| ²é¿´: 2287 | »Ø¸´: 5 | ||
ľ×ÓÖÐÒ»±´Òø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
|
[ÇóÖú]
¹ØÓÚlatexͼƬ²åÈë³öÏÖµÄÎÊÌâ
|
|
±¾ÈËÓÃctex±à¼Ò»ÆªÎĵµ£¬ÓõÄ{cctart}Ä£°å±à¼£¬±àÒëÓõÄpdftex¡£ÔÚÎĵµÖвåÈ뼸ÕÅͼƬ¾ùÄÜÓÃpdfÕý³£Êä³ö£¬µ«ÔÚÎÒÓÃͬÑùµÄ·½·¨ÔÙ²åÈëÒ»ÕÅͼƬºó£¬±àÒëûÓÐÎÊÌ⣬¿ÉÒÔ´ò¿ªpdfÈ´´ò²»¿ª£¬ÏÔʾ´íÎó£ºÎĵµ´ò¿ªÊ±³ö´í£¬ÎļþÒÑË𻵲¢ÎÞ·¨ÐÞ¸´¡£µ«ÎÒÊÔ׎«²åÈëͼƬµÄλÖõ÷ÕûһϺó£¬ÓÖÓпÉÄÜÕý³£Êä³ö²¢´ò¿ª£¬ÎÒÏëÎÊÏ´óÉñ£¬ÕâËãÔõô»ØÊ°¡£¿£¿£¨Ó¦¸Ã²»ÊÇÎÒ²åÈëͼƬµÄÃüÁîʲôÓÐÎÊÌ⣬ÒòΪÎÒ֮ǰ²åÈëµÄÄÜÕý³£Êä³ö£¬ÎÒÓÃͬÑùµÄ·½·¨ÔÚ´Ë»ù´¡ÉÏÔÚ²åÈëʱ³öµÄ´í£¡£©·Ç³£¸Ðл£¬Ï£Íû´ó¼ÒÄܰï°ïÎÒ£¡ ÒÔÏÂÊÇÎÒµÄÔ´´úÂë \documentclass[11pt]{cctart} \usepackage{latexsym,amssymb,amsmath} \usepackage{graphicx} \usepackage{epstopdf} \usepackage{subfigure} \usepackage{float} \usepackage{psfig} \setlength{\parindent}{0cm} %¶ÎÂäÖеÚÒ»ÐÐËõ½øÉèΪ12pt \setlength{\parskip}{3pt plus1pt minus2pt} %plusÉìÕ¹ÖµminusÊÕËõÖµ \setlength{\baselineskip}{20pt plus2pt minus1pt} \setlength{\textheight}{21true cm} \setlength{\textwidth}{14.5true cm} \title{\bfseries Two energy conservation principles in convcctive heat optiminization} \author{Fang Yuan, Qun Chen*\\»ã±¨ÈË£ºÀî¹ó} \begin{document} \maketitle \zihao{4}\ziti{B} \quad Abstract \\ \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4} In this contribution, in order to effectively optimize convective heat transfer, such two principles as the field synergy principle and the entransy dissipation extremum principle are investigated to reveal the physical nature of the entransy dissipation and its intrinsic relationship with the field synergy degree.We first established the variational relations of the entransy dissipation and the field synergy degree with the heat transfer performance, and then derived the optimization equation of the field synergy principle and made comparison with that of the entransy dissipation extremum principle. Finally the theoretical analysis is then validated by the optimization results in both a fin-and-flat tube heat exchanger and a foursquare cavity. The results show that, for prescribed temperature boundary conditions, the above two optimization principles both aim at maximizing the total heat flow rate and their optimization equations can effectively obtain the best flow pattern. However, for given heat flux boundary conditions, only the optimization equation based on the entransy dissipation extremum principle intends to minimize the heat transfer temperature difference and could get the optimal velocity and temperature fields.\\ \zihao{4}\ziti{B} 2.\quad ¶ÔÁ÷»»ÈȵÄ×îÓÅ»¯ÔÔò\\ \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 2.1\quad ´«ÈÈÐÔÄܺͳ¡Ðͬ³Ì¶ÈµÄ¹ØÏµ\\ ¶ÔÓÚÎÞÄÚÈÈÔ´µÄ²»¿ÉѹÁ÷¶ÔÁ÷»»Èȹý³Ì£¬ºöÂÔÕ³ÐÔºÄÉ¢£¬ÄÜÁ¿·½³Ì¿ÉÒÔ±íʾΪ£º \[{\rho}c_pU\cdot{\nabla}T={\nabla}{\cdot}(\lambda{\nabla}T)~~(3)\] ¶Ô£¨3£©Ê½½øÐлý·Ö£¬ºöÂÔ½ø¿ÚºÍ³ö¿ÚµÄ×ÝÏòÈÈ´«µ¼£¬²¢ÔËÓøß˹¶¨ÀíÓУº \[\iiint_V{\rho}c_pU{\cdot}{\triangledown}TdV=\iiint_V{\rho}c_p\lvert{U}\rvert{\lvert{\nabla}T\rvert}cos{\beta}dV=\iint_S{\vec{n}}{\cdot}({\lambda{\nabla}T})dS~~(4)\] ÒýÈëÒÔÏÂÎÞÁ¿¸Ù²ÎÊý£º \[\bar{U}=\frac{U}{U_m},~~{\nabla}{\bar{T}}=\frac{{\nabla}T}{(T_m-T_b)/D}~~(5)\] Ôò£¨4£©Ê½¿ÉÒÔ»¯Îª£º \[\iiint_{v_0}(\bar{U}{\cdot}{\nabla}{\bar{T}})d\vec{V}=\frac{Nu}{Repr}=Fc~~(6)\] $Fc$Ϊ³¡ÐͬÊý£¬±íʾÁ÷ÌåËٶȺÍζÈÌݶÈÔÚÕû¸öÁ÷³¡ÖеÄÐͬ³Ì¶È¡£´Ó£¨6£©Ê½¿ÉÒÔ¿´³ö£¬¶ÔÓÚ¸ø¶¨Èë¿ÚÁ÷ËÙ£¬ÓÉÓÚ$Re$ºÍ$Pr$Ϊ³£Êý £¬ËùÒÔ$Nu$Ëæ$Fc$µÄÔö´ó¶øÔö´ó¡£¼´»»ÈÈÐÔÄÜÔ½ºÃ¡£ \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 2.2\quad »ð»ýºÄÉ¢Óë´«ÈÈÐÔÄܵĹØÏµ\\ ÔÚ£¨3£©Ê½×óÓÒÁ½±ß³ËÒÔζÈ$T$£¬ÎÒÃǵõ½£¬ \[U\cdot{\nabla}(\frac{1}{2}\rho{c_p}T^2)={\nabla}\cdot(\lambda{T}{\nabla}T)-\lambda\lvert{\nabla}T\rvert^2~~(8)\] ¼´£¬ \[U\cdot{\nabla}G={\nabla}\cdot(\lambda{T}{\nabla}T)-\lambda\lvert{\nabla}T\rvert^2~~(9)\] Áî$\phi_h=\iiint_v\lambda\lvert{\nabla}T\rvert^2dV$,¿ÉÒÔ×÷Ϊ²»¿ÉÄæµÄÁ¿¶È¡£ ¶Ô£¨8£©Ê½ÔÚÕû¸öÁ÷³¡»ý·Ö£¬²¢ÔËÓøß˹¶¨Àí£¬ÓУº \[\phi_h=\iint_S{-q^{''}}T\cdot\vec{n}dS+\frac{\rho{c_p}U_{in}{T_{in}}^2}{2}-\frac{\rho{c_p}U_{out}{T_{out}}^2}{2}~~(10)\] µ±±ß½çÈÈͨÁ¿$q^{''}$¸ø¶¨Ê±£¬£¨10£©Ê½¿ÉÒÔ±íʾΪ; \[\phi_h={-q^{''}}\cdot\vec{n}S\iint_S{\frac{T}{S}}dS+\frac{\rho{c_p}U_{in}{T_{in}}^2}{2}-\frac{\rho{c_p}U_{out}{T_{out}}^2}{2}~~(11)\] ÒòΪÁ÷ÌåÎüÊÕ»òÊͷŵÄÈÈÁ¿µÈÓÚͨ¹ý±ß½ç×ªÒÆµÄÈÈÁ¿£¬ËùÒÔ£¨11£©Ê½¿ÉÒÔ½øÒ»²½¼ò»¯Îª£º \[\phi_h=Q£¨T_b-\frac{T_{in}+T_{out}}{2}£©~~(12)\] ÆäÖУ¬$\frac{T_{in}+t_{out}}{2}$±íʾÁ÷ÌåµÄƽ¾ùζȣ¬$T_b$±íʾƽ¾ù±ß½çζȡ£ \[Q\delta({\Delta}T)=\delta(\phi_h)~~(13)\] ÆäÖУ¬${\Delta}T=T_b-\frac{T_{in}+T_{out}}{2}$±íʾβ \\ ÓÉ£¨13£©Ê½¿ÉÖª£¬¶ÔÓÚ×ܱ߽çÈÈÁ÷Á¿²»±äµÄÇé¿ö£¬ÔÚÈÈ´«µÝÇøÓò£¬×îС»ð»ýºÄÉ¢ÂÊ¿ÉÒÔµ¼³öÁ÷ÌåºÍ±ß½çµÄ×îС Î²£¨the minimum entransy dissipation rate in the heat transfer domain leads to the least temperature difference between the fluid and the wall£© ¶ÔÓÚ¸ø¶¨±ß½çζÈ$T_b(T_b>T_{in})$,ÓÉ£¨10£©Ê½¿ÉµÃ£¬ \[(T_b-T_{in}-\frac{Q}{US\rho{c_p}})\delta{Q}=\delta(\phi_h)~~(15)\] ÓÉÓÚ${\delta}^2Q<0$,(15)ʽÊÇ×î´óÖµÔÀí¡£Ò²¾ÍÊÇ˵£¬µ±±ß½çζȹ̶¨Ê±£¬»ð»ýºÄÉ¢×î´óµ¼ÖÂÈÈÁ÷Á¿×î´ó £¨when the boundary temperature is fixed, the maximum entransydissipation rate in the heat transfer domain leads to the largest heat flow rate, i.e. the optimal heat transfer performance.£© \\ ÁíÍ⣬Èç¹û¶ÔÁ÷´«ÈÈ·¢ÉúÔÚÒ»¸öÓÐÄÚÈÈÔ´µÄ·â±Õϵͳ£¬Ôò£¬ÄÜÁ¿Êغ㷽³Ì¿ÉÒÔ±íʾΪ£º \[{\rho}c_pU\cdot{\nabla}T={\nabla}{\cdot}(\lambda{\nabla}T)+q_v~~(16)\] ÆäÖÐ$q_v$±íʾÈÈÔ´¡£¼ÙÉèÖ»ÓÐÒ»¸ö±ß½çζÈÊǺãΣ¬ÆäËü±ß½ç¶¼ÊǾøÈȵ쬣¨16£©Ê½Á½±ß³ËÒÔT,ÓУ¬ \[\nabla\cdot{(\rho{c_p}UT^2/D)}-\frac{c_pT^2}{2}\nabla\cdot(\rho{U})=-\nabla\cdot{({\lambda}T{\nabla}T)}-{\lambda}\lvert{\nabla}T\rvert^2+q_vT~~(17)\] ¶Ô£¨17£©Ê½»ý·Ö£¬²¢ÀûÓøß˹¹«Ê½ºÍ±ä·Ö·½·¨µÄ£¬ÓУ¬ \[\phi_h=Q(T_f-T_b)~~(18)\] ÆäÖÐ$Q=q_vV$ʽ×ÜÈÈÁ÷Á¿£¬$T_f$ÊÇÆ½¾ùζȡ£ÕâÖÖÇé¿ö£¬µ± \[Q\delta(T_f)=\delta(\phi_h)~~(19)\] ´Ó£¨19£©Ê½¿ÉÖª£¬ÔÚÕâÖÖÌõ¼þÏ£¬ÔÚÇ»ÖУ¬×îС»ð»ýºÄÉ¢¿ÉÒÔµ¼ÖÂ×îСƽ¾ùζȡ££¨it is clear that the minimum entransy dissipation in this condition leads to the minimum average temperature in the cavity.£© ×ܵÄÀ´Ëµ£¬ÔÚ²»Í¬±ß½çÌõ¼þÏ£¬×îС»ð»ýºÄÉ¢ÔÔòºÍ×î´ó»ð»ýºÄÉ¢¿ÉÒÔ¼òµ¥µÄ³ÆÎªEDEP£¬¼´»ð»ýºÄÉ¢¼«ÖµÔÀí¿ÉÒÔÓÅ»¯´«ÈÈÐÔÄÜ¡£ £¨the extremumof entransy dissipation leads to the optimal heat transfer performance.£© \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 2.3\quad »ùÓÚÅ·À·½³ÌµÄFSP\\ \[\Pi=\iiint_V\{{\rho}{c_p}U{\cdot}{\nabla}T+C_{\phi_m} +A[{\rho}{c_p}U\cdot{\nabla}T-{\nabla}T\cdot({\lambda}{\nabla}T)~~(21)] +B{\nabla}T\cdot(\rho{U})\}dV\] ÓÉ»ð»ýÉ¢¼«ÖµÔÀíµÃµ½µÄÅ·À·½³Ì£º \[\rho{U}\cdot{\nabla}U=-{\nabla}P+\mu{\nabla}^2U+(C_{\phi}A{\nabla}T+\rho{U}\cdot{\nabla}U)~~(29)\] \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 2.4\quad »ùÓÚÅ·À·½³ÌµÄEDEP£¨The EDEP-based Euler¡¯s equation£©\\ \[\Pi=\iiint_V\{{\lambda}{\nabla}T{\cdot}{\nabla}T+C^{'}_{\phi_m} +A^{'}[{\rho}{c_p}U\cdot{\nabla}T-{\nabla}T\cdot({\lambda}{\nabla}T)]+ B^{'}{\nabla}T\cdot(\rho{U})\}dV~~(30)\] \[C^{'}_{\phi}=\frac{\rho{c_p}}{2C^{'}}~~(33)\] \[F=C^{'}_{\phi}A^{'}{\nabla}T+\rho{U}\cdot{\nabla}U~~(34)\] ×ܵÄÀ´Ëµ£¬³¡Ðͬ³Ì¶ÈºÍ»ð»ýºÄÉ¢ÂÊÁ½¸öÎïÀíÁ¿²»½ö¶¼¿ÉÒÔ×÷ΪÆÀ¼Û´«ÈÈÐÔÄܵÄÖ¸±ê£¬¶øÇÒ¶¼ÄÜÖ¸µ¼ÎÒÃÇͨ¹ý±ä·Ö·¨»ñµÃ ÔÚÔ¼ÊøÌõ¼þÏ»ñµÃ×î¼ÑÁ÷³¡¡£\\ \zihao{4}\ziti{B} 3.\quad a fin-and-flat tube»»ÈÈÆ÷µÄÓÅ»¯\\ \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 3.1\quad ÊýֵģÐÍ\\ \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}Fig 1 is the sketch of the elementary pattern of air-side geometry of an actual condenser with the detailed parameters listed in Table 1, where a laminar heat transfer process takes place. In this paper, only half of the tube and two half of the fins are presented due to the symmetry, and the air is taken as the working fluid with constant physical properties, including:$\rho=1.128kg m^{-3}$,$\mu=1.91\times10^{-5}kg m^{-1}s^{-1}$,$\lambda=0.0276 Wm^{-1}K^{-1},c_p=1005Jkg^{-1}K^{-1}$ \begin{figure}[!htbp] \centering \includegraphics[height=6cm,width=8cm]{fig1.eps} \caption{The sketch of the computational domain and boundary conditions} \end{figure} \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}The meshes at the sections of $z=8.25mm$, $x=2mm$ and $y=0.65mm$ are showed in Fig. 2(a)-(c), respectively, which are more condensed in the near wall and entrance regions, where the steeper velocity gradients are expected. In order to set boundary condition of variable A at outlet conveniently, the computational domain is extended downstream ten times the fin length, and then the gradient of variable A at outlet is assumed to be zero. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \centering \includegraphics[height=8cm,width=5cm]{fig2.eps} \caption{Computation meshes of the calculating domain} \end{figure} \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 3.3\quad Mesh independence of the solution\\ \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}For the sake of adopting an appropriate grid system, a grid refinement is conducted to investigate the influence of the grid density on the numerical results. The simulation results of five different grid systems at a constant boundary temperature are shown in Fig. 3. Compared to the finest grid 133$\times$42$\times$696, the grid 133$\times$42$\times$520 yields 0.2\% lower Nu. Thus, the grid 133$\times$42$\times$696 has the sufficient precision for numerical simulation.\\ To further validate the computational model, the predicted heat transfer characteristics (j-factor) under different Reynolds numbers is also compared with that calculated from the empirical relation proposed by Sieder and Tate [38], which are provided in Fig. 4. \zihao{-4}\ziti{B} 3.3\quad Optimization at a constant boundary temperature\\ When the airflow with the inlet velocity and temperature of 2m/s and 308K, respectively, and the wall temperature of the rectangular domain keeps at 327K, Fig. 5(a)-(c) show the optimal distributions of velocity vector, velocity magnitude and temperature at the cross section of z=8.25mm based on the EDEP with $C^{'}_{\phi}=-1\times10^(-2)$in Eq.(31). \begin{figure}[!htbp] \centering \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=6cm]{fig3.eps} \caption{The Nusselt number, Nu, versus the grid number} \end{figure} \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}There exist five vortexes in the computational domain, which play the role of strengthening the mixture of the flow near the wall with the mainstream so as to transfer more heat from the boundary into the mainstream. In addition, from Fig. 5(b), it is clear that the velocity magnitude of vortex which reflects the strength of vortex becomes larger from the near tube region to the center between every two tubes. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \centering \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=6cm]{fig4.eps} \caption{The heat transfer characteristics, j-factor, versus the Reynolds number, Re.} \end{figure} \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}Increasing $C^{'}_{\phi}=-3.5\times10^(-2)$, we may get the optimized results at the same cross section shown in Fig. 6(a)-(c).The comparison of Figs. 5 and 6 indicates that the vortexes formed at the cross section increase to nine with the average velocity magnitude and temperature becoming larger and higher, respectively. Therefore, it can be concluded that as the absolute value of$C^{'}_{\phi}$ which represents the viscous dissipation rate is increasing, the flow with much more turbulence will be obtained so as to increase the heat flux from the boundary, and consequently optimize heat transfer. \begin{figure}[!htbp] \centering \includegraphics[height=8cm,width=10cm]{fig5.eps} \caption{Optimal distributions of velocity vector, velocity magnitude and temperature based on the EDEP at z=8.25mm ($C^{'}_{\phi}=-1\times10^{-2}.$)} \end{figure} \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}Based on Eqs. (24) and (32), Fig. 7 gives the Nu variation with different viscous dissipation rates. The results show that the Nu increases along with the viscous dissipation rate and the optimized trend curves based on two optimization principles are nearly the same \begin{figure} \centering \includegraphics[height=5cm,width=6cm]{fig7.eps} \caption{The Nusselt number, Nu, versus viscous dissipation rate, $\Phi_m$} \end{figure} \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}Moreover, Fig. 8(a)-(c) show the optimal distributions of velocity vector, velocity magnitude and temperature at the cross section of z=8.25mm based on the FSP, respectively. In a word, the optimized results are in reasonable agreement with our theoretical analysis, i.e. the FSP and EDEP optimizations for a prescribed boundary temperature are the same, they both can effectively maximize the total heat flow rate. \zihao{4}\ziti{B} 3.4\quad Optimization at a constant heat flux\\ \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}For the prescribed heat flux $q^{''}$ in the simulation model, based on the EDEP where $C^{'}_{\phi}=1.25\times10^(-2).$, the optimal distributions of velocity vector, velocity magnitude and temperature are shown in Fig. 9(a)-(c), respectively. Eleven vortexes exist in the computational domain, which reduce the heat transfer temperature difference by 24.2\%, and increase the Nu by 31.9\%. \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}Fig. 10 gives the Nu at different viscous dissipation rates based on the EDEP. Increasing the overall viscous dissipation rate effectively enlarges the Nu based on the EDEP. It exactly corresponds with the theoretical analysis. \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}According to the physical meaning of variational method, the Euler¡¯s equation derived based on the FSP will not make any contribution to decrease the temperature difference. Fig. 11 indicates that the optimized results are the same but with the viscous dissipation decreasing 5.24\% and the Nu reducing 3.94%. Therefore, the numerical results further prove that, for prescribed heat flow rate boundary conditions, only the EDEP does work. \zihao{4}\ziti{B}4\quad Optimization in a foursquare cavity \zihao{4}\ziti{B} Conclusion\quad\\ \hspace*{2\ccwd}\zihao{-4}By establishing the relationships of the field synergy degree and the entransy dissipation over the entire domain with the total heat flow rate (temperature difference) in convective heat transfer processes for both open and closed systems, we find that both the field synergy degree and the entransy dissipation rate are suitable for evaluating heat transfer performance. With the criterion of maximum field synergy degree, the FSPbased Euler¡¯s equation is derived by the variational method, and thereafter compared to the one deduced from the EDEP. It indicates that both the FSP and the EDEP will obtain the best flow pattern for a given boundary temperature, regardless of the different forms of the governing equations of variables A and A¡¯. However, for a prescribed heat flux boundary condition, since the field synergy degree over the entire domain keeps constant, the Euler¡¯s equation based on the FSP, in this case, makes no contribution to heat transfer optimization. Next, we investigate the laminar heat transfer process in the air side of a fin-and-flat tube heat exchanger. For a prescribed temperature boundary, with the viscous dissipation rate increasing, both two optimization principles will make the Nu increase. Moreover, for the same dissipation rate, the optimization results based on the EDEP and the FSP are the same. However, for a prescribed heat flux boundary condition, only the optimized flow based on the EDEP enlarges the Nu, whereas the optimization based on the FSP makes no sense. Furthermore, a similar process in a foursquare cavity is also optimized and the same conclusion is obtained, which is well agreed with the theoretical analysis. In conclusion, the EDEP and the FSP are both suitable for the optimization of heat transfer to improve energy utilization performance, where the EDEP is superior due to its effectiveness in heat tranfer optimization with prescribed boundary heat fluxes. \end{document} |
» ²ÂÄãϲ»¶
½ñÌìÎñί»á¿ªÍêÁË£¬Ã÷Ìì³ö½á¹ûÂð
ÒѾÓÐ21È˻ظ´
2026Äê8ÔÂ25ÈÕ¹ú×ÔÈ»·Å°ñǰͻȻÊÕµ½ÁÐÈëÆÀÉóר¼ÒÓʼþ£¬ÓйØÏµÂð£¿
ÒѾÓÐ14È˻ظ´
ÔÚ¼á±ù»¹¸Ç×ű±º£µÄʱºò£¬ÎÒ¿´µ½ÁËŷŵÄ÷»¨¡£
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
Ã÷ÌìÓ¦¸Ã¿É²éÁË£¡£¿
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
ÓÐûÓдóÉñ°ïÎÒ¿´¿´»ù½ð´úÂë
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
·Å°ñǰµÄ²»µ¶¨
ÒѾÓÐ19È˻ظ´
ijЩ»ú¹¹£¬ÒÔЧÂʵÍΪÈÙ£¬ÒÔЧÂʵÍ×÷Ϊ´æÔÚ¸Ð
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
2026¹ú×ÔÈ»º¯ÆÀ·Ñµ½ÕË
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
½ñÈÕ²»·Å°ñ£¿Íø´«¹ú×ÔȻԤ¼Æ 8 Ô 27 Èտɲé½á¹û
ÒѾÓÐ22È˻ظ´
ʲôʱºò¿ª½±£¿
ÒѾÓÐ13È˻ظ´
» ±¾Ö÷ÌâÏà¹Ø¼ÛÖµÌùÍÆ¼ö£¬¶ÔÄúͬÑùÓаïÖú:
ÔÚlatexÖвåÈë¶àÕÅeps¸ñʽͼƬ£¬×îºó¼¸ÕŲ»ÏÔʾ
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
LaTexË«À¸²åͼµÄÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ6È˻ظ´
LaTexͼÃû»»ÐÐÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
visio»µÄͼÈçºÎ²åÈëµ½LaTeXÖУ¬Ç뾡Á¿½«²½Ö轫Ïêϸ£¬×îºÃÊǼòµ¥ºÃÓõķ½·¨
ÒѾÓÐ11È˻ظ´
Latex ÖеIJåͼ¼¸¸ö²ÎÊýÑ¡Ïî²»ÖªµÀÒâ˼£¬Çó¸æÖª
ÒѾÓÐ4È˻ظ´
LatexÖÐÈçºÎÌí¼Ó×÷Õß½éÉܺÍͼƬ
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
ÂÛÎÄÅŰæÖеÄͼƬÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
ÇóÖúSpringerµÄͶ¸åÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ8È˻ظ´
ÇóÎÊlatex²åÈëͼƬ¡£¡£¡£¡£
ÒѾÓÐ12È˻ظ´
´ó¼ÒͶ¸åµÄͼƬÓÐPS¹ýÂð£¿
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
¹ØÓÚwordÀï²åÈëͼƬ±»ÕڸǵÄÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ15È˻ظ´
¹ØÓÚelsevier signal processing latex¸å¼þÖбí¸ñÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ9È˻ظ´
latex²åÈëÎÄÏ×ʱÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
springerͶ¸åÌá½»texÎļþÓÉϵͳת³ÉPDFµÄÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ18È˻ظ´
ÂÛÎÄlatexͻȻ³öÁËÒ»¸öÎÊÌâ, ¸ßÊÖ°ïæ½â¾ö°¡~
ÒѾÓÐ23È˻ظ´
latexÖвåÈëͼƬ£¬ÉÏÏÂÅÅÁУ¬ÔõôµÚ¶þ¸öͼÉÏ·½ÓÐ´óÆ¬¿Õ°×£¿
ÒѾÓÐ5È˻ظ´
IEEE »áÒé LatexÄ£°åÏÂ×ÖÌåǶÈëÎÊÌâµÄ½â¾ö
ÒѾÓÐ3È˻ظ´
¡¾ÇóÖú¡¿latex²åÈëͼÐΰױߴ¦ÀíµÄÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ10È˻ظ´
latex ½ô¼±ÇóÖú£¬¹ØÓÚͼ±í±êºÅµÄÎÊÌâ¡£
ÒѾÓÐ7È˻ظ´
¹ØÓÚÂÛÎÄÀïµÄͼƬת»»Îªeps¸ñʽÎÊÌâ
ÒѾÓÐ11È˻ظ´

ľ×ÓÖÐÒ»±´
Òø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
![]() |
2Â¥2014-08-24 15:02:51
ľ×ÓÖÐÒ»±´
Òø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 148.2
- É¢½ð: 28
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 71
- ÔÚÏß: 14.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3350478
- ×¢²á: 2014-08-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Á÷ÌåÁ¦Ñ§

3Â¥2014-08-24 16:31:27
ľ×ÓÖÐÒ»±´
Òø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 148.2
- É¢½ð: 28
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 71
- ÔÚÏß: 14.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3350478
- ×¢²á: 2014-08-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Á÷ÌåÁ¦Ñ§

4Â¥2014-08-25 07:50:40
nerolf
Ìú³æ (³õÈëÎÄ̳)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 47.3
- Ìû×Ó: 9
- ÔÚÏß: 10.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 2232279
- ×¢²á: 2013-01-10
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: ÎïÀíº£Ñóѧ
5Â¥2014-08-25 14:45:57
ľ×ÓÖÐÒ»±´
Òø³æ (СÓÐÃûÆø)
- Ó¦Öú: 0 (Ó×¶ùÔ°)
- ½ð±Ò: 148.2
- É¢½ð: 28
- ºì»¨: 1
- Ìû×Ó: 71
- ÔÚÏß: 14.5Сʱ
- ³æºÅ: 3350478
- ×¢²á: 2014-08-03
- ÐÔ±ð: GG
- רҵ: Á÷ÌåÁ¦Ñ§

6Â¥2014-08-25 20:22:15









»Ø¸´´ËÂ¥

