When input LS1 is first closed, state the status (on or off) of each output. When input LS1 is first closed, which rungs are true and which are false? g. When does the timer stop timing and reset itself? f. What is the value of the accumulated time when power is first applied? d. What is the length of the time-delay period? c. What type of timer has been programmed? b. Ladder logic program LS1 -TOF L2 TIMER OFF DELAY Timer Time base Preset Accumulated T4:0 EN o- LS1 SOL A 25 0 SOL B T4:0 SOLA DN T4:0 SOL B 3 T4:0 4 EN T4:0 5 EN Show transcribed image text Study the ladder logic program in Figure 7-41 and answer the questions that follow a. What will the accumulated value of the counter be when power is restored? Figure 7-41 Ladder logic program for Problem. Suppose that rung 1 is true for 5 s and then power is lost. When the timer’s accumulated value equals the preset value, state the status (on or off) of each output. When the timer’s accumulated value equals the preset value, which rungs are true and which are false? i.
Study the ladder logic program in Figure 7-41 and answer the questions that follow a. This indicated that both instructional methods contributed to higher posttest III scores The results of this study revealed that combined computer simulated laboratory instruction with the traditional methods of instruction will maximize the students' understanding of solid state electronics circuitry From this study, the researcher concluded the following: (1) students learned electronics circuitry concepts more when they utilized actual electronics components and then used computer simulations and (2) computer simulated laboratory instruction should be used to extend the traditional methods of laboratory instruction.Answer Chapter 7 Problem 4 of Programmable Logic Controllers,5th Edition.
Also, a significant difference was found between the combined pretests and the combined posttests means of the experimental and control groups. Since the treatment groups switched after two weeks perhaps, the sequence of instruction was an important factor. The results revealed that the simulation group scored significantly higher than the traditional group. Results did reveal that student attitudes were favorable to a similar extent with regard to both the simulation and the traditional methods of laboratory instruction Findings indicated that significant differences did exist between the computer simulated laboratory instruction and the traditional method of instruction as revealed by mean scores of the posttest II with the posttest I as a covariate. The experimental group received the pretests, experimental treatment, posttest I, traditional treatment, posttest II, and the posttests, while the control group received the pretests, traditional treatment, posttest I, experimental treatment, posttest II, and the posttests Findings indicated that no significant difference existed between the computer simulated laboratory instruction and the traditional method of instruction as revealed by the mean scores of the posttest I with the pretest as a covariate, posttest III with the posttest II as a covariate, and posttest III with the pretest as a covariate Findings also indicated no significant difference existed between students' attitude toward computer simulated laboratory instruction and traditional methods of instruction. In this study, the researcher randomly assigned subjects to particular groups. The study also examined the students' attitude toward computer simulated laboratory instruction versus traditional laboratory instruction as a means of conducting laboratory activities A pretest-posttest control group design was used in this experiment. This study was designed to compare and evaluate the effectiveness of computer simulated laboratory instruction versus traditional laboratory instruction (utilizing actual electronics components) for educating college students about solid state electronics circuitry.