SAINT LOUIS, MISSOURI – May 7, 2018

ESRD President and CEO Dr. Ricardo Actis

Finite element modeling originated in the aerospace industry over 60 years ago. Owing to the level of expertise and experience required, it has remained a practice of analysts. There are many reasons for this, among them getting the right mesh for a problem and getting the mesh right is always near the top of why it takes both an expert and much time to get a solution. Not to mention the expertise required to navigate the minefield of multi-purpose finite element software tools in selecting the “right” elements from an ever-expanding element library, and selecting the “right” value of tuning parameters to overcome various deficiencies in implementations.

Yet, looking at this more closely, the focus should not be the level of experience or modeling skills of the user, but the level of intelligence in the software. Nearly all of the most popular legacy FEA software products were designed to support the practice of finite element modeling and as such none of them have the capability to provide a simple Q/A dashboard to advise the non-expert user if they have a good solution.

Splice joint stress contours generated by ESRD’s Multi-Fastener Analysis Tool (MFAT) Sim App

How then can the vision for expanding the use of numerical simulation by persons who do not have expertise in finite element analysis (FEA) be safely realized? The solution lies in the establishment of Simulation Governance through the development and dissemination of expert-designed Engineering Simulation Apps to ensure the level of reliability and consistency needed for widespread adoption.

The Key Ingredient for FEA-Based Simulation Apps

FEA-based Simulation Apps for the standardization and automation of recurring analysis tasks and process workflows for use by persons who do not have expertise in FEA must be designed by expert analysts to fit into existing analysis processes, capturing institutional knowledge and best practices to produce consistent results by tested and approved analysis procedures. Only by meeting the technical requirements of Simulation Governance can simulation apps have the reliability and robustness needed to support engineering decision-making processes!

Simulation Governance must be understood as a managerial function that provides a framework for the exercise of command and control over all aspects of numerical simulation through the establishment of processes for the systematic improvement of the tools of engineering decision-making over time. This includes the proper formulation of idealizations, the selection and adoption of the best available simulation technology, the management of experimental data, verification of input data and verification of the numerical solution.

Establishing the Proper Framework

Double lap joint inputs for ESRD’s Single Fastener Analysis Tool (SFAT) Smart Sim App.

In the creation of FEA-based Simulation Apps for the application of established design rules, data verification and solution verification are essential. The goal is to ensure that the data are used properly and the numerical errors in the quantities of interest are reasonably small: they must have built-in safeguards to prevent use outside of the range of parameters for which they were designed; they must incorporate automatic procedures for solution verification; and must be deployed with a detailed description of all assumptions incorporated in the mathematical model and a clear definition of the range and scope of application.

To ensure their proper use, Simulation Apps must incorporate estimation of relative errors in the quantities of interest, an essential technical requirement of Simulation Governance. They should not be deployed without objective measures of the approximation errors for all the reported results. The success of the vision of Democratization of Simulation depends on it!

Previous S.A.F.E.R. Simulation Posts…

• S.A.F.E.R. Numerical Simulation for Structural Analysis in the Aerospace Industry Part 1: Trends in A&D Driving Simulation
• S.A.F.E.R. Numerical Simulation for Structural Analysis in the Aerospace Industry Part 2: Challenges with Legacy FEA
• S.A.F.E.R. Numerical Simulation for Structural Analysis in the Aerospace Industry Part 3: FEM is not Numerical Simulation
• S.A.F.E.R. Numerical Simulation for Structural Analysis in the Aerospace Industry Part 4: Simulation Governance
• S.A.F.E.R. Numerical Simulation for Structural Analysis in the Aerospace Industry Part 5: An Introduction to StressCheck for High-Fidelity Aero-structure Analysis

To receive future S.A.F.E.R. Simulation posts…

This joint ESRD/Rev-Sim webinar will explore Sim-Gov compliant Sim Apps for democratization of simulation.

On July 29, 2019 a joint webinar on the the importance of Simulation Governance in FEA-based Sim App development & deployment, titled “Democratization of Simulation Governance-Compliant Sim Apps”, was provided by ESRD’s Brent Lancaster and Rev-Sim‘s Malcolm Panthaki.

In this timely webinar, we discussed why it is essential that Sim Apps implement Numerical Simulation technologies which enable the practice of Simulation Governance in order for the vision of democratization of simulations to be realized, as well as why it is important for engineering managers to get on the Simulation Governance train sooner rather than later. Strategies were explored for democratizing engineering simulations via Sim Apps which are: 1) based on the latest Numerical Simulation technologies, 2) available in Commercial Off the Shelf (COTS) form, and most importantly 3) Simulation Governance-compliant.

Live demos of ESRD’s CAE Handbook and Multi-Fastener Analysis Tool (MFAT) were provided in order to prove that COTS, FEA-based, Simulation Governance-compliant Sim Apps are not just “vaporwares” but plug-and-play software solutions!

View Webinar Recording

Click the button below to view the 4 part, 55-minute webinar recording (scroll to the bottom of the webinar landing page to find the videos):

View Webinar Slides

Click the button below to view the webinar slides (PowerPoint Show):

Acknowledgments

As always, many thanks to our attendees for their interest and feedback! And, of course, thanks to the Rev-Sim leadership for their time and contributions. We hope to collaborate on another webinar in the future!

SAINT LOUIS, MISSOURI – October 2, 2019

ESRD Chairman and Co-Founder Dr. Barna Szabó

The idea of simulation governance is easy to understand:  The application of numerical simulation technology must be properly governed in every organization. The responsibility for simulation governance rests with board-level executives.  They exercise this responsibility through setting the goals, objectives and metrics to ensure that the economic value of numerical simulation is positive.  If numerical simulation is not managed properly then it can and often does lead to poor decisions that result in economic loss.  There are many well-documented examples of substantial economic loss that can be attributed to lack of simulation governance and management.

Recognizing the need to clarify the issues associated with the governance and management of numerical simulation, the Simulation Governance and Management Working Group of NAFEMS[1] has undertaken to develop a document on “What is Simulation Governance and Management”. An extract was published in the July 2019 issue of the NAFEMS quarterly Benchmark.

Beware the bottlenecks preventing the adoption of simulation governance.

While the concept is easily grasped, the existence of two bottlenecks must be recognized:  The first is that board-level executives generally lack the expertise to properly formulate realistic policies, expectations and metrics for numerical simulation and to assess the economic risks associated with numerical simulation activities within their organization.  Therefore it is necessary to engage outside consultants who have proper credentials and experience.   The problem is that it is extremely difficult to find consultants who are competent in this area.  This is because there are very few experts in numerical simulation and the consultant must also understand the intricacies of corporate change management.

The second bottleneck is that, with very rare exceptions, the technical staff do not have a clear understanding of what numerical simulation is.  There are historical reasons for this:  The primary tool of numerical simulation is the finite element method.  The legacy finite element codes, whose origins can be traced to the 1960’s and 70’s, were not designed to support numerical simulation.  In fact, numerical simulation, as the term is understood today, did not yet exist at that time.

An essential aspect of numerical simulation is that mathematical models must be formulated independently from how the numerical solution is obtained.  In contrast, legacy finite element software tools have the model definition and approximation conflated in their element libraries, making it very difficult, at times impossible, to separate model form errors from numerical approximation errors.  As a consequence, solution verification and model validation, which are essential elements of numerical simulation, cannot be reliably performed.

To eliminate this bottleneck it will be necessary to re-train the technical staff so that they will become proficient in the use of quality assurance procedures in numerical simulation.

ESRD/Revolution in Simulation Webinar on Democratization of Simulation.

Management should also seek professional advice on the benefits and risks associated with Democratization of Simulation which must be subject to the rules of simulation governance.  The term means that numerical simulation tools are made available to engineers who do not have expertise in numerical simulation.  The goal is to increase productivity without sacrificing reliability through standardization of recurring numerical simulation tasks.  These tools must be carefully designed, tested and certified by experts for safe and efficient use.

The reasons why democratization tools should not be deployed without meeting the technical requirements of simulation governance are outlined in a 2018 presentation as well as in a joint webinar hosted by ESRD & Revolution in Simulation.

[1] NAFEMS is the International Association for the Engineering Modelling, Analysis and Simulation Community.  The parent organization was the National Agency for Finite Element Methods and Standards, established in the UK in 1983 with the objective to promote the safe and reliable use of finite element and related technology.

References

NASA Standard 7009: This NASA Technical Standard provides an approved set of requirements, recommendations, and criteria with which models and simulations (M&S) may be developed, accepted, and used in support of NASA activities.

Szabó B and Actis R. Simulation governance: Technical requirements for mechanical design. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering.  249-252, 158-168, 2012.

To receive future S.A.F.E.R. Simulation posts…

WATCH THIS WEBINAR

To watch this webinar recording, click the button below and you will be re-directed to the Altair Partner Alliance webinar recording page:

WATCH THIS WEBINAR

Part 1: Introduction & Sim Apps Overview

Part 2: What is Sim Gov Compliance?

Part 3: Sim Gov Compliant Sim App Demo - ESRD's MFAT

Part 4: Technology Requirements for Democratization of Simulation

In late February 2021, ESRD’s CAE Handbook was officially added to the Altair Partner Alliance (APA). CAE Handbook provides an elegant and intuitive framework for deploying StressCheck-powered digital handbook solutions. Read the APA newsroom press release here, and learn more about CAE Handbook here.

From Gordon Lehman, ESRD’s Senior Account Manager:

CAE Handbook realizes powerful benefits in virtually any solid mechanics engineering simulation environment where ‘similar but different’ simulations are performed. Because no training is needed to browse, load, update, solve and generate engineering results from simulation apps, repetitive simulations can be offloaded from FEA experts to more junior, less experienced engineers. As well as boosting productivity, it supports much greater complexity and fewer simplifying assumptions than classical engineering handbooks.

CAE Handbook replaces StressCheck Professional on the APA.

CAE Handbook Webinar

To learn more about the features and benefits of CAE Handbook, attend the free APA-hosted webinar “Standardize Recurring Analysis and Process Workflows Using FEA-Based Simulation Apps” on March 18th, 2021 @ 10:00 am EST.

This 45-minute webinar will include a brief demonstration of CAE Handbook, and provide an overview of how CAE Handbook captures corporate knowledge and democratizes simulations for deployment to non-analysts.

3D Lug with Corner Crack Handbook Model

In the May 2018 issue of Digital Engineering, contributing editor Tony Abbey profiled ESRD’s CAE Handbook as part of his “new series of overview articles looking at simulation and optimization software products.” Mr. Abbey then provides additional software product demos and commentary on his website, FETraining.net.

Mr. Abbey reviewed two different CAE Handbook applications, the “3D Lug with Corner Crack” Handbook model from Fracture Mechanics library and a modified “T-Joint” Handbook model from the Parts library, the latter a collaboration between Mr. Abbey and ESRD.

Mr. Abbey quickly found that CAE Handbook allows standardization of repetitive analysis tasks and provides a form of “templating” to support democratization of simulation:

The CAE Handbook is a form of templating. An expert FEA user can set up a model with one or more parts using Linear, Modal, Buckling or Nonlinear StressCheck solver solutions. In the case of the cracked lug, the Contour Integral Method is used to predict the required Stress Intensity Factors. The Model Information window, Parameters window and all the other input windows can be set up by the expert, following the guidelines in the CAE Handbook author’s guide. This is ideal for companies with repetitive analysis requirements. In my case, some 40 years ago I had to carry out exhaustive lug damage tolerance analyses checks on the Tornado combat aircraft. A tool like this would have meant turning that work around far more quickly and delegating much of the analyses.

Mr. Abbey summarized his evaluation of CAE Handbook with this positive remark:

In conclusion, the examples I used from the ESRD CAE Handbook library allowed me to investigate two different scenarios quickly. In the T-joint case, a useful extension beyond classical methods is found. Because I did not have to focus on FEA model setup, I could concentrate on planning the studies and interpreting the results. All models and documentation are loaded into the library, so it was easy to pick up the thread when I revisited the studies after a long break. I look forward to trying the next stage, building up my own CAE Handbook example using StressCheck.

Read Full Article
 

More Information on CAE Handbook

• CAE Handbook Product Page
• CAE Handbook Model Creator’s Guide
• Helpful Hints and Tips: CAE Handbook Development