FEA Consultant (Code_aster)
An independent FEA consultant builds, runs, and verifies finite element models for engineering teams that need structural answers without carrying a full-time analyst on payroll. INNX works in Code_aster, the open-source finite element solver, for linear and nonlinear static analysis, contact, and composite and metallic structures, and checks element types and solver settings against closed-form solutions and NAFEMS benchmarks. You receive the results, the checks behind them, and a report your team can audit.
Typical problems
- No analyst in-house, or an in-house team at capacity for a specific project.
- An existing FEA model whose results need an independent second opinion before a design review or a test.
- Stress concentrations at holes, fillets, and cutouts, where the mesh decides whether the peak stress is right.
- Pins, lugs, clevises, and bolted joints, where contact and friction make the problem nonlinear.
- A choice between linear and quadratic elements, or between a 2D and a 3D model, that has to be justified on accuracy and cost.
- Commercial license costs for an analysis that an open-source solver can run, and document, just as well.
What you receive
- Stresses, strains, displacements, and reactions for every load case, at the locations that drive the design.
- The checks behind them: equilibrium of the reactions against the applied loads, mesh quality (aspect ratio, Jacobian, skew), and comparison with a closed-form solution or benchmark wherever one exists.
- Failure criteria and margins of safety, including ply-by-ply checks for composite laminates.
- A written report in the format of the case studies below: geometry, mesh, materials, boundary conditions, results, and conclusions, including the limits of the model.
- Before any work begins, a fixed-scope proposal with clear deliverables, timeline, and price. No open-ended hourly billing.
Methods & tools
Code_aster. Linear static analysis in plane stress, plane strain, and 3D; nonlinear static analysis with frictional contact (Coulomb friction, continuous contact formulation); linear and quadratic elements. The published case studies show each of these, with the Code_aster validation case they follow.
Verification first. Before a model is used on a production part, its element types and settings are checked on a problem with a known answer. In the plate-with-hole study, Code_aster reproduces the peak stress within 1.1% of the finite-width reference; in the pin-in-bore contact study, the displacement at the contact point is within 0.56% of the NAFEMS-based reference with linear elements.
Meshing and post-processing. Meshes generated with Gmsh, with their quality reported; custom post-processing and automation in Python and C.
Coupled physics. When the loads come from a flow, the structural model is coupled to OpenFOAM: see CFD-FEA coupled analysis.
The work is backed by a background in composite mechanics, three years of doctoral research, and experience as a professor teaching finite element analysis and numerical methods.
Industries
Aerospace, defense, energy, marine, automotive, and sports equipment: any team building load-bearing composite or metallic structures that need to survive real-world mechanical and fluid loading.
Typical pricing
Most focused engineering-analysis projects range from $3,000 to $15,000. Complex composite, CFD, optimization and certification-support engagements typically range from $15,000 to $40,000+. Hourly technical support is available from $110/hour.
| Engagement | Typical range (USD) |
|---|---|
| Technical review | $500–$1,500 |
| FEA or CFD screening study | $3,000–$7,500 |
| Detailed analysis and report | $7,500–$20,000 |
| Advanced composite, optimization or certification support | $15,000+ |
| Rush work | quoted separately |
Final pricing depends on scope, number of load cases, model maturity, reporting requirements and schedule. Every project is quoted as a fixed price before work begins; see the three ways to scope a project.
Related case studies
- Stress Concentration & Hole Edge Verification: Code_aster plate-with-hole verification: peak stress within 1.1% of Peterson's finite-width reference and compressive stress within 4.2% of Kirsch.
- Loaded Pin in a Bore: Frictional Contact Verification: NAFEMS pin-in-bore frictional contact in Code_aster: contact-point displacement within 0.56% (QUAD4) and 0.43% (QUAD8) of the reference.
- Tapered Panel in Shear: Element Formulation Comparison: Cook's membrane in Code_aster: linear QUAD4/HEXA8 elements under-predict deflection by 0.6% and stress by up to 1% vs QUAD8; 3D matches 2D within 0.3%.
FAQ
Why Code_aster instead of a commercial FEA code?
Most structural problems that stall a project aren't textbook cases. They involve coupled physics, nonstandard geometry, or an analysis pipeline that doesn't exist yet in an off-the-shelf tool. Code_aster, with Python and C around it, makes it possible to build what's needed rather than forcing your problem into whatever commercial license happens to be on hand.
How do you verify an FEA model?
By checking that the reactions balance the applied loads, reporting the mesh quality, and comparing the results with a closed-form solution or a published benchmark wherever one exists, as in the published case studies.
Do you work with startups and individual inventors, or only established manufacturers?
Both. Engagements range from early-stage teams validating a first design to established manufacturers extending an in-house team's capacity for a specific project.
Do you sign NDAs?
Yes. Signing an NDA before reviewing your geometry, loads, or design data is standard practice.