25 Reputation

2 Badges

3 years, 165 days

MaplePrimes Activity

These are questions asked by schapplm

I am currently trying to evaluate the performance of different methods for the same calculation and use codegen:cost to give me an overview on the rough computational effort for the results. I stumbled over the function counts not matching my own count in the optimized Matlab code generated by Maple.

Minimal example:

Fcn1 := sqrt(a):
Fcn2 := sqrt(sin(q)):

The first expression gives me "2*functions+multiplications", the second one "3*functions+multiplications".

So my question: Does anyone know, why the square root is counted as two functions while the sine is counted correctly as one?

I am currently trying to solve a geometric problem where I have to calculate angles in two connected four bar linkages parallel to a serial chain of rotatory joints (closed-loop kinematic chain).

The angle is calculated with

 > alpha:=arctan(exp_y, exp_x):

The expressions exp_y and exp_x contain long products of sines and cosines of 6 other time-dependant angles, square roots of these products, constant geometric lengths (not time-dependant) and constant geometric angles (not time-dependant).

The lenghts are already assumed positive

 > assume (l1>0): # similar for all lengths l2, l3, ...

The time dependant angles are defined as

> qJ_t := Matrix(6, 1, [qJ1(t), qJ2(t), qJ3(t), qJ4(t), qJ5(t), qJ6(t)]): # generalized coordinates of the system in the sense of technical mechanics

Other assumptions are not set, since the angles can be positive as well as negative.

Calculating this expression takes up to two days on a fast computer. In my opinion this takes much too long compared to other calculations with similar amount of variables (more complex robotic structures).Also, the arctan function does not "calculate" a result, it just writes down "arctan(...)".

Is there a way to speed up this calculation e.g. by using more assumptions?

On the arctan help page, the examples suggest that Maple is trying to already simplify the solution e.g. by drawing Pi out of the solution.





I am having trouble removing assumptions that are stored within expresssions.

Example code:

assume(l1>0): # this assumptions later helps to find a solution for a geometric problem with two four-bar-linkages
a := sqrt(l1);
save a, "test.m";
read "test.m"
a; # the assumptions are stored within the saved data
l1:='l1'; # try to remove the assumption
a; # assumption in a still existing
subs({l1=2}, a); # nothing happens: I can not access l1 any more
subs({l1~=2}, a); # This does not work either, nothing changes in a

So my question is: How do I remove the assumption within a stored expression?

My main problem lies in the handling of the expression with assumptions. At some point, I want to generate Matlab code, and the codegen-command gives me:

Warning, the following variable name replacements were made: l1~ -> cg


Variable exists but is not shown when using save/read with extension .m

My example maple code is



save a, "test1.m"


read "test1.m"



after the read command, I can access the variable, but it is not shown under "Variables".

This lead to some confusion when debugging the worksheet. Can I change this somehow?

Using the input type file format is not a solution, since then reading takes forever for complicated expressions.

Further, in the read command documentation it says "This functionality is not intended for end users" for saving the file as .m. What does that mean?

Page 1 of 1