Gas station without pumps

2016 November 27

Cyber Monday sale 2016

Filed under: Circuits course — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 12:01
Tags: , ,

My Black Friday sale was a moderate success (12 copies of my book sold for total royalties of about $25).  The sale continues through Cyber Monday (end date 29 Nov 2016), with the same coupon reducing the price to $2.56:

https://leanpub.com/applied_electronics_for_bioengineers/c/Black-Friday-2016

I’m not going to get rich off of this textbook, but I’m hoping that a few other teachers of electronics will pick it up and use it for a course.

2016 October 8

Release notes for book (Oct 2016)

Filed under: Circuits course — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 17:10
Tags: , , ,

I’ve just finished doing a rewrite pass over the part of the textbook needed for BME 51A, which I’ll be teaching starting in January. I’ve been working on this rewrite pass since June, so a little over 4 months. I’ll be spending the next couple of months doing a rewrite pass for the part of the book needed for BME 51B, but that should go a little quicker, as there are about half as many pages in the second “half”, and I think they are in somewhat closer to the desired form than the part I just finished.

There are still a lot of “to-do” notes in the margins of the book, even in the part I just “finished”, but they are all fairly small things, I think. This blog post will be my release notes for this version of the book, summarizing what I changed.

The biggest change was a rearrangement of the order of the labs, so that there are now two amplifier labs in the first half, and all the audio labs are in the second half.  Lots of things (like the table of equipment for labs and the schedule of lectures) needed to be revised to fit.  I still have some work to do on the lecture schedule.

I moved the sampling and aliasing lab after the thermistor lab, so that there is more time in lecture to talk about time-varying signals before the lab.

I expanded the  op-amp chapter into a more general amplifier chapter, and now discuss multi-stage amplification from the beginning, because the instrumentation amp lab for the pressure sensor is now the first amplifier lab. I also added active low-pass filters to the op-amp chapter.

I rewrote the optical pulse-monitor lab, which now calls for a more robust design using logarithmic current to voltage conversion.  I’m still experimenting with different ways of holding the phototransistor, so I may need to redo all the photographs, if I come up with a better design. The optical properties of blood section of the optoelectronics chapter now discusses melanin and fat, and the effect they can have on optical pulse monitoring.  I added a new chapter on transimpedance amplifiers, and added log-transimpedance amplifiers to the chapter. The difficult sensitivity analysis for the pulse monitor has been removed, as the log-transimpedance design does not require great care in setting the gain.

I added more coverage of expected background material, so that students who had not had physics electricity and magnetism courses could still follow along.  I found that a lot of the students didn’t remember anything from physics anyway, so I had to cover the essentials over again, and so I reduced the prerequisites for the course to calculus and high-school physics. I also added a section on logarithms.

I added a bunch more figures, bringing the numbered figures up to 145 (and several of those are multi-part figures). I also improved the typesetting of the captions, so that they are better distinguished from the main body text. Several of the block diagrams were redrawn with draw.io, and I added some new block diagrams and a bit more discussion of how to use block diagrams effectively. I cleaned up a few of the schematics also.

I added a few more exercises, added autonumbering, and converted the somewhat vague prelab assignments into numbered exercises, so that I can assign blocks of numbered exercises without worrying that students may have missed part of the prelab assignment. The oscilloscope probe exercise that caused a lot of problems last year has been rewritten with more scaffolding.

I added “equipment-needed” lists to the beginning of each lab.

I changed some of the labs that had used potentiometers to sweep voltages to use function generators with a slow triangle wave instead. This should save quite a bit of time, particularly for the hysteresis lab, where I described how to trigger on the output of a Schmitt trigger changing to record the input thresholds.

I created a new appendix for some of the PteroDAQ details, which I removed from the DAQ chapter.

I added more index terms and fixed a number of glitches in the index.  Index entries with subindexing now stay together in one column, rather than being split between columns and pages.

I’ve started boxing “important” things (and I may change to highlighting them), but choosing the right things to box will probably take another full pass over the book.

I fixed all the overfull-hbox errors through Chapter 24.

 

2016 January 7

Counting pages

Filed under: Circuits course — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 20:30
Tags: , ,

I just read in Dan Graur’s blog, his post about how publishers report the sizes of his textbooks:

On the Numbering of Pages in Textbooks

American students are apparently afraid of books with too many pages. The solution that publishers have came up with to is to number different sections of the book separately.

Thus my previous book, the second edition of Fundamentals of Molecular Evolution was listed as xiv + 481 pp. That is, 14 pages of front material (title, acknowledgements, dedication) plus 481 pages of text. This was a significant increase in pages from the first edition, which was listed as xv + 284 pp.

My newest book, Molecular and Genome Evolution, which was published with the same publishing house, is listed as xvii + 612 pp + 54 LC + 34 I, in other words 17 pages of front material, 612 pages of text, 54 pages of references, and 34 pages of index. It seems that 612 is significantly less terrifying than 690 (or 707 if one includes everything in the book).  

Under this system, the current draft of my book is xxiv + 270 pp + 6 LC + 4 I—not counting the colophon, which is after the index.  Should the appendix have been in the 270 pp, where I put it, or in the “LC” count? Should the blank pages that exist only so that chapters start on a right-hand page be counted, as I did, or not?

Obviously, my book is much lighter weight than Prof. Graur’s (if weight means anything in an e-book-only publication), and I clearly need to beef up the index (though maybe not to four times the current length, which is what it would take to be comparable to his index/text ratio).

But 54 pages of references seems excessive for a textbook—even one with 612 content pages. No student is going to look up even 1% of those references. That depth of references is more appropriate for review article or a research monograph than for a textbook. Of course, many scientists don’t really distinguish between research monographs and textbooks, so perhaps it really is a research monograph, in which case the level of citation seems appropriate.

Perhaps Prof. Graur’s book, probably aimed at grad students or postdocs, is not typical of books aimed at college freshmen and sophomores. Looking at a textbook I happen to have on the floor by my desk, Matter and Interactions, which I haven’t put away since teaching/learning physics from it 3 years ago, I see xxiv + 1080 pp + 19 I, not counting the endpapers, which add another 3 pages of text (useful reference material).  This book seems to have no references—not at the end, not in each chapter, and not even occasional pointers to more information for curious readers. The indexing rate is 1.76%,which is only slightly more than my 1.48%, so I may not be as far off the mark in the amount of indexing I’ve done as I feared.

2015 December 22

Small updates to book

Filed under: Circuits course — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 13:56
Tags: , ,

I released a couple more small updates to my book today:

  • revised Chapter 25 (Electrodes) and electrode lab
  • small additions to loudspeaker lab to remove several TODO comments
  • cleaned up many (but not all) overfull-box LaTeX errors

I’ll try to get Chapter 27 (EKGs) and the EKG lab redone by the end of 2015, completing the rewrite that I started in June 2015.  After finishing this pass, I’ll raise the minimum price on the book (probably to $3.99 from $2.99), though the book still won’t be “finished”—I’ll still have 46 TODO comments to resolve.

If anyone is waiting for me to finish the book before buying it, remember that as long as I’m publishing it with leanpub, buying a copy entitles you to all updates for free, so you might as well get it now, before I raise the price.

2015 December 14

Sabbatical leave application 2016

Filed under: Circuits course — gasstationwithoutpumps @ 14:33
Tags: , ,

I’ve got to write an application for sabbatical leave and submit it before 2016 March 11.   My plans are to take sabbatical leave for fall quarters at ⅔ or 5/9 pay for the next five years, to gradually drain the accumulated sabbatical leave credits, rather than spending them all at once getting two quarters off at full pay.  If I do that, I can retire after Winter 2021 with one unused sabbatical credit (which is a little left as you can get, as you have to return to the university for at least as long as the duration of your last sabbatical).

It is better for the department for me to take sabbatical at partial pay, as the savings in salary is returned to the department as Temporary Academic Staffing (TAS) funds, which can be used for hiring lecturers.  If I took salary at full pay, the department would get nothing, and if I took leave without pay, they’d get my full salary—at ⅔ salary they get  the remaining ⅓, which should be enough to hire 1.5 lecturers to replace me for that quarter (and cover the 1.4 courses that I’d not be teaching).

The sabbatical leave form is only for the Fall 2016 leave and asks a lot of questions, some of which are difficult to answer briefly.

The application form shall be accompanied by a statement providing in detail the following information:

a. A brief history of the project, from inception through progress to date and projection as to completion date. This history shall include a description of the applicant’s preparation and any significant contributions already made in the field of activity with which the project is concerned.

I’m planning to do two things in Summer and Fall 2016: work on my textbook and try to find a bioelectronics project to design, preferably in collaboration with a doctor at UCSF.  Unfortunately, I don’t know any one at UCSF who has a problem that would be interesting for me to work on, and I’m not very good at the networking needed to find such collaborators. I’m also more interested in open hardware than in proprietary development, and that could be a bad mismatch for the UC emphasis on making money off of research developments in the biomedical field.

Even if I’m vague in the request about starting a bioelectronics project, giving a brief history of the textbook development will take some thought—I can’t very well give them the 373 blog posts I’ve written about the course, as they probably want only one or two paragraphs.  I suppose I should mention the times I’ve taught the course, the evolution of the lab handouts into the current draft of the book, and the need for revision based on changing the level and pace of the course next year. The course will be moved from upper division (junior/senior) to lower division (freshman/sophomore), and split into two quarters (2 4-unit courses, replacing the current 5+2-unit course).  The move to lower division means reducing the prerequisites (I’ll still have differential calculus as a prereq, but not calculus-based physics), which in turns means beefing up the background in the text and in the class, to cover the physics that the students won’t have had.

The book may be publishable after the Fall 2016 leave, but I’ll probably want to try using it at the slower pace during Winter and Spring 2017, and revise it Summer and Fall 2017, based on that experience.  I’m still not sure when the project will be “completed”.  There are many milestones along the way: used in the course (done Spring 2015), released to the public (done in draft form starting August 2015), all the “to-do” notes in the text done (maybe never—I keep finding more that needs to be improved), adopted for teaching by someone other than me, available on paper (maybe never—the cost of printing is high relative to PDF distribution, but see Textbook should be on paper), available in EPUB and MOBI formats (maybe never—those formats are awful for math and for scientific graphics), freezing an edition and getting an ISBN, distributing through a professional publisher (maybe never—the textbook publishers take way too big a share of too high a price, providing little in return except their name).

b. Significance of the project as a contribution to knowledge, to art, to a particular profession; or as an expected contribution to the applicant’s increased effectiveness as a teacher and scholar.

I could find no intro electronics textbook that was suitable for bioengineering students at the level I wanted to teach.  Everything that had sufficient design content assumed that the students had already had at least a circuits course and often several low-level analog electronics courses. The books that assumed no prior electronics experience all ended up being “cookbooks”, which had students building things that others designed, or “physics” books, doing demos to illustrate concepts, with no design work in either case. There seems to be a real need for books that get students to design simple electronics without years of preliminary drudgery.

c. Name(s) of the location(s) or institution(s) where the project will be carried on, and the names of authorities, if any, with whom it will be conducted.

Textbook writing will happen at home.  Finding a project to collaborate on with someone else is less definite—I’ll probably try to find collaborators at UCSF, though that will not be easy to arrange, as I don’t want to move to San Francisco, but only visit for a few days at a time every couple of weeks. Stanford would be closer, but the doctors at the Stanford medical school have easy access to Stanford engineering faculty, so finding a fruitful collaboration is likely to be harder.

d. Assurances of cooperation, or authorization to conduct the project, received from individuals, institutions, or agencies.

No authorization is needed for the textbook project, and nothing has been set up yet for doing a collaboration.  It may be that I’ll spend much of the first sabbatical just finding people and setting up mechanisms for later collaborations.

e. Description of all financial support expected during the sabbatical leave, including any fellowship, grant, government-sponsored exchange lectureship, or payment for contract research. (See also APM-740-18 and 740-19.)

No external support expected. I may do small amounts of consulting (well less than the 1-day-a-week limit), if the opportunity arises.

f. Description of University service which will be provided if the applicant proposes to substitute significant University service for some or all of the teaching/instructional requirements of a sabbatical leave in residence (See APM 740-8-b & CAPM 900.700-G)

Not doing a leave in residence, but I may still do some service work at UCSC while on leave, like giving the “Speaking Loudly” workshop for Women in Science and Engineering or helping the advising office with new-student orientation.

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: