Nicheloom

Market intelligence for builders — see what's gaining traction before it's crowded.

Jacobi–IDE for Abaqus subroutine with analytical tests and AI diagnosis

Details

External ID
48620188
Source
HN
Company
—
Product
Jacobi–IDE for Abaqus subroutine with analytical tests and AI diagnosis
Website domain
netlify.app
Launched
June 21, 2026
Cohort
—
Upvotes
18
Upvotes percentile
0.73224043715847
Tags
—
Fetched at
Sept. 7, 2026, 9:26 p.m.
Updated at
Sept. 7, 2026, 9:26 p.m.

Description

I write Abaqus UMAT subroutines as a graduate student in computational mechanics. These are complex multi-physics simulation models using Abaqus Fortran subroutines (UMAT ~ mechanical behavior, UMATHT ~ heat/diffusion and a lot more) that simulate how different material systems fail under high temperature or manufacturing processes.However, the entire process has been quite challenging, 80-90% of time is actually spent on how make Abaqus CAE simulate a physics you already know on paper or what are the correct subroutines and variables you should use. Huge time is also spent on diving deep into the .sta .msg files to figure out and debug why a simulation failed. The software or current tooling (IDE ~ which is VS Code etc built for software engineering, not computational physics or mechanics) doesn't tell you why the simulation run into a segmentation error, or warn you when your damage variable being 1 (fully damaged) will lead to a zero division error. Silent mistakes or errors propagate through your simulation silently, and the physics is completely wrong (or worse, physics make sense, but wrong nonetheless). The documentation is terse and complex, haven't changed for a decade, offering basic linear elastic examples only.The entire way computational engineers approach their work is with a touch/sense of secrecy. Codes are hidden behind NDAs and various policies. Although, this makes sense from a national security standpoint. It slows down and stifle innovation in the field. Codes are not shared like the way software engineers do, repositories are private, .odb files are hidden, Less resources for tutorials on complex multi-physics simulations. This is why Dr. Fei Fei Li in her recent post on world models, identifying the "simulate" part of the world model taxonomy (the other two is a planner and a renderer) as the linchpin of a world model (read here https://x.com/drfeifei/status/2062247238143996275) with orders of magnitude of less available data available to effectively train world models.On occasions, engineers classify some of these problems as a "skill issue", which I believe is a wrong mindset to have. However, having prior experience building software and webapps, I know how important the tooling and community is to the entire software ecosystem (think open-source projects on Github, Modules/Packages you can easily pip install, and tutorials from legends like Karpathy and a lot more).With the Jacobi Physics IDE, I am building that tooling and ecosystem for physics simulation. Due to my current knowledge of Abaqus, that is what I start with. But eventually, following feedback and engagement from users, this will expand to cover multiple physics solvers out there (COMSOL, NASTRAN, LS-DYNA....I want to hear more from you guys in the comment) that enable users and researchers to write subroutines and user-defined material behavior for their own unique simulations.I will love to hear from you guys, download the IDE at https://jacobee.netlify.app/. Thanks.

Enrichment

Theme
technical learning and training platforms
Vertical
Manufacturing
Function
Dev tools
Audience
Developer
AI stance
AI feature
Project type
Commercial product
Normalized one-liner
ide for abaqus subroutine with ai diagnosis
Manually corrected
False

Could you build this?

No Building an IDE that verifies constitutive material models and computes analytical 6x6 material Jacobians against finite element solvers requires advanced graduate-level computational continuum mechanics expertise.

What it would actually take: The stack involves a desktop shell (e.g., Electron/Tauri) coupled to Fortran compilation toolchains, Python numerical solvers (NumPy/SciPy), and Abaqus FEA solver APIs. The hard part is implementing theoretical tensor calculus, constitutive equations for non-linear solid mechanics (elastic-plastic, creep, hyperelasticity), and analytical tangent stiffness tensor derivations (DDSDDE) verified via numerical perturbation, demanding specialized mechanical engineering and numerical mechanics PhD-level expertise.

Discussion

6 comments analyzed.

Competitors mentioned: VS Code extensions for Abaqus subroutines, Python FEM frameworks

Concerns raised: Fortran seen as outdated by current generation of engineers, Lack of ecosystem attention around computational simulation tools, Outdated/stale subroutine documentation (10-20+ years old), Private repositories and local .odb files limit sharing/collaboration

Feature requests: Better syntax highlighting for Abaqus subroutines, Ability to write custom tests in Fortran

Competitors

Other products that read as similar to this one — 39 launches clear the similarity bar, closest 8 shown.

Attention rank: #17 of 40 (itself plus its competitors, highest first — normalized so YC and Product Hunt are compared fairly).

Launched 220 days after the earliest competitor.

Other launches for this product

Same idea, different domain

Nobody's really built a dev tools tool for Sales yet.