Science topics: EngineeringEngineering Education

Science topic

# Engineering Education - Science topic

Engineering education is the activity of teaching knowledge and principles related to the professional practice of engineering.

Questions related to Engineering Education

My feeling/perception is that *most* (even the vast majority of) undergraduate engineering degree programs worldwide:

(a) Don't or barely include systems thinking in the learning objectives of their course syllabi.

(b) Are (still) heavily invested in passive instructional methods that tend not to foster students’ systems thinking. Meaning, lectures and recitations are the majority and the norm over active learning methods which involve application, collaboration, discussion, and reflection by students.

(c) Don’t provide instructors with the pedagogical training required to foster and assess students’ systems thinking.

(d) Don’t assess students’ systems thinking in any documented and consistent way. I’m not even getting into whether the assessment is valid, reliable, and cost-effective.

All the above are especially absent in the earlier years of the degree program.

**Question 1**: What are your thoughts about my perception of the landscape? Does it match what you know or feel?

**Question 2**: Is anyone aware of studies that survey systems thinking inclusion in undergraduate engineering curricula (worldwide, US, or in any other country)?

Looking forward to your comments, facts, and opinions on these questions or on anything else that comes to mind!

p.s. For a previous discussion on whether systems thinking should even be taught in first-year education, see here: https://www.researchgate.net/post/Should_we_teach_systems_thinking_to_first-year_engineering_students_or_should_we_wait_until_theyve_acquired_disciplinary_knowledge_and_skills

👨🏫 Are you

**teaching in primary, secondary or higher education**? Do you usually**use videos as complementary resource**in your classes? I would like this ResearchGate space to serve us to enhance our classes, by discussing on the main benefits and inconveniencies encountered when trying to integrate videos as pedagogical aids. Let's share our experience!👍 As per my experience in integrating videos in STEM disciplines, they have noticeably increased the interest of students in the subject, as well as their motivation. When using videos for both conceptual and procedural learning it is expected to find an increase in performance (which is reported in literature). In my case studies I haven't been able to isolate their effect because it was developed during covid-19 pandemics and there were many factors affecting students' performance. However, a combination between quantitative and qualitative data collection led us to infer that videos did imply a mitigating effect for the adverse effects of lockdown (this case study is part of my research publications).

👎 In terms of disadvantages, I find that the main drawback is the time and resources that teachers need to invest in the creation of such videos. In order to overcome this difficulty, it is true that the internet is full of audiovisual resources that we might take profit from. They are mostly coming from informal education (dissemination, outreaching activities...), but many of them comply with main quality standards described in literature for pedagogical use.

🔈

**What is your experience**in these regards? Do you count on additional resources or criteria when selecting video material? Is your experience it the classroom indicating any interesting phenomenon of video effects in students' motivation or performance? Please, share in this discussion. Let's build knowledge and share our experiences to enhance our teaching activity.📚🔍 My

**research**in STEM education is focused on some of these key aspects. I am**open to collaborate**in future case studies that might complement our experience and expertise fields. Don't hesitate contacting me through my ResearchGate profile.Thanks for sharing!

Hi ResearchGate community,

I am looking for scientific methods to evaluate student engagement levels per each lecture or few lectures (teaching modules) in two 200 and 400 level engineering courses. My goal is to measure learning outcomes at the end of each assessment module and test correlation between learning outcomes and engagement levels as a function of different teaching methods.

Question is: what are some rigorous and reproducible methods to measure student engagement during a lecture?

As the world becomes more complex and interconnected, the importance of systems thinking is rising, with engineering being no exception to this trend. Should we as engineering educators aim to teach and train our students in systems thinking from the get-go (first year, first semester), or should we wait for later years when they're acquired more discipline-specific (electrical, mechanical, etc.) knowledge and skills? In other words, is there value in teaching systems thinking to novices, even in a basic way?

Hello,

I'm conducting a systematic review in order to understand how the educators are coping with the challenges regarding experimentation and hands-on activities in Engineering Education and the impact of this situation in learning and teaching amidst COVID-19. Until now, It seems to be that the classes only have been replaced by an online format with the accompaniment of simulators (software and virtual). Then, as Educators, How do you cope the reduction or elimination of experimentation and hands-on activities? ¿Did you implement other alternatives to address the problem with laboratories, experimentation and practice in engineering education?

Thanks in advance,

Best regards,

Jonathan

We are calling for a paradigm shift in engineering education. In times of the Fourth Industrial Revolution (“4IR”), a myriad of potential changes is affecting all industrial sectors leading to increased ambiguity that makes it impossible to predict what lies ahead of us. Thus, incremental culture change in education is not an option anymore. The vast majority of engineering education and training systems, having remained mostly static and underinvested in for decades, are largely inadequate for the new 4IR labor markets. Some positive developments in changing the direction of the engineering education sector can be observed. Novel approaches of engineering education already deliver distinctive, student-centered curricular experiences within an integrated and unified educational approach. We must educate engineering students for a future whose main characteristics are volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity. Talent and skills gaps across all industries are poised to grow in the years to come. Therefore, promote an engineering curriculum that combines timeless didactic tradition, such as Socratic inquiry, project-based learning, and first-principles thinking with novel elements (e.g. student-centered active and e-learning by focusing on the case study and apprenticeship pedagogical methods) as well as a refocused engineering skillset and knowledge. These capabilities reinforce engineering students’ perceptions of the world and the subsequent decisions they make. This 4IR engineering curriculum will prepare engineering students to become curious engineers and excellent communicators better navigating increasingly complex multistakeholder ecosystems.

What are your opinions?

What are your insights?

Do you know great articles or books which cover this topic well?

Many thanks for your perspective!

We know that students' creativity develops when there is no fear of failure, then how we do the assessment.

The isolation generated by the COVID-19 pandemic has forced most of the world's universities to choose remote or virtual classes. In the case of engineering programs and other programs where real practical experiences are required, it has been necessary to resort to increasing simulation or to the development and implementation of remote laboratories. The scarce infrastructure that exists in remote laboratories will be able to demonstrate learning effectiveness and enhance future developments that validate the training of engineers using this educational tool that makes possible the technological advances of the 21st century and thus generate a permanent change in the global educational paradigm. .

Examples:

#Engineering_Education

Recently I have flipped my Engineering Mechanics: Dynamics class. Please follow the link below:

I have also shifted the course from a theory-based to a project-based course. Often it is a good idea to take the suggestions from those who have experience of Flipped Classroom. Please, share what makes your flipped classroom successful? What are the things you believe most essential? Also, asking for feedback on the videos.

What is missing? How to improve?

I'm a technical researcher in inter-discipline engineering stream. I'm highly interested in getting involved in educational initiative of engineering at methodology/pedagogy level. Would love to know/discuss various academic/non-academic options for full time career as an educationist.

STEM was the main topic at the 2019 ASTE international conference, with at least 8 posters, 27 oral presentations and 3 workshops promoting

*STEM classrooms, STEM instruction/teaching, STEM lessons, STEM summer camps, STEM clubs,*and*STEM schools***without providing an operational conceptualization or definition of what STEM is**. Some oral presentations advocated for disciplines integration, but the example provided were mainly "inquiry based" and "Engineering Design Process" practices which in fact did not differed from the overly used, poorly conceptualized and epistemologically incongruent**hands on/minds off**type of classroom activities.Therefore, it is worth considering:

(1) Why do we call it STEM if it does not differ from practices being implemented for decades (e.g. inquiry, hands on activities)?

(2) What benefits (if any) can this

**STEMification**mentality/trend bring to science education? We are considering adding experiential learning in our engineering curriculum in the soph/jr years. Some of the experiential learning will be formal (classes) and others informal (professional societies, mini baha etc). We were wondering if there are literature results where the effectiveness of adding these opportunities was measured? We have done a comprehensive search and have found no direct studies. thanks for your time!

I have data on a specific concept inventory (CI) from various cohorts. These cohorts can be categorised into group 1 with instruction type 1 and group 2 with instruction type 2. I know that the categorisation into these groups is reflected in the CI data, i.e. the performance is similar within the groups and different between the groups.

Would it be appropriate to perform a psychometric analysis on the combined data? Or should one treat both cases individually? In the latter case, the result could be that validity depends on the type of instruction.

What is the common practise? How did you choose your data?

I am about to start some independent work, without an academic advisor. The analysis I made so far seems positive. The contribution, should it work in practice, would be interesting but not astonishing.

I am asking your counseling about how would I present the final work in order to get the PhD (or DEng, or whatever) degree.

Are universities open to this kind of endeavour? Or would I be required to go through the complete process (credits, advisor, etc)?

Another concern of mine is how and where I can publish the paper when I am not affiliated to a particular academic institution?

Thank you very much in advance for any assistance.

And how to define Engineering Culture ?

Do "mentality" and "mindset" differ from each other? And what features influence Culture/Nature of Engineering Higher Education?

Hi everybody,

I am studying by myself this method and I have very big doubts about this method and its application to the BSIM model.

I came across with this method not too long ago when I read a couple of papers. Some papers led me to other references including two from prof. Vittoz and Enz, but I must confess that at some point the mathematical treatment started to overtake me and I started to look at their papers in the diagonal.

Although it is a topic that I like very much, because it offers a big insight into semiconductor physics and the way the transistors are modelled, it is very time-consuming. Plus, I don't know to which extent it is necessary to know all this theory to use the method gm/id which is the main objective. I am not an expert in this topic so I apologise for any mistake.

One of the references in those papers referenced to Prof. D. Binkley's book, which I decided to buy and since then I have been focusing my reading on chapter 2 and 3. I bought it because I wanted to know in more detail where all those concepts like inversion coefficient, technology current, gm/id method and so on came from. Plus, the book would explain in more detail all the concepts when compared to some papers.

Since then I have been learning new things and it turns out that this book was a very good investment. However, my brain has been flooded with doubts.

Because I don't know anyone that has any knowledge about this method (prof. Binkley), I thought in posting this message in this community in the hope someone could help me clarify some doubts.

That said, I would like to know if is there someone that hs used David Binkley approach to design circuits using the BSIM model? Even if you haven't used this method with the BSIM model but with EKV I would like to hear from you has well.

Best regards,

Carlos

We say that our students should have the capability to innovate once they graduate. At the same time companies seek talented and innovative graduates. So to what extent should industry (external forces) drive new learning and to what extent should (internal forces) new technology and research wisdom guide the curricula that address tomorrow's breakthroughs?

If no, what is the difference between capacitance type transmitter and intrinsically safety type transmitter?

This question might seem personal and of course, it is, but many of my friends are facing this problem.

I am a sophomore student and I want to do research in the field of electrical and electronic engineering. I am not quite sure about the specific field but I am finding interest in power electronics, embedded circuit and integrated circuits. But I want to know why should I be doing higher studies and research in these fields? Can somebody please tell me the future aspects of these branches? It would be very helpful for us.

Thank you in advance.

My research work is on Guided Enquiry Based Learning (GEBL) approach towards better understanding of Power Electronics concepts and principles. I would like to get to know researchers working in a similar field or who have conducted similar studies earlier, who is willing to share/discuss ideas to help each others research. I am in the process of developing instruments for the research. Regards

While teaching op-amp circuits, which is the best way to explain the working of op-amp? I think the nullor model is useful.

In cochlear implant products, Class D power amplifier is a really good option to use, I think class E power amplifier can be used too, but I am not sure that in cochlear implant products which of these amplifiers is used.

When multi-DOF systems with arbitrary damping are modeled using the state-space method, then Laplace-transform of the state equations results into an eigen problem. In general the eigenvalues and vectors are complex. The IP (eigenvalue) represents the damped natural frequency.

In case of undamped systems the eigenvalues are complex with RP=0. But mode shapes are real and represents relation between various motion variables, when system vibrates with corresponding natural frequency.

I am interested in understanding the physical interpretation of complex mode shapes (complex eigenvectors).

We are looking for good case studies of this method being used for detection of slums or informal settlements

I am working on optimization of transformer parameters and need expert's advice on this one specifically please guide me.My team has introductory level experience on this FEMM tool.We need to present simulations for any type of transformer modification.

Doing research on academic (student) flow (Throughput) at universities in engineering discipline. I am doing research on models that will help to improve the flow and that will help to minimize the current constraints of which the university will have control over.

What is your opinion about QoS enhancement in cognitive networks?

In which fields and in what ways is it best to use QoS enhancement in cognitive networks (forecasting traffic)?

I would like to apply those methods in Engineering Education (Vocational Education)

confused with Z ,S domain and K domain

Visual thinking helps engineers to reason technical problems as well as ideate design solutions. Schemes and sketches are fully applies by engineers for their work, in adición, visual thinking is linked to creativity.

Current engineering educations includes CAD Geometry into engineering graphics subjects, but traditional sketching is displaced, meaning a decrease on spatial abilities and so visual thinking skills. Despite creative aspects are considered in for engineering educations, visual thinking is not. What do you think? What is your experience as educators/students?

As creativity depends on many factors and in great manner on individual aspects, do you think that the approach at engineering education for creativity shall be oriented not to focus on use specific creative methods, proven as more suitable to engineering practice, but to let engineering students to apply which they feel more effective?

I mean some approaches, main principles. Thanks

I needed your support to perform a survey study for both engineering students and educators about visual thinking, skecthing and engineering education.

If you spare a few minutes to fill in this questionnaire I shall appreciate:

Many Thanks

My focus is on Engineering Education.

Which approach do yo feel more effective to get engineering undergraduates become more creative: by specific creatitivy methods teaching, or applying creatitivy on engineerign courses or activities, such as Problem-based Learning?

Literature is filled with the advantages of Problem / Project based Learning (PBL) approaches and how these approaches have been implemented. Did an academic engineering program / course ever quit PBL? What were the reasons? How did students perceive a change from PBL back to traditional teaching and learning?

I'm interested in making more use of technology in education and one recent idea is to create an assignment requiring students to generate learning tools such as short instructional videos, explanations of problem solutions, analogies or metaphors for course topics. These would be assigned early in the course so students could think about options but would not be due until the end of the course as part of the course review. After vetting by the instructor(s), these learning tools would then be made available to the rest of the students in the course to use in their review for final exams. From an initial literature review, it is clear that this is not a new idea, so I'm interested in hearing more about your experiences with such a concept - the good, the bad, and the ugly! Thanks!

I am conducting an action research in my own organization on the appropriation of electronic portfolio as an individual learning environment to capture, document, archive, select and make reflections on artifacts. There are various issues in this research and I would love to share mine with those who are doing the same thing.

I am interesting to measure experience gained by students after performing laboratory classes. How can I measure these things?

Cognitive psychology can be seen as the processes by which our sensory inputs are transformed, reduced, elaborated, stored, recovered and used. In short, cognition can be defined as the acquisition of knowledge. As such, difficult concepts and design should be taught in light of the findings of cognitive psychology. For example, digital map design should be embedded in how we consume the spatial information. Cognitive psychology may provide a strong framework for a new way to explain the engineering topics and others such as computer science. In fact, it can be integrated to all walks of life that are central to mankind.

Interested in refining assessment of college readiness and development of remedial programs to decrease first year drop out

Internships Learnerships trades & ABET literacy & numeracy. Skills development programmes leading to qualifications take time, but the construction sector is characterised by short term contracts and sub-contracting - how is this being reconciled?

We are working in the field of higher education in engineering. We have found that students with industrial background, have exciting ways to integrate various type of knowledge, e.g tacit, practical, network, theoretical knowledge. We are working on several scientific papers in the field. Is there researchers with same interests and/or experience within the field?

I'm producing a review paper on mapping the linkages between 3D printing and engineering education. Any recommendations of papers / domains to examine would be very welcome.

Recently 3d printing has captured a lot of attention. There seems to be many

application possibilities. I was wondering how a simple interesting project or lab exercise could be introduced at u.g level in windows 7 using open source software. I would welcome any open downloadable articles on this topic.

I am leading a curriculum in manufacturing engineering. Each year I ask for 100 students (our optimal capacity) and receive between 160 and 250 students. As our curriculum is unique in the country, I cannot reject some of them. The curriculum is highly practical with about 30% of labs. How to deal with this huge number of students without lowering the quality of teaching?

I would like to know how the teaching, learning process can be improved in Engineering in the context of industrial revolution.

Some universities require field training courses for all majors. While companies do take trainees, they do not always have the time or resources to train them well. Is field training needed in all majors? What can be done to improve student training?

Until now, I reviewed many papers which talked about the security of chaos based ciphers, but until now I could not find the commercial use for chaotic based ciphers. Maybe it is currently still being researched?

Many issues that affect students are discussed by faculty members in many cases without any input from students. In many cases students can make valuable contributions. One way to guarantee students’ input is to include them in the decision making process by having student representatives in university governance bodies.

I wish to to know the understanding, knowledge and satisfaction levels of students after a teacher has taught a class. At the end of the semester, a teacher should get feedback which provides insight into how to modify their approach so that students get the maximum from their teaching efforts. After all, this is the the sole aim of education.

Our research group is looking at the effectiveness of the professional ethics component/content in the current engineering programmes. We are looking at the possibility of developing an integrated curriculum to produce better graduates.

How can highly-rated departments remain competitive?

Increasing the use of social sustainability in the decision-making process of construction projects requires that it be defined such that it can be evaluated objectively.

Should I do a Masters in Industrial Engineering? I know it's pretty hard to get in with a non-engineering undergraduate degree. I have done my research on IE and to me it would have been the perfect major. I started out as an Architect major back in CC and somehow ended up in economics. What I like about IE is the mix of science/engineering and management. Any suggestions?

Currently, engineering students are evaluated mainly through written exams. The total number of students is too high to have individual attention if we try to evaluate them to individual exercises. How could we grade the students effectively?

While taking exams of Engineering/Technical students, which method will be suitable? Either Descriptive Quiestions or Multi Choice questions?

Obviously, it is possible to suggest research articles and foster group discussions. Conducting interviews and some lab activities are among the popular ones.

I am currently developing a 14-week course for computer science undergraduate students that focuses more on the application of control systems and the design and implementation of simple controllers using microcontrollers. The ability to simulate such controllers using Matlab is thought to be essential as well. Can you recommend the core topics needed in order to develop such course? Assumptions are that students have basic knowledge on 1) computer science and engineering mathematics; 2) basics on signals and systems, and 3) basics on microcontroller system design.

Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are a big topic these days on university campuses. There appears to be a divide in support of MOOCs and against MOOCs. What are your thoughts about integrating MOOCs into your institution?

For me STEM activities are fun, but what are the best ways to persuade school students this is true?

Article Junkbots

I teach the undergrad electromagnetic fields and waves course during the Spring semester. Presently we have a course project wherein the cadets (students) write a Finite Difference Equation (FDE) simulation of a bounded solution of the Laplace equation. Although this is a good exercise, I have found that there is a lot of cross-talk between cadets who took the course previously and those in it now. Please suggest a Matlab-based FTDT, FDE, or similar iterative solution that is easy to write (less than say 30 lines if written elegantly) but is illustrative of the utility of numerical methods for solving e-mag problems. I have attached a copy of my project specification sheet from last year to help you understand where I am coming from. I do not teach numerical methods during the course except for the project. The EEs are generally familiar with Matlab from previous courses.

Please provide your thoughts on open access journals and publishing in these types of journals.

Sometimes it is really hard to decide what type of exam reflects students' conceptual knowledge best. From one point of view, in-class exams assess students' ability to think in fast and efficient way; on the other hand, take home exams can reveal deeper understanding of the topic through more sophisticated problems. What is your experience in this area?

Thanks!

I am teaching 2nd order non linear differential equations for chemical engineering students. Can one help to get more solved problems on 2nd order nonlinear differential equations.

I have extracted these questions from the discussions (leaded by Lutz von Wangenheim) about the Barkhausen criterion, RC oscillators and phase shift in RC circuits where we tried to answer the question, "How do sine oscillations arise in RC oscillators?":

I have stated several times that we can find the answer of this question in the time domain by following the sine "movement" of the output voltage between the supply rails. I suggest to do it here by investigating the structure and the operation of the ubiquitous Wien bridge oscillator. Let's begin with the structure; here are my speculations:

To realize this exotic circuit solution, we have "to see the forest for the trees":), i.e. to group the particular elements in well-known functional blocks. Thus, we may first group the two resistors Rf, Rb and the op-amp U1 (see the attached picture below) into a low-gain (≈ 3) single-ended nonlinear amplifier (the classic non-inverting op-amp amplifier) with a Wien network (R1 = R2, C1 = C2) connected in the positive feedback loop. Rb (a bulb) self heats and reduces the amplifier gain until the point is reached that there is just enough (maybe, 3?) gain to sustain the sine oscillations without reaching the saturation point of the amplifier. So, from this viewpoint, the Wien bridge oscillator is considered as two connected in a loop devices - a non-inverting amplifier and a Wien network (a non-inverting amplifier with a Wien network positive feedback).

Then, we may group (in a little more exotic way) the non-inverting amplifier above with the upper part (R2, C2) of the Wien network into a current-driven negative impedance circuit (INIC). Its impedance is roughly equal to the "positive" impedance of the lower part (R1, C1) so that the two opposite impedances roughly neutralize each other at the equilibrium point.

The next powerful idea is to see the whole Wien bridge circuit (Rf, Rb, R1, C1, R2, C2) and to consider the Wien bridge oscillator as a combination of an op-amp and a Wien bridge connected in the positive feedback loop between the op-amp output and its differential input. The loop gain is a product of the very high op-amp gain and the very low bridge ratio. At the oscillating frequency, the bridge is slightly unbalanced and has a very small transfer ratio; so, the loop gain is about unity.

The final, and maybe the most popular viewpoint, is to break down the Wien bridge into two half bridges, and to consider the overall feedback as composed of two partial feedbacks - a nonlinear negative feedback (the voltage divider Rb-Rf connected to the inverting op-amp input) and a frequency-dependent positive feedback (the Wien network connected to the non-inverting input). Thus the feedback voltage applied to the op-amp differential input is the difference between the two partial voltages.

Now about the operation...

I have been recruiting students for our various telecommunication projects and we faced a lot of issues during the induction process.

Suggestions welcome - especially for undergraduate engineering degrees.

Integrated circuits are built of many electronic elements connected in a circuit that is enclosed in a package. These integrated circuits are connected in various circuits. An example is an op-amp (built of many transistors, resistors and capacitors) that is used to build an op-amp inverting amplifier. Then what is the op-amp here - a circuit or an element?

Another example is a negative impedance converter. It consists of a few resistors and an op-amp, and acts as a negative resistor. What is it - a circuit (NIC) or an element (NR)?

After all the epic discussions-:) about the Wien bridge oscillator...

...I have finally arrived at the conclusion that we have to consider the bare Wien network as a key point of understanding the Wien oscillator. For this purpose, we have to reveal the role of each element constituting the whole network. Here are my speculations.

The Wien network consists of four elements - C1, R1, C2 and R2, but they can be grouped into two parts (impedance elements) - the lower part consists of the two connected in parallel C1 and R1; the upper part consists of the two connected in series C2 and R2. Thus, the Wien network can be thought as of a frequency- or time-dependent voltage divider. Let's think freely over and even dream about this ubiquitous arrangement to stir our imagination...

The voltage divider configuration consists of two impedances connected in series. The input voltage is applied across the whole network. The output voltage is taken between the common point and some reference point: the ground, the voltage supply rail or a middle point (virtual ground). In the last case, we obtain a bridge configuration (the Wien bridge in our case).

FREQUENCY DOMAIN. The two elements (resistive, nonlinear, reactive, etc.) of the voltage divider configuration have an opposite influence over the transfer ratio and the output voltage. If only one of them is frequently dependent (a capacitor), it will act as "loosing" or "pulling" element when the frequency increases from zero up to infinity. Thus we obtain the classic integrating (low-pass) and differentiating (high-pass) circuits.

Now assume both the elements are frequency-dependent and we have taken the voltage drop across the lower element as an output (the case of the Wien bridge oscillator). When the frequency increases, the impedance of the lower element decreases up to zero and the ratio (the output voltage) decreases up to zero as well. Contrary, if the frequency decreases, the impedance of the upper element increases up to infinity and the ratio (the output voltage) decreases up to zero again. Only at some ("resonant") frequency the ratio of this frequency-dependent voltage divider reaches its maximum of 1/3 and the circuit behaves as some "mixture" of integrating and differentiating circuits (band-pass). It is interesting to see how such a behavior is achieved... to imagine how Wien was thinking when inventing this clever passive circuits... to put ourselves in his place...

If the two elements had opposite frequency-dependent behavior (a capacitor and an inductor), there was no a problem to create a band-pass voltage divider. The problem here is that we have only one kind of a frequency-dependent element - a capacitor, having a different behavior at different frequencies: it has a low impedance at high frequency and high impedance at low frequency. Then, how do we make it to have the same behavior (not to pass the signal) at both the frequencies - high and low?

If we look closely at the Wien network, we can discern an integrating (low-pass) circuit or a differentiating (high-pass) circuit or both the elementary circuits inside it. First, we can think of it as of an integrating circuit R2-C1 that is "neutralized" at extremely low frequencies by connecting the capacitor C2 in series with the resistor R2 and the resistor R1 in parallel to the capacitor C1. Then, with the same success, we can think of it as of a differentiating circuit C2-R1 that is "neutralized" at extremely high frequencies by connecting the resistor R2 in series with the capacitor C2 and the capacitor C1 in parallel to the resistor R1.

Thus, at the very high frequencies, the behavior of the upper capacitor C2 is reversed and made similar to the behavior of an inductor by connecting in series the resistor R2 (the capacitive reactance has gradually disapeared with the frequency increase and the resistance R2 has gradually dominated). At the very low frequencies, the behavior of the lower capacitor C1 is reversed and made similar to the behavior of an inductor by connecting in parallel the resistor R1 (the capacitive reactance has gradually increased up to infinity with the frequency decrease and the resistance R1 has gradually dominated).

So, this was the great Wien's idea - to transmute a capacitor into an "inductor": at the very high frequencies - by connecting in series a resistor; at the very low frequencies - by connecting in parallel a resistor. Am I right?

TIME DOMAIN. It is even more interesting to investigate the Wien network operation through the time. I would even build a "real-time simulation" arrangement to visualize the operation extremely slowly, in a human friendly manner, like this one:

For this purpose, use high resistances (e.g., 100 kom) and large capacitances (e.g., 100 μF) to obtain an extremely low "resonant" frequency (about 0.01 Hz). Then, drive the network with a varying sine wave voltage source with an extremely low frequency (it is interesting to vary the voltage manually trying to keep a sine wave). Next, connect three Microlab analog inputs (ADCs): the first - to the input voltage; the second - to the voltage of the common point between the upper elements R2 and C2; the third - to the common point between the two network parts (the common point of R1, C1 and R2). Finally, write a program that continuously measures the voltages and draws voltage bars over the respective elements representing the voltages across them like this diagram (in addition, it draws current loops):

My next explanations are closely related to the Lutz's considerations about the network operation, e.g. this one: "...However, always: V(P)<V(N) because charging of Cp with decreasing charge current (Voltage at Cp goes high up to a maximum and then decreases again due to Cs charging and discharging through Rp at the same time)..." Now begin changing up and down (wiggle) the input voltage: first - very slowly, then moderately and finally - very quickly.

**1.**, the role of the capacitor C1 and the resistor R2 is negligible and we may ignore them (to imagine there is no C1 and R2 is a short connection). So, the Wien network acts as a humble differentiating C2-R1 circuit. Note that the discharging current through the resistor R1 dominates over the charging current coming from the upper part of the network and the output voltage "leads" the input one (there is a phase shift); the respective voltage bars on the screen do not move in the same direction. See also:

*When you wiggle the input voltage slowly***2. Contrary,**, the role of the resistor R1 and the capacitor C2 is negligible and we may ignore them (to imagine there is no R1 and C2 is a short connection). Now, the Wien network acts as a humble integrating R2-C1 circuit. Now note that the charging current coming from the upper part of the network dominates over the discharging current through the resistor R1 and the output voltage lags the input one (there is a phase shift again); the respective voltage bars on the screen do not move in the same direction as above. See again:

*when you wiggle the input voltage quickly***3. And finally,**(with a rate of change corresponding to the "resonant" frequency f0), all the elements play a role in the circuit operation, and the Wien network acts as a humble "resistive" voltage divider. There is such a proportion between the charging and discharging currents so that the output voltage follows the input one (there is no phase shift at all). But how do we define this "moderate rate of change"? Just look at the two voltage bars representing respectively the input and the output voltage on the screen and adjust the rate of change of the input voltage so that the output voltage bar to follow the input one.

*when you wiggle the input voltage moderately*The Wikipedia says:

"To convert from a base-10 integer numeral to its base-2 (binary) equivalent, the number is divided by two, and the remainder is the least-sign