Archived OpenModelica forums. Posting is disabled.

Alternative forums include GitHub discussions or StackOverflow (make sure to read the Stack Overflow rules; you need to have well-formed questions)


Forgot password? | Forgot username? | Register
  • Index
  • » Users
  • » Wolanski
  • » Profile

Posts

Posts

May-11-18 16:54:24
Making connector names visible in top level diagram to enhance readability
Category: Programming

Sure, that's what I did, but I was looking for a generic solution to avoid doing the work twice which becomes cumbersome (and error prone) for large number of connectors. Thanks anyway

Mar-21-18 21:18:30
Making connector names visible in top level diagram to enhance readability
Category: Programming

Placing a standard library connector in a model, makes the connector name visible in the model diagram view, but not in the model icon view.
A top level diagram containing models with multiple nameless interface pins becomes difficult to read.
Is there a way of making these names visible, short of developing custom connectors?
Thanks

Jan-31-18 20:49:37
How to solve the "Unmatched Dimension" of the connection

Need to use a vector of Sine 's with dimension of 1.

Jan-31-18 20:46:00
Modelica.Blocks.Math library for vectorized signals

Answering my own question.
Apparently the MSL was de-vectorized at Version.2.1 to simplify notation and understanding:
http://doc.modelica.org/om/Modelica.Use … n_2_1.html

The recommended approach now is to use an array (vector) of components. 

Jan-24-18 23:08:50
Modelica.Blocks.Math library for vectorized signals

It seems that almost all components in the Modelica.Blocks.Math library cannot accept and output vectorized signals. For example, the Modelica.Blocks.Math.Add component is derived from Modelica.Blocks.Interfaces.SI2SO single input, single output Partial class.
This seems like a significant limitation for someone coming from Matlab that accepts vectorized input-output signals almost everywhere.
I have tried various approaches: redeclaring the input/output signals as arrays, redeveloping components by extending from MIMO, instantiating array of components.
All these work but all have disadvantages.
I'm sure someone thought of this before and I would be curious to know which approach was used. Thanks.

Aug-18-16 22:49:07
Deriving user class inheriting properties of base class

That's it !.
Great, thanks

Aug-18-16 22:12:11
Deriving user class inheriting properties of base class

I want to create a model of a magnetic component that overrides the value of magnetic relative permeability, using inheritance chain already defined in Modelica.
The chain of inheritance look like this: the parameter RelativePermeability mu_rConst=1 is defined in: Modelica.Magnetic.FluxTubes.Interfaces.PartialFixedShape. This parameter in turn is inherited by
Modelica.Magnetic.Shapes.Cuboid that adds some geometric constraints.

Ultimately in my model I want to override the mu_rConst=1 with mu_rConst=5000 (or so) while preserving all equations and constraints from the other two classes.
Multiple attempts result in "Class SI.RelativePermeability not found in the scope ReluctanceLinear"
Here's one of my unsuccessful attempts:

model ReluctanceLinear
  import SI;
  extends Modelica.Magnetic.FluxTubes.Shapes.FixedShape.Cuboid;
   parameter SI.RelativePermeability mu_rConst=5000;
end ReluctanceLinear;

I for sure am missing something. Any help is appreciated. 

  • Index
  • » Users
  • » Wolanski
  • » Profile
You are here: