Free!Ship 2.6+ vs Prediction resistance by Holtrop-Mennen started method

Discussion in 'Software' started by Victor T, Feb 16, 2007.

  1. quequen
    Joined: Jul 2009
    Posts: 369
    Likes: 15, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 199
    Location: argentina

    quequen Senior Member

    Could be a virus

    Victor, when entering your web-site, I receive a warning from my resident antivirus (Malwarebytes). Seems like site has some problem?
    IP is: 193.200.173.1

    Thanks for your great work, Freeship is in good hands, I thought!
     
  2. Victor T
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 127
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 58
    Location: Ukraine

    Victor T Senior Member

    I am test my sites - viruses not find
    Try this: http://vms.drweb.com/online/?lng=en
     
  3. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,372
    Likes: 239, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

  4. quequen
    Joined: Jul 2009
    Posts: 369
    Likes: 15, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 199
    Location: argentina

    quequen Senior Member

    May be just false alarm?

    It's still there. May be false alarm, I don't know anything about virus.
    Anyway, I'm attaching a screen capture of the message and the log file of Malwarebytes, could be useful for you (not for me...). What is an "Outgoing"?
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Victor T
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 127
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 58
    Location: Ukraine

    Victor T Senior Member

    This is NOT my site IP.
    SITE - hydronship.net IP - 194.0.200.19
     
  6. Victor T
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 127
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 58
    Location: Ukraine

    Victor T Senior Member

    Test only Version 3.22+
    Released May 24, 2011
    New features:
    Новые изменения:
    * Fixed bug with display CoG ship
    * Added check in the calculation of the stability equation Zmin = 0
    * Added displaying the distance between two points and the angles between the received segment and the axes
    * Added displaying the distance between the endpoints and the angle between the sides (1-2 and 2-3)
    * Added a conclusion of the angle between two segments (1-2 and 3-4) and the distance between 1 and 4 selected points
    * Fixed a bug in the calculation of the resistance by the method of Mercier-Savitsky
    * Added input and accounting components of the propulsive efficiency in the preliminary calculation of propeller series B
    * Added a choice of type of propulsor and the interaction coefficients in the calculation of planing ships

    Download: http://hydronship.net/download/FSplus3_22 .zip
     
    1 person likes this.
  7. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,372
    Likes: 239, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

    Hi Victor, I have one technical question for you. :)

    In the "Layer properties" window there is a check-box which says "Set weight and coord. of CoG manually". It is followed by the "weight" text box, where one should manually input the desired weight of the surface element - if I understood it correctly (please see the attached pic). However, that option is apparently not working. I can check the box, but I cannot input the weight of the piece.

    the question is: can you please tell me what am I doing wrong and how to use that option? :confused:
    It would be very handy for placing concentrated masses in the hull, like engines, tanks, winches, anchor etc. - in order to approximate more correctly the final ship's weight and CoG.

    I'm using the latest version, 3.22 .

    Thank you in advance, and keep doing the excellent job you've done so far on the development of Freeship. :)

    Cheers!
     

    Attached Files:

  8. Victor T
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 127
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 58
    Location: Ukraine

    Victor T Senior Member

    Yes, so originally also it was planned for the task of weights and coordinates of the center of gravity of engines, tanks, winches, anchors and etc.
    And it has then appeared to set easier weight cubes as, for example, in http://hydronship.net/projects/id/140.

    While this feature is temporarily blocked.

    Update on http://www.hydronship.net/download/FreeShip323b1.zip

    Regards
     
  9. daiquiri
    Joined: May 2004
    Posts: 5,372
    Likes: 239, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 3380
    Location: Italy (Garda Lake) and Croatia (Istria)

    daiquiri Engineering and Design

    Ok then. I think it's much easier to set the weight of these smaller items directly (manually) than having to play with plate thickness and density, but I guess it's a matter of personal preferences...

    Just saw this work: http://hydronship.net/projects/id/189 . That's an impressive use of Freeship! :)
     
  10. CmbtntDzgnr
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 119
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 120
    Location: somewhereonearth

    CmbtntDzgnr Senior Member

    I think I found the answer and FEF exp/imp is not needed.

    Short answer:

    It is related to the Intersections module -Stations -in my case. It is NOT (in my case) affected by Buttocks, Waterlines, or Diagonals. I had a station every meter for 170 stations, plus some 32 more to form the opposite-side half-planes of my model's transverse watertight bulkheads.

    Quick interruption/background #1:

    Reason I persevered on this path:

    -- I deleted all blank/empty layers, and closed FS and restarted, to no avail.

    -- I tried the FEF route and progressed on my work for a few hours. I saw the suggestion to export and reimport to/from .fef, and followed it. It did not resolve my issue, but it DID point out to me that I had neglected to look for intersections.

    -- Going FEF export/reimport destroyed my stations. I have far too many stations to have to manually re-enter them every time I run into the Access Violation error message. It would be too painful and I dreaded that, so I pushed on with focusing on the Intersections.


    Quick interruption/background #2:

    These lines make it easier for me to see my compartments when for some reason I am not looking at color on the surfaces. Also, having a station at every meter gives me options for locating sideshell stiffeners once I've exported the model to DXF 3D Polylines. In my case, since I'm using a 3D modeling app to create sideshell stiffeners surfaces based on two lines (Web & Flange of two different sizes), swept along the station, and i don't want to get into the mess of trying to create a sweep path based on the inside face of the sideshell nor use any lines from meshes. After creating the swept lines' surface, I then create solids to them simply by thickening those surfaces. Since the surfaces are associative to the lines/curves, and since the solids follow the surfaces, i can leave the polylines in place and maiplate them as needed later.


    I first downloaded HydroNShip Friday the 10th and put it through some paces related to my personal workflow. I ran into some issues and just accepted them. But, the crashing Design Hydros module got my attention Wednesday (yesterday, the 15th) and so Wednesday night I spent about an hour probing. I'm no programmer, so my only tools are my mind and my keyboard without use of any debuggers nor any programming knowledge.

    Resuming:

    I tend to write narratively, so please bear with me. I hope your patience lasts through to the end.

    Longer Answer:

    I at first targeted the Section Area Curve-related stations that counted in a way that made the SAC bulge more prounced inboard or outboard. I had no scientific approach to go on so I proceded haphazardly and randomly.

    I had maybe 20 waterlines, and fewer than 10 Buttocks or Diagonals (can't recall which), but had around 90 Diagonals or Buttocks. Deleting all of the intersections except for Stations did not resolve my problem. But, deleting ALL of the Stations, and MOST of the Stations did resolve my problem.

    Fortunately, I was closing in on the idea that it was not necessary to delete all my stations, particularly those forming my station center-plane and opposite sides/faces. I iteratively (or would that be regressively? I'm not a coder, but I have seen the words) or recursively closed without saving and reopened my fbm file and randomly deleted lines and then closed the intersections dialog and then ran the Design Hydrostatics tool.

    No error message -- if a certain NUMBER of stations were deleted, regardless of their location along the hull. Along the way in testing, I specifically removed and tested with the presence of a high concentration of stations at my sonar dome. The concentration of stations was at each .1 of a meter so I could obtain decent meshes exported in that region. No appearance of error messages was related. So, I then focused on deleting some count or percentage of stations. Gradually, I realized that the number of stations must be a significant importance in performing integrations on the hull surface area to set up the remaining calculations. If the Design Hydrodynamics module sees all those stations (the 200+ I had), it bogs down the calculations in other places like in Fung/warship hydros, and in other methods.

    I now figure I will deal with the need for extra stations by doing what I did the past 2 years in Delftship: save a copy, add the extra overhead to that file, and keep my main file lighter and nimbler. If I have to re-fair my main model, it is simple enough to save a copy and add stations every meter.

    I hope this is useful to any who had the error message, and I wish Victor success and more time to add features even though success is random and time is in limited supply and refuses to stretch.
     
    Last edited: Jun 16, 2011
  11. CmbtntDzgnr
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 119
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 120
    Location: somewhereonearth

    CmbtntDzgnr Senior Member

    HydroNShip Naval Ship Resistance Calcs

    Is there a persistently intermittent problem with the HydroNShip resistance calcs for NAVAL ships? I have 100% had functionality in the resistance calcs for Sea Ships, but only 3 times in the past 1+ week did i see graphs in Naval Ships resistance, and simply changing a single variable "broke" things. I am unable to use Naval ships resistance calcs in either Free!ship 3.20 Full or Free!ship Plus 3.22

    I've uninstalled/reinstalled/emptied temp files, etc. If a "hasty donation" is what gets an updated module, I'm all for it.... I just want to compare my Sea Vessels resistance calcs to the Naval Ship values.

    I've tried the supplied/available Type-23 Frigate hull, even turning off and deleting appendages. No joy. I've even made a hull from scratch, using the default new model, except making it about 132m lwl by 12 m bwl and closing up the transom. STILL, no joy.

    I am getting error messages about my CPU, but that doesn't seem to be it. It is running win 7, and only a few apps, with 1.7 GB of RAM available on a 2GHZ CPU.

    Please enlighten me!

    Thanks!/Cheers!

    CmbtntDzgnr
     
  12. Victor T
    Joined: Feb 2007
    Posts: 127
    Likes: 6, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 58
    Location: Ukraine

    Victor T Senior Member

    One of the reasons of delivery of the message of impossibility of calculation of resistance methods Hollenbach, Fung, Oortmerssen is the big loading of the processor by other processes, for example, antiviruses (Look in Task Manager). Temporarily disconnect at calculations check on viruses, etc. processes.
     
  13. CmbtntDzgnr
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 119
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 120
    Location: somewhereonearth

    CmbtntDzgnr Senior Member

    Thanks.

    I previously tried and failed to succeed. But, it makes sense, since it's intermittent. There must be a lot more processes to kill without keeling windows over.

    But, I'll check deeper. I nixed (task-killed) Open Office.org, which was chewing up some 24 MB of RAM, and for 10 or so open exploder (explorer) windows, I lost some 17 MB of RAM, but i kept them open because it's easy to switch back and forth when looking for stuff.

    BTW, is it easy (or is it difficult) to recompile the exe to a bin file to run natively in Linux? I wonder my PCLinuxOS machine would run it a lot nimbler than win7.
     
  14. CmbtntDzgnr
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 119
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 120
    Location: somewhereonearth

    CmbtntDzgnr Senior Member

    I tried to "cheat" in the creation of tanks in FS 3.23, by exporting as parts the individual compartment sideshells of my model and then extruding the new boundary edges (fwd, aft, and deck edge) toward centerline and then reimporting the parts into the model, with the pre-existing shell turned off and removed from hydros.

    I got either sharp increases in the SAC line (3x the surface area due to the newly-created fwd/aft/deck boundaries/meshes) or I got these funny looped/pig-tail-like SAC curves that i cannot figure out how to resolve.

    If I chop down the deck lines successively to get to below the waterline where I want tanks to exist, I end up with two light-blue or cyan-colored points -- sometimes, that is. In any case, moving the lines inboard and trying to "join" them to end up with a solid doesn't work. I tried reversing the normals, but the change was insignificant.

    I thought about "getting cute" and using DS pro to create boxes and then re-importing those to FS 3.23 as parts, but it all is extraordinarily time-consuming to try to arrive at 15 or 20 tanks that I hope to judge the influence of on my model's hydros, stability, acceleration, and so on. I'm trying this because I'm too poor to actually buy the tanks extension.

    A curious difference I noticed between FS 3.23 and DS Pro is that when I Ctrl+click the boundaries in FS and then enter -20 to displace my crease-created points well at y=0, the new curve/line beautifully self-limits to y=0. In DS or rather, DS Pro, the displacement of -20 moves each point to its individual distance. Not sure what I'll do except maybe take it as a clue to form smaller tanks.

    In FS 3.23, I found that the scale tool (set to x,y,z = 0.99) actually shifts my "compartment" part fwd by about 2 meters, but does not reduce it. I was trying to "cheat" that way, too, to produce tanks that fit inside the bounds of each compartment.
     

  15. CmbtntDzgnr
    Joined: Jun 2011
    Posts: 119
    Likes: 8, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 120
    Location: somewhereonearth

    CmbtntDzgnr Senior Member

    Hi Victor,

    Short:

    Last night, I tried and failed to get the Fung and several other EXEC files to run in native Win 7, mainly, as I think you warned on your site, because they are not 64-bit compatible. Maybe even my 1.8 GHz CPU is burdened by the Fung and other exe files, but it runs Delftship, Freeship, Punch! ViaCAD, and many other apps, old and new, without a problem. The EXEC contents, though very small in file size, must be extraordinarily complex in step/sequence or something.

    Longer:

    My earlier (and last night) failure to run them was under the environment of Win 7 (on 64-bit hardware) running in VirtualBox, running in PCLinuxOS. It's been so long now that i did the Win 7 install (~Jan 2010) that I cannot recall whether Win 7 is the 64-bit, and whether or not it is, which version 32-bit or 64-bit of VirtualBox I'm running. However, in VirtualBox, neither my hardware nor Win7 seemed to present any 64-bit layers to the EXECs because none of them give any error messages about 64-bit incompatibility.

    I also, last night, ran win 7 natively. In that case, there definitely were 64-bit incompatibility warning/error messages when I double-click directly on the .exe files in the EXEC folder. Strangely, VERY strangely (and humourously), FS 3.23 ran horribly slow in native win 7, yet it runs blazingly FAST in the Virtualized Win 7, and this is now causing me to vaguely recall having issues getting win 7 to run as 64-bit in VBox in early 2010, so my current VBox-hosted installation of win-7 must be 32-bit, given the lack of error messages about 64-bit from the Fung and other exe's.

    Next, i ran FS 3.23 in Win Vista, 32-bit, older version of VirtualBox. No 64-bit error messages. But, still, no graph output under fun, although the output/report did give hydros information just like the win-7-VBox install did. The CPU on the Vista machine is about 1.2 GHZ or mayb 1.8, so, likely it is stressed and plausibly is one of the problem's contributing factors.

    I did not yet run Vista natively. That machine has been running about 355 days now (PCLinuxOS) without a reboot (tho with almost daily suspend/resume without a hitch/issue), and since that uptime is nice, so I don't want to disturb it . However, my main computer also has PCLinuxOS, but it gets reboted 2 or 3 times a month, hehehe (for various reasons: dead battery, spontaneous seizure during suspend or resume....)

    It seems the copyright, code complexity, and program age might be an obstacle to your having it updated to current 32-bit and 64-bit compatibility. Is it in Delphi Code? Is there some way port or recompile it to run in 64-bit and maybe luckly optimize the code? Strange thing is is that while it says some variables are out of range, I tend to get partial hydros, but not the scale graph.

    Cheers!
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.