A Forward Looking Digital Curriculum In Electrical Engineering

This paper describes the new digital track in the Electrical Engineering program at the Milwaukee School of Engineering (MSOE). It uses a combined top-down bottom-up approach. Students are exposed to a number of programming languages on embedded systems in three courses starting in the Freshmen year. Digital logic design ranging from simple gate logic to complex programmable logic devices is covered in two courses. In addition, a sixth course focuses on systems interfacing and mobile robots. These changes assure breadth and depth of knowledge in the digital field of Electrical Engineering. This paper focuses on both, the goals and objectives of the entire digital curriculum and the objectives and contents of the individual courses in the digital track. Technological changes in the Electrical Engineering field In the last ten years the field of Electrical Engineering has undergone a tremendous shift towards digitalization of almost everything. This is readily apparent in most consumer products and is evident for example in the shift from traditional control to digital control 1 . It does not mean that the analog side of Electrical Engineering is suddenly being replaced but rather that electrical engineers use digital systems as the controlling mechanism. This trend goes hand in hand with the increased usage of microcontrollers for systems control. Recent advances in 8-bit microcontroller technologies along with dramatic cost reductions increased the usage of these low-end controlling devices. It is estimated that by the year 2005 a total number of 5 billion 8-bit microcontroller units are shipped annually 2 . MSOE has realized that the microcontroller has become one of the core elements in an Electrical Engineering design and has, therefore, shifted the focus of its digital track. Objectives of the digital track in the EE program Objectives of the digital track in Electrical Engineering can be grouped into the following areas: 1. Programming languages P ge 1.39.1 a. Knowledge of designing and implementing computer programs using various techniques, such as algorithm development, flowcharts etc. b. Knowledge of at least one procedural programming language. c. Knowledge of at least one objective-oriented programming language (possibly an extension of the procedural language). d. Knowledge of at least one assembly language. 2. Embedded Systems a. Knowledge of programming embedded systems in HLL and assembly. b. Knowledge of designing embedded systems. c. Knowledge of interfacing embedded systems to real-life sensors and actuators. 3. Digital Signal Processing a. Knowledge of the traditional fields of DSP, such as discrete time signals and systems, difference equations, z-transform, FIR and IIR filters, etc. b. Knowledge of discrete and fast Fourier transform. 4. Digital Logic and Circuits a. Knowledge of number systems, codes, Boolean algebra. b. Design of combinational and sequential logic circuits. c. Design of digital circuits using SSI, MSI, and PLDs. d. Design of digital systems and subsystems using basic digital building blocks, such as multiplexers, decoders, full adders, ROMs etc. e. Design of sequential circuits using various representations such as state diagrams, ASM charts, and VHDL. f. Design of the Data Path and Control Path of a Control Unit. g. Design of a Control Unit as a FSM and microprogramming. It has been decided that a combined top-down bottom-up would be the best approach to conquer the above list. The objectives concerned with programming languages and embedded systems are covered with a top-down approach, while DSP and Digital Logic and Circuits are covered with a bottom-up approach. This exhibits several consequences: • Since no hardware experience is required in programming microcontrollers in a high level language, objectives 1.a, 1.b, and 1.d can be achieved by using an embedded system as the development platform rather than a personal computer. This has the added advantage that students in Electrical Engineering learn programming in an environment they are most likely to continue using. In addition, these programming classes can be taught relatively early in the curriculum, as it is done at MSOE in the Winter quarter of the Freshman year for objectives 1.a and 1.b (EE1910), and in the Fall quarter of the Sophomore year for objective 1.d (EE2920). P ge 1.39.2 • Since objectives 1.a, 1.b, and 1.d are performed on an embedded system, there is no need for additional coverage of objective 2.a. • Even though implementations of compiler for object-oriented languages do exist on 8-bit microcontroller platforms, it has been deemed necessary that students in Electrical Engineering also learn programming on a personal computer platform. Hence, objective 1.c is covered by an additional course in the Sophomore year using standard PC software as the development environment (CS2510). • Objectives 3.a and 3.b are given their own course in the junior year, since these objectives are only loosely dependent on the other objectives (EE3220). • Objectives 4.a, 4.b, 4.c are covered by a course in the fall quarter of the sophomore year immediately after courses covering circuit theory. This course is structured in a bottom-up fashion, starting with Boolean algebra, number systems and codes, and ends in design of combinational and sequential logic circuit design using SSI, MSI, and PLDs (EE290). • Objectives 2.b and 2.c are covered by a single course in the sophomore year, therefore enabling students to design microcontroller systems and interfacing circuitry (EE2930). • Objectives 4.d – 4.g are covered in a digital system design course in the senior year in a top-down approach, reaching the topics of the bottom-up approach of combinational and sequential logic circuit design (EE392). The combined coverage of all topics can be seen in the following figure, clearly indicating the combined bottom-up top-down approach. The horizontal axis shows the different courses in the order left-to-right while the vertical axis shows the order of coverage of the objectives by the individual course. The arrows show order of coverage in the individual course as well as order of courses within the digital track. It has been deemed vital that the bottom-up and the top-down approach reach the same level of abstraction, as it can be clearly seen in the figure.