Ford's answers to the NHTSA 6.7 Investigation

raleighdogguy wrote:
I would question it too. There are two main factors that influence the results of a simulation: 1) the quality of the model, and 2) the quality of the inputs. For many years hardware was a limiting factor, so the models were dumbed down to be able to run in a reasonable time. Then along came the US DOE and their focus on simulation for nuclear degredation testing and the field of high performance computing was born. Sometime around the late 90s or early 2000s, computing capacity became so powerful that inaccuracies in what were previously believed to be accurate models became apparent.

Couple those issues with the quality of the input data, and you realize that very quickly it's easy for what gets simulated to be completely disconnected from what they intend to simulate. Many of these models have hundreds or thousands of free parameters, and if any one of them is off is can completely change the results of the simulation. Further, you have timing and synchronization issues with distributed systems. The picture gets pretty muddy.

In my view, simulation is a good tool to use as reinforcement for old-fashioned bench work, not a replacement.

My sentiments exactly....we must have worked for the same types of
management...

Scary too, as this is happening whole sale and they truly don't get it
Management that is and us public consumers. Why we coined them 'green
light/red light designers'...once the got a green light from their
simulations/FEMAs, it was good to go and too many times out of context

One guy on another thread even accused me of anality...not understand
the way of things and bet he has no clue that his life is on the line
each time he gets into a plane, car, etc...as that is the required
level of CDR or at least IMHO

See this in this diesel fuel topic. See it in the base OEM supplier
of the pump and in the vehicle OEMs...whole sale lot of them