illustrate and test additional output options, such as the output data for the Target Phenomenology Visualizer (TPV).

For OSC 21.2 acceptance testing, results from executables of OSC 20.3_Upgraded, and OSC

21 (FORTRAN 77, shown in plots as 20.4) were used that were prepared during acceptance testing of OSC 21. These executables used real declarations instead of double precision so that numerical usage between versions would be similar because OSC 21 and OSC 21.1 set the numerical precision automatically per FORTRAN 95 standards. Four versions of OSC were used to generate the core results shown in this acceptance testing: OSC 20.4, OSC

21.0, OSC 21.1, and OSC21.2. For additional confidence testing, we also executed OSC

21.2 on Linux platforms using g95 0.91, gfortran 4.4.7, and Intel Visual Fortran 14.0.0. We compared the results (.out files, BANDSIGS, or other output as appropriate) to results from the baselines using WinMerge or Beyond Compare. The Linux results are not presented in detail here, but the comparisons generally had negligible differences.

Results are presented in figures showing pertinent plots for the first and third iterations of acceptance testing. They are shown on a run-by-run basis and emphasize each input case.

Table 1-2 illustrates acceptance-testing status for each run and a diagnosis of any issues for all iterations.

This report concentrates on the comparison between the first iteration and third iteration.

Section 2 contains the analysis for the input streams that failed the first iteration and the changes that were made to correct them. Section 3 shows the plots for all of the input streams that passed all iterations.

Starting in OSC 20.3, assorted warning messages have been gathered into a series of concerns listed at the end of the output. Figure 1-1 contains this last bit of output (“tails”) for the first iteration; Figure 1-2 contains this same information for the third iteration. Except for six input cases, the noted concerns are the same for both iterations. A majority of these concerns note “Extrapolating Reflectivity, Spectrum extends outside of some of the data limits”. The cause of this message is described in the next few paragraphs.

Generally, the optical property database in OSC, OPTPROP, has materials with measurements from 0.3-25 μm (or so) for seven to eight angles ranging from near-normal

(12° or 20°) to near-grazing (75° or 80°) incidence. There are exceptions that generated

“concerns” reported by OSC. The source is basically three material samples: F03037003

(used on BIDEX2 and OSCE02), FS3985021 (used in NEWCHMP, OSCE09, RESPON9, and

WAKE_EX), and FS3739001 (used in all the EZBALL inputs).

F03037003 is an aluminum sample, one of the eight materials in the X-ray database

(MATCHNG = XRAY), whose last angle of 79° contains measurements only over wavelengths

1-3 from 0.3 to 2.0 m (visible and near IR). The spectra used in BIDEX2 and OSCE02 are 3-9.4 and 8-22 m, respectively. FS3985021 is an unusual sample; its spectral measurements are from 5-24 m for only two incident angles, 20° and 60°. NEWCHMP has only one waveband from 3-5 m; OSCE09 and RESPON9 have a spectrum for 4.2-13.2 m; and

WAKE_EX, like NEWCHMP, uses only a 3-5 m waveband. All of the EZBALL cases use the same materials; and, although the wavebands are not all the same, they all start at 3 m, which lies beyond the measured range for the sample used in the model. FS3739001 has only one incident angle with spectral measurements from 0.3-2.0 m. This particular concern would prompt additional analysis if we were using the data for flight data analysis, pre-mission predictions, etc. The limitations of the data sets are not an issue for acceptance testing with the benchmark cases.

Based on our careful review of the acceptance test matrix results, we find that...

“OSC 21.2 is acceptable for distribution.”

1-4

Table 1-1: OSC 21.2 Acceptance Test Case Input Names, Options Exercised (6 Pages)

OSC 21.2 Acceptance Test Case Input Names, Options Exercised

Name

Description

Other Needed Files

Target Model

Heating Model Signature

Model ablt234.inp OSC Generic Target on ICBM Reentry Trajectory, Ablates Through Three Materials

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

anssgmtest.inp Wall temperature iteration illustration. RVSNTH Datas/Zero,0 DIPF678 aoafins.inp Angle of attack on fins. RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var DIPF678 awmalta8.inp Base heating at near zero angle of attack. RVSNTH Balis;tm,nbdof9/~0,var DIPF678 baseline.inp Simple Missile With Fins on a 3 DOF, SRBM Ballistic Trajectory RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC basemul.inp Same Target As BASELINE, But Exercises Monte Carlo OSC RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC basevanc.inp BASELINE Target With Curved Base And Jet Vanes RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 basexond.inp BASELINE Target flying from EXOHT3 to Reentry RVSNTH XONDO3D CALC basmfrst.inp BASELINE Target Modeled To Use Multi-frusta Portions Of DIPREF RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC batball.inp Interior boundary condition usage in EXO3. TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 bidex1.inp Sphere with hole blocked by disc, bidirectional reflectance calculations TSHAD CARDS CALC3 bidex2.inp Generic target hit with multiple nuclear bursts, invokes X-ray material set RVSNTH EXOHEAT CALC blkrlr_00.inp Exo object, NSOLAB=0, IEMOFT=0 TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 blkrlr_01.inp Exo object, NSOLAB=0, IEMOFT=1 TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 blkrlr_s0.inp Exo object, NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 blkrlr_s1.inp Exo object, NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 blkrlr_z0.inp Exo object, NSOLAB=1, IEMOFT=0, Use IMORDR. TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 bwall07_0.inp Back wall flux modeling, control case without any interior fluxes RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 bwall07_a.inp Back wall flux, assumes some radiation from nozzle to back of last frustum

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

bwall07_b.inp Back wall fluxes, adds flux to interior of frustum 4 and regenerative cooling on nozzle via a data file, bwall07_regen.txt bwall07_regen.txt RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 emstmp0.inp Zeroth case that illustrates usage of IEMOFT = 1 or 2. IEMOFT = 0. Angle-dependent solar absorptivity is input into SHINE

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

emstmp1.inp Temperature Dependent Emissivity example, uses MATER = EARLY and IEMOFT = 1; angle-dependent solar absorptivity is calculated from optical properties in SELECT and passed to SHINE

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

1-5

Heating Model Signature

Model emstmp2.inp Temperature Dependent Emissivity example, uses MATER = EARLY and IEMOFT = 2; angle-dependent solar absorptivity is input in SELECT and passed to SHINE

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

exo3flxs.inp EXO3 front, back wall fluxes. exo3flxs_nozz.dat, exo3flxs_resv.dat, exo3flxs_thrt.dat

TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3 ezballdrf.inp Spherical target using EZFLOW at ~ 180 degree angle of attack TSHAD TSHD678 CALC3 ezballf.inp Spherical target using EZFLOW at ~90 degree angle of attack TSHAD TSHD678 CALC3 ezballfrd.inp Spherical target using EZFLOW at near zero angle of attack TSHAD TSHD678 CALC3 ezballt3.inp One sphere shape with 180 thermal stations, 3 DOF trajectory from deployment to impact

TSHAD TSHD678 CALC3

ez_debris.inp EZFLOW debris, from old Seminar. TSHAD Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 TSHD678 flatlin1.inp A cylinder with a flat nose on short trajectory, No Fins, Length = 4.6 m RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC lxondtor.inp Exo-endo, illustrates toroidal base shape. RVSNTH Balis,idof=4/var,var XONDO3D mslasc07.inp Ascent-EXO3-reentry, Nozzles, fins, raceway. mslwif07.add RVSNTH Balis;nbdof1,idof3/Zero,75

- var,var

ASCNT3D

mslwif07.inp DIPREF-F678, Nozzles, WWIFS, fins, raceway. mslwif07.add RVSNTH Balis;nbdof1,idof3/Zero,75

- var,var

DIPF678

MSR_sphere.inp Sandford Robertson BRDF on sphere TSHAD Balis,idof=3/var,var EXO3

MSR_cube.inp Sandford Robertson BRDF on cube TSHAD Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 EXO3 mssl_add_fn_s0.inp Missile w/ add-ons, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 mssl_add.add RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_add_fn_s1.inp Missile w/ add-ons, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 mssl_add.add RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_add_fn_z0.inp Missile w/ add-ons, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0, IMORDR mssl_add.add RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nzv_fn_s0.inp Missile w/ nozzle, vanes, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nzv_fn_s1.inp Missile w/ nozzle, vanes, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nzv_fn_z0.inp Missile w/ nozzle, vanes, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0, IMORDR RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nz_fn_s0.inp Missle w/ nozzle, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nz_fn_s1.inp Missle w/ nozzle, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_nz_fn_z0.inp Missle w/ nozzle, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0, IMORDR RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_wf_fn_s0.inp Missile w/ WWIFS, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_wf_fn_s1.inp Missile w/ WWIFS, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678 mssl_wf_fn_z0.inp Missile w/ WWIFS, fins; NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0, IMORDR RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678

1-6

Heating Model Signature

Model newchmp.inp A Version Of The Baseline Input (BASELINE) On A Trajectory With Three Points That Generates Input Files To Interface With CHAMP newchmp.add RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 nxehdef.inp One Of The sheres From VB3NXEH That Uses The DEFORMATION Option.

Will Not Deform Using OSC Versions Prior to OSC 20

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

nxehtrn.inp A Similar Spherical Target To Those In VB3NXEH And NXEHDEF Made Of Aluminized Mylar, Mylar Side Up That Uses The Translucent Option First Available In OSC 20

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

osce01.inp Ballistic Trajectory, DIPREF with 4 Frusta, Hypersonic Reentry, Signatures calculated

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

osce02.inp Ballistic Trajectory, Exoatmospheric with x-ray heating, Signatures calculated

RVSNTH EXOHEAT CALC

osce03.inp Ballistic Trajectory, Multi-body/shadowing, Exoatmospheric, Signatures, Chaff

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

osce04.inp Trajectory and Signatures are input, LWTRN6, Sensor performance with signal to noise ratios (SNR) and off-axis rejection computed

Emis Area none CARDS osce05.inp Trajectory and Temperatures are input, Signatures calculated, LOW5, Sensor signal/noise ratio calculated

In

BIDIRC

CARDS CALC

osce06.inp Stationary spherical target with trajectory input, Terminator, Exoatmospheric (MBALL), Signatures

RVSNTH

- MBALL

EXOHEAT CALC

osce07.inp Powered + Ballistic Trajectory, Launch to Impact (ASCNT3D), Signatures calculated, Save thermal gradients

RVSNTH ASCNT3D CALC3

osce08.inp SRBM Trajectory input, Launch to Impact (DIPREF), Signatures calculated ADDTHRM RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 osce09.inp Space shuttle-like, Temperatures input, Satellite target and sensor, Signatures calculated

TSHAD CARDS CALC3

osce10.inp RV from OSCE07, Sensor set to intercept, Exo-atmospheric with gradient-input initial temperatures, Signatures

OLDG55 = GRAD66 from osce07.inp RVSNTH EXO3 CALC3 pipe10_tc.inp Hollow pipe (no nose, no base) model with fins, using DIPREF/F678 thermal model (preferred option) pipe10.g55 RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 pipe_ez.inp Hollow pipe model with fins, using EZFLOW thermal model pipe10.g55 TSHAD TSHD678 CALC3 pipe_xo3.inp Hollow pipe model with fins, using EXOHT3 thermal model pipe10.g55 TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

1-7

Heating Model Signature

Model plmjlk_flat_sep6.inp Plume-induced separated flow option using PST-generated flow field;

back wall heating and front face fluxes are also included to model heat from nozzles.

pst_sep2.dat, sr19_stage2_motor.dat, sr19_stage2_motor.dat, sr19_stage2_motor.dat, sr19_stage2_motor.dat, sr19_stage2_skirt.dat, sr19_stage2_skirt.dat, sr19_stage2_skirt.dat, sr19_stage2_FF_base_radiation.dat

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

precrep.inp A black painted mylar object that uses the coning angle divergence trajectory option first available in OSC 20

RVSNTH EXO3 CALC3

rep-act.inp Exoatmospheric target with pulsing active track (directed energy), 10 % specular, 90 % diffuse reflection scattering rep-traj.boost, rep-trck.boost

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

respon9.inp OSCE09 with sensor response filter functions respon9.one, respon9.two, respon9.tre TSHAD Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 CARDS sismodex1.inp SISMOD example with constant temperature target, 4 wavebands, and

LOWTRAN5

In

BIDIRC

CARDS CALC

sismodex2.inp SISMOD example with simplified signatures, 5 wavebands, LOWTRAN6, and user-requested printer plots of NEFD and S/N.

Emis Area none CARDS solabrv_00.inp Ascent-EXO3-Reentry, NSOLAB=0, IEMOFT=0 RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var ASCNT3D solabrv_01.inp Ascent-EXO3-Reentry, NSOLAB=0, IEMOFT=1 RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var ASCNT3D solabrv_s0.inp Ascent-EXO3-Reentry, NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0 RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var ASCNT3D solabrv_s1.inp Ascent-EXO3-Reentry, NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=1 RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var ASCNT3D solabrv_z0.inp Ascent-EXO3-Reentry, NSOLAB>0, IEMOFT=0, IMORDR RVSNTH Balis,idof=3/var,var ASCNT3D tc_ascnt3d.inp Thermocouple usage through ascent-exo3-reentry. RVSNTH Balis;nbdof1,idof3/Zero, 75 - var,var

ASCNT3D

tcple08.inp A version of OSCE08 that includes the option to generate in-depth temperatures from F678 for comparison with thermocouple data

ADDTHRM RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

tcple10.inp A version of OSCE10 that includes the option to generate in-depth temperatures from EXOHT3 for comparison with thermocouple data

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

tlthnoz.inp A missile that has no base, but includes four nozzles RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC tmpuatst.inp OSCE01 example that includes the use of the back wall thermal mass heating/cooling option

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

tootgrd.inp Illustrates thermal station temperature substitution usage with gradient saving.

tootult8.add RVSNTH Balis,idof=1/Zero,75 DIPF678

1-8

Heating Model Signature

Model ultimd07.inp The target includes a curved base, nozzles, fins, grid fins (WWIFs) as add-ons, thrust termination ports as add-ons; it flies from launch to impact using HEATR = DIPF678. TFX files will not be used.

ULTIMD07.ADD RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

ultime07.inp The target includes a curved base, nozzles, fins, WWIFs as add-ons, thrust termination ports as add-ons; it flies from launch to impact using HEATR = ASCNT3D. TFX files needed for EXOHT3.

ULTIME07.ADD, ultim_awfa.tfx, ultim_awfb.tfx, ultim_awfc.tfx, ultim_ttp.tfx

RVSNTH ASCNT3D CALC3

v2dof6.inp The same A4/V2 rocket as in v2_a4 but uses boost points followed by ballistic flight calculations utilizing endo-aero coefficients to model 6 DOF dynamics

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

v2_a4.inp World War II A4/V2 rocket with an ogive nose, nozzles, jet vanes, and fins using telemetry data trajectory and aircraft sensor input

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

v2_combo.inp The same A4/V2 rocket as in v2_a4 but using boost points followed by ballistic flight calculations that use a nominal ballistic coefficient and moment of inertia for 6 DOF dynamics.

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3

vashad01-10.inp Reflectivity test with two sliding plates TSHAD CARDS CALC3 vatrm13.inp Solid conductive sphere with ε ~ α ~ 0.9 using EXOHT TSHAD EXO3 CALC3 vatrm1x.inp Solid conductive sphere with ε ~ α ~ 0.9 using EXOHT3 In

BIDIRC

EXOHEAT CALC

vatrm23.inp Conductive rod pointing at Sun with ε ~ 0.95, α ~ 0.1 using EXOHT TSHAD EXO3 CALC3 vatrm2x.inp Conductive rod pointing at Sun with ε ~ 0.95, α ~ 0.1 using EXOHT3 In

BIDIRC

EXOHEAT CALC

vatrm33.inp Thin insulated shell with one half hot and the other half cold using EXOHT3 (approximates radiatively adiabatic shell with conduction only)

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

vb3aaaa.inp Baseline Exoatmospheric Validation Target with IRADF = 1, EXOHT3 TSHAD EXO3 CALC3 vb3appo.inp Can inside a Cone with Tumbling Dynamics, EXOHT3 TSHAD EXO3 CALC3 vb3nxeh.inp Contact Spherical Target with Tropical Cloud Cover and a Finer Earthshine Grid, EXOHT3

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

vbdaaab.inp Baseline Validation Target with 3 Cone Angles, 3 DOF Trajectory, DIPREF/F678

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

vbdahaa.inp Baseline Validation Target with 3 Cone Angles, 3 DOF Trajectory and Oblate Earth, DIPREF/F678.

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

vbdpr3b.inp Baseline Validation Target with 1 Cone Angle, 3 DOF Trajectory, DIPREF/F678.

RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC

1-9

Heating Model Signature

Model vbxaaaa.inp Baseline Exoatmospheric Validation Target with TWALL = 290 K, EXOHT. RVSNTH EXOHEAT CALC vbxaaoa.inp Baseline Exoatmospheric Validation Target with EWALL = 0, EXOHT. RVSNTH EXOHEAT CALC vbxqalf.inp Radiative Spherical Target at Night with 20 X 20 Earth pieces, EXOHT. In

BIDIRC

EXOHEAT CALC

wag6m2.inp Thermally light target with active track option using Beard-Maxwell BRDF data.

RVSNTH EXO3 CALC3

wagging.inp Target and two ovoids built around the same center of mass and flying on two similar tumbling trajectories.

TSHAD EXO3 CALC3

wake_ex.inp WAKPRO example case for a reentering Silica Phenolic target. RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC wind1.inp DIPREF wind tunnel option example. RVSNTH DIPF678 CALC3 xballis.inp Standalone BALLIS trajectory example that calculates two sets of trajectories.

N/A N/A N/A

1-10

Table 1-2: Pass/Fail Results for All Iterations (3 Pages)

Pass/Fail Results for All Iterations

Input Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Reason for Failure Decision

Pass 1: Absorptivity was inadvertently left out of heat balance equation in F678 .

Pass 2: PLMJLK_FLAT_SEP6: Gas coefficients ARE, BRE, CRE were zero when they should not have been. MSLWIF07: Exposed emissivity was being set to 0.1 after ablation of the top material;

needed to reinstate the test that emissivity is only changed if it is > 0.1 after material ablation.

Pass 3: Selected inputs were also run with a special version of OSC 21.1 that tested the hypothesis that a few important errata need ed to be incorporated to match OSC 21.2 results, especially BRDF changes.

ablt234.inp Pass Pass Pass anssgmtest.inp Accepted Pass Pass Improved Wall Temperature Iteration values.

aoafins.inp Accepted Accepted Accepted Improved Fin Angle of Attack modeling.

awmalta8.inp FAIL FAIL Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

baseline.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

basemul.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

basevanc.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

basexond.inp Pass Pass Pass basmfrst.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

batball.inp Pass Pass Pass bidex1.inp Test Pass Pass BRDF flag changes, swapped GAUSPK arguments.

bidex2.inp Pass Pass Pass blkrlr_00.inp Pass Pass Pass blkrlr_01.inp Pass Pass Pass blkrlr_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass blkrlr_s1.inp FAIL After input change, Pass.

Pass NSOLAB changed from 2 to 3 and IM(base stations) = 3 for Automatic IM option to work correctly blkrlr_z0.inp FAIL After input change, Pass.

Pass IMORDR changed from default 1,2,3,4 to 1,3,2,4 so that correct angle-dependent absorptivity is used.

bwall07_0.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

bwall07_a.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

bwall07_b.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

emstmp0.inp Accepted Pass Pass Improved base heating algorithm in OSC 21.2.

emstmp1.inp Accepted Pass Pass Improved base heating algorithm in OSC 21.2.

emstmp2.inp Accepted Pass Pass Improved base heating algorithm in OSC 21.2.

exo3flxs.inp Accepted Accepted Accepted Exercises new capability in OSC 21.2.

ezballdrf.inp Pass Pass Pass ezballf.inp Pass Pass Pass ezballfrd.inp Pass Pass Pass ezballt3.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

ez_debris.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation.

flatlin1.inp Pass Pass Pass lxondtor.inp Pass Pass Pass mslasc07.inp Pass Pass Pass mslwif07.inp FAIL FAIL Pass Missing emissivity test in F678 (change if > 0.1).

MSR_sphere.inp Test Pass Pass BRDF flag changes, swapped GAUSPK arguments.

MSR_cube.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_add_fn_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_add_fn_s1.inp Pass Pass Pass

1-11

Pass/Fail Results for All Iterations

Input Iteration 1 Iteration 2 Iteration 3 Reason for Failure Decision mssl_add_fn_z0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nzv_fn_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nzv_fn_s1.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nzv_fn_z0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nz_fn_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nz_fn_s1.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_nz_fn_z0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_wf_fn_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_wf_fn_s1.inp Pass Pass Pass mssl_wf_fn_z0.inp Pass Pass Pass newchmp.inp Pass Pass Pass nxehdef.inp Pass Pass Pass nxehtrn.inp Pass Pass Pass osce01.inp Pass Pass Pass osce02.inp pass Pass Pass osce03.inp Test Pass Pass BRDF flag changes, swapped GAUSPK arguments.

osce04.inp Pass Pass Pass osce05.inp Pass Pass Pass osce06.inp Test Pass Pass osce07.inp pass Pass Pass osce08.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

osce09.inp Pass Pass Pass osce10.inp Pass Pass Pass pipe10_tc.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

pipe_ez.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

pipe_xo3.inp Pass Pass Pass plmjlk_flat_sep6.inp FAIL FAIL Pass Gas coefficients set to zero on decomposing material when they should use those of a phenolic resin.

precrep.inp Pass Pass Pass rep-act.inp Pass Pass Pass respon9.inp pass Pass Pass sismodex1.inp Test Pass Pass BRDF flag changes, swapped GAUSPK arguments.

sismodex2.inp Pass Pass Pass solabrv_00.inp Pass Pass Pass solabrv_01.inp Pass Pass Pass solabrv_s0.inp Pass Pass Pass solabrv_s1.inp Pass Pass Pass solabrv_z0.inp Pass Pass Pass tc_ascnt3d.inp Accepted Accepted Accepted New input that tests for thermocouple output.

tcple08.inp FAIL Pass Pass Absorptivity missing in heat equation in F678.

tcple10.inp pass Pass Pass tlthnoz.inp Pass Pass Pass tmpuatst.inp Pass Pass Pass tootgrd.inp Accepted Accepted Accepted New input that tests…