"Please Rate my Design/Schematic"... [RANT]

[pcprogrammer]

Just a quick note regarding all those schematics made with EasyEDA.
Yes, many are made by people who don't actually have any background in EE, so for sure you won't get common engineering practice there.
But there's another factor: many of these schematics - in particular those often cited as an example of excessive splitting into small blocks - are pretty much the wiring of off-the-shelf dev/breakout boards. So that would explain the schematics: people are effectively just showing how they wired some boards together rather than make a proper, full schematic. And I think those people tend to get into this habit even once they start making their full own PCBs.

I use it for both.

• Prototyping with ready made modules connected on a prototype board. I draw a (multi layer) PCB based on it to aid with the wiring. Find it very useful.
• Design a full schematic for the real deal and derive the PCB from that.

After that, the "right" amount of splitting and hierarchy just... depends. On the complexity of the design, on whether some blocks can reasonably be reusable or not, your own preferences, and other factors.
Some people just freak out at the first sight of a label, others will just put them everywhere. Extremes. As often, reason is in a "healthy" middle ground which depends on the project at hand.

Yep, that is what I expressed in my first post here.

One thing that irks me with labels is people stubbornly not willing to use the direction property (in/out/bidir/or none) appropriately. Many seem to be oblivious to direction and feel like the right thing to do is connect the wire to the pointy end of the label. Properly using the direction of labels (when appropriate, that is when there is a clear signal "flow") helps readability a lot. (Just like placing schematic blocks in a logical flow.) Not doing so makes labels a huge mess.

EasyEDA does not have this as a feature. The "net port" is just a single entity that does not have an option to select signal direction. Bit of a miss you might say. Orcad had it way back in the late eighties when I started using it. Makes things more clear for sure.

[SiliconWizard]

EasyEDA does not have this as a feature. The "net port" is just a single entity that does not have an option to select signal direction.

Well, I don't use EasyEDA but I just checked and it appears that you have "IN", "OUT" and "BI" for net ports.

[pcprogrammer]

EasyEDA does not have this as a feature. The "net port" is just a single entity that does not have an option to select signal direction.

Well, I don't use EasyEDA but I just checked and it appears that you have "IN", "OUT" and "BI" for net ports.

Maybe I'm using a different version then, because below is what I see as options on a net port.

[UncleMario]

I'm always on the lookout for what to do and what not to do after getting into the design work for my company. Been doing design for about a year so far. Here are a few points I have picked up from our old engineer. Still going strong at 80. Lots of analog wizardry.

• The schematic design should be printable in black and white.
• Only use labels/off page connections for input/output signals and power, voltage, current sources.
• While not necessary, output calculations and formulas, and select datasheet information can improve schematic readability.
• Schematic pages are a much better separator of function then simply boxing the circuit section.
• I have received feedback from the mechanical engineers that items like a block diagram included on the schematic makes it easier to understand the overall function.

The reviewers on r/PrintedCircuitBoard have been setting some of these people straight!

[tggzzz]

I'm always on the lookout for what to do and what not to do after getting into the design work for my company. Been doing design for about a year so far. Here are a few points I have picked up from our old engineer. Still going strong at 80. Lots of analog wizardry.

• The schematic design should be printable in black and white.
• Only use labels/off page connections for input/output signals and power, voltage, current sources.
• While not necessary, output calculations and formulas, and select datasheet information can improve schematic readability.
• Schematic pages are a much better separator of function then simply boxing the circuit section.
• I have received feedback from the mechanical engineers that items like a block diagram included on the schematic makes it easier to understand the overall function.

The reviewers on r/PrintedCircuitBoard have been setting some of these people straight!

Agreed.

The only quibble I would make is that you should get an appropriate granularity of separation into either functions in a single schematic, or across multiple schematics.

I would also state that boxes on a schematic should be reserved for characteristics that are not part of the schematic. One example of that is old Tek/HP/etc test equipment manuals where logical functions are grouped onto each schematic, but the logical functions are spread across multiple PCBs and the chassis (e.g. CRT driver and EHT). There an irregular box can be used to indicate which components are on which PCB.

Apart from that, standard "design patterns/conventions" are often sufficient for dividing sub-circuits.

[newbrain]

I'm always on the lookout for what to do and what not to do after getting into the design work for my company. Been doing design for about a year so far. Here are a few points I have picked up from our old engineer. Still going strong at 80. Lots of analog wizardry.

• The schematic design should be printable in black and white.
• Only use labels/off page connections for input/output signals and power, voltage, current sources.
• While not necessary, output calculations and formulas, and select datasheet information can improve schematic readability.
• Schematic pages are a much better separator of function then simply boxing the circuit section.
• I have received feedback from the mechanical engineers that items like a block diagram included on the schematic makes it easier to understand the overall function.

The reviewers on r/PrintedCircuitBoard have been setting some of these people straight!

This list seems quite sensible, a good guideline. I'm also in the camp "chip with net names are hideous".

Since the title of the thread is "Please Rate my Design/Schematic", I'll take part, on the receiving side.
Here attached is the schematic I made for a ham receiver.
Comments are welcome, just consider this is a hobby project.
Note that I'm not asking to review the design (I'm sure I made some newbie blunder, hints are of course accepted!) just the schematic style.

Many IC symbols have pins organized by function, but in some case where the physical location and grouping were OK, I kept them.

BTW: Being the first time I dabble in RF stuff, it seems to work quite well (just on the bench for now), with noise and sensitivity comparable to good brand receivers.

[schmitt trigger]

I am going to focus on what I did like: that you created a symbol for the shields.

When I had used shields myself, I would manually add the individual mounting holes at the correct coordinates and then connected them to ground. If I had to relocate the shield I would then have to manually relocate all the holes and reconnect them again. 

Your method is so much better.

[newbrain]

I am going to focus on what I did like: that you created a symbol for the shields.

Thanks, the shield symbol is already part of Kicad library specifically: "Device:RFShield_TwoPieces".
But that allowed me to connect them to footprints, that I had to create manually, with the right openings to bring out the signals.

[tszaboo]

I'm always on the lookout for what to do and what not to do after getting into the design work for my company. Been doing design for about a year so far. Here are a few points I have picked up from our old engineer. Still going strong at 80. Lots of analog wizardry.

• The schematic design should be printable in black and white.
• Only use labels/off page connections for input/output signals and power, voltage, current sources.
• While not necessary, output calculations and formulas, and select datasheet information can improve schematic readability.
• Schematic pages are a much better separator of function then simply boxing the circuit section.
• I have received feedback from the mechanical engineers that items like a block diagram included on the schematic makes it easier to understand the overall function.

The reviewers on r/PrintedCircuitBoard have been setting some of these people straight!

I have to disagree on most of these points.
1) color can convey information more effectively. You can mark digital and analog netlabels with different color just to be able to quickly tell them apart.
2) Labels are practically necessary to tell software like Altium to work with differential signals. I also name all RF signals, or data bus, all on the same page.
3) You don't want to place that on a schematic, because you don't calculate it on a schematic. And it's a duplication of information. I mean you can write there that "gain = 10" but more complex formulas? No, you want to change the schematic as little as possible, and duplicate info as little as possible, otherwise you have to change it everywhere.
5) I like to place it in a separate project, as if I place a symbol of a component there, then that will get the same designators, and leads to errors.

[PlainName]

Comments are welcome, just consider this is a hobby project.

Why is +9V an air wire? I think it should chain from the 12V regulator since that's what it actually does. You can take a tap off that connection for global 9V, but as it is your eye misses where it's connected because you don't expect to look right next to it - it would surely have a wire if it were that close!

The 12V I an not sure about. I think if you can't attach the regulator input to the connector then they should be on separate sheets: a PSU sheet and perhaps a connections sheet (or, better, shove it on the overview sheet like the two coaxs). But if you put the connector on the left (the SDA/SCL are inputs, after all) then a wire from +12V on the connector to the regulator surely wouldn't be that messy.

C508-C510 should be on a single power bus rather than separate air wires for each. If they are meant to be close to U503/5/7 then either put them there or have all such caps on the power bus (C501-C503). And since it's a preview and not a modded production schematic, the caps should be annotated in a consistent way (I prefer top to bottom, left to right, but consistency is key).

(Non-ICs are annotated that way, whereas ICs are annotated top to bottom, left to right (or whatever the preference is) on the PCB. Reason being on a decently complex board board you'll spend forever trying to find R78 on the PCB so you make it easy to find on the schematic. ICs are pretty obvious, on the PCB by may be spread over more than one sheet of schematic (or in several parts on the same sheet). So knowing from the schematic R78 is on a U15 pin, you know whereabouts on the PCB it is likely to be. Admittedly, the way ICs are annotated isn't that important nowadays - it mainly came about due to the tons of 74 series DIL chips in neat rows.)

The colour scheme... I found Fout hard to look at, and because it's so different from other wires my eye keeps thinking it's part of a border or box or something. I think this is a personal thing and colours are not bad per se, just that particular one. Of course, I could print it in mono if necessary, so this is just a comment without an aye or nay component

[tggzzz]

I'm always on the lookout for what to do and what not to do after getting into the design work for my company. Been doing design for about a year so far. Here are a few points I have picked up from our old engineer. Still going strong at 80. Lots of analog wizardry.

• The schematic design should be printable in black and white.
• Only use labels/off page connections for input/output signals and power, voltage, current sources.
• While not necessary, output calculations and formulas, and select datasheet information can improve schematic readability.
• Schematic pages are a much better separator of function then simply boxing the circuit section.
• I have received feedback from the mechanical engineers that items like a block diagram included on the schematic makes it easier to understand the overall function.

The reviewers on r/PrintedCircuitBoard have been setting some of these people straight!

I have to disagree on most of these points.
1) color can convey information more effectively. You can mark digital and analog netlabels with different color just to be able to quickly tell them apart.
2) Labels are practically necessary to tell software like Altium to work with differential signals. I also name all RF signals, or data bus, all on the same page.
3) You don't want to place that on a schematic, because you don't calculate it on a schematic. And it's a duplication of information. I mean you can write there that "gain = 10" but more complex formulas? No, you want to change the schematic as little as possible, and duplicate info as little as possible, otherwise you have to change it everywhere.
5) I like to place it in a separate project, as if I place a symbol of a component there, then that will get the same designators, and leads to errors.

1) colour is non-standard. You ought to have a key to explain your choices.
1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

2) get a better tool, or use it better.
There are many pieces of design information that could or must be attached to nets; why choose just your subset? Traditionally such information is added in the form of attributes that aren't visible on the schematic, but are visible to the toolset (PCB, simulators of various sorts) -- and are subject to DRC.

5) hierarchical schematics are a traditional way of indicating blocks. If the block diagram is at a higher level than that, then it is part of the design documentation rather than the schematic.

[tszaboo]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.
Mod: seriously, what hell. We make movies in color, and you cannot convince me that it would be better in black an white. What sort of twisted inner mind do you need to have to think this way. Geez. Go out and touch some grass.

[tggzzz]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.
Mod: seriously, what hell. We make movies in color, and you cannot convince me that it would be better in black an white. What sort of twisted inner mind do you need to have to think this way. Geez. Go out and touch some grass.

I wondered if that word would provoke a knee-jerk reaction

Choosing to adopt an unnecessary practice which makes your designs less comprehensible is not, IMHO, a good choice.

Personally I try to make it easy to understand my designs. Why don't you?

[Benta]

This list seems quite sensible, a good guideline. I'm also in the camp "chip with net names are hideous".

Since the title of the thread is "Please Rate my Design/Schematic", I'll take part, on the receiving side.
Here attached is the schematic I made for a ham receiver.
Comments are welcome, just consider this is a hobby project.
Note that I'm not asking to review the design (I'm sure I made some newbie blunder, hints are of course accepted!) just the schematic style.

IMO, it looks good. Nicely connected, partitined and readable. Asking the question "can I come back in three years and still understand this?" I'd answer with a Yes.
But beware of the colours. In the end, you'll have a B/W printout, and I'm not certain how pale blue will work there.
It seems to be KiCAD. Did you try running an ERC? I see quite a number of problems there, but that's not the topic.

[tszaboo]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.
Mod: seriously, what hell. We make movies in color, and you cannot convince me that it would be better in black an white. What sort of twisted inner mind do you need to have to think this way. Geez. Go out and touch some grass.

I wondered if that word would provoke a knee-jerk reaction

Choosing to adopt an unnecessary practice which makes your designs less comprehensible is not, IMHO, a good choice.

Personally I try to make it easy to understand my designs. Why don't you?

There was a time where I joked with fake woke jokes, but it doesn't work through the internet, because those people managed to write things that surpassed every imagination on the stupidity front.
I don't force myself to color my schematics. I do it when it serves a purpose. Say you have a microcontroller with a bunch of pins, some of them analog, you can get a good overview which one is which.
Or mark different isolation distances with different color, line width or any other way. And why would I do this? Because I'm legally required to provide the info to certification agencies. When talking with their technical staff, it was actually their preferred way, more colors to quickly see the differences.

[Benta]

I don't force myself to color my schematics. I do it when it serves a purpose.

Which is a good idea, if it adds something to a well-drawn schematic.
If it's to make a lousy schematic better, it's the wrong way to go.
In the end, it will appear B/W on paper, screen candy or not.

 On a personal note, I find your pulling the "woke" card on disabled people (in this case colour blind) toxic and repulsive.

[tggzzz]

I don't force myself to color my schematics. I do it when it serves a purpose. Say you have a microcontroller with a bunch of pins, some of them analog, you can get a good overview which one is which.

What on earth makes you think I have normal colour vision?

Serves a purpose for you, no doubt. Bit egocentric IMHO.

[Bud]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.
Mod: seriously, what hell. We make movies in color, and you cannot convince me that it would be better in black an white. What sort of twisted inner mind do you need to have to think this way. Geez. Go out and touch some grass.

I almost never use colors in my schematics. Color is not necesarily needed to convey information. A good example is books. Try to read a crazy colored book (heck, just a colored datasheet for that matter), you'll get tired pretty quick. A schematic that looks like a lit Cristmas tree creates nothing but a childish impression. Same applies to overuse of thickness of wires on a scematic. Even worse are thick wires drawn in color. Reserve thick lines to draw signal busses.

[tggzzz]

I don't force myself to color my schematics. I do it when it serves a purpose.

Which is a good idea, if it adds something to a well-drawn schematic.
If it's to make a lousy schematic better, it's the wrong way to go.
In the end, it will appear B/W on paper, screen candy or not.

 On a personal note, I find your pulling the "woke" card on disabled people (in this case colour blind) toxic and repulsive.

Just so.

[tggzzz]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.
Mod: seriously, what hell. We make movies in color, and you cannot convince me that it would be better in black an white. What sort of twisted inner mind do you need to have to think this way. Geez. Go out and touch some grass.

I almost never use colors in my schematics. Color is not necesarily needed to convey information. A good example is books. Try to read a crazy colored book (heck, just a colored datasheet for that matter), you'll get tired pretty quick. A schematic that looks like a lit Cristmas tree creates nothing but a childish impression. Same applies to overuse of thickness of wires on a scematic. Even worse are thick wires drawn in color. Reserve thick lines to draw signal busses.

Agreed.

Add garish colours for keywords, identifiers, functions, classes etc in "intelligent" code editors.

[Analog Kid]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.

Since when is it "woke" to give serious consideration to the fact that a significant portion of your audience won't be able to correctly perceive color, and therefore that using color is a bad idea?

In this instance I think the term "ableist" is perfectly appropriate. If it triggers some reaction in you because it ends in "ist", well, that's strictly your problem, pal.

[reboots]

I tried drawing a better version of this analog video switch schematic, but routing the wires in the schematic was hard; I tried a couple of component layouts, but they all became spaghetti.

When you submit a schematic like this for public review, you are asking every interested party to perform the same difficult routing in their heads, every time they view the schematic. For each signal, they must scan the entire page for connections. They must then maintain all of these relationships in their mind's eye to achieve an understanding of how the circuit functions, and to identify any errors.

I'm sorry; but if you can't bother to document your circuit, then I can't bother to review it.

(I understand that you, Nominal Animal, provided your schematic solely to explain the thought process behind its style, and I don't mean this criticism personally.)

Since when is it "woke" to give serious consideration to the fact that a significant portion of your audience won't be able to correctly perceive color, and therefore that using color is a bad idea?

In this instance I think the term "ableist" is perfectly appropriate. If it triggers some reaction in you because it ends in "ist", well, that's strictly your problem, pal.

There is no need for language implying bias or prejudice. If the design cannot convey critical information to its target audience due to predictable variation in their printers, their displays, their software, their eyesight or their neurology, then it fails at its purpose. I suggest "malfunctional".

[pcprogrammer]

In the end, it will appear B/W on paper, screen candy or not.

Ever heard of color printers. 

How many schematics even do end up on paper these days, with digital distribution to save the planet.

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

That nobody tripped on the "men" in this feminist world of today. 

Must be mostly men on this forum. 

But as an argument against using color it is not to valid. The people with troubled color vision will still be able to see something and with the colors chosen carefully they might not even miss that much of the intent

Since when is it "woke" to give serious consideration to the fact that a significant portion of your audience won't be able to correctly perceive color, and therefore that using color is a bad idea?

Calling 8% significant, nah not in my book. >30 or 40% I call significant. Sure it is a lot of people of the world population, but how many of them are in electronics? It is al relative, and it is typical how things always flow into this "woke" debate.

Technical evolution brought us color computers, so why not use them to serve some purpose. Let go of the archaic thoughts of how things used to be.

[SiliconWizard]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

I honestly don't care, and there is nothing you can achieve with this woke crap with me.

Since when is it "woke" to give serious consideration to the fact that a significant portion of your audience won't be able to correctly perceive color, and therefore that using color is a bad idea?

In this instance I think the term "ableist" is perfectly appropriate. If it triggers some reaction in you because it ends in "ist", well, that's strictly your problem, pal.

Well sure, but did that go a little overboard maybe?
Just because some people can't perceive colors correctly means that nobody should use colors? Sorry, but *that* would be BS and yes, could be qualified "woke".
Now if there are alternate ways to enhance your schematics than using colors and you are going to share them (which may not necessarily be the case), then sure, consider that. That's nice. And especially if said schematics become significantly less readable precisely without the help of colors (in which case, you may have another problem anyway).
But otherwise, I'd be almost like, wtf.

[aeg]

1) colour is ableist. 8% of men won't be able to see colours that you do

That nobody tripped on the "men" in this feminist world of today. 

He meant what he said. The gene for red-green colorblindness is on the Y chromosome.