12 December, 2017
The engineers we surveyed were clear about what they wanted from their thermal simulation packages. The clear number one priority was accuracy. According to our research, 63% of thermal engineers would like to improve the accuracy of their simulations. This was more important than faster solve times, greater automation and better results analysis.
However, only a quarter (27%) of thermal engineers find that their simulation results closely match their physical measurements. This makes it clear that some simulation tools – either due to solver limitations, or modelling issues – are struggling to achieve the accuracy that engineers need.
Indeed, our research found that the vast majority of thermal engineers (61%) are being forced to repeatedly alter their grids manually in order to improve the accuracy of their simulations. At the same time, 24% of those surveyed agreed that they have to compromise the accuracy of their simulations due to hardware limitations.
This paints a clear picture of engineers constantly having to trade off accuracy and speed – which clearly means the simulation results are going to be substandard one way or the other.
It doesn’t have to be this way. More innovative tools like 6SigmaET give you a far better balance between ease of use, accuracy and speed of results – ensuring that you can get fast reliable results without compromise.
With so many engineers being forced to sacrifice accuracy as a result of hardware and software limitations, it’s important to explore all available options. Without trailing other tools, thermal engineers will never be certain that their existing approach to simulation is guaranteeing maximum reliability for their end products and designs. This is not only bad news for engineers and manufacturers, it’s bad news for the end customer.
By: Tom Gregory, Product Manager