How I work and how I review
I like design reviews that end with a better part, not a longer action list. These are the habits I bring to my own work and to the work I review.
Start from the question
Before CAD or FEA, write down what has to be true: the load, the fit, the process, the cost.
Interfaces first
Most problems live between parts. Agree on datums and mating features early.
Process is a requirement
Molding, stamping, and assembly constraints shape the geometry from day one.
Check the model before trusting it
Hand calculation, reaction forces, mesh sensitivity, and restraints that match how the part is really held.
Say what we don't know
Every analysis has limits. Writing them down is part of the deliverable.
Make the reasoning reusable
A clear review note teaches more than a fixed model.
What I look at in a design review
| Function | Manufacturing | Tolerances | Analysis | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Load path, stiffness, interfaces, worst-case assembly | Wall thickness, draft, ribs and bosses, gate and knit lines; bend radii and hole-to-edge distances | Datum scheme vs. assembly; what each tolerance protects; stack-up on critical features | Question stated, boundary conditions justified, convergence, hand check, limitations | What fails first, how we would detect it, and which test would settle it |
Working with other engineers
At Continental, Harman, and Marquardt I mentored younger engineers in 3D modeling and in interpreting FEA results for mechanical systems.
In my current role I support other engineers with their FEA work, and I prepare and run engineering change meetings. Earlier, I wrote DFM, CAE, and Moldflow risk documentation so the whole team could see a concept's possible failures before committing to it.