Principles and Applications of Electrical Engineering

This text is poorly written. It makes frequent leaps in logic from equation to equation. It will say something like "if you substitute in this equation, you'll get this equation" but it looks like they skipped several steps from the first equation to the second. For example, we are given a differential equation for our first-order transient response: it's of the form τ(dx(t))/(dt) +x(t) = 0. We are told to substitute αe^(st) for x(t). It gives us no explanation, simply telling us that doing so "results in a characteristic equation" (a what?):τs+1=0.How in the world did they do that? A similar thing happens with the long-term steady-state response equation. It tells us that "it is a worthwhile exercise to show that" x_ss=K_sF satisfies the equation "τ(dx(t))/(dt) +x(t) = K_sF". I guess it's not worthwhile enough to actually show us.The explanation sections are much too long, often followed by poorly-explained examples. It seems like there's a mismatch between the explanations and the examples.The homework assignments have more than a few errors. In chapter 3, there is a mesh current problem that is missing a resistor value. I banged my head against the wall for over an hour over the weekend trying to solve it. When I went to my instructor, he looked up the answer key, and it turns out that the resistor value was 4 ohms, which the textbook did not bother to mention. In chapter 5, there are dozens of problems that tell you to refer to Figure 5.xx, and assume various numbers. This is very confusing because one of them told us to assume several numbers, but did not tell us anything about the switch positions (the diagram had bidirectional arrows). Turns out that the "original" problem (a couple pages later) did tell us about the switch position, and we were somehow supposed to know to use that different problem's information.Another problem told us to assume L_1 and L_2 equal some numbers that I forget. The problem had only one inductor...and the answer key (that my instructor looked in) gave a third value.A lot of my classmates used a paid homework service that apparently does not have these errors, but I paid a lot of money for this textbook and I shouldn't have to pay an online homework website to show me how to do this homework, let alone to show me what the CORRECT homework question should be!These are just the more recent ones that I can remember. The problems are often very tough, even from the start. They often build upon utilizing multiple new concepts/scenarios at once which is sad because it does not allow us to strengthen a new concept one at a time and then gradually build upon the rest.Learning objective. Isn't that a nice buzzword? This textbook is filled with these, which are depicted by an arrow with "LO" inside it. Confusingly, in Chapter 5, the first time you "learn" how to form differential equations, it's in the examples, which have the "LO" arrows by them. It doesn't explain to the read why it does the steps that it does. After it gets the initial equation, it then does a lot of rearranging (again, without bothering to explain what we're working toward) to give us the final answer. "What is that," I ask, "a standard form?" It was hard to find, but yes, there is a standard form, which they introduce about six pages later. Oddly enough, there is no LO arrow by any of the equations on that page. These chapters are organized in a confusing manner and should have been broken up into smaller chapters.I like the idea of their "Make the Connection" sections, which draws analogies between E.E. and hydraulics, mechanics, and thermodynamics. However, the equations there are also poorly-explained and it ends up being a waste of time for me.I am a 4.0 GPA student who has a passion for E.E. If I weren't already dedicated to this field, this textbook would have scared me a lot. I am worried that other students taking a course that heavily relies on this textbook may come to the conclusion that they are simply not a good fit for electrical engineering.I admit that it's possible that I personally am having a worse-than-average experience with this textbook, but be forewarned that you will likely need plenty of outside resources to make it through this book and that if you have the choice, to look at other textbooks.

If your professor/school wants this book as the premise of your studies, I apologize, and I didn't even write the book. If I made a wage where each typo in this book was a dollar added to my wage, I would not need to finish engineering school. It is truly a monstrosity of a book, and I have no idea who decided this was enough of a professional standard to publish. I've been graded harshly for typos in my essays, and did not make money off of them, so why should this author? Please consider another book for your own sanity.

This book is our reference for academics and my Electrical Engineering Business.

My textbook is missing the end of chapter 7 and the beginning of chapter 8. Thus, when I went to do the homework problems for chapter 7, they were not there. This is ridiculous. It's not like they were torn out or anything. They were just never printed.

Its a text book in good shape.

It was a great book.

good condition.

Great for the price

Good book.

exceed the expectation