Your best way to share results

[HugoHerrera7042]

Hi,

I wanted to leave a question for the entire MoldFlow community to see what advantages/disadvantages everybody faces when explaining results to the customer/designer/tooling/product engineer contacts.

What is the best way to share the results of a MoldFlow analysis?

Thanks for your feedback, and hopefully we all can get something interesting from everyone's approach.

Hugo Herrera

[mayur_dhumal]

Hi,

Nowadays it is more relevant for any analyst to provide a *.MFR file which can be imported in Moldflow result viewer, we all know it by 'Communicator'.
In this way report making time of an analyst is compensated.
This will also help designers/clients/production house to review results early in production or development phase to add their feedback on it as well.

Other conventional way is to provide results in a nice colorful *.PPT or MS-Word format. In this case analyst have to invest his/her time on report making.

Regards,
Mayur

[maxmarautodesk]

Hello Hugo,

I agree with the previous answer. I think it is a good idea to export all the results that your costumers/clients might be interested in to a .mfr result file. Perhaps even more results than they are interested in, because in my experience many people think Moldflow will only provide basic results such as injection pressure, injection time, etc. They are not aware of how mighty and comprehensive Moldflow can be with regard to the results. Thus, they might find some interesting result that they did not think of in the first place. You can give the result file to your costumers/clients and they can open it in Moldflow Communicator. Communicator is free of cost and can be downloaded from Autodesk. I believe it might be helpful to invite your costumers/client to a first session where you can show them how to deal with Communicator and Moldflow results and what kind of results they can get from you/Moldflow.

If you want to visualize the final shape of your warping part (maybe even in comparison to the original one), I found an alternative way. You can export the model of your warping part as CAD file (.stl). Afterwards, you use GOM Inspect (http://www.gom.com/3d-software/gom-inspect.html) for comparison. It is a software free of charge where you can import your .stl file from Moldflow and your original CAD file. The software provides you different tools, such as an overlay function of both models with colors to display the deviation in shape of both models. I like the software and I would recommend that you just try it yourself to get an impression (provided you have to deal with warpage/shrinkage analysis). Perhaps it is suitable for you and your costumers/clients.

Best regards,
maxmar

[madhukeshwart]

Understand your  customer & As they need & As they feel comfortable is the best way to share.

=============================================================================

1. Power point presentation with different views and animations and explanations. It is best and preferable to all.

2. If customer can interpret the resultshimself, No need of explanation, Then MFR/Moldflow communicator is next best.

3. Power point + MFR is best, If customer is a expert, want your suggestions and recommendation &  He himself can also advice you based on results.

4. Instead of PowerPoint , word Format / PDF is best, If customer is not interested in animations.

[HugoHerrera7042]

I do agree with all the given recommendations here.

I personally like to share the MFR files as a solid way to have a record/track of the analysis, but I also have the need of creating a small presentation to add comments and intepretation of the main outputs, recommendations, etc to share it on a personal-discussion level.

If you can, keep posting how does it work better within your facility-teams so that we all can learn what better ways do we have when sharing MoldFlow results.

Thanks for your time,

Hugo Herrera

[mayur_dhumal]

Hey Hugo,

In Synergy, there is a option under View Tab > Windows > User Interface > Notes, this option can be used to its optimal level while sharing simulation results to clients.
You can save your analyst comments on each plot & Save this in Synergy, after exporting to Communicator, these comments will be there, so if you ask me, this is the best option available today to any moldflow analyst, that is why this option is made available from Autodesk.

Hey maxmar,

I dont think you need GOM, because everything is there in AMC, why to go for GOM then, you can visualize the deformed as well as original model in AMC also. Then why to invest time in creating other files and again import in GOM?

Regards,
Mayur

[maxmarautodesk]

Hi Mayur,

I am actually not sure how to do the comparison of the deformed model and the original shape in AMC. I haven't really worked with it yet. If you can provide me some help there, this might also be an alternative option.

So far, I did investigations on the warped and shrunken part inside AMI. However, the possibilities there were not handy or statisfying to me. In my opinion, the visualization and quantification of warpage and shrinkage results is really not one of AMI/AMC's strengths. That's why I had a look at GOM. And I don't have to create any new parts. I have the orignal CAD files available and the export of the warped part is only few clicks.

I think there is anyways not THE ONE way to present results to costumers/clients. This depends on the part, type of results, costumer, etc. And this post is about showing possibilities to present results.

Best regards,
maxmar

[Anonymous]

I heard a wise man once say:  The key to attaining the most value from a mold filling analysis is to understand:  "what are you trying to learn".  Then you can determine how the analysis can help to achieve that goal.

I think that the best way to share your results is to know how can you best answer "the question" in a way that your customer can understand.  I like Mr. Talwar's list.  Powerpoint for everyone, Powerpoint with .mfr for the technical people.

Best regards,

Tim

[harald_goetz]

I also like the list, while I use rarely mfr files (until now).

But what would I do without GOM Inspect and the later comparison of a scanned (or CT) part to see how good my prediction was regarding shrinkage & warpage.

No Sir, not without my GOM

Harald

[madhukeshwart]

GOM is best to compare

1. moldflow warped model with Cad model

2. moldflow  warped model with Production physical sample scanned data(point data or stl out from white light scanning)

Provided you must run moldflow analysis with shrinkage applied model.