Minimum values depending on layer thickness

---

@YA_10963798 wrote:

Just one question about ( min function) why it works only with scalars ... whenever I want to use it with vectors or matrics  it doesn't work ... 

---

The "min" function works that way because PTC had chosen to implement it that way. When you feed this function with a couple of scalars, vectors and/or matrices, it will return the overall minimum value of all of them. The same is true for other functions like "max" or "mean". Usually this isn't bad and is exactly what the user wants.

And yes, if you want something different, you have to do a little work on your own to achieve the desired effect.

Lets say you have to vectors v1 and v2 of the same length and want to create a vector similar in size containing the min value of each 'row'.

There are various ways to achieve this result.
What comes to mind is that we could use the built-in "min" function, but as you already know, this function would just return the overall minimum of all provided values:

Next idea could be to vectorize this function call. After all this is exactly what vectorization is made for. Unfortunately there are a few function where vectorization has no effect and "min" is one of them

So one possible workaround could be that we define our own minimum function for two inputs because this function now could be called vectorized:

Bingo!

Another way, as you wrote yourself, is programming. Looping through the vectors and choosing the minimum in each turn

And yes, there sure may be even other ways to skin this cat.

---

 ...and the result should be also one matric with ten values.

---

That's unclear to me. From what you wrote so far I would have expected that what you want to see is a nested vector which contains THREE 10x1 vectors and not just one ???

Generally I think that your various questions have a greater chance to get answered in your sense by more people if you
1) describe clearly and in more detail verbally what you would like to achieve
2) provide a short(!) sample worksheet with simple variables, stripped down as much as possible instead of providing a 20 or 30 page document with (for me) rather confusing variable names and results stemming from cascading calculations.
You should also state in each new thread from anew which version of Prime you are using even if you already told us so in previous threads. This is especially essential if you are not using the most current version.

3) Provide concrete examples with numbers which possibly show every special case that should be considered and manually write down the exact result value/vector/matrix you would like to see as a result. The more different examples the better.
Its also better not to talk about depths, forces, layers, etc. because there meaning sure are natural for you, but possible not by other people like me 😉

4) Once you got a solution you are satisfied with, you should be able to apply it to the worksheet you are actually working on. If you experience problems doing so, you still can come back and ask for help (its just now that we would need to see your large worksheet with the corresponding data file(s)).

So in case of your current question - why not simply provide a sheet (rather than just a picture) containing two nested vectors v1 and v2, each containing three 4x1 vectors.

They may be generated manually or using random numbers. And then show which data structure with which values you would like to achieve.

Here is what I understood so far from your verbal explanation. The first part not seen in he picture is just the creation of the sample data. You can see it in the attached P9 worksheet.