Where Did the Name “Arrow” Come From?

Posted on April 12, 2012 by Trey Walters

A frequently asked question at our training seminars – usually during a break or over lunch – is how we came up with the name “Arrow”. More completely, the product is named AFT Arrow™ and it is considered by many as the world’s leading compressible pipe flow modeling software product.

There is a similar story behind the naming of AFT Fathom™ and I told that story several months ago here.

The story behind the Arrow name is rooted in the beginnings of Applied Flow Technology as a company. So let’s go back to 1995.

AFT Fathom was released in early 1994. While interest was immediately strong, we also received many requests for a version which performed compressible flow modeling in pipe networks. When I started Applied Flow Technology in 1993 I already had in mind to develop a product for compressible pipe flow. So work on product #2 began in 1994 soon after AFT Fathom 1.0 was released. However, I found out first hand what all fluid flow engineers already know – gas flow calculations are much harder than liquid flow. Especially in pipe networks.

Work on a compressible flow product was set aside in late 1994 in order to make some improvements to AFT Fathom, and version 2 of AFT Fathom was released in early 1995. Then attention was turned back to compressible flow.

But what should AFT’s second software product be called?

I remember coming up with twenty different names to choose from. I can’t remember hardly any of them but I do remember one of them being “Stratus”. So AFT Arrow might have become AFT Stratus if I had made that rather misguided choice in 1995.

But then a moment of fate intervened.

I was working heavy hours in those days and my wife decided to take our young children to visit grandparents and I took them to the airport to send them on their way. On the way back home – AFT’s office was in the basement of our home in those days – I was driving on the highway and passed an RV (a “recreatioanl vehicle” for international readers – it is like a mobile vacation home).

The brand name for the RV displayed in large letters on its back was “Arrow”. And like an arrow which pierced me from out of the blue, I immediately realized AFT’s second product would be called “AFT Arrow“.

As challenging as it was to find a name for AFT Arrow, developing the product was even more challenging. I did not want to settle for a simplified ideal-gas, adiabatic-type of solution methodology to which other software companies have resorted. I wanted the whole thing – heat transfer, real gas modeling and fully capable sonically choked modeling capability. This took considerable effort and research, including the development of many highly innovative and proprietary solution techniques. In the end AFT Arrow was commercially released in October, 1995. Orders surged immediately because of the market awareness already created by AFT Fathom.

Today we are proud to offer AFT Arrow as the most accurate and capable compressible pipe flow software available on the market.

Posted in From the President | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Automatic Renumbering

Posted on April 12, 2012 by John Rockey

All of the pipe numbers in Fathom must be unique. When adding a pipe to a model, the new pipe number will be incremented based on the highest pipe number currently in the model. For example, you may only have 25 pipes on the workspace, but if the highest pipe number is 100, a new pipe will automatically be assigned number 101. After several iterations of deleting and adding new pipes, the numbering scheme may be reduced to chaos.

AFT Fathom provides three tools to quickly and easily renumber pipes. They can be found in the Edit menu.

 

 

 

The Renumbering Wizard allows the user to change pipe numbers one at a time. Simply enter the starting pipe number and the increment size, then go to the workspace and click on the pipes you want to change. 

Automatic Renumbering allows the user to change all pipes or junctions in a selected area at the same time. If you need to renumber the entire mode, this would be an easy way to do it.

 

Incremental renumbering will change all pipes or junctions in a selected area by adding an offset to each pipe. For example, if your pipe numbers range from 1 to 100, but you want one section of the model to be set apart, you can select the desired region and increment all of the pipes by 1000. When viewing the model data or output windows the incremented pipes will be easy to identify.

Posted in Tips and Tricks | Tagged , | Leave a comment

May the Force Be With You: Evaluating Unbalanced Forces Caused by Waterhammer

Posted on March 15, 2012 by Trey Walters

A common task among pipe stress engineers is to evaluate loads on pipe systems caused by waterhammer. Since AFT Impulse 4.0 was released our users have had the ability to calculate waterhammer-induced unbalanced forces for use in any pipe stress analysis application. In addition, our users can create specially formatted transfer files for direct use in CAESAR II and TRIFLEX.

However, the process of calculating such forces in AFT Impulse and then applying them in pipe stress software is not as straightforward as it sounds. Our customers have asked for assistance in this process. I have teamed with Jim Wilcox of CodeCAD – AFT’s distributor in Canada – to write a white paper on how to generate forces in AFT Impulse and apply them in CAESAR II. Jim’s many years of experience with CAESAR II as well as his familarity with AFT Impulse as a distributor was a key factor in us being able to create this unique document.

Here is a link to where you can download the white paper: Evaluating Dynamic Loads in Piping Systems Caused by Waterhammer.

As a point of interest, this effort began as a conference presentation at Intergraph’s CADWorx and Analysis University in 2009. We were invited back again in 2011 and presented a paper entitled “Transient Hydraulic Analysis for CAESAR II Evaluation”. After the 2009 presentation we began work on a white paper and it took us a few years to refine the example and the content.

This version of the white paper is in U.S. customary units and we are currently at work on a metric version.

We expect this white paper to offer significant help to those performing this important engineering task. Please tell us what you think!

Posted in From the President | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Calculating Energy Costs

Posted on March 15, 2012 by David Jackson

AFT Fathom and AFT Arrow have the option to include energy costs in the Output. To utilize this option, first open and fill out the “Cost Settings” window which can be opened from the Analysis dropdown menu.

Next open the specification windows for the pumps that you would like to calculate energy usage for, and select the option to “Include Cost in Report” from the “Cost” tab.

After running the model, you will be able to review the new cost data in the output.  The cost report is configurable in the Output Control window.

 

 

 

Posted in Tips and Tricks | Leave a comment

Problems With Heat Exchanger Specified Heat Rate In Constants?

Posted on February 21, 2012 by Ben Keiser

Using “Specified Heat Rate In Constants” for the thermal model of heat exchangers can often cause problems in system models.  The reason why is because this thermal model type causes the heat exchanger to act like an “assigned heat input” junction as does an assigned flow junction does for providing constant flow rates.  Another problem is that this thermal model can cause unrealistic temperature changes across a heat exchanger.  When the heat rate is specified and the mass flow rate and heat capacity are calculated based on the system solution, the temperature change will be whatever is required to maintain the specified heat rate.  This is analogous to the way an assigned flow junction will add whatever pressure is necessary to maintain a specified flow.

It is always best to use other heat exchanger thermal models and the heat rate for the heat exchanger will be available as an output that can be compared against the original desired heat rate.

If the heat rate is known as well as a function of flow rate, then the thermal model “specified heat rate in vs. flow” can be used.  One would enter this information into a table just like establishing a resistance curve as a pressure loss model.  Use the zero point as the first data point (zero flow rate and zero heat input).  Then enter the heat rate and mass flow rate that is known, and finally add one more data point where the flow rate is doubled and the heat rate is quadrupled.  This will allow the heat exchanger to modulate its heat rate with the system flow rate and can produce more accurate results.  The screenshot below contains the data needed for the curve fit as well as the generated curve in the heat exchanger specifications window itself.

 

Posted in Tips and Tricks | Leave a comment

My 50th Anniversary Visit to the Site of John Glenn’s First American Flight Into Space

Posted on February 20, 2012 by Trey Walters

Many of you probably saw in the news that today, Monday, February 20th, is the 50th anniversary of John Glenn’s flight into space. The flight was aboard a Mercury-Atlas rocket dubbed Friendship 7. This historic event was a significant step on the way to the Apollo missions to the moon.

By good fortune the NASA contractors at Kennedy Space Center had scheduled an AFT training class last week, and I traveled to Florida to teach the class. I took some time to tour the Space Center and Cape Canaveral one evening and was able to visit Complex 14 where the launch took place.

The rocket booster for Friendship 7 was a General Dynamics Atlas rocket. Of special interest to me personally was that I spent several years working on Atlas rockets at General Dynamics. This was a couple decades after John Glenn’s flight. In fact the Atlas rocket liquid oxygen propellant line was my first introduction to waterhammer and where I gained much of the knowledge that undergirds our AFT Impulse™ waterhammer software. It is also where I met and worked with Jeff Olsen who is currently AFT’s Vice-President of Technology. Like me, Jeff is also a former rocket engineer.

Complex 14 was dismantled many years ago and today is just a remnant. Below is a photo I took last week of the launch complex at Cape Canaveral. Also below is a photo of me next to the launch site.

A photo I took of Cape Canaveral Complex 14 with John Glenn’s parking spot freshly painted – the launch site is in the far back.

Me in front of the Cape Canaveral Complex 14 launch site

Astronaut John Glenn, the Friendship 7 Mercury Capsule is shown being launched from Cape Canaveral, Florida on February 20, 1962. (AP Photo)

Today the Atlas rocket is part of Lockheed Martin’s space offerings. Atlas V rockets are launched from Cape Canaveral’s Complex 41 and as luck would have it there was an Atlas V launch scheduled last week as well. I and some of the engineers in the training class gathered one evening to watch the launch from the fourth floor of their office building. But my luck ran out that day and the launch was scrubbed and postponed due to wind.

A sign on the doorway to the Cape Canaveral Complex 14 blockhouse with a history of the General Dynamics Atlas rocket.

I also got to see some of the infrastructure remaining from the Space Shuttle program including a visit inside the massive Vehicle Assembly Building where the Space Shuttle Orbiter Atlantis was being prepared for its new life in a museum (see photo below).

A question we discussed frequently last week was what is next for America’s manned space program. We seem to have lost our way and our will. I hope we can find it and reach for the stars once again. It makes all of us at AFT proud that our software is part of this effort.

A special thanks to the engineering staff at Kennedy Space Center who hosted me last week!

I took this photo of the massive VAB (Vehicle Assembly Building) – which awaits the next generation of heavy lift launch vehicles as its Apollo – Saturn V and Space Shuttle days are now behind it. It is 526 feet (160 meters) tall and one of the world’s largest structures by volume. For scale see the fence and vehicles at its base. The orbiter at the right is a mockup on display.

Posted in From the President | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why I Like Bill Gates More Than Steve Jobs

Posted on January 31, 2012 by Trey Walters

I have an iPod – to which I am very attached. I have had my iPod Nano for a couple years now. All of my kids and my wife have iPods. I hike frequently in the Colorado Mountains near where I live and I can’t do it without my iPod. I can’t work out at the gym without my iPod. I can’t drive my car without my iPod.

I have an iPhone – to which I am very attached. I have had my iPhone for about 6 months now. It goes with me everywhere and – along with AT&T – was a reliable tool for me in Australia and Asia late last year. My wife has an iPhone. All the sales and technical staff at Applied Flow Technology have company-provided iPhones.

For my iPod and iPhone I frequently download music on iTunes. iTunes holds my entire precious music library.

I am emotionally attached to my iPod and my iPhone.

My first experience with a graphical user interface was on an Apple Macintosh. Although I never owned an Apple computer, at my first engineering job I worked regularly on a Mac for five years. It was at my second job where I first became acquainted with Microsoft Windows. Version 3.1.

My first PC was an 8086 IBM clone (from Dell) running Microsoft DOS 3. Command lines. Arcane. High barriers to usage. Definitely the tool for an engineer.

When Steve Jobs passed away a few months ago there was understandably a lot of discussion in the media on his contributions to society and the marketplace. Like many of you I read a number of articles on Steve Jobs and watched several news programs and documentaries. Somewhere along the way I picked up on Steve Jobs’ apparent disdain for Bill Gates and Microsoft.

That sentiment has been bothering me ever since.

Today Apple is the most valuable public company in the world. Microsoft – which not too long ago held that distinction – has, in the opinion of many, seen its better days.

Steve Jobs created Apple out of a garage and was instrumental in building that into a multi-billion dollar company. Twice. Once originally and then, after being kicked out of his own company for ten years, when he saved Apple from potential bankruptcy in the 1990’s. During that time away from Apple he was an early investor in Pixar – another multi-billion dollar company which he helped build. A person who helped create two and arguably three multi-billion dollar companies is one amazing individual. Steve Jobs was amazing, no doubt.

However, Steve Jobs’ (and Apple in particular) always seemed to be about control. His lack of an open architecture for the Apple computer was a big turn off for me. I much preferred the openness of the IBM “PC” so my preferences went that way – along with a huge percentage of the marketplace. Bill Gates and Microsoft were instrumental in propagating the graphical user interface to the masses – both in business and consumers.

Bill Gates and Microsoft is what made Applied Flow Technology possible.

But that is not the only or even the main reason why I like Bill Gates’ more than Steve Jobs’. Microsoft was always open and supportive of outside innovators (as long as they did not compete with Microsoft – a subject for another day!).

Steve Jobs’ disdain for Bill Gates and Microsoft was based, I believe, on creativity. That Microsoft was not creative. And as far as that goes he was mostly right. Apple has been a more creative company than Microsoft.

However, Microsoft has been a more open company than Apple and that has allowed outsiders to achieve their own independent success.

Apple invented the PC but they lost their lead to IBM heritage PCs because of Apple’s closed system mentality. The PC and Microsoft achieved dominance because they were on an open platform, and Microsoft was further open by developing and providing tools to an army of independent software developers who built applications for the PC to run on their Windows operating system.

For the first time the world opened up to small companies (even one-person companies) who could cost-effectively leverage Microsoft’s efforts and tools to influence their own industries and build their own new companies. The software tools developed by these small companies allowed other small non-software companies to exist and thrive. There was and is a multiplier effect from Microsoft’s efforts that has allowed countless individuals and new companies to find success.

In parallel, Microsoft’s tools allowed large companies to collaborate at a level never possible previously. This provided numerous efficiencies in large companies that helped them become more capable and competitive.

I liked Steve Jobs because he made our lives more enjoyable. I like Bill Gates more because he has made our lives more successful.

Posted in From the President | 2 Comments

Integrating Component and Fitting Losses into a Single Pipe on the Workspace

Posted on January 31, 2012 by John Rockey

Many components, such as isolation valves, elbows, and adjacent area changes, do not need to be modeled graphically when a simple k factor will suffice. In these cases, the Fathom user can simplify and avoid unnecessary workspace clutter by integrating this data into a single pipe specification, using the Fittings & Losses tab.

Fathom has a built library of component loss data provided by Miller, Crane, and Idelchik. The Fathom user can quickly and easily pick from a database of components, enter the quantity, and click OK. It is important to note, however, that Fathom uses the size of the pipe to get the correct k factors, so the Fittings & Losses dialog will not be available until a pipe size is specified in the Pipe Model tab.

 

 

Posted in Tips and Tricks | Tagged | 2 Comments

Backup Files

Posted on December 29, 2011 by David Jackson

All AFT Products automatically generate backup files each time you save your model. Backup files will be saved to the same location you have saved your model file to. They will have the exact file name as your model, but rather than having the extension *.fth, *.aro, *.imp, etc., they will have the extension *.001, *.002, *.003, etc.

Every time you click save while working in your model, a new backup file will be created. If the maximum number of backup files already exists, the new backup file will overwrite the oldest backup file. The maximum number of backup files created can be set in the General Preferences window.

 

In order to use a backup file to open a previous version of your model, simply rename the model file by removing the *.001, *.002 and replacing that extension with the extension of the product you are using (Fathom = *.fth).

Posted in Tips and Tricks | Leave a comment

It’s the Economy Stupid. Or Is It?

Posted on December 28, 2011 by Trey Walters

A few months ago I attended a CEO forum in Colorado where a big topic on the minds of the 1000 CEOs in attendance was the state and direction of the US and global economy. The keynote speaker Brian Beaulieu began his presentation with this assessment of the economy from TIME magazine:

The U.S. economy remains almost comatose. The current slump already ranks as the longest period of sustained weakness since the Great Depression. Once-in-a-lifetime dislocations will take years to work out.

 Among them: the job drought, the debt hangover, the defense-industry contraction, the banking collapse, the real estate depression, the health-care cost explosion and the runaway federal deficit.

What was interesting was what was revealed next – the date when the above was written. It was from September, 1992!

The media – especially in the USA – is in the business of making every situation sound extremely ominous. If you are interested here is a link to Brian Beaulieu’s presentation.

An informal survey at the CEO forum (we were asked to show hands) indicated the vast majority had job openings. I have heard this over and over in recent months. Companies are hiring.

Are there people displaced by the current economic challenges? Yes, of course. The economy is a very dynamic thing. But the story is not so much about jobs destroyed but of jobs created. Jobs are always being destroyed. In the USA it is 15-17 million jobs destroyed every year – even in a healthy economy. When job growth occurs it is because more jobs are created than destroyed so there is net growth. Right now jobs are being created – just not enough to significantly offset those being destroyed.

A recent article by Exxon Mobil “Where the jobs are” discusses the huge potential in the USA to create new jobs in the energy sector. A recent article in BusinessWeek “Hope for American Manufacturing—and Maybe Jobs” discusses the rising wage scale in offshore manufacturing and how manufacturing jobs are returning to the USA. Things are not as bleak as the media continues to portray.

Many new companies are started during times of economic challenge. Applied Flow Technology was started during a recessionary time in 1993. We may not see the impact of some of these new startups for many years.

All of this is just a reminder – if we needed a reminder – to view the media’s presentation of the news with great skepticism.

Posted in From the President | Tagged , , | Leave a comment