Software Testing Types and Their Purpose

This assignment delves into the diverse world of software testing, outlining numerous types such as functional, performance, usability, security, and compatibility testing. It explains the purpose and objectives of each type, illustrating how they contribute to ensuring high-quality software products. The document provides detailed descriptions of different testing methodologies and emphasizes their significance in the software development lifecycle.

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3. 1 Types of method to analyze effects of winds on structural system
A building is usually considered flexible when any of the smaller plan dimensions (length or
width) divided by its height is greater than five or when the minimum frequency is lesser than
it’s unity. In situations like this, more accurate estimates of the energetic wind effects on such
giant structures can be gotten through aeroelastic prototypical analysis in a boundary-layer wind
tunnel. The oscillator of the structural system is natural wind forces or its gustiness; but for the
purpose of the physical model for the research, the wind tunnel functioned as the oscillator.
Therefore, the final result of such a research will be a hybrid effort from the theoretical and
laboratory investigations. Therefore, the present study is a comparative study of the pressure and
is eventually the load distribution on a full-scale building and a wind tunnel tested model. The
idea of the mathematical model used was based on the method of Initial parameters (MIP) and a
standby cantilever, whereas the physical model (laboratory experiment of wind tunnel tested
model), was investigated based on the method of dimensional analysis. According to
Kramadibrata et al. (2001), dimensional analysis has already been used widely in solving
engineering glitches. The application of dimensional analysis is dependent on the listing of all
dimensional variables affecting the process in question and the dimensionless groups obtained.
This method can also be a means of correlating experimental data and developing functional
relationships between dimensional variables. It has been of immeasurable value in analyzing
complex engineering problems in many fields, notably fluid mechanics and heat transfer. As far
as the mechanics of solids are concerned, dimensional analysis has been used in the study of the
elastic distortion and tremors of complex engineering structures (Kramadibrata et al., 2001). It
has also been used to establish the modeling standards for the scale model testing of coal-face

production system (Roxborough and Eskikaya, 1974), in subsidence, modeling was referred to
by Whittaker and Reddish (1989), and more recently, its use in rock excavation and lifting of
boring machine was mentioned by Kramadibrata and Jones (1996) and Kramadibrata, et al.
(2000), respectively. In fluid mechanics and many other disciplines of science and engineering,
similitude, dimensional analysis and modeling can be seen as a collection of useful apparatuses
for solving many problems through laboratory investigations. The application of the Buckingham
pi theorem is popularly employed for the development of a set of dimensionless variables for a
given flow or other engineering phenomena. The use of dimensionless variables in data analysis
is most importantly applied to the concepts of modeling and similitude to develop prediction
equations that adequately define many interacting physical, mechanical and chemical
phenomena. Many fluid mechanics and other engineering problems are solved by equations and
analytical procedures. But some rely solely on experimental data (Schmidt and Housen, 2011).
Because it is often impractical to carry out experiments under the specific circumstances desired,
one may wish to redesign the experiment to make it more manageable. For example, testing at
reduced size scale can provide a significant cost-saving opportunity as is often the case in studies
of aerodynamics or fluid mechanics. In other cases in point, it is not only impractical but
impossible to carry out the desired experiment. In these cases, one can simulate a prototype
experiment by designing a model experiment with appropriate test conditions, which may be less
expensive or at least achievable.

Case studies
The shard
The Shard, designed by the award-winning architect Renzo Piano, is now one of the most iconic
buildings that adorn London’s skyline. Irvine Sellar developed it his aim was to create an
architecturally striking vertical city that integrated retail space, offices, hotel, apartments,
restaurants and a public viewing gallery. Reminiscent of a shard of glass, the project is
approximately 306 meters (1,004 ft) high and is currently the tallest building in the European
Union. The View at the shard, on floors 68 - 72 is presently the UK’s highest public viewing
galleries, standing at 240m above street level. As a significant and iconic London building, the
Shard required an aesthetically pleasing and durable ironmongery solution. Allgood Plc supplied
a joint ironmongery and access control package that comprised; automatic door operators,
electronic locks, door furniture and hardware. Allgood supplied a selection of product ranges
(Modric, FSB and Alite) to accommodate the mixed-used development project, as each floor
required a different ironmongery package. The whole package provided by Allgood Plc was
delivered on time and within the clients budget to the following areas of the Shard:
• Base build
• The View at the Shard - Floors 67 -72
• Hutong Restaurant - Floor 33
• Oblix Restaurant - Floor 32
• Aqua Shard Restaurant - Floor 31
• Warwick business School - Floor 17
• Offices - Floor 4 & 15

The empire state building
The Empire State Building is a 20th-century engineering accomplishment with 57,000 tons of
steel columns and beams, 62,000 cubic yards of concrete, 6,400 windows, and 67 elevators in 7
miles of shafts. This year, the famous building (which has starred in movies, survived a plane
crash, and temporarily reigned as the tallest building in the world) turns 75 years old.
The skyscraper features a 2.1 million square feet of rentable office space, opened on May 1,
1931, barely 20 months after the first signed contracts with architects Shreve, Lamb, and
Harmon Associates. Though updates to the systems have been made over the years, many of the
original features remain today. “This building was so well-built the men that built it took such
pride in what they were doing, and it was made from first-class materials with the really great
workmanship. We've been able to improve on perfection, and have all the amenities of a new
building,” says Lydia A. Ruth, director of public relations for the Empire State Building Co.
LLC, New York City.
Innovative Construction
“It’s unthinkable to can get a piece of furniture made in a year and 45 days today,” Ruth
acknowledges. So, how was a 102-storey building, reaching 1,252 feet into the sky, constructed
at a rate of 4.5 stories per week? In her essay “Building the Empire State,” from her book of the
same title, architectural historian Carol Willis cites two reasons for the unbelievable pace: "A
team design approach that involved the teamwork of the architects, owners, builders, and
engineers in planning and problem-solving, and the organizational genius of the general
contractors Starrett Brothers & Eken.”

Surprisingly, this design approach was rooted more in practicality and competition than
aesthetics. In the era of the skyscraper boom, John Jacob Raskob determined that the Empire
State Building should soar above the Chrysler Building, which was under construction at the
same time. Architects had originally designed an 80-story building but had to alter plans several
times to keep up with the Chrysler Building. Eventually, a mooring mast was devised to add
additional height. Intended as a docking station for air blimps, the idea was abandoned after a
few failed attempts. Today, the tower of glass, steel, and aluminum is used as the base of the TV
tower.
Not even the famous exterior of the Empire State Building was intentional. New York City
zoning law required that the building steps back as it went up to allow some sunlight to reach the
streets underneath the shocking skyscrapers. Willis quotes contractor Paul Starrett’s
autobiography: “In other words, the height, the beauty of the Empire State Building, rose out of
strictly practical considerations.”
The “organizational genius” Willis pointed out in her essay includes the delivery and transport of
building materials. The Empire State Building was built on a previously developed site, housing
the original WaldorfAstoria Hotel. “There wasn’t any place to store materials, so everything that
was delivered had to be built that day,” explains Ruth. Workers utilized a railway system to push
cars full of building materials around the site. To transport the 10 million bricks needed to back
up the external limestone and metal trim, Starrett Brothers & Eken created an innovative system.
Dump trucks dropped bricks down a chute leading to the basement upon delivery. From there,
two brick hoppers, each able to house 20,000 bricks, fed bricks into railway cars for transport to
material lifts.

The construction was greatly influenced by the Great Depression. Not only did it provide an
available workforce of up to 4,000 men, but it extremely minimized the cost of the building.
Including land, the total cost of the project was near $41 million - $24.7 million of which was the
cost of the building itself. In addition to the surplus of workers, according to Ruth, "the winter of
1930-31 was the warmest on record for New York City, so everything was in our favor for
record-making construction."
Innovative Systems
one fact that this building is considered a New York City and National Historic Landmark hasn’t
slowed down its progress. Currently wrapping up a $200-million reconstruction project, the
Empire State Building still strives to be a first-class facility. “It’s a 75-year-old building, but we
have all the bells and whistles of a modern building,” Ruth acknowledges. “We’ve been able to
make advancements on already-great systems and meet the challenges of the 21st century and
beyond.”
The fire-detection system in the building has lasted since 1931. “When the building opened,
there were call boxes; they were on every floor, and they made a ‘bong’ sound when manually
triggered. If the fire was on the third floor, it would bong three times so that people would know
where it was," explains Ruth. In 1998, a state-of-the-art audio warning and strobe light guidance
system were installed. But, much of the building's solid fire protection stems from the way it was
built. "The steel frame of the building was protected by iron oxide and linseed oil paint when it
was delivered from the steel mill, and then it was covered with an asphalt coat to resist it from
breaking down when it was brought into contact with cement," Ruth describes. "And, all the steel

columns are fireproofed with cinder concrete, so all the steel is encased in concrete, which, of
course, makes the building not only strong but more fireproof."
The Empire State Building’s water delivery system, left virtually unchanged for 75 years, was an
innovation. Unlike most tall New York City buildings, the Empire State Building’s water tanks
are inside the building rather than on the roof. Seventy miles of pipe deliver water to the entire
building and serve the fire-protection standpipe system.
Replacing 6,400 windows, retrofitting all the light fixtures, converting chiller plants to dual
steam and electric usage, and upgrading water pumps has earned the historic building an
Environmental Protection Agency ENERGY STAR® rating. More upgrades are on the way,
Ruth says, including a computerized HVAC system.
Innovative Changes
Shortly after its opening, the grand building was dubbed the “Empty State Building” in
recognition of its early problems with vacancies, including 56 empty floors in 1933. It wasn’t
until the end of World War II in the late ‘40s that the building reached full occupancy levels.
Today, a smaller-scale struggle to fill the building remains. “We have about 11- to 12-percent
vacancy right now, which, in the real world, is not much; but, for us, it is. We've usually enjoyed
97- to 98-percent occupancy," says Ruth. "We've been holding back on some vacancies so we
can make larger and full-floor spaces available for larger space users instead of just focusing on
small-space users, which was our history here."
Led by Leona M. Helmsley and Peter L. Malkin, the Empire State Building Co. LLC recently
appointed James T. Connors as new general manager of the building. Connors, a 22-year

commercial real estate veteran, will oversee all commercial property management, observatory,
and broadcasting operations at the building.
3. 2 Application of structural analysis Software
With regards to covering the core concepts of structural analysis, we wrote some simple applets
to assist in the understanding of the concepts of determinacy, indeterminacy and stability. We
wrote the Truss and Frame Determinacy Applets to help test a student’s understanding of these
core concepts and each applet comprise of a series of interactive examples of structures where
the student must classify the structure as unstable, determinate or indeterminate. Moreso, a third
applet which was developed for analyzing three-hinged arches was also written to show how
arches transmit loads and all of these applets described in this thesis are available on the Internet
at the following website: http://www.Rojiani.structures1.cee.vt.edu.
3.2.1 Truss Determinacy Applet
The Truss Determinacy Applet tests the student’s knowledge of the concepts of stability and
determinacy of trusses. The truss determinacy applet displays a series of trusses and asks the user
to enter the number of joints, members, reactions, and redundant and make a determination as to
whether the truss is unstable, determinate, or indeterminate. For each truss, the user can check
her answers or display the correct answers.
All the members of a truss are pinned and loads are applied only at the joints. Thus, the members
of a truss can only carry axial forces (tension and compression).
3.2.2 Frame Determinacy Applet
The Frame Determinacy applet examines the student’s knowledge of stability and determinacy of
frames. The applet displays a series of frame examples. Users are then asked to enter the number

of reactions, equations, members, degrees of freedom, as well as the degree of external, internal,
and total indeterminacy. For each of these examples, the user would be able to check their results
or have the applet display the correct results. The components of the frame are connected by
fixed (moment-resisting) joints. Each component of the frame can have three forces: an axial
force, a shear force and a bending moment. A frame is not dynamically determinate if the
number of support reactions, u, equates to the number of equilibrium reaction, e and this
equilibrium equations include the summation of forces in the x and y axes, the outcome of the
combination of moments, and any additional equilibrium equations due to releases (such as a
hinge).
3.3 Reasons for rejection of alternative methods
Some recent research experiences have shown that there are so many situations where analytical
methods cannot be used to estimate specific types of wind loads and resultant structural response
(Onundi, 2012). Take for instance; when the aerodynamic form of the building is rather
uncommon or the building is very flexible so that its movement affects the aerodynamic forces
applied to it and because the dimensional analysis identifies the conditions that are required for
similarity and provides the framework for which the results can be applied to the original
problem of interest. Therefore, the application of dimensional analysis is a unique technique used
in many fields of engineering to aid correlation and clarification of physical, mechanical and
chemical phenomena and their application experimental data as it provides a means of coalescing
the several parameters of an experiment into a lesser number of dimension-less groups and this
technique greatly diminishes the extent of experimental work that is required to determine the
effect of parameter dissimilarity on the reliant parameter of the experiment (Kramadibrata, et al.,
2001).

3.4 Types of tests
The term “structural testing” is used to refer to the testing of the structural composition of the
system or component and it could also be often referred to as ‘white box’ or ‘glass box’ or ‘clear-
box testing’ because in this structural testing we are so much interested in what is happening
‘inside the system/application’. It is worthy to note that in structural testing, the examiners are
required to be endowed with the knowledge of the internal implementations of the code and
these testers also require a vast knowledge of how the software is implemented as well as its
working pattern.
During this testing, the engineer is concentrated on the most basic thing which is: how the
software works and take for instance, a structural technique wants to know how the loops in the
software works as different test cases may be created to exercise the loop once, twice, and for as
many times as possible and this may be done regardless of the software’s functionality.
This structural testing can be used at all levels of testing as developers use structural testing in
the testing of components and component integration testing, especially where there is good tool
support for code coverage. This structural testing is also used in system and acceptance testing,
but the structures are usually different. For example, the coverage of menu options or major
business transactions could be the structural element in system or acceptance testing.
3.4.1 Software Testing Types:
Black box testing – Internal system design is not considered in this type of testing. Tests are
based on requirements and functionality.

White box testing – This testing is based on knowledge of the internal logic of an application’s
code. Also known as Glass box Testing. Internal software and code working should be known
for this type of testing. Tests are based on coverage of code statements, branches, paths,
conditions.
Unit testing – Testing of individual software components or modules. Typically done by the
programmer and not by testers, as it requires detailed knowledge of the internal program design
and codes and may require developing test driver modules or test harnesses.
Incremental integration testing – Bottom-up approach for testing i.e continuous testing of an
application as new functionality is added; Application functionality and modules should be
independent enough to test separately done by programmers or by testers.
Integration testing – Testing of integrated modules to verify combined functionality after
integration. Modules are typically code modules, individual applications, client and server
applications on a network, etc. This type of testing is especially relevant to client/server and
distributed systems.
Functional testing – This type of testing ignores the internal parts and focus on the output is as
per requirement or not. Black-box type testing geared to functional requirements of an
application.
System testing – Entire system is tested as per the requirements. Black-box type testing that is
based on overall requirements specifications covers all combined parts of a system.
End-to-end testing – Similar to system testing, involves testing of a complete application
environment in a situation that mimics real-world use, such as interacting with a database, using
network communications, or interacting with other hardware, applications, or systems if
appropriate.

Sanity testing – Testing to determine if a new software version is performing well enough to
accept it for a major testing effort. If the application is crashing for initial use then the system is
not stable enough for further testing and build or application is assigned to fix.
Regression testing – Testing the application as a whole for the modification in any module or
functionality. Difficult to cover all the system in regression testing so typically automation tools
are used for these testing types.
Acceptance testing -Normally this type of testing is done to verify if the system meets the
customer specified requirements. User or customer do this testing to determine whether to accept
the application.
Load testing – It’s a performance testing to check system behavior under load. Testing an
application under heavy loads, such as testing of a web site under a range of loads to determine
at what point the system’s response time degrades or fails.
Stress testing – System is stressed beyond its specifications to check how and when it fails.
Performed under heavy load like putting large number beyond storage capacity, complex
database queries, continuous input to system or database load.
Performance testing – Term often used interchangeably with ‘stress' and ‘load' testing. To
check whether the system meets performance requirements. Used different performance and load
tools to do this.
Usability testing – User-friendliness check. Application flow is tested, Can new user understand
the application easily, Proper help documented whenever user stuck at any point. Basically,
system navigation is checked in this testing.
Install/uninstall testing – Tested for full, partial, or upgrade install/uninstall processes on
different operating systems under different hardware, software environment.

Recovery testing – Testing how well a system recovers from crashes, hardware failures, or other
catastrophic problems.
Security testing – Can the system be penetrated by any hacking way. Testing how well the
system protects against unauthorized internal or external access. Checked if system, database is
safe from external attacks.
Compatibility testing – Testing how well software performs in a particular
hardware/software/operating system/network environment and different combination s of above.
Comparison testing – Comparison of product strengths and weaknesses with previous versions
or other similar products.
Alpha testing – In-house virtual user environment can be created for this type of testing. Testing
is done at the end of development. Still minor design changes may be made as a result of such
testing.
Beta testing – Testing is typically done by end-users or others. Final testing before releasing the
application for commercial purpose.

REFERENCES
1. Kramadibrata S, Jones IO (1996). Report on: Workshop on validation of research
findings on cutting power modeling for excavation at Krupp Fordertechnik in Lubeck.
Rheinhessen, Germany and Mining Engineering Department of the National Technical
Universty, Athens, Greece, Curtin University of Technology.
2. Kramadibrata S, Rai MA, Juanda J, Simangunsong GM, Priagung N (2001). The Use of
Dimensional Analysis to Analyse the Relationship between Penetration rate of Jack
Hammer and Rock properties and Operational Characteristics. Indonesian Mining
Conference and Exhibition. Jakarta.
3. Kramadibrata S, Rai MA, Darmawan S, Arif I, Ardianto A, Sumanagara DA, Matsui K,
Shimada H (2000). Assessment of the performance of raise boring, 73 RM-DC, at the
Pongkor gold mine, West Java. 9th Symposium of Mine Planning Equipment Selection,
Athens, Greece.
4. Onundi LO (2012). Dynamic Analysis of Wind Resistant Designs of Multi-storey Braced
Steel Shear Wall. Ph.D. Thesis Submitted to the Civil Engineering Programme, ATBU
Bauchi
5. Roxborough FF, Eskikaya S (1974). Dimensional considerations in the design criteria of
a scale model for coal-face production system research. Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci.
Geomech., 11: 129-137.
6. Schmidt R, Housen K (2011). Problem Solving with Dimensional Analysis. Dimensional
Analysis Robert Schmidt.pdf, The Industrial Physicist, www.kzoo.edu/ajp, pp. 21-24.
7. http://www.allgood.co.uk/images/library/files/The_Shard_Case_study.pdf

8. http://www.buildings.com/article-details/articleid/3180/title/the-empire-state-building-an-
innovative-skyscraper.aspx