ACCEPTED SOLUTION
Accepted Solutions
I opened your sheet with Prime 6 and can confirm that the function returns an error for x=8.4 ft and that changing the TOL value does not solve the problem.
Slightly changing the value of x.A (to 2.0001 ft) "solved" the problem.
If its just a cosmetic problem and you are only concerned because of the gap in the plot, you may simply use a slightly different range for x when you plot, something like x:=0 ft, 0,11 ft .. L or x:=0 ft, 0,099 ft .. L works pretty well but the last value for x will be smaller than L (10 ft) and so you may want to let the range run up to L+0.1ft.
Your function M uses an integral which in turn calls another function also using an integral. So quite a lot of integrals have to be calculated for the plot and you can see that creating the plot quite takes some time.
Here is a more efficient way by defining function V without an integral:
Calculation now is lightning fast, the results are more precise even without using a smaller TOL value and the problem with x=8.4 ft is also gone away -> win-win-win 🙂
Of course you could also use the if-function
or the program if
if you feel thats better readable. All three version are fast, provide better precision and do not suffer from the 8,4 ft problem.
In version 7.0, everything is displayed normally on the plot:
What version of Mathcad Prime are you using?
Tested in Mathcad Prime 3, result (in both cases, I did not change the calculation tolerance, just recalculated the entire worksheet):
By the way, if you want to try the Mathcad Prime 7 version, here are the links:
https://www.mathcad.com/en/try-and-buy/mathcad-express-free-download/install
I opened your sheet with Prime 6 and can confirm that the function returns an error for x=8.4 ft and that changing the TOL value does not solve the problem.
Slightly changing the value of x.A (to 2.0001 ft) "solved" the problem.
If its just a cosmetic problem and you are only concerned because of the gap in the plot, you may simply use a slightly different range for x when you plot, something like x:=0 ft, 0,11 ft .. L or x:=0 ft, 0,099 ft .. L works pretty well but the last value for x will be smaller than L (10 ft) and so you may want to let the range run up to L+0.1ft.
Your function M uses an integral which in turn calls another function also using an integral. So quite a lot of integrals have to be calculated for the plot and you can see that creating the plot quite takes some time.
Here is a more efficient way by defining function V without an integral:
Calculation now is lightning fast, the results are more precise even without using a smaller TOL value and the problem with x=8.4 ft is also gone away -> win-win-win 🙂
Of course you could also use the if-function
or the program if
if you feel thats better readable. All three version are fast, provide better precision and do not suffer from the 8,4 ft problem.
