You are on page 1of 9

Make schematic symbols understandable

Paul Rako - February 13, 2017

In the comment section of my last article, there was some great discussion about drawing schematic
symbols. It is important you make your schematic symbols understandable. Sometimes, the pre-
packaged symbols in you CAD (computer aided design) package will work. Most times they wont.
Make sure you have a package that makes symbol creation easy, since you will have to re-draw
every single part, as well as create the new parts you use. The tens of thousands of included symbols
your CAD package brags about are simply a starting point for you to redraw them all.

Good schematics have a predictable flow. This flow requires inputs to the be on the left and top,
while outputs are on the right and bottom. This is not cast in concrete, but it's pretty important if
you want other engineers to be able to read your schematic at a glance. I can scream at you, Make
it does difference what!?! That syntactic, it kind of parses, but if I flow from left to right, What
difference does it make? then you can understand it in a moment. With semiconductor companies
making so much money, and providing so much support, sometimes their tendency to be stuck inside
the part makes the schematic flow disappear. To this day, some companies draw their schematic
symbol to mimic the pin-out of the part rather than the signal flow (Figure 1).
The hex inverter U1 is not very useful. It combines 6 parts into one symbol. There are both inputs
and outputs on both left and right. The pins are longer than they need to be. The symbol for U2 is a
little better. Here, the inputs are on the left and outputs are on the right. Old guys like me dont like
colored backgrounds since six generations of a black-and-white copy turn the yellow into black and
you cant read anything. I created U3 as a heterogeneous part. It has the six parts, as well as a 7th
part that shows power and ground. Resistor pack RP1 is stupid, you dont want to tangle up your
schematic when the resistors should be at various places on the sheet. RP2 shows how a
heterogeneous part can do this.

Some semiconductor companies adopted that ANSI symbol for logic, obviously invented by linear
minds that need to parse, as opposed the graphical minds of analog engineers (Figure 2).
Figure 2 The ANSI/IEEE logic symbol convention is disliked by many engineers and worse than
useless. Showing the exact logic symbol is better than useless. What is useless is the way the part
comes in your CAD package. Better is when you break the part into its two halves. Better yet is
putting the power separate so you dont clutter the signal flow. What an analog guy wants is a little
drawing inside the part that shows what the heck it does.

For multi-part packages, like many logic gates, the schematic symbols need to be broken apart,
since you rarely use them all in one place in your schematic. The same applies to dual or quad op
amps. The part symbol could have a DeMorgan equivalent view (Figure 3). I respect engineers than
can look at Boolean expressions and understand how a circuit works, but I have always preferred a
graphical representation, where I can imagine the bits sitting inside a D-latch, or the pin a
multiplexor asserting with a given input.

Figure 3 OrCAD 9 would allow the DeMorgan equivalent view of a NAND gate back in 1995.
Altium/CircuitStudio lets you assign different modes to a part to do the same thing. This can be
handy if you want to make an op-amp symbol with a mode that has the minus pin above the plus pin.
With no equivalent symbol, if you flip the part vertically, it also puts plus power on the bottom and
ground on the top. By invoking the DeMorgan equivalent you drew, you can swap input pins while
keeping power and ground where they should be. Another way to solve this is to make a
heterogeneous part with separate power (U6). Now you can vertically flip the amp to put the minus
pin on the top.
Schematic programs of a certain age came about in a period when a PCB was about 40 14-pin logic
ICs, a decoupling capacitor for each, and an edge-card connector. In 1985, DOS OrCAD could not
even draw a triangle. That was their milleu; that was what they needed to worry about. Many of
these companies felt there is only one power on a PCB and that was VCC (the two Cs standing for
common collector since all those logic gates feed power to collectors of many transistors). So, you
had VCC and ground. The programmers at the CAD companies thought there was no need to even
show the power pins on the ICs. They just invented zero length pins, and then the layout program
would connect all the pins with the same name. Programmers think engineers are silly for using a
schematic when it all comes down to a netlist.

Speaking of ground, common or return is more accurate, unless your circuit connects to the
earth ground pin of your wall socket (Figure 4). I admit it is only a personal preference, but I like
American-style power and resistor symbols, circles around transistors and MOSFETs with a clear
indication of N- or P-channel type.

I had a professor that would flunk you if you showed the earth ground symbol on a car radio
schematic. The chassis of the car is a different symbol, despite Altium calling it Earth, and what you
should be using for most PCBs are the triangles, meaning common or return. A personal preference
is using the arrow for power, and I have never met an engineer that likes the European conventions
for resistors like R1 and R2, and even the Altium symbol R3 for a pot makes no sense unless it has
three pins, or the footprint shorts two pins together. I also prefer circles on transistors, short pins,
the letter N or P to make clear the type of MOSFET, and the gate pins drawn to help show that, as
well as the P-channel type being flipped so that source is on the top, where the more positive power
goes. I give Altium/CircuitStudio credit for showing the body diode.

The problem with invisible power and ground pins in a modern design is you will always get burned
when the layout package connects them wrongly. Always. Its a huge problem since you might have
the power on planes, so reworking the PCB, even for a prototype, is very difficult. For this reason,
many of us draw the power pins explicitly. There are three approaches for multi-part packages like a
quad op-amp (Figure 5). You can have the power pins on every part. Secondly, can only put power
pins on one part and make sure to place all the spares. Third, you can make a quad op amp as a five-
part heterogeneous package, with each of the four op-amps as a part, and then the power and
ground pins as a separate part. The advantage to this is you can then put the power and ground part
with all the decoupling capacitors. The disadvantage is you might forget to place that part and then
same disaster, only you have no power to the part, instead of the wrong power. One trick is to make
the power pins the first part in the package, so that shows up first when you go to place it. You
should be plopping down all the parts anyway so you can bias unused parts so they dont oscillate.

Figure 5 Dont use zero-length pins for power and ground. Instead, draw the power pins, on every
part if you want (U1). Otherwise, you can only draw the power pins on one part of the package, but
be sure to place all the parts so you remember to connect power (U2). With U3, you make a package
with a separate part that has power and ground. That has the advantage of letting you flip the op-
amps to put the minus pin either above or below the plus as the circuit dictates.

Those heterogeneous parts invented in Cadence OrCAD decades ago can be used to break
connectors into different chunks as well. This too will preserve the flow of the schematic, while still
making sure every wire goes to the right connector (Figure 6). Now you can ensure your schematics
flow from left to right and it will make it much easier for other engineers to understand them. It will
also be easier for you to understand them when you look at them 5 years later.
Figure 6 If you let a connector symbol stay one part it makes the schematic very confusing (a). By
using the heterogeneous part function in OrCAD, or the part modes in Altium/CircuitStudio, you
can break the connector up so that the schematic flows better and is much easier to understand at a
glance (b).

Another consideration is the clarity of complicated parts, like a switching power chip. Even when
you move the inputs to the left side and outputs to the right, it still is pretty mysterious as to how the
part works. For that you can draw a simple diagram inside the symbol outline to give a hint as to
what the part does. It does not have to be the block diagram from the datasheet, but a simple
representation to remind you and others what the part does.

There are other schematic symbol conventions that are more preferences, rather than good design
practice. I have always liked transistors enclosed in a circle. Once again, it was those semiconductor
folks that had to draw hundreds of transistors that dropped the circle. I think the circle has dignity.
Similarly, I have always loved to have little jumps when a wire crosses another. This brings up
another point: no four-way ties. I have worked on a FAXed schematic and sure enough, it was
impossible to see if the wires were just crossing, rather than tied together. I guessed wrong and it
cost me a day. If all schematics had jumps, the no four-way ties rule would not be as important. To
my delight, the recent versions of Altium/CircuitStudio can show jumps as well as suppress four-way
ties (Figure 7).

Figure 7 An old-timer like me loves to show wires jumping over other wires where there is no
connection. Note that four-way ties are a schematic taboo. Altium/CircuitStudio has preferences to
create wire jumps and also to eliminate cross-ties by kicking the wires offset, as at the GND
connection for this chip. Note the library part has outputs on the left and inputs on the right, the
exact opposite of what you want.

My preference is to re-draw the part symbol, using the inputs on the left convention (Figure 8). I
also used separate power and ground symbols, which reduces the tangle effect. After all its the
signal flow we care about.
Figure 8 Modify the 555 timer of Figure 7 to put inputs on the left and outputs on the right. The
schematic flows better. Separate power and ground symbols eliminate the wire tangles.

Most engineers understand what is inside a 555 timer IC. But if you dont, or you think the people
reading the schematic wont, then you can draw some or all of the block diagram inside the part.
Altium/CircuitStudio will let you put an image into a schematic symbol, so I found a nice 555 timer
block diagram online and after a little trimming and stretching, I plopped it into the schematic
symbol. I had to adhere to their pin-out, so now the schematic has some jumps in it (Figure 9).

Figure 9 You can draw a block diagram inside the part to show its function. This might be as simple
as showing an open-collector output, or more involved, like showing functions inside a switching
power chip. Some CAD packages let you paste an image inside the part.

This brings up a good point. You could honor the block structure of whats inside the part at the
expense of the overall schematic, or worry less about what is inside the part and keep a clean simple
schematic. My thinking is to try and draw the pertinent things inside the part, like an open-collector
output. But what is important is to keep the overall schematic untangled and understandable.

OK, a last silly analog guy preference. Back in college, John Kuras used to joke that a power
transistor should be drawn bigger with thicker lines. We all laughed back then but now I do like to
show that a transistor is a giant TO-3 monster by using a bigger symbol (Figure 10). Being analog is
accepting a sense of importance, and that bigger transistor is more important, and its nice to draw
it that way.

Figure 10 Everyone can see the transistor on the right is a power transistor.

Schematic symbol preferences are like musical preferences; they are very personal. It is part of your
style as an engineer. Some things like wire jumps and circles around transistors are less important.
Things like inputs on the left and top, and outputs on the right and bottom are more important. We
all get to argue how to handle buses that are both inputs and outputs. I consider the ground symbols
important. There is an app note on the Web that if you connect it up to earth ground as the symbol
suggests, it will blow up the diodes.

Please chip in your thoughts and style below, it can only make our work more understandable to

Also see:

Funniest schematic ever

Why I Hate Your Schematic Diagrams
5 tips for PCB schematic file management
An insight into layout versus schematic