User: unknown  ||   Login  ||  NEWS: Recordings, Evaluation, Photos, Lectures available, Leaflet
	WCFA'22-VFA Evaluation of the Workshop In order to get some feedback from the participants about the meeting and the lectures, we asked them to fill our questionnaires anonymously. They could select values in between the 1 (awful) to 10 (magnificient). The number of participants coming for the first day on Introduction to Fatigue (35 on-site and 23 on-line) was substantially lower than the number attending the other two days (53 on-site and 24 on-line) focused on the vibration fatigue itself. The overall statistic evaluations is provided here: The more detailed evaluation in individual evaluated sections can be analyzed here below. Note that the fonts in italics are comments of me (Jan Papuga) as the chairman and manager of the conference. Values stated: Average mark/Number of evaluations Day Lecturer: Lecture Slides Show Comprehensibility Gained knowledge Importance of the topic 1 M. Ružička: Basics in Fatigue 8.5/24 7.7/24 8.4/26 7.4/25 8.3/26 Comments: Nice introduction to the topic More forceful speech Czech English, good for refreshment English! English could be better :-) J. Papuga: Fatigue Life Estimates 9.2/23 9.0/23 9.2/25 8.6/25 9.1/25 Comments: Very interesting Microphone was not used for questions Faster! Be happy! M. Nesládek: Fracture Mechanics 8.7/22 7.7/22 8.3/24 8.1/24 7.9/24 Comments: Fracture mechanics is not my topic More forceful speech Important topic, but not too important for VFA Simply not important for our application and maybe not fitting to the workshop programme More charisma! J. Papuga: Advanced Topics 9.3/23 9.2/23 8.9/25 8.6/25 8.8/25 Comments: Good summary, superb overview Better than the first lecture!   Values stated: Average mark/Number of evaluations Day Lecturer: Lecture Slides Show Comprehensibility Gained knowledge Importance of the topic 2 J. Slavič: Signal Processing, Part 1 8.4/38 8.7/38 8.4/40 7.8/38 8.5/39 Comments: Printed slides are not useful, provided material very good Nice presentation and codes Superb presentation, awesome Python materials Plus: Free Py scripts Code inside presentation - advantage for future (home), disadvantage for the slide presentation Very good preparation to switch from TIME to FREQ. Very good comprehensibility even for this "non-popular" topic. More interaction! Too quiet! Not all concepts were explained A bit of difference between the presented slides and the ones available for downloading The presentation of fundamentals was an excellent reminder J. Slavič: Signal Processing, Part 2 8.4/38 8.7/38 8.5/40 7.8/38 8.5/39 Comments: Printed slides are not useful, provided material very good Nice presentation and codes Superb presentation, awesome Python materials Plus: Free Py scripts Code inside presentation - advantage for future (home), disadvantage for the slide presentation Very good preparation to switch from TIME to FREQ. Very good comprehensibility even for this "non-popular" topic. More interaction! Too quiet! A bit of difference between the presented slides and the ones available for downloading Excellent lecture D. Benasciutti: Uniaxial Vibration Fatigue Analysis - Part 1 9.2/38 9.3/38 9.2/40 8.5/38 9.1/39 Comments: Really good Great show Very good preparation to switch from TIME to FREQ. Maybe not necessary to spend so much time on time domain. Excellent teaching! Not all methods described in detail. Very good presentation D. Benasciutti: Uniaxial Vibration Fatigue Analysis - Part 2 9.2/38 9.3/38 9.0/40 8.6/38 9.2/39 Comments: Brilliant! Great show Importance of non-Gaussian / non-stationary loads Spend more time with non-Gaussian and non-stationary loadings Very good preparation to switch from TIME to FREQ. Excellent teaching! A little more time would be appreciated   Values stated: Average mark/Number of evaluations Day Lecturer: Lecture Slides Show Comprehensibility Gained knowledge Importance of the topic 3 F. Cianetti: Introduction to Dynamics 8.2/336 8.1/36 8.2/38 7.7/36 8.9/37 Comments: Printed slides of lower quality Really good presentation Very good presentation Linked to my daily work, refreshment of the equation knowledge Too many equations with unclear message or purpose. Confusing! I really loved this topic M. Palmieri: Dynamic Analysis of Randomly Excited Systems 8.4/36 8.8/36 8.8/38 8.4/36 8.9/37 Comments: Printed slides not conces. (?) Really good presentation Brilliant (TOP 1) Very interesting method to call stress PSD Confusing combination of slides and live lecture but when you focus just on lectures than OK. Many examples, maybe it should be more concentrated on modal approach! Not all in proceedings. I really loved this topic and presentation. Very useful applications Too fast for examples but the didactic material is very good A. Nieslony: Multiaxial Vibration Fatigue Analysis, Part 1 8.6/38 7.7/38 8.3/40 7.8/37 8.9/39 Comments: I was too exhausted "Fire" was missing Sometimes missed in lectures, maybe my fault of lack of knowledge, difficult topic More interaction! A. Nieslony: Multiaxial Vibration Fatigue Analysis, Part 2 8.5/36 7.7/36 8.3/38 7.9/35 8.9/37 Comments: I was too exhausted "Fire" was missing Sometimes missed in lectures, maybe my fault of lack of knowledge, difficult topic More interaction! I appreciated very much when professor explained with a Matlab code Any futher notes It's nice to have a possibility to meet and discuss with people about random vibration (something not readable), because normally it is not possible It was very interesting, thanks! I learned a lot Amazing rate of valuable input from all lecturers. Material that was provided by lecturers is very valuable Perhaps provide a time for each participant to introduce themselves. There were above 50 people in the lecture room, and even more on-line - I do not think we should go that way and remove 2 hours of the lectured content to let the participants introduce themselves. But it is true that also lecturers are quite curious who will come. I guess next time you will be asked to fill in some questionnaire so that the lecturers are aware of your background. Very good workshop and organisation. Congratulations! Is it possible to share the list of participants? I am aware it is forbidden, e.g., in Germany, and I do not want to trespass any law. We will not publish it. The workshop and the social evening are however managed to give you the chance to meet other people dealing with problems similar to yours, and they have the badge (at least the first day usually) including their affiliation - so it is only up to you to get into contact. Will be the additional slides shared? Some slides (introduction of people/topics) were not in printed papers. I asked all lecturers to provide me the latest version of their slides to me. I guess during one week after the workshop all files available for the download should be updated. It seemed to me that there is too much slides for a short time, but it was managed. For people travelling from far it would be better if the days before and after the workshop were working days. E.g. from Tuesday till Thursday. This is a good idea, indeed. It is however quite complicated to find dates which are not taken by some other major or local conference and in which the lecturers are available. BTW, another great idea/recommendation is to prepare the workshop in spring. From online we were able to follow the lectures pretty well. I am very happy to hear that - that was our first try and thanks to our great technician Tomáš Vávra from CTU it went very well. Conference very useful for my PhD and well performed, many interesting and stimulating things. Thanks for the big opportunity. More industry-related examples from your expertise can be explained. Few automobile and aviation industry examples of fatigue damage failures to be emphasized. Reduce time presentations and propose applications if it is possible. Indeed I agree to all 3 last comments, but I wonder how many companies would be happy to allow us to discuss these their peculiarities. Next recommended topics Non-linearities in fatigue, e.g. structures, materials,… non-linear FKM, LCF (3 similar proposals) Vibration fatigue (in 5 years - progress, cooperation, continue with topic) (2 similar proposals) We will definitely repeat the topic and maybe already in 3 years, when it will be 40 years from Turan Dirlik's PhD thesis. Evaluation of fatigue in contacts, fretting (2 proposals) Definition of the fatigue tests properties based on the field measurements (2 proposals) Experimental validation of numerical fatigue analysis (2 proposals) Join us in FABER, if you are interested in such a topic Fatigue of other materials than steel and aluminum alloys (2 proposals) Open-source fatigue… circumventing expensive tools If this interests you, join Janko's workshop: on open-source codes in mechanics Experimental tests focused on control of shaker(s) Variabilities of results (such as D_cr) (?) AI applications in fatigue Great idea, we'll think about that, but it seems to me more ready for a conference Thermal fatigue Acoustic fatigue High strength steel applications and fatigue properties including aftertreatment of the welds with High Frequency Mechanical Impact (HFMI) methods (other methods welcomed as well) Vibration fatigue of welded joints using FEA, treatment of welds. More from the practical view than from academic view. Examples of step-by-step problem solving in industry. See my comments in the previous section to the idea industry is that ready to announce its experience. New methods and trends in fatigue, real-time fatigue. I am getting too old, what is real-time fatigue? Well, my comments: Thanks for your inspiration. Every time, it is the most important to find the right lecturer. I guess that will slightly determine the selection of the topic. To all of you, who are really interested how this ends, I recommend you to join our mail list - see the brown bottom in the left column. Otherwise it is not guaranteed you will be informed early enough that there is something awesome getting ready again :-)! Meeting Organization The meeting itself was rated separately, and the results are provided here: Values stated: Average mark/Number of evaluations Information before meeting Mark: 9.2/39 Comments: * Materials could not be downloaded in Chrome/Edge (open in new page -> enter) This is something I commented during lectures - the issue probably concerns the setup of your browser and maybe also of your antivirus. If your browser tends to download everything as pdf file, change simply the file extension according to the description of the content (zip, xlsx,...). It should work. * Send workshop programme also via e-mail in PDF, so that we do not have to access website every time. You are right, the volume of informations that should be delivered to you before the workshop could be higher. * More feedback should be provided! After payment no information were sent. This is basically the same issue as above. My apology, this year were the preparations a bit overwhelming, and I am happy that only this relatively minor issue was reported by you at last. I will try to improve next time! * OK. Glad to see that, OK. * Some links went wrong. It would help me to know which, but I hope this was just in the start and now is all functional. Realization on-site, location Mark: 9.6/32 Comments: * Good job of working with hybrid online/offline system. I should repeat that - we saw the result of a perfect job done by our technician - Tomáš Vávra. I am glad he could be in our team. * Excellent! Excellent!!! * The smell of the toilet / Awful restroom. I must agree, this was AWFUL. It happened in this building already once, and it seems that the caretaker must be reminded of the service of his people. * Will be done. Room, equipment Mark: 8.7/32 Comments: * Lecture room should be ventilated much more often / Missing ventilation. Well, it was not missing, we even had a technician there to check that, but it simply switched on too late sometimes. This is the best room I can get at the faculty, the other larger halls are not available (except of June-September) and are much more expensive - when I start the preparation, it is risky to expect that price will repay. * Small tables and space for legs / I can imagine more place for 1 participant / Not very comfortable. As above * The chairs were uncomfortable / Hard sitting / Uncomfortable chairs / Uncomfortable seats. / Seats :(. This is something we should finally solve (unless we move elsewhere) and buy cushions for you next time. Remind me of that please! * Too cold on Tuesday morning. Well, you should feel the glass hall on Monday morning! The wise advise of some of your colleague to start on Tuesday is really worth it - this would not happen. And if we would start in June that's even better! * Printed study material would be better in colour. Indeed, but to organize it that way, when the accounting balance gets from red numbers only 4 weeks before we start, and one week before the workshop still quite many companies have not paid yet, is too risky. Take crayons next time. * Excellent! * OK Meals Mark: 9.7/33 Comments: Note again that maximum attainable was 10. To get such a mark from 33 votes is quite a nice result. * Tasty, but no sandwiches without lactose available. Well, you should blame yourself - you could write into the message your request during registration. We were aware in advance that there is one vegetarian, so why we do not know you are lactose-intolerant? * More croissants with hermelín (Brie-type cheese of the Czech provenience) :-) Well, it could happen I ate them instead of you because they were so tasty. Big sorry! * Too cold on Monday Indeed, see my response to one comment in the section above. * Coffee machine too slow. Our Italian lecturers claimed in addition this is no coffee at all. You see, still there is something to improve. I'll let the catering service know. * Excellent! * Sometimes have to hurry That's life! Social evening Mark: 9.8/23 Comments: :-) :-))) Geek evening, but with good beer! Interesting to see people discussing the topic and drawing sketches on tissues (serviettes)! :-) Social evening statistics To those, who took part in the social evening and the Light Hunter game there: Well, it says me, how mediocre in my response time I am - I had 36 in the first try, and my best attempt was 43. What I find interesting however is the fact that the starting attempts are quite nicely following the Gaussian distribution, but the best attempts do not. Or is that Gaussian curve so flat? There were some people who did not try their second (third, fourth...) chance, so that's potentially the reason for the bottom envelope. The lesson learnt: You should not try just once, there is every time a potential of getting better! Photo from the third day Click on the photo to get to the snapshot with a better resolution. papuga@pragtic.com, last update: December 29, 2022	EXTERN LINKS: