Thoughts on FEA consulting services 5

[trainguy]

Hi all.

My question is more of a business question than a technical one. Living in Montreal, Canada, there are only a handful of engineering consulting companies that provide FEA capability.

Is it reasonable to assume that if we offer linear static analysis as a service, that this is a viable business, or must we be able to provide nonlinear static, and dynamic analysis, large deformations, etc.?

My guess is that we MUST provide the advanced analyses (with the related high costs, etc) to be successful. Although this also calls for hiring highly skilled personnel, etc...

Any thoughts?

tg

 

[magicme]

trainguy

starting a consulting busines is complex from lots of viewpoints, and there are lots of questions to answer.......what i have to say is fairly simple and dosen't nearly address all the issues. i will try very hard not to go on for hours.....
also keep in mind that you do state how many people are in with you, what your long term goals are, what risks you are ready to take etc etc etc etc

that aside..... i would say the smart way to start is to bootstrap your way up, DO NOT invest in people, equipment office space etc etc and then go out and try to find work....that's doomed to failure (very quickly). your most likely first job will 95% probably come from some person you know inside a company or a company that is familiar with you and your work and is happy with it and is ready to farm out work.

be prepared to be out of work and income for 3 months a year (possibly 3 consecutive months).
recognize that you have to pay whatever types of insurance you want, and set up your own retirement fund.

when you are "your own boss" (i tried not to smile) , you are also the cleaning lady, the computer/fax/printer repair person, the software evaluator/purchaser, the supply room man, the sales office, customer service, the emergency computer crash recovery team etc etc etc (and of course none of these activities are billable and cannot impact your schedule)

it goes on and on....my main point i guess is that consulting, or contracting successfully from your own office is not something to jump into blindly.... there are some good books on startup business... well worth browsing the shelves and buying.

but to get back to your basic question about static analysis, etc...... when a customer asks "can you guys .....?" you very confidently answer "we sure can and we'd love the job (whatever it was)". then on your way home, swing buy the bookstore and spend all night learning about what it is you just signed up to do.

and of course...loose the concept of 8AM to 5PM ....it means nothing anymore, nor do weekends.

good luck

daveleo

 

[GregLocock]

I am glad to hear that there are books that can teach you non linear analysis, overnight, to a professional standard.

Any suggestions for titles?



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[magicme]

hi there

your joking of course...you dont seriouly think i suggested learning non-linear FEA overnight.

trainguy asked a business question and that is how i answered it.... as a startup business question.

i was encouraging trainguy to be aggressive when negotiating for work....lots of times, in order to open new business doors and grow what you can offer customers, you need to take risks about what you can succeed at. that may be the biggest factor in having a successful "startup transient" ..... if you wait for a customer who will offer you technical work you are comfortable with, your business could very well go broke before that work finds you.

thats what i meant by my remark "what risks are you willing to take".

however ...... like all free advice you find on the internet, my advice is expendable, thats for sure.

daveleo

 

[corus]

I would consider the level of understanding of the people who are giving you the work when considering whether or not to invest in linear or non-linear packages. I would say that the vast majority of engineering companies haven't got a clue and you would probably manage 95% of your work using standard linear type analysis. If you have contacts with defence establishments or research organizations then expect to meet people who are more 'savvy' and who expect you to do a non-linear dynamic analysis using large defomrations and contact, when usually a simple static analysis would have done.

corus

 

[chris9]

I think if you have a little imagination you can solve the vast majority of problems with linear static analysis and contact.

Some companies are happy to waste their money on analysis that is more complex than you need. This may be because the person responsible for outsourcing the work lacks understanding of the problem.

Now if you challenge your client’s judgement then you will surely lose the work. On the other hand if you blindly agree to do all types of analysis then you are offering a poor value service and will eventually lose your clients.

Maybe you could price up the job exactly as requested and throw in a cheaper way of doing it as an alternative. Just having the capability to do some non-linear work will probably win you extra linear static work.

If your client’s perceive you to be an expert in your field then you are one!

 

[trainguy]

Interesting posts, guys.

Just a clarification: I am already a part owner in a small design engineering firm mostly for transportation equipment, but due to slow business, we are exploring the FEA arena. We have used contract FEA personnel before and supervised them, but my goal here is to have in-house FEA capability to take on all types of work, not just railway stuff!

I have a vision of a full room (maybe 6-8 analysts) of employees cranking out FEA for many industries and projects. I'm just not sure if they'll all need to be PH.D's in structural mechanics or just engineers out of a Bachelor's degree doing linear static.

Or, I could just start investing in Real Estate...

tg

 

[feadude]

trainguy
they'll all do not need to be PH.D's in structural mechanics . They should have masters degree in structural mechanics with at least 2 courses in FEA with grades B or better and minimum of 4 years of AFTER master degree graduation experience with FEA structural analysis.

 

[IRstuff]

Your question seems to be too much geared towards the technical aspect and perhaps not enough on the business aspect. Are these other companies hungry or are they turning away work? Are you? Are you turning away that much FEA business?

What is your unbiased assessment of your ability to compete with the other companies and with the internal resources of your customers? How will you keep your FEA guru busy during slack times?

TTFN

 

[GregLocock]

As a customer I'd really like to see an FEA consultancy that also did the physical correlation work. Admittedly this is a lot harder to set up than an office full of PCs and meshers, but I think the improvement in the models would be worth the expense.




Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[corus]

Greglock is quite correct but in designing components you can't take measurements before the event. Usually when using non-linear, large deformational, etc. analysis it's to determine the cause of failure of components in some unusual event. If the FEA consultancy is for design purposes then linear analysis will normally do as design codes are normally based upon these principles, if you're planning on doing forensic type work then you'll need the more advanced software, coupled with measurement capabilities.

corus

 

[feajob]

feadude you are right. A FEA analyst doesn't need to have Ph.D. in FEA. However, he/she needs to have a basic FEA knowledge.

Many FEA analyst, use commercial codes just as a black box, they don't know what is behind of every assumption. Today, all FEA soft wares represent very nice colour results (Garbage in Garbage out!).

I am agree with you and I think Master degree graduates usually have basic FEA knowledge. However, B.Sc guys need more training to be familiar with FEA.

Many B.Sc guys are good FEA analyst too. Because, they learned things by experience (not from theoretical aspects).

Cheers

feajob

 

[feadude]

feajob
I agree. This is the way I see it. Most (not all) engineers with the PHD spend so much time on theory and very little time with applied practical situations. Most (not all) engineers with BS do not have enough theoratical background for the assumtions that they make for practical situations. However most (not all) engineers with MS in structural mechanics usually are proficient with theoratical and practical (if they have the experience) situations.

 

[chris9]

I think your ability to carry out FEA has more to do with the way you go about tackling the problem rather than your academic background alone.

Some people are very good at passing exams but are lousy at solving problems in the real world.

I once got rejected for a job application because I expressed strong opinions on the value of physical correlation of FEA results with testing. My interviewer was looking for someone who could do it all with FEA alone. The company was full of ‘mad professor’ types.

My colleagues sometimes think I’m talking myself out of a job when I suggest that it is often quicker, cheaper and more reliable to do a physical test than a very complex FEA calculation.

 

[israelkk]

As an engineer in the aerospace and military bussiness for more than 25 years I could count the number of times I needed to use FEA with less than one hand fingers. I have found that experience and strong structural theory knowledge combined with plastic analysis will do the job faster and cheaper.

I have once seen a 200 page report for designing a Pylon for a a very famous fighter aircraft all done by hand using plastic analysis.

For airborne systems it is mandatory to actually test all products according to MIL-A-8591H Title: AIRBORNE STORES, SUSPENSION EQUIPMENT AND AIRCRAFT-STORE INTERFACE (CARRIAGE PHASE); GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA FOR.

I once seen a phrase that sums it all "Is your finite element is actaully a Finite Elephant?" or someting close to it...

I believe that to be a good FEA proffesional you need to have even a better theoretical knowledge of elasticity, plasticity and structural analysis, otherwise your finite element may become a "Finite Elephant" and you could get nonesense from it.

If you are in a bussiness that demands a very high factor of safety you may do not need to test it but at the same time you surely do not need FEA. FEA is an invaluable tool where every extra weight is crucial such as in the aerospace industry. However, you still have to prove it by an actual test because FEA is still only an approximattion tool and tools operated by humans may be wrong.

 

[johnhors]

I agree very strongly with israelkk , he has hit the nail on the head. I see analysts diving straight into non-linear analyses with little or no preparation (i.e. not trying to estimate a ball park result before hand) and then puzzling over the results generated , which probably bear little or no relation to reality!

This situation has arisen largely due to the ease with which models and their boundary conditions can be generated by most pre-processors. And, with the advent of FEA embedded systems within most CAD products the situation is getting worse! I have seen CAD jockeys perform FEA using boundary conditions that were nothing short of ludicrous.

Recently I read an article written by the CEO of a leading FEA vendor for embedded systems advocating that FEA can now be performed by NON-ENGINEERS because it so easy to do !

 

[chris9]

If you are a good engineer then FEA is easy to do and you can improve your product.

If you are a poor engineer then FEA is still easy to do but you won't improve your product.

 

[corus]

Unfortunately management these days know nothing that is outside of the loop, and not belonging to the matrix, to use actual quotes. Like children with a new box of crayons, they like coloured pictures and if the vendors can supply a product that any child could produce pretty pictures from,(no disrespect to CAD designers), then they'll buy it, alas.
Unfortunately I also see engineers producing hand calculation that make ludricous assumptions in order to simplify a complex situation, that should have been assessed using FEA, down to a single equation, and then factored the result, just to be safe. I think it is the case that when asked what the value of Pi was, the mathematician said it was an irrational number and incalcuable, the physicist said it was about 3.14, and the stress engineer said it was less than 4, but let's call it 50.

corus

 

[flamby]

trainguy,
Why don't you consider getting some CAD work, construction supervision, shop drawings etc.? Easier and more abundant than FEA.

 

[trainguy]

Our initial reluctunce to do so stems from the fact that
we are not insured for liability within the construction field. Believe it or not, our policy only includes various forms of transportation equipment.

I suppose we could get insured as required for that type of work, if it really is abundant.

tg