cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Community Tip - Did you know you can set a signature that will be added to all your posts? Set it here! X

Translate the entire conversation x

How to get the result as a column instead of a row?

OO_14410365
2-Explorer

How to get the result as a column instead of a row?

OO_14410365_0-1763840308099.png

 

22 REPLIES 22

Unfortunately, I only have Express, so I can't help with the presentation of the symbolic result.

 

Perhaps, try putting the variables in a vector?

 

            [x_1]

solve, |y_1|

            [z_1]

 

You can assign the result to a variable and transpose it.

 

However, is there any particular reason you want to use the symbolic processor to solve the equation, when a numeric solution seems to give reasonable results?

 

2025 11 22 A.png

 

Stuart

Stuart's got it: simply assign result to a vector and then take transpose.  P11 file attached.

rgunwaldsen_0-1763849009158.png

 

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:OO_14410365)

The symbolic solve will always provide the solutions row-wise and there is no option to set which will change this behaviour. You will get further rows for non-linear systems and each row represents a solution set.

I also think that in case you are just looking for the numeric values its better to use a numeric method and not the symbolics. Stuart has already shown some ways. Other options are the usage of the "lsolve" function

Werner_E_0-1763859031709.png

or using a solve block with "find" (you have to provide arbitrary guess values) which displays its results column-wise as you like it.

Werner_E_1-1763859098205.png

 

Using the symbolics makes sense if you are looking for symbolic solutions (in case your system contains some variables)

Werner_E_3-1763859285115.png

and, yes, in this case displaying the results column-wise sure makes sense 😉

 

Another reason for using  the symbolics could be that you want 'exact' results, displayed in fractions (and maybe pi, e, etc) and not a decimal approximation. Unfortunately the symbolics automatically switches into float-mode as soon as just one decimal point is present. So you must also provide your information with fractions, i.e. 3/2, even though 1.5 is also an exact value.

Werner_E_4-1763859563707.png

 

You may also assign the result of the symbolic "solve" a row vector (1 x 3 matrix) with three variables which you then can evaluate symbolically or numerically and use for further calculations.

Werner_E_5-1763859749872.png

 

EDIT: If you really want to use the symbolic engine and insist on a column vector right from the start, there is a way to do it: You have to use a solve block with "find" which is evaluated symbolically:

Werner_E_0-1765162541570.png

 

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)

Will the symbolic processor accept a vector [x,y,z] as a parameter to the solve keyword?

 

(where [x,y,z] is a column vector)

 

Stuart

 

(Unfortunately, lsolve is a Premium function not available to us lowly Express users, and I'm getting loath to suggest things I can't check)

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)


@StuartBruff wrote:

Will the symbolic processor accept a vector [x,y,z] as a parameter to the solve keyword?

 

(where [x,y,z] is a column vector)

 


Yes, the symbolics accepts the list of variables as I did, but also a vector. It does not matter if its a column or a row vector.

Werner_E_0-1763872201886.png

Werner_E_1-1763872230801.png

It also accepts a mixture

Werner_E_2-1763872273913.png

 

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)

That's annoying.  Does that classify as a bug?

 

Stuart

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)

Doesn't feel like a bug to me. But if its a bug then its a bug present already in Mathcad. At least the behaviour is the same in Mathcad 15.

 

If Prime would provide a data type 'list', we could demand that we expect to see the results presented in exact the way as we provide the variables to be solved.

So we would see them as column vector when provide [x,y,z] as a column vector as argument of 'solve'.

But as long as there is no data type (comma separated) list implemented I guess I am happy with the behaviour we have.

 

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)


@Werner_E wrote:

Doesn't feel like a bug to me. But if its a bug then its a bug present already in Mathcad. At least the behaviour is the same in Mathcad 15.

 

If Prime would provide a data type 'list', we could demand that we expect to see the results presented in exact the way as we provide the variables to be solved.

So we would see them as column vector when provide [x,y,z] as a column vector as argument of 'solve'.

But as long as there is no data type (comma separated) list implemented I guess I am happy with the behaviour we have.


 

It has something of the feel of a bug to me.  In this example, I've asked for a column vector whose elements are the solutions I've asked for.  Instead, I get a very Mathcad unlike row vector.

 

We would probably have got a List back if Mathcad had a native List type, which would have been fine provided that there was a lst2vec/vec2lst function pair to go along with the type. 

 

I gave up asking for a list (sequence) type after PTC let the comma be the shortcut for a 3-place range definition.  Whilst I understand the rationale for such a choice, it effectively closed the door on many other potential uses for the comma, and made it more difficult to enter ranges as parameters to functions.

 

Stuart

 

If coerced into giving a recommendation, I'd probably suggest another double period (full stop) ".." as the means of entering a 3-place range, or retain the comma but require a double period to create the third range placeholder.

 

2-place range: 1 ".." 2 -> 1..2 

 

3-place range: 1 ".." 2 ".." 3 -> 1,2..3

or

3-place range: 1 "," 2 ".." 3 -> 1,2..3

 

with commas now opening up for use in a List type, and allowing a means of more familiar means of entering arbitrary length argument lists.

 

1 "," 2 -> 1,2

1 "," 2 "," 3 -> 1,2,3

1 "," 2 "," 3 "," 4 -> 1,2,3,4

 

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)

I understand and a list type sure would be very welcome as would an empty array, as would ...
But maybe the highlight of the next version is just a user definable border around regions - what a masterpiece!

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)


@Werner_E wrote:

I understand and a list type sure would be very welcome as would an empty array, as would ...
But maybe the highlight of the next version is just a user definable border around regions - what a masterpiece!


Hey, I know it might seem like taking imagination to Verrücktheit levels, but don't knock it.

 

2025 11 24 B.png

 

One look at that, and a Company Board couldn't fail to get behind an engineer's request for such an upgrade, and throw their financial might behind their appeals to the Mathcad Prime 13 Requirements Team (and, perhaps, allow an enterprising engineer the opportunity to slip in a few minor requests alongside it (such as empty arrays or lists)).

 

Stuart

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)

Yes! That's quite a frame!

 

But you didn't mention multidimensional arrays or the implementation of cuneiform as a minor request—should I be concerned?

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)


@Werner_E wrote:

Yes! That's quite a frame!

 

But you didn't mention multidimensional arrays or the implementation of cuneiform as a minor request—should I be concerned?


I thought that was taken for granted?  Lists haven't been mentioned much (or at least not by that name), so if I don't mention MDAs, there's a very slight chance the Committee for Denying Stuff for Bruff might miss calls for their implementation.

 

However, you do raise a good point.  I note from the Prime 12 presentation that notice is being taken of Legacy Mathcad users' requests.  Included in the list of such items for inclusion in Mathcad Prime 12 is Plot Titles.  Now, I'm all for Plot Titles being added - it is a worthwhile addition - however, I have to question their priority.  There is already at least one workaround for plot titles, ie, Text regions (and I bet the new Plot Title feature won't allow embedding of Math regions into titles).   

 

2025 11 24 C.png

 

A more worthwhile enhancement priority, in my parochial view, would be the ability to insert a Plot region into a Text Box, in the same way that we can insert Math Regions into Text Boxes.

 

2025 11 24 D.png

 

At the moment, all one can do is paste an image of a plot into a Text Box - having suitably sized it in an external application, such as Paint (not a very satisfactory state of affairs).

 

The above representation of an embedded plot also shows the utility of being able to hide the define operator ("=").  The diagram number (which should have an intrinsic Mathcad autonumber) would look far better without the equals sign.

 

Stuart

 

(Oh, in case I forgot to mention it ... expect MEPs for Sumerian/Akkadian/Bablylonian cuneiform, Mayan, and Attic Greek.

 

Not forgetting 2025 11 24 D.pngs, of course.

 

(I have a book on cuneiform on order.  It might help me to determine whether any of the above are combinations of cuneiform symbols.  I'm reasonably sure that the last one is the Akkadian locative of water (𒀀𒀀), but my Mesopotamian is a bit rusty).

 

https://www.penn.museum/cgi/cuneiform.php?fullname=Multi+Dimensional+Array&name=MDA&inscribe=inscribe

 

 

 

 

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)

Wow, plot labels! Great!

What an innovation—it's actually in the same league as frames around regions.
When I read here once that there were plans to improve the native plots a little and not let them fall into disrepair in favor of the terribly implemented third-party software, I was thinking more of a second y-axis, the option to hide the axes completely, or a box view. Many more different line widths would also be necessary, as well as the option to set the thickness of symbols and lines separately. And the unfortunate limitation regarding the number of points to be plotted, where Prime then refuses to select line thickness, line type, etc., should also be reconsidered. And of course a trace facility. And maybe even some features which ere not implemented in Mathcad 15-20 years ago (maybe some kind of shading or hatching areas, displaying boolean expressions,..). Or is this demanding to much? After all we are only stopping at version 12 for now, not version 120. 
But labels... well, at least. It'll happen eventually.

 

And yes, text boxes should be able to contain plots, but also solve blocks, for example. Although I generally don't like embedding regions in text fields, as I find that editing becomes very tedious. But I know that some people prefer doing so because the feel that they have better control over region positioning and aligning that way - especially as Prime does not offer alignment of regions.

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)

Solch ein Zynismus in jemandem, der so jung ist!

 

See ~ 9 min .. 20 min in https://www.ptc.com/en/resources/cad/mathcad/webcast/mathcad-prime-12-roadmap

 

There are actually some reasonable features proposed for Prime 12.  And you'll be pleased to note that a second y-axis, along with a plot title, is one of the candidate features for Prime 12.0.  (I can't help but feel that the Mathcad team is understaffed by at least three people)

 

"Plot in a Text Box" is a minimalist MEP, raised in the sure and certain knowledge that we'll never get my real MEP - embedded worksheets.  I've used Text Boxes as a very inadequate workaround for them since at least M11.

 

Stuart

 

Clearly, I am out of touch with the current zeitgeist, as my needs aren't quite the same as those of the average Mathcad user.  The limited Mathcad development resources have prioritised being able to set the background colour of a worksheet (we'll soon have white and dark grey, as well as very light grey) rather than, say, fixing the recursive local function bug that's been present since Prime 1, or implementing the Image component, or adding an empty array, or, as you say, "or, ....". 

 

OOIC, what is the point of making the image processing functions Premium when you have to mandrauliically load an image to see the effects?

 

I also note that some people are asking for features that go beyond what Legacy Mathcad offered.  I wonder if any of these new features might be included in the list of features that some of us were asking for back when Legacy Mathcad was the only Mathcad, or when people had high hopes for Prime?

 

https://community.ptc.com/t5/Mathcad/Mathcad-and-articles-for-Journals/m-p/442067/highlight/true#M176635

 

And, from a referenced 2012 post,

 


@StuartBruff wrote:

Back to your point, if you look back at the history of suggestions on the old Collaboratory, you will note that several of us wanted far more radical changes to Mathcad to give it the kind of capabilities that attract people to its rivals: programmable graphics, multi-dimensional arrays, symbolic manipulation of units, LaTex output, formatted strings (capable of display without quote marks), free-hand entry - even 'simple' things such as multiple windows onto a spreadsheet and automatic program line wrapping. The list is very long and many of the same requests have popped up from new users for over a decade. Some of the ideas could be implemented, and quickly distributed, as mpl files (eg, new functions).

(That latter sentence was back when it was being mooted that worksheets would be compiled to a Lisp/Prolog/Haskell-like Mathcad Programming Language that users could also write functions in)

 

I'd appreciate more Mathcad staff, though I wouldn't put all three of those people in R&D. Our application engineer team could definitely use some more people. I know marketing won't ever get more Mathcad people than just me, and all they want to do is make me work on other PTC products.

 

Anyway, with regard to the background colour, that's been a very long-standing request that got bumped up to an even higher priority based off this Mathcad Ideas post making our devs realise that having only one background colour (which happens to be bright) is not just a user preference issue, but also an accessibility issue. The R&D people who work on the background colour stuff aren't necessarily the same R&D people who work on those other long-standing requests you namedropped.

 

I manage the Creo and PTC Mathcad YouTube channels for PTC, as well as all PTC Mathcad marketing in general.
StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:DJNewman)

Make that 4 extra engineers, then ! 😁

 

I don’t have a problem with different background colours, but if accessibility is an underlying driver for its priority, then I must express some surprise that there isn’t a standard colour picker being implemented. I know that different background colours are said to be beneficial for some specific learning disabilities or neurological conditions (eg, dyslexia).  

 

I’m partial to a yellow parchment colour for aesthetic reasons.

 

Or, at least, I was when I last owned a printer.  Even 10 years ago, there wasn’t much emphasis being placed upon how a document looked on paper, as almost all of my company’s systems engineering work flow was managed on screen. And the first thing I do on opening a Mathcad worksheet is switch to Draft mode, anyway (and when is someone going to remove that ugly and pointless expansion of a Text Block across the Draft area???)


As an aside, why  is it proving a problem implementing larger paper sizes.  A3 is already present as a document size.  What kind of problems arise from trying to add A2, A1, A0, or larger (custom) sizes?

 

As for requests being long-standing, many of mine are easily old enough to buy a beer in any US state.

 

Stuart

 

I’m afraid I can’t comment on either the merits of priority of the page colour; I’m just a Mathcad Express user. 

Permission Required

Werner_E
25-Diamond I
(To:StuartBruff)


@StuartBruff wrote:

Solch ein Zynismus in jemandem, der so jung ist!

 


? Why do you thinks so? Awfully wrong! (Not the cynicism, but the age guess) 🙂

 

Thanks for the link. I was not aware that we now can see the videos without having to sign in and provide personal data.

I must admit, however, that I have my problems with videos. Whether they are explanatory videos or informational videos like this one. I find it incredibly tedious and time-consuming to watch such videos and would much rather be able to read the relevant information, well compiled and illustrated. But yes, I understand that it is easier to stand in front of the camera and start talking than to systematically prepare the material in written form. In the case of a live webinar, that would be an additional step—someone would have to be willing to do it and make it easy to find (which is a challenge on the PTC website).
In any case, it's nice to hear that at least some minor improvements are in the works, even if it seems rather embarrassing that nowadays, the possibility of implementing superscripts and subscripts or the upcoming background color is being touted as a big deal — but for Prime standards, I suppose it is.
Another reason for me to reject such videos is, of course, my poor language comprehension. While I can read printed text in English fairly fluently (at my own pace and sometimes with the help of DeepL), I often have a pretty hard time with spoken English 😞

 

Concerning the Prime development team I guess you are perfectly right. The poor quality of Prime and the slow development of the software is most likely not due to the incompetence of the development team, but rather stems from a management decision to allocate fewer resources to this branch. Perhaps this is a remnant from the time when PTC had no intention of continuing to develop the program as standalone software, but thought they had simply purchased a nice little math tool that could be marketed as an add-on for Creo.

Regarding videos and not having to provide personal data, whether PTC does this or not for our replays is based on the marketer on the project. (Obviously me, in this case.)

I decided that going forward, it makes no sense to put a form in front of webinar replays where the main audience are our existing customers who already have our software, so I ditched that step. (Doesn't apply to webinar replays where the audience isn't our existing customer base.)

You and other people have complained about this in the past, so I took your feedback into account...!

 

With regards to "wouldn't it be better if this was in writing?" I agree, but this format is relatively painless in the sense that...

  1. The information is already in words on a slide
  2. There is a chapters widget that lets you immediately skip to your area of interest, as opposed to a common problem of videos where you can't go at your own pace. (I think I'm the only PTC marketer that uses this widget. You have to manually transcribe when chapters begin and end.)
I manage the Creo and PTC Mathcad YouTube channels for PTC, as well as all PTC Mathcad marketing in general.
StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)


@Werner_E wrote:

@StuartBruff wrote:

Solch ein Zynismus in jemandem, der so jung ist!

 


? Why do you thinks so? Awfully wrong! (Not the cynicism, but the age guess) 🙂


Age is just a number.  (Which is the kind of saying invented by people who hadn't put their skeleton through decades of punishment)

 

At one unit in the air force, I recall my 55-yr old Warrant Officer (Oberstabsfeldwebel (und der Spieß)) saying something and then apologising to me for his cynical viewpoint. I, as a world-weary, 24-yr old Flying Officer (Oberleutnant) just looked at him and said, "You think you're cynical now, Mr Smith? Wait until you get to my age.".

 

Your English comes across as very good, so whatever you're doing, keep on doing it! 🙂  

 

I suspect that you are right about the early development phases of Prime.  There are several aspects of Prime that are quite non-Mathcad-like, and I suspect a few early decisions might be causing problems further down the road (eg, the Prime 1.0 decision to go for a single-page-width worksheet rather than the original white-board approach).  Still, without having any flies on the walls, who knows.

 

Stuart

LucMeekes
23-Emerald IV
(To:Werner_E)

What happened to grid lines? 

Or did we solve that problem satisfactorily...

 

Luc

StuartBruff
23-Emerald IV
(To:LucMeekes)

Still a work in progress, Luc, according to the roadmap video.  

 

Stuart

LucMeekes
23-Emerald IV
(To:StuartBruff)

lsolve is easily implemented in Express (for many, if not most, but certainly not all circumstances) with:

LucMeekes_0-1763923600434.png

yielding:

LucMeekes_1-1763923645980.png

Success!
Luc

Announcements

Top Tags