Bendesarts

345 Reputation

10 Badges

9 years, 140 days

MaplePrimes Activity


These are replies submitted by Bendesarts

@tomleslie 

I just try to run the code that acer send us : TestExplore_1.m

with this version of maple : `Maple 2016.1, X86 64 WINDOWS, Apr 22 2016, Build ID 1133417`

and i have the error mistake mentioned previously

@acer 

yes I have tried re-executing the whole sheet but I still obtain this error message which appears each time I try to drag a slider.

Here my version :

`Maple 2016.1, X86 64 WINDOWS, Apr 22 2016, Build ID 1133417`

Do you have other ideas ?

Thans a lot for your help

@acer 

Thank you acer.

I have MAple2016. It seems working but when I drag the slider i obtain this error message.

Do you have an idea of this problem and how can I troubleshoot it ?

 

@Kitonum 

OK I have tried but it seems that no simplifications is made with this function simplify(,size).

Do you have other ideas ?

Thanks a lot for your help

@Thomas Richard 

Hello,

Thanks a lot for your feedback

Here the new file :

TrigonometricSystem2.mw

The unknowns are mentioned in this new file :

ListAllUnknowns := [Psi(t), Theta[1](t), Theta[2](t), x[1](t), x[2](t), z[1](t), z[2](t)]

So it makes 7 equations with 7 unknowns variables.

The names that you have determined are parameters which are considered to be known.

Concerning your remark "I would use Worksheet mode for such applications, but that is a matter of preferences.", may you tell a bit more ? I'm interesting to progress on this field to have better presentation of my worksheet. Which mode do I use ? How can I change to the mode that you proposed. 

@acer 

@vv 

OK thank you for you help.

Now in this file

TrigEq3.mw

Is it possible to simplify again the last equation 5 but within preserving the following groups :

ListV := {cos(Psi(t)-Theta[1](t)), cos(Psi(t)-Theta[2](t)), cos(Psi(t)-Theta[3](t)), cos(Psi(t)-Theta[4](t)), cos(Psi(t)-gamma[1](t)), cos(Psi(t)-gamma[2](t)), cos(Psi(t)-gamma[3](t)), cos(Psi(t)-gamma[4](t)), cos(-phi[1](t)+gamma[1](t)), cos(-phi[2](t)+gamma[2](t)), cos(-phi[3](t)+gamma[3](t)), cos(-phi[4](t)+gamma[4](t)), cos(Psi(t)+phi[1](t)-gamma[1](t)), cos(Psi(t)+phi[2](t)-gamma[2](t)), cos(Psi(t)+phi[3](t)-gamma[3](t)), cos(Psi(t)+phi[4](t)-gamma[4](t)), cos(Psi(t)), sin(Psi(t)-Theta[1](t)), sin(Psi(t)-Theta[2](t)), sin(Psi(t)-Theta[3](t)), sin(Psi(t)-Theta[4](t)), sin(Psi(t)-gamma[1](t)), sin(Psi(t)-gamma[2](t)), sin(Psi(t)-gamma[3](t)), sin(Psi(t)-gamma[4](t)), sin(-phi[1](t)+gamma[1](t)), sin(-phi[2](t)+gamma[2](t)), sin(-phi[3](t)+gamma[3](t)), sin(-phi[4](t)+gamma[4](t)), sin(Psi(t))}

I only want the expand simplifications on these kind of groups :  (cos(a[1])-1)*(cos(a[1])+1) dealing with a[1], a[2], b[1], b[2]

Thank you for your help

 

@vv 

Perfect thank you

simplify didn't work but the simplfiy(expand( )) works well. For my culture, do you have ideas why ?

Moreover, in the same idea, may you see if you manage to simplify this other trigonometric equation 

TrigonometricEquation2.mw

The idea would be to simplfy only cos² () + sin²() = 1 but the simplify seems to expand the expression more than making the simplication  cos² () + sin²() = 1 

@acer 

Thank you for your interesting complement.

May you explain me the role of the option remember,system ?

 

@Doug Meade 

Perfect, it was exactly what I need

@Doug Meade 

Here the data for the plot

dataForTags.mw

For the tags, I would like to use the tp vector again.

Thank you for your help

@Carl Love 

Thank you carl you perfectly answer to my need

@Carl Love 

Thank you for your help.

I hope that we will find your former code again.

Don't you store this code on your computer ?

 

@Thomas Richard 

On this point, is it possible to do with MapleSim only the kinematics ? I'm not sur. I believe that with MapleSim it is only possible to make the dynamics study but not only the kinematics.

@Joe Riel @Carl Love 

Thank you for your tips.

It is a pity that you find the process of Carl not efficient because I found it very appropriated for my need. What do you mean by "standalone" ? is it the fact that you cannot create a procedure 2 that use the procedure 1 in the same module with this way of building a module. In other words, the procedures should be independant if you use this way of creating module.

Mac Dude Thank you for your example. 

 

@one man

Congratulation for your animation. It looks very nice. I look forward reading your paper which will detail the method used. I would be very interested as I told you before to better see the mechanical equations that you have written namely the constraint equations.

It would be great if you add comments, or sections in your worksheet so that it would be possible for readers to analyse the mechanical assumptions and modeling that you made (of course, it is not a confidential project).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Last Page 3 of 16