How Important Is Math In Electrical Engineering Technology Degree?/job - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pm
content: I just started work on my EE degree. It has been around 6-7 years since I had high school math. (I took all 3 required classes freshman year.) So I took intermediate algebra first as a refresher. (I am glad I did!)Now how important is all this advanced graphing, matrices, factoring, simplifying, and systems of equations going to be on the job? I have never seen any of the EE's at my current job do any complex math. Just basic stuff calculated of datsheets.I basically want to know do I really need to fully understand these concepts (like Calc and differential equations) or will a basic knowledge just enough to pass the class with some good notes be enough?Let's assume the job does a few things:Makes simple normally 2-4 layer, low frequency, 5v or 3v3 pcb's using off the shelf microcontrollers and other parts.Works with customers on creating custom designs.From my understanding now a days even advanced stuff like ASIC design is almost all done with off the shelf libraries and simulation software. A lot of stuff is being replaced by computer simulation.

author: jaxbird
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 06:24:18 pm
content: In my experience you'll need very little math in your day to day job, but occasionally you will need to know how things work, as in knowing the relationship between various things and knowing how specific values are calculated (not as in knowing specif complex formulas off the top of your head, but at least knowing the relations) Also knowing whether specific values are reasonable or not and being able to tell by estimation that something is not right.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 06:34:26 pm
content: The big difference between a technician and the engineer is the math background, Have two kinds of engineers the datasheet application cut and paste, and the math modeling guy . the seconds one normally have triple salary

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 06:35:10 pm
content: I have worked with many engineers who had little grasp of or use for mathematics. But the more you want to do, the better you want to understand what you are doing, and the better you want to do it, you will benefit from all of the math you can stand. You may use some of it only once a decade, others will get annual touches, more will be touched more frequently.It is kind of like asking if you can do electronics without test equipment. You can do quite a bit with your fingers, eyes and ears. Add a DMM and many have all they need. But add oscilloscopes and logic analyzers and you can find and do a lot more. Even more sophisticated instruments can ferret out problems or allow design decisions that are not always necessary, but often beneficial.

author: photon
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 06:40:37 pm
content: Mathematics is an ancient science. The civilizations that have developed it have been successful and strong. Ignore it at your own peril.

author: joseph nicholas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:00:02 pm
content: In many professions, including mine, after you start working there will be others in your profession that will try to determine if you are a charlatan and try to get you disbarred or what have you. My advise would be to find out what stuff they may use to determine if you actually went to the school you say you attended. It might be good to learn simple stuff like how to read the resistance color code. I doubt you would be challenged about doing anything mathematical one the fly.

author: tom66
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:06:26 pm
content: Mathematics is very important in engineering. Having an advanced understanding of algebraic principles, statistics and at least a reasonable understanding of calculus (logs, differentials, integrals and so on) is pretty much essential. Beyond that? Set theory, triple integrals, number theory and advanced statistically modelling (Matlab etc)...not that useful for the everyday engineer.I would also say that the ability to make quick approximations and guesses within 20% of the actual answer is very useful, you can pretty much say whether something will work or not in five seconds. Learn your powers of two, as well.

author: skipjackrc4
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:22:51 pm
content: I would say that the ability to manually perform integration and solve differential equations isn't really that useful for most engineers. However, the understanding of the physical meaning behind vector operations, Fourier transforms (and general basis vector decomposition), convolution, etc... is very necessary, and "engineers" who don't understand these things wind up looking like complete morons. In my experience, you need to intuitively understand what the math says, even if you can't actually calculate it by hand. You should also understand at least basic statistics, which is something that I'm working on improving myself. I've found that it's often necessary to write your own simulation code when commercial packages won't do what you want--this obviously requires math.

author: ajb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:28:33 pm
content: It's worth noting that it depends a lot on what subset of engineering you go into. If you were to take all of the work of electrical engineering done across all subspecialties and industries and tally it up, probably 95% requires, at the most, basic algebra. That last 5%, however, covers a wide range of math from algebra on up, and while a lot of the 5% is concentrated in the work of specialists in RF or semiconductor design or whatever, the rest of it is sprinkled all through the work of all the other EEs in the world. So you might wind up in an area where 99% of your work only requires arithmetic, but there will be that 1% of situations where you'll need to be able to crack more advanced problems.Since you mentioned microcontrollers, even if you aren't doing anything computationally intensive embedded software in particular requires a very thorough understanding of numeric representation and algebraic manipulation. In order to get correct results it's imperative to be able to spot where you'll lose precision, overflow a value, etc, and you'll need to know how to transform a given expression into a form that an embedded system can evaluate efficiently and accurately.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:40:35 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmThat's not an engineer. That's a hacker. You don't need a degree for that.One thing that comes up frequently in this forum is the stability of feedback loops and control systems. Things like characteristic functions, poles and zeros, phase shifts and eigenvalues will become important when you try to solve such problems. You may consider that to be analog and not digital electronics. But in the real world all electronics are analog. The perfect square wave with sharp corners does not exist outside of textbooks.You should expect that to be a competent engineer you will need a firm grasp of mathematics. Even if you don't use it all the time, learning mathematics will help train your mind to analyze and solve complex problems.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:45:36 pm
content: In engineering you need math. I think I at least solve (re-arrange) one equation for every project.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 07:55:49 pm
content: All engineering requires math - algebra, linear algebra, calculus, differential equations ordinary and partial, so on and so forth. If you want the degree, do the work.

author: TimFox
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 10:54:38 pm
content: As I tell high-school students, not only is there algebra (etc.) in the "real world", but it's all story problems.

author: sarepairman2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 11:08:10 pm
content: depends where you work. mathematical analysis may be seen as a waste of time by superiors in certain industriesmore valuable is often the accountingyou can go far sometimes by the simple "yes, but how much does this solution cost?"

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 11:27:54 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmAnengineerapproaching a job will first determine what they doand don'tneed to understand and do to successfully complete the job. Frequently that will involve doing quick back-of-the-envelope calculations - which requires understanding their validity and limits. If quick calculations indicate some aspect is near the boundary of validity, then more accurate detailed calculations are required.To do all that requires a good familiarity and understand of mathmatics.QuoteThose aretechnican-level jobs. Nothing whatsoever wrong with that, but they barely touch on the full range of engineering activities.QuoteSimulation is, by definition, a series of tests. Tests never prove a design works - at best they can indicate some ways in which a design doesn't fail -- since the next test could show a problem.

author: retrolefty
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 11:34:41 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 28, 2016, 07:55:49 pmAnd the above math requirements are probably the biggest wash-out cause for all engineering degrees. Get to work if you want the degree.

author: Maxlor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 28, 2016, 11:50:00 pm
content: In the last decade, I've needed quite a bit more of the math I learned at the uni than I thought I would, but far from everything that was taught. By this point I've forgotten more than half of it for sure. But I also noticed, if I need some of those things I've forgotten, it comes back quickly, often just the terse descriptions on mathworld suffice.So I'd say, learn as much as you can, even though you don't know at this point what you'll use (and if you think you do, you're probably wrong,) so you can leave the uni with as big a toolbox as possible. It'll give you a good competitive advantage.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 04:25:40 am
content: There's a very wide range of engineering jobs. Some require hardly any maths at all. Others require serious maths almost every day. The percentage of engineering jobs requiring more than basic maths day to day seems quite small. In many larger organisations there are a couple of well known mathies, to whom most of the seriously mathematical questions go. If you are in a small company, or work alone, you will need to cope with anything the work throws at you.

author: D3f1ant
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:40:36 am
content: The complexity varies greatly, but I doubt a single day goes by when there isn't something that needs calculating, even if it's only the current through a Led. A good broad spectrum book that I wish I had as an undergraduate is Engineering Mathematics by Stroud, its the only dedicated maths book I still have on my bookshelf.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 06:04:30 am
content: QuoteI think that the maths bad focused because the teachers tend to teach it as when hadn't computer. So i believe that resolve math mechanically haven't sense today.The most logic would be teach the application of the maths at the labour or real world .Maxlor . all the world have forgotten the stuff that have learnt at past, who say otherwise LIE.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 07:20:12 am
content: Quote from: vodka on May 29, 2016, 06:04:30 amMaths should be taught without using a (black box) computer, for several reasons:you will understand why the maths works (and when you it is safe to simply skip directly to the results)it will help you mentally visualise what's happening in your systems (so you can synthesise new concepts and debug existing systems)you will develop an understanding of what you can and can't predict, and why (crucial for any engineer with significant responsibility, and avoid having salesman blind you with lies)you will learn how toformallyunderstand and analyse a system (ought to be necessary before any large investment is made)QuoteThose of us that have been around a while have frequently seen people that have acceptedridiculousresults simply because that's the answer that came out of a black box.QuoteNot at university for an engineer - the prime responsibility is to teach technicalfundamentalsandhowto learn. Time spent learning which button to press on software program X is a waste of time.For technicians, the answer may be different - knowingtoday'spackage may be what it necessary to get them a job tomorrow. But it won't be of much use in 5 years, whereas the maths certainly will.

author: Maxlor
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 10:09:36 am
content: Quote from: vodka on May 29, 2016, 06:04:30 amI don't think there's much of a difference at the uni level, really. Even when you use programs to help you, you still need to understand what they're doing to use them correctly.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 10:19:01 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmYep, that's the majority of electronics design jobs in my experience.QuoteUni level math is not easy for most. You more likely than not won't pass it without understanding it. Although I have seen math classes were it was simply enough to study past exams to bum your way through it because the teachers were lazy and didn't change much between semesters.No one hiring you will care what score you got in your math classes, unless it's for some more obscure job that requires a lot of math. So technically, yes, you can get away with not really understanding it, but that could come back to bite you.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 10:25:19 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 28, 2016, 11:27:54 pmYes, but the issue is with the type of math required.In the majority of the cases it's relatively simple stuff.Most practical electronics engineers won't be solving triple integrals.A practical electronics engineer is likely going to need statistics more than calculus in their career for example.To do all that requires a good familiarity and understand of mathmatics.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 11:12:50 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2016, 10:19:01 amWhile they didn't care about a score, two of my employers did explicitly care about maths abilityduring interview- and I wouldn't have got a job without the maths.With one I discussed the problems I had previously had (in my first job out of uni) with analytical solutions to PLL lock-in when noise is present, and how N-Path filters and Z-domain transforms circumvented the problem. (I had previously needed the maths when designing a test set that measured the attenuation in optical fibres)In another we guided candidates through the maths behind IQ modulation and demodulation - which is used in most RF devices today.QuoteYes indeed. Too often the people that baldly claim "maths is unnecessary" don't understand it themselves and/or aren't involved in anything novel.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 11:21:09 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2016, 10:25:19 amI agree statistics are important, and nowadays I will add queuing theory and proofs about what youcan'tguarantee in a distributed system. None of those were taught in my course, but (as you imply) because I had the maths background I picked them up relatively quickly when I needed them.As for triple integrals, well such things can be extremely practical. In a different engineering field one of my father's last papers was using such maths to predict how fast water would drain out of a PWR where the reactor bottom had been breached. Keq question: could the control rods be inserted before meltdown? He did live to see Fukushima, although he had retired 20 years earlier.Closer to electronics, control theory is full of calculus in one form or another.So yes, calculus can be extremely important to practicing engineers.

author: nctnico
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 11:33:21 am
content: And let's not forget digital filters and control loops.

author: lem_ix
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 11:45:16 am
content: Engineers tend to solve their problems by simplifying the math surrounding them. Take your Maxwell's equations and try to turn on a led diode, it will be a problem. If instead you apply circuit theory models all those difficult equations go away. Problems starts when you don't know when/how to apply your approximations. You should know what kind of "math" approximation you can apply to the issue at hand. In some cases as previously mentioned you can't make any sort of approximation because everything matters.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 12:15:39 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 29, 2016, 11:21:09 amYep, and many others can spend their entire career without using calculus once.As other have mentioned, it's very likely that the majority of practicing electronics design engineers (average across all disciplines) will rarely need to use advanced math in their jobs.Some disciplines will use it daily, some will never use it, it's a broad spectrum, but probably not an even bell curve, it's slanted towards the not use end.IME, probably the majority of graduates just "got by" on their advanced math and don'treallyunderstand it and can't really use itintuitivelyat the drop of a hat.It's more about knowing how and when to use advanced than the mechanics of being able to actually solve the equations.Of course the math nerds will say every opportunity is a potential use for advanced math(and many textbooks are written with that slant, as Horrowitz & Hill like to argue)

author: Aodhan145
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 12:50:47 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2016, 12:15:39 pmEven basic calculus? I just a hobbyist, I'm only 16 and I have had to use calculus multiple times for just basic hobby electronics. I mainly use it for optimization trying to get the minimum power dissipation from a component depending on other variables.Even yesterday I wanted to calculate the power consumption of an ESP8266 over 15mins in a specific use case including all the transients. I had to use basic Riemann sums to work out the Charge then energy then average power consumption. I use it all the time.I'm surprised people can do real electronics work without it, never mind getting into the actually complicated stuff.

author: Kalvin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 01:12:18 pm
content: Engineering is more than math. Engineering is like problem solving which requires persistence, positive attitude to problem solving, ability to learn new techniques and ability to apply the theory to the real-world problems. A good engineer is a good problem solver with positive attitude who tries to find good/optimal/practical solution for the problems, which requires persistence, theoretical understanding of the basics, ability to learn new techniques, and ability to apply that knowledge to real-world problems. Math is problem solving, which requires persistence and positive attitude for problem solving, and ability to apply the learnt techniques to given problems.Engineering, like so many other things in the life is a combination of ability and attitude. With a good attitude you can accomplish a lot. With a bad attitude, you will accomplish very little. You do not have to be an expert on everything, but you need to have a will to learn new things, to be able to communicate with the clients and fellow engineers, to be able to grasp the concepts from the experts which typically requires at least some theoretical knowledge, and to be able apply the concepts successfully to your work. It is all about attitude. Like problem solving and math.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 01:23:34 pm
content: Quote from: vodka on May 29, 2016, 06:04:30 amThere is a good argument to be made that colleges don't give enough time for numerical techniques, rather than analytical techniques. However, if you think the analyical knowledge can in any way be deprecated you are condeming yourself to failure if you intend to do anything mathematical. It is becoming a problem that so many graduates can't do much beyond string matlab functions together. It comes as quite a shock to many a fresh master's grad who declares in a meeting that something can't be done with the compute resources available, and someone who actually grasps the maths shows how the whole thing can be reduced to some simple computations.

author: Mastrofski
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 02:18:46 pm
content: Having only internship experience under my belt, I can't speak with any authority on the career side of things, but I can speak to the education side(I just graduated yesterday, after all). Understanding the math is super important for the EE degree. You mentioned an EET degree(which I also have), and I'd say it's not as critical there. For my EET program, basic calculus was all I really needed, and that was all for setting up RLC circuits and analyzing those. For the actual EE program though, that got pretty hairy pretty quickly, especially in the signals and communications courses, where there's a lot of deriving and Fourier transforms going on. For that, you really need to understand all the underlying math.I will say that I've been working my internship for about a year(part time), and I've never done any real math there. Occasionally I'll do Monte Carlo analysis to check out different parameters of my circuit (speaking to Dave's point on probability), but other than that it's mostly been basic ohm's law equations. In fact my department head told me he's only used calculus once in his career, and that was for a certification exam in our industry, and after that he's relied all on app notes and datasheets.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 02:42:30 pm
content: Quote from: Aodhan145 on May 29, 2016, 12:50:47 pmI suspect that quite a lot of people get bydespitea lack of basic mathematical 'clue'. If you're comfortable with calculus some problems just beg for it to be used to reach a quick, simple solution. If you're not, you go around the houses to get to the same end via collections of graphical methods, iterative suck-it-and-see methods (substituting values in SPICE until you get the right answer) and other ad-hoc approaches. They might, at the end of the day, work but they're not the quickest way to get to your destination.Most engineering types try, where they can, to avoid the mathematics side of things. Just as most social scientists, life scientists and medics hate the statistics courses they are forced to take. To see where this leads, look at the quality of statistical decision making in politics and the vacillating between which of fat or carbohydrates in your diet are supposedly going to kill you, or the drugs which are eventually shown to harm not heal people.I would say, learn as much mathematics as you can. The more tools you have in your tool box, the more jobs you can tackle. But don't use your tools to explain things*. I hate nothing more than an engineering textbook that is chock full of maths where prose should have been used. The worst thing about these is that they're written by engineers not mathematicians. Mathematicians learn to use maths as a first class language and it shows - the symbology in a well written mathematical text can be read out loud: "Given a function f of i, such that i is an integer and f has a one-to-one mapping to the integers then...". For the most part engineers don't, sadly, write their mathematics like that.*You don't explain how a bolt holds two sheets of steel together by talking about the spanner. I have a book on transformer design that gets into flinging partial differentials around before it has even explained what a turns ratio is.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 02:43:51 pm
content: Quote from: Aodhan145 on May 29, 2016, 12:50:47 pmThe problem is in any corporation spending 15 minutes on something like this likely be frowned upon by upper management. Especially with deadlines.It's all about cost optimization. If you can get the design done without doing this the company makes more money!Being able to approximate and over design is sometimes more cost effective. Especially on low volume stuff. What's the hourly overhead rate for a electrical engineer? $120+ an hour? If you spend 2 hours doing math you could spend an extra 5 cents on a component. If your only making ~6000 boards.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 02:53:59 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 02:43:51 pmWell, in your hypothetical case, the mathematical solution costs $240, the extra $0.05 per component costs $300. So, if arithmetic yields a better answer in 30 seconds, imagine how good an answer some proper applied mathematics might yield.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 02:55:57 pm
content: Quote from: Mastrofski on May 29, 2016, 02:18:46 pmAnd here is the thing, app notes and datasheets don't appear by themselves. So behind them are people who really understand what they are doing and can create something original rather than simply copying typical circuit from the datasheet. If you want to be on the other side of the datasheet, then, well, you need to do math.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:03:53 pm
content: Quote from: Aodhan145 on May 29, 2016, 12:50:47 pmWith something as simple as Riemann sums, people are doing some basic calculus every day without even thinking of it as calculus. I just had to look up the term Riemann sum, as I don't think I've used that actual name in 40 years. I use calculus most days, though.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:06:46 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 02:43:51 pmDon't be silly. Who's going to buy your 6000 boards for a reasonable margin if you can't even tell potential customers their energy consumption. A lack of supporting information puts you in the bargain basement, where its desperately hard to break even, let alone see a profit.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:14:17 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 29, 2016, 03:03:53 pmMy first thought on seeing that name was "zeroes of the Riemann zeta function" and I wondered exactly how obstruse the maths this guy was using and what he was doing wasting his time on electronics when their was a Fields medal to collect.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:19:09 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 29, 2016, 02:55:57 pmThe key point there, to me, is "create something original". If you like analogies, it is like the difference between being an author writing a book and being an author writing publicity handouts. Both are, of course, necessary.When I was young a short story ("Profession") by Isaac Asimov was sufficiently thought provoking that I still remember its basic point. It is now available on the web athttp://www.abelard.org/asimov.phpand that page's author notes "Isaac Asimov’s Profession is an allegorical description of the manner in which education currently functions in our primitive western societies. Although it may not have been Asimov's intention, I have included this story as a warning of the weakness of Western education."It is worth a speed read, and isdirectlyrelevant to this discussion.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:24:00 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 02:43:51 pmDifferent environments have different standards and challenges.In my line if work, the cheapest part of our deliverables is the engineering. The most expensive thing we do is to deliver an engineering result without doing the engineering thoroughly and properly.

author: Kalvin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:25:19 pm
content: It doesn't hurt if you are clever and know when to apply the right tool for the problem:QuoteSource:https://mathjokes4mathyfolks.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/edisons-birthday/There are many variations to this story, but the principle is the same.

author: sarepairman2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:33:20 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 29, 2016, 03:06:46 pmthe energy consumption of our boards is lower then our competitors. should you have a specific concern about board power consumption we can can get your numbers, so long we are sure that we will have your business. .... forever

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:35:23 pm
content: Quote from: Kalvin on May 29, 2016, 03:25:19 pmYeah, Edison's English was terrible. He saidcalculatewhen he should have saidmeasure.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:50:57 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 29, 2016, 03:06:46 pmYou can measure that after the fact... For probably cheaper than calculating. Remember calculations can be wrong!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:51:43 pm
content: Quote from: nctnico on May 29, 2016, 11:33:21 amJust so. And most of RF and comms engineering. And when you get to antenna engineering and signal integrity engineering, you are back to using your "feel" for the maths to guide you in your use of the numerical tools.Unless, of course, you believe that "evolution algorithms" are sufficient.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 03:55:09 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 03:50:57 pmMeasurements can be wrong too.As for "cheaper", that depends on the cost & time of producing the first board, and on how evolutionary/revolutionary the technology is.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 04:00:29 pm
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 29, 2016, 10:19:01 amQuite probably, but for me theinterestingjobsallrequired maths in one way or another - and I'd rather spend my life doing things that interest me.IMNSHO the OP needs to be made aware that certain "classes" of job are based on certain "classes" of knowledge. It is up to the OP to decide which is best for him, but it is up to us to make him aware therewillbe long-term consequences of his decisions.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 04:09:35 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 03:50:57 pmThe issue doing without calculating first, it may be 1000 iterations until you get something that kinda "works". Measuring after the fact is not faster or cheaper once you get into complex things. Also many things are very hard to almost impossible to measure, and even harder to understand in which way you need to tweak the design to achieve a desirable result. Good luck making something like antenna in modern mobile phones without very advanced math.Or you designed a phone which works very well, but one little issue, current consumption is so high that battery lasts for half a day. Do you start designing from the scratch because there is no chance to do it with current chipset?

author: sarepairman2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:31:19 pm
content: the age old battle between theorists and practicalists.keep in mind, the answers may be biased by what you paid (student loans) for.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:35:25 pm
content: The battle is age old because both answers, taken in exclusion of the other, are wrong. The very best practitioners of our art are capable of applying both types of answers to a wide range of problems. Choosing the best approach in each case.Anyone who is lacking skills from either side of the divide is crippled. Perhaps not in a disabling manner, but crippled.

author: Mastrofski
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:42:24 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on May 29, 2016, 02:55:57 pmI get what you're saying but I don't think it has anything to do with originality. We come up with a fair amount of products where we end up piecing together circuit blocks that other people have developed in order to accomplish new tasks. That being said, I know a few of my colleagues have ended up at an international controls company and they do all of the S-Domain math because they need the mathematical model for their controls systems. It all depends on the industry and scope of a companies product line. If you don't have to reinvent the wheel, then why would you?

author: jaxbird
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:45:29 pm
content: There seem to be a development where, at least in the US, where you pay to attend university, it basically means you pay for your degree. The university's best interest is that all students graduate and it's the same for the students, so unless you quit or fail really badly, you are likely to get your degree.This does however mean a university degree doesn't hold much value anymore.

author: sarepairman2
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 05:52:27 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 29, 2016, 05:35:25 pmor the very best practitioners are part of a team

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 06:14:29 pm
content: Quote from: jaxbird on May 29, 2016, 05:45:29 pmUnfortunately for some companies it is. I do about maybe 95% of the work of what the engineers at my current job do.However to get the 2x increase in pay I need the piece of paper. There are some smaller companies I am aware of who have gone away with this and with enough experience they will give you an engineering title and appropriate pay. (maybe a bit less but still)

author: D3f1ant
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 07:42:43 pm
content: How much bearing your qualification has depends very much where you work. I know of more than one extremely highly paid 'engineer' with almost no qualifications at all. They are highly paid because they are brilliant, 'school' just didn't work for them. I have let people with A+ qualifications go because they simply didn't have a good aptitude for engineering. Once your in the door, what you actually achieve will have a far greater bearing on your future than the piece of paper.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 08:38:38 pm
content: Engineers vs technicians is a dimwitted argument. It is as stupid as asking which is better, a doctor or a nurse.When I'm in hospital I don't want a nurse choosing my treatment, nor do I want a doctor inserting a needle. Horses for courses.A nurse that thinks they can do everything a doctor does is dangerous. A doctor that thinks they are better than a nurse is an ignorant fool.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 09:20:59 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 29, 2016, 03:19:09 pmGood read. I think it's the first time I have read that story. I should probably go back through Asimov's work and see what else I haven't read yet.

author: timb
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 10:11:54 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 29, 2016, 08:38:38 pmWhat about a Nurse Practitioner (aka Prescribing Nurse)?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 29, 2016, 10:34:13 pm
content: Quote from: timb on May 29, 2016, 10:11:54 pmIf they exist over here, I presume their options are carefully and explicitly limited. When I've been in hospital I've needed more than a routine medication.But you knew that, and you know the point of the analogy.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 12:04:20 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 06:14:29 pmJust the fact that you consider an education to be no more than a "piece of paper" is everything I need to recommend that you not get the degree, particularly an engineering degree.My only regret about getting my degrees is that I did not take even more courses and get my Ph.D. My 75 year old former boss is retired but still studies math and engineering. In fact, everyone I respect in engineering is a perpetual student. There is no "piece of paper" and done in our field.

author: photon
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 12:05:46 am
content: Quote from: IanB on May 29, 2016, 09:20:59 pmYes, very fascinating science fiction.For this discussion I'll add that we in this forum are using mathematics. Logic is the basis of science and a discipline inside mathematics. Though its use may be faulty in a post, we are all able to apply logic to a post and find any problems. This is what makes this forum interesting.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:09:03 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 03:50:57 pmWith a bursty local most power/energy measurements are far worse than predicted ones. You can't measure something like Aodhan145 is describing in one go. The only way you get any numbers for the maths is by measurement. Then you need to integrate them into a final result. Measurement and calculation complement each other.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:14:21 am
content: Science fiction explores a lot of things. It may be a thousand monkey solution but the genre does come up with some real truths. I've long forgotten the author and story name of one of my favorites, but the plot has stuck with me. The gist of the story follows. Sorry about the lengthy version, if I were a better author I might not have been an engineer.A senator is on a Jovian moon for a celebration celebrating a theoretical breakthrough proving that force fields have a limitation on the product of strength and duration. This is important because the inhabitants of Jupiter itself have discovered that life exists elsewhere in the solar system and are offended by the fact, promising to eliminate the problem. The large size of Jupiter assures that its military capability will exceed anything the rest of the solar system can do, but without force fields strength of materials limitations will keep the Jovians trapped on the surface of their planet. No pressure vessel can hold their surface atmospheric pressure in a vacuum.At the celebration the theoreticians disparage technicians who have caused many explosions in laboratories experimenting with force fields, and touts his proof that force field pressure vessels are impossible. Everyone pats each other on the back and the celebration breaks up. The senators aid whisks him off for a ride home on a newly developed spaceship.The senator quickly realizes that there is no visible hull to the space ship, the air is held in by a force field. The technician owner, who is missing an arm from an explosion during force field experiments, disparages theoreticians saying they have no idea of practical work. After his accident he quickly realized that the force field couldn't be left on too long, and devised a way to cycle it quickly, turning it off before it explodes, and turning it on before the air has a chance to expand meaningfully.The message I take from this is that theory is very good about telling the limits and best application of known ways to do things. It may or may not define the limits of what can be done. And that neither technicians or theoreticians own all of the brains in the world.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:41:52 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 12:04:20 amWell you sir are a buzzkill.

author: NiHaoMike
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:13:51 am
content: One form of math that isn't taught in the basic university classes is how to effectively use fixed point arithmetic. That's of most relevance when dealing with embedded systems that generally don't have FPUs, but there are other reasons to use fixed point. In particular, look at how floating point has a lot of "traps for young players" so you'll know where you need to take action to avoid those, including sometimes by using fixed point.And then there are bit level tricks that are very efficient to implement. Most obvious is shifting to multiply/divide by powers of 2.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:15:51 am
content: My view is this: Mathematics is a language - and how well youneedknow it will depend on where you will be using it.It is well to appreciate there are levels of complexity (such as arithmetic - algebra - calculus) and to understand the capabilities of each. However, one should also to have the ability to identify where to go when solving a problem - including 'out of the box', such as in the Edison anecdote. Teamwork can be a mixed blessing here.In short, I believe it is important to understand what mathematical processes are available and their fundamental operating principles - but not necessarily to have expertise in them. As long as you understand the basics, you can develop the expertise.In a personal example, when I was in High School, I was fascinated by calculus. It appeared to me as an elegant and powerful tool and I developed my skills to be able to handle some insanely complicated formulae. However, in the Higher School Certificate exams (final high school state exams) there was just oneverysimple question on calculus. That really ticked me off, but I would suggest this experience is going to be typical in a workplace. I haven't had need to use much calculus over the years and my skills have atrophied somewhat - but having had the knowledge, they could be resurrected if the need arises.IMHO - what matters is not necessarily having the answer, but knowing where to go to get it - and quickly. In the commercial world, time is the master.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:25:03 am
content: Quote from: NiHaoMike on May 30, 2016, 02:13:51 amIn most places practical numerical methods, like fixed point arithmetic, don't even seem to be that well covered if you take things like the DSP options.

author: Dave
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:49:54 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 29, 2016, 03:19:09 pmThanks for posting this here, I thoroughly enjoyed it.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 04:50:21 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 01:41:52 amThe fact that you aren't looking forward to a lifetime of learning is a disappointing quality in a future engineer.

author: Tomorokoshi
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 05:21:54 am
content: I too went for several years without using more than algebra and HEX conversions. However, over the last couple years some problems came up where although I didn't reallyunderstandthe math, I knew it wasthere, so I studied up on it. I was able to go back and start to understand why someone would use, in this case, Laplace transforms, along with some other methods.Going back to review and apply that information is "closing the loops" for several things I've been working on where the answer is achieved iteratively, without a strong analytical basis for why it's working.Perhaps I'll be able to make use of it. If even a small improvement in efficiency or quality is possible, then so much the better.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 05:25:58 am
content: I'm still a noob at electronics, and from reading it seems math definitely is something you need to know to be good at electronics, that will definitely be a stumbling block for me as math has always been my weakness.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:33:35 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 29, 2016, 06:14:29 pmIt is revealing that you consider a degree to be a "piece of paper". That indicates youvery deeplymisunderstand what a degree is.If you want more money, change profession. Sorted.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:35:01 am
content: Quote from: Dave on May 30, 2016, 02:49:54 amYou're welcome. I think I'll repost the link the next time this topic rears its head!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:40:15 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 12:04:20 amVery true.However I'll observe that in the opinion of myself and many colleagues who have recruited many PhDs and non-PhDs into commercial companies, there is one good reason for doing a PhD: because you want to.Having said that, advancement in acadaemia (and maybe some civil service careers) requires a PhD, and it will tend to open doors when giving advice to people outside the profession.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:47:46 am
content: Going back to your first post in this thread, you say...Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmIn all but one of the companies that I've worked in, the interview process has been structured to discover if the candidate has such an attitude to any part of their subject. No direct question is asked, of course, but it isn't difficult to determine - and then tonotoffer them a job.The exception turned out to be a thoroughly unpleasant company to work in.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:52:43 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmIt's important to understand what's behind those off the shelf solutions and simulations.For example, in feedback diff equitations often the "reasonable assumption" sin(a)=a is made.It is not possible to expain to someone that never understood diff equitations, why this limits the max. angle that will be controlled.Or: He will be unable to understand: Help, the library/simulation doesn't work, or: witch library is the "best" one.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 10:26:49 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 08:33:35 amIt is not what I consider to be a piece of a paper. But what many companies consider to be a piece of paper. If you shop around some basic jobs now require advanced degrees that someone with 10 years of experience could perform just well.I am not sure of many professions that without a degree make you over $60k a year.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:46:45 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 10:26:49 amYou sound like someone who is very determined to be unemployable.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 12:46:30 pm
content: Quote from: coppice on May 30, 2016, 11:46:45 amHmmm. I don't understand what ROBOT is saying, and you might well be right.On reflection I'd say "not very determined to be employable". The end result is the same, but the route is different, and different techniques are needed to avoid that end result

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 12:52:56 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 12:46:30 pmseems appropriate.

author: Kalvin
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 12:58:19 pm
content: There are many engineering positions in which math is not needed at all or very little math is required. If you really hate math or you just do not get it, it is not the end of your engineering career. Most probably you will end up into some small- or middle-sized company and get eventually a position in the lower management, in the sales or systems installation/design.

author: ebclr
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:16:56 pm
content: Will be very hard to get out of the university with a engineering degree without a reasonable math study

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 01:19:08 pm
content: Quote from: Kalvin on May 30, 2016, 12:58:19 pmPlausible.Often sales people are paid more than engineers, which seems important to the OP.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:15:53 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 12:46:30 pmI am talking about a purchasing generalist job that requires a masters degree in business and 5 years of experience. Many companies now require way more than necessary.Calling up a vendor and trying to pull in a delivery date is not hard... Creating a purchase order in an ERP system is not hard. In fact a business degree will hardly help you with either of these.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:32:27 pm
content: QuoteIn your opinion, not the hiring manager's. They are looking for professionals and are paying accordingly. Perhaps the job entails more responsibility than you think.Lastly, a bachelor's degree is the new high school diploma. It is merely a minimum standard for employment as a professional.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 02:59:27 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 02:32:27 pmTranslation: In the minefield of discrimination claims in the US a bachelors degree is one of the few defensible criteria on an employment application. A human resource department can use this to screen applicants without fear that they will be sued for race, sex, age, religious or other bias. Regardless of whether it has any impact on suitability for the job. This may change when a clever lawyer recognises that there are income barriers to higher education in this country. While I have great disdain for the ambulance chasing profession in general, I would welcome this development as it might force more attention to actual suitability for a position rather than some arbitrary checkbox.As a final thought - are you a professional if your job is defined by hours a week rather than jobs per dollar?Large businesses don't like this question. They are quick to play the professional card when more hours are required to finish a job (long days or weekends), but don't think that it applies when a job is done early and an attempt is made to take the rest of the week off.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 03:29:20 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 08:33:35 amOr he has encountered too many people with degrees who demonstrate no more competence than the unlettered. There's plenty of those about and I can see how that kind of graduate might influence one to think that a degree is just "a piece of paper".To be balanced there are also a lot of "experienced" folks whose experience isn't worth the paper it's not written on. As I apparently once said of a co-worker, "Oh yes, he's got 10 years experience but unfortunately it's the same year's experience repeated 10 times". ('Apparently' as I didn't remember saying it but a friend quoted me in print about 15 years later.)

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 06:21:06 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 30, 2016, 02:59:27 pmI have actually spent a fair bit of time talking about the degreed vs non-degreed employee with people I respect. We all have observed the same thing. A degree is no guarantee of competence. However, the lack of a degree can allow competence in a very narrow area, but once the questions become larger, the non-degreed generally fail.This is not discrimination. It is a simple reality observed by many professionals in business over decades.The question of the income barrier to higher education is valid. Something must change drastically to fix that. It's worth noting that one of the things that must change is the attitudes of those attending. Many of the costs universities are incurring have nothing to do with the actual education of students. Sports programs and lavish facilities are the focal points rather than a quality education. It's time to cut all the fluff and focus on the academics.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 08:22:16 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 02:15:53 pmMost of us were discussingengineeringjobs andengineeringqualifications. It seems you aren't thinking of that, in which case this whole thread has been misdirected.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 09:36:22 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 08:22:16 pmIt was an example I saw on a posting recently I am sure I could find one that is engineering related. All you have to do is look at large engineering companies that are publicly traded on the NYSE

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 10:30:44 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 09:36:22 pmNot only do you not want to go to the effort of obtaining a higher education, now you demand that we do your homework for you.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 10:51:27 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 06:21:06 pmMy remarks may sound resentful, but they were in fact a lamentation about the talent that large companies miss. I personally have advanced degrees from well regarded universities, and am quite satisfied with the professional opportunities and remuneration I have received. You will find my comments in this thread and others advocating as much learning as possible.But I noticed that much of the best talent I worked with could not make it through the front door based on current HR requirements. They didn't have a degree, or they didn't have a degree from one of the "right" universities, or they didn't have a top GPA. What they did have was a keen intelligence, an ability to learn deeply and rapidly, and deep focus on meaningful problems. These attributes can be useful in a university setting, but do not assure success in that environment. Boredom with the pace of structured learning, disinterest in artificial problems and simple geographic or financial barriers preventing attendance of the "best" schools can all lead an outstanding person to have an unimpressive resume.The HR gates "may" provide a higher average result, but it frequently weeds out the outstanding performers. And as you say it does not guarantee a good result. The HR gates are an established and documented "best" process. The problem with "best" processes is that if everyone follows them, then everyone comes in first. Clearly there is a logical flaw here. In actuality, "best" processes are suited to preventing below average results. Achieving superior results in hiring, as in virtually every other human endeavor, requires hard work and intense thought. Some of that thought should sort those who are deep, but narrow from the non-degreed folk who are deep and broad, and achieved their knowledge through unstructured means.As a corollary to this general problem, the engineer whose knowledge goes no further than what he had upon receipt of his degree may be a valuable employee, but he is very unlikely to be one of the top talents that are so desirable.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:02:51 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 06:21:06 pmVery true; nicely put. Nonetheless Bill and Dave would also have been on the lookout for the rare exceptions.

author: ROBOT
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:11:10 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 10:30:44 pmIf I had the time I would surely look it up for you. But after a long weekend of real "homework" it's time to watch some YouTube. Before my watch later list gets to 1200 videos again

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:12:12 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 30, 2016, 10:51:27 pmThere is a lot of truth in what you say, but associating it with degreed vs non-degreed engineers is missing the root cause: the HR droids.In large companies HR droids tend to want toget warm bodies that don't cause division within departments (=> yes-men corporate drones)armour-plate their back against getting blamed if someone turns out to be "inappropriate" (=> filter out people with non-traditional qualifications / career paths, use dubious selection techniques such as graphology)

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:16:19 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 30, 2016, 10:51:27 pmThe HR barrier is a different discussion that this one. This discussion is "do I need to know how to do math to be an engineer?" The answer is yes. And the typical processes to obtain the math skills required to be an engineer are addressed in most competent college programs. Some prodigies will obtain these skills on their own. They are the rare exception, not the rule.Hiring the right people for the right job is a topic for another thread and is a source of frustration for all.As already has been addressed, but is worth repeating, a college degree provides three useful things:- A common language by which to communicate to others in one's field- An understanding of how to learn - which is a process that never ends for a true professional in a technical field- A concept of the boundaries of one's knowledge. i.e. Knowing what we don't know.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:19:21 pm
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 11:11:10 pmThat's not quite right. You see, we are not the ones who want or need the information; you are. If you look it up for anyone, you should look it up for yourself. This is what learning is all about. Curiosity, finding things out that might be to your advantage.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 30, 2016, 11:22:32 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on May 30, 2016, 11:02:51 pmAgreed.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 01:41:59 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 30, 2016, 02:15:53 pmThis is certainly true. Often its supply and demand. With so many bachelor graduates around this has become the entry level for clerical jobs. Sometimes qualification requirements escalate in stranger ways. In the 60s nobody smart wanted to be an accountant. People went into accountancy from high school and studied part time for their accountancy qualifications. Then salaries started to rise for some reason. By the mid 70s accountancy firms could take their pick of the top graduates from the top universities. Candidates still had to go through the part time courses to get their accountancy qualifications. The actual content of their degree course was largely irrelevant. There are now a huge number of jobs like this, where the degree content is irrelevant, and you just need the piece of paper. Science and engineering jobs are rarely among them. There are exceptions. Some software organisations still take in people with a good degree in a random topic, who pass a series of aptitude tests. They then train them in software development. They find this works out a lot better than assuming computer science graduates will be able to tackle real world software development.Most science and engineering jobs really do require deep skills, which most people gain an university and hone in their first couple of years of work.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 03:02:05 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 11:16:19 pmThat's the intention, but it's not guaranteed.I've known many EE degree qualified people who, for some unknown reason have not been able to acquire any of these skills. I don't know how they graduated, but graduate they did.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 03:05:51 am
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on May 30, 2016, 10:51:27 pmSmart engineering managers and hirers know how to work around HR at all costs.

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 03:32:19 am
content: Quote from: ROBOT on May 28, 2016, 06:01:56 pmI was "lousy at Maths" in Secondary School,& when I went to Technical School,I struggled to follow the formulae which were presented in Electrical Theory.I got away with it for a while,until they tightened things up so I had to do a course called "Qualifying Maths D".After battling through that,I had "sort of"picked up the stuff I should have already learned,except for Calculus,which was in the next course "Maths ID".I went to that one too,but missed a night,& when I came back,they were into stuff I didn't have a clue about---I threw up my hands in disgust & dropped out,with the excuse that I was doing two other night classes!Later on,during my time as a Technician,I ran into many occasions where my Maths were inadequate,not least when sitting for the PMG/Telecom Aust Senior Tech,& later,Tech Officer Exams.Yes, Virginia,Techs do have to know Maths&Theory (at least the real Techs we had in the old days did!)The years rolled on,& Telecom Aust set up a "Bridging Training" scheme for Techs to become Technical Officers.I was lucky enough to pass the aptitude test & be selected into the course,which was 18 months of Correspondence,with all the study done in your own time,except for one study day a fortnight.By this time,I was in my early forties,& was concerned as always about my Maths.The course had a very intensive Maths component,including Calculus,Matrixes,Factoring,Statistics,& so on.To my surprise,I found I was able to absorb this & the Electronics Theory much easier than when I was 16 or so at Tech School.Anything I had problems with,I went back to basics on,using my old books from Tech,& picking up secondhand ones at the Uni booksales.I'm not saying it was "a piece of cake"--it wasn't,but as an adult,concepts that I had previously only vaguely understood became clearer.What I'm trying to say,is "Study the Maths,you are an adult now,& regardless of popular belief,adults are smarter than kids!"It is your best opportunity to become "good at Maths",& I would urge you to grasp it with both hands!

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 04:55:28 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on May 31, 2016, 03:02:05 amI know how at least some graduated: they cheated. It all comes back to not valuing the education. They just wanted their "piece of paper."I'm just shocked at how little value is placed on an education. Getting a higher education was one of the greatest things that happened to improve my life. And to those that say they used none of it, I say, what a pity.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 05:15:42 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 31, 2016, 04:55:28 amThe Chinese term for these "pieces of paper" translates to "sandpaper". It seems a good fit to me.

author: vodka
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 06:04:52 am
content: The worst from a "Piece of paper" or "Papelas", is that you asked them a doubt and they didn't resolve the doubt if not they create you more doubts.This trouble told me my father when he worked at refinery , when a boss asked to "Piece of Papel", the boss terminated without response and with more questions.Furthermore , this problem i suffered at University.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 05:34:06 pm
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 30, 2016, 11:16:19 pmI agree with almost all that you say here. But on the topic of this thread I will return to the answer I provided earlier, but state it more plainly. No math is not required. It is only required to be a good engineer, or perhaps to satisfy the more pedantic among us, it is only required to hold properly defined engineering jobs.As evidence I will mention a couple of items from my personal experience. During my university days I got summer internships at a electric power company. I worked in a department of about 30 people who were all called engineers. I did the same things that everyone in the department did and I was overeducated for the job when I finished high school. Every assignment involved taking a customer order, looking up a recipe from the company operating manual and then applying the recipe to generate a sketch (call it a schematic) for the installation department. No math beyond arithmetic was required. Not even algebra. There were other interns in the department who took employment there when they finished their degrees.Later, I worked at a location with approximately six thousand degreed engineers. The sizeable majority of them did not use math beyond arithmetic in their jobs. Many did not even need to. Assembling tinker toys from parts and instrument catalogues really doesn't strain mathematics requirements. Many more succeeded in their jobs even when use of simple mathematics (algebra and trigonometry) would have made them more effective and efficient. In my estimation less than a thousand of those six thousand actually needed any level of mathematics above algebra and trigonometry to succeed in their jobs.While it might be a fruitful discussion to ask whether this company should have been hiring fewer engineers and more technicians, the situation was as described.This may lead to a clarification of the topic from "Do I need mathematics to do engineering?" to "Do I need mathematics to perform a job with an engineering title and salary?". Or as a sub-theme, how little math can I master to get the degree often required to get a job with an engineering title?

author: rstofer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 31, 2016, 07:43:42 pm
content: I worked for a company that designed nuclear power plants. There were engineers using a ton of math. Every single day! Every single detail of the plant had math to back up the design. Nobody was 'winging' anything.My own career didn't involve a lot of higher math, I built buildings and technical facilities. Algebra was usually enough. Until is wasn't and then having math skills seemed important. I used my knowledge of Fourier Transforms exactly once in my entire working career but when I needed an answer, I had a way to get it.Today I spend a lot of time helping my grandson with math - Pre-calculus at the moment. Calculus is dead simple compared to pre-calculus and it's more intuitive. Calculus I is about change and motion. We concern ourselves with how functions change (slope, continuity, asymptotes) and equations of motion, one of which describes and LCR circuit. If you can take a step back from grinding out the solution, the problems are fun. For EEs or soom-to-be EEs, this stuff should be a kick. Build an analog computer and simulate the equations! Or use Simulink in Matlab. What a marvelous tool for visualizing differential equations!Where you make a point in meetings is with mental math. Being able to come up with a close approximation to some financial question before others can dig out their calculators will make you king. Where does that skill come from? Driving a slide rule... We always had to keep track of the decimal point and we were always making approximations because we didn't have resolution. Many times a quick +-10% answer outweighs a 16 digit answer that takes longer to get.If you want to play in the big leagues, you need the skills. You may not need them very often but you will need them.

author: molotov
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 12:52:25 am
content: Do you want to be a wrench turner fixing somebody else's design or the designer?Nothing wrong with either choice. One just pays more.

author: Johnny10
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 02:59:23 am
content: From your question:(Let's assume the job does a few things:Makes simple normally 2-4 layer, low frequency, 5v or 3v3 pcb's using off the shelf microcontrollers and other parts. )It would seem you are in your mid-twenties.You really think this would be a job description in 30 years?Why do so many people ask about the value of the basic knowledge and skills needed for higher education degrees?Math is fundamental to engineering.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 04:38:29 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on May 31, 2016, 04:55:28 amValuing higher engineering education and simply not enjoying and/or not being good at advanced math aren't mutually exclusive.IME the ones who are really good at advanced math, are the ones wholikedit, and more likely to find a need to use it later on in their career.There would be countless excellent engineers who aren't any good at the advanced math, and/or don't enjoy using it and prefer to solve things other ways, and just did enough math to pass etc.There is nothing really wrong with that, it's quite natural to have varying interests and abilities in various aspects of engineering.You can have two identical students doing the same engineering course, one just does enough to pass and has little interest in the math, and the other is a math nerd who loves it and finds a way to use it every opportunity. The latter is not necessarily a better engineer than the former.

author: coppice
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 04:59:41 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 02, 2016, 04:38:29 amIf these students are doing exactly the same engineering course, it sounds like at least one of them chose the wrong options. There are paths to a degree involving limited maths, and paths with lots of maths. They suit different people, and suit them for different kinds of engineering. Just don't try to enter things like the DSP or comms fields if you can't or won't get serious about maths.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 05:05:40 am
content: Quote from: coppice on June 02, 2016, 04:59:41 amOf course. I'm trying to make a more generalised point here.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 05:54:49 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 02, 2016, 04:38:29 amUnderstood. I was not a natural math student, but I fully understood that learning and applying it was part and parcel of my degrees. Rather than piss and moan about it, I worked my ass off, eventually got better at it, and got my degrees.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 07:18:18 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on June 02, 2016, 05:54:49 amJust so.There is a very insidious mentality often associated with moaning and whinging about maths being difficult - the desire/need to find "justifications" and "reasons" why maths isn'treallynecessary. Anybody that does that is also likely to findotherdifficult/tedious parts of creating or manufacturing a design to be "unnecessary" - and hence not worth bothering about. And, of course, that can causeimmenseproblems for an employer.That's one reason why all my (decent) employers have taken care to weed out such attitudes during interview.Less insidiously, "designs" are more likely to be created by Darwinian natural selection.Yes, the OP should stop whinging and get on and learn the maths to the best of their ability. Once they have done that they can hold their head up high - and acknowledge their limitations. That goes down well during job interviews, because knowingand circumventing the limitations of technology and people is a key engineering skill.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 07:19:51 am
content: Quote from: LabSpokane on June 02, 2016, 05:54:49 amSure, but once again I'll point out that working your butt off and understanding it enough to pass your course does not automatically mean you'll be really good at and/or interested in applying it 5 or 10 years down the track in your career.The same goes for practically any subject in engineering.Often it comes down to natural aptitude and interest in the subject. IME, if you like something more (like math) you'll be naturally more inclined to find cases and be more willing to use it.But don't get me wrong, I totally agree with others that the OP should just hunker down and learn the math.

author: LabSpokane
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 02, 2016, 08:42:17 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 02, 2016, 07:19:51 amDammit, Dave! I will just have to agree to agree. ;-)

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2016, 11:31:20 pm
content: Try to make this without math:http://www.instructables.com/id/3DOF-Ball-on-Plate-Using-Closed-Loop-Stepper-Motor/

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 04, 2016, 11:47:01 pm
content: Quote from: Galenbo on June 04, 2016, 11:31:20 pmPerversely, that's just the sort of thing a genetic algorithm or other machine learning system could create quite quickly. Think about it, if I gave you a tray and a ball you could learn to do this with just eyes and muscles without ever doing any maths. Granted, if I was going to write the code to drive this my first thought would be 'Ah! Calculus and O-Level physics' not machine learning, but you get the point.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 12:19:19 am
content: Quote from: Cerebus on June 04, 2016, 11:47:01 pm... and then try to understand how it works and to predict what will happen ifanyvariable is changed. Will it still work in the expected way, or will it flip into a completely different mode?Cautionary tale from the 1980s...The military was experimenting with using neural nets to examine photos of tanks and cars, and to distinguish between them. Obviously an important topic, if USSR tanks ever rolled across the north European plain. The system worked wonderfully in the lab, but failed abysmally in field tests. Why?Eventually people realised that the lab training was done usign pictures of tanks on the Luneberger Heath and cars from a motoring magazine. The Luneberger Heath pictures were typical north European weather, but the cars were sunny advertising pictures.Yes,unbeknownst to the designers, the neural net was ignoring the cars and observing the weather.

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 12:29:48 am
content: Quote from: Cerebus on June 04, 2016, 11:47:01 pmIf you learn to juggle a ball on a tray like that, what is really happening is you are constructing a mathematical model of the system in your brain, and then you are using that model in feed forward mode to predict where the ball is going to go and making corrective actions ahead of time to keep the ball under control and prevent it falling over the side.In contrast, I bet the mechanical device is purely working in feedback mode. It measures the difference between where the ball is and where the ball ought to be and adjusts the position of the servos to bring the ball back into line. It can do this because the response time of such an electro-mechanical system is much faster than a human. A human could not react fast enough to control the ball in the same way, which is why a human has to learn how to do it by practicing.

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 04:24:37 am
content: The tilting ball table is a great example of both the strengths and weaknesses of math. A proper math model of the system would allow selecting size and speed of the control servos correctly the first time, and would also aid in selecting (specifying) the characteristics of the ball and tabletop (hardness, sphericity, surface roughness and the like). This would save an immense amount of cut and try (practice) in making this system.But on top of that, unless truly stunning levels of care were exerted in design and fabrication of the system, I am extremely sure that some cut and try was necessary to tweek the system in because of things like non-linear friction in the joints due to geometry errors, unexpected slop in the joints, departure from flatness in the table top, dirt on the ball and tabletop and a long list of other things. The best work is almost always either by someone who is well versed in both the practical and theoretical side of things, or as someone else pointed out, a close knit team consisting of both types of talent.

author: photon
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 06:38:49 am
content: Sadly, no human knows how the brain works.

author: Galenbo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 12:36:32 pm
content: Quote from: CatalinaWOW on June 05, 2016, 04:24:37 amThis project is something where both profiles "the practical" and "the theoretical" fail.The third guy: the one that sucks in both practical and theoretical, fails too.The fourth guy wins. And he can document the limits of this machine.

author: Cerebus
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 05, 2016, 02:48:39 pm
content: Quote from: IanB on June 05, 2016, 12:29:48 amNo, not in a month of Sundays are you constructing any kind of mathematical model. Cavemen did this stuff before anybody had come up with the idea of counting, let alone mathematical modelling. It's just nerve impulses, synapses and ganglia. Otters can juggle, I've seen one. The otter's not constructing mathematical models, solving differential equations or any such thing. He's playing and thinking about his next fish.