An overview of the PTC 60/V&V 10: guide for verification and validation in computational solid mechanics

Abstract

Question: Are the sometimes lengthy and costly processes of verification and validation really necessary? Consider the following scenario that perhaps you can relate to first hand. A project review meeting is taking place and the project manager needs to make a critical decision to accept or reject a proposed design change. A relatively new employee, freshly minted from the nearby engineering university, makes an impressive presentation full of colorful slides of deformed meshes and skillfully crafted line plots indicating the results of many CPU and labor hours of non-linear numerical analyses, ending with a recommendation to accept the design change. Hopefully, an astute project manager, aware of the vagaries of non-linear numerical analyses, will not accept the analysis and its conclusion at face value, especially given the inexperience of the analyst. Rather, the project manager should seek some assurance that not only are the results reasonable, but a sound procedure was followed in developing the model and documenting the numerous physical and numerical parameters required for a typical analysis. The degree of assurance sought by the project manager is directly related to the criticality of the decision to be made. The processes of verification and validation are how evidence is collected, and documented, that help establish confidence in the results of complex numerical simulations.