Hello friends, this time I want to share in this great and warm community of Smath Studio, a worksheet that calculates the required stages, minimum stages and minimum reflux ratio for a constant pressure binary distillation.

This document is corrected, and highlights a database of 700 organic compounds, the calculation of 6 graphs, mass balances, compositions, pressures and temperatures. The calculation time is 1 to 3 seconds.

I hope it will be very useful for students of Chemical and Process Engineering.

* it was decided to carry out the worksheet in this way, since if the compositions, temperatures and pressures that appear on pages 18 and 19 had been calculated differently, the calculation time would be 3 to 7 minutes.

SMath Studio
McCabe Thiele - 700 Compuestos Erick Valentino SM.sm (610 KiB) downloaded 89 time(s).

PDF
McCabe Thiele - 700 Compuestos Erick Valentino SM.pdf (2 MiB) downloaded 102 time(s).


[albumimg]1628[/albumimg]

Erick Valentino
https://www.facebook.com/erick.valentinosalado/

Hello.Your code can be significantly shortened. Part of the file is shown.
Regards, Fridel.
McCabe Thiele 1.sm (441 KiB) downloaded 65 time(s).

Wrote

Hello.Your code can be significantly shortened. Part of the file is shown.
Regards, Fridel.

File empty ... format not correct.
That bug is permanent, so many times reported ... not doctored from latest SS
As it looks it appeared SS 7610.
Thanks Fridel for being on guard Smath Community.

Wrote

ile empty ... format not correct.
That bug is permanent, so many times reported ... not doctored from latest SS
As it looks it appeared SS 7610.
Thanks Fridel for being on guard Smath Community.

Jean, I created a special place to collect bugs associated with old versions of the program. In the future, I will delete such messages if they mislead users. Therefore, use the indicated place to organize your bugs or they will disappear without a trace. I've been patient for 10 years, but it's annoying with its pointlessness. If you think it is important, then write about them in a special place.

Solving problems with older versions (Bugs & Problems)

Wrote

I've been patient for 10 years

1. I joined Smath 5346 July 4 20015, to de-confuse.
2. Born 01 January 1903 ... I'm a pretty old wolf !
For sure Forum profile invented or found another Jean in the Russian steps.

This only means that I have never used the power of a moderator. Until now. This is sad because loads with unnecessary work.

Wrote

This only means that I have never used the power of a moderator. Until now. This is sad because loads with unnecessary war

.
We do our best our own way(s), Viacheslav.
You are quite right, very many declare bugs from wrong doing.
However that does not happen from Smath Power Users [Leslie expression].
Cheers Kamarad, have a better day ... Jean.

Wrote

You are quite right, very many declare bugs from wrong doing.
However that does not happen from Smath Power Users [Leslie expression].

Everybody make mistakes.
Actually there is no bug in new builds about this issue.
I had checked your file with a notepad.
Your Cfr equation has the result segment in it.
New builds read it correctly.
It seems the bug is in previous builds.

The Cfr equation is not a definition as it seems in your file.
It has a result action, because you had wrote it as a result.
This is why new versions couldn't parse and calculate it.
This is the correct way, a result shouldn't be considered as a definition.

However, very old versions (build 6179 in this case) read it as a definition.
Which they shouldn't, this is a serious bug for old builds.
Fortunately now we are far from that bug thanks to mods.
They had patched it years ago I guess.

Regards.

Jean's file does not contain any errors, but simply that the new version cannot handle the ZERO subscript. Changing the subscript ZERO to 1, the file runs perfectly.

Best Regards

Carlos

Thiele McCabe Companion MERITAS_V7632.sm (77 KiB) downloaded 83 time(s).

Than that is another bug of older builds.
For function shouldn't read the zero element of vector or matrix. Calculation has to give an error. This is how smath handles arrays now as far as I know.
Someone couldn't write an equation as in the pictures above with an equal sign also, but he did somehow. You must use definition.
As I said before, maybe Jean's document is right when it was written and somehow it was working. But it shouldn't, it was working because of bugs (or loopholes). This kind of behaviors was considered as bug by developers and not working now.
What I am saying, these are not bugs of new builds. These are bugs or loopholes of older builds.

The handling of the ZERO subscript cannot be considered a bug, since several programming languages ​​do it

Best Regards

Carlos

I know. I had used this feature regularly with C, Basic, Pascal, Python, VBasic, .Net, etc.
But there are also programming languages that starts array indexing with one. AWK, COBOL, Fortran, R, Julia, Lua, MATLAB, Smalltalk, Wolfram Language, etc. Nowadays I am trying to learn Lua and Awk since I migrated to Linux totally. And zero indexing is considered as a bug for them too.
You can't assign a value to zero indexed array with SMath so it is a bug for SMath.

Regards

Wrote

Than that is another bug of older builds.
For function shouldn't read the zero element of vector or matrix. Calculation has to give an error. This is how smath handles arrays now as far as I know.
Someone couldn't write an equation as in the pictures above with an equal sign also, but he did somehow. You must use definition.
As I said before, maybe Jean's document is right when it was written and somehow it was working. But it shouldn't, it was working because of bugs (or loopholes). This kind of behaviors was considered as bug by developers and not working now.
What I am saying, these are not bugs of new builds. These are bugs or loopholes of older builds.

Under most applications, 0 indexing was an error in older SS version.
For the case in cause it was not, but latest didn't recognized.
Put yourself in the shoes of Clients ... F..k Smath with so many sudden build.
The attached should reconciliate. If You have red, make sure to evidence the red.
The = that puzzles you is the symbolic expansion, not a forgotten :=
About symbolic expansion, in at least one instance, Smath does not save settings
and re-opens red. In that case, yes you have to redefine/assign.
Indexing '0' is logical, considering that all numerical approximation of functions
are on the range [0 ..1]. Even in Mathcad, not so easy sometimes to ORIGIN 1.
In fact, I have an extraordinary piece of Mathcad 11 from Robert that I have not yet
been able to ORIGIN 1 in Mathcad itself , a bit far from Smath then !
Thanks Carlos for visiting Smath Community.
Have all a good day ... cheers Jean

Thiele Procedures Short.sm (79 KiB) downloaded 59 time(s).