filter design [DSP]

Prev: Particle filter help
Next: C6713 HELP REQUIRED WITH EMIF INTERFACING

From: Tim Wescott on 4 Jul 2010 20:03

From: Tim Wescott on 4 Jul 2010 20:09

On 07/04/2010 04:40 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
> On 7/4/2010 12:49 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>
>> *ALL* responses to be independent of programming language!!!
>> You do understand that FORTRAN, BASIC, matlab etc *are* ALL
>> programming languages. ;/ *LOL*
>
> The problem is that most teaching in DSP seems to be about teaching how
> to use Matlab to design or solve a problem. So, without Matlab, a
> student does not how to design or solve a problem, because they did not
> learn the theory nor the mathematics itself well.
>
> So, for a student of a typical signals and systems course, Matlab IS the
> subject itself. They can plot system responses, design a filter, do all
> sorts of things using Matlab commands only. Take Matlab or simulink
> away, and they are lost.
>
> My point is, Matlab is not just a programming language for many. Matlab
> commands and tools seem to have morphed into the DSP subject itself, so
> can't separate the two.

Are you sure that this is the intent, or that this is how the students
that post on USENET view it?

Certainly when I was learning signals and systems decades ago the 'C'
students (and even a few of the 'A' students) would totally fail to
grasp the underlying theory, while still being able to make up for this
lack by energetically applying the appropriate computations by rote to
get the required answers to homework problems.

Move forward twenty five years, and you find that doing a Fourier
transform by hand has been replaced by tippy-tappy-typing Matlab
commands -- but does that mean that it is the instructor's intent to
present "Matlab is DSP", or just that there are still the same
proportion of students that make it through by rote with no
understanding, but that the rote is different than when you were an
undergrad?

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

From: student28 on 5 Jul 2010 06:40

>On 7/3/2010 2:30 PM, student28 wrote:
>> (i)I have designed a band pass filter in matlab using these commands:-
>> n2=200;
>> f2=500;
>> w1=2*95/f2;
>> w2=2*105/f2;
>> wn=[w1 w2];
>> y2=boxcar(n2+1);
>> hd2=fir1(n2,wn,y2);
>> [h2,o]=freqz(hd2);
>>
>> i want the filter response such that i get a bandwidth of 10MHz centered
at
>> frequency 100MHz. But i am getting the center frequency as 200MHz. how
to
>> plot the response correctly?
>
>Have you considered the possibility that the plot is correct and the
>design is faulty?
>
>>
>
>
>Jerry
>--
>Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get.
>???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
>can anyone plz tell why the design is faulty , although I have got the
response I wanted correctly.

From: Rob Gaddi on 6 Jul 2010 13:28

On 7/4/2010 5:09 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
> On 07/04/2010 04:40 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
>> On 7/4/2010 12:49 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>
>>> *ALL* responses to be independent of programming language!!!
>>> You do understand that FORTRAN, BASIC, matlab etc *are* ALL
>>> programming languages. ;/ *LOL*
>>
>> The problem is that most teaching in DSP seems to be about teaching how
>> to use Matlab to design or solve a problem. So, without Matlab, a
>> student does not how to design or solve a problem, because they did not
>> learn the theory nor the mathematics itself well.
>>
>> So, for a student of a typical signals and systems course, Matlab IS the
>> subject itself. They can plot system responses, design a filter, do all
>> sorts of things using Matlab commands only. Take Matlab or simulink
>> away, and they are lost.
>>
>> My point is, Matlab is not just a programming language for many. Matlab
>> commands and tools seem to have morphed into the DSP subject itself, so
>> can't separate the two.
>
> Are you sure that this is the intent, or that this is how the students
> that post on USENET view it?
>
> Certainly when I was learning signals and systems decades ago the 'C'
> students (and even a few of the 'A' students) would totally fail to
> grasp the underlying theory, while still being able to make up for this
> lack by energetically applying the appropriate computations by rote to
> get the required answers to homework problems.
>
> Move forward twenty five years, and you find that doing a Fourier
> transform by hand has been replaced by tippy-tappy-typing Matlab
> commands -- but does that mean that it is the instructor's intent to
> present "Matlab is DSP", or just that there are still the same
> proportion of students that make it through by rote with no
> understanding, but that the rote is different than when you were an
> undergrad?
>

Or, to tie it together, that the 'C' students you used to know, who
entirely failed to grasp the underlying concepts, are now professors
teaching that Matlab == DSP.

--
Rob Gaddi, Highland Technology
Email address is currently out of order

From: Vladimir Vassilevsky on 6 Jul 2010 13:47

Rob Gaddi wrote:

> On 7/4/2010 5:09 PM, Tim Wescott wrote:
>> On 07/04/2010 04:40 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi wrote:
>>> On 7/4/2010 12:49 PM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>>
>>>> *ALL* responses to be independent of programming language!!!
>>>> You do understand that FORTRAN, BASIC, matlab etc *are* ALL
>>>> programming languages. ;/ *LOL*
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem is that most teaching in DSP seems to be about teaching how
>>> to use Matlab to design or solve a problem. So, without Matlab, a
>>> student does not how to design or solve a problem, because they did not
>>> learn the theory nor the mathematics itself well.
>>>
>>> So, for a student of a typical signals and systems course, Matlab IS the
>>> subject itself. They can plot system responses, design a filter, do all
>>> sorts of things using Matlab commands only. Take Matlab or simulink
>>> away, and they are lost.
>>>
>>> My point is, Matlab is not just a programming language for many. Matlab
>>> commands and tools seem to have morphed into the DSP subject itself, so
>>> can't separate the two.
>>
>>
>> Are you sure that this is the intent, or that this is how the students
>> that post on USENET view it?
>>
>> Certainly when I was learning signals and systems decades ago the 'C'
>> students (and even a few of the 'A' students) would totally fail to
>> grasp the underlying theory, while still being able to make up for this
>> lack by energetically applying the appropriate computations by rote to
>> get the required answers to homework problems.
>>
>> Move forward twenty five years, and you find that doing a Fourier
>> transform by hand has been replaced by tippy-tappy-typing Matlab
>> commands -- but does that mean that it is the instructor's intent to
>> present "Matlab is DSP", or just that there are still the same
>> proportion of students that make it through by rote with no
>> understanding, but that the rote is different than when you were an
>> undergrad?
>>
>
> Or, to tie it together, that the 'C' students you used to know, who
> entirely failed to grasp the underlying concepts, are now professors
> teaching that Matlab == DSP.

I think the problem results from objectivism and political correctness.
A professor can only ask questions at the test only if he provided
canned answers for those questions in his course. Hence the art of
problem solving is replaced by the art of picking correct answer from
the list of multiple choices. Matlab is the big list of such choices,
hence there are so many stupidents matlabi around.

VLV

First | Prev | Next | Last
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: Particle filter help
Next: C6713 HELP REQUIRED WITH EMIF INTERFACING