Best Marine Design Software for Hull Modeling? (2008-09)

[Admin]

Continued from http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/showthread.php?t=15678

Which hull modeling programs do you use as your primary hull design software?

Autoship (Autoship Systems Corporation) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=3)

DefCar (DefCar Engineering) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=26)

Delftship (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=7414)

Fastship (Proteus Engineering) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=22)

HullCAO (HullCAO) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=2933)

Hull Form (Blue Peter Marine Systems) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=21)

Maxsurf (Formation Design Systems) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=4)

MultiSurf (Aerohydro) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=19)

Prolines (Vacanti Yacht Design) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=142)

ProSurf (New Wave Systems) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=20)

Rhino (Robert McNeel & Assoc.) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=294)

Naval Designer (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=4460) (US Sales by Forum Marine (http://www.forummarine.com/id17.htm))

SeaSolution (SeaSolution) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=3568)

TouchCAD (Lundström Design) (http://boatdesign.net/cgi-bin/bdn/jump.pl?ID=3901)

[Ahmed Wahab]

Rhino
I prefer rhino !!! Although it's not only for hull modeling,It's a great tool.
You need a lot of marine design background that you can use it perfectly.
Even I have the older version(3) and I expect that the newer version is even better,Still version .3 is sufficient for my use.
Ahmed

[Leo Lazauskas]

I use my own software, Michlet, Flotilla, and an extended version of the Gnu Scientific Library.

[pavel915]

Ofcource Rhino;
East or west; Rhino is the best;

[marshmat]

Rhino & Freeship (which got my vote in the cheap/free poll). Plus Michlet of course. I'd love to get my hands on some of Leo's mystery software.....

[Leo Lazauskas]

Plus Michlet of course. I'd love to get my hands on some of Leo's mystery software.....

It's easy to get it. I'm looking for a full-time job, so the first to employ me for decent wages and conditions gets my code as well. :)

[lazeyjack]

It's easy to get it. I'm looking for a full-time job, so the first to employ me for decent wages and conditions gets my code as well. :)

My Dear Boy
I can offer a whole cabbage

[masalai]

Freeship-Plus 2.9 - - when I can get it to work again after a re-install of system, OS and everything else, - cause I am cheap and a rank amateur...

and PLEASE someone in the Linux field employ Leo as I would love to use it in Linux as a native application...

[Leo Lazauskas]

and PLEASE someone in the Linux field employ Leo as I would love to use it in Linux as a native application...

lol. Sorry, I think you misunderstood me. If (by some complete accident of nature) somebody employs me then they can also have my hydro codes to use. It doesn't mean that I will suddenly release all I have into the public domain.

[masalai]

Linux stuff does not have to be "free and openly published" there is quite a bit that is sold commercially - I believe the Shrek series of movies were made using Linux... as the platform for the rendering engine.

[rocknrule]

There are 3 not even listed that are way, way ahead of the rest.
PTC CADDS 5
UGS NX
Catia

[masalai]

rocknrule are they solely Multiple Sclerosis or will they run on a proper OS like UNIX or the poor mans version Linux?

[Protosys]

as anyone tried this one?
Delcam PowerShape.
http://www.powershape.com/
is as a free version Powershape-E with some limitations.

[rocknrule]

I've seen it in customers engineering departments but it really more like Solidworks, that is, it's not that good for surface development and probably near useless for hull shapes.

If money is an issue and you can do your own analysis outside of the design application you should try Pilot3D.

But for serious design good tools cost money - free tools basically waste your time (and your customers).

[Protosys]

Powershape is a full 3d surface modeler. it also have solids. it as an automatic surface module that works really nice. many italian boat designers use it. trust me, its not cheap. near catia price

[CGN]

Powershape??...i tried the free version nothing but crashes, memory hog and feels like is not finished or polished, reminds me of ashlar vellum.

If the cost is close to catia does not means is good IMO it's almost as stealing :)

[Protosys]

hi CGN,
i am not saying its the best software ever. but i work with it almost for 5 years and i think is far best that most in the list above. example: to make fillets in a complex hull for CNC machinning i take about 15 min. in rhino or most softwares its a matter of days... but i must aggree that its not the most stable platform in the world :)

[Guest625101138]

I use Godzilla for underwater hull generation to specified constraints; Michlet for performance determination; Delftship/Freeship for hull rendering and hydrostatic calculations.

I also make use of Excel for more flexible transfer and manipulation of data.

I have found a very useful little program for viewing different 3D formats called PS-Exchange. The software allows me to view different file formats and a pay-for-use conversion to another format.

Rick W.

[PI Design]

We're about to start using Paramarine.

[CGN]

Rick, how much they charge for translation of a file?

What files you translate?

[Protosys]

this are the files Ps exchange can translate from-to:

ACIS
AutoCAD
CATIA
Cimatron
Cimatron Elite
DGK
DMT
I-DEAS
IGES
Inventor
Parasolid
PowerShape Parts
PDF
Pro/Engineer
Rhino
SolidEdge
SolidWorks
STEP
STL
U3D
Unigraphics
VDA-FS

the price is 50€ per translation. if you are interested please let me know.

[CGN]

Thanks i was asking rick because maybe Viacad can work for him for 100us it can read and translate most of the neutral files

[masalai]

The apps rick uses are open source or freeware - I have them too...

[CGN]

No the PS-Exchange, you can install it and use it as a viewer but when you need to translate a file then you need to pay, all i was suggesting is that for neutral formats (read-modify-write) viacad can be an alternative instead of paying for translation Viacad cost about 100 bucks and does the job.

[masalai]

Ahhh so... Thanks, that was understood.

[Guest625101138]

Rick, how much they charge for translation of a file?

What files you translate?

The download is free and this allows you to view the files and print images from the screen dump. I have not yet needed to convert a file. You can set up an account on the web.

It handles about 20 different formats. I have found a couple that it does not look at but it does most of the common CAD formats.

Rick

[nautique210]

so why no Alias users? I find it so much better for surfaces and visualization than Rhino, but it seems to be so popular here.

[CGN]

I will guess mainly because the cost and is quite prohibitive among user in the forum, I know is good with surfacing and visualizations but i don't think it has all the tools and specific plug ins that may attract users to switch to Alias also IMO seems like a memory hog compared with Rhino and another reason may be that the interface is similar to AutoCad and i know for my experience was very easy to start using it (rhino)

Not a bad product at all but IMO rhino is "leaner" and easier to learn for newbies, and in regard of visualization i don't think it matters that much, all you need your renderings are to sell the idea and/or present a concept,

For general ideas "in the fly" like "how do you like this arrangement?" why would you waste the client time and specially money presenting elaborated rendering for simple concepts that all they need is an screen capture of a 3D mock up, I mean it will be nice to have it all in one click but is not happening like that in an affordable way.

[nautique210]

hey, i agree totally with what you say. just with the visualization, i mean in creating a higher quality surface and associated tools to help achieve that, all long after the concept is finalized.

[3dyachts]

Sorry, but since the question concerns "hull design software", I think it should mention Fastship (or Fastyacht), which is not part of Rhino but of Rhino Marine bundle.
Rhino is not - and not intended as - a hull design software per se, although using the same NURBS as Fastship/ yacht, since it lacks the basic hydrostatic calculations. Moreover, Fastship/ yacht will ensure more fair shape than Rhino, the control points system being different.
So, sorry floks: I cannot vote...!

[masalai]

3dyachts, go here to download http://freeship-plus.pisem.su/indexEN.html - - - from there, click on <Support> then <Downloads> to get a page with lots of download options... I use Release version FREE!ship Plus : 2.9+
File Size: 3,9 MB
Release Date: March 22, 2008

For Freeship 2.6, which seems popular, it may be available as a free offering from the "DelftShip" site.... else do a search of this forum....

Have fun....

[3dyachts]

Hi Malasai,

Thanks for the attention and the link, but we already use a few hi-end hull design softwares.

I have known Freeship since its beginning, but it is not an industry standard. Very good for students though, as a free approach to other 3D design softwares. Delftship, in the other hand, is becoming rapidly very popular, and a few yards are already using it.

But then: did I miss that Fastship was actually in this llist or did it just appear???...well: I may need new specticles ...!!! Then, Fastship would have my preference: practically unlimited, rather cheap, doing very fair surfaces but also capable of any complexity, easy to learn, and natively interfaced with one of the best VPPs. I would not recommend Fastyacht though, who has too many limitations.

[masalai]

Ahhhh, sorry, my erratic speed reading? - - thought it may have been a typo, but now I look different package altogether....

Pity that the products do not have links embedded.... I am just a hobbyist, and apart from getting the concept outline - the rest is for the professionals, as is the build when I am sorted/ready....

[rteng97]

Basically any softwares that handle Nurbs well can be used for hull design. Just my 2 cents for a few softwares that I have used.

Fastship: give you basical hull modeling tools. but it doesn't have many commands to handle Nurbs. The Brep defintion (if you can a brep in fastship) is very primitive. Good for small yards. Please note that proteus engineering is sold to Alian, and all the key guys for developing fastship are fired (no idea why, maybe too expensive, my wild guess), so future support may be an issues. You can forget the future enhancement of this product.

Cadds5: is already dead, few support from India site. Nurbs functions are the best in my opinion, the kernel functions are better than ACIS or ParaSolid. But it is very clumsy to use, I think it is still an Unix baby. So hardware is also an issue. Some customers have used for modeling hulls, but not many as Cadds5 is not intented to be used for hull design, you certainly can use Nurbs tools in Cadds5 to do hull design. Supports? you must be very patient.

Catia, I have never heard or seen anyone using CATIA for hull surface. But they have more money than God has, so Catia will be the dominant player for sure. They have worked with USA navy for ship design, now they want buy FE softwares.

Rhino3D, it is very good tool to design small things. The geometric kernels are not good. E.g, if you create a deck that 20 meter long and touch a bulkhead, now you want to move the bulkhead (5 meter high, a normal frigate size) 7mm (plate thickness) forward, so you have to trim the deck for 7mm. Please note that the deck is not totally planar surface. Most of time, rhino3d can't do it (v4).

[CGN]

"Rhino3D, it is very good tool to design small things. The geometric kernels are not good. E.g, if you create a deck that 20 meter long and touch a bulkhead, now you want to move the bulkhead (5 meter high, a normal frigate size) 7mm (plate thickness) forward, so you have to trim the deck for 7mm. Please note that the deck is not totally planar surface. Most of time, rhino3d can't do it (v4)"

trim won't work if the trimming/boundary object does not crosses or intersect all over the length of the other surface. that's in all softwares (only if the software automatically extends the boundary of the trimming).

[rteng97]

"trim won't work if the trimming/boundary object does not crosses or intersect all over the length of the other surface. that's in all softwares (only if the software automatically extends the boundary of the trimming)." I am sure the objects intersect each others.

[CGN]

interesting, can you upload the copy of the file just the deck and the bhd?

[rteng97]

I wish I could help you, but all the data related with the project are classified.
I am really sorry about this, but the problem really give me a lot of headache, Instead of using 7mm, I have to use 10mm, then it works. I guess that the 7mm or 5mm is too small for Rhino3d. I think you can cut any hull surface with such small steps to repeat the problems. It is quite possible that our hull surface (created from a contract company) is not good modeled, but Once you start the structure modeling, hull surface is freezed, normally you can't updated the hull surface any more.

[CGN]

That's was my guess i find such problem sometimes and i usually export the surface to a Nurb file "flavor" and re import the surface but for what i have seen has more to do with the imported surfaces than rhino, not that rhino is prefect Rhino V3 -4 are a brand new code (Rhino V2 is used to be different core) are you working on the new Ice breaker? are you in Victoria?

[3dyachts]

QUOTE=rteng97
Basically any softwares that handle Nurbs well can be used for hull design. Just my 2 cents for a few softwares that I have used.
If you don't mind my other two cents: When you say "can be used", you are right...but that no-way means that it will be good at it.

Fastship: give you basical hull modeling tools. but it doesn't have many commands to handle Nurbs. The Brep defintion (if you can a brep in fastship) is very primitive. Good for small yards. Please note that proteus engineering is sold to Alian, and all the key guys for developing fastship are fired (no idea why, maybe too expensive, my wild guess), so future support may be an issues. You can forget the future enhancement of this product.
You can B-rep in fastship V6....but I agree it does not do it well, to say the least! In the other hand, what is does very well, unlike what you say, is NURBS modeling: I do not have it anymore in my library, but I did as a test, years ago (with Fastship 5 at the time) a very highly detailed face, with eyelids and lips. Hundreds of controls! It is not designed for that will you say - sure - but for hulls, and that where it excels and is why it has been used by major yards (Keppel Singapore being one: supertankers: no baby yard nor baby ships) until recent years where other more capable softwares are now preferred....but this thread is for cheap ones, isn't it? And Rhino Marine bundle that comes with Fastship is hard to beat price-wise!

Cadds5: is already dead, few support from India site. Nurbs functions are the best in my opinion, the kernel functions are better than ACIS or ParaSolid. But it is very clumsy to use, I think it is still an Unix baby. So hardware is also an issue. Some customers have used for modeling hulls, but not many as Cadds5 is not intented to be used for hull design, you certainly can use Nurbs tools in Cadds5 to do hull design. Supports? you must be very patient.
agreed: forget it!

Catia, I have never heard or seen anyone using CATIA for hull surface. But they have more money than God has, so Catia will be the dominant player for sure. They have worked with USA navy for ship design, now they want buy FE softwares.
Catia is capable of hull design although it was not designed for that. As well, if we are talking about "cheap"....hum: 2.000$/ month/ station is no way cheap! In what seems to be your trade (CAM), combinations like Catia/ Solidworks (all Dassault Systems), or also Multisurf (excellent hull design!), or also Shipconstructor are the right choice....but it all costs quite some!!!

Rhino3D, it is very good tool to design small things. The geometric kernels are not good. E.g, if you create a deck that 20 meter long and touch a bulkhead, now you want to move the bulkhead (5 meter high, a normal frigate size) 7mm (plate thickness) forward, so you have to trim the deck for 7mm. Please note that the deck is not totally planar surface. Most of time, rhino3d can't do it (v4).
I am afraid that your description is not very clear, or I misunderstand it, but anyway Rhino can offset (if that is what you are talking about) a large non-flat surface like your deck (>20m) by 7mm -or less, and extend or trim a bulkhead to it. You can even make this bulkhead a "solid" of whatever thickness and have it's edge following the inner side of the hull and deck...if you really need that! Then, I would say that Rhino is anyway not the best tool for structure design aimed at CAM either, and the here-above mentioned (expensive) softwares better suited. Rhino is specially unable to flatten a curved surface accurately (for CAM) nor do a....fair hull design of any complexity or strict geometry, which is actually the subject of this thread

Well, it all depends of what you need: there is not one suit that fits all!!!

[CGN]

Without sounding like a fanboy (I'm still using Rhino V2) rhino has proven that can do any type of complex surfacing (yes i understand all that "A" class surfacing that rhino can't handle) and is used for CAM years ago there was an idea that rhino was not able to handle or being useful for some of what you are mentioned but it has proved how usefull and complete it is, there are a lot of companies using rhino to Mill 3D for the marine industry, yes rhino is not the best, the best depends on what budget you have so you can maximize your inversion but there is no doubt rhino is capable of play with the high end software (in some areas) lot's has to do with the user and how you model 3D many hulls has been designed with rhino

I will speculate that Shipcam or Shipconstructor "pulled" his plug in for plate developing from rhino becouse rhino was runing over shipcam sales again not because it was the best but i guess becouse the results and cost was probably better than invest on shipcam.

And you are right there is not one that fits all

[rteng97]

I use rhino3d a lot. I made a mistake that I went into specific details as this is not this thread intends do go.

To be fair, Rhino3d is the best for the price you have paid. But I don't think Rhino3d use ACIS or Parasolid as geom. kernel, normally high end product nowdays alway use one of them as Geom. Kernel, company like Intergraph, it has geom. kernel, but it still use ACIS as geom. kernel for their SmartMarine ( or Intelliship). In this respect, I suspect that Rhino3d geom. kernel may not be strong. But if Rhino3d use ACIS or Parasolid, then price will be totally different.

The problem with model is that the user will focus what you can't do. When you use Rhino to create model, everything is fine except a bulkhead can't be created, you will get big troubles. You will spend a lot of time to correct that.

ShipCam or ShipConstructor is different thing. I will write more about what my impression when I got time. They stop support plate developing function for Rhino v4. But solid3dtech can fill the gap. Solid3dtech also works on AutoCAD, so you can develop any surfaces based on AutoCAD, even surface with double curvatures. It works fine for us.

By the way, I am in East Canada, the best place on earth to live.

[CGN]

The best place to live on earth is somewhere in a warm place :)

Do you work for fleetway? I have good friends working there, thanks for the Solid3DTech tip i'll have a look at it have you used it a lot?

[rteng97]

The best place to live on earth is somewhere in a warm place :)

Do you work for fleetway? I have good friends working there, thanks for the Solid3DTech tip i'll have a look at it have you used it a lot?

Warm place, ok, I agree. but not so many rain, right? With global warming, Halifax will be vancouver soon.

No, not fleetway. That reminds me the tribon, fleetway use tribon. Actually the no. 1 software used is tribon, Aver has bought tribon, not sure what happens to them.

Another good one is Naba from Finland, I have heard that they are very good, but I never used it.

As to Solid3dTech, I think it is a startup, they just put their product into download.com not long ago. We use it, it works fine for far. Good thing about small fish is that you can ask for something, they respond you very fast.

[shellexpansion]

"Another good one is Naba from Finland, I have heard that they are very good, but I never used it."

here is a typo. It is NAPA.

[Felix Muehlhoff]

I am using Unigraphics NX (Siemens) since 6 years for all my work. Hulldesign, detailed fairing of hull and superstructure, construction, piping, expansions, profile lists and cutting pieces. Also FEM and CFD is possible. NX has a special modul for shipdesign and an interface to Modelmaker from Autoship for stability calculations.
Before I used Rhino, ACAD, Mastership, Fastship etc.
No I have one system for all my work. No problems with translating data, no problems with changing design because NX is fully assoziativ from surface model to cutting pieces, no problem with complex, large models.
A lot of shipyards in Germany and the Netherlands are using NX.

[shellexpansion]

NX is really a high end product, the other one is catia. Too expensive for boat design. Intergraph want to chip in with smartMarine (used to be intelliship). I have never used UG products, so my opinion may not be correct. However, from my own experience and my involvment with so many projects related with ship design software, I could not find any single solution that can solve all the problems. UK builds nuke sub with CADD5 (Astute project), a lot of delays and complains, but CADDS5 was still the best at that time, even now they are still using it. It is 8B pounds project! Later on, HHI (Korea) tried to build a complete ship design software based on CADDS5 or (pro/E), and failed. Now they are working with Tribon, still going on. Intergraph had US navy projects (by beating Computerversion CADDS5), failed. I can write a long list. They are all high ends and not much related with us. Sorry so long off the topic.

As to this thread, I think Rhino is the best, even the high end product like smartMarine from Intergraph normally use hull generated by Rhino. I use rhino a lot and I think it is great one for hull design.

[daiquiri]

Felix, what can you tell me abut the rendering capabilities of NX? Plus, do you perhaps use NX Shape Studio module and (if you do) what do you think about it?

[rocknrule]

I still think NX and Catia are the best - very expensive upfront. But ultimately the project is easier to manage. There is a high price for quick and cheap!!!

[usrowboy]

I am total novice when it comes to 3d software. I know boats though and can loft on a drafting table; even built a few strip planked canoes and a whitehall.
I have worked with Corel 11 in conjunction with my laser ( a hobby for trophies and engraving and such).
I'd like to make a model of the kit ocean rowboat that I used in the 2001 Atlantic rowing race. It was cut from marine ply using a laser and assembled to some pretty close tolerances. I can't find out what software they used to design the boat though.
I've tried reproducing it with Corel in 2D but I can only go so far with the 60 or so parts that make up the frame. When it comes to making the skin fit, forget it. It just won't work. Adjusting one small detail leads to adjusting quite a few other parts.
Is there something that I can buy and learn on my own that would enable me to "fit" these assorted parts together and make a fair hull?
I looked at SolidWorks and they promised the world, but at $7k and up, it's got way more features than I 'd ever need.
Thanks for your help and input up front.
Feel free to email me directly about this.
usrowboy@nj.rr.com
rowboy

[Felix Muehlhoff]

Felix, what can you tell me abut the rendering capabilities of NX? Plus, do you perhaps use NX Shape Studio module and (if you do) what do you think about it?

Yes I'm using the shape studio module first of all for hull design and fairing of superyachts, inland waterway vessels (very complex shapes) and other ships . I have never seen a better software for this kind of work (I think Catia the same) . It is quick and easy to become a production ready faired lines plan with all building details in it. It is assoziativ and parametrical so variations or changes in shape are very easy.
Also I'm using shape studio for the design of superstructures of superyachts.
The render module of NX comes from LightWorks. Go to the website of lightworks (www.lightworks-user.com) to see examples. I'm using this module in early phase of project. It is easy to use and very fast while rendering and the quality of pictures are excelent.

Felix

[shellexpansion]

Looks like there are a lot of guys loving NX (or UG). Maybe someone can answer the follwoing questions how far you can go with UG. To my best knowledge about NX, it is similiar like CATIA, not for design, but for populating the model, so we already have a hull, now we can list the requirements:
a. hull faring (I think UX must be good).
(1). Hull fairing, block defintion (ug must be good for the tasks)
(2). create panle, seam lines, landing curves, girders, stringers stiffener, floor plates, margin plates, cutouts, end cuts, notch. (I believe UX can do those things as it is a basic thing).
(3). shell expansion, Pinjig, templates, roll lines, bending curves and plate unfolding (can UX do this?).
(4). piping, duck lines, genspool drawing, isometric drawings for pipes, (can UX do this? I doubt).
(5). Pipe support, equipment supports (can UX do this?)
(6). BOM??
It is a very short list, it can be a very long one if you want to build a system that can handle every tasks for building a ship. I doubt any software can do all of thems.
As to the hull fairing, Rhino3d is good enough.

[shellexpansion]

Is there something that I can buy and learn on my own that would enable me to "fit" these assorted parts together and make a fair hull?
I looked at SolidWorks and they promised the world, but at $7k and up, it's got way more features than I 'd ever need.
Thanks for your help and input up front.
Feel free to email me directly about this.
usrowboy@nj.rr.com
rowboy

Rhino3d is a good choice.

[Felix Muehlhoff]

1. yes with shape studio
2. yes, UG has an special module shipdesign
3. yes with the shipdesign module
4. yes piping is part of the shipdesign module
5. yes standard modeling functions
6. yes also profile lists with detailed information of inverse bendings, ventilation holes in profiles, shape endcut etc.

No rhino3d is not good enough for a professional steel or alu production ready hull fairing with all needed details in it. It is only good enough for the first design. It takes too long time to do it in Rhino in good quality. At the end to do it with rhino is too expensive. Believe me I have done this work with rhino before.

Felix

[daiquiri]

Yes I'm using the shape studio module...

Ok, thanks for the reply. I'll see to learn more about UG and will ask to see it in action at the Informatics fair in Milan (SMAU), next month. ;)

[shellexpansion]

Felix, you talk about the best CAD/CAM software in the world, (hope you are not from Siemens AG), I cerntainly agree UG is the best one to choose, but it may be too expensive for the boat design.

[valber]

... I cerntainly agree UG is the best one to choose, but it may be too expensive for the boat design.

And how much it costs in a configuration for boat designing?

[Felix Muehlhoff]

Hi shellexpansion,

I'm german but I'm not from Siemens :) .
Before I used NX I also thought NX is too expensive. But after doing two projects of detailed hull design in NX I saw the advantages and how expensive it is to work with the "normal" software as Rhino, maxsurf, autoship, autocad, cad constructor and so on.
You are right NX is expensive and you are right if you do only one small project per year. And it depends on what you have to do. If you do only simple hull design it may be too expensive but if you have to do 10 or more detailed hull designs (for nc cutting) a year such me you will have a large win situation.
The costs for NX are depending on the modules you want to buy. Only the necessary module to make hull design (shape studio) costs about 25 times of rhino (I don't know the exact proces of today). The shipdesign module for construction is extra. The time win for hull design (my experience) during a project is about 50-75% against rhino.

Felix

[shellexpansion]

Felix, vielen Dank.
have you tried ShipConstructor? it consists of ShipCam and AutoCAD based detail designs.

[Felix Muehlhoff]

Hi Shellexpansion,

no problem, gern geschehen.

Yes I have tried shipconstructor 4 years ago. But it was more expensive than NX (Yes, more expensive) and it is not a assoziativ system. Also the graphics interface (Autocad) has performance problems with large assemblies. The advantage of ship constructor is ACAD. Everybody is able to work with ACAD. But my experience is from 4 years ago. I think now shipconstructor is better and maybe cheaper.

Felix

[Kumar_83]

Hi Felix,

I'm a new engineer currently having problem importing from NX to Modelmaker.

I currently have to manually retrieve co-ordinates from NX3 and manually enter into ModelMaker to create the model.

Could you please elaborate on the module you use to interface with model maker?

Thank you so much for sharing your experience with NX!

[Felix Muehlhoff]

Hi Kumar_83,

there is a software tool (add on) programmed by the netherlands Siemens organization. It is called 'section tool' within the translator for Modelmaker. Using this piece of software is very simple. Once you have a hull form, sew the sheet bodies and then run the tool. Result is a CMD file for Modelmaker. I think contact your local Siemens dealer to ask the netherlands Siemens organization for this tool.
If you want to get a test file send me a hull (NX of Parasolid). You get a CMD file as soon as possible.

Regards

Felix

[PI Design]

We use NX at work, linked with Teamcentre (the Siemens data manager programme). It is excellent and can be used right through the design process up to production (BOM etc). However, I wouldn't use it for the initial design process, something like Paramarine is much better (it also uses the parasolid kernel, so is easy to share with NX). Paramarine has dedicated Early Stage Design, stabilty, powering, maoeuvring, etc. It is generally only used for naval vessels but can be used for anything (expensive though).

[Grant Nelson]

Shouldn´t we add this new comer to the market, looks pretty solid to me...

[CGN]

looks OK, but what's the difference to rhino marine?

[marshmat]

From what I've heard (and this is more rumour than substantiated evidence), Orca3D is being developed by the same engineers responsible for RhinoMarine, who apparently are no longer with Proteus.

[CGN]

Looks like it, is not a knock on them but seems to be the same as rhino marine juts more expensive, maybe more polished? than rhinomarine no doubt is great because it works inside rhino but rhinomarine too.

I have to say kudos to them, the more software is available the more options we can have

[Grant Nelson]

I have heard the same as marshmat, and the split was on good terms. Thus I suspect you will see ORCA continue to evolve, while Rhinomarine not. But regardless, I think ORAC3D should have an entry, as should RhinoMarine... but that is my opinion ;-)

[MikeJohns]

And interesting that they have taken Maestro with them but not Fastship. Definately a product to watch.

I'd move to them like a shot If they added damaged stability and free surfaces.

[iparpura]

I was working in Rhino from 2000 to 2006, and it was`t very useful for workshop documentation and for final design detail definition.
So now I am using Multisurf as basic geometry definition for solidworks in which you can do all kind of details and all kind of production documentation.
Anyhow this combination is fully parametric and object oriented , so time consuming in changes is reduced to minimum plus whatever is modeled once it can be easy inserted in new design with new design code number but a same stock code number.

[Ad Hoc]

Q...what do you mean by hull design software?

Do you actually mean what software do you use to create the 3D shape for a hull?, or what software do you use to create drawings?...all very different and not necessarily the same.

The best hull modelling software i have seen ever, is Paramarine version 6. Their hull modelling using what they call XTCurves, is the most advance bit of software i have ever seen...makes Rhino/Maxsurf etc see like a set square and pencil on graph paper being used in the dark. It has raised the bar in modelling...

Otherwise for "design", i use my brain, software already hardwired!

[marshmat]

AdHoc,
Do you know how much Paramarine 6 costs? Or is it one of those programs where you call the company directly and strike a deal based on what you plan to do with it?

[Ad Hoc]

It is a whole suit of programs..one just selects the software bit one wants. It does the lot. The main problem is that for years it has been used by the military, and the guys have yet to realise their "global market". As such they are currently looking at what the costs should be. I have recommended to them to use Rhino/Maxsurf as their guide, for just the hull modelling bit.

I was at a demo last month at BMT Haslar....a very complex curved trimaran done in just 6 curves. It also has a very neat bitmap function. Scan in a bitmap of a photo of a vessel, and click on key locations and hey presto, a set of faired lines is produced...bloody amazing!!

http://www.grc-ltd.co.uk/products/paramarine/index.asp

You want version 6, not 5. Version 6 has the XT Curve modeller....it really will blow your mind better than any porn star!!!

[PI Design]

I believe Paramarine starts at about £15k. The other bits (stability, manoeuvring, seakeeping etc) are extra. Its good stuff.

[colaktu]

If you once learn NAPA everything is too simple.
Now with release 2008.2 it has RANS solver.

[shellexpansion]

There are 3 not even listed that are way, way ahead of the rest.
PTC CADDS 5
UGS NX
Catia

I didn't come here for long, busy with creating a new model with smartMarine.

cadds5 is already dead, almost. ptc has someone fixing bugs in india, not much. NX and Catia is too expensive.

smartmarine is really good, but the price is also very high, not suitable to discuss here.

has anyone use Inventor from autoDesk to do some boat design? any comments for inventor? I know Inventor a little bit, but not ship/boat related.

[shellexpansion]

I was working in Rhino from 2000 to 2006, and it was`t very useful for workshop documentation and for final design detail definition.
So now I am using Multisurf as basic geometry definition for solidworks in which you can do all kind of details and all kind of production documentation.
Anyhow this combination is fully parametric and object oriented , so time consuming in changes is reduced to minimum plus whatever is modeled once it can be easy inserted in new design with new design code number but a same stock code number.

could you please comments on the modeling capability? how stable is the software?

[Ad Hoc]

Inventor is ok, not great, looks good though. It is not truly parametric.

The problem with all these 3D software programs is that one has to input so much data just to get out basic construction dwgs. This is very very time consuming!

[shellexpansion]

could you please tell me what kind of data you need to input? offset tables, scantline, seamlines or landcurves?

do you use inventor to fair the station lines or repair the hull form?

CADDS5 has geom. package to let know fiddle with hull surfaces. I am not in the position to tell the case for inventor.

[Ad Hoc]

Sounds like you are referring to the hull and its ability to become an electronic file. As such you need a proper hull modeller. Inventor et al are not. These are just software's for producing 'production' related information in a single environment.
Think of a draughtsman, a DO Manager, an estimator, Plasma cutter operator, purchasing manger etc...all these functions can be done in such software. This is what they are 'designed' to do. Hence many small designers (as well as large shipyards) use these tools. But takes for ever to learn how to use them effectively.

Just don't try and crack a nut with a nuclear war head when a hammer will do..!

[Guest62110524]

how can one export polygon meshes into maxsurf please?

[dreamer]

If you were to look at Inventor, you would be better off looking at SolidWorks. SolidWorks has much better surface manipulation tools and the interface is much more tightly integrated. Their sheet metal tools are also much better than those in Inventor (I'm referring to developable sheet metal tools vs. non-developable which neither package can do).

Certainly I am biased as I was formerly an applications engineer for SolidWorks. But, now that I am no longer in that role I can be somewhat critical of SolidWorks as well, though between the two, SolidWorks is a much better package on its own.

With that said, you could probably find some threads of mine from way back that touted SolidWorks as a truly complete package (including hull fairing). After fighting this for a very long time, I will say that today it's just not there. It takes too much work to get a truly fair hull. After trying this for 4 years and working directly with SolidWorks I have given up in favor of RhinoMarine or Orca (Orca being the preferred).

That is STRICTLY for hull design. I design hulls in RhinoMarine (soon to switch to Orca) and bring the half hull surface directly into SolidWorks no IGES translation necessary as SolidWorks can read Rhino files. I build the rest of the boat from there.

This gives me true parametrics and makes the modeling process and 'what-if' process much easier than using Rhino for the whole boat..

The ONLY downside to this method is if the hull changes. It is a bit of work to re-integrate the changes into SolidWorks as there is no parametrics between the Rhino model and SolidWorks. It takes some forethought early on to make sure the up-date process is minimal.

My guess is that a future release of SolidWorks will include the surface manipulation tools necessary to generate hull forms. The surface technology already exists in SolidWorks, but the surface manipulation tools are not as easy (I would say impossible) to use on a hull surface as say the 'net' feature is in RhinoMarine. Once we see nets in SolidWorks, that program could truly become a soup-to-nuts platform for hull design.

Comparitively, it is a bit pricey compared to Rhino + RhinoMarine or Orca, but it is much cheaper than Catia and on par other marine-specific software. In addition, you get an AutoCAD-like editor called DWGEditor for free.

[Ad Hoc]

Dreamer

When you say "..I design hulls in RhinoMarine .." I assume you mean you 'draw' the hull shapes and structure in this software package; replacing a pen and paper so to speak. As opposed to 'design' using first principal calculations, beam theory etc and class rule checking for compliance etc?

[dreamer]

Excellent point Ad Hoc

There is a risk of arguing semantics here. The 'design' I refer to is high level design mainly for recreational craft under 100' or so. Personally, I have been sticking with the 30' to 60' range. These require less theory and more best-practices than a purpose-built 300' commercial vessel. While RhinoMarine may be just fine for such a thing, I wouldn't go down that road with SolidWorks. At least not on the entire vessel. SolidWorks is a more tactical package for that type of project. For examples of work done using SolidWorks, you can see some of my stuff in the Gallery. All those models were done entirely in SolidWorks with the exception of my latest model (Grand Marais 40 - which will be henceforth known as the Grand Portage 40 thanks to YM ;)) which use the process I outlined above.

RhinoMarine does provide tools for predicting hydrostatic performance when 'designing' a hull, but it is not down at a Naval Architect level.

Interesting side-note. I just now d/l'd Free!ship and attempted the same process. It seems promising however the surface editing tools are a bit cumbersome in Free!ship. The nodes are modified via parameters vs. mouse input. That's strictly on a first-impression basis and I could be wrong about that.

[Ad Hoc]

Dreamer

You too hit on a valid point, which confuses many, in the semantics.

"..These require less theory and more best-practices.." Many 'designs' are simply that, using "best practice" but called design. Trouble is, best practice for who, what conditions, why etc?
What may be called best practice is often just "that's the way I was shown or have built in the past" and not knowing if it is indeed 'best practice', it is just a repeat of "something" being done before. This is not to say it wont work, many are actually 'best practice details', just that the "design" element is somewhat lacking. Ask someone why XXX has been done, and "best practice" or similar to that which you have eluded will be the reply. Enquire deeper, .."ok, but why like that and not like this.." just leads to an argument, out of lack of understanding.

These software tools are great for "best practice" type of design. One can create a database of such. Trouble is, without understanding the reasons for such 'details' one is in danger or repeating not just the detail but using the wrong 'detail' or if any inherent flaw that exists too, which are never communicated later.

Copy and paste has never been so easy... as such the emphasis for "designers" is now the knowledge, speed and ability in using the software, and not the knowledge in what is being 'drawn/designed'.

Can't see the wood for the trees!

[dreamer]

Any 'design' (now being used as a noun here rather than verb) can be called successful if it fully meets its goals. In the range of vessel I'm referring to, the goals are fairly narrow in most cases have been goals for hundreds of years, answered with proven 'best practices' that can be quantified by deeper study to be true. If that is the case, why would one re-prove something that's already proven?

Now, if the goal is to be the ULTIMATE race boat, or the ULTIMATE load carrying vessel, or the ULTIMATE in efficiency (timely no doubt) then those goals require further analysis as 'The Devil is in the Details' in these cases.

However, the clients I deal with (and I would bet most who would deal with clients in this market) would not recognize the difference between a best-practice and a theoretical parameter carried out to the 10th decimal place. Especially if that parameter simply proves what is known.

These tools are geared more towads re-using the wheel than re-inventing it. Using known design elements (now used as an adjective - damn English!) and procedures to answer very narrow criteria.

I will stand by my use of the word 'design' and use the word 'engineering' more in the context you describe. In my 20+ years in the design/engineering business, the distinction between the two has always been clear.

Now, if we really wanted to swing a dead cat, we could also throw in those Designers who make the pretty pictures and do cool interweb stuff. ;)

I think what may be happening is more an issue of pride than anything. There are those who slog through the time and expense of getting their NA credentials only to see some high school kid who is good with 'puters crank out boat after boat - and The People are buying it!

It has always been this way. Until recently, here in MN any average drafter could become a licensed Architect (buildings). The 'Pros' with their MArch. degrees put a stop to that and now it is not possible for anyone but Architects to design buildings. Personally I could care less, but I think taking that direction has the potential for stifling creativity.

Considering that today one can create a totally legitimate set of lines in a matter of a few clicks of the mouse when it would take a good drafter a couple of days to create a set by hand, it is pretty phenomenal. Don't disregard the potential of these tools as perfectly acceptable for solving the problems at hand. The same was once said of AutoCAD and despite all the naysayers, it is ubiquitous. I would doubt there is any marine design firm in business who does not utilize several copies of AutoCAD. I would be willing to bet that Rhino is almost as prevelent.

[Ad Hoc]

Dreamer
You are far luckier than I. All my designs are different, in essence they are prototypes, but that is generally the nature of any commercial design, rather than the luxury/private sector wish i assume you are in.

"...Considering that today one can create a totally legitimate set of lines in a matter of a few clicks of the mouse when it would take a good drafter a couple of days to create a set by hand, it is pretty phenomenal..."

Yes amazing. There are some guys i know who really blow me away with their ability to "manipulate" the software and their speed too.

But you are also right in that the word 'design' has become a noun. As such the general public tend to get confused as much as anyone else.

"...Now, if we really wanted to swing a dead cat, we could also throw in those Designers who make the pretty pictures and do cool interweb stuff..."

That is a major can of worms too. Having said that, I've got a friend who is a "stylist/interior designer". He wouldn't know a shear force from a shear drop, but his work is "design". It may not be with numbers, but he is creating something from nothing which has a "function", and jolly exceptional designs they are too...

[dreamer]

Then there are the Hair Designers who DO know what "shear" force is. :p

but, I digress....

[CowMan]

It'd be nice if there was a 'best' program! All the ones I've used have thus far been varying mostly in their level of frustration, generally at the UI. Have had some success using most of these together with educational licenses; that is, AutoShip for hull development, Rhino for some cleanup, Solidworks for structural detailing, and AutoCAD for final drawings. Not economically feasible for a small design office, though.

[dreamer]

There is not a BEST program. Never will be. It is the nature of free market. The best you can do is to reduce your 'fraction' as much as possible. It is entirely possible to eliminate either AutoShip or Rhino from the equation as well as AutoCAD. Use either Rhino or AutoShip as your hull modeler. Bring that into SolidWorks (or ProE or Inventor) either directly (as Rhino) or indirectly (as IGES). You can also generate your hull lines plan in your hull modeler. Or, if you're savvy, it's entirely possible to generate hull lines in SolidWorks as well.

With the hull imported into SolidWorks, complete the entire vessel (if your vessel is under 100') or detail portions of it (if over 100').

SolidWorks includes a free AutoCAD-like component called DWG Editor. It looks more like AutoCAD 2000, but that's not a problem. It can open and edit current versions of AutoCAD and I would bet that all the common commands you would use for editing DWGs are available in DWG Editor.

So, in theory you could do all your modeling with just two applications.

The problem is when you start to dig into the details. You will need other programs to do boundary layer CFD, another for VPP, another for development of non-developable sufaces, etc. I've heard that Catia can do all of this, but it's a matter of getting the modules and Catia is outrageously expensive and requires a great deal of mental real estate.

Now as a CAD instructor for going on 20 years, I can tell you that UI frustrations are more a characteristic of the user than of the software (I had one old-timer continually turn the mouse 180 degrees from its intended use). The students who excel are those who take the time to understand how the interface works rather than trying to make it work the way they think it should. Some of the most difficult students are the ones who are already well-versed in a particular piece of software and have a tough time letting go. It takes a lot of diligence to learn a new piece of software. The good news is that as competition has become fierce, most of the big-name packages have started to look and feel like each other.

Anyone looking to learn a solid modeler will find that SolidWorks, ProE (Wildfire), and Inventor for the most part act the same and use the same terminology. Rhino is set up more like 3D Studio or Maya.

AutoCAD is, well, AutoCAD. As it has evolved, it has become a bloated whale of a package. It was difficult to teach back in the day and I can't imagine trying to wade through all the minutiae it's filled with now as a first-time user.

All of this is academic really. Too much emphasis is placed on Software and not enough on actual skill The software will do EXACTLY what you tell it, no matter how lame. As a 3-year novice in hull design, I can vouch for that.

[ParamarineV6]

Hi Matt

Are you interested in hearing more about Paramarine V6? if so I'm more than happy to send you a demo copy and a presentation.

Drop me a line to hf@grc-ltd.co.uk

Hamish Fowler
MD

[valber]

Hi Matt

Are you interested in hearing more about Paramarine V6? if so I'm more than happy to send you a demo copy and a presentation.

Drop me a line to hf@grc-ltd.co.uk

Hamish Fowler
MD

I have sent inquiry to these guys... In the answer I had a silence... Thus I think, what there will be such support in the future if I buy it?

[ParamarineV6]

Valber

If we've not responed to you many apologies - this is very untypical of us. If you send me your details again I'll get it actioned. Can you reply to my email address please - hf@grc-ltd.co.uk and I'll get it sorted - please bear in mind I'm in the US this week but I WILL get you what you need.

Drop me a note with

a) the bit of paramarine you want to know about - Hull Gen?, stability? Powering? Structures? Endurance? Design for Production? Early Stage Design? Maneouvring? Seakeeping?
B)Ships?
c)Submarines?

You let me know what you need and I'll make sure you get a great reply but please get in touch directly with your full contact details and location.

Many thanks and apologies for the lack of response - sincerely.

Hamish Fowler
MD QinetiQ GRC Ltd

[valber]

Hamish Fowler

OK, I will write to you...
Good luck

[JAK]

Hi,

I am in need of some help.
I am using Rhino as an architect for some years now, so I've a certain knowledge of it.
I am trying to draw a 11' Yacht Tender by Paul Gartside in 3D, which I'd like to then build with the help of a 3-Axis CNC router.
The boat is planked with 3 strakes of plywood, which of course can not have a compound curvature...
I can easily create a surface for the garboard, the way I usually would do, with for example "sweep 2 rails", but that's of course compound curvature...
I worked with the Rhino Marine Tutorial, but the way it describes how to loft the garboard for their skiff, didn't really help at all.
(Quote: If you have never done this, it probably won't work...)
I was able to loft a surface along a chine and the centerline (extended into negative space as per tutorial) but A) I am not able to precisely hit the stem rabbet and B) it's a compound curved surface again...

Could anybody explain to me how you'd create a garboard surface intended to be plywood / single curvature???

I really don't get it, and it drives me nuts!

Thanks!

[Norm01]

I just want to do some basic drawings for fun, on paper, what is the best (read cheapest) way to get some curves without buying whole sets.

I will then go on to a computer, am i better off going to autocad or equivalent(which I know) or to a program such as DEFtship?

Should i just go straight awaay to a hull design program ? . I just want to muck around designing small boats, i dont want to be a designer or enter the industry.Thanks in advance

[apex1]

I just want to do some basic drawings for fun, on paper, what is the best (read cheapest) way to get some curves without buying whole sets.

I will then go on to a computer, am i better off going to autocad or equivalent(which I know) or to a program such as DEFtship?

Should i just go straight awaay to a hull design program ? . I just want to muck around designing small boats, i dont want to be a designer or enter the industry.Thanks in advance

Try this, its a very powerful tool and extremely easy to manage! get:
http://www.carlsondesign.com/#Fun_Shareware
Regards
Richard

[Guest625101138]

I just want to do some basic drawings for fun, on paper, what is the best (read cheapest) way to get some curves without buying whole sets.

I will then go on to a computer, am i better off going to autocad or equivalent(which I know) or to a program such as DEFtship?

Should i just go straight awaay to a hull design program ? . I just want to muck around designing small boats, i dont want to be a designer or enter the industry.Thanks in advance

Norm
Delftship or its parent, Freeship, is used by many here and there are many questions already answered on its use.

It takes about a 20 to 40 hours of frustration to get used to using it but it is very rewarding once you come to grips with the notion of surface modelling, as opposed to solid modelling or 2D drafting, and a few of the menu commands in Delftship.

The ability to render a hull in a few minutes and move it around in 3D to look at it is fantastic compared with playing with paper. You may find it easy to make some basic sketches on paper to get the proportions but you get something close to real life in Delftship.

There are quite a few Freeship files already on the forum so you can see how others have done it.

The price of the standard version of Delftship cannot be bettered unless you are in a position to be paid to evaluate software. There is no obligation on its use. (I felt obligated because I use it so much that I paid for the Pro version - it has a little more functionality particularly with the type of files it can export) I have had a hull blank and prop milled from 3D files I produced in Delftship and was very pleased with the outcome. Also a number of hand formed or hand cut hulls that have worked extremely well.

Once you have the hull drawn up in Delftship you have all the information to loft the hull either by hand or machine.

Rick W

[apex1]

Norm
Delftship or its parent, Freeship, is used by many here and there are many questions already answered on its use.

It takes about a 20 to 40 hours of frustration to get used to using it but it is very rewarding once you come to grips with the notion of surface modelling, as opposed to solid modelling or 2D drafting, and a few of the menu commands in Delftship.

The ability to render a hull in a few minutes and move it around in 3D to look at it is fantastic compared with playing with paper. You may find it easy to make some basic sketches on paper to get the proportions but you get something close to real life in Delftship.

There are quite a few Freeship files already on the forum so you can see how others have done it.

The price of the standard version of Delftship cannot be bettered unless you are in a position to be paid to evaluate software. There is no obligation on its use. (I felt obligated because I use it so much that I paid for the Pro version - it has a little more functionality particularly with the type of files it can export) I have had a hull blank and prop milled from 3D files I produced in Delftship and was very pleased with the outcome. Also a number of hand formed or hand cut hulls that have worked extremely well.

Once you have the hull drawn up in Delftship you have all the information to loft the hull either by hand or machine.

Rick W

Ahh yes you did...........
adding another tool to your half educated way of getting results?
I know you do´nt like it:
Rick you are unprofessional!
Regards
Richard

[wardd]

is there a program or way to shape a hull then add points to represent the weight of components to see how it affects the actual waterline

[Guest625101138]

is there a program or way to shape a hull then add points to represent the weight of components to see how it affects the actual waterline

You can do it in Delftship or FreeShip but it can be a little tedious if there are a lot of components to consider.

You create a new Layer for each item such as the hull, seats, bunks, engine, shaft, person, water tank, fuel tank, battery etc. These are positioned in the hull where required. All components with significant mass need to be included. The layer properties are set either based on actual material density for items like hull panels or component weight by adjusting the density to achieve the known weight.

The end result of this is that you will get the total boat weight and its longitudinal position (LCG). You then have to adjust the trim and draft iteratively until the buoyancy ballances the weight and the longitudinal CoB is the same as the LCG. This typically takes a few minutes. Alternatively you can reposition items to shift the LCG to get the desired trim.

Rick W

[Ad Hoc]

"...You then have to adjust the trim and draft iteratively until the buoyancy ballances the weight and the longitudinal CoB is the same as the LCG.."

If you understand the basic principals, there is no iteration.
It is a simple couple and hence a moment calculation in terms of what mass over what distance to balance. From your MCT you can also see, before hand, how much trim is expected.

The design process is iterative, the calculations are simple 'one liners'.

[wardd]

thanks, i'm thinking in the 30 foot range, something trailerable

i have delftship, i'll look into it more

i was thinking major components like engine , generator and tanks

[Guest625101138]

thanks, i'm thinking in the 30 foot range, something trailerable

i have delftship, i'll look into it more

i was thinking major components like engine , generator and tanks

If you have a hull drawn up in Delftship then you can get some idea how to do it by setting the layer properties for the intended material of construction. This will give the hull weight.

Once you have some weight to look at, you run the hydrostatics report and the table at the bottom of the page will give you the weight and its location in terms of VCG, LCG and TCG. As you add layers you will get a new line in this table for each layer. Delftship averages the moments of each item to determine the overall position of the CofG.

The first table in the report titled "Volume properties" will give you the LCB. For the hull to sit on the waterline drawn you will need to have LCG the same as LCB.

Modelling things like an engine and tank can be done by simply adding a box for each of the appropriate size and in the intended location. Make sure you tick the "Create new layer" box when you add. You can name the layer "Engine" so it is easy to work out what is what as you add components. Select a density and thickness of box so that the calculated weight matches your proposed engine weight. You need to take care to ensure the "Symmetric" box is unticked for an item that is not mirrored in the hull. If not it will add twice the weight.

Using separate layers for individual items will allow you to move them relative to the others as you choose.

Rick W

[valber]

is there a program or way to shape a hull then add points to represent the weight of components to see how it affects the actual waterline
MultiSurf (http://www.aerohydro.com/) can do it!

[JosephT]

There are 3 not even listed that are way, way ahead of the rest.
PTC CADDS 5
UGS NX
Catia

I concur, some of the best modeling tools are not listed. I use Freeship to generate basic hull lines, then import them into NX and do all the detailed design there. NX has a shipbuilding module, but it's overkill for most smaller boat design applications.

[dreamer]

I concur, some of the best modeling tools are not listed. I use Freeship to generate basic hull lines, then import them into NX and do all the detailed design there. NX has a shipbuilding module, but it's overkill for most smaller boat design applications.

Similar process here using Rhinomarine for hull design then SolidWorks to finish. It is possible to creat a hull in SolidWorks, but after dozens and dozens of attempts, it's apparent that they still are not quite there. The nice thing now, however, is that SolidWorks is semi-parametric now with Rhino. I can make a change in the Rhino model and propogate that through SolidWorks. Very handy.

Problem with CADDS5 (besides being ancient) and Catia are the hugemongous expense in the purchase of the software and the very steep learning curve. Both of which are totally unneccessary for pleasure craft but are probably worth the investment for large-scale ship design.

[MikeJohns]

When you design a hull you wrap a surface around the target measurements and coefficients. Then it is more useful to look at packages that can do this automatically and actually compare them.

Shipbuilding is quite different to hull modelling. Shipbuilding packages and addons all work similarly. Ship design is of course a collaborative team effort and shipbuilding modules facilitate that and add some special modules for piping cabling etc. Sure that makes them more capable. However for 'boat' design it would be excessive to buy and use this type of package.

The simpler the cheaper and the lower the learning curve the better it is.
I put a budding engineer with no more than Autocad experience on Rhino, by the end of the day he was working with it producing complex solid models for analysis.

In a small design office designing boats not ships I think you would be hard pressed to beat Rhino with the Rhino-marine or the Orcad addin if you use it to its full extent it's surprisingly capable for it's cost.

[Andrew Mason]

"...You then have to adjust the trim and draft iteratively until the buoyancy ballances the weight and the longitudinal CoB is the same as the LCG.."

If you understand the basic principals, there is no iteration.
It is a simple couple and hence a moment calculation in terms of what mass over what distance to balance. From your MCT you can also see, before hand, how much trim is expected.

The design process is iterative, the calculations are simple 'one liners'.

If LCB didn't move as draft changed, and displacement didn't change as trim changed, and MCT didn't change as draft and trim changed, what you have written might be true.

Unfortunately, its not that simple.

[Ad Hoc]

Andrew

With a print out of hydrostatics, it is that simple. Since it is just a moment change owing to the distance between the CoG and CoB horizontally.

[Andrew Mason]

Andrew

With a print out of hydrostatics, it is that simple. Since it is just a moment change owing to the distance between the CoG and CoB horizontally.

Unfortunately, its not that simple. For small changes of trim with relatively constant hull shapes the approximation is reasonable. Larger differences between LCB and LCG, or hulls with bulb bows or overhangs will require iteration

[Ad Hoc]

Andrew

Within a computer environment this may well be the case.

But from a naval architecture, looking at the design spiral, it isn't. It is very simple. Since minor errors or differences are ignored in the first few stages of the design. The hydrostatics will tell me if i have a 30 or 40tm moment to overcome, for example. If it indicates a 0.3 or 0.4tm moment, in the early stages of design, not worth considering, since other factors will come into play which will affect this value later anyway. But a 30 or 40tm moment is not so easy to overcome once the design has been "set".

[Andrew Mason]

Andrew

Within a computer environment this may well be the case.

But from a naval architecture, looking at the design spiral, it isn't. It is very simple. Since minor errors or differences are ignored in the first few stages of the design. The hydrostatics will tell me if i have a 30 or 40tm moment to overcome, for example. If it indicates a 0.3 or 0.4tm moment, in the early stages of design, not worth considering, since other factors will come into play which will affect this value later anyway. But a 30 or 40tm moment is not so easy to overcome once the design has been "set".

Sorry, I was talking about getting accurate hydrostatics.

[Ad Hoc]

Andrew

yes, i suspected as such, hence my qualifier re: with a print out of hydrostatics and in a computer environment.

[shellexpansion]

There is one software that should be listed here. orca 3d. It is rhino based tool, and not that expensive. The key players for "orca 3d" are the guys who has created fastship, now fastship belongs to aveva. Fastship should be also in the list.

[yipster]

not really a pro i agree on that, at leisure still trying maxsurf whitch is an excelent program!
heard of orca before, fastship i had my hands on once for hours at a show and not in the list?

[pamarine]

Using SW2008 at the moment. It works fine for the simple hulls we are doing. But I tried exactly 1 realitively complex shape and realise this ain't the program to really be using for Hull Design.

I also have Rhino and RhinoMarine, but aside from importing files from SW to run Hydrostatics i haven't really used them.

[dreamer]

It's a shame really, because SWorks has terrific surfacing tools except for hulls! The converging profiles at the bow are the biggest problem. It's actually due to the surfaces being too accurate. The surface manipulation tools are too localized for the surface. Rhino's (and others, I presume) abilty to edit surfaces using a controling net overall allows for more general hull fairing. I keep hoping SWorks will do something about this. There is a tool that allows freeform editing of the surface by directly edting isoline, but that is not general enough and stops short of the net-editing ability in Rhino.

OTOH, SWorks is great for developable surfaces. The sheet metal functionality built in to SolidWorks is pretty incredible.

Also too, I feel SolidWorks is one of the best for modeling everything else. In terms of hulls, I go back and forth between SWorks and Rhino. In SolidWorks, it's very easy to 'expand' a 2D lines plan. You can then import the 3D lines into Rhino and use network of curves to map the surface. Then import the surface into SolidWorks. SolidWorks keeps one-way associativity to the Rhino model, so if you make a change in Rhino, it will update in SolidWorks. Very handy.

[valber]

I like SolidWorks with MultiSurf... But NX works - > It was made for 20 min (http://ugs.ucoz.ru/_fr/0/3308011.jpg)
And another example ->Inland foreship (http://ugs.ucoz.ru/_fr/0/0821416.jpg) NX works...

[Felix Muehlhoff]

The great advantage of NX is doing everthing in one software packet. So hull design, fairing, basic hydrostatics, GA, basic design, detailed design, workshop drawings, expansions, cutparts, FEM calculations, simulation etc.. NX's kernel is the Siemens Parasolid Kernel so for advanced stability calculations GRC's Paramarine is perfect. It is also working on Siemens Parasolid Kernel so you can directly import solid data from NX and calculate.

[dreamer]

The big disadvantage of NX is that it costs a $bazillion and has a steep learning curve. If I was going down that route, I'd go Catia.

[apex1]

The big disadvantage of NX is that it costs a $bazillion and has a steep learning curve. If I was going down that route, I'd go Catia.

Well Catia is really not for free either and the learning curve is very steep too!

[dreamer]

Well Catia is really not for free either and the learning curve is very steep too!

Exactly why I'd choose Catia over NX ;)

[Jeff]

Thread continued in 2010 at http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/design-software/best-marine-design-software-hull-modeling-2010-a-31058.html