Mathcad Prime 2.0 - explicit function, too many digits

[jlyn]

Hello everyone!

My name is Jens, and I'm from Denmark.

I've recently changed from Mathcad 14 to Mathcad Prime 2.0. Everything is wonderful, but there is a problem with my calculations, when using the explicit function. The calculation shows up with too many digits (15), and I do know about the float function, however this is not a possible solution for me. Is there any chance that someone could help me, reducing these digits a bit?

I've attached a picture with my problem

- Jens

[nas0k]

I tried it and achieve the attached results.

Can you include your worksheet?

Norm

[Werner_E]

Norm Schutzkus wrote:

I tried it and achieve the attached results.

The same here. Maybe Jens is using a different maintainance release of Prime 2.

Mine is the current M010.

But that all doesn't change the basic problem. We could apply the formatting of numeric results to symbolic results in Mathcad 15 and below, but we don't have an formatting options for symbolic results in Prime.

[jlyn]

I'll give it a look ..

I'm afraid you are right .. I'm using version F000, if that's what you asking for? Don't know if it's new or old ..

[jlyn]

As requested i attached my worksheet, but please ignore the weird language ^^.

As you can see, there is alot of places where the explicit function will give me way too many digits.

But the worst part is still the imaginary numbers in the calculations, which sometime is giving me 2 x 15 digits 😕 Even a A3 page isn't helping .. hehe

[Werner_E]

Here is what your file looks like in Prime2 M010. Not much better, I guess.

For very long expressions some people here have suggested making a screenshot of the region and paste it reduced in size into the document - awful!

[Werner_E]

Unfortunately there is no formatting for symbolic results implemented in Prime. Haven't heard of an improvemen in that respect in P3 either. Maybe you changed too soon from MC14 to Prime.

The float modifier would affect the total precision of your calculation and also gives sometimes different results if used with explicit (esp. the magnitude of a complex number as in your case).

BTW, your first eval looks differently if I try to reproduce.

[jlyn]

Hmmm .. That's odd .. What version do you have? This might be a workaround for me

[Werner_E]

Jens Lyn wrote:

What version do you have?

As written above as an answer to Norm, who experiences the same, I am using M010.

Your F000 is the very first (therfore the F). There where two maintainance releases in the meantime (M005 and M010). In a few days we expect Prime 3.

You may try to update your Prime2 here http://www.ptc.com/product/mathcad/free-trial/download/

but rescue the license file you got during installation before.

[VladimirN]

Werner Exinger wrote:

... Your F000 is the very first (therfore the F). There where two maintainance releases in the meantime (M005 and M010). In a few days we expect Prime 3 ...

Actually for Mathcad Prime 2.0 was only two service release - F000 and M010.

[Werner_E]

OK, sometimes there was a M005, sometimes not. For P2 obviously not.

[ValeryOchkov]

More correct I think:

[jlyn]

Depends on how you look at it. But thank you for your comment.

[Werner_E]

Both correct in my opinion, considering the versor symbol is just a convenient abbrevation for the multiplication with an exponential expression

But nevertheless I would prefer the first one you suggested, too.

[jlyn]

So, will Prime 3 be able to fix the digits?

[Werner_E]

As far as i know - no. There are some improvements with formatting the results of calculations but whatever I heard was about numeric results. But then, I may be wrong - perhaps the have (re)added the switch to apply the options from the numeric to the symbolic results as we are used to from Mathcad.

BTW I have converted your sheet into a pdf so you can see how the latest release of Prime 2 would do. I guess not much better if any.

http://communities.ptc.com/message/221392#221392

[jlyn]

What a shame ..

I guess I'll have to flip the A3 page, and accept the digits

Thank you for your time - that goes for all who took the time and effort to respond

[ValeryOchkov]

One sheet for a thinking

[Werner_E]

I have to disagree.

Both reactive power and active power are real quantities. Neither their numerical values ​​nor their units contain an imaginary part.

It is computationally convenient that the power is regarded as a complex number. The reactive power is then the (real) imaginary part, the apparent power is the magnitude.

One likes to use different units for apparent, reactive and active power to distinguish one frome the other (VA, VAr or var, W). Just different names, but identical to watt and no imaginary unit is involved.

[ValeryOchkov]

Werner Exinger wrote:

I have to disagree.

Both reactive power and active power are real quantities. Neither their numerical values ​​nor their units contain an imaginary part.

It is computationally convenient that the power is regarded as a complex number. The reactive power is then the (real) imaginary part, the apparent power is the magnitude.

One likes to use different units for apparent, reactive and active power to distinguish one frome the other (VA, VAr or var, W). Just different names, but identical to watt and no imaginary unit is involved.

Yes, Werner!

sorry, I am not an Electrical but a Thermal Engineer!

But I see that not all is OK here! In Prime with ElectricalUnits.

See how it is in Mathcad PM