Notes from the NAFEMS North American Summit

The NAFEMS North American Summit meeting was held in Hampton, VA a week or so ago (10/29-31 to be exact).  Unfortunately, based on informal polling at many user groups and customer events, I'm sure that many of you are asking, "Who is NAFEMS and why do they need a summit?"  NAFEMS (www.nafems.org) is a non-profit organization focused on FEA quality and education.  They provide an unbiased and unaligned resource for users at all levels and of all tools to learn and network on simulation related topics. 

Uptake in North America has been slower than we'd like.  I have a couple theories on that but won't delve into them right now.  Suffice it to say that there is no other organization like NAFEMS in the world for those of us who believe simulation is a critical part of the design process.  If there is a short-coming, it is that being volunteer/member driven, the content and activity tends to reflect the interests of the volunteer members. Currently, these tend to be more involved specialists. Consequently, the activities are geared more (not exclusively) but more for specialists, thus drawing in more specialists and creating a cycle that has been hard to break.  I've been in communications with the NAFEMS leadership on how to change this and would be open to suggestions from the design analysis community.

OK... here is a quick summary of my key take-aways from the conference, which was focused on the future of the technology...  Where will simulation be in 2020?

1. Increased ‘realism’ will provide the biggest payoff in the next several years.  This means both assy vs. part and multi-physics and nonlinear as the default.  More realism = less interpretation required. 
2. As has been said for the last 20 years, the technology has to be scaled for the needs of the design engineer.  Vendors differed on how to get there.  SolidWorks' position (& Simulia’s) calling for a paradigm change stood out from the rest who seemed to say “same thing but easier and faster.” (I think we are on the right track here.)
3. Optimization (presented in several flavors) will be a bigger component of simulation in the next 10 years.  (I still have my doubts as to whether design-level users will embrace structured optimization.  Interested in feedback on this!!!)
4. Computing speed will increase and vendors need to capitalize on it.  The market will demand it.  (The projections for increased power at reduced costs are staggering!)
5. Executive buy-in of simulation as a strategic tool will be required to move it to the next level.  (I’ve been saying this for years.  Education targeted at managers would pay off if the experts at this conference are to be believed.)

More detailed comments to follow...

Comments

[Vmax]

Hi Vince,
I'm not sure about what you mean with the words "paradigm change"? I mean, I understand the concept, but what are the practical implications?
If it is implied a cad-centric simulation environment then I'm pretty curious about how the Simulia platform actually fits in, isn't it supposed to be a simulation-centric environment?
Thanks for your attention and greetings from Italy.
Vmax

[Vince]

Remember that CAD-Centric Simulation is a means to an end, not an end in itself. The movement to CAD-centric simulation is a response to the need to re-engineer simulation in a format that makes it more effective for generalist engineers. It has certainly been an effective first step. I think the best way to describe what I mean is that for the last 20 years, we in the analysis world have been trying to turn designers into analysts... to think like analysts. This has been mostly successful among design engineers who were inclined that way in the first place. A new paradigm for simulation as a mainstream design tool requires rethinking all the assumptions on how this technology is used and results are interpreted. Not just better graphics and icons with the same overall workflow.
-- Vince