Hi. On Sun, Mar 25, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Angadh Nanjangud <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Everyone > > I'm Angadh, a third year Ph.D. student in mechanical and aerospace > engineering at UC-Davis and a prospective applicant for the GSoC 2012. > and the following are some of the ideas/things that I would like to > work on over the course of the summer if given the opportunity. > Over the winter quarter, I took a mechanics class and one of it's foci > was the usage of the sympy.physics.mechanics module to derive > equations of motion for mechanical systems. Over the course of my > experience with it, I felt that there were several things that could > be worked on to make the dynamics package more robust- > > 1. One of the things that students encountered in the class was that > as our systems got more complex i.e. the number of bodies or degrees > of freedom increased, the longer it took to generate the equations. So > one of the things I would like to look at would be to optimize the > code; to enable it to handle larger expressions. This would involve > looking into the .subs() and .diff() to see how they could be improved > upon.
Cool. You could use a profiling tool like kernprof or the built-in CProfile to do this. Also check if the printing is the bottleneck (generate an equation of motion, but don't print it, and see if that makes things faster). > > 2. Currently equations are generated using just one of several methods > in mechanics, Kane's formalism. I would like to look into adding > atleast another technique- either the Newton-Euler approach or > Lagrange's equations. > > 3. Another thing that I would like to do would be to improve the cross- > platform ability of the software i.e. to get the equations of motion > generated to be analyzed across various (open source) platforms such > as Sage. This may involve automatically updating Sage's version of > sympy or even writing a whole new interface for it. I'm not sure I understand what you are suggesting here. Sage will generally include the latest version of SymPy. And anything that can run Python can run SymPy. > > 4. A comprehensive documentation effort to make this module more > accessible for anyone who intends to use it. I noticed that Gilbert already has some pretty nice documentation for the existing module. Are there deficiencies in it? Or are you referring to the documentation for the new code that you plan to write? > > I would be extremely grateful if you could let me know your thoughts > on these ideas. > > Thanks > Angadh Sounds good so far. You should start writing up a proposal (see https://github.com/sympy/sympy/wiki/gsoc-2012-application-template), and also start looking into writing a patch for the patch requirement (look through the code and issues list for something to fix, and submit a pull request). Let us know if you need any help. Aaron Meurer -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sympy" group. 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/sympy?hl=en.
