Anybody Home?

[GBor]

I've been watching this forum for a couple of weeks, now. In that time, I've seen one question regarding learning Algor. Is anyone else out there?

I've been an Algor user, among other software packages, since the DOS days. The current user interface changes continue to improve the product. I spend time on the phone with Algor developers...anyone have anything that they want to see?

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[swertel]

The price come down.

--Scott

For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376

 

[GBor]

Relative to what? It seems comparable to other products on the market.

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[stanier]

What I would like to see is Algor putting some effort into their Pipepak program. They are lagging behind the competition. Its aabout time they covered burieb or sub sea pipelines. They seem to spend all their time on the graphics rather than the engineering computational side. From a calculation point of view its not much improved on the DOS version.

 

[GBor]

I haven't used PipePak much. It appears limited, but for what it is capable of doing, does it do a pretty good job?

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[stanier]

For what it does Pipepak is bang for bucks the best package on the market. Its new graphics front end is a vast improvement over the DOS version. My only comment was that the "engine" hasnt changed much over the years to keep up with the competition.

Report generation is like other Algor products first class.

Analysis time is fast for even complex problems.

I just get the impression that the developers have focussed on the front and back end more than the "guts". To use an anology I would sooner have an SUV than a Ferrari for the rougher road of engineering.

 

[GBor]

Nice analogy! I think Algor is spending a good deal of time on their graphics because when everyone else was working toward a single user interface, Algor was working on Event Simulation and non-linear analysis.

Lately, and someone from Algor can certainly correct me if I'm wrong, they've been trying to work on pre- and post-processing because they have chosen not to purchase a third party front end. I'm not sure what they're doing in terms of the actual engine...but we can certainly ask.

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[swertel]

My smarcastic response (smart-a$$ and sarcastic) is because I will someday purcase Algor, but as a one-man-shop, I can't quite afford it yet.

Other than that, I'm still pleased with the direction Algor is moving, although they had a rough time in the early 90's. Their brick elements are second to none and the solvers are quick and reliable.

What OS's does Algor support other than Windoze?

--Scott

For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376

 

[GBor]

I'm not sure. I think they are working on supporting Linux, but I'm not sure if they are there, yet. I am a one man shop, so I understand the expense concern. Have you called them and asked for a quote? Tell them you are a single person...it helps!

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[swertel]

As a matter of fact, I have. And they have been more than willing to come to an agreement. I haven't pursued it yet down to the specific dollar value because I'm not in a position to get any ROI at any cost.

First things first. I need to get DesignCheck running that came with my CAD software. Once I play with that, then I'll move up to a full Algor package. I know I'm not going to be satisfied with the limitations of DesignCheck.

--Scott

For some pleasure reading, try FAQ731-376

 

[stanier]

Hi Guys,

You talk of being a one man band . So am I but I see Algor's software as an investment. For without it I cant get the work as I didnt have the capability to do the job efficiently and accurately. Also it sets you apart from the other "one man banders" in that you have the capability that they dont.

I am finding that the major consultants cannot, or will not, afford to have a guy hanging around with some software who occassionally uses it, wants to go to training and conferences etc. Most of my work comes from international consultants who sub consult to me. Its worked for me for thrity years.

Its the model the medical & legal profession use. The general doctors and lawyers handle the day to day stuff and then bring in the big guns when they need it.

Its easy to cruise at ground level but the traffic is hell. If you cant afford the software, get serious put up your fees, borrow the money if you have to, get the software and cruise at a higher altitude.

 

[GBor]

Thanks for the encouragement, stanier. Actually, I've had the software for about 5 years and was the "end user" for another company since 1996. I agree that you don't want to run out and purchase the software AFTER you get the contracts, but FEA software isn't inexpensive these days. You have to mortgage one of your children in some cases (this is certainly not an Algor comment...this is technical software, in general).

You've clearly been at this much longer than I have, but right now doesn't seem to be a good time for most small companies. To jump out there on a loan may not be the best timing. I know there are peaks and valleys...I've heard about them. I just feel like I've been in the valley my entire consulting career !

The other question is purchasing only what you need. Are you only going to do linear static analyses? That's not terribly expensive. Add Event Simulation, non-linear analysis, linear dynamics, and heat transfer and your in to some sizable figures...not to mention the annual fees to retain a service agreement...something I HIGHLY encourage with the rapid advances we see in these package interfaces.

Garland E. Borowski
Borowski Engineering & Analytical Services, Inc.

 

[stanier]

Hi GBor,

I know your predicament as I was in it for a while until a friend told me of a lawyer in the same boat. he was told to double his fees as he was always whinging about working long hours for nothing. It worked , he lost some clients who he didnt really like but gained a whole lot of others who were prepared to pay.

I did it slowly using the Chinese philosophy of 20% profit from 80% of customers and 80% profit from 20% of customers. Then concentrate on the 80% profit ones. try the insurance companies, expert witness testimony for lawyers, companies in trouble they pay the big bucks. Some one tries to screw your price down, walk away. Amazingly most come back.

As far as the software is concerned I run some serious waterhammer/hydraulics software and Pipepak. Yes they cost, but they are an investment. You get them, you can charge accordingly. If you branch into the FEA in a big way I suggest you team up with some others and share the costs. That will smooth out the peaks and troughs. A five plan helps of where you want to be. One option is to get a retainer from a company so that their young turks or even project type people can use you as the font of knowledge.

Remember there is a shortage of good technical people out there. The project managers will pay for good advice.

I work throughut SE Asia via the net. Some people I havent even met. I dont go to meetings unless forced to or am being paid to train people. They waste to much time.

Anyhow its your business but the best of luck. Let me know if you take the plunge.

 

[GBor]

Too late now. I took the plunge about a year ago, but have been in business since 2000. I've actually done a few of the things you suggest. I own some CAD software and some FEA software. I raised my price when I became a licensed Professional Engineer (USA title) and finished my Master's Degree. I teamed up with 3 other technical people and a couple of business types in a "virtual" company. One of the tech guys has gone under...the work wasn't there to support us. I'm somewhat fortunate in that my old company has contracted me back once and is looking to do it again. I've also picked up a few sideline jobs with companies that I've done some business over the past few years. I haven't sunk, but I'm limping a little. I just keep looking at the horizon! The future looks bright...I just have to survive long enough to get there!

Thanks for the encouragement and, of course, let me know if I can help in any way.

Garland

 

[GBor]

So although 1000 of us are registered for this forum, there are 3 of us acknowledging it? Anybody else out there?

By the way, stanier, I was looking at the documentation on PipePak and it looked like it could handle buried pipe. Since I don't fool with the program, I didn't follow it too well, but something about the "significant constraints" of "buried pipe" being handled by the y-axis constraint? Anyway, you may want to search the documentation for "Buried" and see what it says. Also, they have Pipe elements in their MES package and have at least one major company (Dupont) doing some type of dynamic pipe stress analysis with event simulation.

Scott, Algor only supports Windows. Apparently their OS efforts are in expanding to fully utilize the 64-bit operation of Windows XP. They are looking at possibly expansion to Linux in 2006.



Garland E. Borowski, PE

 

[stanier]

Hi Gbor,

Yes I was aware of the Pipepak rudimentary handling of buried pipe. It is handled by defining negative levels in the Y axis. It only assumes that the pipe doesnt move and is held rigidly. If you have a pipe in a clay substrate it doesnt take account of the viscelastic properties of the soil. When you consider that the modulus of ferrous materials is orders of magnitude higher than soil then there will be some movement.

One of my intersts is themroplastic pipes and it is important in a buried pipe situation to realise that the soil/pipe behaves as a composite material.

Pipepak doesnt take into account the plastic properties of materials. ie that the material response is strain and load dependent. Ie Non linear matrerial response. If they can do it for FEA why not Pipepak?? It gets back to they concentrating on the appearance of the simulation rather than the engine thats driving it or its technical capability.

Another are that Pipepak and other stress programs fall down on is thin wall materials such as stainless steel. You may have an instance where the material is in the plastic zone, deforms and the loads and stresses are thus removed until the conditions reverse. Local stresses are required to be analysed using another package.

I have not even used the linear FEA package that comes with Pipepak. it is my intention to learn how to use Superdraw and this FEA package. Then I might mve to non linear FEA and event simulation.

How about things such as mine subsidence? Earhquake forces on buried pipelines?

I think its a mind set of having as product for ANSI B31.1 & 31.3 and forgetting that there is a whole world out there of mining, water & wastewater, food, power generation etc that uses diffenrent materials. i have tried to raise this with Algor but they dont seem to want to get out of their comfort zone. There is a huge un tapped market in these industries where a low cost pipe design package like Pipepak would be on every engineers desk for pipe design. I muddle through with its limitations. Its just as easy for me to build a model in PipePak of a pipe system to give the structural engineers the support loads for a static case let alone a thermal, earthquake, ship case as it is to do it manually.

If Algor werre to be as imaginative withits computing capability with Pipepak as FEA then they could have orders of magnitude more licenses in the world. they could start small with say AWWA M011 standard for fabricated steel pipe in the water industry or design in polyethylene. They think palstic if GRp because its mentioned in ANSI codes. Well glass reinforced thermoset plastic behave differently to thermoplastics.

I'll get off my soapbox now.

CYA Stanier.

 

[GBor]

Interesting comments, Stanier. I came from the military shipbuilding industry, so I understand some of what you were mentioning. I think the general attitude is that the non-linear and event simulation world can probably do a lot of what you are talking about. Soil and other substrates can be modeled, I would think, in a wide variety of ways from bulk modulus brick/tetrahedral elements to non-linear springs. Pipes could be modeled as simple line elements or as plates for thin pipe or solid elements if the thickness to diameter ratio gets large enough to warrant solid elements. Again, I don't understand what you are doing with pipe stress analysis, but the non-linear pipe element seems to have a lot to offer.

Just for fun, I ran a [very] simple non-linear analysis with a sched 30 pipe with 2 long radii 90's in it. I fixed one end and loaded the other with a force. I could have supported the 90's with multiple springs to simulate different ground conditions, although I didn't on this one because I was just playing. It ran and produced what appeared to be some reasonable numbers, but, again, this was just a gut feel. I didn't try to validate or verify anything.

I have done some work with shipboard detonation using various forms of linear dynamic analysis. In this case, though, I modeled the pipes as beam elements (before "pipe" elements existed). The new pipe elements allow for the input of non-structural mass, outside diameter and thickness.

As for Superdraw, most people don't seem to care for it, but that's where I learned FEA. I figure any software package you have to learn its quirks whether its SolidWorks, FEMAP, whatever. I don't really understand most people's problem with it. It's really a pretty good program, but the latest FEMPRO is more in line with what most people are accustomed to. Maybe it will be more widely accepted. If I can help with either, let me know.

Sure wish I understood you pipe analysis a little better. Perhaps I could give a half-way intelligent stab at whether MES or non-linear would help.

I feel like I've typed a lot without saying anything! So,

Hope all is well.

Garland

Garland E. Borowski, PE

 

[stanier]

Hi Garland,

I guess its what you are brought up on. Pipepak has a spreadsheet input where standard components such as elbows, tees, spring supports, flanges, valves etc can be nominated. Their position & orientation is defined in three planes from the previous node. Whole piping systemns can be built very quickly. Whereas I get the impression that with FEA each element has to be defined and linked to the next. It appears that it is best suited to examining small portions or elements ina s ystem rather than several kilometres of pipework that supported by various means from structures assumed to be rigid.

This type of stress analysis is recognised in the National Piping Codes as the software has been verified against known systems. Whereas FEA is a little more tailored by the user to suit the boundary conditions and elements and likely has to be verified against results from the field.

Geoff

 

[GBor]

Makes a little more sense, now. I don't think it is as difficult to build entire piping systems as you may think, but I do understand the need to have software approved by codes.

Using FEA (or MES), you would be able, I think, to draw runs of pipe between supports. There would have to be a node at each support, but the supports could be modeled separately as beams, trusses, plates, shells, springs, whichever is appropriate. Using the combined element types, I would think you could get some very nicely modeled systems, that, if modeled smartly, could result in some pretty fast, effective models...

I guess, it might be better to set PipePak up to handle it, but I think it could be done?

Unfortunately, in my conversations with Algor, I don't see this being a priority, but perhaps it will continue to surface and eventually get some attention.

Garland E. Borowski, PE

 

[jcfoley]

I am considering buying Algor currently to handle some structural work. My company is not at a point to need PipePak at the moment. However, we build compressor stations and I am curious to know if this add-on will handle piping vibration and fatigue. Many compressor packagers just continue to increase wall thicknesses until the pipe stops breaking!

Also, as to ease of use, I am wondering how Algor compares to CosmosWorks and Pro/M.

Chris Foley
Compressor Systems, Inc.