Trying to understand how to design circuits

[chriswilliams]

Hi all:

I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?

In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
a certain order, a process. For example:

In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.

But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.

So the question is:
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?

How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

Thanks in advance by any comment.

[Jim Thompson]

On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

In the old days you gained experience by tinkering and burning things
up ;-)

You can't DESIGN without experience.

Try reading Win Hill's book, "Art of Electronics", CAREFULLY, trying
to understand each section before you proceed to the next.

Maybe build some kit electronics.

...Jim Thompson

[Joerg]

Hello Jim,

Post by Jim Thompson
In the old days you gained experience by tinkering and burning things
up ;-)

Hmm, old days. I just built a uC proto circuit. Then the halogen bulb of
the desk lamp blew but I figured I'd just test it really quick, that
it'll be enough daylight for that. Clouds rolled in and it got really
dark. Flipped the red and black supply wires 'cuz it was too dark.
Bzzzzt ... poof. So maybe these are the old days.

Post by Jim Thompson
You can't DESIGN without experience.

Fully agree. But when I was a kid I didn't agree with that. The amazing
thing was that most of the stuff I designed worked anyway, including a
kilowatt size RF amp that I used to a decade. (Chris: Please don't try
to do that).

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

[Pooh Bear]

Post by Jim Thompson
Maybe build some kit electronics.

As if !

Since when did most university courses give regard to practical skills ?

Graham

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 07:41:18 +0000, Pooh Bear

Post by Pooh Bear

Post by Jim Thompson
Maybe build some kit electronics.

As if !
Since when did most university courses give regard to practical skills ?
Graham

For your own learning pleasure.

...Jim Thompson

[Joerg]

Hello Chris,

Post by chriswilliams
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?

It's the same thing as with your car or writing examples. We take what's
called a functional requirement specification (FRS) and then design the
whole thing. The other required input specs contain important data such
as target cost, monthly production quantities, mandatory agency
approvals and so on.

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

Experience, and lots of it. Analog design with discrete parts requires
more than a decade under the belt, especially if it has to result in a
very cost efficient solution. Now I hope this didn't discourage you to
get started.

Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com

[Tim Williams]

The difference is the entire philosophy on constructing a work. Electronics
is highly scientific, and as such comes from a methodic progression of ideas
and constructions, connected together. The real art is connecting the
proper building blocks together to accomplish a given function.

Given that, there are many circuits that apply both linear and
interconnected topologies (arrangements, whatever).
Loading Image...
Here's a good example of a series of stages. On the left it begins with a
common-cathode preamplifier stage, a summing paragraph as it were. (It does
in fact accomplish summation, if you add a signal to the RCA jack as well.)
The next triode (circle) splits this signal into two identical but opposite
signals for the next stages to build on. The next stage, in the middle,
amplifies the signal further, preserving balance between the opposite
signals. The second last stage increases the current capacity of the
signal, allowing it to drive the last tube, which finally turns wiggling
guitar strings into wiggling speaker cones, after the output transformer.

It's like I asked you to do this on a calculator:
Enter 7.
Multiply by 4.
Add 6.
Divide by 3.4.
Press equal button and read answer.
Every operation performs some modification of the signal as it passes each
stage. It flows through every one and is processed in full.

Now on the other hand, you might have something like this:
Loading Image...
I'll help you out. Each pair of transistors (in the circles) facing each
other works together: when one or the other is turned on (positive voltage
on the straight line), the collector (diagonal line) is pulled down near
emitter (diagonal arrow). Say you pull down the upper-left collector node:
the voltage is transferred through the resistors, removing voltage from the
inside upper-right transistor. If the outside upper-right transistor is off
too, then the collector node will rise near +V, which puts voltage on the
inside upper-left transistor -- which you'll recall is already on, holding
its collector near zero (ground). Thus, it holds itself in one state or the
other depending on which input was last triggered, otherwise known as a
register. But there's those other resistors that connect to the diodes,
which then connect to the bottom half register, which behaves in the same
way, and also to the two transistors at the bottom. The two bottom
transistors handle the only input.

What ends up happening is, by way of everything storing, interacting and
switching, the P1 and P2 signals alternate every other clock pulse, which is
to say the clock frequency has been divided by two.

But creating these. It's different from writing, you just jump in. (This
is my first, and last, draft of this post! ;) Jumping into say, designing
an 8-bit computer from scratch, now that's a little more troublesome. I
mentioned you always start from simpler things. In electronics, the first
thing you learn about is the circuit, a switch and lightbulb. Then you
might add a resistor, or two, and determine what happens to the voltages
depending on the resistances. (Hint: I hope you know some algebra.) Then
you can get into nonlinear (nonohmic) components like diodes and
transistors. You determine how the diode, transistor, etc. behave, then
apply it to other things, like your resistors. If you consider how the
transitor works, you can pretty quickly come up with a very high gain
amplifier. If you're clever, you can come up with a voltage regulator too,
and all other sorts of stiff, constant-voltage circuits. If you combine
both, you get an audio power amplifier!

The real genious in electronics is coming up with original connections. One
fellow back in the 1920s had the marvellous idea of sending an amplifier's
output back to its input. Applied properly, you get negative feedback which
reduces distortion. If you apply it backwards (positive feedback), you can
get an oscillator, making radio possible.

Taken to an extreme, all of today's linear amplifiers use astounding amounts
of NFB -- a factor on the order of thousands -- to reduce distortion and
improve bandwidth, with wonderful results.

Tim

--
Deep Fryer: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

"chriswilliams" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:***@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<For some reason it won't add the carat indents>
Hi all:

I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?

In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
a certain order, a process. For example:

In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.

But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.

So the question is:
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?

How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

Thanks in advance by any comment.

[Fred Bloggs]

Post by Tim Williams
http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/Images/Frequency%20Divider.gif
I'll help you out. Each pair of transistors (in the circles) facing each
other works together: when one or the other is turned on (positive voltage
on the straight line), the collector (diagonal line) is pulled down near
the voltage is transferred through the resistors, removing voltage from the
inside upper-right transistor. If the outside upper-right transistor is off
too, then the collector node will rise near +V, which puts voltage on the
inside upper-left transistor -- which you'll recall is already on, holding
its collector near zero (ground). Thus, it holds itself in one state or the
other depending on which input was last triggered, otherwise known as a
register. But there's those other resistors that connect to the diodes,
which then connect to the bottom half register, which behaves in the same
way, and also to the two transistors at the bottom. The two bottom
transistors handle the only input.
What ends up happening is, by way of everything storing, interacting and
switching, the P1 and P2 signals alternate every other clock pulse, which is
to say the clock frequency has been divided by two.

Could you have picked a more complicated example? No one in their right
mind would look at that archaic thing as an elemental building block
from a circuits point of view. You might have explained its
decomposition into more fundamental component circuits.

[Paul Burridge]

On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 20:41:19 -0600, "Tim Williams"

Post by Tim Williams
The difference is the entire philosophy on constructing a work. Electronics
is highly scientific, and as such comes from a methodic progression of ideas
and constructions, connected together. The real art is connecting the
proper building blocks together to accomplish a given function.

I can't agree with that, Tim. Joining up the dots between a block
diagram is the easy bit. What have you got to factor in? Signal levels
and source and load impedances and that's about it. Designing the
blocks themselves at component level is the really clever bit IMV.

[Joel Kolstad]

Post by Paul Burridge
I can't agree with that, Tim. Joining up the dots between a block
diagram is the easy bit. What have you got to factor in? Signal levels
and source and load impedances and that's about it. Designing the
blocks themselves at component level is the really clever bit IMV.

One of the chapters in "The Art & Science of Analog Circuit Design" describes
how, for a mercury delay line memory, the "hook up the blocks" approach was
unable to provide a working design; designing all the blocks "in paralle"
allowed for a very inexpensive solution.

The vast majority of engineers out there are of the "hook up the blocks"
variety; it is much easier than designing the blocks themselves!

[John Larkin]

On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want to
learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper basis
for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.

So: learn the theory, theory of the parts and theory of circuits,
networks, signals+systems, and closed-loop control. Then study some
existing designs. Then start designing stuff, simple things at first,
and make sure you understand and keep control of the quantitative
aspects; you can fiddle simple circuits, but fiddling doesn't scale.

You can't get good at tennis in a week or even a year, so don't expect
to design plasma-screen TV sets first thing.

Working for a grouchy old talented mentor wouldn't hurt a bit. Design
can be taught by osmosis.

John

[m***@care2.com]

Post by Jim Thompson
On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want to
learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper basis
for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.
So: learn the theory, theory of the parts and theory of circuits,
networks, signals+systems, and closed-loop control. Then study some
existing designs. Then start designing stuff, simple things at first,
and make sure you understand and keep control of the quantitative
aspects; you can fiddle simple circuits, but fiddling doesn't scale.
You can't get good at tennis in a week or even a year, so don't expect
to design plasma-screen TV sets first thing.
Working for a grouchy old talented mentor wouldn't hurt a bit. Design
can be taught by osmosis.
John

I think this is the way I see it too. A designer can learn, must learn,
all the building blocks of circuits, eg amplifiers, filters, regulators
and so on, but you cant take a spec and deduce a design logically from
that. Often what comes out is logical / predictable at a block diagram
level, but equally its often not. The reason is there are so very many
options, permutations, and a seemingly endless stream of issues with
everything. Its normal to be able to use any one of a long list of
possible topologies to do the job, a skilful designer can pick what
suits the task best.

Working with the issues gets harder over time. In the 1920s the typical
radio was a quite simple design with large issues. Today such a design
would never be accepted by the buying public, and would contravene
numerous regulations. The expectations increase over time, as do the
legal requirements, and the quality of offering of the competition.

For commercial design, yes you need experience, but for hobbeasts I
dont think its necessary. Just get stuck in, have fun, and simulate
things in spice first to save on parts. The commercial designer needs
to maximise efficiency, reliability, parts availability, cost
efficiency, and satisfy user whims. The hobbeast does not.

And IME the less rules you follow, the more you accomplish and the more
you learn, in hobby tronics. One of my gripes is hobby books always try
to emulate commercial tronics, and the 2 are really chalk and cheese.
Hobbying gives you a much wider world to play with: you can make your
own Nernst lightbulbs, make 100,000 hour lights, use positive feedback
on amplifiers, make your own moving iron or arc speaker drivers,
control systems, burger alarms, arc furnace, welders, metal formers,
mechanical amplifiers, burglar terrorisers, whatever you like.


NT

[lemonjuice]

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

<<3) Become a plumber so you can fix my remote-controlled pool and spa.

<<John


Would you associate with anyone who can swim so badly that he messes up
his piping system?
Grow up you grannies.

[Paul Burridge]

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

I can't sit by and see such a grave injustice go answered. If the
regular designers here are guilty of *anything* it's only forgetting
how tough a subject this is to get to grips with adequately. There are
plenty of demonstrably genuine experts here. I smell a troll
hereabouts...

Post by lemonjuice
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.

Rubbish. It's one of the very best!
Like I said: a troll.

[infinite]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 21:47:00 +0100, Paul Burridge

Post by Paul Burridge

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

I can't sit by and see such a grave injustice go answered. If the
regular designers here are guilty of *anything* it's only forgetting
how tough a subject this is to get to grips with adequately.

Thats a good point. But how many regulars here admit that.

Post by Paul Burridge
There are
plenty of demonstrably genuine experts here. I smell a troll
hereabouts...

Well face facts ... the regulars who talk the most spend more time
trolling, insulting those who actually understand the subject, then
getting down to talk about real electronics. Most of their answers are
easily got with a Google search and most times you find better answers
using the same method.

Post by Paul Burridge

Post by lemonjuice
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.

Rubbish. It's one of the very best!

Check up some serious analog /design design books, none recommend the
Art of Electronics and neither do most engineers I know. But you have
a right to an opinion as I/all do.

infinite

[Paul Burridge]

On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:51:06 -0800, John Larkin

Post by John Larkin
If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want to
learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper basis
for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.

How much design is truly novel nowadays? I mean, if you want an
oscillator - to take just one example - there are loads of eponymous
configurations to choose from, mostly dating from 60+ years ago.
Other staples have likewise been refined and settled over the decades.
The only 'design' as such remaining to be done is hooking up the
various sub-circuit elements, AFAICS. There's no point in re-inventing
the wheel, so how often does a currently working designer actually sit
down and truly design/develop a totally novel configuration?

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 21:35:38 +0100, Paul Burridge

Post by Paul Burridge
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:51:06 -0800, John Larkin

Post by John Larkin
If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want to
learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper basis
for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.

How much design is truly novel nowadays? I mean, if you want an
oscillator - to take just one example - there are loads of eponymous
configurations to choose from, mostly dating from 60+ years ago.

Well, in the last few years, I've designed six or eight different
oscillators, all with topologies I've never seen elsewhere. Of course,
I can't guarantee that nobody has ever done any of them before. Except
two, maybe three, that I'm pretty sure about.

Post by Paul Burridge
Other staples have likewise been refined and settled over the decades.
The only 'design' as such remaining to be done is hooking up the
various sub-circuit elements, AFAICS. There's no point in re-inventing
the wheel,

Sure there is. New applications and new components invite new
topologies. Besides, inventing new circuits is fun.

Post by Paul Burridge
so how often does a currently working designer actually sit
down and truly design/develop a totally novel configuration?

I think there's lots of room for, and need for, both new circuits and
new product architectures.

John

[Kevin Aylward]

Post by John Larkin
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 21:35:38 +0100, Paul Burridge

Post by Paul Burridge
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:51:06 -0800, John Larkin

Post by John Larkin
If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want
to learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper
basis for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.

How much design is truly novel nowadays? I mean, if you want an
oscillator - to take just one example - there are loads of eponymous
configurations to choose from, mostly dating from 60+ years ago.

Well, in the last few years, I've designed six or eight different
oscillators, all with topologies I've never seen elsewhere.

With all due respect John, I would have to see *proof* that such "new"
topologies actually were superior to the well trusted existing ones.

The number of times I have examined "new" circuits that actually achieve
no net benefit from an existing circuit are too numerous to mention.
There are many convoluted designs that achieve precisely, nothing. Most
people fool themselves. It is very hard to be objective about ones own
work.

Post by John Larkin
Of course,
I can't guarantee that nobody has ever done any of them before. Except
two, maybe three, that I'm pretty sure about.

Its very unlikely that anyone can come up, today, with a real useful
topology that hasn't already been looked at. Sure, it does happen, but
not very often. Too many people have looked at this stuff for way too
long.

Post by John Larkin

Post by Paul Burridge
Other staples have likewise been refined and settled over the
decades. The only 'design' as such remaining to be done is hooking
up the various sub-circuit elements, AFAICS. There's no point in
re-inventing the wheel,

Sure there is.

Don't be daft. If its already invented, it invented. End of story.

Post by John Larkin
New applications and new components invite new
topologies. Besides, inventing new circuits is fun.

Post by Paul Burridge
so how often does a currently working designer actually sit
down and truly design/develop a totally novel configuration?

I think there's lots of room for, and need for, both new circuits and
new product architectures.

I don't. The opportunity for a really new circuit that actually has new
value is < 1:1000.

Kevin Aylward
***@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 08:58:57 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by John Larkin
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 21:35:38 +0100, Paul Burridge

Post by Paul Burridge
On Mon, 26 Dec 2005 18:51:06 -0800, John Larkin

Post by John Larkin
If you want to learn to write, you have to write a lot. If you want
to learn how to play tennis, play tennis a lot. Circuit design is
creation, not analysis, so there's no formula. A white paper (app
note?) can be instructive about a part, but isn't often a proper
basis for a design. If it was, nobody would need designers.

How much design is truly novel nowadays? I mean, if you want an
oscillator - to take just one example - there are loads of eponymous
configurations to choose from, mostly dating from 60+ years ago.

Well, in the last few years, I've designed six or eight different
oscillators, all with topologies I've never seen elsewhere.

With all due respect John, I would have to see *proof* that such "new"
topologies actually were superior to the well trusted existing ones.

Well, they did things that no oscillators that I'm aware of can do.
One, for example, oscillates at 800 MHz, has a TC of a few PPM/K,
starts instantly - within 1 ns - of an external trigger, then outputs
clock edges regularly on schedule with picosecond accuracy. It can be
stopped and restarted in 5 ns or so. I know of no "well trusted
existing ones" that can do that.

Another is an LC oscillator, asynchronously triggerable in 2 ns and
stoppable within one cycle, that has the longterm accuracy and jitter
of the best crystal oscillators. I *know* nobody else has ever done
this commercially.

Around my place, we do stuff like this all the time, because we
believe it's possible.

Post by Kevin Aylward
The number of times I have examined "new" circuits that actually achieve
no net benefit from an existing circuit are too numerous to mention.
There are many convoluted designs that achieve precisely, nothing. Most
people fool themselves. It is very hard to be objective about ones own
work.

Maybe nobody shows you the really good ones.

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by John Larkin
Of course,
I can't guarantee that nobody has ever done any of them before. Except
two, maybe three, that I'm pretty sure about.

Its very unlikely that anyone can come up, today, with a real useful
topology that hasn't already been looked at. Sure, it does happen, but
not very often. Too many people have looked at this stuff for way too
long.

Disagree. New parts allow new things to be tried. uPs, dense FPGAs,
screaming ADCs allow architectures to be put on a board that would
have been ludicrous 5 years ago. These architectures need circuits.

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by John Larkin
I think there's lots of room for, and need for, both new circuits and
new product architectures.

I don't. The opportunity for a really new circuit that actually has new
value is < 1:1000.

Well, I guess I'm doing all of them, and for every one I do, you poor
drones are stuck with copying and tweaking the other 999.

John

[Pooh Bear]

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

You seem to be obsessed with a theoretical analysis and a 'paper design'.
Real engineers assuredly *don't* do it this way ! Then again they probably
have former practical experience !

Without practical experience a 'paper design' from pure theory is worth no
more than a block diagram. Useful for reference but unlikely to be what is
finally made.

Graham

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 07:39:50 +0000, Pooh Bear

Post by Pooh Bear

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

You seem to be obsessed with a theoretical analysis and a 'paper design'.
Real engineers assuredly *don't* do it this way ! Then again they probably
have former practical experience !
Without practical experience a 'paper design' from pure theory is worth no
more than a block diagram. Useful for reference but unlikely to be what is
finally made.
Graham

I don't know about that.

When I was a kid I DID have a lot of "hack around" time in my dad's
radio and tv repair shop.

However I WAS obsessed with mathematical analysis of circuits, and
probably remain somewhat that way after all these years.

Take a look at my analysis of the MC1530 OpAmp. I designed that
circuit through mathematical analysis, then built a breadboard to
prove it, then integrated it... I was 23 years old at the time.

...Jim Thompson

[Pooh Bear]

Post by Jim Thompson
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 07:39:50 +0000, Pooh Bear

Post by Pooh Bear

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

You seem to be obsessed with a theoretical analysis and a 'paper design'.
Real engineers assuredly *don't* do it this way ! Then again they probably
have former practical experience !
Without practical experience a 'paper design' from pure theory is worth no
more than a block diagram. Useful for reference but unlikely to be what is
finally made.
Graham

I don't know about that.
When I was a kid I DID have a lot of "hack around" time in my dad's
radio and tv repair shop.
However I WAS obsessed with mathematical analysis of circuits, and
probably remain somewhat that way after all these years.
Take a look at my analysis of the MC1530 OpAmp. I designed that
circuit through mathematical analysis, then built a breadboard to
prove it, then integrated it... I was 23 years old at the time.
...Jim Thompson

I reckon mathematical analysis is fine once you've mastered a level of
practical competence.

How many times have we heard here that it worked in Spice but won't in real ife
?

Graham

[Jim Thompson]

On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 01:39:04 +0000, Pooh Bear

Post by Pooh Bear

Post by Jim Thompson
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 07:39:50 +0000, Pooh Bear

Post by Pooh Bear

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

You seem to be obsessed with a theoretical analysis and a 'paper design'.
Real engineers assuredly *don't* do it this way ! Then again they probably
have former practical experience !
Without practical experience a 'paper design' from pure theory is worth no
more than a block diagram. Useful for reference but unlikely to be what is
finally made.
Graham

I don't know about that.
When I was a kid I DID have a lot of "hack around" time in my dad's
radio and tv repair shop.
However I WAS obsessed with mathematical analysis of circuits, and
probably remain somewhat that way after all these years.
Take a look at my analysis of the MC1530 OpAmp. I designed that
circuit through mathematical analysis, then built a breadboard to
prove it, then integrated it... I was 23 years old at the time.
...Jim Thompson

I reckon mathematical analysis is fine once you've mastered a level of
practical competence.
How many times have we heard here that it worked in Spice but won't in real ife
?
Graham

Yep. The practical competence allows you to judge the worth of the
simulation.

...Jim Thompson

[Kevin Aylward]

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated
to achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Of the order of 99%+ of all new circuits design is based on varying
existing circuits. There is a tremendous volume of well trusted and
tried topologies that have been refined over many, years and work
extremely well. All new designs should be based on these designs.
Reinventing the wheel is the last thing to do. One of the biggest
mistakes in design to try and do the "not invented here" thing. Anything
totally new will always give you grief, so don't do it unless there is
no alternative.

The way to become a good designer is to study and thoroughly understand
why existing designs work the way the do, and why they are used in a
particular application. Only by this understanding will you understand
when you have to modify an existing design to satisfy different
requirements.

A starter...recognise that design is *always* a trade off. That is
improving one aspect can only come at the expense of another aspect. For
example, G(power, speed, accuracy) = 0. That is, it is not possible to
achieve an arbitrary high speed at arbitrary low power with arbitrary
accuracy. Learn when to compromise a spec and when to tell the boss to
stick it up his arse when he doesn't.


Kevin Aylward
***@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

[John Larkin]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:20:18 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated
to achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Of the order of 99%+ of all new circuits design is based on varying
existing circuits. There is a tremendous volume of well trusted and
tried topologies that have been refined over many, years and work
extremely well. All new designs should be based on these designs.
Reinventing the wheel is the last thing to do. One of the biggest
mistakes in design to try and do the "not invented here" thing. Anything
totally new will always give you grief, so don't do it unless there is
no alternative.

That's not design, that's copying. It's not fun, and it's usually not
very profitable, because if you can do it, everybody else can, too.

Post by Kevin Aylward
The way to become a good designer is to study and thoroughly understand
why existing designs work the way the do, and why they are used in a
particular application. Only by this understanding will you understand
when you have to modify an existing design to satisfy different
requirements.
A starter...recognise that design is *always* a trade off. That is
improving one aspect can only come at the expense of another aspect. For
example, G(power, speed, accuracy) = 0. That is, it is not possible to
achieve an arbitrary high speed at arbitrary low power with arbitrary
accuracy. Learn when to compromise a spec and when to tell the boss to
stick it up his arse when he doesn't.

Or take the other path, make every design insanely great.

John

[Kevin Aylward]

Post by John Larkin
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:20:18 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Of the order of 99%+ of all new circuits design is based on varying
existing circuits. There is a tremendous volume of well trusted and
tried topologies that have been refined over many, years and work
extremely well. All new designs should be based on these designs.
Reinventing the wheel is the last thing to do. One of the biggest
mistakes in design to try and do the "not invented here" thing.
Anything totally new will always give you grief, so don't do it
unless there is no alternative.

That's not design,

It is, its:

1 Replication (copying)
2 Randam variation
3 Selection

Thats it mate. End of story.

Ho humm... I have explained this many times, as I am sure you know, but
to refresh,

http://www.anasoft.co.uk/replicators/intelligence.html check out the
"Electronic Engineer as a Darwinian machine" bit.

Post by John Larkin
It's not fun, and it's usually not
very profitable, because if you can do it, everybody else can, too.

Sorry to bust your bubble John, but that *is* the way it is, and the
method is very profitable. Indeed, its essentially the only way to make
profit.

The problem here is that people like to lie to themselves. You need to
stand back and understand what it is one really does, not what one would
like to believe they do.

I design *new* products every day. I do it using the same *old*
components like diff pairs, cascodes, folded cascades, push pull stages
etc that were invented at the beginning of electronics. It will always
be that way. Don't kid yourself any different, but please do let me know
when you invent a ultracascideconduit.

Post by John Larkin

Post by Kevin Aylward
The way to become a good designer is to study and thoroughly
understand why existing designs work the way the do, and why they
are used in a particular application. Only by this understanding
will you understand when you have to modify an existing design to
satisfy different requirements.
A starter...recognise that design is *always* a trade off. That is
improving one aspect can only come at the expense of another aspect.
For example, G(power, speed, accuracy) = 0. That is, it is not
possible to achieve an arbitrary high speed at arbitrary low power
with arbitrary accuracy. Learn when to compromise a spec and when to
tell the boss to stick it up his arse when he doesn't.

Or take the other path, make every design insanely great.

Completely pointless.

Kevin Aylward
***@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

[lemonjuice]

My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.

Cheers

[Jim Thompson]

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

And who the fuck might YOU be? I've never seen a contribution by you
on the newsgroup... NEVER!

Post by lemonjuice
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

It's a good book "by example".

To learn "design" takes hacking around on your own.

...Jim Thompson

[martin griffith]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:15:32 -0700, in sci.electronics.design Jim

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

And who the fuck might YOU be? I've never seen a contribution by you
on the newsgroup... NEVER!

Hook, Line and Sinker.......

Merry Whatever's





martin

[John Larkin]

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

3) Become a plumber so you can fix my remote-controlled pool and spa.

John

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 09:17:02 -0800, John Larkin

Post by John Larkin

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

3) Become a plumber so you can fix my remote-controlled pool and spa.
John

Bwahahahaha ;-)

...Jim Thompson

[lemonjuice]

HohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohiHohi

Now who is laughing

[Noway2]

When I was in High School, I took a couple of electricity and
electronics courses. A large part of the class was wiring example
circuits out of a book and analyzing how they worked. I forget how
many times I asked the teacher the same question you are now asking,
"How do you know how to connect these components to get it to do this?"
Each time I was given the same reply, "That's the engineers job",
which was why I became an electrical engineer. Little did I know that
engineering school does not teach you to design things, which I admit
was a major disappointment at the time. What it does teach you is
about the math behind different components and also how to read new
information, digest it and then apply it to a new situation, which are
things you can do on your own.

Electronic design is part art and part science and requires an
investment of time, patience, and a willingness to learn and
experiment. There is a lot of good advice in the replies to your
question. Getting the book, the Art of Electronics is a very good
place to start. I would even recommend the Lab work book that
accompanies it. From there, you will probably want to purchase a
"bread board" which contains rows of spring loaded connection holes at
.100" spacings (common for ICs) and a basic power supply. Then start
by building an analyzing small circuits.

One other piece of advice, for when you have an idea of what part you
want to use, but aren't quie sure how to apply it. The part data
sheets often have typical applications that show common ways to use the
device. The datasheets are also very helpfull in determining
implmementation details such as a particular pin requires a pull up or
pull down resistor of XX Ohms. Also, the datasheets will provide a lot
of information about the electrical operation of the part, e.g. how
high is a logic high output, etc, which is necessary for understanding
what building blocks are compatible.

As a word of encouragment, my first attempt at a real production design
was a simple circuit that routed a couple of RS-232 signals and power
supply connections. Quite frankly, it was a piece of crap, crude in the
design and poor in the implementation. A couple of years later, I was
designing system boards based on DSPs, with all sorts of analog and
digital circuitry. This ability didn't happen over night for me, nor
will it for you. Just keep at it.

Lastly, I would have to say that you will undoubedtly learn a hell of a
lot more from your mistakes than from what you get right. The mistakes
will force you to analyze what went wrong, which often times is not as
simple as it seems.

[lemonjuice]

On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:15:32 -0700, Jim Thompson

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

And who the fuck might YOU be? I've never seen a contribution by you
on the newsgroup... NEVER!

Keep on dreaming
You must still be using Intels 8086 CPUs . I advice you to change .

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

It's a good book "by example".
To learn "design" takes hacking around on your own.

Hacking teaches a guy to design a major electronics project?
Wrong answer.
Don't ever look at it.
There is a poster here who claims to be the author ... Hill ...he is a
fake. Look at the quality of his replies ... absolutely useless stuff.

Post by Jim Thompson
...Jim Thompson

[Jim Thompson]

Post by lemonjuice
On Tue, 27 Dec 2005 08:15:32 -0700, Jim Thompson

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
My advice on what to avoid.
1) Don't come on this NG . Most of the regulars and their pals who
have been here for years don't have a clue about what electronics is
about. Avoid them like you'd avoid an epidemic! They are far worse
then that!

And who the fuck might YOU be? I've never seen a contribution by you
on the newsgroup... NEVER!

Keep on dreaming
You must still be using Intels 8086 CPUs . I advice you to change .

^^^^^^
SHEEEESH! Another juvenile..........|

Post by lemonjuice

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
2) Never ever read the Art of Electronics. Its the worst book that has
ever been written on the subject.
Cheers

It's a good book "by example".
To learn "design" takes hacking around on your own.

Hacking teaches a guy to design a major electronics project?
Wrong answer.
Don't ever look at it.
There is a poster here who claims to be the author ... Hill ...he is a
fake. Look at the quality of his replies ... absolutely useless stuff.

Post by Jim Thompson
...Jim Thompson

PLONK!

...Jim Thompson

[Tim Williams]

Post by Jim Thompson

Post by lemonjuice
There is a poster here who claims to be the author ... Hill ...he is a
fake. Look at the quality of his replies ... absolutely useless stuff.

PLONK!

Gee Jim, considering the difference in political opinion you two have, I'd
think you'd give puckerface (lemonjuice) a little credit on that ;-)

Tim

P.S. Was on vacation a few days. Took AoE with ;)

--
Deep Fryer: a very philosophical monk.
Website: http://webpages.charter.net/dawill/tmoranwms

[Fred Bloggs]

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle this
very question at the entry level:
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

[John Larkin]

Post by Fred Bloggs

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle this
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

I just hate book titles like "Bicycles: a Peddling Approach." And
journal article titles containing the word "Novel."

John

[Rick]

Stuff snipped

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle this
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

I just hate book titles like "Bicycles: a Peddling Approach." And
journal article titles containing the word "Novel."
John

I was going to suggest "The Feng Shui of Electronics" by Pau Horowiti
and Wan Hio

[John Larkin]

Post by Rick
Stuff snipped

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle

this

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

I just hate book titles like "Bicycles: a Peddling Approach." And
journal article titles containing the word "Novel."
John

I was going to suggest "The Feng Shui of Electronics" by Pau Horowiti
and Wan Hio

This book comes highly recommended:

Loading Image...


John

[Jim Thompson]

Post by Rick
Stuff snipped

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle

this

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

I just hate book titles like "Bicycles: a Peddling Approach." And
journal article titles containing the word "Novel."
John

I was going to suggest "The Feng Shui of Electronics" by Pau Horowiti
and Wan Hio

Sno-o-o-o-ort ;-)

...Jim Thompson

[Fred Bloggs]

Post by John Larkin

Post by Fred Bloggs

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

There is no short answer. There are two books available that tackle this
Electronics: A Systems Approach , Storey and
Gateway to Electronics, Dunn

I just hate book titles like "Bicycles: a Peddling Approach." And
journal article titles containing the word "Novel."
John

Those books are not for you, they are for beginners, written well and
comprehensive, more like surveys than textbooks, although they do
contain problem sets.

[Riscy]

I just ignore the silly response from the oldies like them.

I recommends reading many good electronics books and learn about basic
thing such as transistor, resistor and capacitor. The important thing
is to spend time experimenting and interacting with electronics and see
the response. The shopping list includes soldering irons, scope, PSU
(battery is cheaper but don't last long) and digital voltmeter (DVM).
There is maplins 200:1 electronics kits which give you very good start.
You can get equipment cheaply from ebay but don't expects perfect
accuarcy or performance, but you still get out from them.

The book need to be easy to following with simple equation to start
with. Once you understand the basic equation and theory, you can
advance into op-amp and feedback levels. Then you progress into more
complex domains such as ADC, DAC and serial interface. You could start
involving Microchip PIC and C programming but don't let this dent you
or being afriad of it. Once you done this you can declare yourself as
designer engineer(!) which would turn your dream into wonderful
realities(!).

All this is more like investment of your skill and treat as part of
hobbies, otherwise you simply walk away, watch TV and drink beers or
popcorns and hope to die knowing nothing.

I work as Analogue Design Engineer and earning nice income from it, I
do hobby from time to time in embedded design engineer because that is
where digital meet analogue.

Hope this help...

Good luck.

Riscy

[Joel Kolstad]

Post by Riscy
I just ignore the silly response from the oldies like them.

I wouldn't. The path you describe works fine if you want to be a board level
or digital designer, but there's no getting away from a decent dose of math
and knowledge of some fairly sophisticated device models if you're looking to
design to build those "small blocks" like Jim Thompson, Winfield Hill, and
others do.

Post by Riscy
Once you understand the basic equation and theory, you can
advance into op-amp and feedback levels. Then you progress into more
complex domains such as ADC, DAC and serial interface.

Knowing how to interface an ADC or DAC over a serial interface is arguably
trivial compared to having an in-depth understanding of op-amps and feedback.

Granted, for every Jim or Win out there there are probably 1,000 or more
"block level" design engineers, and the number is increasing all the time.
Still, it's important to have a decent idea of "what I know" vs. "what _is_
there to know?" I.e., you should have some vague idea as to just how little
you know. :-) Personally, I know that I couldn't begin to design a lot of the
stuff that those "oldies" can!

[John Larkin]

On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Barrie Gilbert did a chapter in Jim Williams' first (1991) Analog
Circuit Design book[1], where he talks about this very issue, "Where
do little circuits come from?" Highly recommended, his bit and the
whole book.

John

[1] my copy of which, improbably, is autographed by Bob Pease.

[Kevin Aylward]

Post by Jim Thompson
On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated
to achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the
electric system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a
certain function and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil
Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Barrie Gilbert did a chapter in Jim Williams' first (1991) Analog
Circuit Design book[1], where he talks about this very issue, "Where
do little circuits come from?" Highly recommended, his bit and the
whole book.

*ALL* "new" design is a randam variation from an existing design.

If the design were *all* new, it would have say, no diff pairs, no
cascods, no source followers no etc, that is, it could only be an
aimless connection of component terminals, and could not possible
achieve anything.

If the new design had no random component, it would, by definition, be
derivable from existing designs, in which case it couldn't be genuinely
new. Random generation is the only way to produce a non derivable
result. If it is random then we have no control over it, by definition.
Its random. The brain is a Darwinian machine, and that is how it
produces "new" designs. Copying, Selection and Randam variation is all
there is.

John, you seen to think that there is merit in coming up with something
new. Why? The brain can only do this by a random process, so what's
superior about generating something by accident? For example, it way
harder to copy a complicated arpeggio and play it fast, then to generate
new music. Its piss easy to hit some random notes on a piano.

Kevin Aylward
***@anasoft.co.uk
http://www.anasoft.co.uk
SuperSpice, a very affordable Mixed-Mode
Windows Simulator with Schematic Capture,
Waveform Display, FFT's and Filter Design.

[John Larkin]

On Wed, 28 Dec 2005 08:58:15 GMT, "Kevin Aylward"

Post by Kevin Aylward

Post by Jim Thompson
On 26 Dec 2005 17:37:31 -0800, "chriswilliams"

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated
to achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the
electric system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a
certain function and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil
Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

Barrie Gilbert did a chapter in Jim Williams' first (1991) Analog
Circuit Design book[1], where he talks about this very issue, "Where
do little circuits come from?" Highly recommended, his bit and the
whole book.

*ALL* "new" design is a randam variation from an existing design.

All of yours, maybe.

Post by Kevin Aylward
If the design were *all* new, it would have say, no diff pairs, no
cascods, no source followers no etc, that is, it could only be an
aimless connection of component terminals, and could not possible
achieve anything.

Am I allowed to use resistors? Wires? Or would that make it
derivative?

Post by Kevin Aylward
If the new design had no random component, it would, by definition, be
derivable from existing designs, in which case it couldn't be genuinely
new. Random generation is the only way to produce a non derivable
result. If it is random then we have no control over it, by definition.
Its random. The brain is a Darwinian machine, and that is how it
produces "new" designs. Copying, Selection and Randam variation is all
there is.
John, you seen to think that there is merit in coming up with something
new. Why?

Because it's fun? Because it's profitable? Because it's beautiful?

Because it amuses me.

Post by Kevin Aylward
The brain can only do this by a random process, so what's
superior about generating something by accident? For example, it way
harder to copy a complicated arpeggio and play it fast, then to generate
new music. Its piss easy to hit some random notes on a piano.

Damn, what a bleak opinion you have of yourself.

John

[Winfield Hill]

John Larkin wrote...

Post by John Larkin
Barrie Gilbert did a chapter in Jim Williams' first (1991)
Analog Circuit Design book [1] ...
[1] my copy of which, improbably, is autographed by Bob Pease.

Now you'll have to get Jim to autograph your copy of Bob's book.
:-) I do wish Barrie Gilbert would write a book. His papers,
occasional book chapters, and patents are entirely too short.
And it's too bad Robert Widler didn't write an IC design-tricks
book. All we have are a few papers and NSC design notes.

[Jim Thompson]

On 28 Dec 2005 07:46:25 -0800, Winfield Hill
<***@newsguy.com> wrote:

[snip]

Post by Winfield Hill
And it's too bad Robert Widler didn't write an IC design-tricks
book. All we have are a few papers and NSC design notes.

Was he ever sober enough to write a book ?:-)

...Jim Thompson

[Winfield Hill]

Jim Thompson wrote...

Post by Winfield Hill
And it's too bad Robert Widler didn't write an IC design-tricks
book. All we have are a few papers and NSC design notes.

Was he ever sober enough to write a book? :-)

Yes, of course. Hey, the book probably would have been better
when he wasn't. BTW, since we don't have Widler any more, we'd
be pleased to see you write a comprehensive IC-design how-to,
with ideas and tricks on every other page. Playing second best
to a non-existant Widler book isn't bad. :-)

And, it'd be a far better use of your time than trashing me and
other anti-Bush folks here on s.e.d. After you pass on, your
book will be a grand legacy, whereas your trashing...

[Jim Thompson]

On 28 Dec 2005 09:43:32 -0800, Winfield Hill

Post by Winfield Hill
Jim Thompson wrote...

Post by Winfield Hill
And it's too bad Robert Widler didn't write an IC design-tricks
book. All we have are a few papers and NSC design notes.

Was he ever sober enough to write a book? :-)

Yes, of course. Hey, the book probably would have been better
when he wasn't. BTW, since we don't have Widler any more, we'd
be pleased to see you write a comprehensive IC-design how-to,
with ideas and tricks on every other page. Playing second best
to a non-existant Widler book isn't bad. :-)
And, it'd be a far better use of your time than trashing me and
other anti-Bush folks here on s.e.d. After you pass on, your
book will be a grand legacy, whereas your trashing...

I could even write about Widlar so drunk he ended up sleeping sprawled
out on Jim Estep's living room floor... much to Jim's wife's horror
when she got up the next morning.

Or the time Widlar and Joel Karp got picked up for DUI by the San Jose
police... but let go since the brother of one of the COP's worked as a
technician for Widlar.

...Jim Thompson

[Rich Grise]

Post by Jim Thompson
On 28 Dec 2005 09:43:32 -0800, Winfield Hill

Post by Winfield Hill
And, it'd be a far better use of your time than trashing me and
other anti-Bush folks here on s.e.d. After you pass on, your
book will be a grand legacy, whereas your trashing...

I could even write about Widlar so drunk he ended up sleeping sprawled
out on Jim Estep's living room floor... much to Jim's wife's horror
when she got up the next morning.
Or the time Widlar and Joel Karp got picked up for DUI by the San Jose
police... but let go since the brother of one of the COP's worked as a
technician for Widlar.

Or, you could set your political issues aside, and write a killer book
on analog ASICs, or whatever suits your fancy - it's clear you have
many years of experience at that stuff, why not share it?

Good Luck!
Rich

[Joel Kolstad]

Post by Rich Grise
Or, you could set your political issues aside, and write a killer book
on analog ASICs, or whatever suits your fancy - it's clear you have
many years of experience at that stuff, why not share it?

I'd vote for a chapter, "Reminisces on drunks, liberals,Attila the Hun, and
other things that tickle my fancy" so long as Jim wrote it _after_ finishing
the hard-core stuff. :-)

For those who aren't aware of this, Hans Camenzind -- the designer of the
555 -- wrote a book on analog IC design that's available for free download at
http://www.arraydesign.com/downloads/index.html or can be purchased in print
form at Amazon. I vaguely recall that Hans hung out on sci.electronics long
ago, but it's been years now since I've seen a post from him.

---Joel

[John Miles]

Post by Joel Kolstad
For those who aren't aware of this, Hans Camenzind -- the designer of the
555 -- wrote a book on analog IC design that's available for free download at
http://www.arraydesign.com/downloads/index.html or can be purchased in print
form at Amazon. I vaguely recall that Hans hung out on sci.electronics long
ago, but it's been years now since I've seen a post from him.

Thanks for that pointer. Ordered...

-- jm

------------------------------------------------------
http://www.qsl.net/ke5fx
Note: My E-mail address has been altered to avoid spam
------------------------------------------------------

[PeteS]

There are, of course, a large number of exceedingly good replies (from
well known and exceedingly good engineers) amongst the noise of some
trolling.

I look at design as where art and technology meet. One must have an
understanding (indeed, an intimate knowledge) of the fundamental
theory, but there is a huge amount of art in any non-trivial design.
How do I decide just which method I am going to use? Large parts of
experience, and lots of bouncing ideas around in my head to figure out
just what is going to work for me *in this situation*. It's rather like
painting a picture - what am I trying to portray or achieve with this
exercise? Ultimately, that's what leads me to 'put a resistor there,
choose that diode here' .

As someone said, all designs are tradeoffs (and that's true whether
they are digital or analog) for various factors.

Even apparently simple designs may have been considered for quite a
while (one might argue that the simpler [more elegant] the design *for
a given task*, the more difficult it was to design, but ultimately more
satisfying to the designer).

That said, there is no 'method to design' that would work for everyone
- that's why I consider the design side an art, not a technology - we
*use* technology, we live design [well, I do ;) ]. Of course, we also
design the original technologies on occasion ;) On other occasions we
study it to understand it so we may modify and use it. (There must be a
recursive in there somewhere...).

Cheers

PeteS

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?
Thanks in advance by any comment.

[Mark Fergerson]

Post by chriswilliams
I am trying to understand the process by which the design of circuits
is carried out.

What makes you think there is "a" process? IME it's several
subprocesses running in parallel, but there's one thing I think we all

Post by chriswilliams
How from the white paper begins the design of a certain circuit?

Real simple; you first decide where you want to get to, then decide
how to get there.

Post by chriswilliams
In many other areas one understands that there is a certain structure,
In the case of a writing one understands that there is a thesis, main
ideas, ideas of support, a conclusion. All this must be articulated to
achieve a certain objective. This is understandable.

Then you need to describe "where you want to get to" and "how to get
there" as concisely as needed; but "as concisely as needed" means
figuring out where you can and cannot compromise (identifying design
criteria). "Criteria" is from the same root as "critical" which here
means "what must I do/not do?".

In writing, must you use simple declarative prose, or poetry? Is
Standard English the "best" way to express something or would say Haiku
work better? Depends; who's your target audience, and what are you
trying to get across? Do you want them to "get it" right away or should
they think about it a while?

Where are you trying to get to, how many ways do you know of to get
there, and how many are you willing to use?

Post by chriswilliams
In the case of a car is understood that exists the motor, the electric
system, the chassis, the panel, all they complying a certain function
and thus in many other areas as the software, Civil Engineering, etc.

This kind of thinking (analyzing a problem by starting with known
solutions) is not designing.

You appear to be confusing design philosophy with pattern matching.
Pattern matching is part of designing but not the whole thing.

In the case of a car we start not with four wheels, an engine, and a
chassis etc. but with the premise that we want to make it possible to
get x number of people and y amount of stuff a given range of distances
in a given range of time. Then we explore some possibilities, one of
which is an independently-operated machine that carries a few people and
a little stuff over pre-existing roads with non-negotiable
characteristics. You know about I.C. engines and stuff like that, so you
may wind up with something very like a car.

But if "independently-operated" is considered compromisable (not all
that "critical" a criterion), then buses and so on enter consideration.
If you decide you don't _have_ to use the roadways then trains and
planes become design possibilities. If the terrain allows, maybe you
draw on your sailing experience and design a land yacht.

Target identification first, then criteria selection, then
possibilities. Then maybe some recursion over the criteria...

Post by chriswilliams
But in the case of the circuits all seems very confused (at least for
the novice). One doesn`t know how someone decided to put a resistor
here, there a diode, or a capacitor over there. At times seems that
certain circuits were discovered by accident. Which is the center and
which the periphery.

IME you start at the end ("where you want to get to") then explore as
many possible paths as you know about, then pick one that satisfies as
many of the design criteria as possible. When (not if) the boss tells
you "that won't do", you begin the compromise process. Figuring out
which criteria are really critical can be a pain. ;>)

Post by chriswilliams
Once one has certain know-how of electronics as the funcion of the
components, the basic theory, etc
¿How to proceed from the white paper to go building a certain circuit?

Sometimes it's a matter of personal preference, professional
experience, or what your design house is best set up to do. Sometimes
these things compete as in you occasionally have to discard "traditional
thinking" or be left behind.

Post by chriswilliams
How to decide where to put a resistor, a diode, a capacitor, etc?

Parts-level thinking is usually a matter of designing the blocks or
interfacing blocks (would putting a resistor _here_ speed this
oscillator up vs. what's the impedance of this transmission line at that
frequency?), but that's an experience thing.

OTOH YMMV. ;>)


Mark L. Fergerson