I have a dataset:

NMP:=<0.530,0.555,0.572,0.592>:
ETOH:=<0.136,0.153,0.163,0.170>:

For these four data points [NMP,ETOH] I want to find the least square function in form of:

ln(ETOH/(1-ETOH-NMP))=a*ln(NMP/(1-ETOH-NMP))+b

also I need to find appropriate a,b constant values.

This function is implicite so I cannot use with(Statistics):NonlinearFit.

Can you help me how to determine a,b constants?

Hi 

friend i want fit a curve regarding some data and fnction and how we can find the values of a,b,c and d for the following 

f=1-(8*a*b+6*c*d/(b*k*x))/(2*a*b+c*b*(1/(b*k*x)))

X := Vector([200, 210, 220, 230, 240, 250, 260, 270, 280, 290])

Y := Vector([.4172, .3030, .4668, .3317, .1276, .1303, .1733, .1451, .3466, .4125])

Code & result:

> map((a::uneval,b)->'args',[a,b,c,d],1..4,x);       
['a, 1 .. 4, x', 'b, 1 .. 4, x', 'c, 1 .. 4, x', 'd, 1 .. 4, x']

> map((a,b::uneval)->'args',[a,b,c,d],1..4,x);           
[a, 1 .. 4, x, b, 1 .. 4, x, c, 1 .. 4, x, d, 1 .. 4, x]

Why is the output not:
['a', 1 .. 4, x, 'b', 1 .. 4, x, 'c', 1 .. 4, x, 'd', 1 .. 4, x]
and
[a, '1 .. 4', x, b, '1 .. 4', x, c, '1 .. 4', x, d, '1 .. 4', x]
?

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

In the process of simplification I have the following multi-variable polynomial:

y:=-8*C*d1^2*(-2+d1)*(-1+d1)^3*r*L*R^3+(d1^4*(-2+d1)^2*L^2-4*C*(-2+d1)*(4*d1^3-13*d1^2+16*d1-8)*(-1+d1)^2*r^2*L+4*C^2*(-2+d1)^2*(-1+d1)^4*r^4)*R^2+(2*d1^4*(-2+d1)^2*r*L^2-2*C*(-2+d1)*(5*d1^3-24*d1^2+32*d1-16)*(-1+d1)^2*r^3*L+4*C^2*(-2+d1)^2*(-1+d1)^4*r^5)*R+d1^4*(-2+d1)^2*r^2*L^2-2*C*(-2+d1)*(d1^3-6*d1^2+8*d1-4)*(-1+d1)^2*r^4*L+C^2*(-2+d1)^2*(-1+d1)^4*r^6

This polynomial contains several (-2+d1), (-1+d1) terms with varying powers in each term. My question here is how to take out common terms and then form compact multi-variable polynomial (without having physical inspection).

Thank you for your help.

MVC

Hello people in Mapleprimes,

I have an expression which I want to modify with another equation.

They are simple, and looks easy to simplify.

nb:=(k-sigma+1)*lambda*L*(gamma*upsilon-delta__1122^k*tau)*upsilon*tau*v/(f__F*sigma*(-tau^2+upsilon^2)*k);

hh := (L*lambda*(k-sigma+1)*upsilon*tau*v)/(f__F*sigma*(-tau^2+upsilon^2)*k)=rho;

I want to express nb with hh as

(gamma*upsilon-delta__1122^k*tau)*rho;

With the next code, that modification can be done.

isolate(hh,f__F);subs(%,nb);simplify(%);

But, this isolates hh for f__F, which does not look intuitive.

On the other hand, the outcome of the substitution looks so simple, which you find with executing  the codes of

nb, and hh.

But, algsubs, and subs, and simplify/siderel won't work properly.

What I want to ask is this. Isn't there any nice way to substitute hh into nb other than isolating f__F, so that the result is expressed with rho?

I will be very glad if you will give me answers.

Best wishes.

taro

I am solving "Fx=0" for geting "roots:x" using "solve(Fx,x)". Solution is in the form of "a+sqrt(b)", "a-sqrt(b)". One solution "f1" is given below.

f1:=1/2*(-8*R*d1^2*r^2*C+10*d1*r^2*C*R+5*d1*r^3*C+2*r*L*d1^2-2*C*r^3+2*R*L*d1^2-R*L*d1^3-r*L*d1^3-4*C*r^2*R+2*R*d1^3*r^2*C-4*r^3*d1^2*C+r^3*d1^3*C+sqrt(26*r^6*d1^4*C^2+41*r^6*d1^2*C^2-44*r^6*d1^3*C^2-20*C^2*r^6*d1+16*C^2*r^5*R-16*C*r^4*L-176*r^5*d1^3*C^2*R+164*r^5*d1^2*C^2*R-74*r^4*d1^4*C*L+136*r^4*d1^3*C*L-136*r^4*d1^2*C*L-80*C^2*r^5*d1*R+72*C*r^4*L*d1-64*C*r^3*R*L+104*R^2*d1^4*r^4*C^2-176*R^2*d1^3*r^4*C^2+164*R^2*d1^2*r^4*C^2-8*r^6*d1^5*C^2+r^2*L^2*d1^6-4*R^2*L^2*d1^5+104*r^5*d1^4*C^2*R+40*r*L*R^3*d1^5*C-72*r*L*R^3*d1^4*C+56*r*L*R^3*d1^3*C-16*r*L*R^3*d1^2*C+R^2*L^2*d1^6+20*r^4*L*C*d1^5-32*r^4*d1^5*C^2*R^2+2*R*L^2*d1^6*r-2*r^4*L*d1^6*C+4*R^2*d1^6*r^4*C^2+4*R*d1^6*r^5*C^2-306*r^3*d1^4*C*R*L+548*r^3*d1^3*C*L*R-544*r^3*d1^2*C*R*L+288*C*r^3*L*d1*R+16*C^2*r^4*R^2+4*R^2*L^2*d1^4-16*R^2*L*d1^6*r^2*C-10*R*L*d1^6*r^3*C+r^6*d1^6*C^2-32*r^5*d1^5*C^2*R-4*r^2*d1^5*L^2-352*R^2*d1^4*r^2*C*L+580*R^2*d1^3*r^2*C*L-552*R^2*d1^2*r^2*C*L-80*d1*r^4*C^2*R^2-8*R^3*d1^6*L*C*r+88*r^3*L*C*d1^5*R+116*r^2*L*R^2*d1^5*C+4*C^2*r^6-8*r*R*L^2*d1^5+288*d1*r^2*C*R^2*L-64*C*r^2*R^2*L+8*r*L^2*d1^4*R+4*r^2*L^2*d1^4)^(1/2))/(-3*r^2*d1*L*C-6*R*d1*L*C*r+2*L*C*r^2+r^2*d1^2*L*C+4*L*C*r*R+2*R*d1^2*L*C*r);

I used the following Maple syntax

patmatch(f1,XT::algebraic+sqrt(YT::algebraic),'q1');

the answer is "false"

Is there any modification in the syntax "patmatch" is required.

Here, my question is how to separate "a" and "b" in "a+sqrt(b)" (a, b are big expressions involving many variables).

Thanking you advance for your help.

  In attached file I need to plot (R/R0 )^3  versus t for diffrent of (s) for example  s=0.01,0.005,0.003   plot.mwplot.mw

I have this function:

Z := (cos((1/2)*x)-I*sin((1/2)*x))*A0/r^(1/2)+(cos((1/2)*x)+I*sin((1/2)*x))*r^(1/2)*A1+(cos(3*x*(1/2))+I*sin(3*x*(1/2)))*r^(3/2)*A2;

I wanna to obtain another function Y which equal to

Y:=f1*(Re(Z)+Re(Z'))+f2*(Im(Z)+Im(Z'));

where: f1 and f2 are constant 

thanks :)

In order to change Maple for the better, I use to submit SCRs. However, as i was kindly
informed by Bryon (a copy of his e-letter on demand), MaplePrimes are under reconstruction and do not
work properly. At least my three messages sent through the Contact button were lost.
I have  unsuccessfully tried to reach beta.maplesoft.com (see the result of ping in the screen screen.29.08.16.docx).
Please, help me!

I am solving "Fx=0" for geting "roots:x" using "solve(Fx,x)". Solution is in the form of

"a+sqrt(b)", "a-sqrt(b)"

Here my question is how to extract "a", "b" separately (a, b are complex and very big expressions).

Thank you in advance for your help.

Hello people in mapleprimes,

I think that I found a bug.

Using the screen opened with command + f, I tried to find a v__1211 in the file I appended here.

But, when the cursor is trapped on an output part, which is a blue part, maple wouldn't continue to find the next

v__1211 anymore even if I clicked the Find Next on the screen.

If I move the cursol one line below with a hand, the Find Next butttons works again, but it is intricate.

Isn't there any good way to avoid this trouble other than not using double _, that is __.?

I hope you will give me some hint.

taro

v_1211.mw

P.S. I clicked the above link and opened that file with maple. Then, the notification telling that this is read-only file and

you cannot save this file after some modification, appeared. I don't know whether there is any problem. 

Does appending a maple file on a post on this mapleprimes always done in such a way? 

The keyboard shortcut sequence for executing an entire worksheet is Alt+e+e+w. Occasionally, I hit Alt+e+w+w by accidence. In that case, Maple sometimes, not always!?, gets completely stuck and can only be shut down through the job list window (Windows Ctrl+Alt+Del). Can anybody else replicate that? And if so, has this erratically odd behaviour been fixed in later versions of Maple?

Hi,

I'm currently writing my thesis and actually haven't used Maple before.

I've got the following problem with converting the results of a sequence:

seq(Optimization:-Maximize(function with 2 variables), parameter:0..1,0.1)

The results are ok, but I can't convert the values to a spreadsheet with 4 columns (parameter value, maximum value, value of variable 1, value of variable 2).

Thank you!

Best regards

Hello everyone!

I want to plot few curves. I need plot legends with slected curves only. When I try to do so, I get an error saying the number of legends are less that the curves( not exact words obviously).

I am using this sample code please help me to achieve the goal.

plot([cos(x)^2, 1-(1/2)*x, x^2], x = -Pi .. Pi, legend = [typeset("Curve: ", cos(x)^2), typeset("Curve: ", 1-(1/2)*x)])

The maple file is attached here

legend.mw