About Us

Prototypes often perform well in controlled conditions but encounter challenges in real-world environments. When development teams reach technical impasses that require specialized expertise, that's where we come in.

The pattern: 

Ambitious project for a patent or enterprise contract. 12 months in: $200K+ in prototypes and  engineering time. Still stuck.

The problem: 

New technologies have to operate beyond material specs & machinery specs to achieve breakthrough performance. That means you're off the beaten path, and industry experience doesn't help. 

What's needed: 

First-principles analysis to understand why physics isn't cooperating. Theoretical calculations and technical deep-dives to get to the heart of the problem, rather than pattern matching.

What we do:

-Reverse-engineer the root cause (interaction effects between systems)

-Identify solutions with strengths/weaknesses

-Rebuild using theoretical models validated with high-end FEA

-Assess manufacturability, reliability, market position, and patentability

Timeline: 1-2 weeks for root cause analysis, 4-8 weeks for solution development

Organizations face critical technical decisions that benefit from independent validation:

Before Capital Commitment

Your board is considering $500K-$2M in R&D investment. They need independent validation: Will this actually work? What are the failure modes? What's the realistic timeline?

Development Project Stuck

$200K+ burned on prototypes and salaries. Engineering team is still stuck. Investors are asking hard questions. You need to identify why conventional approaches failed and develop validated solutions.

Patent Strategy & IP Protection

Creating patentable innovations requires understanding what's genuinely novel vs. obvious combinations. You need someone who can develop new embodiments, assess patent strength through workaround analysis, and create defensible IP positions.

Most "unsolvable" problems aren't single-domain—they're interaction effects between systems:

-Undersized castings aren't a cooling-rate problem... it's thin-walled mold flexing

-Bearing failures aren't lubrication issues... it's statically indeterminate systems creating uneven load distribution

-Mechanical cracking in metal 3D prints looks like delamination... but it's actually Type 2 & 3 crack propagation

Solving these requires working across multiple domains simultaneously:

- Structures and mechanical design

- Materials science and metallurgy

- Manufacturing processes

- Thermal analysis

- Patent strategy

Mix-and-matching across domains creates multiple paths to success.

Our founder brings 20 years of R&D experience across oil & gas, industrial equipment, elastomers & composites, and machinery design, with:

Five Granted Patents (100% Allowance Rate) + Two Pending

- Successfully prosecuted patents through USPTO

- Rebutted examiner rejections with technical arguments

Three Successful Product Turnarounds

- Brought in after original teams couldn't solve critical problems

- Products worth $1M-$5M each

Twenty Years First-Principles Problem Solving

- Deep expertise across multiple engineering domains

- Reverse-engineered problems to find theoretical reasons for failures

- Track record of solving open-ended problems with cascading effects

Successful Support of Investment Decisions

- Helped companies pass due-diligence reviews

- Secured government grants and investor funding

Reverse-Engineering in Secretive Industries

First-Principles Analysis, Not Pattern Matching

Industry experts rely on pattern matching from similar projects. For novel technical challenges that lack established precedents, first-principles analysis provides the path forward.

Our approach:

1. Theoretical calculations to understand fundamental physics

2. High-end FEA to validate theoretical models

3. Multi-domain analysis to identify interaction effects

4. Reverse-engineering to understand what competitors are doing

5. Patent analysis to identify novel approaches

Why Theoretical Calculations Matter

Most engineers rely too heavily on FEA simulations. FEA is a validation tool, but it won't find the performance window you're looking for.

If you want to do better than guess-and-check, you have to build theoretical models first.

This is a rare skill. Years of leading teams has shown us that complex theoretical calculations are something few engineers possess.

Organizations typically engage independent technical validation for:

✓ Strategic Capital Decisions - Technical assessment of feasibility & risk for R&D investments 

✓ Development projects that are stuck - Despite experienced teams, progress has stalled

✓ Board/investors that need confidence - Technical risk is threatening the investment

✓ Patent applications facing complex objections - Examiner rejections require sophisticated technical arguments

✓ Competitive analysis that requires deep assessment - Understanding what competitors are actually doing, not just what they claim

✓ Upgrading for enterprise customers - Developing highly-advanced features to reach high-end market segments

✓ Series A at risk - Need to prove technical feasibility to close funding round

We structure projects in phases, each with a clear go/no-go decision point. 

You're never locked in—if we determine there's no viable path forward, we tell you immediately and you stop investing.

Phase 1: Technical Assessment (2-3 days)

Phase 2: Functional Concept (2-3 weeks)

Phase 3: Working Product (6-10 weeks)

Click below to see details. 

We have technical white papers that demonstrate our expertise in advanced engineering concepts.

View our design demonstrators that showcase some of our ideas. 

Reach out if you want an in-depth white paper that demonstrates our methodology. 

We have pre-made solutions that can be adapted to your application.

Click below to see more.