ietti-103 – introduction to microcontrollers...

59
IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS) NAME: Last update 12 March 2021 # Due by Experiment Score 01 Session #12 Demonstrate DC voltage measurement 02 Session #12 Demonstrate DC current measurement 03 Session #12 Demonstrate microcontroller (MCU) pulsing an output 04 Session #12 Demonstrate Ohm’s Law 05 Session #12 Demonstrate effects of open and shorted faults 06 Session #12 Demonstrate proper fuse operation 07 Session #12 Safety tests of Development Board 08 Session #24 Demonstrate a voltage divider network 09 Session #24 Demonstrate current-limiting resistor for MCU output 10 Session #24 Demonstrate a current divider network 11 Session #24 Demonstrate KVL in a series-parallel DC circuit 12 Session #24 Demonstrate a Wheatstone bridge circuit 13 Session #24 SPICE simulation of a series-parallel DC circuit 14 Session #24 Create a custom resistance value 15 Session #36 Demonstrate source internal resistance 16 Session #36 Demonstrate Th´ evenin’s or Norton’s theorem 17 Session #36 Demonstrate electromagnetism 18 Session #36 Demonstrate electromagnetic induction 19 Session #36 SPICE simulation of a resistor-capacitor time delay 20 Session #36 Demonstrate resistor-capacitor time delay 21 Session #36 Demonstrate RC smoothing of MCU pulse output signal 22 Session #48 Choose your own 23 Session #48 Demonstrate diode characteristic curve 24 Session #48 Demonstrate BJT β 25 Session #48 Demonstrate MCU driving a heavy load using BJT 26 Session #48 Demonstrate MCU driving a heavy load using FET 27 Session #48 Demonstrate astable 555 circuit 28 Session #48 Demonstrate thyristor action 29 Last day Choose your own 30 Last day Demonstrate a relay-based logic function 31 Last day Demonstrate an IC gate logic function 32 Last day Demonstrate a MCU-based logic function 33 Last day SPICE simulation of an IC logic gate 34 Last day Demonstrate IC logic implementing arbitrary truth table 35 Last day Demonstrate MCU implementing arbitrary truth table # Due by Troubleshooting activity Score 36 Session #12 Computer simulation: simple one-resistor circuit 37 Session #24 Computer simulation: 3-resistor voltage divider 38 Session #36 Real circuit: RC time-delay circuit 39 Session #48 Real circuit: transistor switching circuit 40 Last day Real circuit: combinational logic circuit 41 Last all-lab day Lab clean-up activities 1

Upload: others

Post on 17-Oct-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)

NAME: Last update 12 March 2021

# Due by Experiment Score01 Session #12 Demonstrate DC voltage measurement02 Session #12 Demonstrate DC current measurement03 Session #12 Demonstrate microcontroller (MCU) pulsing an output04 Session #12 Demonstrate Ohm’s Law05 Session #12 Demonstrate effects of open and shorted faults06 Session #12 Demonstrate proper fuse operation07 Session #12 Safety tests of Development Board

08 Session #24 Demonstrate a voltage divider network09 Session #24 Demonstrate current-limiting resistor for MCU output10 Session #24 Demonstrate a current divider network11 Session #24 Demonstrate KVL in a series-parallel DC circuit12 Session #24 Demonstrate a Wheatstone bridge circuit13 Session #24 SPICE simulation of a series-parallel DC circuit14 Session #24 Create a custom resistance value

15 Session #36 Demonstrate source internal resistance16 Session #36 Demonstrate Thevenin’s or Norton’s theorem17 Session #36 Demonstrate electromagnetism18 Session #36 Demonstrate electromagnetic induction19 Session #36 SPICE simulation of a resistor-capacitor time delay20 Session #36 Demonstrate resistor-capacitor time delay21 Session #36 Demonstrate RC smoothing of MCU pulse output signal

22 Session #48 Choose your own23 Session #48 Demonstrate diode characteristic curve24 Session #48 Demonstrate BJT β

25 Session #48 Demonstrate MCU driving a heavy load using BJT26 Session #48 Demonstrate MCU driving a heavy load using FET27 Session #48 Demonstrate astable 555 circuit28 Session #48 Demonstrate thyristor action

29 Last day Choose your own30 Last day Demonstrate a relay-based logic function31 Last day Demonstrate an IC gate logic function32 Last day Demonstrate a MCU-based logic function33 Last day SPICE simulation of an IC logic gate34 Last day Demonstrate IC logic implementing arbitrary truth table35 Last day Demonstrate MCU implementing arbitrary truth table

# Due by Troubleshooting activity Score36 Session #12 Computer simulation: simple one-resistor circuit37 Session #24 Computer simulation: 3-resistor voltage divider38 Session #36 Real circuit: RC time-delay circuit39 Session #48 Real circuit: transistor switching circuit40 Last day Real circuit: combinational logic circuit

41 Last all-lab day Lab clean-up activities

1

Page 2: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

This is a lab course focused on scientific experimentation, where students both devise and conducttheir own experiments to explore principles. The instructor certifies each experimental stage for properformat, documentation, and accuracy by a checklist. The pre-run stage consists of the student writing anhypothesis (i.e. what they think will happen), an experimental procedure, and an assessment of risks alongwith appropriate mitigations for those risks. When all pre-run objectives are met, the student then runsthe experiment and collects data. That recorded data is shown to the instructor, along with the student’swritten analysis of the data and summary of the experiment. The instructor challenges the student with aquestion related to their experiment, which the student should be able to easily answer. Videorecording ofall experiments is encouraged. Experiments are listed in suggested order.

The goal of all scientific experimentation is learning. As such, there is really no such thing as a “bad”hypothesis – even disproven hypotheses offer valuable lessons. What matters most of all is the student’sanalysis and summary where they draw important lessons from the experiment.

Experiment scores reflect the thoroughness and accuracy of your presented work. Work that is completeand accurate when presented to the instructor will receive a 100% score. The instructor’s role is to certifyyour completed work, with re-work resulting in deductions to your score.

EET Program Learning Outcomes

(1) COMMUNICATION and TEAMWORK - Accurately communicate ideas across a variety of media(oral, written, graphical) to both technical and non-technical audiences; Function effectively as a member ofa technical team.

(2) SELF-MANAGEMENT – Arrive on time and prepared; Work diligently until the job is done; Budgetresources appropriately to achieve objectives.

(3) SAFE WORK HABITS – Comply with relevant national, state, local, and college safety regulationswhen designing, prototyping, building, and testing systems.

(4) ANALYSIS and DIAGNOSIS - Select and apply appropriate principles and techniques for bothqualitative and quantitative circuit analysis; Devise and execute appropriate tests to evaluate electronicsystem performance; Identify root causes of electronic system malfunctions.

(5) PROBLEM-SOLVING – Devise and implement solutions for technical problems appropriate to thediscipline.

(6) DOCUMENTATION – Interpret and create technical documents (e.g. electronic schematic diagrams,block diagrams, graphs, reports) relevant to the discipline.

(7) INDEPENDENT LEARNING – Select and research information sources to learn new principles,technologies, and/or techniques.

file eet_outcomes

2

Page 3: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Values

This educational program exists for one purpose: to empower you with a comprehensive set of knowledge,skills, and habits to unlock opportunities in your chosen profession. The following values articulate personalattitudes guaranteed to fulfill this purpose, and the principles upon which this program has been designed.

Ownership – you are the sole proprietor of your education, of your career, and to a great extent yourquality of life. No one can force you to learn, make you have a great career, or grant you a fulfilling life –these accomplishments are possible only when you accept responsibility for them.

Responsibility – ensuring the desired outcome, not just attempting to achieve the outcome. Responsibilityis how we secure rights and privileges.

Initiative – independently recognizing needs and taking responsibility to meet them.

Integrity – living in a consistently principled manner, communicating clearly and honestly, applying yourbest effort, and never trying to advance at the expense of others. Integrity is the key to trust, and trust isthe glue that binds all relationships personal, professional, and societal.

Perspective – prioritizing your attention and actions to the things we will all care about for years to come.Recognizing that objective facts exist independent of, and sometimes in spite of, our subjective desires.

Humility – no one is perfect, and there is always something new to learn. Making mistakes is a symptomof life, and for this reason we need to be gracious to ourselves and to others.

Safety – assessing hazards and avoiding unnecessary risk to yourself and to others.

Competence – applying knowledge and skill to the effective solution of practical problems. Competenceincludes the ability to verify the appropriateness of your solutions and the ability to communicate so thatothers understand how and why your solutions work.

Diligence – exercising self-discipline and persistence in learning, accepting the fact there is no easy way toabsorb complex knowledge, master new skills, or overcome limiting habits. Diligence in work means the jobis not done until it is done correctly: all objectives achieved, all documentation complete, and all root-causesof problems identified and corrected.

Community – your actions impact other peoples’ lives, for good or for ill. Conduct yourself not just foryour own interests, but also for the best interests of those whose lives you impact.

Respect is the acknowledgement of others’ intrinsic capabilities, responsibilities, and worth. Everyone hassomething valuable to contribute, and everyone deserves to fully own their lives.

file eet_values

3

Page 4: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Course description

This course introduces basic microcontroller operation in conjunction with resistor networks, time-delaynetworks, discrete semiconductor components, and integrated-circuit (IC) digital logic. All experimentsemploy scientific method: proposing falsifiable hypotheses, devising procedures, gathering data, analyzingresults, and developing documentation. Students also apply fundamental circuit principles to the diagnosisof simulated and real faults in these same types of circuits. Mastery standards applied to all experimentaland diagnostic steps guarantee attainment of learning outcomes.

Course learning outcomes

• Rigorously demonstrate fundamental circuit principles (e.g. Ohm’s Law, Kirchhoff’s Laws, networktheorems), semiconductor device characteristics, and Boolean algebra relations by means of scientificexperimentation. (Addresses Program Learning Outcomes 2, 4, 6, 7)

• Edit microcontroller programs to interface with peripheral circuitry as per specification. (AddressesProgram Learning Outcome 5)

• Troubleshoot faulted voltage dividers, DC bridge circuits, time-delay circuits, transistor switchingcircuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken at test points with circuit componentsand connections hidden from view. (Addresses Program Learning Outcomes 4, 6)

• Articulate diagnostic reasoning while troubleshooting these same circuits. (Addresses Program LearningOutcomes 1, 3)

4

Page 5: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Required Tools, Supplies, and Software

Listed by IETTI course number and course type (Thy = theory, Exp = Experiments, Prj = Projects).

Semester 1 = IETTI-101 (Theory), 103 (Experiments), and 102 (Projects)Semester 2 = IETTI-104 (Theory), 112 (Experiments), and 105 (Projects)Semester 3 = IETTI-222 (Theory), 221 (Experiments), and 220 (Projects)Semester 4 = IETTI-223 (Theory), 225 (Experiments), and 106 (Projects)

Tool, Supply, or Software Thy Exp Prj Thy Exp Prj Thy Exp Prj Thy Exp Prjinstallation 101 103 102 104 112 105 222 221 220 223 225 106

$25 scientific calculator X X X X X X X X X X X XComplex number math functions X X

$300 personal computer X X X X X X X X X X X Xany OS, not tablet

$10 USB “flash” drive X X X X X X X X X X X X$50-$100 digital multimeter X X X X X X X X

$400 optional upgrade: Fluke 87-V + + + + + +$300 optional upgrade: Simpson 260 + + + + + +

$150 USB-based oscilloscope X X X X X X X Xe.g. Picoscope model 2204A$10 solderless breadboard X X X X X X X X$25 grounding wrist strap X X X X X X X X

$10 jeweler’s screwdriver set X X X X X X X X$10 wire strippers, 18-24 AWG X X X X X X X X

$10 needle-nose pliers X X X X X X X X$20 diagonal wire cutters X X X X X X X X

$10 alligator-clip jumper wires X X X X X X X X(package of at least ten)

$15 small flashlight X X X X X X X X$10 safety glasses X X X X X

$25-$100 soldering iron (pencil-tip), X X X X X30 Watts or less

$15 tube/spool of rosin-core solder X X X X X$0 software: schematic editor X X X X X X X X

$0 software: Notepad++ text editor X X X X$0 software: NGSPICE circuit sim. X X X X

$0 software: WSL X X X X(Windows Subsystem for Linux)$0 software: tshoot fault sim. X X X X

$15 microcontroller development kit X X Xand IDE software

$0 software: PCB layout editor X

5

Page 6: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Required Tools, Supplies, and Software

Scientific calculator – at minimum your calculator must perform trigonometric functions (sine, cosine,tangent, etc.), offer multiple memory registers, and display values in both scientific and “engineering”notations. I recommend the Texas Instruments model TI-36X Pro because it easily performs complex-number arithmetic necessary for AC circuit analysis and is inexpensive.

Personal computer – all course materials are available in electronic format and are free (most are alsoopen-source), making a portable computer extremely useful. The school provides personal computers foron-campus use, but having your own will enable you to work outside of school. Any operating system, anysize hard drive, any amount of RAM memory, and any screen size is appropriate. Useful features worthhigher cost include an RJ-45 Ethernet port and an EIA/TIA-232 (9-pin) serial port.

Multimeter – this is your first and most important electronic test instrument. At minimum it mustmeasure DC and AC voltage, DC and AC current (milliAmpere range), resistance, and “diode check”voltage drop. Useful features worth higher cost include microAmpere current measurement, true-RMS ACmeasurement (for second-semester courses and above), frequency measurement, capacitance measurement,and minimum/maximum value capture. Cost is a strong function of accuracy, frequency range, and safety(“Category” ratings for over-voltage exposure). The Fluke model 87-V is an excellent professional-gradechoice for digital multimeters, and the Simpson 260 is an excellent professional-grade choice for analogmultimeters. Note that Fluke offers a 25% educational discount for students.

Oscilloscope – once too expensive for student purchase, entry-level USB-based oscilloscopes now costless than a textbook. Pico Technology is an excellent brand, and their model 2204A comes with high-quality probes as well. Plugged into your personal computer using a USB cable, the Picoscope turns yourcomputer’s monitor into a high-resolution oscilloscope display. Features include two measurement channels,10 MHz bandwidth, built-in arbitrary waveform generator (AWG), ± 100 Volt over-voltage protection,digital “cursors” for precise interpretation of amplitude and frequency, meter-style measurement capability,Fast Fourier Transform algorithm for frequency-domain measurement, export ability to several graphicimage formats as well as comma-separated variable (.csv) files, and serial communications signal decoding.Together with your multimeter, solderless breadboard and Development Board (which you will construct inthe IETTI-102 Project course and is yours to keep) this forms a complete electronics laboratory for doingexperiments and projects outside of school.

Soldering – the equipment you purchase for soldering need not be expensive, if you purchase the rightsolder. For electronics work you must use rosin-core solder. Kester is an excellent brand, and you shouldavoid cheap imported solders. For lead-based solder, a 63% tin and 37% lead alloy (Sn63/Pb37) works verywell. A one-pound roll is likely more solder than you will need in these courses, so I recommend buying justa small tube or small roll. I recommend a fine-tipped soldering iron (15 Watts continuous power, althoughsome with adjustable temperature controls may have higher power ratings to get up to soldering temperaturemore quickly) and a solder diameter 0.031 inches or smaller for doing fine printed-circuit board work. Also,keep the tip of your soldering iron clean by wiping it against a damp sponge or paper towel when hot, andnot leaving it hot any longer than necessary.

Microcontroller – these courses are not brand- or model-specific, but the Texas Instruments MSP430 seriesis highly recommended for their powerful features, modern design, and programmability in multiple languages(assembly, C, C++, and Sketch). I particularly recommend the model MSP-EXP430G2ET “LaunchPad”development board (MSP430G2553IN20 microcontroller chip) with Code Composer Studio for the IDEsoftware.

6

Page 7: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Required Tools, Supplies, and Software

All software required for these courses is free, and some of it is open-source.

Schematic editor – this is used to draft schematic diagrams for circuits. A good one is TinyCAD, but thereare also web-based CAD tools such as circuitlab.com that are very effective and easy to use.

Text editor – this is used to create plain-text files, kind of like a word processor but lacking formattingfeatures such as typeface, font size, etc. It is absolutely necessary for writing code of any kind. Notepad++

is a very good editor, but others work well too.

NGSPICE – this is a modern adaptation of the venerable SPICE circuit simulator which uses a text-coded“netlist” rather than a visual schematic diagram to describe circuits. Very powerful, and with decadesof netlist examples from earlier versions of SPICE to use as references. The installer lacks sophistication,being nothing more than a compressed (zip) file that you unpack. Once installed, you should instruct yourcomputer’s operating system to automatically associate any files ending in the extension .cir with theNGSPICE executable file ngspice.exe so that all of your netlist files will appear with the NGSPICE iconand will automatically load into NGSPICE when double-clicked.

WSL – Windows Subsystem for Linux is a “virtual machine” Linux operating system that runs within theWindows operating system, giving you a command-line user environment mimicking that of a Unix operatingsystem. It is a free application from Microsoft, with instructions available from Microsoft on how to install.I recommend installing the “Debian” distribution of WSL. Once installed, you will issue these commands inthe following order to install all the necessary programming tools:• sudo apt update

• sudo apt install build-essential

• sudo apt install python3

tshoot – this is a specialized circuit-simulator program that inserts faults into circuits and tests your abilityto locate them. The download consists of a single “tar” archive file which you must unpack and compileusing the following two commands within a Unix-type operating system or within WSL. The third commandlisted below starts and runs the application:• tar xvf *.tar

• make

• ./tshoot

IDE software – an “Integrated Development Environment” is a software package used to write code, andfor our purposes this would be code meant to run in a microcontroller. For the Texas Instruments MSP430series, the main IDE is called Code Composer Studio, and it supports programming in assembly language,C, and C++. A third-party add-on to Code Composer Studio called Energia supports programming in theSketch language, identical to that used by the popular Arduino microcontroller series.

file eet_tools

7

Page 8: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Grading standards for Experiment courses

Your grade for this course is based on percentage scores (in every calculation rounded down to whole-numbered values), with each category weighted as follows:

• Experiment scores = 25% (Note: all Experiments are mastery-based, which means they must beeventually completed at 100% competence in order to pass the course)

• Troubleshooting scores = 75% (Note: all Troubleshooting activities are mastery-based, which meansthey must be eventually completed at 100% competence in order to pass the course)

Please note the importance of completing all Experiments and all Troubleshooting activities on or beforetheir respective deadline dates. If any Experiment or Troubleshooting activity is incomplete by the end ofthe school day of the deadline date, it will receive a 0% score. If any Experiment or Troubleshooting activityis incomplete by the end of the last day of the course, you will earn a failing grade (F) for the course. AllExperiments and Troubleshooting activities must be complete by the end of the last day of the course toreceive a passing grade for the course.

Electronic submissions of Experiments and Troubleshooting activities are acceptable for full credit. Thestandards are just as high for electronic submissions as for face-to-face demonstrations. For Experiments,video documentation of you completing all objectives in their proper order will count as full credit. ForTroubleshooting activities, the fault must be random and all steps must be videorecorded in one seamlesstake, which limits electronic submissions of Troubleshooting activities to those designated as computersimulations (i.e. where the computer simulation software implements the random fault).

This course is based on experiments and troubleshooting activities, and does not have fixed start and stoptimes as is the case with instructor-facilitated theory sessions. However, your punctual and consistentattendance is important for your success, as these activities require significant time-on-task to complete.

If you must be late or absent, it is imperative that you contact your instructor as well as any classmates youmay be coordinating with so plans may be adjusted. It is still your responsibility to meet all deadlines.

A failing (F) grade will be earned for the entire course if any experiment or troubleshooting exercise is notcompleted on or before the deadline date, or for any of the following behaviors: false testimony (lying),cheating on any assignment or assessment, plagiarism (presenting another’s work as your own), willfulviolation of a safety policy, theft, harassment, sabotage, destruction of property, or intoxication. Thesebehaviors are grounds for immediate termination in this career, and as such will not be tolerated here.

file eet_grading_e

8

Page 9: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Recommended microcontrollers

This introductory course uses microcontrollers as a tool for exploring certain concepts fundamental tobasic DC and digital circuit theory. It is not a microcontroller programming course, as there are other coursesin the second year of this program giving that topic further treatment. For this course you will simply needa microcontroller of any kind, and here you will see some options.

BASIC Stamp

One of the first microcontrollers offered to hobbyists, the BASIC Stamp manufactured by Parallax isan excellent choice for a student’s first microcontroller. Documentation is excellent, the user base is large,and the programming language is easy to learn. Parallax also offers a wide range of accessory devices tointerface with their BASIC Stamp product line.

Arduino

Arguably the “king” of hobbyist microcontrollers, the Arduino is an open-source design with a vast userbase, a large array of good books for learning to use it, and a programming language that is more powerfulthan BASIC. Various shield accessories are made to fit directly on the Arduino board for very easy expansionof capabilities.

Texas Instruments MSP430 / LaunchPad

A relative newcomer to the microcontroller market, Texas Instruments’ model MSP430 microcontroller isa very powerful unit with programming software allowing full access to all device functions, with professional-depth language support for assembly coding as well as C and C++ coding. A parallel project called Energiaprovides an Arduino-clone programming environment to make the MSP430 as easy to program as an Arduino.TI also sells a small printed circuit board called “LaunchPad” used to program the microcontroller.

Any of these microcontroller options will suffice for this course, and they are inexpensive enough thatmost students can easily afford to purchase all three if they desire! It should be noted that neither theBASIC Stamp nor the Arduino offer enough sophistication in the choice of programming languages to sufficefor later IETTI microcontroller courses, but that the Texas Instruments MSP430 microcontroller is sufficientfor all. If you wish to purchase just one microcontroller, make it the MSP430.

9

Page 10: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 01

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to measure DC voltage using a multimeter. Note: a very practicalvariation on this theme would be to compare the measurements of two different multimeters (e.g. personalmultimeter versus school-provided multimeter).

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0035

10

Page 11: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 02

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to measure DC current using a multimeter. Note: a very practicalvariation on this theme would be to compare the measurements of two different multimeters (e.g. personalmultimeter versus school-provided multimeter).

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0036

11

Page 12: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 03

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to generate a pulsing signal using a microcontroller.You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:

http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0037

12

Page 13: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 04

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of Ohm’s Law.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0038

13

Page 14: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 05

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the effects of both shorted faults and open faults.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0039

14

Page 15: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 06

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of a fuse interrupting current.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0040

15

Page 16: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 07

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to test the AC line (wall-plug) wiring for safety on a DevelopmentBoard.

You will find useful information within the Electrical Hazards learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_hazards.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0041

16

Page 17: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 08

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of a voltage divider circuit.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0042

17

Page 18: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 09

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of limiting load current using a resistor,applied to a microcontroller pin outputting a pulsing signal.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0043

18

Page 19: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 10

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of a current divider circuit.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0044

19

Page 20: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 11

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of Kirchhoff’s Voltage Law in a DC series-parallel resistor circuit. Your demonstration should validate KVL within multiple loops in the circuit, atleast one of them excluding the power source.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0006

20

Page 21: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 12

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of a Wheatstone bridge circuit.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0045

21

Page 22: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 13

NAME: DUE DATE:

Write and execute a SPICE simulation to demonstrate the behavior of a series-parallel resistor circuit.You will find sample code with explanations in the “Gallery” chapter of the SPICE Modeling of Resistor

Circuits learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_spice_r.pdf

Pre-simulation objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of simulated circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will simulate)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

Simulation run:⊙All pre-simulation objectives must be certified complete before running your code

Post-simulation objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Includes text or screenshots of simulation results© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes any programming errors made (i.e. errors preventing the program from running)© Includes any simulation errors encountered (i.e. incorrect simulation results)© Describes lessons learned from this simulation

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain programming concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter parameter(s) and predict new program behavior)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of errors, choose effective methods to debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated edits and simulation runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero scorewill result if (1) the simulation is run without all pre-simulation objectives certified; or (2) you copy anyoneelse’s data or work. Note that it is proper to sample some (but not all!) of your source code from previoussimulations of your own or from others, so long as it is properly cited.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0019

22

Page 23: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 14

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to create a custom, non-standard resistance value (specified by theinstructor) by connecting multiple standard-size resistors together in a network.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0126

23

Page 24: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 15

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to measure the internal resistance of a voltage source (e.g. battery,Development Board power supply, solar panel).

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0047

24

Page 25: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 16

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of either Thevenin’s and Norton’sTheorem.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0048

25

Page 26: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 17

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of electromagnetism.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0049

26

Page 27: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 18

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of electromagnetic induction.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0050

27

Page 28: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 19

NAME: DUE DATE:

Write and execute a SPICE simulation to demonstrate inverse-exponential growth and decay for voltageand current in a resistor-capacitor network.

You will find sample code with explanations in the “Gallery” chapter of the SPICE Modeling of Inductiveand Capacitive Circuits learning module:

http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_spice_lc.pdf

Pre-simulation objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of simulated circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will simulate)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

Simulation run:⊙All pre-simulation objectives must be certified complete before running your code

Post-simulation objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Includes text or screenshots of simulation results© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes any programming errors made (i.e. errors preventing the program from running)© Includes any simulation errors encountered (i.e. incorrect simulation results)© Describes lessons learned from this simulation

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain programming concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter parameter(s) and predict new program behavior)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of errors, choose effective methods to debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated edits and simulation runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero scorewill result if (1) the simulation is run without all pre-simulation objectives certified; or (2) you copy anyoneelse’s data or work. Note that it is proper to sample some (but not all!) of your source code from previoussimulations of your own or from others, so long as it is properly cited.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0023

28

Page 29: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 20

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of inverse-exponential growth and decayin a resistor-capacitor network.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0008

29

Page 30: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 21

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of “smoothing” a pulse signal output bya microcontroller.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0051

30

Page 31: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 22

NAME: DUE DATE:

You may choose your own experiment, ideally one that will help you strengthen your understanding ofone or more foundational principles. One suggestion is to choose a concept misunderstood or misapplied ona previous assessment (e.g. a failed exam question).

Checklists for physical experiments and computer simulations appear on the following two pages. Yourchoice may be of either (or both!) types.

31

Page 32: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for physical experiment

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

32

Page 33: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for computer simulation

Pre-simulation objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of simulated circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will simulate)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

Simulation run:⊙All pre-simulation objectives must be certified complete before running your code

Post-simulation objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Includes text or screenshots of simulation results© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes any programming errors made (i.e. errors preventing the program from running)© Includes any simulation errors encountered (i.e. incorrect simulation results)© Describes lessons learned from this simulation

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain programming concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter parameter(s) and predict new program behavior)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of errors, choose effective methods to debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated edits and simulation runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero scorewill result if (1) the simulation is run without all pre-simulation objectives certified; or (2) you copy anyoneelse’s data or work. Note that it is proper to sample some (but not all!) of your source code from previoussimulations of your own or from others, so long as it is properly cited.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

33

Page 34: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for microcontroller-based experiment

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0002

34

Page 35: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 23

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the characteristic curve of a diode.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0052

35

Page 36: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 24

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of current gain (β) in a bipolar junctiontransistor.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0053

36

Page 37: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 25

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of using a bipolar junction transistor toallow a microcontroller to drive a heavy load.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0054

37

Page 38: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 26

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the principle of using a field-effect transistor to allowa microcontroller to drive a heavy load.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0055

38

Page 39: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 27

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of an astable 555 timer circuit.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0009

39

Page 40: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 28

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the operating principle of a thyristor.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0056

40

Page 41: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 29

NAME: DUE DATE:

You may choose your own experiment, ideally one that will help you strengthen your understanding ofone or more foundational principles. One suggestion is to choose a concept misunderstood or misapplied ona previous assessment (e.g. a failed exam question).

Checklists for physical experiments and computer simulations appear on the following two pages. Yourchoice may be of either (or both!) types.

41

Page 42: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for physical experiment

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

42

Page 43: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for computer simulation

Pre-simulation objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of simulated circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will simulate)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

Simulation run:⊙All pre-simulation objectives must be certified complete before running your code

Post-simulation objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Includes text or screenshots of simulation results© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes any programming errors made (i.e. errors preventing the program from running)© Includes any simulation errors encountered (i.e. incorrect simulation results)© Describes lessons learned from this simulation

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain programming concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter parameter(s) and predict new program behavior)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of errors, choose effective methods to debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated edits and simulation runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero scorewill result if (1) the simulation is run without all pre-simulation objectives certified; or (2) you copy anyoneelse’s data or work. Note that it is proper to sample some (but not all!) of your source code from previoussimulations of your own or from others, so long as it is properly cited.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

43

Page 44: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Checklist for microcontroller-based experiment

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0002

44

Page 45: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 30

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of a logic circuit built fromelectromechanical relays, implementing a logic function of your choosing (e.g. AND, OR, NAND, NOR,XOR, etc.).

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0011

45

Page 46: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 31

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the behavior of an IC logic gate, implementing a logicfunction of your choosing (e.g. AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR, etc.).

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0012

46

Page 47: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 32

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate the use of a microcontroller to implement a multi-inputdigital logic function.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0057

47

Page 48: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 33

NAME: DUE DATE:

Write and execute a SPICE simulation to demonstrate the behavior of an integrated circuit logic gate.You will find sample code with explanations in the “Gallery” chapter of the SPICE Modeling of Resistor

Circuits learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_spice_r.pdf

Pre-simulation objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of simulated circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will simulate)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

Simulation run:⊙All pre-simulation objectives must be certified complete before running your code

Post-simulation objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Includes text or screenshots of simulation results© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes any programming errors made (i.e. errors preventing the program from running)© Includes any simulation errors encountered (i.e. incorrect simulation results)© Describes lessons learned from this simulation

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain programming concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter parameter(s) and predict new program behavior)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of errors, choose effective methods to debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated edits and simulation runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero scorewill result if (1) the simulation is run without all pre-simulation objectives certified; or (2) you copy anyoneelse’s data or work. Note that it is proper to sample some (but not all!) of your source code from previoussimulations of your own or from others, so long as it is properly cited.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0058

48

Page 49: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 34

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate an arbitrary truth table implemented in IC gate logic.The truth table will have three inputs and be randomly assigned by the instructor. The gate circuit mustdrive a DC load requiring more current than the final gate alone can source or sink.

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Calculates error (Error % of value = Measured−Predicted

Predicted× 100%) and proposes sources of error

© Describes lessons learned from this experiment• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]

→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values and re-calculate)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign using different components, research datasheet parameters)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0013

49

Page 50: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Experiment 35

NAME: DUE DATE:

Plan and conduct an experiment to demonstrate an arbitrary truth table implemented in amicrocontroller. The truth table will have three inputs and be randomly assigned by the instructor. Themicrocontroller must drive a DC load requiring more current than the output pin alone can source or sink.

You will find sample code in the Texas Instruments MSP430 Microcontrollers learning module:http://ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/mod_mcu_430.pdf

Pre-run objective checklist:• Written hypothesis: [Attempts = (ungraded) ] [Completed = ]

© Makes clear and verifiable prediction(s), quantitative if at all possible© Shows schematic diagram of experimental circuit in full detail (i.e. everything you will build)© Shows all supporting mathematical work

• Written procedure: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Clearly states criteria for either accepting or rejecting the hypothesis (i.e. “How will we know?”)© Identifies components and test equipment to be used© Cites any sampled source code and properly credits that code’s author© Identifies how to build and test in stages where applicable, to simplify troubleshooting

• Risk assessments: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]© Identifies all personal risks (e.g. shock, burns, inhalation) and methods to mitigate© Identifies all risks to hardware (e.g. citing maximum ratings from datasheets where applicable) andmethods to mitigate

Experimental run:⊙All pre-run objectives must be certified complete before running the experiment⊙All safety protocols must be followed

© Running experiment shown to the instructor, either live or recorded

Post-run objective checklist:• Data collected: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙

All data must be original (i.e. no plagiarism)© Records data with full precision (i.e. no rounding), sketches or screenshots where appropriate© Lists final version of source code

• Written analysis: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]⊙All conclusions must be your own (i.e. no plagiarism)

© Explains how the collected data either confirms or refutes the hypothesis© Includes explanations of any errors and corrections© Describes lessons learned from this experiment

• Challenge question: [Attempts = ] [Completed = ]→ e.g. Conceptual (explain circuit or code concepts, correct a misconception, qualitative analysis)→ e.g. Quantitative (alter component values or code and predict effects)→ e.g. Diagnostic (explain effects of faults, choose effective tests to diagnose/debug)→ e.g. Other (e.g. redesign to achieve same objective with different components/code)

The instructor will have you demonstrate each completed objective, in order from top to bottom. The totalnumber of completed objectives divided by the total number of attempts made yields the percentage score.Repeated experimental runs are expected and will not count as additional attempts. A zero score will resultif (1) the experiment is run without all pre-run objectives certified; or (2) any safety standard is violated(e.g. touching energized conductors); or (3) you copy anyone else’s data or work.

You must answer the challenge question without aid from any external information source.

file we_0059

50

Page 51: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Troubleshoot 36

NAME: DUE DATE:

Troubleshoot a computer-simulated fault within a simple one-resistor circuit. The schematic diagramfor this circuit as simulated in the tshoot troubleshooting simulator software is shown below:

+−V1

Fuse

F1

TP0

TP1 TP2

TP3

TP4

TP5

Voltagesource

Circuit #000

TP6

TP7

TP8

TP9

Wire

WireWire Wire

Wire Wire

Wire

W1

W2

W3

W4

W5

W6

W7

(2 Watts)Heater

R1

Nominal component values:

V1 = _______ Volts +/- _____ %

R1 = _______ Ohms +/- _____ %

The tshoot software randomly selects the fault and the circuit component values for you, after whichyou will have a limited amount of time to perform measurements and other tests. The software tracks eachdiagnostic step you take, the amount of time you needed to take each step, and assigns a “cost” to each stepbased on its complexity and risk. A successful troubleshooting exercise consists of both correctly identifyingthe location and nature of the fault, as well as logically defending the necessity of each diagnostic step.Incorrect fault identification, unnecessary steps, and/or incorrect defense of any step will result in a failedattempt. “Par” scores exists for the number of steps taken, time, and cost of correctly diagnosing the fault.You must achieve at par or better.

Troubleshooting is mastery-based, meaning every one must be competently completed by the due datein order to pass the course, and you will be given multiple opportunities to re-try if you do not pass on thefirst attempt. Each re-try begins with another randomized fault. Scoring is based on the number of attemptsnecessary to successfully troubleshoot a circuit (e.g. 1 attempt = 100% ; 2 attempts = 80% ; 3 attempts= 60% ; 4 attempts = 40% ; 5 attempts = 20% ; 6 or more attempts = 0%). Troubleshooting assessmentsare closed-book and closed-note. You are encouraged to practice using the tshoot software, being free andreadily available for your use.

file we_1009

51

Page 52: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Troubleshoot 37

NAME: DUE DATE:

Troubleshoot a computer-simulated fault within an unloaded voltage divider circuit. The schematicdiagram for this circuit as simulated in the tshoot troubleshooting simulator software is shown below:

+−V1

Fuse

F1

Toggle switch

S1

R1 Resistor

Resistor

Resistor

R2

R3

TP0

TP1TP2

TP3

TP4

TP5

Circuit #001

Voltagesource

Nominal component values:

V1 = _______ Volts +/- _____ %

R1 = _______ Ohms +/- _____ %

R2 = _______ Ohms +/- _____ %

R3 = _______ Ohms +/- _____ %

The tshoot software randomly selects the fault and the circuit component values for you, after whichyou will have a limited amount of time to perform measurements and other tests. The software tracks eachdiagnostic step you take, the amount of time you needed to take each step, and assigns a “cost” to each stepbased on its complexity and risk. A successful troubleshooting exercise consists of both correctly identifyingthe location and nature of the fault, as well as logically defending the necessity of each diagnostic step.Incorrect fault identification, unnecessary steps, and/or incorrect defense of any step will result in a failedattempt. “Par” scores exists for the number of steps taken, time, and cost of correctly diagnosing the fault.You must achieve at par or better.

Troubleshooting is mastery-based, meaning every one must be competently completed by the due datein order to pass the course, and you will be given multiple opportunities to re-try if you do not pass on thefirst attempt. Each re-try begins with another randomized fault. Scoring is based on the number of attemptsnecessary to successfully troubleshoot a circuit (e.g. 1 attempt = 100% ; 2 attempts = 80% ; 3 attempts= 60% ; 4 attempts = 40% ; 5 attempts = 20% ; 6 or more attempts = 0%). Troubleshooting assessmentsare closed-book and closed-note. You are encouraged to practice using the tshoot software, being free andreadily available for your use.

file we_1002

52

Page 53: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Troubleshoot 38

NAME: DUE DATE:

Troubleshoot a fault within the following resistor-capacitor time delay network, where a pair of normally-open pushbutton switches cause a capacitor to slowly charge and discharge, respectively. This circuit shallbe constructed in such a manner that all circuit components and simulated faults must be hidden from view(e.g. covering it up with a box or towel) while leaving the pushbuttons and test points accessible. It is highlyrecommended to use your Development Board to construct this circuit, placing the capacitors, pushbuttonswitches, and resistors on a solderless breadboard while using the terminal blocks as test points, and thatyou select resistor and capacitor values resulting in a time constant (τ) value reasonable for viewing voltagerise and fall using a multimeter (e.g. all resistors 10 kΩ, capacitor 100 µF). These diagrams will be allowedfor use during the troubleshooting exercise:

+VCharge

Discharge

R1

R2

R3

C1

TP1TP2

TP3TP4

TP5TP6

TP1TP2TP3TP4TP5TP6

--

+ -

Charge

Discharge

R1

R2

R3

C1

DC source

Schematic diagram

Pictorial diagram

Terminal blocks

Breadboard

Possible faults include:

• Power supply failure• Any component failed open• Any component failed shorted• Any component value altered

53

Page 54: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

The instructor will either set up or supervise other students setting up a random fault hidden fromview. You will then have a limited amount of time to independently perform measurements and other testswhile under the continuous observation of the instructor. A successful troubleshooting exercise consists ofboth correctly identifying the location and nature of the fault, as well as logically defending the necessity ofeach diagnostic step. Incorrect fault identification, unnecessary steps, and/or incorrect defense of any stepwill result in a failed attempt. Your only access to the faulted circuit will be via the test points, and onlyone unpowered test will be permitted.

Troubleshooting is mastery-based, meaning every one must be competently completed by the due datein order to pass the course, and you will be given multiple opportunities to re-try if you do not pass on thefirst attempt. Each re-try begins with another randomized fault. Scoring is based on the number of attemptsnecessary to successfully troubleshoot a circuit (e.g. 1 attempt = 100% ; 2 attempts = 80% ; 3 attempts =60% ; 4 attempts = 40% ; 5 attempts = 20% ; 6 or more attempts = 0%). Troubleshooting assessments areclosed-book and closed-note.

file we_1007

54

Page 55: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Troubleshoot 39

NAME: DUE DATE:

Troubleshoot a fault within a circuit using a transistor as a switch to control the energization of arelatively heavy load. This circuit shall be constructed in such a manner that all circuit components andsimulated faults must be hidden from view (e.g. covering it up with a box or towel) but test points willbe available for contact with a multimeter’s probes. A schematic diagram showing the circuit and its testpoints will be allowed for use during the troubleshooting exercise.

The circuit shall utilize a pushbutton switch to serve as the input and some load such as a small DCmotor or low-valued resistor as the controlled output. Possible faults include:

• Power supply failure• Any component failed open• Any component failed shorted• Any component value altered

The instructor will either set up or supervise other students setting up a random fault hidden fromview. You will then have a limited amount of time to independently perform measurements and other testswhile under the continuous observation of the instructor. A successful troubleshooting exercise consists ofboth correctly identifying the location and nature of the fault, as well as logically defending the necessity ofeach diagnostic step. Incorrect fault identification, unnecessary steps, and/or incorrect defense of any stepwill result in a failed attempt. Your only access to the faulted circuit will be via the test points, and onlyone unpowered test will be permitted.

Troubleshooting is mastery-based, meaning every one must be competently completed by the due datein order to pass the course, and you will be given multiple opportunities to re-try if you do not pass on thefirst attempt. Each re-try begins with another randomized fault. Scoring is based on the number of attemptsnecessary to successfully troubleshoot a circuit (e.g. 1 attempt = 100% ; 2 attempts = 80% ; 3 attempts =60% ; 4 attempts = 40% ; 5 attempts = 20% ; 6 or more attempts = 0%). Troubleshooting assessments areclosed-book and closed-note.

file we_1008

55

Page 56: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Troubleshoot 40

NAME: DUE DATE:

Troubleshoot a fault within a combinational logic circuit. This circuit shall be constructed in such amanner that all circuit components and simulated faults must be hidden from view (e.g. covering it up witha box or towel) but test points will be available for contact with a multimeter’s probes. A schematic diagramshowing the circuit and its test points will be allowed for use during the troubleshooting exercise.

The circuit shall have three inputs and drive a DC load requiring more current than the final gate alonecan source or sink. Possible faults include:

• Any resistor failed open• Any transistor terminal failed open• Any gate output failed high• Any gate output failed low

The instructor will either set up or supervise other students setting up a random fault hidden fromview. You will then have a limited amount of time to independently perform measurements and other testswhile under the continuous observation of the instructor. A successful troubleshooting exercise consists ofboth correctly identifying the location and nature of the fault, as well as logically defending the necessity ofeach diagnostic step. Incorrect fault identification, unnecessary steps, and/or incorrect defense of any stepwill result in a failed attempt. Your only access to the faulted circuit will be via the test points, and onlyone unpowered test will be permitted.

Troubleshooting is mastery-based, meaning every one must be competently completed by the due datein order to pass the course, and you will be given multiple opportunities to re-try if you do not pass on thefirst attempt. Each re-try begins with another randomized fault. Scoring is based on the number of attemptsnecessary to successfully troubleshoot a circuit (e.g. 1 attempt = 100% ; 2 attempts = 80% ; 3 attempts =60% ; 4 attempts = 40% ; 5 attempts = 20% ; 6 or more attempts = 0%). Troubleshooting assessments areclosed-book and closed-note.

file we_1005

56

Page 57: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

Lab clean-up 41

NAME:

This list represents all of the major work-items that must be done at every semester’s end to preparethe lab space for the upcoming semester. Each student will have at least one task assigned to them.

Non-technical tasks

© Thoroughly clean whiteboard(s)

© Clean floor of all debris

© Clean all workbench surfaces

© Organize all cables, cords, test leads neatly into their storage locations

© Clean all electrical panel and test equipment surfaces

© Note any depleted bins (electronic components, threaded fasteners, cables, etc.)→ Report to instructor for re-ordering in preparation for next semester

Technical tasks

© Check fastener storage bins to ensure no fasteners are misplaced

© Check digital IC storage bins to ensure no ICs are misplaced

© Check resistor storage bins to ensure no resistors are misplaced

© Check inductor/transformer storage bins to ensure no inductors or transformers are misplaced

© Check capacitor storage bins to ensure no capacitors are misplaced

© Test oscilloscopes for basic functionality (e.g. all channels functional, all vertical sensitivity settingsfunctional, all timebase settings functional, triggering functions properly)

© Test signal generators for basic functionality (e.g. all waveshapes functional, magnitude adjustmentfunctional, frequency adjustment(s) functional)

© Test power supplies for basic functionality (e.g. voltage adjustments functional, current limits functional,voltage/current meters functional)

© Test benchtop multimeters for basic functionality (e.g. all voltage ranges functional, all current rangesfunctional, overcurrent fuse good)

© Test permanently-installed demonstration projects for basic functionality (read instructions on each!)

file we_2000

57

Page 58: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

General Circuit Design Tips

When designing and constructing circuits for experimental and prototyping purposes, the following tips arerecommended for success:

• Sketch a schematic diagram before constructing anything. You need to have a clearunderstanding of what it is you intend to build before you begin building, in order to avoid majorerrors and hazards, and planning your build in schematic form is an excellent way to do that. Having aclear diagram in hand also aids others who you might wish to help you if things don’t work as planned.

• Build and test in stages. If you try to build the entire system before testing it, you will very likelyencounter multiple errors which will be more time-consuming to diagnose than if you took the time tobuild and test each portion of your circuit before building and testing the next portion.

• Choose resistor values between 1,000 and 100,000 Ohms unless there is some compelling designrationale for using a smaller or larger values. Reactance values within AC circuits should also fall withinthese same limits. Circuits built with low-value resistors tend to dissipate a lot of power when energizedby constant-voltage sources, while circuits built with high-value resistors tend to exhibit “signal sag”when connected to loads and/or test equipment.

• Use decoupling capacitors connected in parallel with the DC power pins of every integrated circuit,to stabilize DC voltage for reliable operation. This is especially critical for high-speed digital circuitsand sensitive analog circuits, where variations in DC supply voltage may compromise signal integrity.1 µF ceramic capacitors work well for this purpose, and should be located as close to each IC’s powersupply terminals as possible.

• Diversify your learning experience by using different types of test equipment (e.g. DMMs,VOMs, oscilloscopes), different types of construction techniques (e.g. solderless breadboards, solderedconnections, terminal blocks), and different types of power sources. Remember, the reason you are inthis course is to learn, not just to complete assignments!

When using sources of energy other than laboratory-quality power supplies, you may need to stabilizesource voltage to ensure reliable circuit function. This is especially true when using chemical batteries, solarpanels, and other electrical sources known for varying voltage output. A simple integrated circuit called athree-terminal fixed voltage regulator takes in power at some voltage larger than what your circuit needs, anddissipatively reduces the voltage level to a fixed value determined by the part number of the regulator IC.The popular LM78xx series of voltage regulators is recommended, where the last digits represent the fixedoutput voltage (e.g. 7805 = 5 Volts, 7812 = 12 Volts, etc.). An illustration showing how such a regulatormight be installed in a solderless breadboard for general experiment/prototype use is shown here:

7805

+-

12 V

5 V

Regulator

C1 C2

InGnd

Out

Your circuit goes here . . .

Capacitors C1 and C2 help stabilize the regulated voltage if your circuit’s current happens to pulserather than be steady over time. Consult the regulator IC’s datasheet for pin designations, recommendedcapacitor sizes, and also for general maximum voltage and current ratings.

file eet_tips

58

Page 59: IETTI-103 – Introduction to Microcontrollers (EXPERIMENTS)ibiblio.org/kuphaldt/socratic/model/ietti103.pdf · circuits, and combinational logic circuits from measurements taken

General Troubleshooting Advice

All electronic circuit faults fall into at least one of these categories:

• Connection fault – the components are not properly connected together.

• Design flaw – the circuit cannot work because something about it is incorrectly designed.

• Lack of power/signal or poor quality – the power and/or signal source is “dead” or “noisy”

• Component fault – one or more components is faulty.

• Test equipment – either the test equipment itself is faulty, or is not being used appropriately.

Of these categories, the one causing more problems for students initially learning about circuits than allthe others is the first: connection fault. This is because the ability to translate an idea and/or a schematicdiagram into a physical circuit is a skill requiring time to develop. Many such problems may be avoided by(1) drawing a complete schematic of what you intend to build before you build it, (2) marking that schematicto show which connections have been made and which are left to make, and (3) using an ohmmeter (notyour eyes!) to verify that every pair of points which should be connected are connected and that no pointswhich should be electrically distinct from each other are in fact electrically common.

Troubleshooting strategies

• Verify the symptom(s) – Always check to see that the symptom(s) match what you’ve been told byothers. Even if the symptoms were correctly reported, you may notice additional (unreported) symptomshelpful in identifying the fault.

• Verify good power quality – Is the source voltage within specifications, and relatively free of “ripple”and other noise?

• Check signals at component terminals – Use an oscilloscope or multimeter to check for propersignals at each of the component pins, to see if each one matches your expectations. An importantcheck, especially for integrated circuits, is whether the measured output signal(s) are appropriate forthe measured input signal(s).

• Simply the system – If possible, re-configure the circuit to be as simple as possible, because complexitymakes faults harder to find.

• Swap identical components – If particular a component is suspected of being faulty, and you areable to swap another (identical) component for it, do so to see whether or not the problem moves withthe old component. If so, that component is to blame; if not, the problem lies elsewhere.

• Always look for Root Cause(s) – don’t declare success simply by finding the proximate (i.e. themost direct) cause, but continue your search to find what design flaw, circumstance, or other distalcause led to it.

file eet_troubleshooting

59