Items tagged with structure

Feed

I am modeling a molecule.  I have six line segments.  I know the coordinates of their ends as functions of time.  Naively, I would think it would go like this:

define some functions (composites of trig functions, rational functions, etc)

define points 1,2, ..., 6.   (in terms of the functions)

define line1, line2, ...., line6

define structure = union of 6 lines

animate(structure) as t goes from t_0, ..., t_1

How exactly do i do this?

There is an heuristic-free algorithm, designed by Greg Reid to find structure constant of finite dimension Lie algebra of symmetries, admitted by differential equation. Details could be found in his paper:

http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=2316480

 

The main problem - I couldn't find implementation of it in Maple...

When trying to plot "Example1" from this page www.rhitt.com/courses/227/su99/Maple/html/surfaces2.html I get an error message that Maple cannot make a plot structure from an object with the transformation proc( (x,y) -> [x,y,-.3] end proc) . How can I plot this example?

Dear all,

I tried to use pdsolve to solve the parabolic pde but get the unexpected answer:

Is it the PDESolStruc or the other structure? Where can I find the description about this kind of structure.

Thanks.

Hi MaplePrime-ers!

I've been using the Maple(17) toolbox in Matlab(2012b) to quickly enumerate systems of equations by: (i) solving them symbolically, (ii) using unapply to make them functions, (iii) then supplying the points (driver equations) to get the system solution.  Speed is a must, because there may be 3 million+ systems to solve.  Symbolics is also very important because I am evaluating topology, so the structure of the equations may change, and therefore a functional approach will not work.

I have had success (seen in the first code snippet).  I would like similiar behaviour in the second code snippet, but sometimes I get 'solutions may be lost' as an error message,  or 'Error, (in unapply) variables must be unique and of type name'

The system of equations include:  Linear equations, 5th order polynomials, absolute functions, and pieceiwse functions.

Here is code with a topology that solves:

#Interconnection Equations
eq2[1] := FD_T + EM2_T = 0;
eq2[2] := ICE_T + GEN_T = 0;
eq2[3] := EM2_A + GEN_A + BAT_A = 0;
eq2[4] := -FD_W + EM2_W = 0;
eq2[5] := -ICE_W + GEN_W = 0;
eq2[6] := -EM2_V + GEN_V = 0;
eq2[7] := -EM2_V + BAT_V = 0;

#ICE
eq_c[1] := ICE_mdot_g=((671.5) + (-21.94)*ICE_T + (0.1942)*ICE_W + (0.5113)*ICE_T^2 + (-0.01271)*ICE_T*ICE_W + ( -0.0008761)*ICE_W^2 + (-0.006071)*ICE_T^3 + (9.867e-07)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W + (5.616e-05)*ICE_T*ICE_W^2 + (1.588e-06)*ICE_W^3 + (3.61e-05)*ICE_T^4 + (8.98e-07)*ICE_T^3*ICE_W + (-2.814e-07)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W^2 + (-8.121e-08)*ICE_T*ICE_W^3 + ( -8.494e-08 )*ICE_T^5 + (-2.444e-09)*ICE_T^4*ICE_W + (-9.311e-10)*ICE_T^3*ICE_W^2 + ( 5.835e-10)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W^3 ) *1/3600/1000 * ICE_T * ICE_W;

#BAT
eq_c[2] := BAT = 271;

#EM2
EM2_ReqPow_eq := (-148.3) + (4.267)*abs(EM2_W) + (12.77)*abs(EM2_T) + (-0.0364)*abs(EM2_W)^2 + ( 1.16)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T) + (-0.258)*abs(EM2_T)^2 + ( 0.0001181)*abs(EM2_W)^3 + (-0.0005994)*abs(EM2_W)^2*abs(EM2_T) + ( 0.0001171)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T)^2 + (0.001739 )*abs(EM2_T)^3 + (-1.245e-07 )*abs(EM2_W)^4 + ( 1.2e-06)*abs(EM2_W)^3*abs(EM2_T) + ( -1.584e-06)*abs(EM2_W)^2*abs(EM2_T)^2 + ( 4.383e-07)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T)^3 + (-2.947e-06)*abs(EM2_T)^4;
eq_c[3] := EM2_P = piecewise( EM2_T = 0, 0, EM2_W = 0, 0, EM2_W*EM2_T < 0,-1 * EM2_ReqPow_eq, EM2_ReqPow_eq);
eq_c[4] := EM2_A = EM2_P/EM2_V;

#GEN
GEN_ReqPow_eq:= (-5.28e-12) + ( 3.849e-14)*abs(GEN_W) + (-71.9)*abs(GEN_T) + (-1.168e-16)*abs(GEN_W)^2 +(1.296)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T) + (2.489)*abs(GEN_T)^2 + (1.451e-19)*abs(GEN_W)^3 + (0.0001326)*abs(GEN_W)^2*abs(GEN_T) + (-0.008141)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T)^2 + (-0.004539)*abs(GEN_T)^3 +(-6.325e-23)*abs(GEN_W)^4 + (-2.091e-07)*abs(GEN_W)^3*abs(GEN_T) + ( 3.455e-06)*abs(GEN_W)^2*abs(GEN_T)^2 + ( 2.499e-05)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T)^3 + (-5.321e-05)*abs(GEN_T)^4;
eq_c[5] := GEN_P = piecewise( GEN_T = 0, 0, GEN_W = 0, 0, GEN_W*GEN_T < 0,-1 * GEN_ReqPow_eq, GEN_ReqPow_eq);
eq_c[6] := GEN_A = GEN_P/GEN_V;

#ASSUMPTIONS
assume(BAT_V::nonnegative);
assume(FD_W::nonnegative);

#FINAL EQUATIONS

sys_eqs2 := convert(eq2,set) union {eq_c[1],eq_c[2],eq_c[3],eq_c[4],eq_c[5],eq_c[6]};

#Selecting which variables to solve for:

drivers2:= { ICE_T,ICE_W,FD_T,FD_W};
symvarnames2:=select(type,indets(convert(sys_eqs2,list)),name);
notdrivers2:=symvarnames2 minus drivers2;


#Symbolic solve

sol2:=solve(sys_eqs2,notdrivers2) assuming real:
symb_sol2:=unapply(sol2,convert(drivers2,list)):


#Enumerate (there will generally be about 40, not 6)

count := 0;
for i1 from 1 to 40 do
     for i2 from 1 to 40 do
          for i3 from 1 to 40 do
               for i4 from 1 to 40 do
                    count := count + 1;
                    solsol2(count) := symb_sol2(i1,i2,i3,i4);
               od;
          od;
     od;
od;
count;



This works great!  I would like simliar output in my second code snippet, but this time with more inputs to symb_sol.  However, if I try and change the interconnection equations a little, and add a piecewise function, and another driver... (differences in bold)

#Interconnection Equations
eq1[1] := FD_T+EM2_T = 0;
eq1[2] := ICE_T+GBb_T = 0;
eq1[3] := GEN_T+GBa_T = 0;
eq1[4] := EM2_A+GEN_A+BAT_A = 0;
eq1[5] := -FD_W+EM2_W = 0;
eq1[6] := -GEN_W+GBa_W = 0;
eq1[7] := -ICE_W+GBb_W = 0;
eq1[8] := -EM2_V+GEN_V = 0;
eq1[9] := -EM2_V+BAT_V = 0;

#ICE
eq_c[1] := ICE_mdot_g=((671.5) + (-21.94)*ICE_T + (0.1942)*ICE_W + (0.5113)*ICE_T^2 + (-0.01271)*ICE_T*ICE_W + ( -0.0008761)*ICE_W^2 + (-0.006071)*ICE_T^3 + (9.867e-07)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W + (5.616e-05)*ICE_T*ICE_W^2 + (1.588e-06)*ICE_W^3 + (3.61e-05)*ICE_T^4 + (8.98e-07)*ICE_T^3*ICE_W + (-2.814e-07)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W^2 + (-8.121e-08)*ICE_T*ICE_W^3 + ( -8.494e-08 )*ICE_T^5 + (-2.444e-09)*ICE_T^4*ICE_W + (-9.311e-10)*ICE_T^3*ICE_W^2 + ( 5.835e-10)*ICE_T^2*ICE_W^3 ) *1/3600/1000 * ICE_T * ICE_W;

#BAT
eq_c[2] := BAT = 271;

#EM2
EM2_ReqPow_eq := (-148.3) + (4.267)*abs(EM2_W) + (12.77)*abs(EM2_T) + (-0.0364)*abs(EM2_W)^2 + ( 1.16)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T) + (-0.258)*abs(EM2_T)^2 + ( 0.0001181)*abs(EM2_W)^3 + (-0.0005994)*abs(EM2_W)^2*abs(EM2_T) + ( 0.0001171)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T)^2 + (0.001739 )*abs(EM2_T)^3 + (-1.245e-07 )*abs(EM2_W)^4 + ( 1.2e-06)*abs(EM2_W)^3*abs(EM2_T) + ( -1.584e-06)*abs(EM2_W)^2*abs(EM2_T)^2 + ( 4.383e-07)*abs(EM2_W)*abs(EM2_T)^3 + (-2.947e-06)*abs(EM2_T)^4;
eq_c[3] := EM2_P = piecewise( EM2_T = 0, 0, EM2_W = 0, 0, EM2_W*EM2_T < 0,-1 * EM2_ReqPow_eq, EM2_ReqPow_eq);
eq_c[4] := EM2_A = EM2_P/EM2_V;

#GEN
GEN_ReqPow_eq:= (-5.28e-12) + ( 3.849e-14)*abs(GEN_W) + (-71.9)*abs(GEN_T) + (-1.168e-16)*abs(GEN_W)^2 +(1.296)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T) + (2.489)*abs(GEN_T)^2 + (1.451e-19)*abs(GEN_W)^3 + (0.0001326)*abs(GEN_W)^2*abs(GEN_T) + (-0.008141)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T)^2 + (-0.004539)*abs(GEN_T)^3 +(-6.325e-23)*abs(GEN_W)^4 + (-2.091e-07)*abs(GEN_W)^3*abs(GEN_T) + ( 3.455e-06)*abs(GEN_W)^2*abs(GEN_T)^2 + ( 2.499e-05)*abs(GEN_W)*abs(GEN_T)^3 + (-5.321e-05)*abs(GEN_T)^4;
eq_c[5] := GEN_P = piecewise( GEN_T = 0, 0, GEN_W = 0, 0, GEN_W*GEN_T < 0,-1 * GEN_ReqPow_eq, GEN_ReqPow_eq);
eq_c[6] := GEN_A = GEN_P/GEN_V;

#GB
FiveSpeedGearbox_R := proc(ig)
local i ,eq;
i[1]:=3.32;
i[2]:=2;
i[3]:=1.36;
i[4]:=1.01;
i[5]:=0.82;
eq:= piecewise(ig=1,i[1],ig=2, i[2],ig=3,i[3],ig=4,i[4],ig=5,i[5],1);
return eq(ig);
end proc;


eq_c[7] := GBb_T = -1/GB_R * GBa_T;
eq_c[8] := GBb_W = GB_R * GBa_W;
eq_c[9] := GB_R = FiveSpeedGearbox_R(ig);

 

#System Equations
sys_eqs := convert(eq1,set) union convert(eq_c,set);

 

 #Solve for variables
symvarnames:=select(type,indets(convert(sys_eqs,list)),name);
drivers:= {ig, ICE_T,ICE_W,FD_T,FD_W};
not_drivers := symvarnames minus drivers;

#Assumptinons

assume(BAT_V::nonnegative);
assume(FD_W::nonnegative);

sol:=(solve(sys_eqs,not_drivers) assuming real);

symb_sol:=unapply(sol,convert(drivers,list)): ---> Error, (in unapply) variables must be unique and of type name

Subsequent parts don't work...

count := 0;
for i1 from 1 to 40 do
     for i2 from 1 to 40 do
          for i3 from 1 to 40 do
               for i4 from 1 to 40 do
                    for i5 from 1 to 40 do
                         count := count + 1;
                         solsol2(count) := symb_sol2(i1,i2,i3,i4,5);
                    od;
               od; 
          od;
     od;
od;
count;

While running the last line sol:, 1 of 2 things will happen, depending on the solver. Maple17 will take a long time (30+ minutes) to solve, then report nothing, or sol will solve, but will report "some solutions have been lost".

Afterwards, evaluating symb_sol(0,0,0,0,0) will return a viable solution (real values for each of the variables).  Whereas evaluating symb_sol(0,X,0,0,0), where X <> 0, will return and empty list [].

Does anyone know how to (i) speed up the symbolic solve time?  (ii) Return ALL of the solutions?

 

Thanks in advance for reading this.  I've really no idea why this isn't working.  I've also attached two worksheets with the code: noGB.mw   withGB.mw

 Adam

As described on the help page ?updates,Maple17,Performance, Maple 17 uses a new data structure for polynomials with integer coefficients. Our goal was to improve the performance and parallel speedup of polynomial algorithms that underpin much of the system and create a platform for large scale polynomial computations. Shown below is the new representation for 9xy3z

acer discussed in a recent post the effect of different array types on performance.

I have, however, a much more elementary question: Maple has a bewildering number of differing data structures: Arrays, Vectors, lists, sets, tables,... Some of these are supersets of others.

Being still on the learning curve I am building a module with definitions of certain functions or procedures I use frequently, such as to make my life easier. A lot of my stuff uses array-like...

I would see on the monitor the vector n > 10 with all his components, but the output of Maple is always the structure of the vectors.

For example, if I write:

There is a cool option of dropping one graph from multigraph (after that it goes as separated one). How to get  this dropped structure itself? I.e. i have "graph" component with command AllPlots that itself is

AllPlots:=plots[display](AllPlotsStructure,...);

AllPlotsStructure is a list of plot/textplot.

After all i removed one structure by drag-and-drop on component. How to update AllPlotsStructure correctly?

I have a calculation (analytic) involving sums (finite) that ends up with an expression structured like a sum over an expression with several terms, like

sum(Y(t)*cos(omega*t) + a*sin(omega*t)+b*cos(omega*t),t);

(The real case is more involved but this simple example shows the issue.)

What I want is to distribute the sum over each term separately, observing that a & b are numbers & therefore can be pulled out of the sum. Note that the expression...


How would you transform a 3D plot structure into a 2D plot structure? I have in mind 1) creating a 3D plot with odeplot or with plot3d, 2) selecting (say) 4 orientations, 3) transforming each into a 2D plot, 4) exporting the 2D plots using the Standard GUI.

The reason behind my question is that the best-looking exported plots that I have been able to obtain with Maple are 2D plots exported as postscript with the Standard GUI. 3D plots don't look nearly as good when...

Hello,

I have some difficulties to create an X-Y chart and what data structure I should use.

I have a loop, I set the maximum number of iteration to nmax.

At the end of each iteration, I will retrieve two information (variables):

-iteration number, 1 by 1 until nmax, integer: n
-an value associated with this iteration, integer: v

I will store iteratively these values (at least v) at the end of each loop...

Here is the sort of data I want to plot:

plot([seq([i,i],i=1..10),seq([i,1/i],i=1..10)],style=point);

The above works (Maple 14, Windows 7, Standard GUI). but I'd like to use different scales on the left- and right-hand sides, e.g. raise the second plot by a factor of 10.

I thought dualaxisplot would be the ticket, but I haven't been able to make it to work. It may have to do with the fact that my data is a list of coordinates rather than a function ...

In the help, a structure block diagram is given under the DynamicSystems[SystemConnect] command for the explaination of the use for the general connection,

that's intuitive and gives clear connections among every structure block,

so, I wonder whether there is a method to build that diagram or similar fig using the GraphTheory package,

that will be amazing,

is there a method? I want to know how to get it.

1 2 Page 1 of 2