Get Help

Turn on suggestions

Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

- Community
- :
- PTC Mathcad
- :
- PTC Mathcad
- :
- RMS bug.

Options

- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page

Auto-suggest helps you quickly narrow down your search results by suggesting possible matches as you type.

Showing results for

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
08:25 AM

Labels:

1 ACCEPTED SOLUTION

Accepted Solutions

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
10:23 PM

10-17-2019
10:23 PM

How about this approach?

Note that you must use the old legacy symbolics (muPad). It will not work when using the new friCAS.

Worksheet in P6 format attached.

12 REPLIES 12

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
01:38 PM

10-17-2019
01:38 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Mathcad and Prime never had much luck with integrals, neither symbolically nor numerical as in your example.

Defining the function in a different way like the two shown in the pic does not help much:

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
01:54 PM

10-17-2019
01:54 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Not necessarily restricted to Prime 6, Prime 4 shows the same.

Mathcad 11 too:

The value of TOL has some effect.

As usual, symbolics is right:

How is that in Prime?

Luc

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
03:02 PM

10-17-2019
03:02 PM

Re: RMS bug.

How is that in Prime?

Here you are!

I gave it a try with Prime 6 using the new and future symbolics (friCAS) and the old one (muPad). The new symbolic is not really convincing. The simplification of muPad is (even without using simplify) even more compact than your Maple result 😉

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
01:56 PM

10-17-2019
01:56 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Hi,

you shouldn't square the function containing the Heaviside function but only the function defined in the window created with the step function. See the picture:

don't square U(t). However, the rms is still zero.....

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
02:41 PM

10-17-2019
02:41 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Squaring the sine 'within' gives you a different function:

with a different symbolic result:

but numerically it's still flawed...

Luc

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
03:50 PM

10-17-2019
03:50 PM

Re: RMS bug.

I think you misunderstood what Francesco meant.

The idea was not to replace V(t) by his U(t) but rather replace V(t)^2 by his U(t).

I am not sure what the benefit of doing so would be, though.

BTW, here is more clearly the deficiency of the new symbolics (friCAS) in Prime when it comes to integration with the Heaviside function with the step inside the integration interval:

We always moaned about Prime would not be developed (or not fast enough). Replacing the very old symbolics engine muPad by a new, more modern one sure is a good a big development step. When we moaned in the past about development, have we forgot to state the direction in which we would like to see development taking place? We did not meant the direction of making things worse!!

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
05:05 PM

10-17-2019
05:05 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Yes, I misunderstood.

After investigation: The intended method should not make a difference, because PHI only takes on values 0 or 1, and likewise PHI^2 only takes on values 0^2=0 or 1^2=1. Mathcad 11 symbolics still gives the same (correct) answers. Numerically it's still a mess.

Luc

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
09:46 PM

10-17-2019
09:46 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Using 3D plot, the bug region is visible.

For Fourier analysis, if the signal is f(t)=-f(t+T/2) integral from 0 to pi is OK. Otherwise, we should integral from 0 to 2*pi. Therefore, this bug is sever problem.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-17-2019
10:23 PM

10-17-2019
10:23 PM

How about this approach?

Note that you must use the old legacy symbolics (muPad). It will not work when using the new friCAS.

Worksheet in P6 format attached.

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-18-2019
03:51 AM

10-18-2019
03:51 AM

Re: RMS bug.

Hi,

Mathcad 15 gives almost the same results. However, if we change the integration algorithm the result is not null; see photo:

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-18-2019
11:10 AM

10-18-2019
11:10 AM

Re: RMS bug.

Attached is a slightly different approach (Prime 6.0)

- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Email to a Friend
- Notify Moderator

10-18-2019
07:24 PM

10-18-2019
07:24 PM

Re: RMS bug.

Thanks for using time for my question.

In electricel engineering RMS of sin(t) must 1/sqrt(2)=0.7. The denominator is fixed to T, that is a period of fundamental signal, in this case 2pi.