Pavel Samuta
Systems Architect | Engineering Risk Consultant | Mechanical Engineer (R&D, production) for B2B/B2G projects — value > $2B
I've spent years as a production engineer watching companies lose thousands — sometimes millions — not because of bad suppliers, but because they didn't know what questions to ask.
Procurement managers, project leads, even business owners make decisions based on price, lead times, and promises. But technical specs hide risks in materials, coatings, tolerances. Without engineering insight, "savings" become losses: scrap, downtime, rework.
I love automating repetitive tasks. As an engineer, you get blueprints, specs, part photos from China, Germany, Turkey — in Chinese, English, DIN, GOST, ISO. Translating standards, finding material equivalents, checking tolerances eats hours.
Recently I built ENGINEERINGVISION for myself — a "digital engineer" that dissects blueprints, equipment photos, complex technical scenes. Not a commercial product yet, just my personal tool. But maybe useful to others — so here's how it works.
ENGINEERINGVISION: From Manual Grind to Instant Analysis
Used to be: 1-2 hours per blueprint/KP manually — hunting material analogs, cross-checking standards, comparing quotes.
Now: 5-10 minutes to actionable report.
What it does:
Upload anything: Blueprint, part photo, schematic, even 3D scene → extracts geometry (sizes, radii, angles), materials (with cross-standard analogs), coatings, tolerances, surface finish, critical zones.
Pick analysis protocol: Materials check, geometry validation, coatings compliance, standards match.
Get report: Highlights risks, recommendations, exact questions for suppliers.
100+ languages: Chinese spec? Translates technical terms, material codes, standards.
All major standards: ISO, ASME, BS, DIN, JIS, GOST/ESKD, GB. German DIN drawing? Auto-matches your GOST equivalents.
One-Page Solution: Blueprint + KP → Ready-to-Use Report
Not consulting. Not training. One page you use immediately.
Send blueprint (PDF/DWG) or commercial proposal → get report for ordering.
Part: MTB12.000 Pipe
Application: TB line, 1000+ pcs batch
Batch weight: 50kg
Material: 08ps steel (GOST 1050-2013)
Equivalents: St12, 1.0330, HR2, Q195 (demand weldability MTC!)
Weld zone: NO coating (verify MTC)
Critical specs:
Coating: ISO 11408 black oxide (NOT zinc!)
Tolerances: H14/h14, ISO 2768-mK
Ra: 3.2 internal, 8.0 external
Checks required:
Weld QC photo BEFORE coating
Sample approval (3 pcs)
EN 10204/3.1 certificate
RFQ templates (copy-paste):
RU: "MTC EN 10204/3.1 req, weld zone free of coating"
EN: "MTC EN 10204/3.1 required, welding zone free of coating"
CN: "要求EN 10204/3.1材质证书，焊接区无涂层"
Savings:
China Q195: -15-20% price (+5% QC cost)
EXW+sea: -12% vs DAP express
Recommendation: Supplier B (EXW 15 days) if >30 days needed, else A (DAP)
Total savings: €1.2k per 1000 pcs batch
Why You Need This
Scenario: Ordering production parts. Quote says "stainless steel." Sounds solid. But which alloy? Weld-compatible? What if supplier slips cheap substitute that rusts in 6 months?
Without engineering eyes, you learn too late.
My service delivers:
Exact materials for your use case (+ safe cost-cut options)
Must-ask supplier checks (certificates, QC photos, samples)
Perfect RFQ wording to get what you need
True cost comparison (price + logistics + risks + lead time)
Like having a veteran engineer vet every quote in 5 minutes — no salary, no vacation.
Who Benefits
If you've faced any of these, this is for you:
Comparing supplier quotes, unsure which wins
Dealing with China/Turkey/EU suppliers, fear of getting scammed
Procuring parts/materials, need quality confidence
Non-engineer making shop-floor decisions
Want savings through smart choice, not corner-cutting
Client quote: "Thought I was saving picking cheapest supplier. Actually lost 3x more on scrap/downtime." After analysis, saved 28% on next batch — knew where to cut, where not.
How It Helps Me
Time: 1-2hr blueprint → 5-10min
Risk: Never miss criticals — auto-flagged
Negotiations: Pre-armed with exact questions
Confidence: Nothing slips on materials/tolerances/coatings
Why Not Monetized Yet?
Personal tool for now. Holding off because:
Unsure exact audience (engineers? procurement with tech background?)
Format unclear (mobile app? Part of full KP analysis service?)
Needs polish for broad use — simpler, more universal
How It Works
Send blueprint/KP (PDF, photo, AutoCAD export)
I analyze: materials, tech requirements, logistics, risks
Get one-page report — decision-ready, no fluff
Use it: pick best quote, clarify with supplier, revise order
Currently just my tool + occasional colleague demos. Might evolve into full KP analysis service — or stay personal.
Ideas welcome! How to evolve/apply? Open to discussion.
Test it: Engineers, procurement, tech-curious — send any blueprint/part photo. I'll run ENGINEERINGVISION, show results.
Real Case: "Steel 08" Pipe for Chemical Plant
Quote said: "Steel 08" — seemed straightforward.
Reality: Multiple 08 grades; not all fit aggressive environments
Risk: Wrong alloy = pipes rust in months
Solution: Specified GOST 1050-2013 08kp, warned vs cheap China analogs sans certs
Saved: €12k (replacement batch + downtime avoided)
Standard One-Page Report Contents
Part summary: Purpose, weight, key parameters
Materials + analogs: Equivalents + weldability notes
Critical requirements: Coatings, no-coat zones, Ra, tolerances
Risks + checks: Supplier must-provide (MTC, QC-photos, samples)
RFQ wording: RU/EN/CN ready-to-send
Savings spots: Cost reduction without quality loss
Quote comparison: Supplier A vs B (price/delivery/terms)
Part example: MTB12.000 Pipe — Steel 08 (GOST 1050-2013); analogs St12/RRSt3/1.0330/etc. Coating: ISO 11408 chem black oxide; weld zone bare. Tolerances H14/h14, ISO 2768-mK, Ra 3.2/8.0. Quick facts: 1000pcs=50kg; China analogs -15-20% but demand weld certs.
Supplier compare (no names):
A: Lower unit but DAP express; total DAP higher for rush; 30-35d LT
B: Higher EXW unit, sea DAP much lower; 15d EXW LT
Pick: Speed-critical = transparent DAP; time-flexible = EXW+sea, request DAP calc
Service Packages
Free Trial — 1-page review of one blueprint/KP — Free.
Standard — Report + RFQ templates (RU/EN/CN) — €49 each.
Pro — Report + up to 3 KP compare (EXW/DAP calc) + best/base/worst — €199/order.
Enterprise — Pro + detailed batch cost (materials/waste/energy/labor/QC/packing) + priority — €799+ (volume-based).
Add-ons — QC photo check, sample approval prep, engineer verification — €5–€199/task.
Format & Timelines
Free Trial: 24h post blueprint/KP receipt.
Standard: 24–48h.
Pro: 48–72h.
Enterprise: 3–7 business days (depth-dependent).
Better Than Hiring an Engineer?
Shorthand hire?
Expensive (€2k+/mo salary)
Slow (recruit/train/onboard)
Spotty (misses your production specifics)
My service:
Fast: Report in 24-48h
Cheap: €49+ per analysis (first free)
Reliable: 18yr engineer vetting each
Pay-per-use: Results only, no commitments
What Your Report Answers
One page covers:
What part?
Right material?
Watch for what?
KP hidden risks?
Perfect supplier questions?
Safe savings?
A or B supplier?
Flange example ("stainless steel" KP):
Exact: AISI 304 (=08Х18Н10)
Analogs: AISI 316 (harsh env), 430 (cheaper/less durable)
Risk: "China often swaps 304→201 — demand chem cert!"
Save: "No acids? 430 saves 15%, same life"
Get Started
DM me + send blueprint/KP.
Free review in 24h.
Assess — order expanded if fits.
Zero commitment. Test on your case.
Why I Do This
18yr engineer. Seen companies bleed cash on tiny misses: wrong material, processing, coating. Often not procurement's fault — just lacks tech to ask right questions.
Not selling consulting. Delivering instant-use solution.
Want to stop procurement losses? Start with one blueprint. Send it — I'll show how.
P.S. Client after first report: "Didn't know how much I didn't know. Now see why we had scrap issues." Don't repeat — audit your buys before losses hit.
What Features Next?
Still shaping this. Your input matters:
Auto-RFQ generation from blueprint?
Procurement system integration (1C, SAP)?
Handwritten note recognition?
3D analysis (STEP/IGES)?
Other?
Comment/DM — need to know what users actually want.
Top comments (0)