Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in

Interesting Bug in SMath 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
dik

dik

Structural
Apr 13, 2001
25,560
0
36
CA
There have been a few items that seem not to work, since SMath has gone to the market. Mostly dealing with numbers being too large... This one is with units.

Clipboard01_mpv7yz.jpg




-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

Sort by date Sort by votes
Two possible explanations:

The inputs should be defined above the equation region, not on the same line. I have noticed that the "center" of an expression field is not always the obvious row it's on but somewhere below. Shifting the result Cr=# down a line sometimes fixes it. I acknowledge that the error does not correspond to this problem, but I'd move it anyway.

One of the variables has a value of "0*unit". Sometimes SMath can evaluate an expression with mismatched units, when the numerical value is zero. And sometimes it can't.

Were both expressions typed in full, all keystrokes, or was one of them typed in full and the second generated by select-copy-paste? Try the copy-paste from the working expression back into the bad expression, just to see if what you think is the same expression actually might not be for various reasons (e.g. the "1" and "l" look similar, etc.).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Neither is the case... I can move the Variable output name below the cut and paste of the formula... and it doesn't change. I do all my calcs in Imperial and SI... I don't know who looks at them. I'm a dinosaur... I can work in both... but only really understand Imperial. If you ask me what a W12x26 moment capacity is, it's about 120 K-ft (350 grade), but if you ask me the capacity of a W310x39 is, I have to stop and think about it... (They're the same beams, and I cannot immediately convert the metric to the imperial... I have to think about that first) Both were 'exact' cut and paste... formulae for values with the output is the same as the one in the equation.
I've tried cutting and pasting all variables from their initial definition into the formula, and none of them works. But the answer cut and paste works for both Imperial and SI.

Clipboard01_tsaaay.jpg


-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I forget the name of the setting exactly, but can you switch on "numerical format" or whatever it's called and compare them?
Do you have the yellow pop=up when you hover the mouse, displaying a large elaborate fraction? Are they the same?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I sometimes check...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OK it took me a while to remember the trick to open a v1.0 file in 0.99.

Now that I have it open, the two equations look the same "inside" when I select >optimization>symbolic.

Both give me 8.3837*10^5 Newtons. But the "Cr=" refuses to work. I can recreate the problem but various fiddlings didn't help.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

How do you do that?

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
be appreciated... thanks Sparweb...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thanks IRS... I'll see if that approach works with a couple of other issues I've found. I've never done that with my programs... thanks...

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The approach fixes the issue with r[sub]o[/sub] immediately preceding this formula. I don't know what the distinction is, but it's a great workaround.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I wasn't aware of that 'symbolic' and 'numeric' switch... thanks so much. It may fix a few other issues I've encountered.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
IRS... that fix fixed a few other problems I had... thanks.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'll take a gander, maybe I've set it in preferences... it doesn't seem to have that option... but knowing I can do this may fix some other issues.

@Sparweb... "OK it took me a while to remember the trick to open a v1.0 file in 0.99." Do you have this info... it'll likely be handy... thanks Dik



-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

wb.c
  • Locked
  • Question
SMath Down?
Replies
1
Views
9
IRstuff
IRstuff
dik
  • Locked
  • Question
SMath Integer 1
Replies
2
Views
7
dik
dik
Sparweb
  • Locked
  • Question
SMath version rollback 2
Replies
5
Views
13
Sparweb
Sparweb
francis_intano
  • Locked
  • Question
SMath Advanced and Enterprise Users
Replies
0
Views
8
francis_intano
francis_intano
dik
  • Locked
  • Question
SMath Problem 1
2
Replies
21
Views
28
dik
dik
Back
Top