0

I found this solution to explain some details of some equations. In the first case I added \begin{minipage}[h]{0.95\textwidth}..... while the second case is taken from the previous discussion.

I'm not very sure if this is correct. could you give any suggestions? thanks

\documentclass[a4paper]{article} 

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc} 
\usepackage[italian]{babel}
\usepackage{amsmath}
%\usepackage{mathtools}
%\usepackage{capt-of}
\usepackage{graphicx,wrapfig}
\usepackage{mwe} 
\usepackage{scalerel}
\newcommand\scale[2]{\vstretch{#1}{\hstretch{#1}{#2}}}
\newcommand\ssp[1]{#1^{\scale{.8}{\scriptstyle{\prime}}}} %% scala il simbolo prime
\newcommand\sspp[1]{#1^{\scale{.8}{\scriptstyle{\prime\prime}}}}

\newcommand*{\Fra}[2]{\frac{#1}{#2}} 
\newcommand{\ccdot}{\,\mathrm{\!\cdot\!}}

\graphicspath{ {./img/} }

\begin{document}

\begin{minipage}[h]{0.95\textwidth}
In particolare possono essere evidenziati due casi:\\
\vspace{-25pt}
\begin{wrapfigure}{l}{.3\textwidth}
        \begin{align}
        F_{rd}^2 = \Fra{\Delta{U^2}}{g\,H\,\Fra{\Delta{\rho}}{\rho}}\tag{\ref{eq090}}
        \end{align}
\end{wrapfigure}
\begin{enumerate}
        \item in cui si abbiano due densità uguali, $\Delta{\rho}=0$ ed essendo a denominatore fa andare il valore del \emph{Numero di Froude} infinito;
        \item quanto $\Delta{\rho}\rightarrow\infty$ ( caso impossibile) allora $Fr_{rd}^2\rightarrow 0$
    \end{enumerate}
\end{minipage}\vspace{5pt}

Da questo si capisce che usare l'inverso di Froude al quadrato sarebbe più razionale, in particolare viene utilizzato all'interno del numero di Richardson.\\
\bigskip\bigskip\bigskip

\begin{wrapfigure}{l}{.3\textwidth}
    \begin{align}
    F_{rd}^2 = \Fra{\Delta{U^2}}{g\,H\,\Fra{\Delta{\rho}}{\rho}}\tag{\ref{eq090}}
    \end{align}
\end{wrapfigure}
In particolare possono essere evidenziati due casi:
\begin{enumerate}
    \item in cui si abbiano due densità uguali, $\Delta{\rho}=0$ ed essendo a denominatore fa andare il valore del \emph{Numero di Froude} infinito;
    \item quanto $\Delta{\rho}\rightarrow\infty$ ( caso impossibile) allora $Fr_{rd}^2\rightarrow 0$
\end{enumerate}
\vspace{10pt}
Da questo si capisce che usare l'inverso di Froude al quadrato sarebbe più razionale, in particolare viene utilizzato all'interno del numero di Richardson.

\end{document}

enter image description here

  • what is the intention of \begin{minipage}[h]{0.95\textwidth} ? minipage does not have a h option, and this just indents everything by a paragraph indent and reduces the width of the text by 5% ? – David Carlisle Mar 6 '19 at 20:09
  • @DavidCarlisle I was wrong writing the minipage, the h should not be put – Antonio Mar 6 '19 at 20:28
  • but what is the intention of the minipage? you could delete it and get the same result, but with the normal page margins restored. – David Carlisle Mar 6 '19 at 20:29
  • @DavidCarlisle I do not get the same result. obviously I inserted the two codes to highlight that I tried the two options, which obviously are different. – Antonio Mar 6 '19 at 20:33
2

I'm not clear what layout you want but perhaps

enter image description here

\documentclass[a4paper]{article} 

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc} 
\usepackage[italian]{babel}
\usepackage{amsmath}
%\usepackage{mathtools}
%\usepackage{capt-of}
\usepackage{graphicx,wrapfig}
\usepackage{mwe} 
\usepackage{scalerel}
\newcommand\scale[2]{\vstretch{#1}{\hstretch{#1}{#2}}}
\newcommand\ssp[1]{#1^{\scale{.8}{\scriptstyle{\prime}}}} %% scala il simbolo prime
\newcommand\sspp[1]{#1^{\scale{.8}{\scriptstyle{\prime\prime}}}}

\newcommand*{\Fra}[2]{\frac{#1}{#2}} 
\newcommand{\ccdot}{\,\mathrm{\!\cdot\!}}

\graphicspath{ {./img/} }

\begin{document}

%??? does nothing useful \begin{minipage}[h]{0.95\textwidth}
In particolare possono essere evidenziati due casi:% don't end a paragrapg with \\
% dont't need negative space \vspace{-25pt}
% no need for wrapfig\begin{wrapfigure}{l}{.3\textwidth}

\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{.3\textwidth}
     % don't use align for single line equations   \begin{align}
\[
% mathrm for multi-letter identifiers
        F_{\mathrm{rd}}^2 = \Fra{\Delta{U^2}}{g\,H\,\Fra{\Delta{\rho}}{\rho}}
% this looks strange but I leave it
\tag{\ref{eq090}}
\]
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.6\textwidth}
\begin{enumerate}
        \item in cui si abbiano due densità uguali, $\Delta{\rho}=0$ ed essendo a denominatore fa andare il valore del \emph{Numero di Froude} infinito;
        \item quanto $\Delta{\rho}\rightarrow\infty$ ( caso impossibile) allora $Fr_{rd}^2\rightarrow 0$
    \end{enumerate}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}

%\vspace{5pt}

Da questo si capisce che usare l'inverso di Froude al quadrato sarebbe più razionale, in particolare viene utilizzato all'interno del numero di Richardson.\\
\bigskip\bigskip\bigskip

\begin{center}
\begin{minipage}{.3\textwidth}
\[
    F_{\mathrm{rd}}^2 = \Fra{\Delta{U^2}}{g\,H\,\Fra{\Delta{\rho}}{\rho}}\tag{\ref{eq090}}
\]
\end{minipage}\hfill
\begin{minipage}{.6\textwidth}
In particolare possono essere evidenziati due casi:

\begin{enumerate}
    \item in cui si abbiano due densità uguali, $\Delta{\rho}=0$ ed essendo a denominatore fa andare il valore del \emph{Numero di Froude} infinito;
    \item quanto $\Delta{\rho}\rightarrow\infty$ ( caso impossibile) allora $Fr_{rd}^2\rightarrow 0$
\end{enumerate}
\end{minipage}
\end{center}

Da questo si capisce che usare l'inverso di Froude al quadrato sarebbe più razionale, in particolare viene utilizzato all'interno del numero di Richardson.

\end{document}
| improve this answer | |
  • CarliseThank you for the precise and very useful explanation. question: why can not '\ begin {align}' be used for single line equations? I normally used \ begin {equation} \ begin {align}, after I read this possibility that I find comfortable, but it is not correct. – Antonio Mar 7 '19 at 6:41
  • 1
    @Antonio an align is always full width (for technical reasons to support the align constructs) so the usual adjustment tex makes for spacing around short equations never happens, so you get much better spacing around equation or \[ – David Carlisle Mar 7 '19 at 7:37
  • I have seen that using this method \[.equation \label{.}\] the label references of the equations are not included in the pdf print. in particular I'm using \usepackage {showkeys}. this is very useful for me to remember the references of the various equations. this does not create problems with \begin{equation} \begin{aligned}..equation. . I also saw that I receive an error in the amsmath package about the \ tag {\ ref {eq090}}, when I use it \begin{equation} \begin{aligned}.equation.\tag{\ref{eq090}},the error is canceled if I use it \[..\tag{\ref{eq090}}\] – Antonio Mar 7 '19 at 17:44
  • @Antonio no see any basic latex tutorial, use \begin{equation}a=b\label{zzz}\end{equation} if you want a numbered eauation you can reference, \[a=b\] is fro un-numbered equations (same as align giving numbers and align* no numbers) – David Carlisle Mar 7 '19 at 18:39
  • @Antonio the construct \tag{\ref{eq090}} is very odd, you are forcing one equation to get the same label as some other equation? – David Carlisle Mar 7 '19 at 18:40

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.