Learning Electronics

[knight4713]

I have been watching and reading for a couple years and am very impressed by the knowledge of many of you and hope to get your input.

I'm planning on going back to school.  I'm deciding between Electical Engineering and Electrical Engineering Technology.  I've been in computers for 10 years so it is fairly easy for me to justify either.  Would a technology degree be enough learning to build all devices used in an RE system?  I not only want to build and maintain it myself but make improvements and do a lot of designing myself.  Obviously that would fall within the scope of the 4 year degree, but would the 2 year tech degree do the job?

Thanks,

Todd

[willib]

hows your math skills

an EE requires calc ,and  physics with calc where an EET does not , i'm pretty sure

[Tom in NH]

I would think a technical school might offer some electronics and electrician courses that would be a shorter more direct route to being able to design, build, maintain, and repair your own energy system. You may not even need a 2-year degree if you can find the right courses to take. You can learn a whole lot just monkeying around on your own.

You may want to pick up some books on do-it-yourself home electrical wiring, and maybe some general electronics books to help you get started. Sounds like fun, -tom

[pepa]

there are some great books at your local library to help you get started. basic electronics by paul rosenburg, is very good. basic electronics by bernard grob, encyclopedia of electronic circuits by leo sanders and donald mackenroth will be very helpful to you. regulated power supplies by irving m. gottlieb will give  you a lot of material to study. if the local library does not have these titles on the shelf, they will order them for you from the state library in just a fiew days. pepa

[Nando]

Todd:

Your justification for Technology or engineering will depend highly on you, your capabilities with mathematics ( like calculus and Physics) and much higher level of technical knowledge for Engineering versus Technology.

Also, not what you think for the near future but for the FAR away future and what you aim financially at the end of your career and retirement.

Retirement may be financially more rewarding if you follow Engineering, or course, one should as well, learn a bit about investing and future financial planning, which unhappily the great majority of people do not pay attention but at the end of their careers instead of at the beginning of their careers.

Social Security pension should not represent more than 20 % of your retirement money.

Referring again to your plans, even short courses in the technology field may be sufficient for RE if your general knowledge in the mechanical, electronic, electrical, civil areas are more or less already in your realm.

Nando

[knight4713]

Math skills, not a problem.  I took a dc course last fall was signed up for ac in spring but it was cancelled.  I'm now just deciding if the tech is the way to go.

I've been reading books, researching many sites online, like this one, and I just don't think it is enough.  I read peoples postings and hear their interpretations of what circuits do.  I want to know more of what the components do.  I kind of get the flow through a circuit.  I'm very analytical and technical.  I have always been able to see something and get the basic idea of what happens but not necessarily what it does.  I can see computer code and even if I don't know the language I can get a fairly good idea of what happens.  I even have messed around with Assembly to fix someone elses errors.  I'm kind of scary that way.

I just want to know if a 2 year degree will give me the knowledge of components necessary to build and understand the components in an re system?

charge controllers, inverters, controlling dump loads...  I have more ideas of what I want to do putting multiple Renewable and sustainable thing together, solar heating with solar hot water and so on.

[dinges]

Knight,

My original reaction too was that, if you only want the knowledge to tinker with RE, go the library route, read some books, start building and have fun with electronics. You'll learn the things YOU are interested in, without any excess bagage that you WILL get in school.

It's how I've got my electronics knowledge (books & self-study), but by now I am doing it for about 20+ years that way (started at age 9, am 32 now...)

Whether it's a suitable method for you depends on you; self education vs. formal schooling. BTW, don't know the difference between engineering and tech. school, in your country.

Recently I've graduated as a mech.engineer (level between B.Sc & M.Sc.) All I can say is, that with my background (M.Sc in bus. economics) it was a piece of cake. Lots of math, but nothing too difficult. However, before I was an engineer I looked up to them. Now I've finished school, and am a bit disappointed about the scope of subjects & the depth of knowledge, I don't look up to them anymore.

If you're motivated, you can probably (or at least, I could) easily get the same or more knowledge about my area of interest than in school; without the excess bagage. On the other hand, in school you are compelled to study subjects you would, on your own, never study. It gives you breadth of knowledge, also good. Plus, there's the interaction with other students (in my case one of the most valuable aspects of those 3.5 years).

So, it all depends a bit on what you want know & in the future. At the risk of kicking in an open door, the more effort you put in yourself, the more you get out of it. I'd advice talking to some schools in the area, maybe walk along for a day, if possible. Talk to students & graduated students from those schools. If possible, also the dropouts; why did they stop? Did it have to do with their school, expectations not met, etc.

Only thing I can say for myself: I regret not having taken the (evening) course years sooner, while I was still full-time studying business economics. And, I regret not having taken the university course. It would have taken more effort, but I think I'd have learned a bit more (esp. qua depth of knowledge; at my school, they changed subjects just about every time we got into it deep enough to arouse my interest...)

No easy answers here. Then again, don't look up to much to it. Once you've actually started and are doing it (going to school), you may find out it's not that hard at all, the teachers are usually very nice & compliant (they love teaching to part-timers much more than full-time kids, because the first are usually much more motivated), and (at least I) felt I could talk to the teachers on the same level, as friends/colleagues, instead of teacher/student. But that may be different at your school.

Good luck choosing.

Peter.

(The Netherlands).

[terry5732]

I think schooling would be an impedement to overcome. It would be better to have a little basic knowledge and come up with your own best designs. For all the higher learned people out there, there doesn't seem to be much 'professional' developement in this area. I have yet to meet someone who can impress me with what they learned in college.

[nanotech]

"I have yet to meet someone who can impress me with what they learned in college."




Ditto

[ghurd]

Probably 99% of what I actually use was covered in 3 or 4 courses.

I think the DC power course, an AC course, and something related to basic RF, would cover most of it.

"Math skills, not a problem.  I took a dc course..."

Not sure if those 2 were intended to be together.  The math gets fancy with AC.

"... knowledge of components necessary to build and understand the components in an re system?"

There are really only a handful of components, simple enough. How they interact is the magic.

If by "components" you mean 2N2222A, NE555, LM2917, IRF510, etc, NOBODY knows what all of them do.  There are just too many!  People find something that does what they want, then use it.

Some numbers pop up over and over enough to be common and known to many people.

Remember, half the 2 year degree is totally unrelated to electricity.

For normal RE, I don't believe the calc and higher math is neccessary.

It is not all it is often cracked up to be.

ie: Want a PWM solar controller running at 356hz optimized for batteries?

Buy one for $50, that is tested, reliable, simple to connect, warrenty, etc.?

Or spend 6 months (and $500 on "component" stuff that didn't work) to build a controller that uses $40 in parts, $10 shipping, and 3 hours to assemble?

The Radio Shack / Forrest Mimms (sp?) books are a good start.  500 parts in a circuit diagram is overwhelming, but a few parts can be understood with some study of data sheets.  Under stand one circuit at a time, connect a few together, then a few more, and all of a sudden the 500 part circuit begins to be understandable.

My opinion. The correct few courses cover what you want to know for a hobby. For a job you need the degree with all the English, poetry, tech writing...

G-

[commanda]

I think schooling would be an impedement to overcome. It would be better to have a little basic knowledge and come up with your own best designs. For all the higher learned people out there, there doesn't seem to be much 'professional' developement in this area. I have yet to meet someone who can impress me with what they learned in college.



Obviously. But I think you mean impediment.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

Don't know who to attribute this quote to, but it is definitely one of my favourites.

My advice to all wanna-be students; the first book you need to study is "teach yourself speed reading".

Then you can set about devouring every book on your chosen subject that your local library can supply. Another hint here; not everything you read will make sense initially, read it anyway. It will all fall into place later.

Amanda

[dinges]

Funny. I see the comment 'no college educated person managed to impress me'. When I see who said it... Better keep my mouth shut.

A little knowledge is indeed very dangerous.

We learn as we get older and by doing. I remember having replaced a few safety resistors in appliances with normal resistors; one time the flames came out of it as it blew again. But in a normal resistor, the flames don't go away by themselves.

There's dozens of these little things to know. Why do they use X2-rated caps sometimes? Why use an insulation transformer when you put 220 in and 220 comes out of it? etc. etc.

Experience is also very important here. You won't get that in college, nor after 2-4 years of studying on your own the library books.

'The only thing two engineers can agree upon is that the 3rd one is an idiot'

(maybe this goes for all people, not just engineers?)

[dinges]

I forgot:

The most important 'thing' I learned in univ. & eng. school is not the knowledge it gave; it's a way of looking at problems, analyzing and solving them.

Took me years of working with differently-schooled colleagues to find this out though. Instead of immediately diving into a problem, take some distance, try to see the entire picture, what's going on, what are the sub-systems, what's the exact goal, etc. Guess it's called 'abstract thinking'.

If you already have that kind of analyzing mindset, that would be one less reason to take formal schooling.

Peter.

[finnsawyer]

Apparently you want to go beyond what you see here in understanding and design capability.  Within an Electrical Engineering curriculum you should get the following:  Advanced and vector calculus, electronics and physical electronics, electromagnetic theory, computers, etc.

All of that will be useful in doing what you desire.  But the most useful thing will be the development of the mental skills to apply that knowledge to design problems.  You will not get any Aerodynamic training within EE, but the mathematical foundation you get will allow you to incorporate that into your design process on your own.

So, I think the question becomes, "How does the Technical curriculum stack up to that?"  Will it, for example, give you a good understanding of electromagnetism?

Note to Terry5732:  So you're in favor of the "cookie cutter" approach where everybody does the same thing.  After all, if everyone has the same basic knowledge no one can move beyond what everybody is already doing.  How then does the field advance?  I think there is more professionalism floating around this board than you realize.  You have to dig beneath the chaff to see it.  Maybe those college educated people didn't impress you because you didn't understand them.  

[dinges]

Oops, Amanda, this reply seems to have ended up in the wrong thread; wasn't meant as a response to your reply. Just for clarity

Peter.

[commanda]

Oops, Amanda, this reply seems to have ended up in the wrong thread; wasn't meant as a response to your reply. Just for clarity

Well that's alright then.

The most important 'thing' I learned in univ. & eng. school is not the knowledge it gave; it's a way of looking at problems, analyzing and solving them.

Took me years of working with differently-schooled colleagues to find this out though. Instead of immediately diving into a problem, take some distance, try to see the entire picture, what's going on, what are the sub-systems, what's the exact goal, etc. Guess it's called 'abstract thinking'.

Agreed.

Also, learning "HOW" to learn. And, to continue this particular train of thought, 2 books I might recommend;

Edward De Bono's Lateral Thinking, and another book called Straight & Crooked Thinking. Can't remember the author off-hand; it's in my bookshelf somewhere (now almost completely dis-organized after moving house).

Amanda

[BigBreaker]

Disagree.

I work in finance and my EE background put me well ahead of my peers.  This was recognized early by my superiors and propelled a high paying career (still does).  Lots of boneheads graduate from good schools but they get found out over time.  The question is what YOU will do with the extra schooling.

If I had it to do over again, I would have gone for a masters (just an extra year) and get better grades.

I know it sounds elitist but the doors that open with a great education put you in a peer group that elevates your game.  The experiences you have will have cannot generally be duplicated without the degree.  You can't appreciate the ideas you would have had with the extra schooling and brighter colleagues.  My fraternity mates are the smartest, most successful group of people I have ever known.  Knowing them made me better.

I also think that "self-taught" is very useful.  University is also basically self-taught but in a much more nurturing environment with experts on-hand.  It takes time and money but is a great investment if you can do it.  Four years versus a 40 year career? and 20 years tinkering in retirement?

No degree means working to prove your knowledge in every new place you work.  A degree will make you better and everyone will take your skills as a given.  No additional proof required.  Credentials matter.

I'd say go for the four year degree.  Tinkering with RE is a fun hobby.  It's less fun if you NEED it to provide warm shelter for your family.

I'll second the recommendation for the Radioshack books.  I used them to learn as a kid.  Get a breadboard (those white plastic boards with tiny wire sockets) and a grab bag of parts and have at it.  Scopes are nice and I've heard that the USB versions are good for the price.  I was spoiled with 2GHz digital ones at uni.

[ghurd]

I disagree too.

My wife just (2 Years now?) got her BA in Pro Writing & Editing. She sort of minored in software stuff.

She got a job teaching software at the same place she got the BA.

Doing websites full time for other companies.

She has been on boards to decide 'stuff' about MS prgrams.

Today is the first day of her new job.

Out of the 10 friends at school, none have a job even close to related to their field.

Degrees did that.

John West (the LCD one) is my wife's new boss.

Funny.  Too Funny!

G-

(and I still go back to the Radio Shack books for cook book circuits)

[nanotech]

I would be willing to bet that Terry is an ex enlisted man in the US military.  In fact I'd be willing to lay money on it.

Why?

Because to become an officer in the military there are only two ways to do it :

Have a degree

Work through the enlisted ranks and either go to BOOST or become a warrant officer.

90% of the officers I interacted with in my 7 years in the Navy were complete and utter morons with an attitude that spoke volumes of what length of 2X4 they had stuck up thier arse.  They were the most condescending, self centered, self righteous butt-holes I've had the displeaseure of meeting.

The 10% that weren't in the above category?  You got it, they were the BOOST candidates or the warrant officers.  In other words, they were Mavericks.

So please pardon me if my attitude towards people shoving thier degree at me gets a response like I quoted above.  I had WAY too much of the "I'm a college graduate, you're not.  I'm better than you." from the (male genitalia) in the Navy that were supposedly my "superiors".  The only thing they were superior to me in was thier ability to hang thier arses out thier drawers and show just how much of an idiot they actually were.  Especially at officer's parties.  :rolleyes: