I pasted you code in my version and it worked.

Which version are you using?

I finally had to implement both proposals from @mmcdara and @acer. Calculating expressions containing elliptic integrals and their inverse seems to challenge sophisticated high-level commands like fsolve or plot. I guess that the default convergence criteria are simply set too high in this instance.  

On the other hand, Maple was able to integrate expressions containing a potential division by zero without limiting the precision of the integration or the integration range by a small fraction. Thumbs up for Maple.

My problem stemmed from a rather simple looking BVP containing an ODE that is similar to the simple nonlinear pendulum.

Those who are interested can find details in the attachment how this problem can be solved analytically and where I stopped calculating the inverse with fsolve.

Recalc_of_Belendez_et_al.mw

@acer I was looking for such an option within fsolve. Thank you!

@mmcdara I read in a paper that such problems are "easily" solveable in other Math packages. However they did not give more than a hint: use of numerical integration.  They probably  did soemthing simliar to acers solution.

@Carl Love Thanks for clarifing.
Further bellow in the worksheet there is the statement "Solve 2nd order ODE for phi(phi)". Should this be u(phi) then?

@Anthrazit If you can reproduce it: Do you see a dependence when you change the dpi settings (e.g. changing the monitor)?

I am asking because I have rendering issues when I switch monitors. It could be Windows related and may depend on compatibility settings of the program.

It seems that this test case is very challenging since the analytical solution oscillates and loops back to zero. 

A force applied at the free end of the beam instead of a momentum is probably more forgiving. Loops are not possible, and the leaver arm decreases with the deflection. Unless for this new test case someone can come up with analytical or PDE solutions, verified FEM code (which I do not have access to) could be used to confirm this guess.  

For planar models: Modifying the default settings of the flexible beam compoent in the example by setting the elastic coordinate in z direction to zero will speed up the calculation (about a factor of 10 in the example with the segmented beam). This will half the number of generalized coordinates the solver has to deal with. 

Likewise, increasing the elastic coordinates will increase the number of generalized coordinates.  

@vv Works. Thank you!

@Rouben Rostamian  

Thank you for the code. It’s very instructive and much leaner than I did expect.

Could you check this code line?

Disk := plot3d(0, r=0..R, t=0..2*Pi, coords=z_cylindrical, color=col0):

With Maple 2021 I get an error message.

Error, (in plot3d) cannot convert to coordinate system: z_cylindrical

@acer is not so bad at all.

Thank you!

of a currently opened help page.

Such a string could than be pasted, for example, in the target field of the Hyperlink properties dialogue.

I had hoped that in the new release this feature would also be available for visualitsation components of MapleSim standard libraray.

I hope that visualization of rotation of spheres, cylinders and disks will be possible one day. If possible in combination with the new and very useful scaling feature.

Could you share details how you have done it?

@epostma 

Carl's solution (with an initial simplification to SI units) worked and I am fine with it.
What didn't work was the solution from tomleslie 9664 . For that one I prepared the simplified example which did not work either with the construct convert, simplify~(U.....
he proposed.
It's becomming now more a question about Maple syntax. I don't want to waist your time byond my initial request.

Thank you all!