Connect with us

Some 3D Animations

Discussion in 'General Electronics Discussion' started by translatortom, Jun 1, 2012.

Scroll to continue with content
  1. translatortom

    translatortom

    4
    0
    May 31, 2012
    Hi guys,

    I've just completed two 3D animations. Maybe they are of interest for you :)

    3D Animation of Transistors


    3D Animation of LCD Monitors


    Regards,
    translatortom
     
  2. (*steve*)

    (*steve*) ¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd Moderator

    25,496
    2,837
    Jan 21, 2010
    I watched about half of the first one.

    Aside from the technical errors (of which there are a several fundamental ones) it was great.

    Unfortunately the fundamental errors mean that I wouldn't recommend these videos to a beginner.

    1) electrons don't bind to each other
    2) current WILL flow from collector to emitter if the voltage gets high enough
    3) How can the majority of current flow toward the collector when the transistor is turned off?

    Also you seem to suggest that doping with tri-valent agents is done less often or is somehow less important.

    Your circuit shows what appears to be a 1.5V battery, I would probably have shown it with something that looks like a small 9V battery -- but that is not a major issue.

    Of greater concern is that you place the load in the emitter rather than the collector. This will result in a circuit that is far less effective, and is a real newbie error.
     
  3. translatortom

    translatortom

    4
    0
    May 31, 2012
    Hi Steve,
    Thank you very much for sharing your thoughts with us :)
    As you probably know, the target group of this animation is for example a student who wants to understand the basic structure of transistors. To meet the demands of the target group, we had discussions on (for example) where to place the light bulb. As you noted, no engineer in his right mind would have placed it that way. However, we placed it that way, because a) the light bulb will light up, b) it was the easiest way without going into too much detail, and c) there is no need for the target group to create a really effective circuit (it's just about understanding basic things).
    Same for other ideas... We could have created a complex 15 minutes animation with footnotes, details, equations, etc., but we didn't. Of course, the transistor will be conductive if the current is too high, there is no doubt about that. We left it out and focused on the basic structure. But we do appreciate your feedback and understand your concerns. Thank you very much!

    Regards,
    translatortom
     
  4. davenn

    davenn Moderator

    13,833
    1,950
    Sep 5, 2009
    Tho your logic may be valid with what you were thinking
    BUT I also strongly suggest you follow steve's comments. REGARDLESS of who the intended target audience is .... you should do it correctly, else you instill bad/incorrect ideas into people very early on in their learning of electronics. And you can guarantee that those false beliefs will stay with them for a very long time

    cheers
    Dave
     
  5. CocaCola

    CocaCola

    3,635
    5
    Apr 7, 2012
    I have to agree with what is being said, there is nothing wrong with 'dumbing' it down for a particular audience but that 'dumbing' down should not introduce factual or implementation errors...

    Fixing the errors Steve outlined does not make the video any more complex, complicated or take away in any bit from your target goal and audience it just corrects factual errors in the video...
     
  6. (*steve*)

    (*steve*) ¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd Moderator

    25,496
    2,837
    Jan 21, 2010
    I feared this was someone just trying to spam us with links to their youtube videos. I'm glad it has turned into a discussion :)

    Back to the videos...

    The problem is that if someone understands any of what you're showing and they spot the errors then they will wonder at the accuracy of the stuff they don't understand.

    My suggestions:

    Around 0:30 - I would be a little more accurate about valence electrons. Whilst what you say is true, is is misleading. Sure it has 4 valence electrons and it wants to pair with another 4, but it's not because it has 4 electrons that it wants 4 more. The idea is that the shell will be full with 8 electrons, so it can fill up to 8.

    Around 0:57, I would make the other doping agents an "OR" rather than a "But...". To my mind it seems that the "but" implies some sort of difference or inferiority.

    I would also mention which one is a P and which is an N dopant here (but not explain it until later). This is an important concept which seems to remain obscured too long in this video.

    1:37 - you mention free electrons (which are obvious) and holes (which are less so), then refer to N and P type layers without explicitly saying which is which. I could be left asking "Is the layer that had the extra electron N, or the layer that gained it?" and "Is the hole what was filled by the migrating electron, or the place the electron came from?" An "N" and a "P" appearing over the layers, and a better representation of the hole might help.

    3:00 "No matter how high the voltage..." could be "At normal operating voltages". This would tell the same truth, AND make people realise that other stuff can happen at higher voltages.

    Also the pink later is graduated from top to bottom. Does this graduation mean anything? Is it the strength of the doping? or is it just to make the picture look nice? Since the meaning in this image is explained by the colours, a use of colour could be expected to mean something. If you do wish to use a graduation (or a difference in colour saturation) then shouldn't the emitter be darker? At least if it's correct then people can come back later and think "well look at that -- it even hinted at a deeper truth". People who understand will probably pick up on it and have their confidence increased. And then one could discuss the base doping...

    I also wish I could see the edges of the N and P layers under that blue

    3:18 You show the collector current as equal to the base current (count the electrons)

    This explanation also seems to be at odds with the "at any voltage". This is especially true as the base is always shown as being +ve. Perhaps if it were initially -ve and was changed to positive?

    I'm not overly sure of the exact physics at this point, but I (as explained above) don't trust what I see. Perhaps I would be expecting to see a change in the electric field somewhere.

    3:55 You describe the bulb as being one which automatically turns on as light intesity falls. This is a description of the circuit, not of the bulb.

    As described previously, placing the load in the collector circuit is really essential. Otherwise you'll be teaching exactly the wrong thing, and worse, describing a circuit that doesn't work the way you say it does (you're not wanting to introduce feedback at this stage)

    4:10 Absolutely wrong. most of the current cannot flow to the collector when the transistor is off. Also it adds to the bad assumption that people make about current being supplied by a voltage source (as opposed to being determined by the load).

    As also previously mentioned an AA or other 1.5V looking cell is not the best choice.

    If this is the case with the LDR illuminated then surely the line should show current flowing through the LDR rather than through the base.

    Also, you've just switched from electron flow to conventional current. The ways the arrows point is exactly the opposite of what was seen in the last animation. This would have to cause confusion.

    Frankly, I'd probably create a circuit that turns on the light when the LDR is illuminated because that (whilst less useful) is a far easier explanation that doesn't directly invoke questions about the BE voltage required to turn on the transistor.

    In any case, as 4:36 you add an extra arrow showing current exiting the emitter and going through the bulb. It looks as if current has been pouring into this transistor and can now escape. Not a good analogy. I would have preferred to see an arrow drawn first showing base current and a small emitter current, then a larger (fatter) arrow showing the collector (and hence emitter) current.

    At present it is actually hard for me to pick the bits that are not going to be contradicted later.
     
  7. (*steve*)

    (*steve*) ¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd Moderator

    25,496
    2,837
    Jan 21, 2010
    And now for the LCD animation:

    Firstly, I would say at the very beginning that what are called LED monitors and TVs are actually LCD monitors that use LEDs as the back-light source. It's amazing how many people don't understand.

    Secondly, you describe a back-light first, then describe the operation of a reflective LCD display.

    Or perhaps, you really mean that the back-light is the source of light, however in this case would it not be better to show the light coming from the bottom rather than the top?

    Since your initial examples were both reflective and transmissive, should you not describe both?
     
  8. translatortom

    translatortom

    4
    0
    May 31, 2012
    Hi guys,

    Great to read you again :)

    I really appreciate your feedback, and there are good ideas on your site. I just want to mention that, according to your feedback, all school books as well as animations will lead to false conclusions (and in fact they will!). Just a quick example: The atoms in this animation (and its electrons, etc.) appear, for example, in different colors and shapes. Now, according to you, I would have to say (in this animation) that an atom doesn't look the way I (and many other) show it. There are no electrons that look that way, the core is much smaller, there are no colors, etc.! Same for silicon... last time I checked, you couldn't use normal silicon to make transistors, but I didn't mentioned that - it isn't important here in our opinion ;) Furthermore, doping isn't realized through a syringe :) etc., etc., etc.

    This animation is not for engineers who want to build up circuits for Intel :) / It's an animation for children/students that want to understand transistors (and want to have a "good time" :) / Give your detailed "book" about transistors with 10 footnotes to 14-year olds and they will fall asleep... faster than you can mention the third footnote :)

    However, there are also some really good points you mentioned that would result in a better animation.

    Regards,
    translatortom :)
     
  9. (*steve*)

    (*steve*) ¡sǝpodᴉʇuɐ ǝɥʇ ɹɐǝɥd Moderator

    25,496
    2,837
    Jan 21, 2010
    Sure, I take your point about simplification.

    Although I have a number of problems with the video, I'm sure that most of them could be easily fixed, some with just a slight wording change.

    If you do update the video it would be great to take a second look.

    (I don't really want to sound too negative -- the video has a lot of good things that I didn't mention)
     
    Last edited: Jun 3, 2012
  10. davenn

    davenn Moderator

    13,833
    1,950
    Sep 5, 2009
    Yes and earlier this was addressed... but it didnt seem to sink in...

    nothing wrong with making it more simple... BUT dont sacrifice accuracy as a result!!

    else as I said in my earlier post .... you will instill incorrect ideas into people that will stick with them for a long time

    Its good that you are making the effort to reach students, not enough of that is done through the school cirriculum....
    just Keep It Accurate :)

    cheers
    Dave
     
  11. translatortom

    translatortom

    4
    0
    May 31, 2012
    Hi,

    Thank you for your replies.

    @steve
    I just can't modify the video. If I upload it again to YouTube, it won't get high in the ranking list again. Don't know exactly why, but it happened earlier to my videos. So, I will leave it that way. The German version is currently a great success :) But I will implement some of your ideas in the next 3D animation.

    @davenn
    As mentioned earlier, we decide on the basis of the target group what to implement. It is of course up to you to tell your 5-year old boy how he was "created" (in full detail and highly accurate if you like ;) ) because you are afraid that he will never understand it (believe me: he will sooner or later!). Or tell him, that painting a sun with a face is nothing but wrong... because you are afraid that he will always believe that the sun looks that way... so you start explaining: "The sun isn't yellow! You must use all of your colors! And what are those light rays? Nothing but wrong, inaccurate, etc., etc."
    So, once again. We might be wrong, but we focused on the target group (children, students but NOT engineers), and we came up with this animation. That's all :)

    However, I always appreciate feedback of visitors. So, once again, thank you very much for your help!

    Best wishes,
    translatortom
     
Ask a Question
Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?
You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Electronics Point Logo
Continue to site
Quote of the day

-