Dear Fahreddın,
I think, the norm of the eigenvectors corresponds to some generic
amplitude. But that is something you cannot extract from the solution of
the eigenvalue problem but it depends on the initial deflection or
velocities.
So I think you should be able to use the normalized values just
Aaah, thanks a lot Lennart, I knew there had to be some logic to Octave's
output, but I couldn't see it...
-=- Olivier
2011/12/21 Lennart Fricke pge08...@studserv.uni-leipzig.de
Dear Fahreddın,
I think, the norm of the eigenvectors corresponds to some generic
amplitude. But that is something
Just to be completely clear, there is no such thing as a
non-normalized eigenvector. An eigenvector is only determined *up to a
scalar normalization*, which is obvious from the eigenvalue equation:
A v = l v
where A is the matrix, l is the eigenvalue, and v is the eigenvector.
Obviously v is
According to this page eigenvectors are normalized with respect to the
second matrix. Do you guys have any idea how that's done?
http://www.kxcad.net/Altair/HyperWorks/oshelp/frequency_response_analysis.htm
If the eigenvectors are normalized with respect to the mass matrix, the
modal mass
Hi Geoffrey,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Geoffrey Irving irv...@naml.us wrote:
Hello,
As a followup to the prior thread on bugs in user defined types in
numpy, I converted my rational number class from C++ to C and switched
to 32 bits to remove the need for unportable 128 bit numbers.
I read it like that:
(**T is the transpose)
Let's call M the mass matrix and N the modal mass matrix. Then
X**T*M*X=N. If X (matrix of eigenvectors) is normalized with respect to
M, N is I (unity) so it just mean that X**T*M*X=I. That is what octave
and matlab give you.
For this to be true.
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:48 PM, Christopher Jordan-Squire cjord...@uw.edu
wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:10 PM, Mark Wiebe mwwi...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 6:24 PM, Geoffrey Irving irv...@naml.us wrote:
Hello,
As a followup to the prior thread on bugs in user
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 3:56 AM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Geoffrey,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Geoffrey Irving irv...@naml.us wrote:
Hello,
As a followup to the prior thread on bugs in user defined types in
numpy, I converted my rational number class from
In article
CABL7CQi_jQZgHa5rL8aSsb_PEmAPTNXyUyQutgQtz=_ljux...@mail.gmail.com,
Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Russell E. Owen ro...@uw.edu wrote:
In article rowen-74bafa.11292712122...@news.gmane.org,
Russell E. Owen ro...@uw.edu wrote:
In article
CABL7CQi_jQZgHa5rL8aSsb_PEmAPTNXyUyQutgQtz=_ljux...@mail.gmail.com,
Ralf Gommers ralf.gomm...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 10:52 PM, Russell E. Owen ro...@uw.edu wrote:
In article rowen-74bafa.11292712122...@news.gmane.org,
Russell E. Owen ro...@uw.edu wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Geoffrey Irving irv...@naml.us wrote:
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 3:56 AM, Charles R Harris
charlesr.har...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Geoffrey,
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 7:24 PM, Geoffrey Irving irv...@naml.us wrote:
Hello,
As a followup to the prior thread on
11 matches
Mail list logo
