40 reputation
4
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years
seen Dec 20 '13 at 18:24

Aug
1
awarded  Commentator
Dec
8
accepted Using subequations without amsmath
Dec
8
comment Using subequations without amsmath
Thanks David - thats superb. I found I needed to mess a little with the spacing between subequations by adding artificial \vspace as I found that the cases brackets would bunch a little too close together, however i'm sure this could have been incorporated to what you wrote easily. Either way, that was definetly what I was looking for.
Dec
8
comment Using subequations without amsmath
To followup on my previous post (again, dont worry until you have sufficient time) - good point is that \bigskip or equivalent works a treat with the spacing. Unfortunately, I have found another bad point, in that the labelling I use for \subequations is now creating problems in the file. If I refer to DD2 for example in the above working example, I am given the same number as if I refer to either DD1, DD3 or DD - which is certainly very strange?!?
Dec
8
comment Using subequations without amsmath
No problem - thanks anyway for the help. If you make any progress, i'd certainly be happy to hear of it. It is strange that the proceedings does not have amsmath as a core package, but this is the last issue. The document now builds fine, just the centering and linespace issues, but i'll try what you mentioned in the first instance.
Dec
8
comment Using subequations without amsmath
Thanks for the help. Its almost fine in my document, however I find that it 'bunches' up to the text both at the top and bottom when I view the output. Also, I would like the equations to center if possible as per the subequations environment, but cannot use \centering as it has no effect. Do you have any possible workarounds?
Dec
7
awarded  Scholar
Dec
7
accepted Using aligned and align without amsmath
Dec
7
comment Using aligned and align without amsmath
Just to follow up, I also need a workaround for subequations, if you have one or know how? I have posted a separate topic from this one to save confusion.
Dec
7
asked Using subequations without amsmath
Dec
7
comment Using aligned and align without amsmath
Thanks for the reply. This certainly works - I have no idea how you came up with such a solution though! I have used the method proposed above for now, as it seems the easiest option to use, and keeps the formatting the same. Thanks, Chris
Dec
7
comment Using aligned and align without amsmath
Thanks so much for this, its saved me a lot of work. I originally used Werner's suggestion, however this has dealt with most of the issues for me.
Dec
7
comment Using aligned and align without amsmath
If it was possible to edit the original equation to fit with array in such a way that the output when compared to the original with amsmath was similar, then yes, I would be prepared to edit the document. I imitially suggested trying to use \aligned and \align after \begin{document} though as I have used them in about 17 places, so a fair bit of editing will be needed if I choose this route.
Dec
7
awarded  Student
Dec
7
awarded  Editor
Dec
7
revised Using aligned and align without amsmath
added 985 characters in body
Dec
7
comment Using aligned and align without amsmath
Hi Werner, thanks for the quick reply. I have edited my original response to include the MWE. Hope this helps - please let me know if you need any more info.
Dec
7
asked Using aligned and align without amsmath