|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Aug 10, 2023 |
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 00:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:50 |
|
|
grover posted:At Penn State, we had: I was curious because I hadn't heard of a setup like that, it looks like they have the standard sequence now? Or maybe you took an elective? I do like how there is a 3 hour DE class without Fourier analysis and a 4 hour DE class with Fourier analysis, seems a little redundant. I wonder how much ABET related infighting was involved with that one. To contribute, my EE degree required 4 semester of calculus (diff, integral, multi, DE), a calculus based probability course and one free math elective. I took numerical methods for mine. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Oct 30, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 00:17
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 00:22
|
|
|
Thoguh posted:What kinds of topics are in "Advanced Differential Equations"? I was in Engineering Science, a multidisciplinary honors-only major. We took the core fundamentals courses from all the different engineering disciplines, and so needed all the math. Except this one, which nobody "needed" but we had to take anyhow. None of the other engineering majors had to take the 5th semester of calc, as far as I know. grover fucked around with this message at 02:16 on Oct 30, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 02:13
|
|
|
My school has the standard fare of Calc 1, 2, 3, DE, and a discrete math and probability course tailored for EE. What gets me is that the math profs say that most of their courses are service courses for engineers yet most of the methods we learn in the math classes are never used in actual engineering problems. Why the hell are we learning to solve problems one way if we never use it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 02:44
|
|
|
Mongolian Squid posted:What gets me is that the math profs say that most of their courses are service courses for engineers yet most of the methods we learn in the math classes are never used in actual engineering problems. Why the hell are we learning to solve problems one way if we never use it? I have long been a proponent of having an engineering-specific math series, where the focus is on useful techniques rather than proofs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 03:04
|
|
|
grover posted:At Penn State, we had: No complex math? Or was that naturally covered in your other courses? ie, Cauchy-Riemann, Cauchy’s integral theorem, etc. I remember walking into the arts & science building one day for a midterm for my second year elective (Roman history). For their third year complex math course for mathematics majors, I saw the midterm solutions posted on the wall outside a lecture hall. They were covering the same stuff we were in our second year 'advanced engineering mathematics' course. I was pretty disappointed. edit: so I had Calc 1 and 2 in first year and 3 in second year, algebra in first year, discrete math in second, this complex math course in second, probability in third. I didn't cover finite element method stuff until grad school - but it was pretty hardcore then. Now they're introducing the concept of FEM in second year. Phlegmbot fucked around with this message at 04:41 on Oct 30, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 04:36
|
|
|
Phlegmbot posted:No complex math? Or was that naturally covered in your other courses? ie, Cauchy-Riemann, Cauchy’s integral theorem, etc. I don't think complex calculus is taught in a standard engineering curriculum in most places. I'm learning parts of it this semester as part of an advanced math course I'm taking with an absolutely brilliant applied mathematician. Total course enrollment: 4 students.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 06:06
|
|
|
At U of Calgary, they seem to mash Calc I-IV into three calculus courses for engineers. The progression goes from single-variable calc -> multi-variable calc -> a DE class that also teaches series, sequences and Laplace transforms. Geomatics engineers also have to take a course on vector calculus (EE used to, now they just teach the relevant material in the first Electric Fields class). Of course, there's also your stats/probability class, a class on numerical methods and linear algebra. I feel like we're the only school that does it this way. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 07:22
|
|
|
Here at VT (for Mechanical Engineers and most others) it's Calc I Linear Algebra Calc II Vector Geometry Multivariable Calc (Calc III) Diff. Eq. Statistics For CS, EEs and Aerospace(I think) they have a few more required which I don't remember. My System Dynamics class is pretty much "Let's solve Diff. Eq. problems using a method totally different from your pure math classes that is more real-world applicable" so it sort of counts, but its an engineering course, not a math one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 08:30
|
|
|
grover posted:At Penn State, we had:
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 09:18
|
|
|
You are all horribly spoiled. An entire semester for differential calculus? drat. We get half a semester per subject; 1) Calculus I - differential, integral, limits, basics of series and complex numbers and some differential equations. 2) Calculus II - multivariable, vector calculus, the rest of series and complex numbers. 3) Linear algebra 4) Signals/or sometimes called Calculus C - Fourier- and Laplace transformations basically and some differential equations. 5) Linear analysis - advanced linear algebra 6) Advanced differential equations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 10:06
|
|
|
After filtering through this thread, I didn't see much of what I should expect as an entry level ChemE. Just for kicks, I have a 3.5 GPA from one of few the ChemE schools in NJ. edit: for grammar. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 12:54
|
|
|
Phlegmbot posted:No complex math? Or was that naturally covered in your other courses? ie, Cauchy-Riemann, Cauchy’s integral theorem, etc. Namarrgon posted:You are all horribly spoiled. An entire semester for differential calculus? drat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 13:05
|
|
|
grover posted:Depth vs breadth. There's a lot more to some of this than you can cover thoroughly in half a semester. Of course I considered this. Than I learned that someone transferring from a college to my university (where I live there is a clear distinction; colleges only offer 4 year Bachelors and universities offer 3 year Bachelors ánd Masters etc.) to do his Masters had to go through a 1 year pre-Masters course to take math classes a normal university student gets in his first year. So if someone with a four year degree in Engineering has less math skills than someone just out of his first year in university it gets me thinking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 13:48
|
|
|
OrbitalHybrid posted:After filtering through this thread, I didn't see much of what I should expect as an entry level ChemE. Just for kicks, I have a 3.5 GPA from one of few the ChemE schools in NJ. What's up, fellow NJ ChemE grad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 14:26
|
|
|
You people who never had to take Partial Differential Equations are horrible and I don't like you. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 18:39
|
|
|
SubCrid TC posted:You people who never had to take Partial Differential Equations are horrible and I don't like you. I took PDEs as an elective and I found it to be incredibly useful and not too difficult, but I had a great teacher.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 19:26
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2009 21:18
|
|
|
Shao821 posted:Wanna know why he got so boring? Probably has something to do with action items, project schedules, and DO-178. As I mentioned earlier, an engineer's real job is producing paperwork. ....which is why I'm actively looking to get back into academia.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 01:49
|
|
|
Cyril Sneer posted:As I mentioned earlier, an engineer's real job is producing paperwork. Academia requires tons of paperwork too, I have no clue how it compares though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 02:30
|
|
|
I'm just finishing (exams done in 10 days) a B.E. (Hons.) in electrical engineering. It's been a great experience. I've had a few job offers, but I'm going to take a summer position (programming DSPs for encoderless control of brushless DC traction motors), then get into a Masters. After that I'm looking at trying to get into somewhere like ETH Zurich for a PhD, at this stage I'm really excited about power electronics research. Who knows what I'll think after a Masters, but that's my plan now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 02:57
|
|
|
Cyril Sneer posted:As I mentioned earlier, an engineer's real job is producing paperwork. This isn't true for all engineers! I produce code and bug reports, but no paperwork.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 03:12
|
|
|
In one sense I spend a lot of time doing paperwork, in that what I'm doing has an effect on a drawing or words on a page, but I spend nearly no time doing bureaucratic style paperwork. I get given a problem to fix and drawings generally end up being the thing we give to the client, but that's not really my product. We sell problem solving, technical knowledge, and the fact that they need an engineer's stamp before they can actually build anything. We get hired because we can solve a problem a client has. I also spend a lot of time climbing around inside industrial buildings and mud for someone that just produces paperwork.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 03:55
|
|
|
My experience has been a lot like Cyril Sneer's: lots and lots and neverending paperwork. Even as a junior engineer, I spent as much time writing emails and reports than doing actual design. Every promotion just makes it worse and worse.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 04:09
|
|
|
Civil Engineering checking in. What I do now: I design high voltage transmission lines (69kV and up) for a consultant firm. Life after school: Been really good so far. Job has been stable and fun. I wouldn't change my job now but in a few years I will want to do something different. Would I pick something else: Hell no. It is a terrific industry, it was awesome classes in college, it is fun everyday. The cool thing: I can seriously do a whole crap load of other stuff easily. I would suggest civil engineering to anyone who even thinks they would like it at all. There are so many disciplines and opportunities everywhere for you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 05:03
|
|
|
grover posted:Every promotion just makes it worse and worse. Yup. All the higher-ups, who may have once been engineers, are now completely detached from any technical activities and do nothing but project management and dreadfully boring regulatory compliance type stuff. As someone deeply interested in the sciences, I just can't bare the thought of losing my technical edge.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 06:14
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:24 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 06:22
|
|
|
Having just got out of studying engineering I've realised there are some things I really wish I'd known going into it. If you're going into a decent engineering program you're probably smart enough to have gotten good grades in highschool / other degrees with zero/minimal work. This approach to studying engineering won't work unless you're one of a handful of people at your university that you will probably end up despising. On the other hand, engineering material isn't actually difficult and almost anyone can get really good results if they take the time to develop an effective study method. While the best study method for you is probably going to be the one you develop yourself here's some generic tips I wish I'd known.
Group work is a whole other topic I don't want to think about. Edit: After exams, drinking the pain away is traditional. slorb fucked around with this message at 12:51 on Oct 31, 2009 |
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 12:48
|
|
|
slorb posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 13:13
|
|
|
slorb posted:If you're going into a decent engineering program you're probably smart enough to have gotten good grades in highschool / other degrees with zero/minimal work. This approach to studying engineering won't work unless you're one of a handful of people at your university that you will probably end up despising. You're ultimately going to eventually apply to NASA's astronaut program or some other poo poo hot awesome job... and get flatly rejected because Bs aren't good enough; they don't just want brilliant people, they want brilliant people who work their asses off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 13:37
|
|
|
grover posted:If you are able to do this in college, and slack by with 0 work, you're not going to be able to get straight As, that requires going to class, but you'll likely end up with a good enough GPA and will be able enjoy your 4 years of school as much as the liberal arts kids do. You're right that usually flakes get average grades, but I've met a couple people smart enough to skip all the classes in coursework subjects, do a very minimal amount of study before the exams and have a perfect GPA. The guys I know who are like that are going to end up in elite research farms or as professors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 13:49
|
|
|
slorb posted:[*]Join the right study group. You want to be in the study group with the people who get good grades and are taking it seriously, not guys who are just going to bug you for answers. Study group time is valuable but not a substitute for time spent studying alone. Personally, I always worked solo. Groups only seem to work at their slowest member's level. Plus my classmates smelled bad. I would never tell anyone that they *must* do group work to succeed - but it's worth a shot to see if it helps you. Maybe you could be the slow guy!
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 17:58
|
|
|
catbread.jpg posted:
Just got rejected from ETH (the Phd required a masters degree but i went anyway so i had it coming i guess), great school for engineers and amazing labs for science nerds maybe i should start with masters first.
|
|
#
?
Oct 31, 2009 20:20
|
|
|
Phlegmbot posted:Personally, I always worked solo. Groups only seem to work at their slowest member's level. Plus my classmates smelled bad. Group study certainly isn't necessary to get good grades and it does move pretty slow. One reason it helped me was I found sometimes I'd run into a problem I was just struggling with either because the notes/textbook were inadequate or there was a printing error or I was just slow. If you're in a good group someone will always know if there's a better resource to look up or the corrected question or will spend some time explaining it to you. The other thing about it I found valuable was that the process of helping someone else with difficult material was a really thorough review of my own understanding. I found that trying to teach someone else both consolidated my own understanding of the material better and frequently showed me problems in my understanding of concepts I thought I had already understood. But yeah, I always spent well over 90% of my study time alone and I did join a couple groups exactly like you describe that were useless time sinks.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 02:46
|
|
|
As a ME I found that the student ASME chapter was incredibly valuable for finding a good study group. Our organization even included some of the grad students, so there would definitely be classes where the TA would be the one leading the study session. Study groups aren't just for learning the material. Early in your college career they're a good way to get to know the student community. Even if your current class is a cakewalk you may find that future classes will kick your rear end if you don't have others to help you. For me my easy class was Heat Transfer, but the study group was incredibly helpful for Vibrations.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 03:29
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 04:44
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 04:44
|
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 04:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 00:50 |
|
|
.
Thoguh fucked around with this message at 14:25 on Aug 10, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2009 04:46
|
|