Author Topic: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic  (Read 10141 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ANTALIFE

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 313
  • Country: au
  • ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
    • Muh Blog
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #50 on: October 09, 2018, 11:42:57 pm »
Do you have a link or a number for a good IEEE standard for symbols & designators?

Offline rrinker

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2030
  • Country: us
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #51 on: October 10, 2018, 02:17:38 pm »
 Video length when actually teaching something doesn't bother me. I just watched it over 2 sessions.

While I have 0 industry experience, I can't imagine making a schematic as horrible as that. I've torn up and redrawn DaveCad-style schematics because I drew myself into a corner and would have had to draw lines all over the place to connect things. here's just no excuse when using a computer program, it's too easy to align things, rotate them to face the same way. etc without needing to completely start over. That's just lazy, not incompetence. I do a lot of network and system diagramming with Visio for my job, and I'm just OCD enough that everything HAS to line up horizontally and vertically or else it just doesn't look right. No weird steps in lines connecting things. I may not draw the most professional schematics for my projects, but my resistors all line up, the wires all come out straight and don't cross through components, and the grounds all face down so the electrons drain properly.
 

Offline Sudo_apt-get_install_yum

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 101
  • Country: se
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #52 on: October 16, 2018, 08:38:52 am »
Nice and long video Dave!
Does anybody know how to add "grouping frames" to your schematic in eagle? I know Dave is using Altium but I’m wondering if there is a way to do the same in Eagle.
Currently I just stick a frame around everything and use different sheets if it’s a more complex design, but I think it would be nice if I have a small design that I just want to group together in "modules".

PS: I know Eagle has a new modules function but that not really what I’m looking for.
 

Online Smokey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1614
  • Country: us
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #53 on: October 18, 2018, 09:20:38 am »
I always make the footprint/symbol name visible, especially for passives.  If you make the name short and put the package size in the name (ie. R0402 for an 0402 resistor) then it's not much extra clutter and it's super useful for confirming the correct package is used when doing a schematic review.
 
The following users thanked this post: nctnico

Offline artag

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 511
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #54 on: November 04, 2018, 01:45:57 pm »
The thing I hate most is when people just plop down all the symbols, with net names but no interconnect wires at all & call it a schematic.

THIS, in buckets !

I guess it's easy to follow the signals if you're in the schematic editor. But if you don't use that same editor and are using a printout or electronic copy, it's utterly useless, especially if you use multiple pages. You can never find where the signal goes and, worst of all, if you find the matching name, you have no idea if it goes more than one place. DON'T EVER DO THIS ! 

Seems like some people aren't trying to draw a schematic. They're just using the schematic editor to create a net list.
Well, why bother with the picture ? Just enter the net list as text and save a whole lot of effort.
And don't imagine you're created a useful schematic :)


 

Offline artag

  • Frequent Contributor
  • **
  • Posts: 511
  • Country: gb
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #55 on: November 04, 2018, 01:50:39 pm »
@Cerebus

Good point. But while the diff pair is easily recognisable and what I'd tend to use, I really like that alternative you've shown. So much neater without the wire that turns around and goes backwards. I wish that the second form were common enough that it was also instantly recognisable as a standard circuit.
 
 

Online Smokey

  • Super Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1614
  • Country: us
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #56 on: November 04, 2018, 08:22:12 pm »
The thing I hate most is when people just plop down all the symbols, with net names but no interconnect wires at all & call it a schematic.
 
THIS, in buckets !
...You can never find where the signal goes and, worst of all, if you find the matching name, you have no idea if it goes more than one place....

This is why, in my opinion, Altium Ports are superior to Nets.  You can turn on that feature for Ports that shows what pages they are used on.  It shows up right next to the port like "2,4,5".
 

Offline Clear as mud

  • Regular Contributor
  • *
  • Posts: 135
  • Country: us
    • Pax Electronics
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #57 on: November 06, 2018, 03:16:43 am »
Someone asked for a link to the technical standards for reference designators and electronic component symbols.  IEEE-315 is one of them.  Also see the references at the end of the Wikipedia article Reference designator.

Someone else mentioned that the standards can be expensive for a hobbyist.  I found that there wasn't much need for the actual entire standards book.  The more common designators are easy to remember, and whenever I'm working with some weird component and I don't know what letter to use for a reference designator, I can just do a web search and usually find some comment or document that tells what the standard designator is.
 

Offline jfitter

  • Contributor
  • Posts: 11
  • Country: au
Re: EEVblog #1129 - Creating a Nice Readable Schematic
« Reply #58 on: March 19, 2019, 07:46:29 am »
Re the nano wars. This is just my 2c worth, but I have a corporate standard and it is important to pick a standard and stay with it.

1. I never use units. A capacitor is in Farads, so why clutter up the schematic with the unit; resistors are in Ohms, etc.
2. Multipliers replace decimal points, always.
3. Trailing zeros are unnecessary.
4. I never use lower case except for comments.

Examples;
Resistors 100R, 1R5, 10K, 1M, 1M5, 0R002
Capacitors 10P, 100N, 100U, 6U8, 2U2, 3N3, 1N
Inductors 100U

This keeps the drawing clear, legible, and resistant to duplication noise.

Of course there are exceptions which can be dreamed up. If you must use M for milliFarads, which I hate, how do you differentiate it from mega. You do it with common sense. If it's a capacitor and your circuit is smaller than a dumpster then it is not megaFarads.
 
 


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf