I'm going to reply to my own post (even though the author of the original question was not me).
My debate position is that qualified individuals are being replaced with software that can do the same job for the same, or less cost.
Management seems to think that a (supposedly) one-time expenditure of, let's say, $50K for hard and software can replace a $100K/year designer or engineer, after everything else is considered.
I'd be a total luddite if it weren't for the internet.
Paul
> Recycled content:
>
> > Does anyone on the list have
> > any hard information that CAD and FEA actually makes projects better?
I
> > know the claims--mostly from software vendors--and I've seen all the
> > gee-whiz articles in Mechanical Engineering. Neither is proof and
> > probably isn't even true. Neater drawings and cool-looking solid
models
> > don't count either because flashier documents don't mean much.
> >
> > I'm thinking about improved products produced at lower cost at least,
> but
> > I think the proof lies in the quantum leap--stuff that could never
have
> > been built otherwise either because of money saved or design barriers
> > broken. I'll trust everyone not to bring up money saved by firing
> > experienced engineers and replacing them with outsourced CAD monkeys.
> >
> > I posed this question on a FEA list once, and there was a lot of words
> > exchanged about how FEA can solve bigger more complicated problems but
> > almost nothing specific about better designs that resulted. I'm
inclined
> > to doubt that there's been much product improvement with CAD or FEA.
We
> > can make more mistakes faster with a far greater impact, but are we
> doing
> > things better and smarter?
Received on Sat Jan 11 22:01:00 2003
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Oct 27 2008 - 20:23:52 EDT