3 ms·

Well over 30 years ago one of the first things I learned in my EE degree was Steinmetz's method for calculating steady state amplitude and phase in AC networks

Well over 30 years ago one of the first things I learned in my EE degree was Steinmetz's method for calculating steady state amplitude and phase in AC networks comprising generators, resistors, capacitors and inductors. He worked out a transformation that lets you use simply solve a set of simultaneous equations, in exactly the same way as simpler DC networks with only batteries and resistors. The only extra price you pay is that the equations use complex numbers instead of real numbers. It really seemed like magic to me. Sadly a career in software has gradually worn down the motivation I once felt to revisit some of the really beautiful ideas underpinning technology, with the idea of getting a better understanding the second time through.

dungle6 9y ago
Well the actual transform is due to LaPlace. Steinmetz didn't really work out any new math but he certainly pushed it's practical application forward. For better or worse most engineering students learn it as a Laplace transform with very little mention of Steinmetz.
- madengr 9y ago
  I thought Heaviside came up with the Laplace transform method.
- billforsternz 9y ago
  In my courses we were taught the Laplace transform as part of analog control theory. It was clear that the Fourier transform was related, but it was taught completely independently in signals theory. Meanwhile I didn't know the Steinmetz impedance concept as (I understood it) was related to the Laplace transform, but it absolutely doesn't surprise me. I had a sense that all these things, things I'd really like to go back and learn properly, were deeply interrelated. I was sure they could best be presented to students through some kind of integrated and harmonious approach rather than the haphazard let-me-present-my-approach-to-one-aspect-as-if-it's-self-contained-when-really-it's-just-one-piece-of-a-bigger-puzzle approach the instructors (and textbooks) took. I wonder if the teaching of fundamental electrical engineering concepts has improved on average since the early 80s? Edit: typo

dungle6 9y ago

Well the actual transform is due to LaPlace. Steinmetz didn't really work out any new math but he certainly pushed it's practical application forward. For better or worse most engineering students learn it as a Laplace transform with very little mention of Steinmetz.

madengr 9y ago
I thought Heaviside came up with the Laplace transform method.
billforsternz 9y ago
In my courses we were taught the Laplace transform as part of analog control theory. It was clear that the Fourier transform was related, but it was taught completely independently in signals theory. Meanwhile I didn't know the Steinmetz impedance concept as (I understood it) was related to the Laplace transform, but it absolutely doesn't surprise me. I had a sense that all these things, things I'd really like to go back and learn properly, were deeply interrelated. I was sure they could best be presented to students through some kind of integrated and harmonious approach rather than the haphazard let-me-present-my-approach-to-one-aspect-as-if-it's-self-contained-when-really-it's-just-one-piece-of-a-bigger-puzzle approach the instructors (and textbooks) took. I wonder if the teaching of fundamental electrical engineering concepts has improved on average since the early 80s? Edit: typo