Thread Subject: Alternative to inv function

I am writing a Finite Element program that needs to solve the typical [K]{f}={d} system. Of course I know that we SHOULD NOT use inv to solve the system of equations, but my problem has unique characteristics. The FE program is for plates on an elastic foundation. What is unique about this problem is that you can explicitly define the stiffness matrix for the plates, but the foundation has historically been modeled using the Boussinesq model. Unfortunately the Boussinesq model gives the flexibility matrix not the stiffness. For this reason, what I have been doing is compute the stiffness of the plates using traditional FEM techniques and then compute the flexibility of the foundation and then use “inv” to calculate the stiffness and then add it to the stiffness of the plates. Then my system is,
[Kp+inv(Sf)]{f}={d}
Which I then solve with “\”.

My question is, is there a way to avoid using the “inv” function?

"Cesar " <cesar.carrasco@att.net> wrote in message <h76ruu$ntb$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
SNIP
> Then my system is,
> [Kp+inv(Sf)]{f}={d}
> Which I then solve with “\”.
>
> My question is, is there a way to avoid using the “inv” function?

Hi Cesar,
What about to solve a system
Sf*[Kp+inv(Sf)]*f = Sf*d
with a solution
f = [Sf*Kp+I]\Sf*d
Maybe it is better than the original system with inversion.
Mira

"Miroslav Balda" <miroslav.nospam@balda.cz> wrote in message <h76tss$5kh$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
> "Cesar " <cesar.carrasco@att.net> wrote in message <h76ruu$ntb$1@fred.mathworks.com>...
> SNIP
> > Then my system is,
> > [Kp+inv(Sf)]{f}={d}
> > Which I then solve with “\”.
> >
> > My question is, is there a way to avoid using the “inv” function?
>
> Hi Cesar,
> What about to solve a system
> Sf*[Kp+inv(Sf)]*f = Sf*d
> with a solution
> f = [Sf*Kp+I]\Sf*d
> Maybe it is better than the original system with inversion.
> Mira

Thanks Mira,
Your solution worked perfectly.
I just had to tweak it a little bit because of the way boundary conditions are applied.
Cesar