Job interview help! Good analog primer?

[Tim Shoppa]

Al Cohen <amc79@no.junk.please.cornell.edu> wrote in message news:<bpKcnUpnlO2ERz_dRWPC-w@speakeasy.net>...

If I were looking for a firmware person, the most I could reasonably
expect them to understand...
A little on transistors. Transistors are usually brought in to boost
current-handling capabilities when op-amps can't cut it, although there
are many other uses for transistors as well.

An understanding of current-sourcing vs current-sinking, as well as
some of the tricks about mixing outputs with inputs is essential
for most firmware writers. These are not complicated subjects but
they do require some order-of-magnitude understandings of the
currents and impedances involved, especially when it comes to the
trendy-for-the-past-few-years push towards microamp level current
consumption in quiscient consumer devices.

If someone asks you to illustrate a LED driver and you need to solve
equations to come up with typical values, you're in trouble. Depending
on the employer there may be other areas where familiarity with actual
products would be good.

Tim.

 

[Joe Legris]

Lewin A.R.W. Edwards wrote:

How about applying for a job for which you are actually qualified? If


Charming. Yes, I also eat small kittens for breakfast, rob the
elderly, kick puppies, and routinely throw kindergarteners in front of
buses.

I would not bother applying, let alone going to a first-round
interview, for a job that I couldn't do. What on earth would be the
point? They would know within ten minutes that I didn't have a clue. I
described my analog knowledge as rudimentary and RF as practically nil
up-front, before even coming in for an interview. I simply haven't
needed such knowledge in the jobs I've worked, and my education has
been project-driven for most of my working life.

As I understand it, the context of this info is primarily being able
to understand what the analog peripherals are doing without being too
much of a load asking questions of the design team. The duties in the
job description do NOT include RF or analog design.

It has also been stated to me that if I'm offered the position, it
will basically be conditional on my going back to school. Implication
from that being that they understand I'm not a perfect match for every
bullet point on their list, but they are willing to work with that.
Also, as you doubtless well know, most job descriptions read "The
ideal candidate will have 25 years' experience in designing spacecraft
and nuclear submarines, at least one platinum solo R&B album, a
distinguished military service record, a personal letter of
congratulation from the Pope, and will be a former champion sumo
wrestler and/or ballerina." Few hiring managers succeed in matching
all bullet points on their wishlist.

So, kindly don't make such accusatory statements without a solid basis
of fact. People who matter read public forums like this. I believe I
have a reasonably consistent and solid sense of ethics, and I KNOW I
have an excellent comprehension of my own limitations, and I don't
much care for people who jump to unwarranted conclusions and then
slander me in public.

Oh yes - As I recall, I also posted the previous thread to which you
refer anonymously, so that it could not directly be associated with me
(e.g. by potential acquirers of my current employer, who would
perceive significantly diminished value in the company if I were to
leave it). Some people - and you may have been one of them -
successfully reverse-engineered my identity from my writing style,
which is something I could not avoid. The ethical thing for you to do
in such a case is to respect my desire to keep the original thread
anonymous.

Get real. When you post your personal life on a newsgroup, repeatedly
and in excruciating detail no less, your right to privacy evaporates,
especially if your identity is obvious simply from the length of the post.

Do the "people who matter" include your prospective employers? In the
interest of total disclosure you may want to forward this thread to them.

--
Joe Legris

 

[Lewin A.R.W. Edwards]

But as the other posters already suggested, I can only wish you luck in
reading that much info, let alone understand it. Would you be able to tell a
Colpitts oscillator from a Hartley after reading the basics on transistors
or opamps? I doubt it. Best is to be fit for the interview and keep an open

Honestly, all I want to do is recognize some simple configurations
without having to sit down and puzzle it out from first principles. I
know the essential characteristics of bipolar transistors and, to a
lesser extent, FETs, and I understand what capacitors, resistors and
inductors do Gee, people. I didn't think I was opening a hornet's
nest here. Either 50% of the people in c.a.e/s.e.d congenitally hate
me (which is fine; this is Usenet), or I approached this question
totally the wrong way. Either way, I'm somewhat regretting making the
initial post, but I did get some useful responses, for which I am
grateful.

 

[Joe Legris]

Lewin A.R.W. Edwards wrote:

But as the other posters already suggested, I can only wish you luck in
reading that much info, let alone understand it. Would you be able to tell a
Colpitts oscillator from a Hartley after reading the basics on transistors
or opamps? I doubt it. Best is to be fit for the interview and keep an open


Honestly, all I want to do is recognize some simple configurations
without having to sit down and puzzle it out from first principles. I
know the essential characteristics of bipolar transistors and, to a
lesser extent, FETs, and I understand what capacitors, resistors and
inductors do Gee, people. I didn't think I was opening a hornet's
nest here. Either 50% of the people in c.a.e/s.e.d congenitally hate
me (which is fine; this is Usenet), or I approached this question
totally the wrong way. Either way, I'm somewhat regretting making the
initial post, but I did get some useful responses, for which I am
grateful.

I, for one, don't hate you. You are obviously very bright and energetic.
Just spare me the personal details. You could have asked for the advice
without saying why, avoided the flack, and shortened your post by 75%.
--
Joe Legris

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"Joe Legris" <jalegris@sympatico.ca> wrote

I, for one, don't hate you. You are obviously very bright and
energetic.
Just spare me the personal details. You could have asked for the
advice
without saying why, avoided the flack, and shortened your post by 75%.

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and libelous
accusations. Of course you could also troll somewhere else too.

Since you are such a proponent of competency and certification, can you
list for us your certifications qualifying you to summarily pass
judgment upon others?

 

[Paul E. Bennett]

Al Cohen wrote:

Ouch. Analog is very non-trivial.

First, I'd second the recommendation of another poster by suggesting
Horowitz & Hill's "The Art of Electronics" as a good all-around reference.

Don Lancaster is an amazing resource, www.tinaja.com.

If I were looking for a firmware person, the most I could reasonably
expect them to understand would be op-amp circuits. In general, at
least in the real world, most analog circuits are built of little blocks
that usually revolve around an op-amp with some feedback from output to
input. Common building blocks include:

- inverting amplifiers
- non-inverting amplifiers
- filters (a big topic - lots of variations here)
- comparators (sort of like op-amps with no feedback)
- integrators
- instrumentation amplifiers

I would expect them to also know differential amplifier configurations
and have a good grasp of various earthing topologies as well. This is
in addition to the usual Health & Safety aspects of the job.

--
********************************************************************
Paul E. Bennett ....................<email://peb@a...>
Forth based HIDECS Consultancy .....<http://www.amleth.demon.co.uk/>
Mob: +44 (0)7811-639972 .........NOW AVAILABLE:- HIDECS COURSE......
Tel: +44 (0)1235-811095 .... see http://www.feabhas.com for details.
Going Forth Safely ..... EBA. www.electric-boat-association.org.uk..
********************************************************************

 

[Charles Edmondson]

Lewin A.R.W. Edwards wrote:

Hi all,

I'm going to a second-round job interview next Monday, and I've been
forewarned by the first-round interviewer that I will be asked
questions on analog and RF topics (basic op-amp circuits, transistors
used in switching and amplification apps, superhet receivers and AM
transmitter).

I'm not being expected to demonstrate extreme skill (my primary
function is firmware and digital, analog and particularly RF are not
my strong point - and I made this clear to them before ever coming in)
but I would like to have as good a briefing as possible. He
recommended the ARRL Radio Comms handbook, which is totally
unavailable near me (libraries, bookstores, etc). I ordered a copy
from amazon, but I'm worried that it won't arrive in time.

So, can anyone suggest other references that are either available
online, or likely to be in Barnes and Noble? I'm looking for
introductory overview type information rather than detailed
down-to-the-last-electron info.

AAMOI: the interview technique he used was, among other things, to
give me a large mixed-signal schematic and a stuffed board, and leave
me to look at it for 15 minutes, then I had to describe as far as
possible the function of the various blocks in the circuit. I did
tolerably well on that. But the second part of the test was 15 minutes
with a snippet (~10 pages) of assembly source for a micro I'd never
used. THAT was fun. Didn't do at all well on that. Oh well. I hope the
aim was to observe behavior under stress

Any assistance will be karmically rewarded ))
Basically, any decent text on general electronics should get you going.

Before I got my present job, I had two interviews coming up. One was
with HP (now Agilent) on design of MW instrumentation. Studied for
three days, going over all the basics such as opamps, transistor
biasing, etc. During the interview (over the phone...) he gave me a lot
of really tough questions, and I was in way, way, way over my head.
Since I hadn't really done much analog design since getting my degree, I
blew the interview.

A couple of days later, I interviewed at Microsim. In this case, the
knowlege test was much more basic. 4 resistor transistor bias, basic
opamp gain, truth table realization, a simple counter. Since I had
studied for the much harder test, this one I aced. But to study, I just
reviewed my old circuits 101 textbook. Win's Art of Electronics would
be good, but overkill. The idea is to remember what you know, rather
than try to actually learn anything new.

--
Charlie
--
Edmondson Engineering
Unique Solutions to Unusual Problems

 

[Tim Auton]

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

"Joe Legris" <jalegris@sympatico.ca> wrote

I, for one, don't hate you. You are obviously very bright and
energetic.
Just spare me the personal details. You could have asked for the
advice
without saying why, avoided the flack, and shortened your post by 75%.

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and libelous
accusations.

Pots and kettles spring to mind.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"Tim Auton" <tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY]> wrote

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that
you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your
mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and
libelous
accusations.

Pots and kettles spring to mind.

I'm not sure what you're getting at. I really try not to get involved
in subjective political battles, but this is just nonsense. Lewin made
it quite clear that he was only following the advice of the interviewer
and wasn't trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. He also said he
made that clear to the interviewer before even showing up to the first
interview, but Joe seems to have completely missed that part of Lewin's
post.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"Tim Auton" <tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY]> wrote

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that
you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your
mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and
libelous
accusations.

Pots and kettles spring to mind.

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at. I really try not to get
involved in subjective political battles, but this is just nonsense.
Lewin made it quite clear that he was only following the advice of the
interviewer and wasn't trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. He
also said he made that clear to the interviewer before even showing up
to the first interview, but Joe seems to have completely ignored that
part of Lewin's post.

I apologize if I have offended you, it was certainly not my intention.

 

[Lewin A.R.W. Edwards]

I would not bother applying, let alone going to a first-round
interview, for a job that I couldn't do. What on earth would be the
point? They would know within ten minutes that I didn't have a clue. I
described my analog knowledge as rudimentary and RF as practically nil
up-front, before even coming in for an interview. I simply haven't

Get real. When you post your personal life on a newsgroup, repeatedly

Nice way to side-step the point at issue, Legris. You jumped to a
conclusion (that I'm misrepresenting myself in order to obtain
something I'm not entitled to), and you were sadly wrong, so you
proceed to another avenue of ad-hominem attack in lieu of assembling a
factual argument. This is all standard, well-accepted Usenet practice,
of course, I'm simply pointing it out for the benefit of future alien
races that may read this NG.

I endeavor to be completely honest with everyone I deal with,
including potential employers, simply because it is the only strategy
that makes longterm sense. This method of doing business happens to be
very important to me, and I resent it when people unwarrantably attack
it.

You also appear to have a strong personal antipathy to me, and I'm
darned if I can fully understand it. I do understand _part_ of it -
you're of the school that resents the fact that I work in your
industry without a formal qualification in the field. But that doesn't
seem quite enough to justify such bitterness. Perhaps I can mollify
you towards me by redirecting your anger towards others - there are
numerous successful and exceedingly wealthy people (much more
successful and wealthy than I) who have built their careers the same
way I am. Feel free to vituperate them. At least allow me to eat my
chitlins before I get back to picking cotton.

Oh well. As HAL said, "this conversation can serve no further useful
purpose".

 

[Joe Legris]

Anthony Fremont wrote:

"Joe Legris" <jalegris@sympatico.ca> wrote


I, for one, don't hate you. You are obviously very bright and

energetic.

Just spare me the personal details. You could have asked for the

advice

without saying why, avoided the flack, and shortened your post by 75%.


Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and libelous
accusations. Of course you could also troll somewhere else too.

Since you are such a proponent of competency and certification, can you
list for us your certifications qualifying you to summarily pass
judgment upon others?

Just expressing my opinion, and for that I need no license. By the way,
which of my statements are "unfounded and libelous accusations"? He
admitted he is not formally qualified for he job.

Having interviewed a few job applicants, I know that certification saves
the trouble of running a battery of tests covering elementary concepts,
as we see happening here. You never know what a "project-driven"
education may be lacking and certification provides some confidence that
there are no gaping holes, which we see here too.

Finally, there is the issue of politics. Engineers and technicians spend
a lot of time, effort and money developing their skills. It is insulting
to presume that a few days of cramming is somehow equivalent.

--
Joe Legris

 

[Joe Legris]

Lewin A.R.W. Edwards wrote:

I would not bother applying, let alone going to a first-round
interview, for a job that I couldn't do. What on earth would be the
point? They would know within ten minutes that I didn't have a clue. I
described my analog knowledge as rudimentary and RF as practically nil
up-front, before even coming in for an interview. I simply haven't

Get real. When you post your personal life on a newsgroup, repeatedly


Nice way to side-step the point at issue, Legris. You jumped to a
conclusion (that I'm misrepresenting myself in order to obtain
something I'm not entitled to), and you were sadly wrong, so you
proceed to another avenue of ad-hominem attack in lieu of assembling a
factual argument. This is all standard, well-accepted Usenet practice,
of course, I'm simply pointing it out for the benefit of future alien
races that may read this NG.

I endeavor to be completely honest with everyone I deal with,
including potential employers, simply because it is the only strategy
that makes longterm sense. This method of doing business happens to be
very important to me, and I resent it when people unwarrantably attack
it.

You also appear to have a strong personal antipathy to me, and I'm
darned if I can fully understand it. I do understand _part_ of it -
you're of the school that resents the fact that I work in your
industry without a formal qualification in the field. But that doesn't
seem quite enough to justify such bitterness. Perhaps I can mollify
you towards me by redirecting your anger towards others - there are
numerous successful and exceedingly wealthy people (much more
successful and wealthy than I) who have built their careers the same
way I am. Feel free to vituperate them. At least allow me to eat my
chitlins before I get back to picking cotton.

Oh well. As HAL said, "this conversation can serve no further useful
purpose".

Personal antipathy? It is your obsession with yourself that offends me -
the superfluous initials, the annoyingly verbose posts, the cloyingly
personal anecdotes - they make my skin crawl. I think I deserve some
credit for suffering in almost total silence these past few years.
Please write another book - by all accounts the first one is technically
very good (seriously) and I could use a break here. There you go, a free
plug, now do you believe I don't hate you?

--
Joe Legris

 

[Tim Auton]

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

> wrote
"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> wrote:

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that
you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your
mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and
libelous
accusations.

Pots and kettles spring to mind.

I'm not exactly sure what you're getting at. I really try not to get
involved in subjective political battles, but this is just nonsense.
Lewin made it quite clear that he was only following the advice of the
interviewer and wasn't trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. He
also said he made that clear to the interviewer before even showing up
to the first interview, but Joe seems to have completely ignored that
part of Lewin's post.

I apologize if I have offended you, it was certainly not my intention.

No offence taken, not by me anyway.

It's just that your rant was in response to a fairly innocuous post of
Joe's. His first post in the thread was, in my view, unnecessarily
harsh. His second I didn't agree with either. The one you replied to,
however, wasn't offensive at all in my view. Abrupt and frank, but
hardly deserving of the tirade you launched at Joe for it. I was
drawing a parallel between your harsh words at Joe and Joe's harsh
words at the OP. IMO, they were both un-called-for and in particular
"Who died and made you boss of the group?" could apply equally to both
posts (and probably mine!).


Tim

p.s. In case you're not familiar with the phrase (this is a global
medium and I don't know how widespread the phrase is, let alone
whether you are a native English speaker): I meant "the pot calling
the kettle black" - to say something about someone else which is
actually true of you yourself. The phrase dates back to when pots and
kettles were used on open fires and became similarly blackened.
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[Anthony Fremont]

"Joe Legris" <jalegris@xympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:40A3C3E4.9010109@xympatico.ca...

Anthony Fremont wrote:

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that
you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your
mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something
perhaps you should re-read the post before making unfounded and
libelous
accusations. Of course you could also troll somewhere else too.

Since you are such a proponent of competency and certification, can
you
list for us your certifications qualifying you to summarily pass
judgment upon others?


Just expressing my opinion, and for that I need no license. By the
way,
which of my statements are "unfounded and libelous accusations"? He
admitted he is not formally qualified for he job.

Opinions are fine as long as everyone understands that is all they are.
I'm thinking that, "How about applying for a job for which you are
actually qualified? If you cannot answer these questions without
cramming even your digital "skills" are bogus" would probably qualify as
unfounded and libelous. Since you apparently have no personal knowledge
of his abilities, nor the specific requirements of the job, you most
certainly seem to be in no position to assess his qualifications for it.

Having interviewed a few job applicants, I know that certification
saves
the trouble of running a battery of tests covering elementary
concepts,
as we see happening here. You never know what a "project-driven"
education may be lacking and certification provides some confidence
that
there are no gaping holes, which we see here too.

How do you certify someone as an "electrical engineer", or even as an
"embedded engineer"? Those fields are so diverse that each individual
job would likely require it's own specialized certification. I suppose
that's what the interview process is all about. Would you expect a HV
substation designer to be able to answer detailed questions about MMU
operations? Should an FPGA designer also be an expert in lightning
protection?

Having interviewed a "few" people myself, I have found that someone's
professional education, job history, and certifications have little to
do with their "real world" skills, adaptability and desire to learn.
Some people are very good at school and taking tests, others are
excellent at obtaining usable results even with no formal education.

Finally, there is the issue of politics. Engineers and technicians
spend
a lot of time, effort and money developing their skills. It is
insulting
to presume that a few days of cramming is somehow equivalent.

Irrelevant and quite typical of professional student and professor speak
IME. When politics starts producing usable results, I will reconsider
my opinion.

 

[Tim Auton]

Joe Legris <jalegris@xympatico.ca> wrote:

Anthony Fremont wrote:
[snip]
Since you are such a proponent of competency and certification, can you
list for us your certifications qualifying you to summarily pass
judgment upon others?

Just expressing my opinion, and for that I need no license. By the way,
which of my statements are "unfounded and libelous accusations"? He
admitted he is not formally qualified for he job.

Your suggestion that a lack of analog skills implies a lack of digital
skills is utterly illogical, so saying his digital skills are "bogus"
is unfounded.

Finally, there is the issue of politics. Engineers and technicians spend
a lot of time, effort and money developing their skills. It is insulting
to presume that a few days of cramming is somehow equivalent.

I have seen nobody in this thread make that presumption. You are
presuming that the OP has made that presumption, despite him making it
abundantly clear from the start that he has not.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[Lewin A.R.W. Edwards]

If I were looking for a firmware person, the most I could reasonably
expect them to understand...
A little on transistors. Transistors are usually brought in to boost
current-handling capabilities when op-amps can't cut it, although there
are many other uses for transistors as well.

An understanding of current-sourcing vs current-sinking, as well as
some of the tricks about mixing outputs with inputs is essential
for most firmware writers. These are not complicated subjects but

That is pretty much exactly the limit of my analog knowledge. I know
how to drive various sorts of loads, how to interface to various types
of analog inputs, some theoretical info about PCB layouts, some
background of EMI mitigation, etc.

BTW, I should point out that the employer in question has already set
the tone of the experience by putting this in an examination context.
(Those "analyze this unknown ckt" and "analyze this unknown firmware"
approaches really threw me). Anyway, cramming would be appropriate.
But it's not exactly what I have in mind.

 

[Frank Bemelman]

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> schreef in bericht
newshOoc.102272$hR1.6666@fe2.texas.rr.com...

[snip]

Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something

I limit 92% of my posts by 100% - is that impressive or what ? ;-)

[snip]

--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'x' and 'invalid' when replying by email)

 

[Joe Legris]

Frank Bemelman wrote:

"Anthony Fremont" <spam@anywhere.com> schreef in bericht
newshOoc.102272$hR1.6666@fe2.texas.rr.com...

[snip]


Who died and made you boss of the group? It could also be said that you
could have shortened your posts by 100% and spared us all your mindless
ramblings. Next time you get ready to accuse someone of something


I limit 92% of my posts by 100% - is that impressive or what ? ;-)

[snip]

I try to follow the advice of Strunk & White (The Elements of Style, 3rd
ed., p.23):

Omit needless words!

--
Joe Legris

 

[Alan Balmer]

On Thu, 13 May 2004 15:21:11 -0400, Joe Legris <jalegris@xympatico.ca>
wrote:

Personal antipathy? It is your obsession with yourself that offends me -
the superfluous

<much ad-hominem, off topic stuff snipped>

You do know how to use a kill filter in Mozilla, don't you?

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
removebalmerconsultingthis@att.net