How does MapleSim compare?
See how MapleSim compares to other physical modeling products.
Dymola®
Whereas Dymola® is a tool primarily for Modelica coding, MapleSim’s user experience has been designed for engineers who want to solve problems without relying on hand coding, while still having the flexibility of accessing code when it is needed. MapleSim offers a top-down design approach, in contrast to the bottom-up approach of Dymola.
SimulationX®
MapleSim, coupled with Maple, is a completely open environment, meaning that you are never restricted to built-in components or analyses. With its complete programming and analysis environment, you can run simulations, customize analyses or script entirely new ones, perform optimizations, develop advanced symbolic control laws, and investigate models in ways not possible with SimulationX®.
AMESim®
MapleSim presents a more complete system-level offering than AMESim®. It is a true acausal modeling environment where the solver determines the direction of energy flow at simulation time. On the other hand, AMESim users must guide the solver by providing information about casualization, which is burdensome and limits model reusability. Furthermore, AMESim does not have multibody modeling capabilities, limiting it to 1-D systems only.
Simscape™
MapleSim presents a more appropriate solution for physical modeling than Simscape™. It is a true acausal modeling environment, where the solver determines the direction of energy flow at simulation time. On the other hand, Simscape™ users must guide the solver by providing information about casualization, which is burdensome and limits model robustness.
SystemModeler™
MapleSim presents a more complete system-level offering than SystemModeler™.
|
