BENCHmark July 2004
 One of the great privileges of my role in NAFEMS is to be able to
meet many well informed people who are closely involved with
engineering simulation: engineers and managers from different
countries, different industry sectors, using different software
tools, in different disciplines of engineering.
It is particularly interesting to hear different views expressed
about the future of simulation. A number of common themes
frequently seem to get mentioned. One of these is increased
integration. This can take many forms: the integration of analysis
into the overall design and development process, the integration of
different analysis tools, the integration of analysis between
different companies and different countries, to name but a few.
Developing the necessary software tools to enable such integration
is one thing, but what about the people issues?
At a recent NAFEMS committee meeting, the subject of “FEA
versus Test” was raised, which prompted a lot of lively
discussion about the relative merits of “real” testing
and “virtual” testing. Coincidentally, the next week I
made a presentation about NAFEMS at an international conference on
testing. From both sets of discussions, it was clear that analysts
understand that simulation will never totally replace physical
testing, and test engineers appreciate that simulation can do much
to inform decisions about which tests to perform. However, these
two sets of engineers are usually quite separate groups of experts.
Few people have the suitable experience to enable them to integrate
and combine the benefits of both techniques.
On a similar theme, in this issue we have an article about the
controversial subject of the use of analysis by another (often)
separate group: nonspecialist design engineers. We are all aware of
the ongoing debate about whether this is appropriate and, if so,
how it should be managed.
 If we are to achieve the goal of integration, to allow the full
potential of simulation to be realised, I believe that we must look
at ways of tackling the people issues as well as the software
issues. Bridges need to be built between analysts and those in
related disciplines: test engineers, design engineers and others.
We must also look to build bridges between users of different
analysis disciplines: FEA and CFD for example. NAFEMS is striving
to help build these bridges.
Tim Morris Chief Operating Officer
July 2004
Knowledge Base 004 - Fundamentals of Numerical Techniques...Part 2
FEA and Failure of Bi-Metallic Welded Joints
The Expanding Use of Virtual Prototyping to Develop Superior
Products
Fire Loading of Structures: Material Properties for Non-Linear
Analysis
Computational Simulations for Safer Roads
The Study of Various Parameters in the Numerical Simulation of
Springback
Spray Drying in the Food Industry
|
