Offpage connector symbols
in [Design]
|
Prev: Rules of thumb for power transformer current rating - derivation?
Next: Anyone looking for a NEC uPD7220
From: D Yuniskis on 19 Jan 2010 18:16 Hi Tim, Tim Wescott wrote: > On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:17:24 -0700, D Yuniskis wrote: > >> As a side-comment to the schematic preferences thread (hopefully not >> another lengthy thread :> ), I'm curious as to what folks use as an >> offpage connector symbol. >> >> Other techniques? > > Most of the schematic editors I've used distinguish an innie from an > outie, at least graphically (if not as part of a hierarchical schematic > editor that even does some rules checking, like no nets with all inputs, > no nets with two alway-on outputs, etc). That's why it's important to make sure the pin attribute on such connectors is correct.
From: mpm on 19 Jan 2010 19:14 On Jan 19, 4:43 pm, Phil Hobbs <pcdhSpamMeSensel...(a)electrooptical.net> wrote: > On 1/19/2010 4:17 PM, D Yuniskis wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > As a side-comment to the schematic preferences thread > > (hopefully not another lengthy thread :> ), I'm curious > > as to what folks use as an offpage connector symbol. > > > Given that I prefer these to be *at* the edges of the schematic > > *and* given that the signal name will be "outboard" of it, > > I try to use very narrow symbols. And, since it is common for > > other such "offpage" symbols to be located immediately above > > and/or below, I try to keep the height of this symbol to > > "one intersignal spacing unit" (IsSU? :> ). > > > I also like to show direction of signal flow in the symbol. > > > This has led me to a set of six (<frown>) symbols: > > Output Right > > Input Right (blech!) > > BiDir Right > > and the corollaries for "Left". (I.e., left and right refer > > to the edges of the page at which it is most appropriate to > > place these symbols). > > > For unidirectional signal flow, I use a pair of "concentric" > > (wrong word) arrow heads. E.g., >> or <<. These can be spaced > > close enough (horizontally) together that they occupy very little > > space on the page (i.e., 1 IsSU square). > > > For BiDir signals, I use one of each arrow head (< + >). > > Since BiDir symbols should occupy the same amount of space > > (an arbitrary but desirable condition I impose), I overlap these > > together. > > > If they don't overlap much (or, at all), you end up with a > > diamond (<>) or an X (><). I compromise and end up with > > an assymetrical "stacked pair of X's" -- sort of like a > > slice out of a DNA helix. > > > This is intentionally assymetric -- you could shift one or > > the other arrow head to obtain better symmetry throughout the > > X > > X > > but then placing two or more of these BiDir symbols above each > > other ends up looking like *needlepoint* (can't see where one > > signal begins and the previous one ends!) > > > Other techniques? > > I use bigger things with the signal name inside--arrow directed outwards > for outputs, inwards for inputs, like this: > > /------------ > < CONV_CLOCK |----- and > \------------ > > *-------\ > ---| DONE > > *-------/ > > Cheers > > Phil Hobbs > Dr Philip C D Hobbs > Principal > ElectroOptical Innovations > 55 Orchard Rd > Briarcliff Manor NY 10510 > 845-480-2058 > > email: hobbs at electrooptical dot nethttp://electrooptical.net- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - Yes!! Working in production is one thing, fixing it in the field is something else! For me, I definitely prefer signal names inside the offpage connector (arrow). NOT adjacent to the connector, or squished between the lines. Very cumbersome outside the factory. Also, try to avoid all nomenclatures that attempt to describe the function (such as "in" or "out", etc..) when the interpretation depends on some outside intervention (such as the prespective of the tech). For example, I wouldn't recommend using "Audio Out Right" because that same term won't make any sense when it gets to where it's going. Try "Unamplified Audio, R+", or something like that. You get the idea.
From: larwe on 19 Jan 2010 19:43 On Jan 19, 7:14 pm, mpm <mpmill...(a)aol.com> wrote: > Also, try to avoid all nomenclatures that attempt to describe the > function (such as "in" or "out", etc..) when the interpretation > depends on some outside intervention (such as the prespective of the Jesus H. Christ on a stick YES. Every, EVERY time we have to connect two boards that have "RXD, TXD, GND", there is confusion over whether that means "data from me to you" or "data from you to me". ARGHHH!! We have literally boards that go through six "flips" of RX/TX lines because of this. Each time something in the middle got revved, someone got it wrong, and someone else added a buffer and a flip in a different subsystem.
From: krw on 19 Jan 2010 20:06 On Tue, 19 Jan 2010 14:17:24 -0700, D Yuniskis <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com> wrote: >Hi, > >As a side-comment to the schematic preferences thread >(hopefully not another lengthy thread :> ), I'm curious >as to what folks use as an offpage connector symbol. > >Given that I prefer these to be *at* the edges of the schematic >*and* given that the signal name will be "outboard" of it, >I try to use very narrow symbols. And, since it is common for >other such "offpage" symbols to be located immediately above >and/or below, I try to keep the height of this symbol to >"one intersignal spacing unit" (IsSU? :> ). > >I also like to show direction of signal flow in the symbol. > >This has led me to a set of six (<frown>) symbols: >Output Right >Input Right (blech!) >BiDir Right >and the corollaries for "Left". (I.e., left and right refer >to the edges of the page at which it is most appropriate to >place these symbols). Pretty much. Output right (input left) makes sense at times, though I try not to use them either. >For unidirectional signal flow, I use a pair of "concentric" >(wrong word) arrow heads. E.g., >> or <<. These can be spaced >close enough (horizontally) together that they occupy very little >space on the page (i.e., 1 IsSU square). > >For BiDir signals, I use one of each arrow head (< + >). >Since BiDir symbols should occupy the same amount of space >(an arbitrary but desirable condition I impose), I overlap these >together. Yeah, I'd like to fit the sheet number cross references in there, but that's asking for too much. >If they don't overlap much (or, at all), you end up with a >diamond (<>) or an X (><). I compromise and end up with >an assymetrical "stacked pair of X's" -- sort of like a >slice out of a DNA helix. Diamond works for me. >This is intentionally assymetric -- you could shift one or >the other arrow head to obtain better symmetry throughout the >X >X >but then placing two or more of these BiDir symbols above each >other ends up looking like *needlepoint* (can't see where one >signal begins and the previous one ends!) > >Other techniques?
From: Michael A. Terrell on 20 Jan 2010 09:16
larwe wrote: > > On Jan 19, 7:14 pm, mpm <mpmill...(a)aol.com> wrote: > > > Also, try to avoid all nomenclatures that attempt to describe the > > function (such as "in" or "out", etc..) when the interpretation > > depends on some outside intervention (such as the prespective of the > > Jesus H. Christ on a stick YES. Every, EVERY time we have to connect > two boards that have "RXD, TXD, GND", there is confusion over whether > that means "data from me to you" or "data from you to me". ARGHHH!! We > have literally boards that go through six "flips" of RX/TX lines > because of this. Each time something in the middle got revved, someone > got it wrong, and someone else added a buffer and a flip in a > different subsystem. Wouldn't it be simpler to have pads for zero ohm resistors to configure the port? Or two positions to put the connector to chose the right configuration? -- Greed is the root of all eBay. |