Electrical engineering
7 comments
How old are you? What do you already know? What is 2/3+4/7?
Do you know what an electron is? Do you know its charge? What does V=IR mean?
What is sqrt(-1)? What are the solutions of x^2-3x+2=0, and how did you find them?
Without knowing things like this it's impossible to know whether to recommend Horowitz and Hill, or something like this: http://www.makingthings.com/teleo/products/documentation/tel...
Just try typing "Introduction to Electronics" into Google and see what you get.
Finally, Why? What do you want to accomplish - where are you trying to get to?
Do you know what an electron is? Do you know its charge? What does V=IR mean?
What is sqrt(-1)? What are the solutions of x^2-3x+2=0, and how did you find them?
Without knowing things like this it's impossible to know whether to recommend Horowitz and Hill, or something like this: http://www.makingthings.com/teleo/products/documentation/tel...
Just try typing "Introduction to Electronics" into Google and see what you get.
Finally, Why? What do you want to accomplish - where are you trying to get to?
well..i'am 25 years old and i'am very much eager to learn,i'am pretty good at algebra but i've got no knowledge in physics nor the essential math needed to learn physics and essential physics needed to learn electrical engineering,i'am stuck
Where are you, and what local resources do you have?
This sort of stuff is enormously difficult to learn from books and unstructured on-line material. The problem, then, is that you need a properly structured course, with exercises and tests to help regulate your progress.
As others have said, you'll need algebra and trig, then you'll need some calculus. You need facility with word problems, and then some basic physics.
Here are some very, very simple basics to see where you are.
We can think of electricity as water flowing in a pipe. This analogy will get you a long way, but you will have to keep in mind that it is an analogy, and will sometimes be misleading. So ...
Loosely speaking, "Voltage" is the amount of "oomph" behind electrical current, it's like pressure. The more voltage you have, the more current you'll be able to push through a conductor.
However, a conductor will also resist the flow of current. In the simplest case, the amount of resistance remains constant over a wide range of conditions.
So, the formula is V=IR, (voltage drop across a resistor) is equal to (current flowing through it) times (value of the resistor).
The unit of voltage is the "volt"
The unit of current is the "amp" (short for "ampere")
The unit of resistance is the ohm.
So, suppose you have a resistor of 1K ohms (1000 ohms) and you put 2V (2 volts) across it. How much current will flow?
Suppose from A to B I have a resistor of 5K, and from B to C I have a resistor of 2K. If we have 5mA (5 milli-amps, 5/1000 amps) flowing from A to C, what is the total voltage drop from A to C?
Showing how you answer these will help us to provide suitable recommendations.
Finally, is there a local library? Is there a local college/university? Are you limited to on-line resources?
This sort of stuff is enormously difficult to learn from books and unstructured on-line material. The problem, then, is that you need a properly structured course, with exercises and tests to help regulate your progress.
As others have said, you'll need algebra and trig, then you'll need some calculus. You need facility with word problems, and then some basic physics.
Here are some very, very simple basics to see where you are.
We can think of electricity as water flowing in a pipe. This analogy will get you a long way, but you will have to keep in mind that it is an analogy, and will sometimes be misleading. So ...
Loosely speaking, "Voltage" is the amount of "oomph" behind electrical current, it's like pressure. The more voltage you have, the more current you'll be able to push through a conductor.
However, a conductor will also resist the flow of current. In the simplest case, the amount of resistance remains constant over a wide range of conditions.
So, the formula is V=IR, (voltage drop across a resistor) is equal to (current flowing through it) times (value of the resistor).
The unit of voltage is the "volt"
The unit of current is the "amp" (short for "ampere")
The unit of resistance is the ohm.
So, suppose you have a resistor of 1K ohms (1000 ohms) and you put 2V (2 volts) across it. How much current will flow?
Suppose from A to B I have a resistor of 5K, and from B to C I have a resistor of 2K. If we have 5mA (5 milli-amps, 5/1000 amps) flowing from A to C, what is the total voltage drop from A to C?
Showing how you answer these will help us to provide suitable recommendations.
Finally, is there a local library? Is there a local college/university? Are you limited to on-line resources?
to be honest i 'am capable of solving the above problem without any dificulty as they are pretty straight forward.to answer your question
i don't have the time to go to a university nor a local library as i need to work to feed my family.but i can buy sufficient time to study on my own .anyways thanks a lot for your advice ,if you have further recomendations i'll be really glad to hear from you
Learn pre-calculus including trig, then proceed with calculus and classical mechanics and E&M. Then you'll have a solid foundation for serious EE.
Which books are right for you depends on what in particular you're interested in, and what your level of aptitude for this area is. For a sequence of topics, here's MIT's; I'm providing the course numbers, match those against the on-line versions at the OCW site: http://ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/web/courses/courses/index.htm
18.01 Single Variable Calculus
8.01 Classical Mechanics
18.02 Multivariable Calculus
8.02 Electricity and Magnetism
6.002 Circuits and Electronics
6.003 Signals and Systems
If I remember correctly, MIT doesn't distinguish between Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, which helps to product EEs who can program and CS majors who understand hardware.
You were correct; the idea was that no MIT EECS graduate should be completely at sea if he had to do some programming or had some weird electrical problem to deal with (as a nearly total CS type, I can tell you the latter is extremely valuable):
The early '80s curriculum had a core of 6.001-4, in a word or phrase they were SICP, Kirchhoff's law, Laplace transforms, and low level architecture (gates and circuits, microcode and assembler).
Those were hard courses, each 15 units compared to the normal 12 for a typical course (one unit equals one nominal hour of work a week). I and others can attest that even if you were an experienced Lisp hacker 6.001 made you sweat blood.
That system is no more, the department panicked when the dot.com bust resulted in an unprecedented and permanent crash in undergraduate enrollment, which had been steady for decades.
So they terminated 6.001 with extreme prejudice and replaced the mandatory core with two new "fun and exciting" (but still hard) courses, 6.01 and 6.02. The first is robots programed with Python and the second is communications inspired by cell phone networks the last time I checked (I haven't looked hard at it).
After that there are different paths that can be taken by majors focusing on EE, CS or both, but almost all of the current student body goes for the later.
So MIT grads starting about now are a "new thing", a different "product"; obviously they will still have a fair understanding of both, but the guarantee for one of them is much lower. And you are of course you aren't going to see many who are in it for the money alone.
The early '80s curriculum had a core of 6.001-4, in a word or phrase they were SICP, Kirchhoff's law, Laplace transforms, and low level architecture (gates and circuits, microcode and assembler).
Those were hard courses, each 15 units compared to the normal 12 for a typical course (one unit equals one nominal hour of work a week). I and others can attest that even if you were an experienced Lisp hacker 6.001 made you sweat blood.
That system is no more, the department panicked when the dot.com bust resulted in an unprecedented and permanent crash in undergraduate enrollment, which had been steady for decades.
So they terminated 6.001 with extreme prejudice and replaced the mandatory core with two new "fun and exciting" (but still hard) courses, 6.01 and 6.02. The first is robots programed with Python and the second is communications inspired by cell phone networks the last time I checked (I haven't looked hard at it).
After that there are different paths that can be taken by majors focusing on EE, CS or both, but almost all of the current student body goes for the later.
So MIT grads starting about now are a "new thing", a different "product"; obviously they will still have a fair understanding of both, but the guarantee for one of them is much lower. And you are of course you aren't going to see many who are in it for the money alone.
I'd be shocked at this. I'd understand not differentiating EE and CompE, but not CS.
What's CompE?
Note, CS departments generally either came out of Math departments, in which case they emphasize CS and not much in the way of EE, or they came out of EE departments and strongly emphasize the EE side of things even if you're pure CS. MIT is an example of the latter, I think the same is true for Berkeley and Stanford, I'm not sure about CMU.
Note, CS departments generally either came out of Math departments, in which case they emphasize CS and not much in the way of EE, or they came out of EE departments and strongly emphasize the EE side of things even if you're pure CS. MIT is an example of the latter, I think the same is true for Berkeley and Stanford, I'm not sure about CMU.
CompE = Computer Engineering.
Ah, I see.
MIT's EECS department was first just plain EE, so they rather naturally combined the two as computers came of age (there was much less division between the two in the '50s and early '60s).
As of the '80s, it had the opinion that "no MIT EECS graduate should be completely at sea if he had to do some programming or had some weird electrical problem to deal with" as I said in another reply to this thread.
There really aren't many if any EE disciplines today that have no programming component. The reverse isn't so true, but a whole lot of programmers/CS types will be faced with EE problems they should at least have some understanding of. Plus the abstractions are hardly opaque; a minimal understanding of EE will help a lot in understanding what's going on with the beasts we program, where they're going, etc.
WRT to the former, at my 2001 job at Lucent we had the strangest transmission line problem on a big PC board. It wasn't fully diagnosed until the lead EE for it got really desperate and put his scope probes at every point he could, upon which he found the signal was messed up in middle of a line ... but not at the end (which he had of course already checked).
I don't have to know too much EE to know I can't blame him for taking so long to find it.
MIT's EECS department was first just plain EE, so they rather naturally combined the two as computers came of age (there was much less division between the two in the '50s and early '60s).
As of the '80s, it had the opinion that "no MIT EECS graduate should be completely at sea if he had to do some programming or had some weird electrical problem to deal with" as I said in another reply to this thread.
There really aren't many if any EE disciplines today that have no programming component. The reverse isn't so true, but a whole lot of programmers/CS types will be faced with EE problems they should at least have some understanding of. Plus the abstractions are hardly opaque; a minimal understanding of EE will help a lot in understanding what's going on with the beasts we program, where they're going, etc.
WRT to the former, at my 2001 job at Lucent we had the strangest transmission line problem on a big PC board. It wasn't fully diagnosed until the lead EE for it got really desperate and put his scope probes at every point he could, upon which he found the signal was messed up in middle of a line ... but not at the end (which he had of course already checked).
I don't have to know too much EE to know I can't blame him for taking so long to find it.
Funny. Just yesterday I was flipping through MIT's OCW 6.xxx offerings, getting a refresher on EE and CS. There are a few holes in the on-line documentation, but it's a fantastic resource.
Having finished a degree in Electronics I would recommend the following two books:
* Engineering Maths by K. Stroud http://www.amazon.co.uk/Engineering-Mathematics-6th-K-Stroud... to my mind there's no better maths book, very logical step by step approach to improving maths skills by building on previous knowledge
* The Art of Electronics by Horowitz and Hall http://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Electronics-Paul-Horowitz/dp/052... this is often referred to as the bible of electronics and acts as a great reference book (there is a circuit chip designer in my workplace who came from a physics background and taught himself electronics with this book)
* Engineering Maths by K. Stroud http://www.amazon.co.uk/Engineering-Mathematics-6th-K-Stroud... to my mind there's no better maths book, very logical step by step approach to improving maths skills by building on previous knowledge
* The Art of Electronics by Horowitz and Hall http://www.amazon.co.uk/Art-Electronics-Paul-Horowitz/dp/052... this is often referred to as the bible of electronics and acts as a great reference book (there is a circuit chip designer in my workplace who came from a physics background and taught himself electronics with this book)
Horowitz and Hill, not Hall. It is a superb reference book, agreed, but it's not a good book to learn from, especially if you don't have the basics.
ah can't correct the spelling mistake now, thanks for spotting it.
A video I saw on a few years ago which was great for getting a fast paced over-view of how starting with digital electronics one can build a computer and write a program to work on it "From NAND to Tetris in 12 steps" http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7654043762021156507
A video I saw on a few years ago which was great for getting a fast paced over-view of how starting with digital electronics one can build a computer and write a program to work on it "From NAND to Tetris in 12 steps" http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7654043762021156507
A few gratis books I can recommend: http://openbookproject.net//electricCircuits/
They're the best that I have ever found. (It is a very sweet irony that they happen to be free).
edit: be sure to download the pdf versions. E.g. here's a link for book I, DC: http://openbookproject.net//electricCircuits/DC/DC.pdf (6 MB)
They're the best that I have ever found. (It is a very sweet irony that they happen to be free).
edit: be sure to download the pdf versions. E.g. here's a link for book I, DC: http://openbookproject.net//electricCircuits/DC/DC.pdf (6 MB)
If you have a local community college, they should offer math courses that will teach what you need to know at a reasonable price. I'm not sure I would recommend any text to learn math on your own.
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Networks has an interesting approach to teaching Electrical Engineering. Not sure how it would work for someone new to EE.
ARRL might have some good sources of information. The ARRL Handbook is a good reference.
Mathematical Modeling of Physical Networks has an interesting approach to teaching Electrical Engineering. Not sure how it would work for someone new to EE.
ARRL might have some good sources of information. The ARRL Handbook is a good reference.
I can recommend this site:
http://www.khanacademy.org/
I suggest you find a video there that you're interested in and that you can't quite understand, then come back and ask a question. You said you were OK with algebra, so pre-calculus would be a good place to start.
I suggest you find a video there that you're interested in and that you can't quite understand, then come back and ask a question. You said you were OK with algebra, so pre-calculus would be a good place to start.
Halliday & Resnick is still a great introduction to Physics, and it will be for quite some time.
Please suggest books which teaches all(fundamental) aspects of electrical engineering,books which teaches essential physics and math