Sometimes I procrastinate, sometimes I don’t. About a year ago, I attended PLM World and was introduced all that is Siemens. I have to admit, for a guy used to bopping around in flip-flops and shorts with his ipod blaring, I was a bit taken back by the Siemens attendees. A much more formal group, giving a more sophisticated, dare I say “uptight” vibe. This all sounds like a dig, but in reality, I say it resulted in some of the most passionate, in-depth technical discussions I have ever seen at a user conference. I was lucky enough to be allowed to sit in a “birds of a feather” discussion on the good and bad of simulation in a design environment. It was amazing to me, as I felt like I took a porthole back in time to beam-element theory discussions, but what I was witnessing was hardcore engineering types digging in and getting to the base of the matter. No BS!!! The facts were clearly presented and the whole room agreed. I was on the edge of my seat as what I thought I knew, may actually be a bit different.
As we all know, much of the Siemens technology is driven with NASTRAN “under the hood”. So? As I simulation geek, I think this is one of the most unspoken, under-delivered gems of the Siemens offering. They have FEMAP (and slices/dices of their technology) on the front end and the engine is driven by a new-generation NASTRAN solver. Hmmm, if I was a marketing person, I’d be driving these facts home with a sledge hammer. You have big gun technology and are re-packaging it to simply work. That is different than everyone else. Why? Because it is proven technology that is scalable. Nobody has that in the MCAD world.
The simplicity is where Solid Edge Simulation comes into play. Like in a fairy-tale blog post, I literally rolled out of the birds of a feather discussion to a hands on session of Solid Edge Simulation. Hoping to finally physically meet @burhop in the flesh, I was informed that he left the day before. I am becoming more and more convinced that he only exists on twitter and second life and is just a figment of the marketing of Siemen’s invention. Maybe, I’ll never know??
But anyway, I sat through an FEA 101 for about 5mins with pleas of not jumping ahead. But, I’m a jumping ahead kind of guy and dove head first into the goodness of Solid Edge Simulation. I was pleasantly surprised. I was flying through, creating loads, materials, results viz off all sorts. For the most part, not handcuffed by nonsense and able to do what I wanted and more importantly, the guys running the show- when asked for something advanced, knew what I wanted. They might not have had it, but they knew what I meant. That’s huge to me! I don’t expect you to have it in your 1.0 version, but I like to know that you know what I mean and that it is at least on some road-map to the future, or not. But at least, you know what I am asking for.
To me, that’s the difference. One of the dangers of an MCAD company having an FEA offering is that is exactly what it is- an offering. What I saw at Siemens was deeper than that. I saw hardcore simulation people intertwined with design MCAD dudes. A possible, powerful combination that I will critically say isn’t exploited enough by the Siemens folks. You have a different story than everyone else, I for one, would like to hear it- in your words.
Because time is limited, I am going to ride Kenneth Wong’s coat tails and embed his video of Solid Edge Simulation and link to his article. He is what guilted me into speaking up and giving my two cents. Could be my old eyes and inability to handle colors well, but I dig the “purple” tones in the color spectrum of SE Simulation. I think they are just buttering up to me, but I find them really engaging. Do you buy a simulation package on colors? No! But it sure as hell grabs your attention!! You go, Solid Edge, about time you got yours!
