Can you give some examples or counter examples of these engineering observations?

Question

On the four major fields of electrical engineering, we may say:

1. Electronics is rather difficult in the micro level and also in the macro level.
2. Communications is difficult in the micro level but more easily understood at the macro.
3. Control Theory is manageable at the micro level but is quite evolved in the big scheme.
4. Power Systems is more visible in both domains.

I agree with you SkyWayGuy! Everything is relative. I just posted this observation that I found intriguing; especially when I made it up after I finished my studies. Regarding the Control Theory, I was thinking at the time that when you have an implementation level problem your non-linearity is more easily constrained. In the case of more complex system, you have to incur to more powerful modeling methods to make the system performs within its stable region.

Answer 1

I'm an electrical engineer, and am familiar with each of the four fields that you have provided in your question. I believe you are trying to generalize about how detail oriented / system oriented each of these particular fields are with respect to a project or managment level. Here are my own observations:

1. Electronics - This happens to be my particular specialty. Electronics requires knowledge of details at many levels, so perhaps your analogy to "micro" and "macro" levels is correct. A good electronics engineer should possess and apply skill at both a systems level (macro) and in a detailed oriented (micro) implementation level. A set of specifications for a large project will need to be broken down into practical subsets of related functions and implemented in a manner that optimizes the goals of the project. This may be power savings, size or form factor constraints, or performance requirements such as for high speed operation. The successful electronic engineer will partition the design out at the macro level, then tackle the micro problems of solving smaller electronic design problems by selecting components, drawing schematics, simulating circuits, layout out PCB, etc. The circuits themselves may require knowledge of communications theory, control theory, and power concepts in order to come up with the overall design. Perhaps I am biased, but I feel this field is the most challenging and requires a broad range of knowledge versus other fields which may be more specialized.

2. Communications - Yes, it is difficult at the micro level which I would place in the realm of actual implementation. Communication theory is more of a systems level "macro" concept that requires more applied mathematics than practical implementation knowledge. Once a set of mathematical operations to accomplish the communication task are defined, implemenation usually requires an electronics engineer to choose the actual devices to perform those functions.

3. Control Theory - I would disagree that control theory is more manageable at the micro level. I would place it in the same set as Communications. It involves mathematical theories at a systems level with very little practical implementation (micro level) involvement. Electronics is usually needed, or a combination of electronics and computer programming skills to implement the control system.

4. Power systems - Power systems can have both aspects, but I feel that most power systems engineers probably focus more on systems theories for balancing loads and also on efficient transmission of power using transmission line theory. There is a practical (micro) level involvement as well though since selection of transformers, circuit breakers, contactors, transmission lines, relays, generators, etc may be involved as well.

I hope that helps!!