MapleSim Questions and Posts

These are Posts and Questions associated with the product, MapleSim

Hello guys..

I am a master student and I am interested in modelling of six dof industrial robots. in this study, ı firtsly import autocad model into Maplesim and add revolute jont between each  two link. I want to coriolisis matrix from the model with inertia matriix . I wait your helping and thanks for your interest   

What shall I do to install Maple 15 and MapleSym 5 in a Windos 10 environment.

I find the procedure in Maplesoft site up to Windows 8.

May I follow it for Windows 10.

Thank you for any help. Kind regards

Hi,

I get an error when I try to create a modelica block including a piecewise function with one of its expressions including csgn function.

similarly when I use the piecewise And for its conditions.

are these not supported in Modelica?

Hi everyone,

I need some help with the following error,

How can i solve this problem?

Thanks for your time

Best regards,

Canberk

Hi,

Ive been trying to use the global optimization toolbox to optimize a model I extract from the maplesim environment.
It works fine with the regular Optimization toolbox. but when I run the optimization on the Global toolbox I get this error:

Warning, Error at t=0.0000000000000000e+000: index-1 and derivative evaluation failure

to explain a little,
I use the getCompiledProc command to turn the maplesim model into a module to be used in maple.

pjf

I  encountered a non-integrable integral in the process of solving the following process, . How to achieve its numerical solution? Such as in a looping   code:

#######
pa[i] := pa[i-1]-(Int(subs(t = tau, Lpa[i-1]+Na1[i-1]-Na2[i-1]), tau = 0 .. t)); 

pw[i] := pw[i-1]-(Int(subs(t = tau, Lpw[i-1]+Nw1[i-1]-Nw2[i-1]), tau = 0 .. t)); u[i] := u[i-1]-(Int(subs(t = tau, Lu[i-1]+Nu1[i-1]+Nu2[i-1]), tau = 0 .. t));

######
Detailed code see annexBC2.mw

This MaplePrimes guest blog post is from Dr. James Smith, an Assistant Lecturer in the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department of York University’s Lassonde School of Engineering. His team has been working with Maplesim to improve the design of assistive devices.

As we go through our everyday lives, we rarely give much thought to the complex motions and movements our bodies go through on a regular basis. Motions and movements that seem so simple on the surface require more strength and coordination to execute than we realize. And these are made far more difficult as we age or when our health is in decline. So what can be done to assist us with these functions?

In recent years, my research team and I have been working on developing more practical and streamlined devices to assist humans with everyday movements, such as standing and sitting. Our objective was to determine if energy could be regenerated in prosthetic devices during these movements, similar to the way in which hybrid electric vehicles recover waste heat from braking and convert it into useable energy.

People use – and potentially generate – more energy than they realize in carrying out common, everyday movements. Our research for this project focused on the leg joints, and investigated which of the three joints (ankle, knee or hip) was able to regenerate the most energy throughout a sitting or standing motion. We were confident that determining this would lead to the development of more efficient locomotive devices for people suffering from diseases or disabilities affecting the muscles around these joints.

In order to identify the point at which regenerative power is at its peak, we determined that MapleSim was the best tool to help us gather the desired data. We took biomechanical data from actual human trials and applied them to a robotic model that mimics human movements when transitioning between sitting and standing positions. We created models to measure unique movements and energy consumption at each joint throughout the identified movements to determine where the greatest regeneration occurred.

To successfully carry out our research, it was essential that we were able to model the complex chemical reactions that occur within the battery needed to power the assistive device. It is a challenge finding this feature in many engineering software programs and MapleSim’s battery modeling library saved our team a great deal of time and effort during the process, as we were able to use an existing MapleSim model and simply make adjustments to fit our project.

Using MapleSim, we developed a simplified model of the human leg with a foot firmly planted on the ground, followed by a more complex model with a realistic human foot that could be raised off the ground. The first model was used to create a simplified model-based motion controller that was then applied to the second model. The human trials we conducted produced the necessary data for input into a multi-domain MapleSim model that was used to accurately simulate the necessary motions to properly analyze battery autonomy.

The findings that resulted from our research have useful and substantial applications for prostheses and orthoses designs. If one is able to determine the most efficient battery autonomy, operation of these assistive devices can be prolonged, and smaller, lighter batteries can be used to power them. Ultimately, our simulations and the resulting data create the possibility of more efficient devices that can reduce joint loads during standing to sitting processes, and vice versa.

Hello every one,

I'm using Maple to create a compiled program of my model Maplesim. I had a error with "getcompiledProc" command, which is :

Error, (in GetCompiledProc) non-numeric initial condition for `Main.RAB.value`(t): Float(undefined)

the "Main.RAB.value(t)" represent a probe used to visualize an output of my system.

Does anybody had a such error ?
Thank you for your responses.

Larbi ANIBA

Hi I was wondering if theres a way to smoothen a signal in maplesim.
I was trying to create a simple moving average but it doesnt seem to be able to create a feed back loop?
Much appreciate any help, or if there are other ways within maplesim to do it.

thanks
pjf

Hi, 

 I use Maple/MapleSim 2016. I have a question about how to save compiled modules as an one set. (Picture below describes my question.)

I use the Maple command "GetCompiledProc" to obtain the compiled module of MapleSim Model. And then, in some cases, I need to make a lot of compiled modules by using one MapleSim model.

(Usually, I make different compiled modules which contain different parameters to others)

For the convenience of using different compiled modules, I want to make these contained in one set whose name is "ModelSet". ("Case1 -> Case2" in the picture)

I tried this, but it did not work. Please see the attached (simple) model and the Maple worksheet in that model.

[TS]CompiledMoule_Practice.msim

For example, I want to use Model1(Compiled module 1) by loading that module from the ModelSet[1]. (Similarly, Model2 by loading ModelSet[2].)

However, when I load one of them, it is not the compiled module, but just a "symbol". It does not work as a compiled module any more.

Is there any way to make the "ModelSet" as I want? In fact, I tried to make the type of ModelSet as vector, list, and set, but all of them did not work. 

I appreciate any idea you may have.

Hi,

I was playing around with the example "Simple Inverse Kinematic Problem" and found somethings to be odd:

the angular motion seems to be calculated from between pi and negative pi and this has some effects when using position block to move a joint.

the original angular displacement is graph below

the angular displacement after ik calculations have been performed:

if you run the simulation it seems to copy and mirror the input pendulum, however if you disable one of the IK solutions you see that infact its motion isn't like the input.

this becomes more prevailant when you use a position block to force rotation on a joint instead of using the 'prescribed rotation' blocks that comes with the example.

My question then:
why does this happen?
how do I work around this?

the importance that the motion is follow precisely becomes more prevailent when we want to extract other values such as vel, accel, torque. they are incorrect and very jumpy. Also simply put the angular displacement is wrong, how do I fix it?

(side note: I'm thinking  it has to do with the way arctan is calculated in maple limits it to stay in range -pi to pi
"For real arguments x, y, the two-argument function arctan(y, x), computes the principal value of the argument of the complex number x+Iy, so −π < arctan(y,x) ≤ π." from https://www.maplesoft.com/support/help/Maple/view.aspx?path=invtrig)

pjf

Hi, after installing Maple 2015 I installed Maplesim 2015 but the following error comes up when trying to run Maplesim:

 

Java Virtual Machine Launcher

Could not find the main class:

com.maplesoft.application.Launcher. Program will exit

 

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks

 

 

Hi, so I am a newbie with simulation on maplesim. I've made a simulation of the lower part of a humanoid robot and I attempt to input angles to the joints from an excel file.

However, after adding my file .xls to the data set and linking it to a time lookup table, I get this error:

unable to store Time when datatype=float[8] Main

Havent installed any add-ins, I am working with excel 2007, Maplesim 6.4 and Maple 18.

Any insight on the problem would be of great help.

Thank you

Bruce Jenkins is President of Ora Research, an engineering research and advisory service. Maplesoft commissioned him to examine how systems-driven engineering practices are being integrated into the early stages of product development, the results of which are available in a free whitepaper entitled System-Level Physical Modeling and Simulation. In this series of blog posts, Mr. Jenkins discusses the results of his research.

This is the third entry in the series.

My last post, System-level physical modeling and simulation: Adoption drivers vs. adoption constraints, described my firm’s research project to investigate the contemporary state of adoption and application of systems modeling software technologies, and their attendant methods and work processes, in the engineering design of off-highway equipment and mining machinery.

In this project, I interviewed some half-dozen expert practitioners at leading manufacturers, including both engineering management and senior discipline leads, to identify key technological factors as well as business and competitive issues driving adoption and use of systems modeling at current levels.

After identifying present-day adoption drivers as well as current constraints on adoption, finally I sought to learn practitioners’ visions, strategies and best practices for accelerating and institutionalizing the implementation and usage of systems modeling tools and practices in their organizations.

I was strongly encouraged to find a wealth of avenues and opportunities for exploiting enterprise business drivers, current industry disruptions, and related internal realignments and change-management initiatives to help drive introduction—or proliferation—of these technologies and their associated new ways of working into engineering organizations:

  • Systems modeling essential to compete by creating differentiated products
  • Mechatronics revolution in off-highway equipment
  • Industry downturns and disruptions create opportunities for disruptive innovation
    • Opportunities to leverage change in underlying industry competitive dynamics
    • Mining industry down-cycle creates opportunity to innovate, find new ways of working
    • Some manufacturers are using current down-cycle in mining industry to change their product innovation strategy
  • Strategies of manufacturers pursuing disruptive innovation
    • Best odds are in companies with deep culture of continually inculcating new skills into their people, and rethinking methods and work processes
    • Some managements willing to take radical corporate measures to replace old-thinking engineering staff with “systems thinkers”
    • Downsizing in off-highway equipment manufacturers may push them to seek more systems-level value-add from their component suppliers
  • New technology opportunities inside manufacturers ready to move more deeply into systems modeling
    • Opportunities in new/emerging industries/companies without legacy investments in systems modeling tools and libraries
    • Best practice for introducing systems modeling: start with work process, then bring in software
    • Capitalizing on engineering’s leeway and autonomy in specifying systems modeling software compared with enterprise-standard CAD/PLM tools
  • Systems modeling technology advances anticipated by practitioner advocates
    • Improving software integration, interoperability, data interchange
    • Improving co-simulation across domain tools
    • Better, more complete FMI (Functional Mock-up Interface) implementation/compliance
    • Higher-fidelity versions of FMI or similar

The white paper detailing the findings of this research is intended to offer guidance and advice for implementing change, as well as documentation to help convince colleagues, management and partners that new ways of working exist, and that the software technologies to support and enable them are available, accessible, and delivering payback and business advantage to forward-thinking engineering organizations today.

My hope is that this research finds utility as a practical, actionable aid for engineers and engineering management in helping their organizations to adopt and implement—or to strengthen and deepen—a simulation-led, systems-driven approach to product development.

You can download the full white paper reporting our findings here.

Bruce Jenkins, Ora Research
oraresearch.com

Bruce Jenkins is President of Ora Research, an engineering research and advisory service. Maplesoft commissioned him to examine how systems-driven engineering practices are being integrated into the early stages of product development, the results of which are available in a free whitepaper entitled System-Level Physical Modeling and Simulation. In this series of blog posts, Mr. Jenkins discusses the results of his research.

This is the second entry in the series.

My last post, Strategies for accelerating the move to simulation-led, systems-driven engineering, described my firm’s research project to investigate the contemporary state of adoption and application of systems modeling software technologies, and their attendant methods and work processes, in the engineering design of off-highway equipment and mining machinery.

Adoption drivers

In this project, I conducted in-depth, structured but open-ended interviews with some half-dozen expert practitioners at leading manufacturers, including both engineering management and senior discipline leads. These interviews identified the following key technological factors as well as business and competitive issues driving adoption and use of systems modeling tools and methods at current levels:

  • Fuel economy and emissions mandates, powertrain electrification and autonomous operation requirements
  • Software’s ability to drive down product cost of ownership and delivery times
  • Traditional development processes often fail to surface system-level issues until fabrication or assembly, or even until operational deployment
  • Detailed analysis tools such as FEA and CFD focus on behaviors at the component level, and are not optimal for studies of the complete system
  • Engineering departments/groups enjoy greater freedom in systems modeling software selection and purchase decisions than in enterprise-controlled CAD/PDM/PLM decisions
  • Good C/VP-level visibility of systems modeling tools, especially in off-highway equipment

Adoption constraints

At the same time, there was widespread agreement among all the experts interviewed that these tools and methods are not being brought to bear with anywhere near the breadth or depth that practitioner advocates would like, and that they believe would be greatly beneficial to their organizations and industries.

In probing why this is, the interviews revealed an array of factors constraining broader adoption at present. These range from legacy engineering culture issues, through human resource limitations and constraints imposed by business models and corporate cultures, to entrenched shortcomings in how long-established systems modeling software toolsets have been deployed and applied to the product development process:

  • Legacy engineering culture constraints
    • Conservatism of mining machinery product development culture
    • Engineering practices in long-standardized industries grounded in handbook formulas and rules of thumb
    • Perceived lack of time in schedule to do systems modeling
  • Human resource constraints
    • Low availability of engineers with systems modeling skills
    • Shortage of engineers trained in systems thinking
    • Legacy engineering processes compound shortage of systems-thinking engineers
    • Industry downturns put constraints on professional staff development
  • Business-model and corporate-culture constraints
    • Culture of seeking to mitigate cost and risk by staying with legacy designs instead of advancing and innovating the product
    • Corporate awareness of need to innovate in mining machinery gets stifled at engineering level
    • Low C/VP-level visibility of systems modeling tools in mining machinery
  • Engineering organization constraints on innovating/modernizing their systems modeling technology infrastructure
    • Power users wedded to legacy systems modeling tools
    • Weak integration at many/most points of the engineering digital toolset chain
    • Implementing systems modeling software as a sales configuration/costing aid seen as taking too much time

My next post will detail practitioners’ visions, strategies and best practices for accelerating and institutionalizing the implementation and usage of systems modeling tools and practices in their organizations.

You can download the full white paper reporting our findings here.

Bruce Jenkins, Ora Research
oraresearch.com

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Last Page 1 of 28