One real problem — a sensor mounting bracket that has to hold a 20 kg sensor on a 250 mm arm — taken from a blank brief to a signed-off, documented design. Every number below is computed live by the same engines in the app; nothing here is a mock-up.
Mitigation: Reserve schedule float for a section resize; run FEA early on the driving load case.
Mitigation: Order stock and book machine time at DFM sign-off, before the prototype phase.
Mitigation: Run the stack-up before releasing drawings; apply GD&T only where function needs it.
A safety factor of 1.63 is defensible for a static, well-characterised load, but thin for real service or any fatigue.
→ For margin, take the height to 11.37 mm. If the load is truly static and known, 1.63 may be accepted with justification.
Tip deflection is 3.99 mm — that is span/63, past the common span/180 limit. The part may pass on strength yet feel flimsy or misalign mating features.
→ Deflection scales with h³, so it governs here. A section height of 11.37 mm brings the tip inside the span/180 limit (and comfortably clears strength). Alternatively, shorten the span or add a support.
Take the section height to 11.37 mm and the safety factor climbs from 1.63 to 3.30, with tip deflection dropping to 1.39 mm.
Views, dimension lines, centre marks, the grouped 5 HOLES ⌀16 callout, hole schedule and title block are all generated from the geometry — change the part and the drawing re-dimensions itself. It cannot drift out of sync with the model the way a hand-drafted sheet does.
ENGINEERING DESIGN PACKAGE — Sensor Mounting Bracket
Generated by MyIngenieur · plan → design → review, end to end
1 PROJECT PLAN
Discipline Mechanical (course project)
Timeline 17 working days across 6 phases
Critical path 10 tasks
Top risk FEA reveals inadequate safety factor
2 DESIGN (as first drawn)
Material Steel (A36)
Section 30.00 mm × 8.00 mm, 0.250 m arm
Load 196 N (20 kg sensor)
Max stress 153.1 MPa
Tip deflection 3.99 mm
Safety factor 1.63
3 REVIEW — FAIL
1. [MEDIUM] Safety factor is below the usual design target of 2
→ For margin, take the height to 11.37 mm. If the load is truly static and known, 1.63 may be accepted with justification.
2. [HIGH] Tip deflection exceeds the serviceability limit
→ Deflection scales with h³, so it governs here. A section height of 11.37 mm brings the tip inside the span/180 limit (and comfortably clears strength). Alternatively, shorten the span or add a support.
4 RESOLUTION
Advisor fix section height → 11.37 mm
New safety factor 3.30
New deflection 1.39 mm
Method: Euler-Bernoulli bending (I = b·h³/12, σ = 6PL/bh², δ = PL³/3EI) + Critical Path Method.
Verify against project design standards before release.No spreadsheets, no hand calcs, no context-switching between five tools. Every number on this page was computed by the same verified engines you get inside the app.