Author Topic: schematic etiquette  (Read 5943 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline subolg123Topic starter

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 12
  • Country: us
schematic etiquette
« on: April 11, 2014, 05:40:02 pm »
it might be time to craft a short video on schematic etiquette.

« Last Edit: June 16, 2014, 03:21:52 pm by subolg123 »
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5550
  • Country: us
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #1 on: May 02, 2014, 01:29:49 am »
By all means, power rails deserve their own page, don't mix them with other stuff just because you have the space to do so.

But I'm a noob.
 

Offline free_electron

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 8515
  • Country: us
    • SiliconValleyGarage
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #2 on: May 02, 2014, 01:35:40 am »
hmm. interesting idea.. i'll add a chapter to my next book on this. (book on PCB design)
Professional Electron Wrangler.
Any comments, or points of view expressed, are my own and not endorsed , induced or compensated by my employer(s).
 

Offline SL4P

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2318
  • Country: au
  • There's more value if you figure it out yourself!
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #3 on: May 02, 2014, 07:47:15 am »
My vote - where possible ---

-- Signal flow from left-to-right
       - and also when it doesn't confuse the purpose of the drawing - inputs of parts on left / outputs on right
       - mixed i/o to go where it best indicates the function of the circuit

--Supply rails in descending voltage from top-to-bottom - where it makes the diagram more readable.

--Connectors & Ports - when possible, Inputs arriving from the left / Outbound pointing to the right... !
       - preferably in a similar layout/order if they arrive on another sheet that makes them easier to mentally associate.
       - same for connectors that appear on different or separate sheets.

Schematics are documentation to be read in the future - not just a means to generate a netlist and PCB layout !
Don't ask a question if you aren't willing to listen to the answer.
 

Offline ignator

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 206
  • Country: us
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #4 on: May 02, 2014, 05:55:13 pm »
Make all the rules you want. Only you can follow your rules.
PC drafting don't follow your rules. They can't read schematics, and they never worked on any electronic anything first hand.
All they want is a netlist, PWB artwork, BOM and auto insert data base. They don't maintain the product.

This is what I learned in 30 years of working on avionics.
It was frustrating, PC drafting fell into "engineering services" organization. They had their own vice-president. And a fundamental rule of large organizations is never say anything bad outside of your organization. So in the 30 years I was there, it never improved. The design quality was left to the engineer, and how tenacious they were in dealing with idiots.
You could leave a list of layout rules, and they were ignored. There were a few designers that knew what they were doing, but you could never get them to work on your board, as they were in demand and everything was a que to get through their hurtle. The organization did everything to prevent engineering having access to the schematic capture tool (EPD), and the board layout tool (VISULA/CR5000).

To try to add to useful input:
Notes for service center technicians that (especially for analog) indicate the signal processing blocks. If you stick build a differential amp, draw it so it looks like a differential amp.
For processor based sch. have a memory map on the processor or memory page.
Layout notes that are released with the schematic are good (for future support by the next cognizant), if they can be excluded from the published version to limit intellectual property info.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2014, 11:38:29 pm by ignator »
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5550
  • Country: us
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #5 on: May 03, 2014, 01:33:19 am »
I believe this is meant as in sharing schematics for peer review or as in open source hardware, not as in submitting them to your manufacturing house.
 

Offline zapta

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 6189
  • Country: us
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #6 on: May 03, 2014, 04:11:19 am »
How would you critic the schematic in page 3 here http://www.mikrocontroller.net/attachment/193474/MX-500P-11.pdf ?

My own are much more decoupled but I appreciate the compactness, planarity and the artistic aspects of that one.
 

Offline miguelvp

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 5550
  • Country: us
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2014, 04:38:56 am »
How would you critic the schematic in page 3 here http://www.mikrocontroller.net/attachment/193474/MX-500P-11.pdf ?

My own are much more decoupled but I appreciate the compactness, planarity and the artistic aspects of that one.

Test point voltages would help, way too compact and reminds me of 60's circuits on the back of consumer audio equipment manuals.
 

Offline pickle9000

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2438
  • Country: ca
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2014, 05:09:52 am »
I always encouraged the "Think of the next guy" rule. 
 

Offline T3sl4co1l

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21606
  • Country: us
  • Expert, Analog Electronics, PCB Layout, EMC
    • Seven Transistor Labs
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #9 on: May 03, 2014, 05:31:44 am »
Although this page is about the use of my bitmap symbols, the rules in general apply to most anything:
http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms/Elec_Circuit_Rules.html

Some day I would love to make the symbols in 300 DPI bitmaps, and vector format.  And have either a schematic capture program, or a netlist with hints, or something, to use them with.  A lot of work either way, and especially for the latter, I don't know nearly enough about LaTeX programming to be able to do it.  The result would be excellent though.

Tim
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electronic design, from concept to prototype.
Bringing a project to life?  Send me a message!
 

Online Neilm

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1545
  • Country: gb
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #10 on: May 03, 2014, 06:39:37 pm »
I have worked at a company where we used a database for the symbols. The only problem, this database was administered by mechanical engineers (who also do our board layouts). Result, the symbols could have the pins anywhere - usually the electronic symbol was just the chip package. A square block with pins on it - output usually being on the left.
Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe. - Albert Einstein
Tesla referral code https://ts.la/neil53539
 

Offline Kremmen

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1289
  • Country: fi
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #11 on: May 03, 2014, 07:19:56 pm »
Mostly good suggestions so far. One thing that i would like to add in this day of the all pervading digital microchips: please, do use logic symbols that are more descriptive than the dumb blank rectangle with unidentifiable pins scattered around the perimeter. IEC (for one) has done a good job in coming up with a vast library of descriptive graphics elements to help visualize the functionality and features of specific logic and other circuits. Granted, there is a learning curve and some effort is required in correctly applying those but the reward in elucidating the functionality is considerable.
Nothing sings like a kilovolt.
Dr W. Bishop
 

Offline T3sl4co1l

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 21606
  • Country: us
  • Expert, Analog Electronics, PCB Layout, EMC
    • Seven Transistor Labs
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #12 on: May 04, 2014, 06:41:47 am »
EWwwwwhewwhewww (shuddering), IEC symbols.

So ugly and undescriptive.  How very European.

Tim
Seven Transistor Labs, LLC
Electronic design, from concept to prototype.
Bringing a project to life?  Send me a message!
 

Offline German_EE

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2399
  • Country: de
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #13 on: June 12, 2014, 03:39:57 pm »
So, a question about drawing a schematic. If you have to draw a 16-pin IC do you draw the pins in numerical order or are they grouped by function with inputs on the left and outputs on the right?
Should you find yourself in a chronically leaking boat, energy devoted to changing vessels is likely to be more productive than energy devoted to patching leaks.

Warren Buffett
 

Offline KJDS

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2442
  • Country: gb
    • my website holding page
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #14 on: June 12, 2014, 04:12:28 pm »
So, a question about drawing a schematic. If you have to draw a 16-pin IC do you draw the pins in numerical order or are they grouped by function with inputs on the left and outputs on the right?

The schematic symbol should be a schematic, so inputs on left, outputs on right, power supplies on top and grounds on the bottom.  CLumps of pins should be tgrouped together, so address pins 1-16 should be in order on the left hand side. Data pins 1-16 should also be in order, and as they are input and output then put them on the side which looks neatest for the part.



Offline Richard Crowley

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 4317
  • Country: us
  • KJ7YLK
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #15 on: June 12, 2014, 05:10:14 pm »
So, a question about drawing a schematic. If you have to draw a 16-pin IC do you draw the pins in numerical order or are they grouped by function with inputs on the left and outputs on the right?

The people who draw IC packages per the physical layout seem to be mostly those with no understanding of electronics.  For example guitar players hacking together some stomp-box circuit, etc.

No offense to musos. It is encouraging that they are exploring electronics. But dumbing-down the schematic diagram isn't helping them learn anything except which pin to solder the wire to.

The word "schematic" implies that it shows the SCHEME of the circuit, NOT the physical layout.  The physical layout is useful when you are trying to find components on a board, but the SCHEME is what you need when you are trying to understand/debug a circuit.
 

Offline Dave Turner

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 447
  • Country: gb
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2014, 10:40:27 pm »
I am an occidental, by which I mean my roots are European, American, etc. Our writing is left to right and top down.
For me it is easier to see schematics laid out in the way. Indeed there have been a number of comments about 'poorly' drawn schematics that do not follow this system.

Other peoples have writings which work differently, Chinese, Arabic etc.

Just as matter of interest and ignoring international peer pressure how do the non-occidental (for want of a better description) members of this forum feel what a 'natural' schematic layout should be?
 

Offline Zad

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1013
  • Country: gb
    • Digital Wizardry, Analogue Alchemy, Software Sorcery
Re: schematic etiquette
« Reply #17 on: June 14, 2014, 02:36:01 am »
A simple rule for schematics.....Less is More.
Attached is the Apple Macbook schematic. Don't ask me where I got it from.  Okay, its 78 pages, but it's rarely crowded with more than one function per page.

Funnily enough, this illustrates one of my pet hates - having a small number (sometimes even one) of components on a sheet, with lots and lots of words and "mess".

All we have here is an automatically generated list with some graphical augmentation.  Diagrams should give you some idea of the logical operation of a system. Adding extra clutter to the components, with attributes such as tolerance, power, composition (metal film, COG, ceramic etc) and physical dimensions just obscures the circuit diagram and removes from its usability.

A diagram is an abstraction, losing detail which is unnecessary. Most of the time, all that is needed is component number and value. All the attributes and so on can be stored on component detail pages. I don't know if this is genuine Apple, but it smells of Chinese reverse engineering.




Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf