Feedback on schematic

[Benta]

@tooki, Petrukhin, you're really going off topic!
Take this discussion to the KiCAD section, please.

It's not helpful to the OP.

[tooki]

PWR_FLAG isn't a net name, it's a special "component" (actually, just a flag on a net) that tells KiCad that the net it's attached to is a power net. (Not that they're the same power net. It's literally just metadata saying "I'm a power net".) Apparently, KiCad uses this in ERC when making sure every component is powered.

Thanks. I'll know. I'm just planning to switch to KiCAD this year. 

From what? After getting comfortable in EasyEDA and Altium, I find KiCAD to be needlessly complex and fiddly. (Though not impenetrable like Eagle.)

EasyEDA is very similar to KiCad, probably modeled on it and made. But there are already too many glitches and inconvenient moments in it. The last thing I didn't like was hiding the project through some clumsy other site, before it was just enough to choose "share". Direct selection of components from LCSC is very convenient, but increasingly limited and the price is already catching up with Mouser, for example. Altium is very bulky and expensive.

I used KiCad for a long time, but then I used EasyEDA for a long time - I'm drawn back. 

Definitely not. EasyEDA is very clearly modeled after Altium. Some dialogs even copy Altium's layout and oddball wording! EasyEDA is nothing at all like KiCAD. (I use Altium and EasyEDA frequently.)

Altium is costly (if you're not in education), and while it does have a learning curve, it still makes more sense than KiCAD or Eagle.

@tooki, Petrukhin, you're really going off topic!
Take this discussion to the KiCAD section, please.

It's not helpful to the OP.

It happens, and it's not entirely off-topic. (Nor would the KiCAD forum be unambiguously appropriate since it's a comparison of packages.)

[Benta]

It happens, and it's not entirely off-topic. (Nor would the KiCAD forum be unambiguously appropriate since it's a comparison of packages.)

Seriously? Your bickering about different EDA packages is on topic? Just because there's no general EDA forum on this site, you hijack a thread like this to to ride your hobby horse?

No.
Bad style.

[rHermes]

@rHermes:

Just for fun, I redrew your circuit to my satisfation, using the KiCAD library standard parts (took around 15 min. It's Corona time...).

What immediately stood out after redrawing is that your "debouncer" circuit wont work.

Here it is:

Thanks for the redrawing, but I see something that doesn't look quite right, you are pulling CEP and CET to ground, which will disable the counter.

Also, the debouncer circuit did work, what is it that shouldn't work?

[Benta]

Sorry, my mistake. like I said it was a 15 min. job, so I didn't bother to consult the datasheet. My purpose was more to show how a schematic could look using KiCAD.

EDIT: spent a couple of minutes correcting the schematic. Attached the .PDF as well as the .sch file for you to play with

[tooki]

It happens, and it's not entirely off-topic. (Nor would the KiCAD forum be unambiguously appropriate since it's a comparison of packages.)

Seriously? Your bickering about different EDA packages is on topic? Just because there's no general EDA forum on this site, you hijack a thread like this to to ride your hobby horse?

No.
Bad style.

Discussion ≠ bickering. And your complaints have now equaled the number of posts (excluding my responses to your complaints) that I had written on the topic. A discussion of what is and isn’t on-topic is even less on-topic than the EDA discussion. So you’re helping... how? Or just flexing your nuts trying to boss people around? (Which won’t succeed with me, mmkay? At least not with the tone you took when doing so.)

[Benta]

So you’re helping... how? Or just flexing your nuts trying to boss people around? (Which won’t succeed with me, mmkay? At least not with the tone you took when doing so.)

I've tried to help the OP, who's a newbie in schematic drawing/artwork, and hasn't got the full grip of EDA and KiCAD yet. I've even replicated his circuit in KiCad (with a couple of errors which have been fixed).

Where's your help?

I've reported your boorish/Trumpish response to the moderator.

[Bud]

Sorry, my mistake. like I said it was a 15 min. job, so I didn't bother to consult the datasheet. My purpose was more to show how a schematic could look using KiCAD.

EDIT: spent a couple of minutes correcting the schematic. Attached the .PDF as well as the .sch file for you to play with

Ground the unused logic inputs, it is a general practice to not leave them unconnected.

[S. Petrukhin]

So you’re helping... how? Or just flexing your nuts trying to boss people around? (Which won’t succeed with me, mmkay? At least not with the tone you took when doing so.)

I've tried to help the OP, who's a newbie in schematic drawing/artwork, and hasn't got the full grip of EDA and KiCAD yet. I've even replicated his circuit in KiCad (with a couple of errors which have been fixed).

Where's your help?

I've reported your boorish/Trumpish response to the moderator.

Herr Benta, stop grumbling. 

[wizard69]

Understand that the comments I'm abut to make come form somebody that has read more schematics and wiing diagrams than you could iaigne over the years.    These are both of the Electronics engineering mindset and the controls engineering mind set seen in automation so might not reflect what is normal here.

I made a simple circuit which is just a binary counter with a debouncer.


Afterwards I thought this would be a good exercise to try out in KiCad, so here is my first schematic:

I have to agree with others here.   Whenever possible use standard drawing elements and minimize the use of tags/labels/whatever you want to call them.   Simple schematics like this should have a minimal of tags/abels.

As for those labels there is a fine line between too many and not enough.   In general you want your schematic to flow from left to right and when that becomes an issue make use of labels.   The problem with labels is that it isn't always easy to find the other end so to speak.   It helps to make such labels large and distinctive.

I was just wondering if anyone have any feedback on the schematic (and circuit for that matter). Please be as harsh as you want, I have think skin and want to get better

Any feedback is much appreciated!

Some other thoughts that might ruffle a few feathers:

• It helps to distinguish human interface elements from others. In this regard don't tag a pushbutton switch to be used by humans with an SW prefix.    Use PB instead.   PB short for pushbutton of course.   It is a good habit to get into in m mind if you graduate to machine control you may have a hundred (possibly many more) ""switches"" of various types 
• Make use of large and thick fonts, for data entered on to the schematic.    This will save you a lot of grief as you age.   Further you can't expect that everybody that will read your schematic will have amazing eyesight.  This is perhaps one of the things that I run into the most using schematics from many sources. There is another factor that must be considered and that is reproduction capability.   I know his might shock a few people but paper still works well in the field and often those printouts are not to the original scale.   I'm talking about most text on a schematic.
• Make use of colors!    You have to be careful here as color blindness is real, however colors can really help separate out drawing elements if you don't have that issue.   However like many things you can go overboard, so have a plan.
• Create a column of numbers and a row of letters (or vs versa), to allow referencing coordinates on the schematic.    This seems to be more common in the industrial controls world but it can really help with communications with others.   The perfect example here is the ability to simply say that tag you can't find is at coordinates 5H.    This is done in some form or another world wide with industrial controls and I've seen this on conventional electronics type schematics also.   Now you may say that it isn't needed on a personal project and you are likely right but often this is incorporated into the template that sets up the border.   An example from the net: https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=http%3A%2F%2Feon.sdsu.edu%2F~johnston%2FEng_Graphics_Essentials_5th_Ed%2Ffiles%2Fege%2Fintro%2Fintro_page6.htm&psig=AOvVaw0-g_mJYNEwD1eWU4gsAfm1&ust=1610525361257000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CAIQjRxqFwoTCPibp_b4le4CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAD   Hopefully that works.
• Sometimes you really need a short description beyond what would make sense for an item tag.   Many CAD solutions don't handle this well as ideally the short description becomes part of the element specified and would move with it.   Usually this is of benefit with I/O points.   Probably not applicable to this drawing but something that you should be aware of.