Re: LT Spice looks

Liste des GroupesRevenir à se design 
Sujet : Re: LT Spice looks
De : liz (at) *nospam* poppyrecords.invalid.invalid (Liz Tuddenham)
Groupes : sci.electronics.design
Date : 14. Nov 2024, 18:01:08
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Poppy Records
Message-ID : <1r30v1o.1i0ovwuasvnl4N%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6
User-Agent : MacSOUP/2.4.6
Edward Rawde <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote:

"Liz Tuddenham" <liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:1r307zo.v2hb321oo3t6gN%liz@poppyrecords.invalid.invalid... > Edward
Rawde <invalid@invalid.invalid> wrote: > > [...]
>
If the netlist and PCB layout is correct then why waste time on making the
schematic look like you want it, only to be told by someone else that they
would have drawn it completely differently?
>
If you were a service engineer with the customer breathing down your
neck, which diagram would you prefer, 'A' or 'B' ?
>
http://www.poppyrecords.co.uk/other/CircuitDiagrams.gif
 
When I was a service engineer there was no such thing as a schematic and I
often had to make do without a circuit diagram at all. On rare occasions a
repair had to wait for a circuit diagram to arrive by post and when it did
it could easily contain circuit A.
 
I'm not suggesting that your B layout isn't preferable but in the real
world A will often be encountered.


I suppose it depends on whether it was drawn by a wireman or by the
designer.  Small firms often benefit from more direct contact between
the designer and the user or repairer.

The drawing office in one firm I worked for was mainly staffed by radio
amateurs and/or radio engineers.  Their circuit diagrams and handbooks
were a model of clarity.


--
~ Liz Tuddenham ~
(Remove the ".invalid"s and add ".co.uk" to reply)
www.poppyrecords.co.uk

Date Sujet#  Auteur
13 Nov 24 * LT Spice looks26john larkin
13 Nov 24 +* Re: LT Spice looks24legg
13 Nov 24 i`* Re: LT Spice looks23john larkin
13 Nov 24 i +* Re: LT Spice looks9john larkin
13 Nov 24 i i`* Re: LT Spice looks8Edward Rawde
13 Nov 24 i i `* Re: LT Spice looks7john larkin
13 Nov 24 i i  `* Re: LT Spice looks6Edward Rawde
13 Nov 24 i i   `* Re: LT Spice looks5john larkin
13 Nov 24 i i    `* Re: LT Spice looks4Edward Rawde
14 Nov 24 i i     `* Re: LT Spice looks3john larkin
14 Nov 24 i i      `* Re: LT Spice looks2Edward Rawde
14 Nov 24 i i       `- Re: LT Spice looks1john larkin
14 Nov 24 i `* Re: LT Spice looks13Liz Tuddenham
14 Nov 24 i  +- Re: LT Spice looks1Jan Panteltje
14 Nov 24 i  +* Re: LT Spice looks6john larkin
14 Nov 24 i  i`* Re: LT Spice looks5Liz Tuddenham
14 Nov 24 i  i `* Re: LT Spice looks4john larkin
14 Nov 24 i  i  `* Re: LT Spice looks3Liz Tuddenham
15 Nov 24 i  i   `* Re: LT Spice looks2john larkin
15 Nov 24 i  i    `- Re: LT Spice looks1Liz Tuddenham
14 Nov 24 i  `* Re: LT Spice looks5Edward Rawde
14 Nov 24 i   `* Re: LT Spice looks4Liz Tuddenham
14 Nov 24 i    `* Re: LT Spice looks3Edward Rawde
14 Nov 24 i     `* Re: LT Spice looks2Liz Tuddenham
14 Nov 24 i      `- Re: LT Spice looks1Edward Rawde
13 Nov 24 `- Re: LT Spice looks1Cursitor Doom

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal