Please allow me to share some experience of using HAMS. It is an open-source software which can be used to calculate hydrodynamic coefficients as an alternative to Wamit. But I found HAMS may assume the wave is e^-iwt (I can not 100% confirm), while Wamit assume wave is e^iwt. When using HAMS, users must be careful, as I found the imaginary part of dimensionless excitation force calculated by HAMS is opposite to that calculated by Wamit. The real part of dimensionless excitation force from both two software can match well.
If my understanding is correct (I HAMS may assume the wave is e^-iwt, while Wamit assume wave is e^iwt). Re(X_Hams) = Re(X_Wamit), and Im(X_Hams) = -Im(X_Wamit). Here, Re denotes Real part of complex value, while Im denotes Imaginary part of complex value. X_Hams denotes dimensionless excitation force from HAMS, while X_Wamit denotes dimensionless excitation force from WAMIT. When calculating excitation force, Re(X_Hams * A e^-iwt) actually equals to Re(X_Wamit * A e^iwt). Here, A is the amplitude of wave.
I think Hydrodyn only allows Wamit results file at present. And I guess when Hydrodyn calculates the excitation force, it also assumes wave is e^iwt.
Therefore, users must be careful if they want to import HAMS results to OpenFAST.
Regards,
Ran