"Please Rate my Design/Schematic"... [RANT] - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 12, 2024, 10:53:12 pm
content: I think it's great when noobs ask for feedback on their creations. And I (mostly) help.But unfortunately there's a trend towards unreadable schematics, fed by some blathering idiots with web sites, and apparently supported by some web-based EDA. IDK.Fashion seems to be putting every part in a little box and placing a label on each pin to connect the little boxes. It looks neat, like stacking shoe cartons.... and it's completely undecipherable.Labels everywhere... where does this label connect... did I find all labels in a net... which are output and which input... etc. etc.I did a little exercise to demonstrate my point. I took an existing schematic of mine and redrew it in the "modern" way. Quite at lot of work, inventing label names and typing them, plus drawing all the little boxes etc.I attach my "modern" schematic. Comments appreciated.Tomorrow I'll post the original schematic for comparison. If you like a challenge, tell me what this "modern" schematic/circuit does.PS1: I added a bit of colour, it's the festive season.PS2: The real hard-core "modernists" would have used DIP-14/16 graphics for symbols. I kept the real ones, no reason to exaggerate.

author: temperance
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 12:14:15 am
content: I really like it. I don't want to be over critical but you could use more colors. You are clearly a fan of blue. You also forgot draw a box around all the boxes because page borders are for people without imagination. But the overall look and feel is about right except for the yellow around the input which is hard to see.I don't know what it does apart from flipping and counting something because I feel that the level of detail is still too high. IC's are supposed to be boxes with pin numbers only and when possible should be rotated sideways. But that's of course only for true masters. But if you want to become really good at it, I can also suggest the usage of boxes around boxes to group component into more functional groups. Functional groups must of course be drawn with a different line width.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 06:07:13 am
content: The people who do that seem to be emulating some commercial schematics, which are in the same "disconnected parts floating in boxes" style. It's not a particularly new phenomenon either - see attached example from mid-2000s.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 07:37:53 am
content: I absolutely see your point in this and drawing a clock divider this way is indeed ridiculous.What makes this one even worse is the usage of net names instead of labels. A label has a pointed box around the name. In the old days (Orcad) the point of the label was an indication of the direction of the signal, or bus and a two pointed one was used to indicate being bidirectional, like a databus.But there are schematics that need a mixture of the techniques. Instead of drawing boxes to separate functionality or to indicate what a part is for, using separated sheets is better. Like a sheet for the processor part, and one for the power supply, one for the video controller, etc. To make the connections across the sheets you need labels.On a single sheet it sometimes makes it so cluttered trying to connect everything with single wires, that labels can be the solution to clear things up. Or maybe a bus can be used to connect parts of the schematic, but having mixed types of signals on the bus can also be confusing. Like putting memory control signals on the databus.It of course also depends on the intent of the schematic. If it is just for personal use to get to an error checked PCB, who gives a f***. When the intention is it to be for service and has to be read by a wider audience, than yes, you better make sure it is a good readable schematic. But there is a learning curve, and with new technology come new methods and options.I myself also am going through a (re)learning curve, as to what is the best in drawing schematics, and try to find the benefits of both worlds.A carefully balanced mix could be used in my opinion.

author: forrestc
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 07:41:38 am
content: Your circuit will never reload the preset since you don't have power for U4. Plus you didn't draw a thousand caps in the power box.I'm a big fan of something in-between. Following lines on a schematic which has every single line connecting everything is just as bad as this other extreme. I'd rather see a 'traditional' schematic for each functional chunk and then the interconnects be done similar to the new style.For example, It's perfectly ok to see a CPU on page one and connect all it's pins to labeled nets on busses, and then have various things which connect to that bus just refer to the bus symbol. I.E. have memory on a memory page. Or have an 'analogbus' which all of the ADC inputs and the sources connect to in two different spots.I'm guessing this has happened due to the need to break apart schematics for complex systems so each chunk is understandable - but a single component doesn't equal a chunk. Unless it's a 400 pin CPU.What is even worse is when they start breaking apart components - i.e. 'counter 2 outputs' is in one spot and 'counter 2 inputs' are in another and 'counter 2 control pins' are in a third.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 07:45:51 am
content: A computer may have no problems with it. AI may love it. Humans ... not at all.To be blunt, it's simply not "readable".Perhaps I'm just a grumpy old sod - but I like the left-to-right functional sequence that exists on the vast majority of the circuits I have in my library, references and other resources.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:17:25 am
content: You are missing overly complicated artsy fartsy logo of the maker, that one spent 10x more time to draw that the schematic itself.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:36:35 am
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on December 13, 2024, 08:17:25 amI'm laughing (on the inside).Sometimes absurdities like that are all too real.

author: Wolfram
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 01:06:46 pm
content: It's a solid effort but you missed an opportunity by using clear and standardized symbols for the logic functions. Drawing the chip as a block, with the pins in order, can do wonders for illegibility. Pin names are optional. This works especially well in op-amp circuits, using dual or quad parts. Makes even the most basic and well known circuit topologies unrecognizable without redrawing them from scratch.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 01:19:17 pm
content: Quote from: Wolfram on December 13, 2024, 01:06:46 pmBetter: just copy a PCB layout symbol, and insert signal names. Makes it easier to put on a solderless breadboard or strip board.In addition those colours are too strong and distinct: modern fashion is for dark grey on a light grey background, or light yellow on a dark yellow background. Benefit: nobody will (be able to) print it out, thus making it easier to issue new documents.In addition make sure vital information is conveyedonlyin the colour; you'll be able to see it, and tough luck to the ~8% of men (<1 % women) who are colour blind.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 01:36:25 pm
content: For better unreadability add 100 resistors and capacitors individually boxed and Net Named.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 02:26:47 pm
content: Quote from: Wolfram on December 13, 2024, 01:06:46 pmHahaha!I did mention drawing them as Dip-14 or DIP-16, though.

author: temperance
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 03:03:00 pm
content: Quote from: 2N3055 on December 13, 2024, 08:17:25 amWhich must be replicated in the solder mask at all cost. Preferably in colour.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 03:10:56 pm
content: For (large) microcontrollers or FPGAs, where most pins have somewhat generic and configurable functionality, I think it is fine to draw them with just wire stubs and signal labels on most pins. Trying to actually draw connecting lines to all peripherals would create a huge mess. I tend to draw only some functions on dedicated pins -- crystal, reset button, boot config switch etc. -- connected directly to these large ICs.(But then, don't name the signals "GPIO27" or such. Give them descriptive names!)I prefer to draw direct connections within circuits built from multiple smaller chips, where the chip pins serve dedicated, hardwired functions.

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 03:14:26 pm
content: Quote from: temperance on December 13, 2024, 03:03:00 pmDon't forget to color coordinate silkscreen and solder mask, and unnecessary gold plating.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 04:42:50 pm
content: 😳(Click to embiggen)😢

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 04:52:10 pm
content: Excellent (not!) pin description for the ATTiny85. Forgot about that "style".I think the isolated R1/10k technique has been mentioned elsewhere.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 05:18:07 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 04:52:10 pmIn my defense, I didn't draw it myself; it's what EasyEda provides for ATtiny85-20PU. Should've drawn my own; I hate those extra-long pin descriptions.Symbol colors (including pin legs) cannot be changed except by creating a copy of the symbol. All symbols are public and discoverable. Wire colors are my fault; they default to green. I use red for power rails and black for grounds. In this one, green indicates max. 12V signals, blue max. 5V signals.Both thesingleanddual12V PWM fan controllers using ATtiny85 are my own designs, about a year ago. I'm still learning.Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 04:52:10 pmI originally had a reset button there, but I realized it wasn't needed, so simplified to a single pull-up resistor instead. Should've moved it, though.Also, R6 should really be on the +5V side instead of the wiper. It's purpose is to ensure an accidental short between any of the three pins is not dangerous, because the pot is remote, connected using a 3-pin JST PH2.0 connector.So, it's partially an issue with the symbols LCSC has provided for EasyEda, and partially newbies like myself trying to create modular, easily modified schematics. It's not about trying to be annoying; we just don't know how to do better, yet!Besides, now you know exactly how Linux developers feel when long-time Windows users are asking why doingXin Linux is so hard, what is the best program to replaceY, and why nothing makes much sense in Linux."Until you old hands change your attitude towards us newbies, schematic capture and EE as a hobby will not be as popular as social media."

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 05:32:10 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 05:18:07 pmInteresting. I've long suspected that EasyEDA is the instigator, but never got around to testing it.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 05:49:14 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 05:18:07 pmWhich is very easy to do in EasyEda.As it is very open and everybody can add parts to it, I tend to make most parts myself to make sure they match what I want. Also for PCB footprints, I won't sent a design to a fab unless I checked it against the components by laser printing the design and see if the parts align and fit.For professionals it probably makes more sense to use something offline and with more features for special stuff, but for a hobbyist it works like a charm as long as you check everything, just like with all that is presented on the internet.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 05:51:29 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 05:18:07 pmI would have deleted all the irrelevantpossibleuses of each pin. If it being used as MISO, then itcannotalso be AIN1.QuoteI wouldn't argue against that,providedthey show legibly on a black/white print,andcolour blind people aren't grossly disadvantaged.QuoteUsing EasyEDA isn't an excuseIn my experience, which includes keyboard-only-no-mouse ORCAD in the 80s, modifying schematics isn't hard. It requires alittlemental pre-planning, much less thought that is required to create and create a circuit and schematic.QuoteWindows users have to be much cleverer and more adaptable than me, simply because they are using Windows. I'm not clever enough to run Windows safely, and the GUI and applications seem to radically change every 5 years - usually for the worse.Having said that, there are some Win3.11 dialogs still to be found in Win11 (ODBC setup).

author: themadhippy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 06:05:24 pm
content: QuoteAs with most software siso applies

author: hwasti
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 06:12:34 pm
content: Quote from: amyk on December 13, 2024, 06:07:13 amThey were not sending the best and the brightest to be apps engineers back then either.In fact, many of the worst counterproductive design elements are created by application designs. Separate ground plane and guard traces to prevent cross talk are the top two.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 06:28:38 pm
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 13, 2024, 05:49:14 pmYes – seedocumentation example(HTML guide).Footprints, too, although there is a recommendednaming rules(PDF), since they are all visible to other users. The naming of the footprints is really the hardest part...Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 05:51:29 pmThat requires editing the symbol, essentially making your own private copy of it. The pin name texts are not editable in the EasyEda schematic editor, only in the symbol editor. It is less work to just redraw ones own symbol, and I do often do, both symbols and footprints.For resistors and capacitors, I use my own 0603+0805 footprints: the outline is the same as the standard 0805, but the gap is the same as 0603.Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 05:51:29 pmI didn't intend any of it as such; only as an explanation.I am a bit distressed that so many members feel so strongly about the failures. You see,in another thread, I tried drawing a better version of this analog video switch schematic,(Click to embiggen)but routing the wires in the schematic was hard; I tried a couple of component layouts, but they all became spaghetti. Again, colors indicate signal type (blue is analog, cyan is digital, green is almost-DC –– except for EXTCLOCK, which either isn't used or is 32 MHz). The switch in lower left corner selects between the CN2 and CN3 output, and whether CN3 gets the color signal, or the monochrome signal, both cases via attenuation resistors. Input signal amplitude is a bit higher than the 0.7Vpp VGA expects so R1-R6 are To Be Determined in practice, perhaps using trimpots. (VGA analog video signals are terminated at the display device, 75Ω to ground.) All digital signals use 5V TTL level logic.Because of this, I do claim that this kind of splitting is done because properly connecting the wires is way harder (without creating an even more horrible mess), when you don't have the experience yet in placing the components so the wires fall at least halfway neatly. Using net labels like I have here is simpler; I just didn't know howdeeply annoyingthis is to more experienced people.Noted. Will try harder in the future.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 06:47:51 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 06:28:38 pmCopy or duplication is required inallEDA tools, simply because the use of the pins is specific to your design. Hence, if one EDA tool doesn't make that easy, avoidthattool and use another.The software equivalent is to copy-paste something from the web without ensuring it fits your program Sure, a lot of web-weenies do that - and look at the mess we all have to endure.QuoteIt does tend to, but over the many decades techniques have been developed to contain the issue. Nonetheless care and good taste are required.The very rough software equivalent is not bothering to indent code to indicate structure. (Mind you some scrotty little languages rely on tab and space having differentsemantics. Other popular languages use spaces to indicate meaning)QuoteIs that just your convention, or the tool convention - and how is a new reader meant to know that?QuoteThe software equivalent is code using "goto name", instead of if-the-else, while, exceptions. That has been deprecated for half a century.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 07:16:05 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 06:47:51 pmNot a convention, something I'm experimenting with, to make it easier to understand how the parts interact. The colors are only informative; nothing of significance would be lost if all were the same color. I describe the colors in the post where I explain each part of the circuit.Red for supplies and black for ground seems to be somewhat of a convention, though.QuoteNo, it is not.gotois still useful in structured cleanup, when nesteddo { ... } while(0)"loops" would require extra state variables or excessive nesting.Splitting such cleanup into separate functions –– which is often suggested as a way to avoidgoto(because they, like yourself, mistakenly believe it is "deprecated" somehow) –– on the other handisanalogous to splitting a schematic into too small pieces, making understanding the entire schematic difficult.

author: Smokey
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 07:45:14 pm
content: I feel like hierarchical schematic design is also partly to blame. All this is is an extension of the hierarchical design concept with the smallest "block" being each individual part. And then putting all those blocks on one page instead of separate pages.I look forward to the next stage of this schematic design style where each part is actually on its own page.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:00:32 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 06:28:38 pmWhat would make drawing your schematic with wires easier, is when you use the proper logic symbol for inverters and buffers like the 74125 you used in different forms. (single gate, quad gate) Then you can have the left to right signal flow and place the gate in series with the wires, instead of having to bend around the rectangle with pins on either one or two or even four sides.EasyEDA does allow you to create these logic symbols such that the power pins are hidden and the different gates in a quad package are identified in the designator like U2A, U2B, etc. How to do this should also be in the documentation you referred to. I have done it before, but would have to look it up again because it did not stick.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:06:43 pm
content: Wow, lively discussion here. The topic seems to have struck a nerve (which is why I started it).Professional engineers (yes, I'm one) hate dealing with bad documentation. We're paid by the hour, and the "Little Boxes" schematics are total time-wasters.Anyway, I promised the original schematic and here it is (feel free to comment on that as well).I repeat the "modern" version for easy comparison.Cheers.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:33:10 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 13, 2024, 08:06:43 pmJust so. Life is too short to waste time wondering whether someone creating a circuit and schematic is ignorant or lazy - or has worthwhile ideas. Nowadays there is so much stuff clamouring for our attention that it is necessary toquicklydecide what toignore. An incompetent schematic is a good reason to ignore something.If I was to pick bits with that decent schematic, they would be...Possibly having a separate Vcc label for each side of the schematic. Reduces wires, keeps info next to the pins. Yes, I am aware this is almost labelling nets on pins, but PSU wires are an exception.I think I would have the two JK flip flops on the right of the diagram facing in the traditional direction, with just the single feedback wire looping backwards. The mentality would be "from the counter's TC we form a new signal, and that is looped back to the counter input".But those are nits; it is easy to follow the signalflowthrough the circuit, and to see the intention.

author: temperance
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 08:33:52 pm
content: QuoteYes indeed, here is an example from Infineon:https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon-ApplicationNote_evaluation_board_EVAL_HB_BC_1EDN8550B-ApplicationNotes-v01_01-EN.pdf?fileId=5546d46266a498f50166ef75bd7e183fPage 13:-MOSFET symbols. The what?-The person who made this drawing placed the pin numbers on the inside and the description on the outside of the symbols... Honey, this shit doesn't generate a netlist, must call the help desk.-Some things are crammed together because other items are unnecessarily spread out.-The fact that the driver uses Kelvin sensing really stands out. It's the first thing you should see clearly because that's what the app note is all about. Instead you see just a bunch of wires.-The half bridge really resembles a half bridge if you look carefully.Overall a sloppy job.In my opinion schematics should communicate the function and intent for anyone involved. Software developers, mechanical engineers, PCB layout requirements,...In symbols for micro controllers for example I use PA0, PA1,... On the connections I always tag a label stating the intended function such as TIM1-CH1-PWM and preferably identical as they appear in the data sheet. By doing so the software developer knows what to do without asking questions.Besides, those differential input kelvin sensing drivers are very interesting.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 09:19:19 pm
content: Quote from: temperance on December 13, 2024, 08:33:52 pmThis has touched on before. If you're too lazy/incompetent to draw a symbol, just use the PCB footprint instead. Job done. Who reads this stuff anyway.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 09:36:56 pm
content: Again, the following is not intended as an excuse; only an attempt to explainwhyandhowthese bad schematics happen.Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 13, 2024, 08:00:32 pmThis situation seems analogous to comments in source code. To me, source code and schematics are the implementation of the desired logic. Source code comments describe theintent. For schematics, that is in external documentation, like the posts here where I describe the ideas and reasoning behind each part of the schematic.You are saying that instead of doing it that way, I should split the ICs into their logical symbols; for example TS5V330 into a four pairs of SPST switches with common active low enable and selector inputs, TS5A3159A into a pair of SPST switches with active low enable and selector inputs, SN74HCS125 into four tri-state buffers (buffer and switch) with Schmitt trigger inputs, and 74LVC1G125 into one tri-state buffer with Schmitt trigger inputs. (These logic symbols are usually shown in the IC datasheet somewhere.)I do realize that this will make the schematic much easier to read. Definitely so; splitting the ICs into (logic) subsymbols makes the wiring simpler, too. Then, at a glance, one can see not only the intent but also the implemented functionality. I can understand why this should be my goal, and will try to do this in the future –– I've already discovered that for transistors and opamps, especially dual and quad opamp packages, this is basically a necessity. (With those, I've struggled between having the supply pins in all subsymbols (problematic with EasyEda), in one of the subsymbols, or in a separate opamp subsymbol without inputs and outputs.)However, this is a lot of extra work that does not help whoever created the schematic, when their main purpose is to create the PCB. Splitting the ICs into the logical components they implement shows some, but not all, the reasons for picking specific ICs. It is like having the source code properly commented, explaining the algorithms and choices made for each function: good to have, but not necessary when most users will simply compile it without any modifications, or extend its functionality without changing any of the choices made. Doing it the stupid way is notwrongper se, just less useful and less clear than it could be; incomplete as a product, but understandable for hobby stuff.(Me, I'm starting to think I might want to create my own schematic editor, because it would definitely be possible to construct a graphical UI that encouraged "good taste" more than EasyEda and KiCad do. In particular, combining and splitting symbols into packages and vice versa would make this easier, and also solve the pin selection issues. EasyEda already shows browsers are fully featured enough and fast enough so HTML+JavaScript should suffice, even without a network connection...)

author: schmitt trigger
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 09:40:36 pm
content: Poorly drawn schematics pre-date semiconductors.I remember seeing an all-tube (valve) controller, where the tubes were drawn like circles with the pin numbers. Not showing the heater, the cathode, the plate or the grid(s).Although there were a few tubes which almost everyone knew them by heart (the ECC83-12AX7 being one of them), most tubes one would have to look them up in a dog-eared and wornRCA receiving tube manual.By the time you had found the correct tube, your thought process would have been derailed.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 09:52:51 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 09:36:56 pmThere is a programming fashion that code should be written in ways that make it self-explanatory, and that comments are unnecessary. While it is true that code should be self-explanatory, it is religious dogma to believe comments are superfluous. Comments are necessary, just as good naming and traditional formatting is necessary - not for the machine but for the humans.The dual is that schematics should be drawn on a way that makes it easy to read them, using traditional design patterns for components in a subcircuit.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 10:57:27 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 09:36:56 pmI understand that "quick 'n dirty" work is OK for a hobbyist, if you don't want to revisit the project after some years because a new idea has come up.It's fine with us all, your private thing, keep it at home.The problem comes up when you publish it as the latest and greatest. Just don't. There's enough web noise as is.Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 09:36:56 pmYou don't seem to know much about KiCAD, but this is what your much-quoted 74125 looks like there. No boxes in sight.

author: Nominal Animal
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 13, 2024, 11:59:05 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 13, 2024, 10:57:27 pmYou don't seem to understand the difference between an user interface and a symbol library.All schematic editors support multi-part symbols. There is a BIG difference between multi-part symbols and an UI that supports combining and splitting symbols into a single footprint.You seem to have quite a big mouth, Benta, but very little to show to back that up. I am starting to believe you have very little to contribute, only a lot of complaints.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 12:15:12 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 11:59:05 pmI'll leave that one here for posterity.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 07:07:16 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 09:36:56 pmTrue, and that is more or less what I wrote in my first post in this thread.QuoteBut just as with code, having proper comments makes it easier to understand the intent when you circle back on it after many years. Especially with aging, I find it to become more and more important. Recollection deteriorates faster then I would like.Quote from: Benta on December 13, 2024, 08:06:43 pmQuote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 08:33:10 pmNo one is forcing us to be on the forum and review other peoples work. If someone asks for a bit of help and the schematic is crap, than the options are to either walk away and ignore it completely, or just get over your own personal preferences and do a bit of work to understand the intent and give some guidance. Maybe a hint to how a schematic can be drawn better, but the full on bashing and pounding I have seen from some of the members is over the top.Unless the recipient is "asking" for it of course. Some art and robot springs to mindTalking about crappy schematics that one holds the crown.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 10:17:36 am
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 14, 2024, 07:07:16 amOn a forum, I tend to agree. Unfortunately it occurs more widely that that.I see it associated with things people are trying to sell, or where they are using the schematic to illustrate their coolness/competence/etc and/or I am trying to work out the crux of what they are claiming.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 11:51:07 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 14, 2024, 10:17:36 amWhen it is in the commercial domain, or to show off, I fully agree and with pleasure supply the sledge hammer to do the pounding.

author: nfmax
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 01:24:31 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 09:52:51 pmThe primary function of the source code is to support human reasoning about the program behaviour. As a secondary function, it enables the compiler to choose the processor instructions needed to implement it.

author: SteveThackery
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 08:51:53 pm
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 06:28:38 pmIt's not annoyingper se, it's just that schematics like that are essentially unreadable to a human brain, thus leading to frustration.A good schematic is a bit like a flowchart for the signal. I'm sure you are familiar with flowcharts and how their structure reveals the "logic" behind the flow, the decision points, the loops, etc. Now imagine the same flowchart drawn as randomly placed boxes with labels instead of lines. I'm sure you would agree that it would be vastly more difficult to interpret.In fact, I bet you would be sorely tempted to take a pencil and draw lines between the labels to help clarify it.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 09:09:09 pm
content: Quote from: SteveThackery on December 14, 2024, 08:51:53 pmAnd they are completely non-scalable. Try reading a schematic like that with 100 semiconductors plus passives!

author: 2N3055
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 09:11:15 pm
content: That is not a schematic at all.It is a table of what component pin is connected to what net.Whole purpose of schematic diagram is graphic representation, where it is visually easy to "see" what is connected where.You can have 35 pins connected to same node. How do you keep in head all of them?That is why on classic schematic diagrams you do have labels for power rails, data buses etc.That is logical.But trying to figure out any kind of signal is connected where in analog circuit looking at that kind of netlist is ludicrous. And how do you even design a circuit that way?

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 09:47:52 pm
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 14, 2024, 07:07:16 amFor those who missed the fun, here's a sample of his "schematics" that I saved. They do indeed take the cake.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 10:19:43 pm
content: @Analog Kid, that seems to point at a certain user (I've no idea who), but I did NOT want to go there.I started the thread as a discussion about a certain "fashion fad", not to call anyone out.Better edit your post IMO.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 10:52:58 pm
content: I won't edit it (why should I?), and I don't think it detracts at all from your point, which is different but somewhat related.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 11:14:34 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 12, 2024, 10:53:12 pm"Unreadable trash that doesn't work, you will make a perfect software engineer at this company!"

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 14, 2024, 11:55:47 pm
content: 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.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.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.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 15, 2024, 07:33:50 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on December 14, 2024, 11:55:47 pmI 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.Quote from: SiliconWizard on December 14, 2024, 11:55:47 pmYep, that is what I expressed in my first posthere.Quote from: SiliconWizard on December 14, 2024, 11:55:47 pmEasyEDA 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.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2024, 01:25:59 am
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 15, 2024, 07:33:50 amWell, I don't use EasyEDA but I just checked and it appears that you have "IN", "OUT" and "BI" for net ports.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 16, 2024, 07:29:07 am
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on December 16, 2024, 01:25:59 amMaybe I'm using a different version then, because below is what I see as options on a net port.

author: UncleMario
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: December 18, 2024, 01:57:02 pm
content: 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!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 18, 2024, 08:11:44 pm
content: Quote from: UncleMario on December 18, 2024, 01:57:02 pmAgreed.The only quibble I would make is that you should get an appropriategranularityof 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.

author: newbrain
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 11:00:44 am
content: Quote from: UncleMario on December 18, 2024, 01:57:02 pmThis 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 thedesign(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.

author: schmitt trigger
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 03:15:53 pm
content: 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.

author: newbrain
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 04:14:51 pm
content: Quote from: schmitt trigger on December 19, 2024, 03:15:53 pmThanks, the shieldsymbolis 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.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 10:40:54 pm
content: Quote from: UncleMario on December 18, 2024, 01:57:02 pmI 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.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 10:41:31 pm
content: QuoteWhy 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'tthatimportant 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

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 11:03:44 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 19, 2024, 10:40:54 pm1) 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 do2) 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.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 11:33:18 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 19, 2024, 11:03:44 pmI 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.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 11:46:03 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 19, 2024, 11:33:18 pmI wondered if that word would provoke a knee-jerk reactionChoosingto adopt anunnecessarypractice which makes your designslesscomprehensible is not, IMHO, a good choice.Personally I try to make it easy to understand my designs. Why don't you?

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 19, 2024, 11:55:44 pm
content: Quote from: newbrain on December 19, 2024, 11:00:44 amIMO, 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.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:08:57 am
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 19, 2024, 11:46:03 pmThere 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.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:31:31 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 12:08:57 amWhich 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.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:02:19 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 12:08:57 amWhat on earth makes you thinkIhave normal colour vision?Serves a purposefor you, no doubt. Bit egocentric IMHO.

author: Bud
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:02:36 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 19, 2024, 11:33:18 pmI 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.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:03:33 am
content: Quote from: Benta on December 20, 2024, 12:31:31 amJust so.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:06:53 am
content: Quote from: Bud on December 20, 2024, 01:02:36 amAgreed.Add garish colours for keywords, identifiers, functions, classes etc in "intelligent" code editors.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:37:32 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 19, 2024, 11:33:18 pmSince 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.

author: reboots
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 03:23:34 am
content: Quote from: Nominal Animal on December 13, 2024, 06:28:38 pmWhen 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.)Quote from: Analog Kid on December 20, 2024, 01:37:32 amThere 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".

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 08:09:25 am
content: Quote from: Benta on December 20, 2024, 12:31:31 amEver heard of color printers.How many schematics even do end up on paper these days, with digital distribution to save the planet.QuoteThat 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 intentQuoteCalling 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.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 08:54:26 am
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on December 20, 2024, 01:37:32 amWell 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.

author: aeg
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 09:12:30 am
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 20, 2024, 08:09:25 amHe meant what he said. The gene for red-green colorblindness is on the Y chromosome.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:07:58 pm
content: Quote from: aeg on December 20, 2024, 09:12:30 amBut according to some research I did, it does also affect woman, only far less. ~0.5%.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:10:55 pm
content: Quote from: reboots on December 20, 2024, 03:23:34 amThe older I get the more I take that attitude. If someone wants or expects me to understand their circuit, then they need to make it easy (i.e. not unnecessarily difficult) for me to understand it.Extra benefit: making it easy formeto understand probably makes it easier forthemto spot the "silly" mistake. That kind of thing occurs in multiple forms, e.g. teaching someone a subject (you realise how little you know), or writing down the reasons for a decision.QuoteNicely put. Of course it is a malfunction in the creator, not in the audience

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:30:28 pm
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 20, 2024, 08:09:25 amYes, of course. I don't have one, and they are relatively expensive to run.Some colours are more visible on the screen than on the page. Pure yellow is a prime example, with some greens being almost as bad.Background colours give no information, are expensive to print, and make the foreground less distinct.QuoteMany, especially when trying to faultfind equipment. It is not easy to annotate a PDF with the voltages at various nodesEvidence: even though free PDF scans of test equipment are readily available, there is a thriving marketplace in printed manuals.Quote"Men" is accurate in this context. ~0.5% of women are colour blind, i.e. men are ~16 times more likely to be colour blind.QuoteAs I was taught at school, the first person to define colour blindness (John Dalton of "atoms" fame) was publically vilified and shamed for a reason he could not understand. His community avoided clothing with bright colours, and everybody was horrified when he gave a red shawl as a present. He thought it was grey.For other examples including his notebook, seehttps://blog.scienceandindustrymuseum.org.uk/john-dalton-colour-blindness/QuoteNo, 30% isn't "significant"; that requires >50%. (Yes I realise the stupidity of both statements)It colour blindness was "archaic", you might have a point. Unfortunately...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 12:32:59 pm
content: Quote from: pcprogrammer on December 20, 2024, 12:07:58 pmWas your research sufficiently thorough that you noticed that red-green is only one type of colour blindness? There are others.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 01:21:57 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on December 20, 2024, 01:37:32 amUsing colors is a bad idea? This is one of the most ridiculous discussions in a while. Color is usedeverywhere; e.g. in traffic lights, pass/fail indicators, reference manuals to find the relevant section. Yes, even safety critical. I'm not surprised at all that in his real-world safety-critical engineering work tszaboo is encouraged to use color coding.The key to avoid problems with "8% of men" is not to encode critical information with the choice between red and yellowish-green. This is why traffic lights use cyanish green and also the fixed order or lights (red on top). Also, when information is critical do not convey it in only one way. Let the colorsupportcomprehension, not to become the sole way of defining things. It's more like ahash- enabling quicker glancing.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 02:58:09 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard on December 20, 2024, 08:54:26 amExactly. If you can tell blue and white apart, then what gives you the right to complain about my schematic. Especially since it's an addition of information. And considering that I also have something called "Anomalous Trichromacy", and somehow I can just suck it up without complaining about it all the time. If you don't like it, print it in grayscale.Next topic is going to be complaining that the used font is too small, think about the visually impaired... The point is always the complaining.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 04:37:37 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 02:58:09 pmWe could all be Dutch. Is somewhat of a national sport in the Netherlands. Complaining.

author: davep238
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 04:58:27 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 13, 2024, 09:52:51 pmI took some COBOL classes way back in college. COBOL was supposed to be "self-documenting".

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:19:32 pm
content: Quote from: davep238 on December 20, 2024, 04:58:27 pmSome people don't bother to indent code in a traditional style, and use unhelpful function/variable names. I've seen schematics that were equivalent to C code with gotos into the middle of unrelated blocks (and I've seen that too!)I've never heard of design patterns for COBOL. Then again I only looked at the language when I was in school, and decided to avoid it because after a long time "advanced" notation was introduced: "C+A+B". Writing that as "add a to b giving c" does not make the design clearer.If you are just spewing out a quick bit of throwaway crap that nobody else will see, then (perhaps) crap formatting isn't something to worry about. If not, then taking pride in what you create is no bad thing.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:22:29 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 02:58:09 pmCan you explain that in words of one syllable, because that makes no sense to me.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:25:49 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 20, 2024, 05:22:29 pmCan you read blue text on a white paper?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:29:46 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 02:58:09 pmApparently "Anomalous Trichromacy" means "The effects of anomalous trichromatic vision can range from almost normal colour perception to almost total absence of perception of red, green or blue light."https://www.colourblindawareness.org/colour-blindness/types-of-colour-blindness/So you knowdon'tperceive colours in schematics as other people do, and still make claims about how easy/difficult it is for other people. Hmmm.Viewing in grayscale is difficult on the screen.As I've already pointed out, some colours reproduceverydifferently on screen and paper. It is unclear to me whether you could perceive that; nonetheless it is true.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:32:50 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 05:25:49 pmThe question is about why the bit after the comma follows from the bit before the comma.And some bluesaredifficult to perceive on paper or on the screen. If you have defective colour vision, you might not realise that.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:42:40 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 20, 2024, 05:29:46 pmI don't make claims on how difficult it is. I am stating that I don't care that it's difficult for you.Nobody is going to lower the bar for every people to be able to do anything they want. Especially that it will make the life for 99% harder.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:59:27 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 05:42:40 pmOne of the few things I have observed in life is that those who do care about other people tend to attract other people who care. Vice versa is also true. I know which group appears more happy and content.More than 1% of the people in this thread have stated colour often makes schematics worse.

author: reboots
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 05:59:55 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 02:58:09 pmColor is typically dithered by monochrome printer drivers. Lighter colors like yellow or cyan may disappear entirely. Unless the schematic is available in a scalable vector format like PDF, it can be very difficult to get a distinct printout. Scaling for print also degrades line art in raster image formats, and color makes this much worse.Of course you can keep your schematics however you like. I certainly do. But if you supply this documentation to other people, including claimed enhancements which actually degrade the document for the viewer and prevent critical information from being communicated, they are equally entitled to complain or to reject it entirely.This is all fun and games between friends. Manufacturers who include colored or rastered information in their datasheets--I've seen this, and you know who you are--deserve marketplace oblivion.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 06:06:41 pm
content: Quote from: reboots on December 20, 2024, 05:59:55 pmThat has been pointed out to tszaboo several times; either he doesn't believe it or he ignores it. I don't think you will change his mind.His colour vision defects provide a possible reason he doesn't believe it, but even then the dithering ought to visible.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 06:19:26 pm
content: Quote from: reboots on December 20, 2024, 05:59:55 pmWhy would anyone use yellow or any other light colors for a schematics?Do you think that I don't know how colors work?Is this the argument? Yellow on white is hard to read therefore all colors are bad?What makes the entire argument retarded ja that the very next thing in the software, PCB layout is going to use 30 different colors for every layer, and nobody is going to complain about that.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 06:29:06 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 06:19:26 pmYou have told us you cannot perceive colours "normally", so it wouldn't be surprising if you had some difficulty understanding how they work and are perceived.Apart from that, your statements lead people to believe you don't understand printing.Look at the example in the first post. Unfortunately that isn't unique, and yellow isn't the only problematic colour.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 06:56:25 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 20, 2024, 06:29:06 pmWhich was a made-up strawman intentionally using problematic colors. We came a full circle of strawman after strawman by you using another strawman as your case example without realizing it. Typical tggzzz.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 07:00:41 pm
content: It is interesting how basically every electronics CAD package has used colored texts, lines and boxes by default since 1990's if not even earlier. Like, Altium already in Protel days, and Allegro of course. Every professional schematic describing a product (internal documentation, public PDFs etc.) use these colored Allegro/etc. outputs.Somehow this has not caused any trouble during last 30 years, but surely we must go back to the 1970's photocopies of hand-drawn schematics without any net labels and endless tight bunch of lines connecting everywhere because they are sooooooo much better because the world was completed in 1970's.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 07:30:41 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 20, 2024, 06:29:06 pmI also attended ergonomics class at University where they give you amongst other things what colors to use. But that's fine, I guess in your worldview only lived experience is valid, unimaginable that they actually teach this. Or that someone would actually say things that they have some idea about.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 07:56:52 pm
content: I fear we are getting too polarized over this, and one extreme is taking issue with the other extreme (and vice versa, of course). My view is that colours shouldn't be necessary - print the schematic in black and white and you've not lost anything. But use of colours can add something, much like datasheets (yes!) use bold and larger fonts for topic heading, table headers, etc. They just make it easier to differentiate important things. Of course, one can go overboard just as one can inappropriately use any tool.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 08:53:48 pm
content: Quote from: davep238 on December 20, 2024, 04:58:27 pmA bit off-topic, but I can't help myself. Somewhat related to this thread.I not only took COBOL classes, I worked for a short time as a (paid) COBOL programmer.I'm a defender of that language that is the butt of so many programming jokes.The people who knock it are, for the most part, not familiar with it at all.It really is self-documenting.By design.Grace Hopper knew well what she was doing.Very easy to maintain because of that. Because you really don't want any fuckups when your program is printing everyone's paychecks.I'd like to see some young whippersnapper try to write a rock-solid, bulletproof payroll program in Java or PHP or Perl or Snort or Fart or whatever the fuck programming language is currrently in vogue.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 09:00:40 pm
content: Quote from: Siwastaja on December 20, 2024, 07:00:41 pmDunno anything about CAD packages; never used one.I do know, though, that other packages that use color sometimes use it in a very suck-y way.Particularly LTspice. Whoever picked colors for traces had a very poor color sense. Like two blues (or is it greens?) that are so close as to be practically indistinguishable.Yet more proof of the problematic nature of using colors in computer representation.Yes, sometimes color can be useful. But it has to be done consciously (and yes, you have to care!), otherwise it can be totally counterproductive.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 09:06:40 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 07:30:41 pmInteresting.What did the course teach aboutcolour in schematicscolour where black and white has been shown to be sufficientcolour on print processescolour with small characters, especially w.r.t. print processesthe purpose and objectives of schematicswhen to use and when to avoid using specific techniques, e.g. colour or fancy fonts

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 09:11:26 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on December 20, 2024, 07:56:52 pmJust so. Good taste rulez!Unfortunately too many people have poor taste.In this case the objective is - or should be - to communicate details toeverybodywho reads the document. Not to 92% of those that read the document.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 10:03:19 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on December 20, 2024, 09:06:40 pmAll right, onto my ignore list you go. Bye.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 10:38:58 pm
content: Everyone, take a deep breath and count to 100, please.As OP on this thread I feel I'm allowed to say that.My original intention/rant was to push back against bad schematic design practices and websites that actively support those. And it still is, and I'll keep fighting against them.Be respectful, polite, constructive and positive. Please.And don't nitpick.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 10:45:30 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 20, 2024, 10:38:58 pmWell, you can say that all you want if it makes you feel better.Ain't gonna stop me, nor many other people either, from "nitpicking".We likes to do that!

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 10:58:58 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on December 20, 2024, 10:45:30 pmI'm fine with that as long as it's on a technical/engineering level.Not when it's shouting "woke!"That belongs on X/Telegram/whatever.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 11:05:07 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 20, 2024, 10:58:58 pmAgreed.I've given up on twatter, especially since Musk changed it so you have to login to seeanytwattweet.I use Farcebook once a fortnight, unfortunately - solely to see what's happening in the village and occasionally alert others to incipient idiocies.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 11:19:06 pm
content: Quote from: Benta on December 20, 2024, 10:58:58 pmWoke people are extremely toxic. You better get used to this, people had enough, there is zero tolerance left for that ideology. Look at how this discussion went. I disagreed with some technical points, they personally attack me.Every single time, it's the only tactics of the woke. Strawman and misdirection.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 11:33:13 pm
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 11:19:06 pmWhoosh!That's the sound of the criticism you were responding flying right over your head.He wasn't saying that "woke!" is toxic; in fact, probably the opposite ("shouting 'woke!'").

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 20, 2024, 11:45:20 pm
content: Quote from: Analog Kid on December 20, 2024, 11:33:13 pmBecause when you disagree with someone, you always start your sentence with that.No offense but this is a bit juvenile.

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2024, 12:16:05 am
content: Sigh!Once again, you can't let it go. Take it somewhere else, please.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2024, 12:25:16 am
content: Quote from: tszaboo on December 20, 2024, 11:19:06 pmPeople who, when they know the alternative options, choose to sh1t on less fortunate people are extremely toxic.QuoteWe had better get used to that toxicity, because we've forgotten the lessons of the 1930s and the world again is splitting into "those baddies" and "us goodies".

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2024, 12:34:26 am
content: @tggzzz: stop it and let it go.'nuff said.

author: Siwastaja
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 21, 2024, 07:52:23 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on December 20, 2024, 07:56:52 pmIt's not really a polarization issue, it's a "grumpy old men complaining about anything" issue.

author: newbrain
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2024, 06:37:44 am
content: Quote from: PlainName on December 19, 2024, 10:41:31 pmThanks for your comments - answering only now since I'm on a skiing week with almost no internet.I'll start from the last one: the color scheme is the Kicad one, and not used to convey information, with possibly the exception of the blue 50 ohm nets (but there are flags signalling that).Printing in B/W would not change readability, I should have thought of it - given the amount of discussion this has generated.As for numbering: yes, it's a bit messy, I have manually assigned them in some cases but mostly relied on the automatic renumbering.As the different sheets correspond to different areas on the PCB, the numbering ranges are at least consistent.Decoupling caps on the clock buffers: noted, pure laziness on my side.Regulators and I/O comments: I had tried in a previous version to connect them all, but did not really like the result. The connector is actually input (SDA/SCL) and output (Audio, in fact a 24 KHz IF).All in all, not too bad I'd say, thanks for the detail analysis.

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2024, 06:46:49 am
content: Hope the skiing was good. I guess it's a bit of a shock to come back and see the remains of this thread

author: Benta
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: December 23, 2024, 09:58:55 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on December 23, 2024, 06:46:49 amI have to agree. But that's certainly not @newbrain 's fault.

author: UncleMario
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: January 02, 2025, 02:58:27 pm
content: Well darn, this was something to come back to. After having some further time to think, I have a few ideas. My perspective is mostly a professional (inexperienced) technician clawing his way into a design position. We did lose that old engineer a bit ago to sudden retirement. I don't really see beginners who make the common mistakes do a lot of research into good reference designs. Overuse of things like net labels or off page connections means they have not considered how to section their circuitry for testing. I don't know if these beginners use many simulation tools like LTspice or TINA. But those are used far faster to make blocks or sections of more self contained circuitry. This could be a section of amplifiers to receive and process an incoming signal, some counting or digital logic control. A good technician builds, documents, and tests these sections that have clear inputs and outputs. We could see these problems as people stepping out of the Maker pre-built mostly plug and play modules and into something they have little reference for. In the end, clear communication and a lack of observe, listen, and learn plagues these designs. I'm going to link to a design I believe is a good middle ground reference for people on both ends of this forum post. I found it to be a good reference for improving my work.https://www.reddit.com/r/PrintedCircuitBoard/comments/18p31p2/review_request_high_power_bldc_controller/

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 02, 2025, 05:51:43 pm
content: Quote from: UncleMario on January 02, 2025, 02:58:27 pmSo does a good engineerOr designer. Or anybody that thinks about their audience's understanding rather than just their own understanding, such as ...Quote