Circle line intersect
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
Circle line intersect
Lea,
Here is the 71 pages work sheet between your first visit in this collab and your e-mail. Pages 14, 15, 44, 59 are for the circle centered in the Cartesian [0, 0]. The "goat" problem is another case as it leads to Valery constant. The level control is another case with the line horizontal. For these two cases, the intersection were not analyzed.
Hope it helps. I will read your work sheet again.
My e-mail does not send, maybe a parental control is still active ? For the big sheet, follow the instruction at the top of the page, strictly !!!. Some 3D might lose specifications ( a bug in Mathcad 11.2a).
Apparently, 14 does not like the serial definition

if so: convert it
Jean
Here is the 71 pages work sheet between your first visit in this collab and your e-mail. Pages 14, 15, 44, 59 are for the circle centered in the Cartesian [0, 0]. The "goat" problem is another case as it leads to Valery constant. The level control is another case with the line horizontal. For these two cases, the intersection were not analyzed.
Hope it helps. I will read your work sheet again.
My e-mail does not send, maybe a parental control is still active ? For the big sheet, follow the instruction at the top of the page, strictly !!!. Some 3D might lose specifications ( a bug in Mathcad 11.2a).
Apparently, 14 does not like the serial definition

if so: convert it
Jean
Labels:
- Labels:
-
Other
3 REPLIES 3
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
On 1/18/2010 9:22:57 AM, jmG wrote:
>Apparently, 14 does not like
>the serial definition
It handles that example just fine. In version 11 the elements are assigned sequentially (which is arguably a bug). In version 14 all elements are assigned simultaneously. So if the first and second elements are a:1 and b:2 it will work in both versions. But if the elements are a:1 and b:a*2 it will not work in 14 because in the second element "a" is undefined.
Richard
>Apparently, 14 does not like
>the serial definition
It handles that example just fine. In version 11 the elements are assigned sequentially (which is arguably a bug). In version 14 all elements are assigned simultaneously. So if the first and second elements are a:1 and b:2 it will work in both versions. But if the elements are a:1 and b:a*2 it will not work in 14 because in the second element "a" is undefined.
Richard
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
On 1/18/2010 10:35:17 AM, rijackson wrote:
>On 1/18/2010 9:22:57 AM, jmG wrote:
>
>>Apparently, 14 does not like
>>the serial definition
>
>It handles that example just fine. In
>version 11 the elements are assigned
>sequentially (which is arguably a bug).
>In version 14 all elements are assigned
>simultaneously. So if the first and
>second elements are a:1 and b:2 it will
>work in both versions. But if the
>elements are a:1 and b:a*2 it will not
>work in 14 because in the second element
>"a" is undefined.
>
>Richard
__________________________________
Thanks Richard,
Finally, that work sheet is just fine in 14 ?
If so, quite happy.
Jean
>On 1/18/2010 9:22:57 AM, jmG wrote:
>
>>Apparently, 14 does not like
>>the serial definition
>
>It handles that example just fine. In
>version 11 the elements are assigned
>sequentially (which is arguably a bug).
>In version 14 all elements are assigned
>simultaneously. So if the first and
>second elements are a:1 and b:2 it will
>work in both versions. But if the
>elements are a:1 and b:a*2 it will not
>work in 14 because in the second element
>"a" is undefined.
>
>Richard
__________________________________
Thanks Richard,
Finally, that work sheet is just fine in 14 ?
If so, quite happy.
Jean
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Jan 18, 2010
03:00 AM
On 1/18/2010 1:13:15 PM, jmG wrote:
>Finally, that work sheet is just fine in
>14 ?
More than 95%. There were a couple of places it turned red, but I didn't spend the time to figure out why.
Richard
>Finally, that work sheet is just fine in
>14 ?
More than 95%. There were a couple of places it turned red, but I didn't spend the time to figure out why.
Richard
