Are you in public? If so how has it been

Think of this that way: How much money goes into the business and how much of that money is reflected and you want to minimize reflected money

Benjamin Franklin discovered you can account electricity the same way as money, with positive and negative. money is the symbolic energy of an economy

Lol. Don't hype yourself up. Watching a video without jargon words and writing a comment that you understand doesn't mean you are smart. Try doing application and you'll never want to pick up an oscilloscope again.

@@shayorshayorshayor you sound like a crab in a bucket

Hi, I was actually thinking if going down a career path similar to this, would you mind giving me a brief overview of what you do day to day?

What’s your take on microwave auditory effect?

@@ale895 charts like that aren't really used now, but while studying they help to better learn the inner workings if you understand why the graph looks like this. Using software would be more akin to using lookup table, which is easier but doesn't help to "get" things

Pax River?

@@siphonlx don't do it

I don’t get it.

@@mkehammond7277 don't worry you are not alone😃

​@mkehammond7277 I'm an electrical engineer and use this almost every day and while I "get it" it took me months to grasp it. Don't beat yourself up this is EXTREMELY difficult to understand

@@skyking6989 If you understand the basic effects of R, Lx and Cx and the effects of object form on the same then you get it, minus the formulas. The formulas alone will leave you with WTF-itis.

I have dyslexia and ADHD but I’ve had poor self confidence because of it. I had my IQ tested and it was high and I have found have found that if I don’t “get it “, then it’s because the person teaching it doesn’t do a good job of explaining it.

Last semester i understood how this works and I failed the exam, this semester i just used it and passed

@@jackpeterson6670 wut?

@@vitoremanuel5349 The Smith chart doesn't tell you why or how the signal gets reflected, only how big the reflection will be.

​@@jackpeterson6670relatable

​@@jackpeterson6670😢

It's a nomograph! Computers before computers!

Not gonna lie, im an electrical engineer (power systems) and never encountered smith chart except through the internet.. we just did the transmission line theory and calculations by hand. i feel like branching transmission line grids and stuff like bewley diagrams become hectic and complex very easily, so it might lose utility

@matteod2567 im still in college and our teacher made us use them in class, he did say we'd probably never see them again though. the chart is pretty slick when it works!

If you're going to do RF work, you need to make the Smith Chart you're friend. Even circuit simulators like TopSpice can show you results on a Smith Chart. Getting RF signals around anywhere on a board, or to an antenna or load REQUIRES a good matching impedance. Being able to navigate around one helps you understand what parts you need and where to put them when you're designing your circuit, and can even help you debug your circuit and find problems when your prototype doesn't work. I don't use it for my current job, but I did for my last one, in the design of a 2GHz satellite receiver, and for matching a 600MHz transmitter to a carefully constructed matching circuit that powered a small quartz tube to generate LOTS of UV light. Good luck with your studies!

@Cynthia_Cantrell yeah even the network analyzers we used in class show their results on a smith chart, and by seeing how the curve moves around you can get a lot of info out of it really quickly. it's what I love about EE, yeah there's complicated math but you can see that math working in the real world

i hated the big red arrow that went around the middle of the chart 4:38, but then 4:45 shows what to look for, the rest of the animations were great

​@@XDbored1WHAT IS E=MC2 is taken directly from F=ma, AS TIME is NECESSARILY possible/potential AND actual ON/IN BALANCE; AS ELECTROMAGNETISM/energy is CLEARLY AND NECESSARILY proven to be gravity (ON/IN BALANCE); AS the rotation of WHAT IS THE MOON matches the revolution. GREAT. Gravity is an INTERACTION that cannot be shielded (or blocked) ON BALANCE. It ALL CLEARLY makes perfect sense ON BALANCE. Consider WHAT IS THE EYE ON BALANCE. GREAT !!! By Frank Martin DiMeglio

Is the Smith chart always used in electrical circuits or only when carrying information?

@@jrfcss its used to calculate losses to reflection so you would want to use it for anything that is either high frequency signalling or high power transmission, most DIY stuff probably doesn't need it but people still do impedance matching for like custom modded speakers with HIFI audio.

@@XDbored1 thanks I never thought about that

Yeah, your country is terrible at education.

Should have attended DeVry, we studied them extensively in RF circuits class.

@@firstnamelastname9215 Your country is plummeting in the ranks I wouldn't be so quick to jump the gun on being a dork lol

@@publicalias8172 lol we could take over your country right now if we wanted to in one day

​@@firstnamelastname9215 ok kid, go back to the corner, there's crayons over there, adults are talking here

It's quite interesting to use the chart when working with antennas. However antennas are influenced by neighboring structures like antennas tuned to the same frequency. I have seen this myself as recent as today - change one antenna on my ham radio site and it impacts the other. A fence can also cause headaches.

It really was the best explanation I have ever seen.

@@ehsnils yeah we get these issues with metal detectors too out in the bush, nearby detectorists and powerlines mess it all up

Yeah, basic science is TERRIFYING. Scared. Not using electricity anymore.

@@ehsnils That's primarily due to the antenna's reactive field I'd have thought, when you place objects (especially conductive) in its near field it will impact the return loss of the antenna.

way better explanation

Stuff of nightmares.

how to get in such a class?

@@jokerpandroidc9807 Join the Marines or the Navy-same school & VERY intense! Year long, but it is free! with housing, and food and exercise and guaranteed job offers upon graduation!! Not being sarcastic, it is a great school

@@jokerpandroidc9807 it's a requirement for electrical engineering

Interesting you say that. I am also based in the same field- I work in broadcast with emphasis in audio. Let’s be real, we both know audio engineering isn’t actual engineering lmao. It used to be but unless you’re working stage or studio voltages, building a studio, or on antennae’s you barely ever have to worry about math. I always wish I would have done almost the reverse of what I did and worked harder in HS math and then done an undergrad in EE and grad in Acoustics or something similar like audiology. Don’t get me wrong I’m happy where I’m at, make enough to live comfortably, and will probably be moving into a broadcast engineering position within a couple years from the natural progression, but still. Could’ve been there sooner had I given a shit about math back in HS. Totally my advice anytime I have kids asking what they should do if they’re interested in the field. There is the argument it’s a dying field due to AI but I believe everything will always need ears and eyes so I disagree with those. Just hedge yourself in areas like broadcast and signal flow.

​​@@digital_urn9250I am also want to study in the university to be an audio engineer and I am very scary of the maths from that, but you said that barely maths are helpful, so I am little confused. However I am in another country where the AI aren't using in the world of audio for now. But anyways I want to study, so in less words i am confused and scary of the future PD: I am already making music and studying some basics concepts of mixing, production, frecuencias, sound design, stuff like that but I imagine is the 5% of you can learn in the career.

I remember in an undergraduate electrical engineering class where we were told AM stood for amplitude modulation and FM for “frankly” magic (to put it nicely). This is another case where the math is so involved and elegant and yet corresponds to a common real world application. Amazing.

Yes!

different people different experiences, this was the easiest part with my teacher, but in the long run one remembers more about the parts you struggled with, not the ones that were easy, a little paradox, the people that pass everything might remember it, but the ones that struggled and passed will remember it more. But everyone will remember it enough to know where to find the answer if needed.

The same thing happened to me with reading schematics. One day it just popped and a whole world opened up to me.

Had that happen. When I took EMTheory, our text book was really thin and had really limited explanations and worked out example problems. After getting a low B on the first test I went to the bookstore and got a Schaum's outline on EMTheory, and a couple others, and got a couple more EMTheory text books from the library. Between them, reading explanations of something I was absolutely NOT understanding, stuff would kinda meld together and often there would be that "OHHHHHH--That's EASY" moment. 'Course then the prof would throw a curve ball into things with some question on the test unlike anything we'd done or the other texts had and I'd be back to "I don't even know how to start drafting an equation for this".

@@alenasenie6928 Might have something to do with how stress effects memory creation

I guess that's also the origin of the phrase "impedance mismatch" so often used in software engineering. It usually means two sets of abstractions where data are represented in different ways, so when you want to move it around between components you often find bottlenecks.

Same name, different phenomenon. In audio, you need impedance matching not because of reflections but because the end-stage and pre-amp input in the amplifiers are designed to work best for a specific load impedance, regardless of the characteristics of the cable in between (beyond the point where it is "good enough"). Having a bad match in inputs means the signal / noise ratio gets worse, in outputs it means more distortion and less output power. With EM waves, the cable is the key factor. A very expensive 50 ohm cable driving a 75 ohm antenna will do MUCH worse than a cheap 75 ohm cable driving that same antenna. In audio, a good cable will drive 4 ohm and 8 ohm speakers equally well. That is because the length of the cable is negligible compared to the wave length (15km). Any audio cable less than 1km long will have no problem at all with reflections etc. In accoustics however, you do have proper wave transmission and reflections. I.e. baffles and reflex ports have an acoustic impedance that needs matching with the room for optimum results, as well as the need for careful delay of signals to different sets of speakers to avoid interference.

here in Brasil we call it "impedance marriage", I never forgot it because I find it kinda funny

What shall we do give you a medal

It's basically like the complex version of the unit circle, resistance is the component on the real /horizontal axis, where reactance is the imaginary/ horizontal component. Together the restance and reactance make the complex impedance. Since the imaginary parts of impedance (capacitance and inductance ) are frequency dependent and inversely related to one another as such, this nice and clean for one particular frequency, but gets more tricky when dealing with multiple frequencies.

it has a correlation with polar coordinates, but I would love to take an active class to know it. For reference, an active class is one where the teacher doesn't teach you directly, they are there to guide you, not to give you information, so, for example, they give you a problem, and some formulas that you have to use, the problem is designed in a way so you end up rediscovering the target formulas instead of the teacher giving them to you, you learnt the process that it took to get there, in other words, you end up learning how the hell did they came up with those formulas. Those classes are hard to create, but so fun to take.

Agreed with both. Still, I would love seeing this chart being made from scratch, defining its scale, the relationship between the variables, etc...

Bell Labs came up with this in the 30s. There are only two equations, one for the constant imaginary and the other for the constant real circles. The real wild thing is what people plot on top of the smith cart, noise, efficiency, stability, output power, etc. based on a given range of impedances available at one port

It was a guy named Smith

It might have been the way they taught it. It made perfect sense to me in this video.

​@@user-qy3jq9kr1d to be fair, you basically only learned to read a number off the chart. To use that number to actually do something useful is an entirely different matter.

Partially right - at one end of the chart you have a singularity where the universe breaks down. If your design ends up there it's a sign that it won't work.

​@@user-qy3jq9kr1dhigh level college professors are notorious for not being able to actually explain anything. You can tell they are smart, but they are also horrible at effective communication. I'm also fairly certain that my textbook didn't actually have any information on how to use a smith chart and instead just gave us the formulas. And even if it is explained, you better hope your compass and ruler skills are up to the task or you will follow the steps correctly but still end up a wrong answer because the charts introduce imprecision.

When you take a class, then often use that knowledge in your career for many years, it gets to be very familiar. If you never use it, you'll forget most of it. For instance, I don't remember that a transmission line typically has much resistance. What I seem to remember is that the 50 ohms is mostly capacitance, in magnitude dependent on frequency. What I do remember is that signals don't flow thru a cable at the speed of light; only about 1/3 that. Also, "ee-ee's" don't call themselves "ee-ee's". We are "double E's".

They have other uses. That's just the most common.

would HAVE

@@peterheinzo515 What do you mean "would have"? Seems like you imply they haven't been used for anything else.

@@dbtest117 „would of“ is wrong.

Maybe it sounds easyer because you already learned it in school XD

certainly one of the moments ever

Tesla was right apparently.

What a moron, these natural patterns in electrical current and other places in nature literally represent God, it's the face of creation itself. Buddy needs to study the Masonic church and their symbolisms like triangles, eyes and other strange symmetry that does NOT occur in nature. Someone like that would funnily enough walk right into a Devils trap.

Good for him. If you think these frequencies don't have the capability to bring forth energies from other realms overlapping this one, you are sadly mistaken.

@@theurbanthirdhomestead Oh you're talking about CERN, but CERN has to do with particle physics. It's who uses it and how. Electricity and currents are just a tool. Like when you give a gun to a satanist he will shoot up a school, but give that same gun to a hunter and he will provide you with food.

Yep - because waves are waves. It's only the frequency that assigns what we call the signal type.

“What we have called matter is energy, whose vibration has been so lowered as to be perceptible to the senses. There is no matter.” - Einstein

I began to took Physics in 12th Grade, I then wished that it had started much earlier because the value of the math became very obvious.

I'm a EE, and while working for an earthquake simulation lab I learned that the same equation I use to calculate reflections in a coaxial connection is used by civil engineers to calculate the energy reflected by a building's foundation during an earthquake.

Yes. Look into the difference between microwave and radio transmissions.

omg control system :((((

I studied those subjects and they are way betond whatever the math you see in a normal engineering course. It's a big leap of math

​@@jamesandrew7120 thank god I did CompE and the only thing here that I recognize is the Z-transform, and only as a brief acquaintance.

@@jamesandrew7120yeah it’s the few courses where engineering is actually difficult

Omg control theory was one of the most fun things in my program haha, guess I like the mathematics more

Exactly. Resonance is a good example, as well. There's mechanical and electrical resonance. So many analogues, it makes this EE Techology major wish I had gotten a second major in Mechanical Engineering. In fact, I still go back to my alma mater and take CAD courses for free, and I enjoy it very much!

They were making analog simulations. Basically an analog computer/calculator model.

That process uses analog computers. Analog computers can be used to "solve" all manor of differential equations. I had fun with analog computers when I was studying EE in the sixties. This brings back great memories. I believe the principles described here are roughly the same as vibrations in mechanical systems. By extension, these principles can be applied as analogies in all kinds of systems like economic and social systems.

I always appreciate digital systems emulating analogue. Humans can't unlearn the world.

Am I mistaken or is this done to prevent interns who can’t make it in the long run from wasting thier/your time?

@@anonymousadam8950 Read Charles Darwin. Struggle for existence, intraspecies competetion for resources

@@anonymousadam8950if they majored in engineering or physics and they’re in an engineering internship, it’s highly likely they could make it as an engineer. I think he uses it to scare interns away from RF engineering, specifically, as it cuts out a lot of the people who aren’t passionate or interested in the industry as much as they are looking for any job to make money

They're very easily scared then

@@rv706 oh I agree. I doubt it actually scares anyone away. The smith chart isn’t even a scary concept, and I’m not an EE but I’d be really surprised if a 3rd or 4th year EE major doesn’t know what this is. They should be quite comfortable with all related math and physics concepts at that point, even if they haven’t seen it explicitly before. Algebra and calculus in the complex (w/ imaginary numbers) domain is the bread and butter of EE math. I think the original commenter’s “weed out” method is really out of touch, and more so some sort of delusional ego boost for them. The only rationalization I can think of would be if he’s actually talking about electrical engineering technician interns, as they would be 2 year degree seekers/graduates with far less experience and depth of knowledge on the theory behind EE. Then it would be borderline cruel.

just read the textbook next time, and you'll understand it in less than 2 minutes

@@pyropulseIXXI exactly.. I wonder why people post such exaggerated copied comments

@@pyropulseIXXI HI, That is what I did after the lecture and then understood it. My point was a KZfaq video did a better job of explaining it in 10 minutes than a University professor did in a one-hour lecture. btw. Thank you for your condescending advice on how I should fill any holes in my knowledge after a lecture - much appreciated!

@@pyropulseIXXI if people understtod the smith chart in less than 2 minutes, everyone would be an RF engineer.

@@pyropulseIXXI you'll definitely understand WHAT the Smith chart is in less than 2 minutes, but that doesn't mean you will fully grasp all its concepts. What OP means is that he gained a better understanding by spending less time watching youtube compared to an hour of college lectures, and most of the time, sadly, it's true

welcome to "higher" learning...there a vid about graphing e^pi x i , and other "imaginary" numbers....very cool, and visuallizing a 4 dimensions

Real scary stuff here

​@@RwP223hardly. If you want a walk on the wild side; go look up conformal compactifications lol

That's how it was done for the majority of human history. Modern education is just garbage and designed to produce factory workers not intillectuals.

The elegance of physics is beautiful art, with a harmony and balance to it. Agreed.

Check out the Psychrometric Chart for gas-vapor mixes, and Mohr’s Circle for equivalent mechanical stress states.

hm. totally new? Smith Chart was invented in the 1930s. (yes, it's beautiful, intuitive, and mindblowing. :-) )

@@romaneberle I think you misunderstood me. I never claimed the Smith Chart was new. What I DID claim was that as a result of the Smith Chart being constructed some of those that see it since its invention understand its underlying arithmetic much easier which may have led to other mathematical breakthroughs being discovered much sooner than without its existance. I believe it's beneficial to all of us to look at problems from as many different points of view as possible.

That's great 👍

Hi, a quick question from an undergrad student here. I'm studying a double in EE and Physics, do think my degrees are a good skillset if i'm looking at pursuing a career in aerospace?

Absolutly

Audio systems aren't big enough to have reflection, not unless you're building extremely old-fashioned long distance telephone lines. Ignore the Smith chart, and ignore anyone who uses cable impedance as a selling point. They're trying to rip you off, or they're too ignorant for their opinion to matter. You do need impedance-matched cables for digital links, but those cables are standardized, mass-produced, and cheap. It's as simple as "buy reputable HDMI cable for HDMI, Ethernet for Ethernet, etc." You should care about input impedance when driving speakers but that's not reflection. It's actually "low impedance speakers draw more current and you need a power amp that won't get bogged down." "Equivalent series resistance" is the electrical engineering concept to apply. If you're designing a passive crossover, that's when you need to care about the complex-value impedance of the speaker - and impedance as a function of frequency - and the fact that acoustic coupling means that curve changes when you put a driver in its enclosure. That's full on filter design and the math is more hary than simple transition lines. I'm not an expert in it so I'm not sure if the Smith chart is helpful but I'd guess not.

@@jordanrodrigues1279 I've been following the audio world/mindset/craziness for several years and I cannot believe the level of misunderstanding, myths, lies and underhanded marketing out there about speakers, cables, amplifiers and other "snake oil". I wish I was smart enough to test, document and present 100% truth in data to put an end to all of it. I really want a recording oscope and/or strip recorder to help me layout side by side proof of the nonsense myths and Golden Ear hype about audio products. Surely, you have met some folks like I have. Oh! The funniest one to me is the people who are worried about "skin effect" in speaker cables - hahaha! All the best, Kevin

OG viewer

He's the same person

Surprisingly, they are the same thing

Sounds like AlphaPhoenix to me!

This is where I am now. I'm in Electronics Engineering Tech, but a whole lot of Electrical Engineering curriculum crosses over to our own curriculum (For obvious reasons. We're doing a lot of the same things Electrical Engineers do, just on a much smaller scale.) I never thought I would end up doing math that took multiple pages of work to solve, but here we are. There is a silver lining though, when my wife looks at some of the problems I have to solve for homework and proclaims "That looks like Greek to me!" I get to respond "That's because it is!" and it makes everything worthwhile. Edit: I forgot to add that another positive is the fact that my shiny new calculator comes with python pre-loaded, so it's even more fun to play with than a normal scientific calculator.

Good memories. But we were expected to program our hyperbolic functions ourselves. In FORTRAN.

I laughed out loud and shuttered at the same time remembering the one question final that took three or four pages and the entire hour, all it took was just one miss placed negative sign to screw up the whole thing. Oh, and no credit for the work only credit for the final answer. Good times.

@@DSquared1969 Engineers are such geeks.

@@jwrosenbury especially Electrical Engineers

it's the same with light, think about the change of medium when it goes into water, some gets reflected, some pass and it is distorted, angles also affect in junctions, like when you dive into water, the wrong angle and you stop, in the case of electrical junctions it can make it heat up. BTW (about interesting things), if you want something extra interesting, look up superconductors and quantum lock, I find it fascinating.

I did RF double stub matching - long ago - but I couldn't do it now. Then I found out that a hydraulic pump driving a pipe uses the same Smith chart to do double stub matching for the sound waves.

We, who see the same videos recommended, are somewhat alike. :)

Laplace transform is indispensable for control theory and system analysis - and (just like any other subject) not that hard to understand once you understand it. Yes, the recursion is intended.

I used to fear Laplace in Diff eq. But then in Circuits Analysis 2 I learn it was my best friend in RLC circuits. Trying to do any work on an RLC without LaPlace was just shooting yourself in the foot. It was many times more complicated and longer process. While using a laplace, adding all components then reversing the laplace is just a fraction of the process. With the table you can do practically most scenarios, otherwise a good calculator can help you with it (TI Inspire Cas ii) when programmed right or if you know the equation (integral) process. To me was like fearing Polar equations in calc2, but in calc3 were the easiest way to solve certain equations. Although the point of engineering was never 'how to use tools' (that is something you have to develop on your own), it is When to use them. Thankfully as you said, IRL work is much detached from those processes. (Granted, Statistics and probability is the most important course any engineer should take no matter how detached it is from the essensance of their concentration). - Computer Engineer

laplace transforms are easy; I think people don't understand this stuff because they view math is a tool rather than the fundamental thing to all of existence I double majored in math and physics; math people thought physics people were too gung ho and sloppy with math (which I agreed), but were too stuck in their generalizing ways and would be very shallow and general. my entire purpose was to get a PhD in theoretical physics, combining the best aspects of math and physics into one

with laplace in control theory, divide output function over input, laplace transform, project result on unit circle in complex coordinates. your operating point lies outside unit circle -> unstable.. as far as i remember

@@pyropulseIXXI Hey can you tell us even more crap we never asked about you? Kthx

Hmmm, learning ancient maritime laws in present maritime war training. 🤔

​@theurbanthirdhomestead6061 i was a nuclear engineer in the navy, whats your point?

@@JgHaverty I was just thinking how this world really is a spiritual battle, and the ancient evil maritime spirits are actually being brought back by the world and its wicked ways, wars, violence, hatred, etc...

@@theurbanthirdhomestead what does marlinspike have to do with any of what you just said?

Just had my exam on this subject and it was one of the most pleasant subjects to learn out of ee

But did you get scared and have nightmares?

@@tranzco1173 On contrary it was like a wet dream 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Love it when simple math ideas have profound engineering impacts!

Took me a second to realize that you were not saying that you were in engineering school at an age less than 1.

@@annieZOK 😁😁😁 -> engineering schools here usually are from age 14 to 19 if you pass all exams. -> 5 school years of 40 hours of school per week. (not counting homework and studying for exams) 9 of the 40 were practical work in workshops. So in my case: on a lathe, mill, learning to file precisely, soldiering, circuitboard etching... And of the remaining 31 hours 80% were calculating things. (the 20% are languages, sports, ethics and a tiny portion of "law and citizenship and finances" There is also the possiblity for "grown ups" to do engineering school as "evening school" after their workdays, but i am glad i did it right after mandatory school.

What country are you in? Your education system sounds like it takes good advantage of the energy and curiosity of youth, getting them involved in career/higher level courses earlier than they usually are here in the US. Our "high school" programs can vary widely from state to state, even district to district, some doing a good job at preparing students with essential skills to move on to college or a trade certification, others not even graduating students capable of essential communication or math skills. I keep hoping that the decision makers will look at what's working elsewhere.

@@erinmcdonald7781 Austria. And we are the only ones to my knowledge with engineering schools like that. Sorry in advance, this is going to be a long one, trying to explain how it works here: We have something similar to elementary school from age 6-10 (4 schoolyears). From age 10 to 14 there was, what would translate to "main school" and today is called "middle school". (4 years) Mandatory education is 9 schoolyears. So either one has to do 1 "polytechnikum", or go on to a "higher school" that takes longer anyways. People who decide for only the 1 year only, after said year, then usually start an apprentice ship (at age 15) to learn crafts or trades. These apprenticeships take place at companies who use such crafts/trades people and they train them in the practical work. And for 2 months or so each year they attend craft/trade schools. (so they learn the theoretical needs for their craft) The apprenticeships take between 3-4 years depending on the craft or trade they learn. (carpenter, mechanic, cook, hairdresser...) After their final exam, they are considered "craftsperson" and can be employed as such. If after their final exam they want to step up their game another stop, they can attend (on their own money this time) further courses and attend a more difficult exam which makes them "Meister" (master of their craft, not to confuse with the university study title Master which is used in it's english wording) During an apprenticeship the apprentice gets an "apprentice compensation" (so the salary of an apprentice is a little lower than that of an approved craftsperson) If one opts for higher education instead of an apprenticeship there are said "higher schools". And of those there are 2 types: 4 schoolyears ones and 5 school years ones. The 4 year ones are called "allgemeinbildende höhere Schulen" would translate to "higher schools for general education". (they usually have a 3rd language, and arts etc.) And the 5 year ones are "berufsbildende höhere Schulen" which translates to "higher schools for professions/crafts education" And for a better understanding, these are the engineering schools. (they produce engineers so some of us call them engineering school) Cause as a student of these you learn around 80% of what a university student in the same field learns, but you spread it out over 5 years and you get more practical training in the workshop. (and you start earlier in your life) Both of these higher schools have final exams. But the 5 year ones are a "bit" harder iif i may say so. To get a little taste of the final exam of an engineering school at the turn of the millenium, mine consisted of: 5 hours of written german language exam 40 hours of project work exam (getting a task, then calculating, drawing, programming, making parts-lists... without talking to your classmates who are in the same room, and only using books and tools you brought in on the first day and no finished projects among them.) -And lastely oral exams in 4 school subjects. My four subjects were -measuring technology, -information technology, -electronics and digital techology and -english. These oral exams were in a way that you can pick between two topics in each subject. (out of all the stuff we learned in the 5 years prior), then get 10 minutes of preparing and then have to hold a presentation in front of a commision about the topic you picked. And of course answering possible questions of the commision. And passing such final exams in either higher school means one is allowed to study at a university. But with the engineering schools you also are trained in a profession and can start working for a company, or found your own. Companies all over the world do hire such people. Former classmates of mine were working in Brazil and the UK from what i learned at my last class reunion 5 years ago) Sometimes as middle ground (translater) between workers and uni engineers, but often also instead of uni engineers. Btw.: those engineering schools have a long tradition here. The engineering school i attended had it's 100 year anniversary at it's current location 2 years ago.

Let us know which country you learned this at… I agree with @erinmcdonald, it’s great to start teaching young, energetic minds about the more complex concepts of the subjects they’ll take in university/college. Thanks.

Energy not delivered to the antenna is reflected back to your output transistors and fries them.

I know EXACTLY what you mean, I got major in electronics and computer science myself. The fact people teaching that stuff at my university were probably the strictest of the strict there didnt help either : ^)

it's not a tough idea though! is that why you chose comp sci for grad school? 😋🫣 jk.i was a chem eng student and my EE class wasn't easy when I took it but made sense when I reviewed it some years later to soothe my wounded ego. I really psyched myself out over it all at the time 😑 ✌🏻

@john-ic5pz The idea is extremely simple, but taught to a 19 yr old without background in complex analysis, out of a slide and giving them the toughest questions to solve within a time limit is criminal. I work on probabilistic robotics, so hell no 😁😆.

dang. my best is getting me 85-99.. any advice?

@@josho9910 my first few years of college were extremely challenging, so I went in with the mindset of, “I’m not going to fully understand everything, and will be taking home B’s,” which may have been more mentally healthy, but setting low expectations for myself just created a self-fulfilling prophecy. Go into classes and units with the mindset of, “I’m going to become an expert in this field. When this class is over, I’ll be able to explain what I learned to a fellow engineer, my parents, and a child.” That mindset will take you far.

@@trinity8675309beautiful reply. Love the 3 audiences to imagine giving an explanation. Only being able to explain to any strict subset of the 3 shows you lack understanding.

Good lord. At my uni the highest mark on our Telecoms class final was like 62%, and that was an open book exam. That was the hardest class I did at uni by far, and I'm convinced that it's all magic and that telecom engineers are wizards.

@@trinity8675309 I've been trying to fill that gap. just did 92% on exam 2 of precalc and Its mentally challenging trying to get that other 8%

I sure wish we had had KZfaq videos when I was an undergraduate Electronic Engineering Technology student. Graduated in 1995...

0621s unite

That comes in Microwave & RF design (Electronics & Communication domain).

You're gonna get an F, because this was so terrifying you won't be able to sleep.

It's more accurate but less intuitive if you think about the stub as being a third, much shorter rope attached to the thin rope, that resonates just so and cancels out the reflected wave from the junction. From far away, though, the "one big rope" analogy is good enough.