0 Stimmen dafür0 Stimmen dagegen

2 Aufrufe5 SeitenAug 15, 2014

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT oder online auf Scribd lesen

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

2 Aufrufe

© All Rights Reserved

Als PDF, TXT **herunterladen** oder online auf Scribd lesen

- Numerical Methods
- Eee1 Syllabus 2s1112
- Distance Prt
- Bonus exercise/solution, chain parameters
- Reference IEC Fault
- The Standard Desrete System
- SLIC Longitudinal Balance Appnote
- 8common Noise
- syllabus2
- IJCER (www.ijceronline.com) International Journal of computational Engineering research
- carregador_baterias_v_final_com_revisões_v2
- Matrix Algebra
- R7310203 Power Systems - II
- N5180-90057
- A Hybrid Inverse Approach Applied to the Design
- MR - 1
- noise.pptx
- Introduction to Matlab
- [Kenneth P. Parker] the Boundary-Scan Handbook
- Transformer Impedance Calculation Sheet

Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

to energy monitoring

Alessio Filippi, Ashish Pandharipande, Armand Lelkens, Ronald Rietman,

Tim Schenk, Ying Wang, Paul Shrubsole

Philips Research,

High Tech Campus, 5656 AE Eindhoven, The Netherlands

Email: {alessio.lippi, ashish.p, armand.lelkens, ronald.rietman, tim.schenk, ying.z.wang, paul.shrubsole}@philips.com

AbstractConsumers increasingly want to make informed and

proactive decisions based on an understanding of their energy

consumption. However, current energy monitoring solutions are

either too limited in the information they provide or are too

intrusive. We consider a solution for disaggregating the electrical

power consumption of individual appliances connected in a res-

idential electricity network, with a single point of measurement.

We pose the power disaggregation problem in the framework

of multi-user detection. Two linear detection algorithms are then

provided to determine which appliances are active in the network

and in turn to determine their individual power consumptions.

An experimental setup is described that was used to evaluate the

performance of the algorithms along with simulation results.

Index TermsEnergy monitoring, Non-intrusive appliance

load monitoring, Power disaggregation, Linear detection algo-

rithms.

I. INTRODUCTION

Residential energy monitoring has become a subject of

recent research focus as consumers seek better insights into

their energy consumption and electricity utility companies

offer dynamic electricity pricing options. Increased awareness

of environmental impact and sustainability have also been

contributing factors to rising energy mindfulness. An energy

monitoring approach that has received attention is appliance

power disaggregation. This technology provides the ability to

recognize the power consumption of individual appliances in

use in a residence, thus resulting in consumption information

at greater granularity. Different methods to achieve this have

been proposed [1], [2], [6], [7], [8], [10]. These works describe

different algorithms to disaggregate the power consumed by

individual appliances based on a single point of measurement,

thus providing an inexpensive, easy-to-install and centralized

energy monitoring solution.

The concept of disaggregating power consumption of indi-

vidual appliances was rst described in [2] under the name

non-intrusive appliance load monitoring. The basic insight

behind this method is that appliances produce electrical

waveforms (e.g., current signatures), depending intrinsically

on their in-built circuitry, that additively constitute the total

electrical output measured for instance at the electricity meter.

Different signal processing techniques for disaggregating the

signatures such as edge detection to determine transient or

steady-state power level changes, cluster analysis on signature

space of the real-reactive power were described. Later works

have built upon [2]. In [4], [5], [9], different electrical signa-

tures that may be used in disaggregation algorithms have been

discussed, along with methods to construct a database of such

signatures. Algorithms and methodologies for disaggregation

have been further considered in [6], [7], [8], [10]. In particular,

[7], [8] consider signal waveforms obtained by sampling at

much higher rates (12,000 samples per second) as compared

to previous works.

The approach we take in this paper relies on steady state

analysis where observations are aggregated over a complete

period of the electrical waveform. In particular, a current

sensor measures the total current drawn which is a linear

summation of the individual currents owing through active

appliances corrupted by additive noise. We translate this into a

vector system model after performing matched ltering. Two

forms of linear detectors - Zero Forcing (ZF) and Minimum

Mean Square Error (MMSE) are then used to estimate the

active/inactive states of the appliances, and in turn their power

consumptions. We then compare the performance of the two

detectors in terms of error rates using measurements collected

from various appliances using an experimental setup.

The paper is organized as follows. In Section II, we describe

the disaggregation architecture and present the system model.

The problem of power disaggregation is formally posed in

Section III and linear detection schemes are described. The

experimental setup and simulation results are presented in

Section IV. Finally, conclusions are drawn in Section V.

II. DISAGGREGATION ARCHITECTURE AND LOAD MODEL

IN AN ELECTRICITY NETWORK

We rst describe the power disaggregation architecture. A

single sensor unit is located at a central measurement point

and monitors the total power consumption. The data is sent

to a central processor, e.g. a PC or an energy management

box, which disaggregates the total power consumption and

attributes them to individual active appliances. The sensor

could be a stand-alone device where disaggregation algorithms

run on a dedicated visualization device. Alternatively, the

disaggregation algorithms might be included in the sensing

unit, thus making it possible to use it as an off-the-shelf

visualization unit. These architectural choices depend on the

available connectivity solutions and the envisioned application

scenario.

2010 IEEE International Energy Conference

978-1-4244-9380-7/10/$26.00 2010 IEEE 91

Z0 Z1 Z2 Zn ZN

b1,k

b2,k bn,k

bN,k

... ...

V0(t)

itot,k(t) current sensor

i1(t) i2t) in(t) iN(t)

Fig. 1. Electrical model showing appliances in connection.

We now consider the electrical model describing the connec-

tion of appliances in a residential network. A well-established

simple model [2], [10] of the electricity network is depicted in

g. 1, showing the various appliances connected in parallel.

The utility meter at the residence is modeled as a voltage

generator and an internal equivalent impedance Z

0

. The volt-

age V

0

(t) delivered by the utility is, in rst approximation,

a sinusoidal wave with a time-varying peak amplitude that is

constant over a period, but may vary slightly across different

periods. The operating frequency is 50 Hz (in Europe) and as-

sumed constant. We assume that there are N appliances in the

residential network. The state of the n-th appliance over period

k is denoted by b

n,k

, i.e. b

n,k

= 1 if the appliance is active,

else b

n,k

= 0. An appliance is characterized by its impedance

Z

n

. The current owing through this appliance in active state

is determined by the normalized current signature i

n

(t) and a

root-mean square (rms) value A

n

. The normalization factor to

obtain i

n

(t) is the 2-norm of the current owing through the

n-th appliance. We can then write the overall current i

tot,k

(t)

in the k-th period as the sum of the currents owing through

the N appliances as

i

tot,k

(t) =

N

n=1

i

n

(t)A

n

b

k,n

+w(t), 0 t < T. (1)

The duration of the period is given by T (=1/50 s). We

assume that information pertaining to the current signatures

(i

n

(t) and A

n

) is known a priori and collected in some form

of a signature database. In the above, w(t) denotes the

additive noise component. We model w(t) as a white, Gaussian

process. The noise power is given by

2

. In practice this noise

component is small in residential power lines [3]. We shall

now proceed to derive a disaggregation procedure under this

additive, white Gaussian noise (AWGN) model. The procedure

can be suitably modied if the noise is colored.

III. MULTI-APPLIANCE POWER DISAGGREGATION

The disaggregation method we consider is inspired by multi-

user detection [11] encountered in communication theory. In

multi-user detection, the goal is to reliably detect the source

symbols transmitted by multiple users over parallel AWGN

communication channels at a receiver. Analogously, we are

interested here in determining the state of the appliances (1

or 0; cf. communicating bits 1 or -1 in BPSK [11]) using

electrical current measurements following the model (1).

We rst use a bank of matched lters by correlating i

tot,k

(t)

of (1) with i

n

(t) and integrating over a period T. Dene the

following components,

i

n,k

=

1

T

_

T

0

i

tot,k

(t)i

n

(t)dt. (2)

Dene the N 1 vector

i

k

=

_

i

1,k

i

2,k

. . .

i

N,k

T

, (3)

and an N N correlation matrix R with the element in the

m-th row and n-th column, R

m,n

, dened as

R

m,n

=

1

T

_

T

0

i

m

(t)i

n

(t)dt. (4)

Further, let

A = diag{A

1

, A

2

, . . . , A

N

}. (5)

Denote b

k

to be the N 1 indicator vector containing the

active/inactive binary (1/0) states of the N appliances in the

k-th period,

b

k

=

_

b

k,1

b

k,2

. . . b

k,N

T

. (6)

Further, denote the noise components

w

n

=

1

T

_

T

0

w(t)i

n

(t)dt. (7)

Collecting these into an N 1 vector, we have

w =

_

w

1

w

2

. . . w

N

T

. (8)

We can now write our system model subsequent to the matched

ltering operation in matrix form as

i

k

= RAb

k

+ w. (9)

Note that we assume that matrices R and A are perfectly

known, given our assumption of a perfectly accurate signa-

ture database. Our goal is to estimate the binary vector b

k

.

Different algorithms of varying computational complexity and

accuracy are available for this estimation. The performance

of the algorithms depends on the structure of matrices R and

A (specically how close they are to being singular) and the

noise level . We consider two approaches and compare their

performance.

First, consider the transformation

i

k

= 2

i

k

RA1 (10)

where 1 is an N 1 vector with all of its elements equal

to one. Under this transformation, (10) can be rewritten after

substituting (9) in as follows

i

k

= RA(2b

k

1) + 2 w = RA

b

k

+ 2 w. (11)

With (11), we can design a threshold algorithm to detect

b

k

=

(2b

k

1) which has elements equal to 1. With the states

being equally likely, an appropriate threshold is 0.

92

Device number Device type Nominal power Alias

1 CFL 20 W CFL20

2 Incandescent lamp 40 W Inc.

3 CFL 5 W CFL5

4 Halogen lamp 20 W halo20

5 Halogen lamp 50 W halo50

6 Living Colors 14.5 W LC

7 LED lamp 4 W LED

8 Hair Dryer 720 W HD

9 DVD player 14 W DVD

10 TV with ambilight 145 W TV

11 Water cooker 2200 W Kettle

TABLE I

APPLIANCES CONNECTED IN THE RESIDENTIAL NETWORK.

Fig. 2. Experimental setup used for power disaggregation.

We now consider two linear detectors. The ZF algorithm

obtains an estimate

b

ZF

k

for the vector

b

k

as follows

b

ZF

k

= sign

_

R

1

i

k

_

= sign

_

A

b

k

+ 2R

1

w

_

. (12)

In the above, the sign(.) operator works on the components

of the argument vector and determines the sign of each

component, resulting in a vector of 1. As is well known

[11], the ZF approach suffers from noise enhancement. Note

that ZF involves inversion of the correlation matrix R. If the

normalized current signatures from different appliances are

similar, the matrix R becomes close to being singular. Under

such situations, the ZF algorithm can perform quite poorly.

An alternative approach is the MMSE detector. Here, an

estimate

b

MMSE

k

for the vector

b

k

is given by

b

MMSE

k

= sign

_

_

R + 4

2

A

2

_

1

i

k

_

. (13)

In the above, we again encounter a matrix inversion. If we have

appliances with very large rms values, the matrix A would be

close to being singular leading to instabilities in the solution.

IV. SIMULATION RESULTS

We now describe our experimental setup that emulates a

residential environment where household appliances like TV,

hair dryer, water cooker, different types of lamps may be

found. The appliances are fed by mains that behaves as a single

distribution channel that delivers electricity to the residence.

Fig. 2 shows the experimental setup. An Agilent current probe

is used to sense the electric current. This current probe is

placed around the single core of the live or neutral wire to

sense the current value. The current probe operates at 0.1

V/Ampere conguration and it is linear within a high dynamic

range from milli-Amperes to tens of Amperes. The current

values are fed into a 24-bit National Instruments A/D converter

proving digital data input to the disaggregation algorithms.

The A/D converter runs at 10 kHz sampling rate. These

choices allow us to distinguish very small loads (1W) and

also to discard quantization effects on the performance of the

algorithms.

The performance of the disaggregation algorithms is inves-

tigated in the following way. We chose a set of 11 appliances

and use the demonstrator to collect the current waveforms of

the different appliances, based on which a current signature

database is built off-line. Table I lists the devices used, with

their nominal power as declared on the devices themselves.

Sample current signatures are shown in Fig. 3. The current

waveforms have different shapes, although some of them

are very similar, e.g., fully resistive devices like the hair

dryer, the incandescent lamp, the halogen lamp, and the water

cooker. Also note the differences in amplitudes of the current

waveforms of the various appliances.

Based on the normalized current signatures i

n

(t), we com-

pute the correlation matrix R calculated according to (4). The

entries of R are shown in Table II. Notice that the diagonal

entries of R are unity. In addition, R

2,5

= 1, R

2,11

= 1,

R

2,4

1 and R

2,8

1 indicating that the incandescent

lamp, halogen lamps, hair dryer and the water cooker have

highly correlated current signatures. This leads to R being

rank decient.

The simulation scenario we consider is as follows. All

eleven devices are active and the total current is corrupted with

varying levels of noise. We evaluate the performance of the ZF

and MMSE algorithms in terms of appliance error rate (AER).

We dene error rate of a particular appliance as the number of

errors in detection of that particular appliance divided by the

total number of realizations, i.e. the total number of times

the simulation experiment is carried out. We consider 10

5

realizations.

The simulation performance of the ZF algorithm can also be

compared with the theoretical error rate using the expression

[11]

P

err,n

= Q

_

A

n

2

_

1 r

T

n

R

1

n

r

n

_

(14)

where P

err,n

is the AER of the n-th device, r

n

is the n-th

column of the correlation matrix R obtained by excluding the

diagonal element and the matrix R

n

is the matrix obtained by

deleting the n-th row and the n-th column of R, and Q(a) =

1

2

_

a

e

x

2

/2

dx.

Figures 4 and 5 show the AERs of four specic appliances

- CFL5, halo20, halo50 and LC, with varying levels of noise

power

2

. The following observations can be made from these

plots:

(i) the simulation results showing AER with the ZF algo-

rithm match closely to the theoretical result.

93

CFL20 Inc. CFL5 halo20 halo50 LC LED HD DVD TV Kettle

CFL20 1.000 0.591 0.812 0.650 0.588 0.311 0.416 0.580 0.386 0.204 0.584

Inc. 0.591 1.000 0.642 0.951 1.000 0.524 0.499 0.999 0.543 0.750 1.000

CFL5 0.812 0.642 1.000 0.707 0.639 0.328 0.370 0.630 0.338 0.220 0.635

halo20 0.650 0.951 0.707 1.000 0.949 0.572 0.500 0.943 0.558 0.653 0.951

halo50 0.588 1.000 0.639 0.949 1.000 0.524 0.499 1.000 0.543 0.754 1.000

LC 0.311 0.524 0.328 0.572 0.524 1.000 0.497 0.523 0.803 0.454 0.526

LED 0.416 0.499 0.370 0.500 0.499 0.497 1.000 0.498 0.781 0.333 0.497

HD 0.580 0.999 0.630 0.943 1.000 0.523 0.498 1.000 0.543 0.764 0.999

DVD 0.386 0.543 0.338 0.558 0.543 0.803 0.781 0.543 1.000 0.413 0.543

TV 0.204 0.750 0.220 0.653 0.754 0.454 0.333 0.764 0.413 1.000 0.757

Kettle 0.584 1.000 0.635 0.951 1.000 0.526 0.497 0.999 0.543 0.757 1.000

TABLE II

CORRELATION VALUES OF CURRENT WAVEFORMS.

0 50 100 150 200

1

0

1

CFL20

0 50 100 150 200

0.5

0

0.5

Inc.

0 50 100 150 200

0.2

0

0.2

CFL5

0 50 100 150 200

0.2

0

0.2

Halo20

0 50 100 150 200

0.5

0

0.5

halo50

0 50 100 150 200

0.5

0

0.5

LC

0 50 100 150 200

0.2

0

0.2

LED

0 50 100 150 200

5

0

5

HD

0 50 100 150 200

0.5

0

0.5

DVD

0 50 100 150 200

5

0

5

TV

0 50 100 150 200

20

0

20

Kettle

Fig. 3. Current waveforms of the appliances under investigation. The x-axis represents time in samples; 200 samples correspond to one period T of 0.02s.

The y-axis represents the current amplitude in Amperes.

(ii) the MMSE algorithm outperforms the ZF algorithm.

(iii) for very low noise power levels, the AERs approach zero

without an apparent error ow. However at higher noise

power levels, the AER is above 0.5 which is worse than

making a random decision based on ipping an unbiased

coin.

(iv) the detection performance of halo50 as seen in Fig. 5

is quite poor. This can be attributed to the fact that the

current signature of halo50 is highly correlated with four

other appliances - Inc., halo20, HD and Kettle, with some

correlation values being unity.

(v) Although the current signature of halo20 also shows high

correlations with Inc., halo50, HD and Kettle, its AER as

seen in Fig. 4 is not as poor as that of halo50. This can

be attributed to the difference in their rms values. This

further suggests that a better understanding of the impact

of signature correlations and rms values on detection

performance, and its quantication, is required.

V. CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE WORK

We presented a power disaggregation approach to energy

monitoring. Using current sensor measurements taken at a

single point, we employed linear detection algorithms to

determine which appliances are active and their power con-

tributions. We evaluated the performance of the algorithms

with real appliance measurements using an experimental setup

and simulations, and showed that their performance matches

closely to the theoretical one.

94

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10

4

10

3

10

2

10

1

10

0

1/

2

(in dB)

A

p

p

l

i

a

n

c

e

e

r

r

o

r

r

a

t

e

ZFCFL5

MMSECFL5

theorCFL5

ZFhalo20

MMSEhalo20

theorhalo20

Fig. 4. Appliance error rates for CFL5 and halo20.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

10

4

10

3

10

2

10

1

10

0

1/

2

(dB)

A

p

p

l

i

a

n

c

e

e

r

r

o

r

r

a

t

e

ZFhalo50

MMSEhalo50

theorhalo50

ZFLC

MMSELC

theorLC

Fig. 5. Appliance error rates for halo50 and LC.

Our approach assumed the existence of a current signature

database that was perfectly known a priori. We will investigate

disaggregation algorithms that are robust to errors or inaccu-

racies in this database.

The linear detection algorithms we considered in this paper

are sensitive to the structure of matrices R and A. We plan

to address this issue by considering successive decision-driven

multiuser detection approaches. This study will be a subject

of further investigation.

REFERENCES

[1] S. Drenker and A. Kader, Nonintrusive monitoring of electric loads,

IEEE Computer Applications in Power, pp. 47-51, Oct 1999.

[2] G. W. Hart, Nonintrusive Appliance Load Monitoring, Proceedings of

the IEEE, pp. 1870-1891, Dec 1992.

[3] IEEE Std. 1159-2009, IEEE Recommended Practice for Monitoring

Electric Power Quality, 2009.

[4] H. Y. Lam, G. S. K. Fung and W. K. Lee, A Novel Method to Construct

Taxonomy of Electrical Appliances Based on Load Signatures, IEEE

Transactions on Consumer Electronics, pp. 653-660, May 2007.

[5] C. Laughman, K. Lee, R. Cox, S. Shaw, S. Leeb, L. Norford and

P. Armstrong, Power signature analysis, IEEE Power and Energy

Magazine, pp. 56-63, Mar/Apr 2003.

[6] S. B. Leeb, S. R. Shaw and J. L. Kirtley Jr., Transient event detection

in spectral envelope estimates for nonintrusive load monitoring, IEEE

Transactions on Power Delivery, pp. 1200-1210, July 1995.

[7] J. Liang, S. K. K. Ng, G. Kendall and J. W. M. Cheng, Load

Signature Study Part I: Basic Concept, Structure, and Methodology,

IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, pp. 551-560, Apr 2010.

[8] J. Liang, S. K. K. Ng, G. Kendall and J. W. M. Cheng, Load

Signature Study Part II: Disaggregation Framework, Simulation, and

Applications, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, pp. 561-569, Apr

2010.

[9] F. Sultanem, Using appliance signatures for monitoring residential loads

at meter panel level, IEEE Transactions on Power Delivery, pp 1380-

1385, pp. 1380-1385, Oct 1991.

[10] K. Suzuki, S. Inagaki, T. Suzuki, H. Nakamura and K. Ito, Nonintrusive

appliance load monitoring based on integer programming, SICE Annual

Conference, pp. 2742-2747, 2008.

[11] S. Verdu, Multiuser Detection, Cambridge University Press, 1998.

95

- Numerical MethodsHochgeladen vontikdrian
- Eee1 Syllabus 2s1112Hochgeladen vonJonathan Grande
- Distance PrtHochgeladen vonjeyavanianbudan
- Bonus exercise/solution, chain parametersHochgeladen vonAnonymous hOHi6TZTn
- Reference IEC FaultHochgeladen vonVictor Luiz Merlin
- The Standard Desrete SystemHochgeladen vonsmanoj354
- SLIC Longitudinal Balance AppnoteHochgeladen vontranvanmanh
- 8common NoiseHochgeladen vonShaik Jilani Basha
- syllabus2Hochgeladen vonlekshmipriya9
- IJCER (www.ijceronline.com) International Journal of computational Engineering researchHochgeladen vonInternational Journal of computational Engineering research (IJCER)
- carregador_baterias_v_final_com_revisões_v2Hochgeladen vonRicardo de Azambuja
- Matrix AlgebraHochgeladen vonkam131731
- R7310203 Power Systems - IIHochgeladen vonsivabharathamurthy
- N5180-90057Hochgeladen vonmeroka2000
- A Hybrid Inverse Approach Applied to the DesignHochgeladen vonZahid Kausar
- MR - 1Hochgeladen vonManisha Alda
- noise.pptxHochgeladen vonsinu5651
- Introduction to MatlabHochgeladen vonHenk
- [Kenneth P. Parker] the Boundary-Scan HandbookHochgeladen vonresponse18
- Transformer Impedance Calculation SheetHochgeladen vonjm.mankavil6230
- estimation.pdfHochgeladen vonPhong Pd
- Orthogonal MatricesHochgeladen vonHemant
- EENG300 Common Final Spring 2015-1.pdfHochgeladen vonFirass Alamin
- lec17Hochgeladen vonetan
- Notes On Linear AlgebraHochgeladen vonRuchit Shrestha
- datasheet (24).pdfHochgeladen vonJORGE
- 11. Questions & Answers on Single-Phase Parallel NetworksHochgeladen vonkibrom atsbha
- 2009_Impulse Efficiency of Ground Electrodes.pdfHochgeladen vonSrihari Mandava
- CLASS REPORT.docxHochgeladen vonedobagusprastika
- ch11Hochgeladen vonOrçun Özkılınç

- Design and Analysis of Operational Transcondactance AmplifierHochgeladen voneditor3854
- A Coaxial Magnetic Gear With Halbach PM ArraysHochgeladen vonHuynh Thanh Anh
- Electrical Instrument Interface PhilosophyHochgeladen voniviji81
- new05.pdfHochgeladen vonvazzoleralex6884
- Catalogue AMF Magnetic Clamping TechnologyHochgeladen vonAlexandru Mecu
- Paper BatteryHochgeladen vonpop2ww
- IB CHEMISTRY Toothpaste Experiment IAHochgeladen vonSri Vishnu Prabhakar
- Investigating the Influence of DBD Plasma Actuators on the Skin Friction in Integral Boundary Layer Formulation - 6.2016-2162Hochgeladen vongaeldeoliveira
- Quiz-I-and-IIHochgeladen vonKevin Lavandero
- Automobile Systems _9057Hochgeladen vonKhushbu Joshi
- CCC White Paper a Total Integrated Approach 2012Hochgeladen vonrodruren01
- 4 Getting ConnectedHochgeladen vonAlejandro Rodríguez
- OpticsHochgeladen vonSiddharth Acharya
- Grabeex openCVHochgeladen vonPablo Del Saz-orozco Huang
- Variation of Magnetic FieldHochgeladen vonVinit Kumar
- 3 - Chemical EquilibriumHochgeladen vonRuby Polido
- Fb Multipier v 4 Pile Group Example AndersonHochgeladen vonNgô Quang
- Canon iR5000_6000 Service ManualHochgeladen vonsheyllaaja
- MY 2nd Sem. Presttn Biosensor & Enzymes as ImmunosensorsHochgeladen vonSamhita Kalita
- Cristina Sarasa Buisán TFMHochgeladen vonCristinaS.b
- My word doc..Hochgeladen vonizolmane
- Microscope Lab- Estimating Field DiameterHochgeladen vonvedreag
- Icons Brochure FinalHochgeladen vonMathew John
- Acoustic Echo JournalpaperHochgeladen vonSingamaneni Rajesh
- OlsHatMatrix.pdfHochgeladen vonsimao_sabrosa7794
- conceptos basicosHochgeladen vonyesid fabian medina rincon
- Tesys T ManualHochgeladen vonEdgar Martinez Barragán
- GEAS Evaluation 6Hochgeladen vonDenaiya Watton Leeh
- 2008 BITSAT Solved PaperHochgeladen vonom123456789
- lab5-ohmslaw docHochgeladen vonapi-263577432

## Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.

Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.

Jederzeit kündbar.