Who knows MAAT Hydro ?

MAAT Hydro is a new generation professional hydrostatic solver allowing to 'marinize' most of the existing 3D modelers exporting trimmed NURBS and BREP solids like Rhino.

Currently acknowledged by most classification societies, MAAT Hydro is appreciated by a growing number of professionals, schools and home-users, especially in France where it has almost become a standard.

For further information, don’t hesitate to visit http://www.sistre-shipdesign-software.com , http://www.sistre-shipdesign-software.com/faq/maat-hydro-faq/general/ or http://www.sistre-shipdesign-software.com/help

Thinking that this discreet but powerful software may interest many boat designers in this forum, I will have pleasure in answering your questions, as a member of the Sistre team !

 

What sociaties acknowledged?

 

Can it produce wave patterns of multihulls, hovercraft and surface effect ships?

Can it estimate the total resistance (and/or wave resistance and skin-friction) of those vessels?

Can it estimate the sinkage and trim of those vessels?

 

I have visited web pages and images that appear in them are very nice. So I wanted to dig a little deeper into this software and I'd like you to tell me what you mean with the following:
- Allowing to 'marinize'most of it the existing 3D modelers . Other applications on the market do not need to marinize anything. Can be calculated, without marinize, the hydrostatics values for any body are proposed.
- Currently Acknowledged By Most classification societies: what exactly does it mean for you the term "acknowledged". What C.S. have Acknowledged.?
- Home-users: it seems difficult for a home-user play to design boats. What price do you have for home-users?
- This discreet but powerful software: what means that the application is discrete: Are the other "undiscretes" or are they continuous (non discretes)?. I do not understand why this can be declared as a differentiator, an added value, for the application.
Are you aware that the structure do you play as an example on the web has major construction errors?
Thank you.

 

Thank you for your interest in MAAT Hydro !

The answers to your questions are the followings:

- Can it produce wave patterns of multihulls, hovercraft and surface effect ships?

- Can it estimate the total resistance (and/or wave resistance and skin-friction) of those vessels?

- Can it estimate the sinkage and trim of those vessels?

No, MAAT Hydro is only designed for providing real-time static / quasi-static simulation and ship’s hydrostatic / stability reports... but we have specialized partners for such questions: http://www.k-epsilon.com/, http://www.hydrocean.eu/, ...

Sinkage and trim can therefore only be calculated on a quasi-static base by MAAT Hydro.


- Allowing to 'marinize'most of the existing 3D modelers:

Most of today’s ships are designed with 3D software, making the traditional 3D surface -> 2D stations conversion useless (i.e., cause of time, interactivity and accuracy wastes).

As NURBS / BREP models are now the most common way to define ship’s geometry, it appeared that their direct hydrostatic analysis was an urgent need.

Although integrated marine software is, of course, available on the market, ship designers often prefer ‘marinizing’ their favorite 3D modeler (i.e. combining it with specific marine tools) and, in this case, MAAT Hydro is certainly one of the easiest accesses to high level hydrostatic calculations, including damage deterministic and probabilistic stability.


- Currently Acknowledged By Most classification societies:

This means that MAAT Hydro’s results have always been accepted by any C.S. over the world till now.


- Home-users:

Although MAAT Hydro is designed for professional users, its free demo version is so highly operational that it generally fulfills students and home user’s needs.


- This discreet but powerful software:

Discreet (not discrete) means that MAAT Hydro has mostly been promoted in France till now and only started recently (January 2013) to be presented abroad.


Don't hesitate to try MAAT Hydro's demo version on our website (www.sistre.eu) and tell us your impressions and/or expectations !

 

I'm sorry my mistake to interpret the word "discreet". Thousand apologies.
I'm a developer of applications for naval architecture, I do not hide it, and therefore aware of the tremendous rigor called for in this type of software. Therefore, with respect and with the intention to help, I want to say that it is a mistake to use words and phrases that seem very nice, high tech, but they are poorly used, or may result in the reader interpret things incorrectly , or believe that the program has a performance that does not have. For example, a Classification Society does not usually judge your calculations or make value judgments on a progarma (I think even they have it prohibited). All they will say is that what you have presented is, or is not, within its requirements, regardless of the tool you used for calculations.

 

I apologize if my answer was not clear enough:

'Currently Acknowledged By Most classification societies' means that MAAT Hydro’s results have always been accepted by any C.S. over the
world till now and, of course, confirmed everytime they have been checked.

For a typical comparison between MAAT Hydro's results and C.S. results, see this RINA paper: http://sistre-marinesoftware.com/Sistre RINA 2013.pdf

In the rare cases where a C.S. found a difference with its results, it quickly appeared that it was resulting from a modeling error and the problem disappeared after correcting it.

Of course, like for any software, this doen't mean that MAAT Hydro is 100% error free, but only that it is as reliable as most of the C.S. software.

 

I have read the article by RINA and I think very well.
I have to say a few things:
- I also believe that the calculations with 3D solid models are more accurate than with surfaces. They have difficulty, for example correctly calculate the wet surface.
- A model made by means of transversale sections in space does not have to be integrated with trapeciuos rule. There are methods of integration that apply to them and are more accurate than the trapezoids. Therefore, the possible error is not in the model but in longitudinal integration method used.
- The only right way to compare the results between two different calculation programs is to use the same model in both. Otherwise, you can not make comparisons.
- A program can be great but if the model is wrong, the results are not good.
- No one can say that the differences between the results were eliminated by changing the model because you can modify the model as you need till arrive to desired result.
- I still do not know what the phrase means: 'Currently Acknowledged By Most classification societies'. There are many C. S. and say that most have "acknowledged" (whatever that means) the program, it seems exaggerated and misleading. I would recommend, if I can, to explain us which companies have talked about the program and what they have said about.
- The program I am sure is great but advertising does not seem right.
Cheers

 

Concerning the companies using MAAT Hydro, several of our references can be seen here: http://www.sistre-shipdesign-software.com/sistre-demo/references.html.

Moreover, thanks to its visual and intuitive user interface, MAAT Hydro is also currently used for teaching by most of the French Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture schools and also in Spain, Poland, South Korea, Thaland, ...

 

Yes sir, that's good advertising. What is said in posts # 1, 5, 7 can be misleading and little accurate.
Congratulations for such a long list of references (not a CS among them)

 

... ICNN is a French C.S., SAMSA is a South African C.S. ...

 

Congratulations, again.
What about : "Currently Acknowledged By Most classification societies". Maybe that's not entirely correct.

 

Concerning what we mean by 'aknowledged', see http://www.thefreedictionary.com/acknowledged

'Acknowledged' therefore doesn't mean 'used by' and, when we say that MAAT Hydro's results are 'currently aknowledged by most classification societies', we simply mean that 'MAAT Hydro’s results have always been accepted by any C.S. over the world till now and, of course, confirmed everytime they have been checked ’, as explained above.

I sincerly regret if we don't give the same meaning to the word 'aknowledged'.

 

From my experience with the C. S. I have to say that they accept any calculation, even handmade. If there is any difference between my calculations and theirs, indicate no coincidence, ask for explanations and accept, or not, my calculations, but never my calculation tool.
If I'm wrong and someone else in this forum can lay that out, I will be very grateful.
According to my interpretation of how to work in a CS, they never recognize a calculation tool unless approval is asked of it. And this, really, I do not think they are allowed to.
So in summary, I think you and I give the same meaning to the word "aknowledge". What happens is that I think that, whatever it is, does not add any value to the application and, I repeat again, can be misleading for the customer.
I insist that I do not question the goodness of the application, but I think the advertising is misleading.

 

I do not want to go into your semantic discussion on the meaning of "acknowledge", but as a MAAT Hydro user, when a MCA technician stability writes to me "We have very good agreement with all computer output (Hydrostatics Etc..) and steady heel calculations and the books are ready to approve ..." I think that a relationship of trust begins to develop between the user, the software and the flag. This is an example, but when you have calculated more than 300 stability booklets approved by a dozen of CS, flags or other Certifying Authorities, you do not send smp “to law court” for these “acknowledge” and “most”, you thank him and MH +.