>The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >segments. Why is it so important to remove them? We don't draw symbols >by hand very often anymore. Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most.>Where is the advantage of making the symbol >very slightly more simple?The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians prefer them. Their deviation from the the correct view naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well as their aesthetic judgement. Cheers Comrade Snowball (whoops, wrong team) ;)
Can we PLEASE stop using these shitty symbols?
Started by ●May 22, 2017
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote on 5/27/2017 1:12 PM:>> The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >> segments. Why is it so important to remove them? We don't draw symbols >> by hand very often anymore. > > Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) > > When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. > > The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most. > >> Where is the advantage of making the symbol >> very slightly more simple? > > The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians prefer them. Their deviation from the the correct view naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well as their aesthetic judgement.Actually, reading your post made me realize the difference is not two line segments, but just one. ONE LINE SEGMENT!!! It is the sort of thing that is not even worth thinking about. -- Rick C
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On Sat, 27 May 2017 10:12:34 -0700 (PDT), pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:>>The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >>segments. �Why is it so important to remove them? �We don't draw symbols >>by hand very often anymore. � > >Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) > >When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. > >The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most. > >>Where is the advantage of making the symbol >>very slightly more simple? > >The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians prefer them. Their deviation from the the correct view naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well as their aesthetic judgement. > >Cheers > >Comrade Snowball > >(whoops, wrong team) ;)Out of curiosity (>:-} I examined all the schematic entry software I have on hand and compared symbols (Cadence Virtuoso from an Image, I don't personally own a copy)... <http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/MOS_Symbol_Comparison.pdf> Note that Cadence Virtuoso _does_ use an arrow to mark sources, but then doesn't indicate body diode polarity :-( (I personally despise Cadence Virtuoso, it's GUI is profoundly worse that even that of LTspice.) I think Win's symbol "...maybe our book will push it a bit." is a mistake without also showing the body connection, inviting confusion with an IGBT symbol... but, as you say, the "Big-Endians" will be happy (which crowd is where Win's book is aimed ;-) ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | STV, Queen Creek, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Thinking outside the box... producing elegant solutions. "It is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you do that is the secret of happiness." -James Barrie
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On 27/05/17 18:12, pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:>> The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >> segments. Why is it so important to remove them? We don't draw symbols >> by hand very often anymore. > > Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) > > When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. > > The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most.To me, other than as an input to other tools, the principal value of a schematic is to convey meaning and understanding of a circuit's operation. If the symbols and/or arrangements on the diagram do that, then they are satisfactory. If not, they they should be revised. If the symbols and/or arrangements confuse of mislead, then they should be binned. The original symbol/diagram creators are, of course, going to think their creations are wonderful - and so they are unfit to decide whether they are satisfactory.
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On Thu, 25 May 2017 10:40:17 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote:>Why the need for such inaccurate/klutzy symbol representations? > >I generally use... > ><http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/MOS_Symbol_Discussion_(SED).png> > >Besides, symbols are only there for human consumption, All that >matters is how the devices netlist so that simulators (or PCB >software) properly perform. > > ...Jim ThompsonAs in... REFDES=MN? PART=XFAB-NMOS MODEL=MODN TEMPLATE=M^@REFDES %d %g %s %b @MODEL L=@L W=@W AD={@DF*@W*2*@HDIF} + AS={@SF*@W*2*@HDIF} PD={@DF*2*(@W+2*@HDIF)} PS={@SF*2*(@W+2*@HDIF)} + NRD={@HDIF/@W} NRS={@HDIF/@W} M=@M L=0.6u W=20u M=1 HDIF=0.8u LVS=M^@REFDES %d %g %s %b @MODEL L=@L W=@W WTOTAL={@W*@M} DF={(2*@M-(-1)**@M+1)/4/@M} SF={(2*@M+(-1)**@M+3)/4/@M} CHIPAREA=M^@REFDES %d %g %s %b @MODEL L=@L W=@W M= @M \n ; CHIPAREA = {(((@M+1)*2+4)*@HDIF+@M*@L)*(@W+4*@HDIF)} All this folderol is necessary because PSpice, and LTspice, don't automatically estimate parasitics as do chip-dedicated simulators, such as Cadence... so I do it myself ;-) I also implement binning in a similar fashion. The LVS template allows me to pass a netlist to my layout associate without all the parasitic garbage. The CHIPAREA template allows me to estimate chip area (once processed by a tool developed by my son, Aaron). ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | STV, Queen Creek, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Thinking outside the box... producing elegant solutions. "It is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you do that is the secret of happiness." -James Barrie
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:07:57 PM UTC-7, Clifford Heath wrote:> On 23/05/17 12:23, Tim Williams wrote:> > I mean, there is absolutely, positively no work lost, using electronic > > formats, with symbols as complicated, as baroque, as you can dream of.> 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 SO untrue. There are entire written languages based on pictographs (basically, all text is in rebus form), depicting objects whose names sound like the word or name being expressed. The symbol for a diode is a pictograph of a point-contact rectifier (a cat's-whisker). The symbol for a resistor is a long piece of wire, as though wrapped around a card. The symbol for a capacitor, inductor, vacuum tube, transformer... we use pictorials, for better or for worse, a LOT. What I'd really like to see, is a good symbol for a Hall effect sensor. The one for thermocouple is really a nuisance, it looks too much like just a joint in a wire. Which it IS, but it's a SPECIAL joint, and the wire types matter, and they ARE NOT IDENTIFIED in that silly symbol. So, how can I get the polarity right?
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On Sat, 27 May 2017 17:22:11 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com> wrote:>On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:07:57 PM UTC-7, Clifford Heath wrote: >> On 23/05/17 12:23, Tim Williams wrote: > >> > I mean, there is absolutely, positively no work lost, using electronic >> > formats, with symbols as complicated, as baroque, as you can dream of. > >> 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 SO untrue. There are entire written languages based on >pictographs (basically, all text is in rebus form), depicting objects >whose names sound like the word or name being expressed. > >The symbol for a diode is a pictograph of a point-contact rectifier (a cat's-whisker). >The symbol for a resistor is a long piece of wire, as though wrapped around a card. >The symbol for a capacitor, inductor, vacuum tube, transformer... we use >pictorials, for better or for worse, a LOT. > >What I'd really like to see, is a good symbol for a Hall effect sensor. >The one for thermocouple is really a nuisance, it looks too much like >just a joint in a wire. Which it IS, but it's a SPECIAL joint, and the wire >types matter, and they ARE NOT IDENTIFIED in that silly symbol. So, how >can I get the polarity right?You'd have to use a character-based language. TYPE K + - -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote...> > The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians > prefer them. Their deviation from the correct view > naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well > as their aesthetic judgement.Bah, humbug. I don't believe in a single symbol, and use the full symbol whenever it's useful. My preference has only a little to do with being faster to draw, but lots to do with reducing drawing clutter, so it can be more quickly comprehended. A clear simple drawing, without leaving out anything critical, is very useful. -- Thanks, - Win
Reply by ●May 27, 20172017-05-27
On Sat, 27 May 2017 10:12:34 -0700 (PDT), pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote:>>The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >>segments. �Why is it so important to remove them? �We don't draw symbols >>by hand very often anymore. � > >Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) > >When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. > >The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most. > >>Where is the advantage of making the symbol >>very slightly more simple? > >The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians prefer them. Their deviation from the the correct view naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well as their aesthetic judgement. > >Cheers > >Comrade Snowball > >(whoops, wrong team) ;)It's not a matter of hand-vs-CAD drawing; all my schematics will be CAD files fairly early in the process. I like the insulated-gate-bipolar symbol because it's instantly, intuitively obvious which way the current will flow. I'm not so much interested in the semiconductor physics as feeling how the circuit works. The convention that p-type devices have their sources/emitters up, and n-types down, helps a lot. But sometimes transistors work better sideways. -- John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com http://www.highlandtechnology.com
Reply by ●May 28, 20172017-05-28
On Sat, 27 May 2017 19:53:42 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com> wrote:>On Sat, 27 May 2017 10:12:34 -0700 (PDT), pcdhobbs@gmail.com wrote: > >>>The symbols you are saying aren't needed have two more line >>>segments. �Why is it so important to remove them? �We don't draw symbols >>>by hand very often anymore. � >> >>Whadda ya mean "we", bub? ;) >> >>When doing electronics, my primary output is paper schematics and parts lists, which Beautiful Layout Hunchback turns into PCB designs. >> >>The present wrangle is mostly among people who _do_ draw schematics by hand a lot. The Big-Endians (Win, John L, and their fellow travellers) value simplicity most, whereas the Little-Endians (JT, moi, and a faithful remnant) value accurate depiction of circuit behaviour most. >> >>>Where is the advantage of making the symbol >>>very slightly more simple? >> >>The BJT-ish symbols are faster to draw, so Big-Endians prefer them. Their deviation from the the correct view naturally impairs their hand-eye coordination as well as their aesthetic judgement. >> >>Cheers >> >>Comrade Snowball >> >>(whoops, wrong team) ;) > >It's not a matter of hand-vs-CAD drawing; all my schematics will be >CAD files fairly early in the process. > >I like the insulated-gate-bipolar symbol because it's instantly, >intuitively obvious which way the current will flow. I'm not so much >interested in the semiconductor physics as feeling how the circuit >works. > >The convention that p-type devices have their sources/emitters up, and >n-types down, helps a lot. But sometimes transistors work better >sideways.Only snag... often, in analog applications, current flows both ways. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson | mens | | Analog Innovations | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | STV, Queen Creek, AZ 85142 Skype: skypeanalog | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Thinking outside the box... producing elegant solutions. "It is not in doing what you like, but in liking what you do that is the secret of happiness." -James Barrie
