I think it would be fantastic to be able to have options for units output. for example, if i were to input 5 kip * 10 ft, the output in prime 2.0 is 1608702.43 lb*ft^2/s^2. I understand that this current default is the true form and is correct but we just dont think that way in all our respective disciplines so having the ability to set our output units given certain input units would be wonderful and would cut back on a lot of time spent constantly changing units. This will allow for more fluid work flow without constant interruption to change units.

PLEASE GIVE US THIS OPTION!!!!!!

E

ELSID

1-Visitor

Could not find another thread on Prime 3.0

Original road map had 3.0 being fully capable up to MathCAD 15 functionality. Is this still valid? Feel free to move to a more appropriate thread if necessary

D

ddenholm

1-Visitor

How about:

NM3 (Normal Meters Cubed) and SCF (Standard Cubic Feet).

Once one has established the standard conditions, these are essentially equivalent to moles.

One is basically calculating the volume of a gas at a standard condition using the ideal gas law and the number of moles.

Unfortunately the standard conditions are not all that standard. In most cases the pressure will be 1 atmosphere and the temperature will be 0 C for NM3 and 60 F for SCF. But there are other values (mainly for the temperature) so it would be great if the end-user could adjust the temperature.

--Doug

J

JohnDoe

1-Visitor

Please add the nano-henry unit (10^-9 Henry).

E

ELSID

1-Visitor

Just see Valery's response above dated Aug 3, 2012 7:44 AM

http://communities.ptc.com/message/186807#186807.

nH:=10^9*H

Now if it's used in industry ALOT ... like cm or mm, I can see the request. Hell, KIPs are used in the US and not part of the base units.

Not a unit request , but a request non-the-less

How about annotation and drawing functionality with industry symbols per ISA or equivalent EU standard. Mathcad is used for engineering and sometimes CAD drawings are not used. If I could draw basic systems (even as rudimentary as Adobe) to sketch would be a great feature.

Example would be the insulation file uploaded by Alan Stevens http://communities.ptc.com/docs/DOC-3093. He brought in a JPG. This would have been a snap in Adobe

S

StuartBruff

23-Emerald V

ELSID wrote:
Not a unit request , but a request non-the-less
How about annotation and drawing functionality with industry symbols per ISA or equivalent EU standard. Mathcad is used for engineering and sometimes CAD drawings are not used. If I could draw basic systems (even as rudimentary as Adobe) to sketch would be a great feature.
Example would be the insulation file uploaded by Alan Stevens http://communities.ptc.com/docs/DOC-3093. He brought in a JPG. This would have been a snap in Adobe

Drawing tools have been on the feature request list since at least 2005.

V

ValeryOchkov

24-Ruby IV

You can do a reference on my sheet and have a lot of new units:

It will be good to have it for Mathcad Prime too!

1_RefUnits-xmcd.zip

O

OscarJ.

1-Visitor

Good morning,

I would like to see the symbols used for units as per SI:

hour: h (not hr)

gram: g (not gm)

...

Best Regards,

Oscar J.

R

RichardJ

19-Tanzanite

I agree. This was not the case in MC15 and earlier because g and h conflicted with built in constants. This is a non-issue in Prime though, because of the labels.

H

HarveyHensley

12-Amethyst

I guess it does me no harm if there is a unit for heat capacity, like cal/g/C, or kcal/kg/C, but why? There currently is no name for it, unlike W = J/s. Also, the combinations can be extensive. If you add new units that are combinations of the existing units, the rule should be "is there a common name for it?" If you add the heat capacity unit, then it means remembering a new name, which most people won't know, so most people won't use it. Thus, if you need a new combination of units, do what we do now and create it yourself. Of course, if you use it for your output, most people won't know what it is unless the name looks just like the definition: so again, what was the point?

An example of a unit that most people would know, but that doesn't exist in MC15 is a barrel, or bbl. It might be nice to have that, but it's no big deal for me to create it when needed.

Most of the other suggestions deal with names for different orders of magnitude. Maybe some thought could be given to an order of magnitude placeholder in addition to a units placeholder. This would eliminate having to go through the list of units making nano this, nano that, kilo this, kilo that etc.

R

RichardJ

19-Tanzanite

Most of the other suggestions deal with names for different orders of magnitude. Maybe some thought could be given to an order of magnitude placeholder in addition to a units placeholder. This would eliminate having to go through the list of units making nano this, nano that, kilo this, kilo that etc.

I hate to sound like a stuck record (like me, you are old enough to understand that analogy in more than just an abstract way ), but full support of SI prefixes is a long standing request. Sigh

H

HarveyHensley

12-Amethyst

Regarding my repeated practice of suggesting changes that have been requested for decades, I prefer to forge blindly ahead knowing you or Stuart will point out my extreme tardiness.. It saves me time trolling through the archives to see when it was first proposed. However, since the changes are still needed, I have no guilt for bringing them to the forum once again.

H

HarveyHensley

12-Amethyst

Mona,

This discussion should be moved to Enhancing Mathcad. Maybe if these long standing requests get collected in one spot they might actually produce some results..

S

StuartBruff

23-Emerald V

Harvey Hensley wrote:
Mona,
This discussion should be moved to Enhancing Mathcad. Maybe if these long standing requests get collected in one spot they might actually produce some results..

There have been at least half a dozen PTC/Mathsoft initiated attempts to collect feature requests into one place. At least three of the user-input threads to these attempts have slipped into the oblivion reserved for old, unsupported databases (ie,the Collaboratories). We shouldn't be having this conversation, because PTC/Mathsoft should have sorted the unit system out properly at least 5 years ago - certainly, as major as rewrite as Prime should have been a lot smarter than what amounts to little more than a resurrection of Mathcad 11's dynamic type checking.

Valery's example below is a good example of why a quantity tracking system is preferable to the dimension tracking system in place at the moment. Dimensionless quantities (ie, quantities of dimension 1) are indistinguishable from each other and allow such things as adding bits to bytes and angles to solid angles - thus obviating the advantages of a "unit" tracking system. One way round this is allow the user to define the quantity that is associated with each unit (and, yes, just like money, that will form a new base quantity in the Mathcad System of Quantities if it's of dimension one and not a derived quantity).

I do not get the impression that feature request take-ups (or the little I have seen about the Mathcad Prime roadmap) are determined by people who grok Mathcad from the point of view of an experienced user.

Stuart

(grok ... now there's a word I haven't come across for some time)

V

ValeryOchkov

24-Ruby IV

One (crazy) idea in Mole day (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mole_Day)

And what about this unit of Substance: