If I didn't do well in calculus will I be a lousy electrical engineer?

[psparky]

I did well in algebra... I had a 3.9 GPA in my math classes up through differential calculus. It's only been the math since then that I've struggled with. While Linear Algebra seemed harder than I expected, my biggest difficulty was keeping the terminology straight.

As far as working harder or longer, that's a luxury in my shoes. It strikes a sour chord with me to think I'm not working hard enough for this... My dad put me to work at 15 because he didn't agree with public education, and I never even earned my GED until I was 24. Now I'm almost 29 and have spent 4 years just to get this far--all while working 40-50 hours per week as well as trying to keep a somewhat sane relationship with my girlfriend and her two kids. It hasn't been easy, and in many repsects I've given far more than "just enough to get by" as some have implied. I envy the younger students who still have all the time they need to study.

Something else that may be worth mentioning here: In my 14 years of work experience, I've never once had an employer who couldn't trust that I was up to the task. I'm not about to have that change, and that was my reasoning behind this post. As much as I want to be an EE, I don't want to be a hack or do the job halfway, and if I can't get the math down maybe I'm not cut out for this.

At any rate I still plan to give it my best shot. Today I started a new term at school and I'm currently taking Electrophysics (Engineering Physics III) and ODE. With my other responsibilities it's a heavy load, but I'm going to do everything in my power to get through this. And if I don't, well then I have my answer.

Thanks to all for your replies.

I would agree that you will do fine. It is clear you have a very high work ethic. It's not going to be easy...but it wasn't easy for any of us.

Keep this in mind as well...your average college student isn't the brightest person in the world. If you are just average intelligence, you will still do fine with hard work. With a 3.9, you are clearly above average. I never got a 3.9 in my life. Graduated with a 3.1 cumlative...averaged a B in all my math classes...and was still able to pass the Electrical P.E. on my first attempt.

Keep in mind too...your average engineer fresh out of school isn't the brightest person in the world either.

And then when you do land your job with a big firm...you will also notice that the average engineer there isn't the brightest person around either. You get my point.

An average student who works hard...often outdoes a gifted student who is lazy. You will see this over and over...

Good luck. I am positive you will succeed.

 

[kd7lee]

Well the encouragement helps... Thanks!

BTW my work background:
2 years industrial maintenance (in my dad's service business)
12 years CNC machining, including 3 years as programmer and 2 years as quality inspector (my current position).

 

[yungman]

linear algebra? i don't recall taking that course.


you sound a practical sort.

you'll do fine.

industry needs hands-on engineers.
it's not what you know but your ability to look it up and figure it out.


to paraphrase mark twain -- your honesty will reassure half the people and scare h**ll out of the other half.

old jim

I never studied that either. I just studied enough to do all the matrix manipulations, determinants, Adjoint etc. Anything that get me through the network parameters and nothing more! It is not even hard. I never even talk about this here as you learn it on the fly.

 

[yungman]

I did well in algebra... I had a 3.9 GPA in my math classes up through differential calculus. It's only been the math since then that I've struggled with. While Linear Algebra seemed harder than I expected, my biggest difficulty was keeping the terminology straight.

As far as working harder or longer, that's a luxury in my shoes. It strikes a sour chord with me to think I'm not working hard enough for this... My dad put me to work at 15 because he didn't agree with public education, and I never even earned my GED until I was 24. Now I'm almost 29 and have spent 4 years just to get this far--all while working 40-50 hours per week as well as trying to keep a somewhat sane relationship with my girlfriend and her two kids. It hasn't been easy, and in many repsects I've given far more than "just enough to get by" as some have implied. I envy the younger students who still have all the time they need to study.

Something else that may be worth mentioning here: In my 14 years of work experience, I've never once had an employer who couldn't trust that I was up to the task. I'm not about to have that change, and that was my reasoning behind this post. As much as I want to be an EE, I don't want to be a hack or do the job halfway, and if I can't get the math down maybe I'm not cut out for this.

At any rate I still plan to give it my best shot. Today I started a new term at school and I'm currently taking Electrophysics (Engineering Physics III) and ODE. With my other responsibilities it's a heavy load, but I'm going to do everything in my power to get through this. And if I don't, well then I have my answer.

Thanks to all for your replies.

OK, now I have a lot more confidence in you. I tell you, nothing beats a good healthy does of common sense. That's what a lot of student from college lack of. As far as time, nobody said you have to do it in certain amount of time. Spread it out. Hack, I waited until I finished my career before making up my math and physics, talk about late!

Real EE job is not only about knowledge, work ethics, careful, common sense mean a whole lot. When you first start out, you'll find yourself spending a lot of time reading data books( well in my days, reading on the computer for you). Design has a lot to do with knowing what's out there on the market, what kind of performance. That's the reason a lot of times you see Jim Hardy and me just pull out a part name when someone asked a question. That come with time and been around the block a few times. Those are in certain sense very important. Your work experience will definitely help, hack! I can't tell you how much my years as a musician help me in my EE career, it's the way of things, how to approach a problem that you learn from your pass job. Go get them tiger.

Just study, have question, come here and ask.

 

[reddvoid]

I did it all ODE PDE Fourier laplace's z line surface volume integrals random variables processes complex variables and the damn curl divergence etc during my bachelor's degree but all i did was just to learn how to solve problems i didn't know much of where all those are used and even didn't know physical interpretation or concept of much of the topics i learn't , maybe because time available between exams was less(i didn't know how complex exponential signal would look but i useto get good in signals) ...so it was not much fun working math.
I finished bachelor's degree and now preparing for masters entrance test so I'm studying all engineering math again this time with full conceptual understanding and its a lot fun, I learn't that once you know physical interpretation or some analogy its lot fun to work with. . .and i believe good books make good engineers.cuz i useto struggle in controls i hated it and once i started reading it from ogata it became my favourite subject :-) so hunt for good books .these are some excellent authors out there whom you've never heard of but can convert your nightmare subject to your favourite one :-)

 

[yungman]

Yep, knowledge is not cheap. No books are good in all topics in a subjects. You can have a very good book on most topics and you hit the wall on one. Guide line to me is you have at least 4 books per subject. Also every book present the topic very different, some people like one way, some like the other, all in all, if you read them all, you start to get the meaning.

Yes Curl and Divergence mean very little in math, only when you get into EM then you really start to get the feel of it. I always joke about Griffiths "Intro to Electrodynamics" is the follow up course of Vector Calculus. You work out the problems in Cpt 10 and Cpt 11, you get pretty good in vector calculus.

My next topics in math I like to get into is Complex Analysis, Numerical Analysis after I finish Antenna Theory. I still have the "Classical Electrodynamics" by J D Jackson to look forward to. This is the holy grail of EM, it's like climbing the Mt Everest.

 

[Bassalisk]

Wow this thread actually made me feel better. I failed my EM course because I have lousy knowledge of vector algebra.

In my opinion, Fourier transform is holy grail in calculus.(and transforms alike)

When we studied FT in calculus course, I failed it.

But now, when I am studying it at Signals and Systems, it goes almost flawlessly.
Why?

Because I got something to relate this whole bunch of math. Frequency domain etc.
I need to see the purpose of the math that I am trying to learn, before I can actually learn it.

I like Fourier transform so much, that I will, with my teaching assistant, start developing application for students like me, that struggle with concept of transforms.

Calculus is good in a way that forces you to think differently. I know what Fourier transform does, but give me integral that has billion terms in it, good bye see ya.If you can think like an engineer, you will become one. Tesla didn't know scrub(not as much as Maxwell anyway) about math, now did he?

 

[yungman]

Wow this thread actually made me feel better. I failed my EM course because I have lousy knowledge of vector algebra.

In my opinion, Fourier transform is holy grail in calculus.(and transforms alike)

When we studied FT in calculus course, I failed it.

But now, when I am studying it at Signals and Systems, it goes almost flawlessly.
Why?

Because I got something to relate this whole bunch of math. Frequency domain etc.
I need to see the purpose of the math that I am trying to learn, before I can actually learn it.

I like Fourier transform so much, that I will, with my teaching assistant, start developing application for students like me, that struggle with concept of transforms.

Calculus is good in a way that forces you to think differently. I know what Fourier transform does, but give me integral that has billion terms in it, good bye see ya.If you can think like an engineer, you will become one. Tesla didn't know scrub(not as much as Maxwell anyway) about math, now did he?

Shoot! I wish I can say that. I studied FT but just never really "get it" Also I have not study probability ( yes I know, it is not hard!) that is require in Signal and systems, modulation etc. I finally decided to pick my battle and change direction to EM RF side.

FT and Laplace transform are the two that I studied, if I review, I can solve problems, but just never been good at them. Been using Bode Plot for all my closed loop feedback design and never let me down, so I never transition to LT and if you don't use it, you loose it!

Is ODE and PDE still belong to Calculus? I thought these two are the hardest.

 

[Bassalisk]

Shoot! I wish I can say that. I studied FT but just never really "get it" Also I have not study probability ( yes I know, it is not hard!) that is require in Signal and systems, modulation etc. I finally decided to pick my battle and change direction to EM RF side.

Funny thing is that I am studying telecommunications. I should know EM.

Probability is very big cake, I like it, I want to do it but it has too much to learn, in very short time. I will be most likely self taught this summer vacation, things I couldn't get to learn(because of time) in my course.

Ah Fourier transform. Its a playground for me actually. I won't lie to you that I spent nights, just laying there and thinking Fourier transform pairs. Filters? I am obsessed with them :D

 

[yungman]

Funny thing is that I am studying telecommunications. I should know EM.

Probability is very big cake, I like it, I want to do it but it has too much to learn, in very short time. I will be most likely self taught this summer vacation, things I couldn't get to learn(because of time) in my course.

Ah Fourier transform. Its a playground for me actually. I won't lie to you that I spent nights, just laying there and thinking Fourier transform pairs. Filters? I am obsessed with them :D

Good for you, to each their own. You should go with your heart, that's how you can be good in the career...passion. To me, RF, EM, EMC make me tick, I can sit there and think about how the current goes.

It is a big field, Yours will take a few years and so is my interest. You have to choose your battle. I know my passion and I had to give up signals system and modulation techniques in favor of my interest. Particular at my age, things leak out the other end as fast as I learn it. I am using the opportunity of responding to EM questions here to motivate myself to pickup the notes and read before answering. I am hoping that if I do it long enough, something should stick!

BTW, my highs is to design RF amplifier circuits with all distributed elements including all kind of filters and matching circuits...and all you see on the pcb is just a maze of copper patterns!

 

[Bassalisk]

Good for you, to each their own. You should go with your heart, that's how you can be good in the career...passion. To me, RF, EM, EMC make me tick, I can sit there and think about how the current goes.

It is a big field, Yours will take a few years and so is my interest. You have to choose your battle. I know my passion and I had to give up signals system and modulation techniques in favor of my interest. Particular at my age, things leak out the other end as fast as I learn it. I am using the opportunity of responding to EM questions here to motivate myself to pickup the notes and read before answering. I am hoping that if I do it long enough, something should stick!

BTW, my highs is to design RF amplifier circuits with all distributed elements including all kind of filters and matching circuits...and all you see on the pcb is just a maze of copper patterns!

I have passion in circuit design too. I am second year in college, and already I am pushing myself in designing circuits. I would like to work as a circuit designer, but I am on the wrong field.

And I think you are never too old to learn something. Can you explain a bit more what is RF amplifier circuit design? I am really interested in this.

 

[yungman]

I have passion in circuit design too. I am second year in college, and already I am pushing myself in designing circuits. I would like to work as a circuit designer, but I am on the wrong field.

And I think you are never too old to learn something. Can you explain a bit more what is RF amplifier circuit design? I am really interested in this.

RF amp design in a way is just normal amp circuit design, except you have to deal with frequency that the wave length is not much longer than the components and the traces in the circuit. You cannot look at any component as just a lump element. Also parasitic of the components become dominant in some case. Beyond 2 to 3 GHz, it is getting harder and harder to design with discrete components like inductors, capacitors. That's when components realized by transmission lines become popular.

Also the component availability is much more limited, you just don't go out and buy an op-amp that run at 2GHz! Even RFICs amplifiers are more like transistors. The most common way of presenting the characteristic is the S-Parameters when it lump input output, feed forward and reverse coupling characteristics together.

Even though RF design concept start out to be the same as low frequency design, but the reasons above quickly complicates the situation and a totally new approach and new parameters are used for all calculation and you really have to train your mind to think like the Smith Chart that plot the characteristics using the S parameter.

Get the RF book by David Pozar or Ludwig. both are very good books particularly Pozar. Ludwig is easier. Honestly, you don't need a lot of EM to study this as long as you can accept the phasors representation of traveling waves. You don't even need a lot of Linear algebra as I said that I learn on the fly whenever I need it for the two port networks.

One thing, pay more attention on pcb layout. It is a big part of the circuit design. Too many students have no idea and don't understand the importance of pcb layout. With good layout, those cook book circuits really work! A lot of the problems of circuit not working can be traced back to a bad layout. What I meant layout is not about learning a CAD software. It is about the art of putting the circuits together. I don't know whether there is any classes for that as I highly question whether those professor even know what I am talking about. If not anything, just respect the layout, that is where the battle won or lost. Particular the kind of Tx line distributed elements design I refer to as like a maze, I doubted you can have someone else do it for you.

Regarding of memory, I can tell you my memory degraded so much it's not even funny. I remember when I was young, I seldom had to study back, reading and working it out one time was good enough for me. Now, when I went back to study the EM the second time, it almost look foreign to me, read back my own notes and question whether I wrote it or my evil twin! I studied the subject of EM 3 complete times already, working through problems in two and half books to get to this point. And if someone ask a question here, I still have to hurry up and pull out my notes! It is only after all these effort, I start to at least feel a little bit more comfortable with it! Talk about slllooooooowwwww!

 

[Bassalisk]

RF amp design in a way is just normal amp circuit design, except you have to deal with frequency that the wave length is not much longer than the components and the traces in the circuit. You cannot look at any component as just a lump element. Also parasitic of the components become dominant in some case. Beyond 2 to 3 GHz, it is getting harder and harder to design with discrete components like inductors, capacitors. That's when components realized by transmission lines become popular.

Also the component availability is much more limited, you just don't go out and buy an op-amp that run at 2GHz! Even RFICs amplifiers are more like transistors. The most common way of presenting the characteristic is the S-Parameters when it lump input output, feed forward and reverse coupling characteristics together.

Even though RF design concept start out to be the same as low frequency design, but the reasons above quickly complicates the situation and a totally new approach and new parameters are used for all calculation and you really have to train your mind to think like the Smith Chart that plot the characteristics using the S parameter.

Get the RF book by David Pozar or Ludwig. both are very good books particularly Pozar. Ludwig is easier. Honestly, you don't need a lot of EM to study this as long as you can accept the phasors representation of traveling waves. You don't even need a lot of Linear algebra as I said that I learn on the fly whenever I need it for the two port networks.

One thing, pay more attention on pcb layout. It is a big part of the circuit design. Too many students have no idea and don't understand the importance of pcb layout. With good layout, those cook book circuits really work! A lot of the problems of circuit not working can be traced back to a bad layout. What I meant layout is not about learning a CAD software. It is about the art of putting the circuits together. I don't know whether there is any classes for that as I highly question whether those professor even know what I am talking about. If not anything, just respect the layout, that is where the battle won or lost. Particular the kind of Tx line distributed elements design I refer to as like a maze, I doubted you can have someone else do it for you.

Regarding of memory, I can tell you my memory degraded so much it's not even funny. I remember when I was young, I seldom had to study back, reading and working it out one time was good enough for me. Now, when I went back to study the EM the second time, it almost look foreign to me, read back my own notes and question whether I wrote it or my evil twin! I studied the subject of EM 3 complete times already, working through problems in two and half books to get to this point. And if someone ask a question here, I still have to hurry up and pull out my notes! It is only after all these effort, I start to at least feel a little bit more comfortable with it! Talk about slllooooooowwwww!

hahahaha :D

But still you are veteran circuit designer.

Where is RF circuit design used? Can I do that with degree in telecommunications?

You are talking about GHz's and that ignites my interest already.

 

[yungman]

hahahaha :D

But still you are veteran circuit designer.

Where is RF circuit design used? Can I do that with degree in telecommunications?

You are talking about GHz's and that ignites my interest already.

Cell phone, SONET, ATM and all sort of serial communications are all relate to telecom. You need to know RF to design the front end interface. They are get into multi GHz. Having knowledge of signal and communication has a big advantage of knowing the requirement of the RF design. In my case that don't know enough about signals and system, or each kind of modulation. I have to take the requirement at it's face value for designing. You'll have better feel in how much distortion you can live with knowing what kind of modulation you are using. Even slower communication link like USB and Firewire is 400MHz.

Even 10 years ago, we were talking about OC192 where it run at 10GHz!

 

[Bassalisk]

Cell phone, SONET, ATM and all sort of serial communications are all relate to telecom. Even slower communication link like USB and Firewire is 400MHz. You need to know RF to design the front end interface. They are get into multi GHz. Having knowledge of signal and communication has a big advantage of knowing the requirement of the RF design. In my case that don't know enough about signals and system, or each kind of modulation. I have to take the requirement at it's face value for designing. You'll have better feel in how much distortion you can live with knowing what kind of modulation you are using.

Even 10 years ago, we were talking about OC192 where it run at 10GHz!

So I can be circuit designer in telecommunications? :D:D:D

What joy!

I thought I would end up with studying networks etc. and work as a IT engineer. I don't want that. As much as I know about computers, and even like them, they are not challenge to me.

So RF you say. I may have just found field of interest. Signals and Systems and electronics!

Apart from that one book you suggested, what do you suggest more? I want to start to tie things up, on this spring break between semesters.

I already have a project regarding demodulation. If it has signals and electronics, I am your man. I am even fond on MATLAB and simulink.I will probably need to go outside my country to get a job, but that is not to think about now :D

 

[yungman]

So I can be circuit designer in telecommunications? :D:D:D

What joy!

I thought I would end up with studying networks etc. and work as a IT engineer. I don't want that. As much as I know about computers, and even like them, they are not challenge to me.

So RF you say. I may have just found field of interest. Signals and Systems and electronics!

Apart from that one book you suggested, what do you suggest more? I want to start to tie things up, on this spring break between semesters.

I already have a project regarding demodulation. If it has signals and electronics, I am your man. I am even fond on MATLAB and simulink.I will probably need to go outside my country to get a job, but that is not to think about now :D

These are 4 books that I studied and consider them the best in the subject along with many others that I bought. Pozar book is not as easy, that's the reason I put in the first one by Radmanesh. This is about the easiest of all RF books, it is not quite enough by itself BUT it is really easy to understand. If you jump into Pozar, you might be shock! Not too long ago when I was answering question about Q factor of components and band width calculation, I actually review the material in Radmanesh before I posted. This book give a good transition from circuit analysis to full blown RF.

1) Radio Frequency and Microwave Electronics Illustrated by Matthew M. Radmanesh.
2) Microwave Engineering by David Pozar.
3) RF Power Amplifiers for Wireless Communication by Steve C Cripps.
4) Phase-Lock Basics by William F. Egan.

The power amp and PLL book is not as hard but they are good. try to get them used as it save a lot of money. If you have other book names in these subjects, PM me, I just might have them and I can share my opinion with you. I have many books per subject.

Make sure you have a good understanding of EM. Also, spend a lot of time "dancing" on the Smith Chart! Make it part of you and start thinking on the Smith Chart. Hand draw on all the design instead of relying on the CAD. Get the feel.

 

[Bassalisk]

These are 4 books that I studied and consider them the best in the subject along with many others that I bought. Pozar book is not as easy, that's the reason I put in the first one by Radmanesh. This is about the easiest of all RF books, it is not quite enough by itself BUT it is really easy to understand. If you jump into Pozar, you might be shock! Not too long ago when I was answering question about Q factor of components and band width calculation, I actually review the material in Radmanesh before I posted. This book give a good transition from circuit analysis to full blown RF.

1) Radio Frequency and Microwave Electronics Illustrated by Matthew M. Radmanesh.
2) Microwave Engineering by David Pozar.
3) RF Power Amplifiers for Wireless Communication by Steve C Cripps.
4) Phase-Lock Basics by William F. Egan.

The power amp and PLL book is not as hard but they are good. try to get them used as it save a lot of money. If you have other book names in these subjects, PM me, I just might have them and I can share my opinion with you. I have many books per subject.

Make sure you have a good understanding of EM. Also, spend a lot of time "dancing" on the Smith Chart! Make it part of you and start thinking on the Smith Chart.

I will probably start with 1).

Also I think I will learn these subject throughout the years in my faculty. But a head start isn't bad.

Thank you for your suggestions. Helpful is not good enough word to describe, what you have been.

Thank you very much kind sir. If I come across any problems regarding RFs be sure to expect my PMs.

Thank you again.

 

[yungman]

I will probably start with 1).

Also I think I will learn these subject throughout the years in my faculty. But a head start isn't bad.

Thank you for your suggestions. Helpful is not good enough word to describe, what you have been.

Thank you very much kind sir. If I come across any problems regarding RFs be sure to expect my PMs.

Thank you again.

You are welcome. I gave it a lot of thoughts before I replaced RF circuit design by Ludwig with Radmanesh. I studied Ludwig really from cover to cover. It is half way between the two. But I was so impressed by Pozar afterwards particular it cover the symmetrical coupled line design that no other coupled line books can compare. I think you should get both 1 and 2.

Good luck.

 

[kd7lee]

So just thought I would fill you all in on how my last term went:

I ended up with low B's in both Physics (electricity & magnetism) and ODE, and pulled an A on my capstone Physics project, all while maintaining my full time job. So all said and done it was quite a confidence booster, and I can carry on with a "can do" attitude.

This term I'm taking Electric Circuits I, and for now it's so easy that I'm bored. It's my last class before I graduate with my A.S. in Pre-Engineering.

Another confidence booster: I've been accepted into Seattle University's BSEE program, and I'm under review for acceptance to the University of Washington's BSEE program.

Thanks for the encouragement!

 

[jim hardy]

That's great news ! I'm happy for you, and pleased that you thought of us PF'ers here at semester's end.