1: \begin{abstract}

2: Much progress has been made in advancing and standardizing verification,

3: validation, and uncertainty quantification practices for computational

4: modeling in recent decades. However, examples of rigorous code verification

5: for solid mechanics problems in the literature remain scarce, particularly

6: for commercial software and for the non-trivial large-deformation

7: analyses and nonlinear materials typically needed to simulate medical

8: devices. Here, we apply the method of manufactured solutions (MMS)

9: to verify a commercial finite element code for elastostatic solid

10: mechanics analyses using linear-elastic, hyperelastic (neo-Hookean),

11: and quasi-hyperelastic (Hencky) constitutive models. Analytical source

12: terms are generated using either \texttt{Python/SymPy} or \texttt{Mathematica}

13: and are implemented in \texttt{ABAQUS/Standard} without modification

14: to the solver source code. Source terms for the three constitutive

15: models are found to vary nearly six orders of magnitude in the number

16: of mathematical operations they contain. Refinement studies reveal

17: second-order displacement convergence in response to mesh refinement

18: for all constitutive models and first-order displacement convergence

19: in response to increment refinement for the finite-strain problems.

20: We also investigate the sensitivity of MMS convergence order to minor

21: coding errors using an exploratory case. Code used to generate the

22: MMS source terms and the input files for the simulations are provided

23: as supplemental material. \textbf{}\\

24: \textbf{Keywords:} Code verification, verification and validation

25: (V\&V), finite element analysis (FEA), method of manufactured solutions

26: (MMS)

27: \end{abstract}

28: