Well, even that's not "necessary", but certainly useful. The issue was the college/university's attitude towards education. Theory was all. Publish over practice. Teaching was secondary (at best) to research.
That's not even the problem. They don't care about teaching at all. Students are only necessary because it's a "university". Research, publication, and recognition are all that matter. That hasn't changed in fifty years.
Yes. Full professor at UIUC. It's certainly rare for full professors to teach undergrads.
I work with a number of GT interns and recent grads. There are some good ones in there but mostly software. A few are reasonably competent entry level hardware types, too. GT is one of the top schools, though.
The analysis is so simple, an undergrad can do it.
Consider a coaxial chamber, with outer radius R, inner radius r, height h, made of continuous metal (i.e., a cylindrical donut). Consider a voltage applied in series with the center cylinder.
In other words, consider a via in the middle of a plane pair, with vias stitching the planes together at a radius R.
At low frequencies, we can ignore standing waves, and calculate the low frequency equivalent inductance. For convenience, we also ignore fringing or eddy currents (though I don't think that matters in this situation?), and also assume h
Right, the underlying truth is in the filter network.
Z = sqrt(L/C) and F = 1 / (2*pi*sqrt(L*C)). You can put these together for any pair of L and C, and get a number that is probably meaningful.
Just add Q = Z / R (or R / Z as the case may be, depending on series or parallel, respectively), and you have all you need to know to make perfect PDN (power distribution network) filters.
Distributed values are, at best, wasted parts, and dangerous at worst. Staggered values and sizes give multiple zeroes in the supply impedance, and without consideration of the ESR, the peaks can blow out your supply impedance spec.
Speaking of specs. That's assuming you had one. If you don't, what the hell are you trying to do anyway? Just stick in a few 0.1's and be done with it (still making sure they don't resonate with each other, and with the PSU, due to trace inductances, of course).
Not that the manufacturer will ever give a hard number on what Z(f) is required to meet, for a given product. Or not that they really can, anyway, for general purposes -- if you need low jitter for example, you'll need much lower impedance than something doing clocked logic will. That said, you can at least get a starting point by looking at the maximum change in supply voltage, delta V, for a change in load current, delta I. dV/dI == R, the maximum supply impedance.
And yes, indeed, bulk caps are not used for energy storage -- if they were, their voltages would be changing considerably, since energy depends on voltage! -- they are only used in PDNs to provide damping ESR, without consuming DC current. (I specify PDNs, because power supplies have additional ripple current requirements, which often make large ceramic or polymer caps (with very low ESR) necessary; or in other applications, where energy storage is actually in use, and the ripple is intentionally significant. Note that a low-ESR bulk cap on the PS is still fine for the PDN, that just means you need to apply damping somewhere inbetween or at the end, or insert an R||L at the front.)
Manufacturing is all done by hand in the developing world. People work from home, it's not the factory setup people here are used to. That saves costs & enables mothers to work. Complexity: the simpler the better. If you use parts with a higher failure rate than traceable new supplies, the more comp lex your modules the more the failure rate. A percentage of failures is exp ected & acceptable, testing has to be 100% due to a bunch of issues. Despit e breaking most of the accepted golden rules of manufacturing it's both via ble & competitive. When most of your BOM is wiped out one can live with the added issues. A lot of this sort of manfacture method goes on, mainly in C hina, where I don't operate. If you're interested it might be informative t o take a tour round this sort of stuff on your next holiday to China. It wi ll open your eyes for sure.
There are some poor practices out there in the recycled electronics industr y, I'm not involved with anything that creates pollution or makes people il l.
ignore either one of theory & practice. When students sit in lectures heari ng about circuits they fail to relate it to things they know, and fail to g rasp much of what's being said, and forget it soon after. It's just not an approach that works at all well.
competent. Schools especially need a total overhaul from top to bottom.
There are several learning styles, different people do best with different approaches. I don't relate to the learn it all in uni then practice a littl e style, and watched people that did look like rabbits caught in headlights when asked to design & make something.
When it came to lab time to do the final year project, I realised working i n the lab was a huge waste of time & did the project at home. From the limi ted amount I've seen of unis they seem to miss out that cost effective way for students to learn. And they entirely fail to motivate students to do so .
gnore either one of theory & practice. When students sit in lectures hearin g about circuits they fail to relate it to things they know, and fail to gr asp much of what's being said, and forget it soon after. It's just not an a pproach that works at all well.
ompetent. Schools especially need a total overhaul from top to bottom.
ignore either one of theory & practice. When students sit in lectures hear ing about circuits they fail to relate it to things they know, and fail to grasp much of what's being said, and forget it soon after. It's just not an approach that works at all well.
ncompetent. Schools especially need a total overhaul from top to bottom.
Research is a rather better test of intellectual quality. Those amongst my lecturers who professed to taking teaching seriously gave rather bad lectur es.
All the academics I've hung around with have taken teaching very seriously. They do pay more attention to the brighter students who might turn into gr aduate students and do the grunt work on their research, but they do teach the entire class, and don't want the duller students to get bored and resti ve.
That's capitalism in action. If you pay universities on the basis of the nu mber of students they graduate and don't control for the quality of the gra duates you get what you pay for. Incentive payments have to be carefully de signed to create the desired effect, and quality isn't an easily measured p arameter.
formatting link
n/
Robert Plomin makes the point that most of what constitutes "quality" is in herited, and doesn't become fully obvious until the student is of mature ye ars. And selecting on the basis of the quality of the parents doesn't work.
Rubbish.
Which could have been true if some of the students didn't go on to become g raduate students and do the grunt work on the research that gets published.
Universities regenerate themselves from the students they graduate. In bad universities the graduate students eventually become the teaching staff, bu t good universities cross-fertilise.
u ignore either one of theory & practice. When students sit in lectures hea ring about circuits they fail to relate it to things they know, and fail to grasp much of what's being said, and forget it soon after. It's just not a n approach that works at all well.
incompetent. Schools especially need a total overhaul from top to bottom.
t approaches. I don't relate to the learn it all in uni then practice a lit tle style, and watched people that did look like rabbits caught in headligh ts when asked to design & make something.
I got started by having to make my own electronics to get my Ph.D. to work. Byv then I'd got the idea that the library is your friend, and spent a lot of time in the physics department library (I was in chemistry) reading use ful texts, some of which I got more recent copies of.
in the lab was a huge waste of time & did the project at home. From the li mited amount I've seen of unis they seem to miss out that cost effective wa y for students to learn. And they entirely fail to motivate students to do so.
Graduate students mostly learn that way. Undergraduates get exposed to the approach, but not all of them take it on board.
If universities "entirely fail to motivate students" to learn, one would ha ve imagined that we would have come up with better scheme by now.
formatting link
We've had them since 859AD and if they didn't work one would have imagined that we would have managed to come up with something better since then.
As devices for inculcating the kind of knowledge that NT seems to value, th ey probably suck, but there's not a lot of interest in giving students anti quated misinformation, even in faculties of Theology.
"Holiday in China" Yeah, that's going to happen. ;-) OTOH, it is rather interesting if you've written something about this.
I didn't consider that you were doing manual assembly in the third world. I wouldn't know where to start. I suppose reels just get in the way.
Understood. The electronics industry has loads of such problems. OSHA, EPA, and similar agencies clean up our environment and make it a whole lot worse for the rest of the world.
rom home, it's not the factory setup people here are used to. That saves co sts & enables mothers to work. Complexity: the simpler the better. If you u se parts with a higher failure rate than traceable new supplies, the more c omplex your modules the more the failure rate. A percentage of failures is expected & acceptable, testing has to be 100% due to a bunch of issues. Des pite breaking most of the accepted golden rules of manufacturing it's both viable & competitive. When most of your BOM is wiped out one can live with the added issues. A lot of this sort of manfacture method goes on, mainly i n China, where I don't operate. If you're interested it might be informativ e to take a tour round this sort of stuff on your next holiday to China. It will open your eyes for sure.
stry, I'm not involved with anything that creates pollution or makes people ill.
I wonder why krw thinks that. The agencies that stop Americans fouling thei r own environment (less so under Trump) don't encourage them to export thei r pollutants to the rest of the world.
America's tendency to outsource dirty jobs, rather than spending the money that lets the jobs be done in a non-polluting way, may work to make the res t of the world dirtier than it might be, but that's scarcely the fault of t he US agencies.
China does seem to be finally getting it's act together in this area, thoug h it has taken a while.
Keeping the environment more or less clean - or at least stopping the dumpi ng of toxic pollutants - isn't all that expensive, but it does cost money t hat capitalist are loathe to spend, and third world countries mostly haven' t got.
In the school where I learned 'electronics' it was often said: 'Only hobbyists make it through the exams'
From 2 classes of 40 there were 4 people that made it through the final exams, we had a little festivity in the local pub...
Where did the others go? I know about some.
Yes we had a lab, but the real lab was at home.
Natural selection.
What did I learn there? Some basic theory. But understanding 'tronics happened when I was 4 years old or so. I mean as understanding it is all about electrons, and playing with that. Thanks to some good books, my mother had to get a waver from the library as I was too young to get those books.. How did I get the parts? Steal rob and beg .. The curiosity never stopped.
In my job I have met highly educated electronic engineers who had no clue electricity was about electrons, really, I remember that conversation.
It is all about understanding.
String theory never made it with me. Too much math leads to divide by zero and ... see what fishicks is today.
LOL Simulations are often daydreams.
Like with climate,
formatting link
'True polar wander' may have caused ice age Scientists use Hawaiian hot spot to study movement of Earth's poles
models, of reality, some are right some get brushed away...
On Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 5:18:02 PM UTC+11, snipped-for-privacy@nospam.org w rote:
Actually, it's continental drift.
We've been having ice ages - alternating with interglacials - for the last couple of million years.
This isn't long - geologically speaking - and the continents rarely organis e themselves into configurations that allow ice ages.
That's one way of seeing continental drift, but mid-ocean hot spots (like t he one under Iceland) also move - it's all convention currents in the molte n part of earth's core.
Continental drift isn't so much a model of reality as a record of what has been going on, and is still going on now - the measured speeds are around a couple of centimetres a years, though it varies from continental plate to continental plate, and the Indo-Australian plate is also rotating.
Your idea that this has anything to do with anthropogenic global warming is evidence of seriously confused thinking.
Perhaps for you, but you do seem to be slightly sub-human being.
g in the lab was a huge waste of time & did the project at home. From the l imited amount I've seen of unis they seem to miss out that cost effective w ay for students to learn. And they entirely fail to motivate students to do so.
Of course. My equipment was old & underspecced, but I got it to do the job. My home lab was open 24/7, had all the bench space needed, albeit no bench es, and zero commuting time. Also no need to waste time chasing a mercurial professor for equipment.
rom home, it's not the factory setup people here are used to. That saves co sts & enables mothers to work. Complexity: the simpler the better. If you u se parts with a higher failure rate than traceable new supplies, the more c omplex your modules the more the failure rate. A percentage of failures is expected & acceptable, testing has to be 100% due to a bunch of issues. Des pite breaking most of the accepted golden rules of manufacturing it's both viable & competitive. When most of your BOM is wiped out one can live with the added issues. A lot of this sort of manfacture method goes on, mainly i n China, where I don't operate. If you're interested it might be informativ e to take a tour round this sort of stuff on your next holiday to China. It will open your eyes for sure.
Everyone seems to think holidaying in developing world slums is totally to be avoided. The ones brave enough to go are glad they did, and would never swap it for a boring holiday. We have a lot here but have lost a lot too.
It costs money to put parts into tape reels. Reels are only useful for pick & place of course.
stry, I'm not involved with anything that creates pollution or makes people ill.
How to solve it all is controversial. I don't see current legislation havin g cracked it yet.
Looking decades into the future I suspect PCBs & discrete parts might becom e mostly obsolete, and goods made from just one mixed signal IC with proces sing & versatile analogue building blocks in one lump. Those would eliminat e most of the waste & the chips could be reused for other jobs, so possibly the eventual solution to e-waste will have nothing to do with agencies or legislation. Who knows.
ent approaches. I don't relate to the learn it all in uni then practice a l ittle style, and watched people that did look like rabbits caught in headli ghts when asked to design & make something.
k. Byv then I'd got the idea that the library is your friend, and spent a l ot of time in the physics department library (I was in chemistry) reading u seful texts, some of which I got more recent copies of.
ng in the lab was a huge waste of time & did the project at home. From the limited amount I've seen of unis they seem to miss out that cost effective way for students to learn. And they entirely fail to motivate students to d o so.
e approach, but not all of them take it on board.
have imagined that we would have come up with better scheme by now.
d that we would have managed to come up with something better since then.
obviously humans have, otherwise university entrants that already know most of the course material wouldn't exist.
A pile of stuff I knew would never be the remotest use to me. Particularly solid state & degree level maths. Hopefully I've forgotten all of it.
Some useful things about electronics that I could have learnt in less than 2 days. PID control & more types of filters than I knew of. And a bit more about video signals.
How research results can be massively manipulated without needing to ever lie.
That the 4 years of course time was therefore an excercise in gross inefficiency.
How little some students knew. I'll never forget that rabbit look on most faces when we were asked to do a fairly simple lab project. We were the only pair of students to implement a filter to fix the data errors.
That a degree in EE does not make someone competent. A prior hobby background or a bunch of employment time is necessary.
erent approaches. I don't relate to the learn it all in uni then practice a little style, and watched people that did look like rabbits caught in head lights when asked to design & make something.
ork. Byv then I'd got the idea that the library is your friend, and spent a lot of time in the physics department library (I was in chemistry) reading useful texts, some of which I got more recent copies of.
king in the lab was a huge waste of time & did the project at home. From th e limited amount I've seen of unis they seem to miss out that cost effectiv e way for students to learn. And they entirely fail to motivate students to do so.
the approach, but not all of them take it on board.
d have imagined that we would have come up with better scheme by now.
ned that we would have managed to come up with something better since then.
st of the course material wouldn't exist.
What's obvious to NT does tend to look utterly implausible to other people.
I've comes across "intelligent sixth formers", which is to say, incipient u niversity entrants, who were convinced that they already knew most of the c ourse material. Of course they didn't know what the courses actually involv ed, so it is possible that they may have been mistaken.
If you couldn't see how it might be useful to you, the defect may just be in you, rather than the people who put the course together.
John Larkin makes the same kind of complaint.
So the vast bulk of the course went over your head. No surprise there.
It's always possible, but the manipulations are more obvious than most people seem to think, and the results that come out do seem to answer question that nobody in their right mind would bother asking.
It didn't teach you what you thought you needed to know. Efficiency compares inputs and outputs. You wanted specific information and resent the times spent on trying to give you information that you thought that you didn't need.
From the universities point of view, they tried to give you an education, and you rejected most of it.
The process wasn't intrinsically inefficient but you weren't the kind of student it was designed to educate.
What kind of data errors? And what kind of filter?
Electronic engineering is a practical skill. You have to practice it to get good at it. A degree in electronic engineering is not required to do it well - I certainly never bother to acquire one - but reading the relevant textbooks can be very helpful.
That should happen. Jim Thompson seemed to miss most of it.
Built my first 1 valve radio at 11, but my dad was a an ee and built our first tv from ww2 scope parts. 5" green screen and oil filled magnifier on the front. I guess that sort of thing was the inspiration, but haven't lost that up to the present time. The thing about tech is that it never sleeps, always new developments, but unless you have a real passion for it and insatiable curiosity, how does that work ? etc, you will never be anything more than average...
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.