Proof in case: http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg It's bad enough that AoE3 stooped to using those MOSFET symbols. (The only problem I can find with the tome! Why did it have to be such an important, and deceptive, problem!? Please Win, if you fix this in a reprint, I will send you the finest bottle of liquor I can find.) And now look at this. You know what's worst? (Maybe not. You can't tell! Because there's no device that exists that can be described by that symbol!) The more common convention is to draw them like BJTs, where the arrow is used to indicate the common terminal. In further analogy, the arrow is usually outwards, for "NPN MOSFETs", as it were. Which means, by the "most common convention", this circuit is a direct short from VCC to output to GND. This figure is wrong by the "most common convention". Except, if you try to read some meaning from those arrows, instead of forcing some other meaning upon them: this circuit is "right", in that the arrows show the direction of conventional current flow through the body diode. Which IS what the little arrow in a normal MOSFET symbol means, in the first place. And is why any symbol with an "antiparallel diode" is redundant*. (*Except maybe "FETky" types -- I don't know.) It's almost like they... simply forgot to put the source connection in, and draw the channel as enhancement mode (dashed). They could almost be forgiven for such an omission! Whereas, the "most common convention" symbol deserves no forgiveness; it is only madness. I'd say "rant over", but it's not over until people actually realize that, when they write things, you know, they're writing things that actually mean something! The original MOSFET symbol is not just some random assemblage of lines. The lines mean something! Ugh! Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs, LLC Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Can we PLEASE stop using these shitty symbols?
Started by ●May 22, 2017
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
Tim Williams wrote...> >Proof in case: > >http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg > >It's bad enough that AoE3 stooped to using those MOSFET symbols. (The only >problem I can find with the tome! Why did it have to be such an important, >and deceptive, problem!? Please Win, if you fix this in a reprint, I will >send you the finest bottle of liquor I can find.)The symbols in the ECN figure are simply wrong, by my opinion. I first adopted the use of the simplified MOSFET symbols (with arrows like BJTs), because the trend is toward streamlined drafting and uncluttered symbols. Many IC designers further simplify by eliminating any arrows, assuming the reader can surmise which is n-channel or p-channel.> The more common convention is to draw them like BJTs, > where the arrow is used to indicate the common terminal. > In further analogy, the arrow is usually outwards, > for "NPN MOSFETs", as it were.Yes, right. But you're unhappy with that in AoE?> The original MOSFET symbol is not just some random > assemblage of lines. The lines mean something!Yes, exactly, but to my taste, there are too damn many lines for everyday use, now that we're using MOSFETs by the barrel, like we used to use BJT transistors. My latest amplifier has 50 of them. OK, it's a 10kV amplifier, but still, gotta keep drawings readable. -- Thanks, - Win
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 4:02:32 AM UTC-4, Tim Williams wrote:> Proof in case: > > http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg > > It's bad enough that AoE3 stooped to using those MOSFET symbols. (The only > problem I can find with the tome! Why did it have to be such an important, > and deceptive, problem!? Please Win, if you fix this in a reprint, I will > send you the finest bottle of liquor I can find.)AoE3 is now the standard! I like that n-chan fet's now look like npn's. (It makes it easy for me to draw them correctly.) Get with the program, or go home. :^) (that's a joke.) George H.> > And now look at this. > > You know what's worst? (Maybe not. You can't tell! Because there's no > device that exists that can be described by that symbol!) > > The more common convention is to draw them like BJTs, where the arrow is > used to indicate the common terminal. In further analogy, the arrow is > usually outwards, for "NPN MOSFETs", as it were. > > Which means, by the "most common convention", this circuit is a direct short > from VCC to output to GND. > > This figure is wrong by the "most common convention". > > Except, if you try to read some meaning from those arrows, instead of > forcing some other meaning upon them: this circuit is "right", in that the > arrows show the direction of conventional current flow through the body > diode. > > Which IS what the little arrow in a normal MOSFET symbol means, in the first > place. And is why any symbol with an "antiparallel diode" is redundant*. > (*Except maybe "FETky" types -- I don't know.) > > It's almost like they... simply forgot to put the source connection in, and > draw the channel as enhancement mode (dashed). > > They could almost be forgiven for such an omission! > > Whereas, the "most common convention" symbol deserves no forgiveness; it is > only madness. > > I'd say "rant over", but it's not over until people actually realize that, > when they write things, you know, they're writing things that actually mean > something! The original MOSFET symbol is not just some random assemblage of > lines. The lines mean something! > > Ugh! > > Tim > > -- > Seven Transistor Labs, LLC > Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design > Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
George Herold wrote...> > AoE3 is now the standard! I like that n-chan fet's now look > like npn's. (It makes it easy for me to draw them correctly.) > Get with the program, or go home. :^) (that's a joke.)I certainly didn't devise the scheme, but I started using it early on for the schematic sketches I was making for AoE 3rd. I also used them exclusively in my instrument designs at work. When it came time to send the drawings in for drafting, I had some second thoughts, and especially about their preponderance; I had intended to keep more drawings with the original symbol (we have some), to help acquaint the kiddies with both types, but by then Paul really liked them and we were stuck with them. -- Thanks, - Win
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
On Mon, 22 May 2017 03:02:25 -0500, "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> wrote:>Proof in case: > >http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg >The symbols are fine, except that they got them backwards. That's the way we draw mosfets, like bipolars with insulated gates. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
On 22 May 2017 03:51:37 -0700, Winfield Hill <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote:>Tim Williams wrote... >> >>Proof in case: >> >>http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg >> >>It's bad enough that AoE3 stooped to using those MOSFET symbols. (The only >>problem I can find with the tome! Why did it have to be such an important, >>and deceptive, problem!? Please Win, if you fix this in a reprint, I will >>send you the finest bottle of liquor I can find.) > > The symbols in the ECN figure are simply wrong, > by my opinion. I first adopted the use of the > simplified MOSFET symbols (with arrows like BJTs), > because the trend is toward streamlined drafting > and uncluttered symbols. Many IC designers further > simplify by eliminating any arrows, assuming the > reader can surmise which is n-channel or p-channel.Some people add a bubble to the gate of a p-fet, but still don't distinguish between source and drain. I like the way you/we draw mosfets. It's clean and intuitive. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Circuits/Amps/LM5112.jpg> >> The more common convention is to draw them like BJTs, >> where the arrow is used to indicate the common terminal. >> In further analogy, the arrow is usually outwards, >> for "NPN MOSFETs", as it were. > > Yes, right. But you're unhappy with that in AoE? > >> The original MOSFET symbol is not just some random >> assemblage of lines. The lines mean something! > > Yes, exactly, but to my taste, there are too damn many > lines for everyday use, now that we're using MOSFETs > by the barrel, like we used to use BJT transistors. > My latest amplifier has 50 of them. OK, it's a 10kV > amplifier, but still, gotta keep drawings readable.Please show us if you can. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
Reply by ●May 22, 20172017-05-22
"Winfield Hill" <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in message news:ofufrp02mta@drn.newsguy.com...> Yes, exactly, but to my taste, there are too damn many > lines for everyday use, now that we're using MOSFETs > by the barrel, like we used to use BJT transistors. > My latest amplifier has 50 of them. OK, it's a 10kV > amplifier, but still, gotta keep drawings readable.What? But?! You're _literally_ half a century late! Every person on Earth has a supercomputer, in their pocket, that is able to solve this problem! You make the symbol once, and copy-and-paste it wherever you need it! I mean, there is absolutely, positively no work lost, using electronic formats, with symbols as complicated, as baroque, as you can dream of. Printers are 100% vector to raster, thanks again to computers. No time lost there. If you need to take the shortcut just when diagramming something by hand, alright, but leaving that in? Deceptive AND lazy, my god... :-( Tim -- Seven Transistor Labs, LLC Electrical Engineering Consultation and Contract Design Website: http://seventransistorlabs.com
Reply by ●May 23, 20172017-05-23
On 05/22/2017 11:21 AM, John Larkin wrote:> On Mon, 22 May 2017 03:02:25 -0500, "Tim Williams" > <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> wrote: > >> Proof in case: >> >> http://www.ecnmag.com/sites/ecnmag.com/files/legacyimages/ECN/Articles/CS-1109-Figure_02.jpg >> > > The symbols are fine, except that they got them backwards. > > That's the way we draw mosfets, like bipolars with insulated gates. > >If things had worked out differently it was going to be required by executive order that all electrical engineers use this to represent N channel MOSFETS: <http://imgur.com/a/4VWRe> That's what I heard
Reply by ●May 23, 20172017-05-23
On 23/05/17 12:23, Tim Williams wrote:> "Winfield Hill" <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in message > news:ofufrp02mta@drn.newsguy.com... >> Yes, exactly, but to my taste, there are too damn many >> lines for everyday use, now that we're using MOSFETs >> by the barrel, like we used to use BJT transistors. >> My latest amplifier has 50 of them. OK, it's a 10kV >> amplifier, but still, gotta keep drawings readable. > > What? > > But?! > > You're _literally_ half a century late! > > Every person on Earth has a supercomputer, in their pocket, that is able > to solve this problem! You make the symbol once, and copy-and-paste it > wherever you need it! > > I mean, there is absolutely, positively no work lost, using electronic > formats, with symbols as complicated, as baroque, as you can dream of. > > Printers are 100% vector to raster, thanks again to computers. No time > lost there. > > If you need to take the shortcut just when diagramming something by > hand, alright, but leaving that in? Deceptive AND lazy, my god... :-(Tim, A drawing short-cut is also a visual one. I personally quite like the simplified symbols. They're easy on the eye. They don't reflect reality, but neither does any other symbol, in any alphabet. That's why they're called "symbols". Clifford Heath.
Reply by ●May 23, 20172017-05-23
On Mon, 22 May 2017 21:23:04 -0500, "Tim Williams" <tiwill@seventransistorlabs.com> wrote:>"Winfield Hill" <hill@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote in message >news:ofufrp02mta@drn.newsguy.com... >> Yes, exactly, but to my taste, there are too damn many >> lines for everyday use, now that we're using MOSFETs >> by the barrel, like we used to use BJT transistors. >> My latest amplifier has 50 of them. OK, it's a 10kV >> amplifier, but still, gotta keep drawings readable. > >What? > >But?! > >You're _literally_ half a century late! > >Every person on Earth has a supercomputer, in their pocket, that is able to >solve this problem! You make the symbol once, and copy-and-paste it >wherever you need it! > >I mean, there is absolutely, positively no work lost, using electronic >formats, with symbols as complicated, as baroque, as you can dream of. > >Printers are 100% vector to raster, thanks again to computers. No time lost >there. > >If you need to take the shortcut just when diagramming something by hand, >alright, but leaving that in? Deceptive AND lazy, my god... :-( > >TimDon't be a symbol nazi. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Circuits/Current_Sources/Isrc_cascode_Ib.JPG https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Circuits/Mirror2.JPG The Win-style symbol is clean and intuitive; you can feel the current flow. The fussy one has resolution problems even with CAD schematics. And it's ugly. I bet you wouldn't like the way I draw schottky diodes, either. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc lunatic fringe electronics
