|
"Virtual prototyping" is the 1990's buzzword for software that
enables virtual product testing before physical prototypes are built.
The electronics industry has adopted many of these tools and today engineers
use them regularly to simulate thermal, electromagnetic, vibrational and
other mechanical modes of operation. Many of today's widely used virtual
prototyping software were introduced to the electronics industry in the
late 1980's and have seen steady improvements in functionality and ease-of-use
ever since. Today, many mechanical engineers in the electronics industry
now consider virtual prototyping for thermal design a mainstream design
activity. FLOTHERM software from Flomerics is the tool of choice for this
activity.
Where will development of virtual prototyping software go from here?
Will we continue to see relatively unexciting, incremental improvements
to functionality and user interfaces? Or will new ideas take hold and
re-invigorate the pace of innovation for virtual prototyping software? We at Flomerics believe the latter will take place. 
Flomerics has created a new class of virtual prototyping software called
"Design-Class Analysis" (DCA). DCA software is drastically different
from traditional virtual prototyping software in both focus and functionality.
DCA software has an exclusive focus on utilizing analysis techniques to
solve engineering design problems. In this context, specific analysis
techniques are not sacred and are simply a means to an end, not the end
itself. On the other hand, traditional virtual prototyping software has
a focus on the analysis field upon which it was formed, frequently at
the expense of cost effective design solutions. Evidence of this can be
found in the way traditional analysis companies describe their software.
Analysis-focused terms such as "Finite-Element Analysis (FEA)",
"Flow Network Modeling (FNM)" and "Computational Fluid
Dynamics (CFD)" are commonly used. Core competency is at the center
of this distinction between traditional and Design-Class Analysis companies.
DCA companies specialize in applying analysis techniques to solve engineering
design problems. Traditional analysis companies specialize in specific
fields of analysis. Distinctions can also be made between traditional and DCA software in
they way they are used. Traditional software is largely used in a manner
that is independent and isolated from the main design process and is heavily
dependant on special skills for effective use.
In contrast, DCA software embraces a new set of requirements for today's
demanding product development requirements and project schedules. These
requirements call for analysis software that is an integral part of the
main design process and usable by generalist
The differences are summarized in the table below:
|
Design-Class
Analysis
|
Traditional
|
| Design
centric - Strength lies in the application of analysis techniques
to solve engineering design problems |
Technology
centric - Strength lies in specific fields of analysis (ie. CFD,
FEA, FNM, etc) |
| Process
oriented - Rich feature set for integration of analysis into the
design process |
Point-solution
oriented - Little emphasis is placed on process integration. Burden
of integration is placed on the user |
| Promotes
standards - Supports and promotes open standards and mechanisms
for information supply chains |
Promotes
proprietary formats - Harbors strong ties to proprietary data
formats and is mainly ambivalent to the free exchange of data |
Stay tuned to this column as we further explore the emerging classification
for analysis software called Design-Class Analysis and its unique benefits
for the ultra-competitive, fast-paced electronics industry. |
