> For variational problems, I've already written code in Maple to derive > the element matrices. I presented a paper on in at the Maple 2005 > Conference. Unfortunately, I've been having a difficult time translating > some of the things I did from Maple to Sage. It was only for 1D problems > (since that was all I needed), but it is modular enough to extend > to others. The code derives the mass and stiffness matrices and then > outputs them as MATLAB functions. I wrote the code because I needed > something that can handle rotating flexible beams.
Is your matlab code available? Where did you have problems translating it to Python? > I know about both of these, but I had never heard of the symfe work. > Interesting, since my Maple toolbox is called SFEM. That's because we started symfe a week ago. :) Just experimenting. > There is also a package for Maple called femLego: > > http://www.mech.kth.se/~gustava/femLego/ > > It's design is about solving the PDE once it has been derived. It > uses Maple to write Fortran code, and compiles it with its own code. > I nearly ended up using this, but see below. > > > But let's discuss at least the design. Let's use the same design as > > in: > > > > http://www.mathworks.com/products/pde/ > > There are some problems with its design. It is basically an early > version Are you talking about the femLego, or pde from mathworks? > of FEMLAB, and it puts its focus strictly on solving PDEs once the > formulation of the PDE has already been done. If a Ritz approach is > used, > the formulation of the PDE is never explicitly done and this design > can't > handle it. Plus, for systems with multiple coupled variables, the > Galerkin > approach becomes very complicated. I know because my SFEM package was > originally an attempt to derive the weak form for use in FEMLAB. Where is the SFEM package? Is it this: http://people.civil.gla.ac.uk/~bordas/sfem.html ? > > or is there a better product out there? > > > > Ondrej > > The difficulty is that most products seem to be trying to replace the > major > FE packages, but even those who do symbolic work, don't put any focus on > the derivation. If one is going to use the weak formulation, this can be > difficult. I don't understand what you mean by "the derivation" - like taking the differential equation and constructing the corresponding integral (variational) formulation? Ondrej --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/ -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
