Analog and Digital C - Conclusion of logic Gate Function realization, undefined for Analog and Digital C. Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University

Analog and Digital C

Description: In this document topics covered which are Two-Level Combinational Logic, Motivation, Chapter Overview, Boolean Algebra, From Expressions to Gates, Logic Functions.
Showing pages  1  -  2  of  94
The preview of this document ends here! Please or to read the full document or to download it.
Document information
Uploaded by: hamit1990
Views: 1000+
Downloads : 0
University: Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) University
Upload date: 02/09/2011
Embed this document:
Chapter #2: Two-Level Combinational Logic

No. 2-1

Chapter #2: Two-Level Combinational Logic

No. 2-2

Motivatio n

Rapid prototyping technology

Use of computer aided design tools: espresso

Design Techniques that Spanning Multiple Technologies

Transistor-Transistor Logic (TTL)

Complementary Metal on Oxide Silicon (CMOS)

Multiple Design Representations

Truth Tables

Static gate descriptions

Dynamic waveform descriptions

Further Amplification on the Concepts of Chapter #1:

No. 2-3

Chapter Overview

Logic Functions and Switches

Not, AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR, XNOR

Gate Logic

Laws and Theorems of Boolean Algebra

Two Level Canonical Forms

Incompletely Specified Functions

Two Level Simplification

Boolean Cubes

Karnaugh Maps

Quine-McClusky Method

Espresso Method

No. 2-4

Logic Functions: Boolean Algebra

is Algebraic structure consisting of:

set of elements B

binary operations {+, •}

unary operation {'}

such that the following axioms hold:

1. B contains at least two elements, a, b, such that ab

2. Closure a,b in B, (i) a + b in B (ii) ab in B

3. Commutative Laws: a,b in B, (i) a + b = b + a (ii) ab = ba

4. Identities: 0, 1 in B (i) a + 0 = a (ii) a • 1 = a

5. Distributive Laws: (i) a + (bc) = (a + b) •(a + c) (ii) a •(b + c) = a b + ac

6. Complement: (i) a + a' = 1 (ii) aa' = 0

No. 2-5

Logic Functions: Boolean Algebra Note that B = {0,1}, + = OR, • = AND, ' = NOT is a Boolean Algebra

must verify that the axioms hold: E.g., Commutative Law:

0 + 1 = 1 + 0 1 = 1

0 • 1 = 1 • 0 0 = 0

Theorem: any Boolean function that can be expressed as a truth table can be written as an expression in Boolean Algebra using ', +, •

Review from

Chapter 1 X Y

Description Z = 1 if X and Y are both 1

Gates Truth Table Switches X Y Z

Y 0 1 0 1

X 0 0 1 1

Z 0 0 0 1

X • Y

false

true

NOT

AND

OR

Description If X = 0 then X ' = 1 If X = 1 then X ' = 0

Switches Gates

X

X X 0 1

X 1 0

T ruth T able

X T rue

False X

Description Z = 1 if X or Y (or both) are 1

Gates T ruth T able Switches X Y Z

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

Z 0 1 1 1

X Y

X + Y

False

T rue

No. 2-6

Logic Functions: From Expressions to GatesMore than one way to map an expression to gates

E.g., Z = A' • B' •(C + D) = (A' •(B' •(C + D))) T1

T2

Literal: each appearance of a variable or its complement in an expression E.g., Z = A B' C + A' B + A' B C' + B' C

use of 3-input gate

3 variables, 10 literals

A

B

C

D T

2

T 1

Z

Z

A

B

C

D

No. 2-7

Description Z = 1 if X is 0 or Y is 0

Gates T ruth T able Switches

X Y

X • Y

False

T rue X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

Z 1 1 1 0

X Y Z

F0 0 0 0 0

F1 0 0 0 1

F2 0 0 1 0

F3 0 0 1 1

F4 0 1 0 0

F5 0 1 0 1

F6 0 1 1 0

F7 0 1 1 1

F8 1 0 0 0

F9 1 0 0 1

F10 1 0 1 0

F1 1 1 0 1 1

F12 1 1 0 0

F13 1 1 0 1

F14 1 1 1 0

F15 1 1 1 1

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

0 X • Y X Y X + Y X Y

1

Logic Functions: NAND, NOR, XOR, XNOR 16 functions of two variables:

X, X', Y, Y', X • Y, X+Y, 0, 1 only half of the possible functions

NAND

NOR Description Z = 1 if both X and Y are 0

Gates T ruth T able Switches X Y

Z X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

Z 1 0 0 0

X Y

X + Y False

T rue

No. 2-8

Logic Functions: NAND, NOR Implementation

NAND, NOR gates far outnumber AND, OR in typical designs easier to construct in the underlying transistor technologies

Any Boolean expression can be implemented by NAND, NOR, NOT gates

In fact, NOT is superfluous (NOT = NAND or NOR with both inputs tied together)

X 0

1

Y 0

1

X NOR Y 1

0

X 0

1

Y 0

1

X NAND Y 1

0

No. 2-9

Logic Functions: XOR, XNOR XOR: X or Y but not both ("inequality", "difference") XNOR: X and Y are the same ("equality", "coincidence")

X Y = X Y' + X' Y X Y = X Y + X' Y'

(a) XOR (b) XNOR

Description Z = 1 if X has a different value than Y

Gates

T ruth T able

X

Y Z

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

Z 0 1 1 0

Description Z = 1 if X has the same value as Y

Gates

T ruth T able

X Y

Z

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

Z 1 0 0 1

 

No. 2-10

Logic Functions: Waveform View

No. 2-11

Logic Functions: Rationale for Simplification

Logic Minimization: reduce complexity of the gate level implementation reduce number of literals (gate inputs)

reduce number of gates

reduce number of levels of gates

fewer inputs implies faster gates in some technologies

fan-ins (number of gate inputs) are limited in some technologies

fewer levels of gates implies reduced signal propagation delays

minimum delay configuration typically requires more gates

number of gates (or gate packages) influences manufacturing costs

Traditional methods: reduce delay at expense of adding gates

New methods: trade off between increased circuit delay and reduced gate count

Traditional methods: reduce delay at expense of adding gates

New methods: trade off between increased circuit delay and reduced gate count

No. 2-12

Logic Functions: Alternative Gate Realizations

Two-Level Realization (inverters don't count)

Multi-Level Realization Advantage: Reduced Gate

Fan-ins

Complex Gate: XOR Advantage: Fewest Gates

Number of gates: Z1 - 3x inverters, 3x 3-input AND, 1x 3-input OR Z2 - 2x inverters, 3x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input OR Z3 - 1x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input XOR

0 1 0 1 0 1

A B C

0

0

Z 1

Z 2

Z 3

0

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Z 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0

No. 2-13

Logic Functions: Waveform Verification

Under the same input stimuli, the three alternative implementations have essentially the same waveform behavior.

Slight delay variations due to differences in number of gate levels

The three implementations are equivalent

There are some glitches in all of them!

No. 2-14

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra

Duality: a dual of a Boolean expression is derived by replacing AND operations by ORs, OR operations by ANDs, constant 0s by 1s, and 1s by 0s (literals, I.e., inputs are left unchanged).

Any statement that is true for an expression is also true for its dual!

Useful Laws/Theorems of Boolean Algebra: Operations with 0 and 1:

Idempotent Law:

Involution Law:

Laws of Complementarity:

Commutative Law:

1. X + 0 = X 2. X + 1 = 1

1D. X • 1 = X 2D. X • 0 = 0

3. X + X = X 3D. X • X = X

4. (X')' = X

5. X + X' = 1 5D. X • X' = 0

6. X + Y = Y + X 6D. X • Y = Y • X

No. 2-15

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra (cont)

Distributive Laws:

Simplification Theorems:

DeMorgan's Law:

Duality:

Theorems for Multiplying and Factoring:

Consensus Theorem:

8. X •(Y+ Z) = (X • Y) + (X • Z) 8D. X + (Y • Z) = (X + Y) •(X + Z)

9. X • Y + X • Y' = X 10. X + X • Y = X 11. (X + Y') • Y = X • Y

9D. (X + Y) • (X + Y') = X 10D. X •(X + Y) = X 11D. (X • Y') + Y = X + Y

12. (X + Y + Z + ...)' = X' • Y' • Z' •... 13. {F(X1,X2,...,Xn,0,1,+, •}' = {F(X1',X2',...,Xn',1,0, • +)}

12D. (X • Y • Z •...) ' = X' + Y' + Z' + ...

14. (X + Y + Z + ...) = X • Y • Z •...

15. {F(X1,X2,...,Xn,0,1,+, •} = {F(X1,X2,...,Xn,1,0, • +)}

D

D 14D. (X • Y • Z •...) = X + Y + Z + ...D

16. (X + Y) •(X' + Z) = X • Z + X' • Y 16D. X • Y + X' • Z = (X + Z) •(X' + Y)

17. (X • Y) + (Y • Z) + (X' • Z) = X • Y + X' • Z

17D. (X + Y) •(Y + Z) •(X' + Z) = (X + Y) •(X' + Z)

Associative Laws: 7. (X + Y) + Z = X + (Y + Z) = X + Y + Z

7D. (X • Y) • Z = X •(Y • Z) = X • Y • Z

No. 2-16

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra Proving theorems via axioms of Boolean Algebra:

E.g., prove the theorem: X • Y + X • Y' = X

E.g., prove the theorem: X + X • Y = X

X • (Y +Y')=X = X •1 = X

dist, law 8 complementarity theorem 5 identity (1D)

X •1+ X •Y = X • (1+Y) = X •1 = X

identity 1D dist identity 2 identity 1D

No. 2-17

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra Proving theorems via axioms of Boolean Algebra:

E.g., prove the theorem: X • Y + X • Y' = X

X • Y + X • Y' = X •(Y + Y')

X •(Y + Y') = X •(1)

X •(1) = X

distributive law (8)

complementary law (5)

identity (1D)

E.g., prove the theorem: X + X • Y = X X + X • Y = X • 1 + X • Y

X • 1 + X • Y = X •(1 + Y)

X •(1 + Y) = X •(1)

X •(1) = X

identity (1D)

distributive law (8)

identity (2)

identity (1)

No. 2-18

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra DeMorgan's Law

(X + Y)' = X' • Y'

(X • Y)' = X' + Y'

NOR is equivalent to AND with inputs complemented

NAND is equivalent to OR with inputs complemented

Example: Z = A' B' C + A' B C + A B' C + A B C'

Z' = (A + B + C') • (A + B' + C') • (A' + B + C') •(A' + B' + C)

DeMorgan's Law can be used to convert AND/OR expressions to OR/AND expressions

DeMorgan's Law can be used to convert AND/OR expressions to OR/AND expressions

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

X 1 1 0 0

Y 1 0 1 0

X + Y 1 0 0 0

XY 1 0 0 0

X 0 0 1 1

Y 0 1 0 1

X 1 1 0 0

Y 1 0 1 0

X + Y 1 1 1 0

XY 1 1 1 0

No. 2-19

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra

Apply the laws and theorems to simplify Boolean equations

Example: full adder's carry out function Cout = A' B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

No. 2-20

Gate Logic: Laws of Boolean Algebra

Apply the laws and theorems to simplify Boolean equations

Example: full adder's carry out function Cout = A' B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= A' B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin + A B Cin

= A' B Cin + A B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= (A' + A) B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= (1) B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin + A B Cin

= B Cin + A B' Cin + A B Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= B Cin + A (B' + B) Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= B Cin + A (1) Cin + A B Cin' + A B Cin

= B Cin + A Cin + A B (Cin' + Cin)

= B Cin + A Cin + A B (1)

= B Cin + A Cin + A B

identity

associative

No. 2-21

A + 0 = A A + 1 = 1

A A

0

=

A 1

= 1

Gate Logic: Switching Equivalents

Idempotent Laws Identity Laws

Complementarity Laws Simplification Theorems

A • A = A

A A A

A

A

A + A = A

= =

A

A + A = 1 A • A = 0

A

A =

1

A A

=

0

X Y + X Y = X X + X Y = X

X Y

X Y

X Y

X

= =

X X

No. 2-22

Gate Logic: 2-Level Canonical Forms

Truth table is the unique signature of a Boolean function

Many alternative expressions (and gate realizations) may have the same truth table

Canonical form: standard form for a Boolean expression provides a unique algebraic signature

Sum of Products Form also known as disjunctive normal form, minterm expansion

F = A' B C + A B' C' + A B' C + A B C' + A B C 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1

F' = A' B' C' + A' B' C + A' B C'

F 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1

F 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

No. 2-23

Gate Logic: Two Level Canonical Forms

Sum of Products

Shorthand Notation for Minterms of 3 Variables

minterm: ANDed product of literals in which each variable appears exactly once, in true or complemented form (but not both!)

F in canonical form:

F(A,B,C) = m(3,4,5,6,7) = m3 + m4 + m5 + m6 + m7 = A' B C + A B' C' + A B' C + A B C' + A B C

Minimized gate-level implementation F = A B' (C + C') + A' B C + A B (C' + C)

= A B' + A' B C + A B

= A (B' + B) + A' B C

= A + A' B C

= A + B C 2-Level AND/OR

Realization F' = (A + B C)' = A' (B' + C') = A' B' + A' C'

B

C

A

F

A B C = m 1 A B C = m 2 A B C = m 3 A B C = m 4 A B C = m 5 A B C = m 6 A B C = m 7

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Minterms A B C = m 0

product terms

Minterm product term

No. 2-24

Gate Logic: 2 Level Canonical FormsProduct of Sums / Conjunctive Normal Form / Maxterm Expansion

Maxterm Shorthand Notation for a Function of Three Variables

Maxterm: ORed sum of literals in which each variable appears exactly once in either true or complemented form, but not both!

Maxterm form: Find truth table rows where F is 0 0 in input column implies true literal 1 in input column implies complemented literal

F(A,B,C) = M(0,1,2) = (A + B + C) (A + B + C') (A + B' + C)

F'(A,B,C) = M(3,4,5,6,7) = (A + B' + C') (A' + B + C) (A' + B + C') (A' + B' + C) (A' + B' + C')

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Maxterms A + B + C = M 0 A + B + C = M 1 A + B + C = M 2 A + B + C = M 3 A + B + C = M 4 A + B + C = M 5 A + B + C = M 6 A + B + C = M 7

No. 2-25

Gate Logic: Two Level Canonical Forms Sum of Products, Products of Sums, and DeMorgan's Law

F' = A' B' C' + A' B' C + A' B C' Apply DeMorgan's Law to obtain F:

(F')' = (A' B' C' + A' B' C + A' B C')'

F = (A + B + C) (A + B + C') (A + B' + C)

F' = (A + B' + C') (A' + B + C) (A' + B + C') (A' + B' + C) (A' + B' + C')

(F')' = {(A + B' + C') (A' + B + C) (A' + B + C') (A' + B' + C) (A' + B' + C')}' F = A' B C + A B' C' + A B' C + A B C' + A B C

Apply DeMorgan's Law to obtain F:

No. 2-26

Gate Logic: Two-Level Canonical Forms Four Alternative Implementations of F:

Canonical Sum of Products

Minimized Sum of Products (simplest)

Canonical Products of Sums

Minimized Products of Sums

A

B

F 2

F 3

F 4

F 1 C

No. 2-27

Gate Logic: Two-Level Canonical Forms Waveform Verification of the Three Alternatives

Eight Unique Combinations of Three Inputs

Except for short-duration glitches, output waveforms of the four implementations are

essentially identical

100 200

A

B

C

F 1 F 2 F 3

No. 2-28

Gate Logic: Two-Level Canonical Forms Mapping Between Forms

1. Minterm to Maxterm conversion: rewrite minterm shorthand using maxterm shorthand replace minterm indices with the indices not already used

E.g., F(A,B,C) = m(3,4,5,6,7) = M(0,1,2)

2. Maxterm to Minterm conversion: rewrite maxterm shorthand using minterm shorthand replace maxterm indices with the indices not already used

E.g., F(A,B,C) = M(0,1,2) = m(3,4,5,6,7)

3. Minterm expansion of F to Minterm expansion of F': in minterm shorthand form, list the indices not already used in F

E.g., F(A,B,C) = m(3,4,5,6,7) F'(A,B,C) = m(0,1,2) = M(0,1,2) = M(3,4,5,6,7)

4. Minterm expansion of F to Maxterm expansion of F': rewrite in Maxterm form, using the same indices as F

E.g., F(A,B,C) = m(3,4,5,6,7) F'(A,B,C) = M(3,4,5,6,7) = M(0,1,2) = m(0,1,2)

The same goes to Maxterm case

No. 2-29

Gate Logic: Positive vs. Negative Logic Normal Convention: Postive Logic/Active High

Low Voltage = 0; High Voltage = 1

Alternative Convention sometimes used: Negative Logic/Active Low

Behavior in terms of Electrical Levels

Two Alternative Interpretations Positive Logic AND Negative Logic OR

Dual Operations

Negative Logic Positive Logic V oltage T ruth T able

F low low low high

F 0 0 0 1

F 1 1 1 0

A low low high high

B low high low high

B 0 1 0 1

A 0 0 1 1

A 1 1 0 0

B 1 0 1 0

F

No. 2-30

Gate Logic: Positive vs. Negative Logic Conversion from Positive to Negative Logic

Positive Logic NOR: A + B = A • B

Negative Logic NAND: A • B = A + B

Dual operations: AND becomes OR, OR becomes AND Complements remain unchanged

Negative Logic Positive Logic V oltage T ruth T able

F high low low low

F 1 0 0 0

F 0 1 1 1

A low low high high

B low high low high

B 0 1 0 1

A 0 0 1 1

A 1 1 0 0

B 1 0 1 0

F

No. 2-31

(c)

Change Request

(active low)

T imer Expired

(active low)

Change Lights

(active low)

Bubble Mismatch

(d)

(a)

Change Request

(active high)

T imer Expired

(active high)

Change Lights

(active high)

Active High

(b)

Change Request

(active low)

T imer Expired

(active low)

Change Lights

(active low)

Active Low

Change Request

(active low)

T imer Expired

(active low)

Change Lights

(active low)

Bubble Match

Gate Logic: Positive vs. Negative LogicPractical Example

Mismatch between input and output logic polarities

Use NAND w/ inverted inputs if negative logic

Use OR gate if input polarities are neg. logic

Use AND gate if active high

A + B = ((A + B)')' = (A' • B')'

No. 2-32

A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

C 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

D 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 X X X X X X

X 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 X X X X X X

Y 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 X X X X X X

Z 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 X X X X X X

Gate Logic: Incompletely Specified Functions n input functions have 2 possible input configurations

for a given function, not all input configurations may be possible

this fact can be exploited during circuit minimization!

E.g., Binary Coded Decimal Digit Increment by 1 BCD digits encode the decimal digits 0 - 9 in the bit patterns 0000 - 1001

n

2 2

These input patterns should never be encountered in practice

associated output values are "Don't Cares"

Off-set of W

On-set of W

Don't care (DC) set of W

No. 2-33

Gate Logic: Incompletely Specified FunctionsDon't Cares (d) and Canonical Forms

Z = m0 + m2 + m4 + m6 + m8 + d10 + d11 + d12 + d13 + d14 + d15

Z = m(0, 2, 4, 6, 8) + d(10, 11, 12 ,13, 14, 15)

Z = M1 • M3 • M5 • M7 • M9 • D10 • D11 • D12 • D13 • D14 • D15

Z= M(1, 3, 5, 7, 9) • D(10, 11, 12, 13, 14 ,15)

Canonical Representations of the BCD Increment by 1 Function:

No. 2-34

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

Algebraic Simplification: not an algorithm/systematic procedure

how do you know when the minimum realization has been found?

Computer-Aided Tools: precise solutions require very long computation times, especially for functions with many inputs (>10)

heuristic methods employed ? "educated guesses" to reduce the amount of computation good solutions not best solutions

Still Relevant to Learn Hand Methods:

insights into how the CAD programs work, and their strengths and weaknesses

ability to check the results, at least on small examples

don't have computer terminals during exams!!!

No. 2-35

A 0 0 1 1

B 0 1 0 1

G 1 0 1 0

A 0 0 1 1

B 0 1 0 1

F 0 0 1 1

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

Key Tool: The Uniting Theorem - A (B' + B) = AKey Tool: The Uniting Theorem - A (B' + B) = A

F = A B' + A B = A (B' + B) = A

A's values don't change within the on-set rows

B's values change within the on-set rows

G = A' B' + A B' = (A' + A) B' = B'

B's values stay the same within the on-set rows

A's values change within the on-set rows

B is eliminated, A remains

A is eliminated, B remains

Essence of Simplification: find two element subsets of the ON-set where only one variable changes its value. This single varying variable can be eliminated!

No. 2-36

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Boolean Cubes

Visual technique for identifying when the Uniting Theorem can be applied

Just another way to represent the truth table

n input variables = n dimensional "cube"

2-cube 3-cube

4-cube

XYZ

X

011

010

000

001

111

110

100

101 Y Z

WXYZ 0111

0011

0010

0000

0001

0110

1010

0101

0100 1000

1011

1001

1110

1111

1101

1100 Y

Z W

X

XY 1-cube

X

X

01

00

11

10

Y

0 1

No. 2-37

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Mapping Truth Tables onto Boolean Cubes

ON-set = filled-in nodes

OFF-set = empty nodes

DC-set = X'd nodes

F

G

A asserted and unchanged

B varies within loop

A varies within loop

B complemented and unchanged

Adjacency plane reduces expression

01 11

10 00

B

A

01 11

10 00

A

B

No. 2-38

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

A

B

Cin 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Cout 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1

011 111

010 110

001

000 100

101 Cin

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Three variable example: Full Adder Carry Out

(A' + A) B Cin

A B (Cin' + Cin)

A (B + B') Cin

Cout = B Cin + A B + A Cin

The ON-set is covered by the OR of the subcubes

of lower dimensionality

No. 2-39

011 111

101

100

110 010

001

000

B

C

A

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Subcubes (or adjacency plane) of Higher Dimensions than 1

F(A,B,C) = m(4,5,6,7)

On-set forms a rectangle, i.e., a cube of two dimensions

represents an expression in one variable i.e., 3 dimensions - 2 dimensions

A is asserted and unchanged B and C vary (A=1)

This subcube represents the literal A

No. 2-40

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

In a 3-cube:

a 0-cube, i.e., a single node, yields a term in three literals

a 1-cube, i.e., a line of two nodes, yields a term in two literals

a 2-cube, i.e., a plane of four nodes, yields a term in one literal

a 3-cube, i.e., a cube of eight nodes, yields a constant term "1"

In general, an m-subcube within an n-cube (m < n) yields a term with n - m literals

attempts to find the smallest number of the highest-dimensionality adjacency planes that contain all the nodes of the function’s on-set.

CAD algorithm for minimization,

No. 2-41

A B 0 1

0

1

0

1

2

3

0

1

2

3

6

7

4

5

AB C

0

1

3

2

4

5

7

6

12

13

15

14

8

9

11

10

A

B

AB CD

A

00 01 11 10

0

1

00 01 11 00

00

01

11

10 C

B

D

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Karnaugh Map Method

hard to draw cubes of more than 4 dimensions

K-map is an alternative method of representing the truth table that helps visualize adjacencies in up to 6 dimensions

Beyond that, computer-based methods are needed

2-variable K-map

3-variable K-map

4-variable K-map

Numbering Scheme: 00, 01, 11, 10 Gray Code - only a single bit changes from code word to next code word

Should be 10

No. 2-42

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Karnaugh Map Method

Adjacencies in the K-Map

Wrap from first to last column

Top row to bottom row

000

001

010

01 1

1 10

1 1 1

100

101

00 01 11 10

0

1

AB C

A

B

011

010

000

001

100

110

101

111

B

C

A

No. 2-43

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification K-Map Method Examples

F = ?

A asserted, unchanged B varies

G = ?

B complemented, unchanged A varies

Cout = ? F(A,B,C) = ?

A B 0 1

0 1

0 1

0

1

A B 0 1

1 1

0 0

0

1

A B A

B

Cin 00 01 11 10

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

AB C

A

00 01 11 10

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

B

No. 2-44

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification K-Map Method Examples

F = A

A asserted, unchanged B varies

G = B'

B complemented, unchanged A varies

Cout = AB + Bcin + ACin F(A,B,C) = A

A B 0 1

0 1

0 1

0

1

A B 0 1

1 1

0 0

0

1

A B A

B

Cin 00 01 11 10

0

1

0

0

0

1

1

1

0

1

AB C

A

00 01 11 10

0

1

0

0

0

0

1

1

1

1

B

No. 2-45

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification More K-Map Method Examples, 3 Variables

F(A,B,C) = m(0,4,5,7)

F =

F'(A,B,C) = m(1,2,3,6)

F' =

F' simply replace 1's with 0's and vice versa

00 C AB

01 11 10

1 0 0 1

1 1 0 0

A

B

0

1

00 C AB

01 11 10

0 1 1 0

0 0 1 1

A

B

0

1

No. 2-46

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification More K-Map Method Examples, 3 Variables

F(A,B,C) = m(0,4,5,7)

F = B' C' + A C

In the K-map, adjacency wraps from left to right and from top to bottom

F'(A,B,C) = m(1,2,3,6)

F' = B C' + A' C

Compare with the method of using DeMorgan's Theorem and Boolean Algebra to reduce the complement!

F' simply replace 1's with 0's and vice versa

00 C AB

01 11 10

1 0 0 1

1 1 0 0

A

B

0

1

00 C AB

01 11 10

0 1 1 0

0 0 1 1

A

B

0

1

Why not group m4 and m5?

No. 2-47

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

K-map Method Examples: 4 variables

F(A,B,C,D) = m(0,2,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,14,15)

F = AB

00 01 11 10

1 0 0 1

0 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-48

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

K-map Method Examples: 4 variables

F(A,B,C,D) = m(0,2,3,5,6,7,8,10,11,14,15)

F = C + A' B D + B' D'

K-map Corner Adjacency Illustrated in the 4-Cube

Find the smallest number of the largest possible

subcubes that cover the ON-set

AB 00 01 11 10

1 0 0 1

0 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

0011

D

0010

0000

0111

0110

0001 C

A

B 0100 1000

1100

1101

1111

1110

1001

1011

1010

0101

No. 2-49

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

K-map Method: Circling Zeros to get product of sums form

AB 00 01 11 10

1 0 0 1

0 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

1 1 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

F = (B + C + D) (A + C + D) (B + C + D)

F = B C D + A C D + B C D

F = B C D + A C D + B C D

F = (B + C + D) (A + C + D) (B + C + D)

Replace F by F, 0’s become 1’s and vice versa

No. 2-50

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification K-map Example: Don't Cares

F(A,B,C,D) = m(1,3,5,7,9) + d(6,12,13)

F = w/o don't cares

F = w/ don't cares

Don't Cares can be treated as 1's or 0's if it is advantageous to do soDon't Cares can be treated as 1's or 0's if it is advantageous to do so

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 0

1 1 X 1

1 1 0 0

0 X 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-51

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification K-map Example: Don't Cares

F(A,B,C,D) = m(1,3,5,7,9) + d(6,12,13)

F = A'D + B' C' D w/o don't cares

F = C' D + A' D w/ don't cares

Don't Cares can be treated as 1's or 0's if it is advantageous to do soDon't Cares can be treated as 1's or 0's if it is advantageous to do so

By treating this DC as a "1", a 2-cube can be formed rather than one 1-cube

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 0

1 1 X 1

1 1 0 0

0 X 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B AB

00 01 11 10

0 0 X 0

1 1 X 1

1 1 0 0

0 X 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

In Product of Sums form: F = D (A' + C')

Same answer as above, but fewer literals

No. 2-52

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example: Two Bit Comparator

Block Diagram and

Truth Table

A 4-Variable K-map for each of the 3 output functions

F 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

F 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

F 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0

D 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

C 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

B 0 1 0 1

A 0 0 1 1

=, >, < F 1 A B = C D F 2 A B < C D F 3 A B > C D

A B

C D

N 1

N 2

No. 2-53

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example: Two Bit Comparator

F1 =

F2 =

F3 =

AB 00 01 11 10

1 0 0 0

0 1 0 0

0 0 1 0

0 0 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 1

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0

1 1 0 1

1 1 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 2

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 3

No. 2-54

Gate Logic:Two-Level Simplification Design Example: Two Bit Comparator

F1 = A' B' C' D' + A' B C' D + A B C D + A B' C D'

F2 = A' B' D + B' C D + A' C

F3 = B C' D' + A C' + A B D'

= (A xnor C) (B xnor D) much simpler, but not in sum of products form 1’s on K-map diagonals make XOR or XNOR

AB 00 01 11 10

1 0 0 0

0 1 0 0

0 0 1 0

0 0 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 1

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 0 0

1 0 0 0

1 1 0 1

1 1 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 2

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for F 3

No. 2-55

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example: Two Bit Adder

Block Diagram and

Truth Table

A 4-variable K-map for each of the 3 output functions

+ N 3

X 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1

Y 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1

Z 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

D 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

C 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

B 0 1 0 1

A 0 0 1 1

A B

C D

N 1

N 2

X Y Z

No. 2-56

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example (Continued)

X =

Z =

Y =

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0

0 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for X

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 1 1

0 1 0 1

1 0 1 0

1 1 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for Y

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 1 0

1 0 0 1

1 0 0 1

0 1 1 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for Z

No. 2-57

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example (Continued)

X = A C + B C D + A B D

Z = B D' + B' D = B xor D

Y = A' B' C + A B' C' + A' B C' D + A' B C D' + A B C' D' + A B C D

= B' (A xor C) + A' B (C xor D) + A B (C xnor D)

= B' (A xor C) + B (A xor C xor D) gate count reduced if

XOR available

1's on diagonal suggest XOR!

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0

0 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for X

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 1 1

0 1 0 1

1 0 1 0

1 1 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for Y

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 1 0

1 0 0 1

1 0 0 1

0 1 1 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B K-map for Z

No. 2-58

\ D \ A \ C

Y 1

A

C

D

\ B

B

Y 2

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example (Continued)

Two alternative implementations of Y with and without XOR

Note: XOR typically requires 4 NAND gates

to implement!

X XOR Y

X

Y

No. 2-59

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Design Example: Binary-Coded Decimal (BCD) Increment By 1

W =

X =

Y =

Z =

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 1

0 0 X 0

0 1 X X

0 0 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 X 0

0 1 X 0

1 0 X X

0 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 0

1 1 X 0

0 0 X X

1 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

1 1 X 1

0 0 X 0

0 0 X X

1 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

Z Y

X W

No. 2-60

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification

W = B C D + A D'

X = B C' + B D' + B' C D

Y = A' C' D + C D'

Z = D'

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 1

0 0 X 0

0 1 X X

0 0 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 X 0

0 1 X 0

1 0 X X

0 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 X 0

1 1 X 0

0 0 X X

1 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

1 1 X 1

0 0 X 0

0 0 X X

1 1 X X

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

Z Y

X W

No. 2-61

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification Definition of Terms

implicant: single element of the ON-set or any group of elements that can be combined together in a K-map (= adjacency plane)

prime implicant: implicant that cannot be combined with another implicant to eliminate a term

essential prime implicant: if an element of the ON-set is covered by a single prime implicant, it is an essential prime

Objective:

grow implicants into prime implicants

cover the ON-set with as few prime implicants as possible

essential primes participate in ALL possible covers

No. 2-62

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplication Examples to Illustrate Terms

6 Prime Implicants: A' B' D, B C', A C, A' C' D, A B, B' C D

Essential

Minimum cover = essential implicants + one more prime implicant = B C' + A C + A' B' D

5 Prime Implicants: B D, A B C', A C D, A' B C, A' C' D

essential

Essential implicants form minimum cover = A B C‘ + A C D + A' B C + A' C' D

AB 00 01 11 10

0 1 1 0

1 1 1 0

1 0 1 1

0 0 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 1 0

1 1 1 0

0 1 1 1

0 1 0 0

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-63

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification More Examples

Prime Implicants: B D, C D, A C, B' C

essential

Essential primes form the minimum cover = BD + AC + B' C

AB 00 01 11 10

0 0 0 0

0 1 1 0

1 1 1 1

1 0 1 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-64

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Algorithm: Minimum Sum of Products Expression from a K-Map

Step 1: Choose an element of ON-set not already covered by an implicant

Step 2: Find "maximal" groupings of 1's and X's adjacent to that element. Remember to consider top/bottom row, left/right column, and corner adjacencies. This forms prime implicants (always a power of 2 number of elements).

Repeat Steps 1 and 2 to find all prime implicants

Step 3: Revisit the 1's in the K-map. If covered by a single prime implicant, it is essential, and participates in final cover. The 1's it covers do not need to be revisited

Step 4: If there remain 1's not covered by essential prime implicants, then select the smallest number of prime implicants that cover the remaining 1's

No. 2-65

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification Example: f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Initial K-map

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-66

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification Example: f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Initial K-map Primes around A' B C' D'

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-67

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification Example: f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Initial K-map Primes around A' B C' D'

Primes around A B C' D

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD A

D

B

Note: don’t worry about the blue colored elements. I couldn’t fix the figures.

No. 2-68

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Example Continued

Primes around A B' C' D

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-69

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Example Continued

Primes around A B' C' D'

Primes around A B C' D

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

No. 2-70

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification Example Continued

Primes around A B' C' D'

Primes around A B C' D

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

AB 00 01 11 10

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

00

01

11

10 C

CD

A

D

B

Essential Primes with Min Cover

(each element covered once)

No. 2-71

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification 5-Variable K-maps

f(A,B,C,D,E) = m(2,5,7,8,10, 13,15,17,19,21,23,24,29 31)

=

BC DE

BC DE

A =0

A =1

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

0 4 12 8

1 5 13 9

3 7 15 11

2 6 14 10

16 20 28 24

17 21 29 25

19 23 31 27

18 22 30 26

1

00

1

10

1

10 BC

DE 00 01 11 00

01

11

10

A=0

BC DE 00 01 11

01

11

10

A=1

1 1

1

1 1

1

1 1

1 1 1

No. 2-72

Gate Logic: Two-Level Simplification 5-Variable K-maps

f(A,B,C,D,E) = m(2,5,7,8,10, 13,15,17,19,21,23,24,29 31)

= C E + A B' E + B C' D' E' + A' C' D E'

BC DE 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

A=0

BC DE 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

A=1

1 1

1

1

1 1

1

1

1 1 1

1 1 1

BC DE

BC DE

A =0

A =1

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

0 4 12 8

1 5 13 9

3 7 15 11

2 6 14 10

16 20 28 24

17 21 29 25

19 23 31 27

18 22 30 26

No. 2-73

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification 6- Variable K-Maps

f(A,B,C,D,E,F) = m(2,8,10,18,24,

26,34,37,42,45,50, 53,58,61)

=

CD EF

CD EF

AB =00

AB =01

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

0 4 12 8

1 5 13 9

3 7 15 11

2 6 14 10

16 20 28 24

17 21 29 25

19 23 31 27

18 22 30 26

CD EF

AB =11

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

48 52 60 56

49 53 61 57

51 55 63 59

50 54 62 58

CD EF

AB =10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

32 36 44 40

33 37 45 41

35 39 47 43

34 38 46 42

CD EF

CD EF

AB =00

AB =01

00 01 11 10 00

01 11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01 11

10

CD EF

AB =11 00 01 11 10

00

01 11

10

CD EF

AB =10 00 01 11 10

00

01 11

10

1

1 1

1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

No. 2-74

Gate Logic: Two Level Simplification 6- Variable K-Maps

f(A,B,C,D,E,F) = m(2,8,10,18,24,

26,34,37,42,45,50, 53,58,61)

= D' E F' + A D E' F + A' C D' F'

CD EF

CD EF

AB =00

AB =01

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

0 4 12 8

1 5 13 9

3 7 15 11

2 6 14 10

16 20 28 24

17 21 29 25

19 23 31 27

18 22 30 26

CD EF

AB =11

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

48 52 60 56

49 53 61 57

51 55 63 59

50 54 62 58

CD EF

AB =10

00 01 11 10 00

01

11

10

32 36 44 40

33 37 45 41

35 39 47 43

34 38 46 42

CD EF

CD EF

AB =00

AB =01

00 01 11 10 00

01 11

10

00 01 11 10 00

01 11

10

CD EF

AB =11 00 01 11 10

00

01 11

10

CD EF

AB =10 00 01 11 10

00

01 11

10

1

1 1

1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

1 1

No. 2-75

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Quine-McCluskey Method

Tabular method to systematically find all prime implicants

Implication Table

Column I 0000 0100 1000 0101 0110 1001 1010 0111 1101

1111

f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Step 1: Fill Column 1 with ON-set and DC-set minterm indices. Group by number of 1's.

Stage 1: Find all prime implicants

No. 2-76

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Quine-McCluskey Method

Tabular method to systematically find all prime implicants

Implication Table

Column I Column II 0000 √ 0-00 -000 0100 √ 1000 √ 010- 01-0 0101 √ 100- 0110 √ 10-0 1001 √ 1010 √ 01-1 -101 0111 √ 011- 1101 √ 1-01

1111 √ -111 11-1

f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Step 1: Fill Column 1 with ON-set and DC-set minterm indices. Group by number of 1's.

Step 2: Apply Uniting Theorem Compare elements of group w/ N 1's against those with N+1 1's. Differ by one bit implies adjacent. Eliminate variable and place in next column.

E.g., 0000 vs. 0100 yields 0-00 0000 vs. 1000 yields -000

When used in a combination, mark with a check. If cannot be combined, mark with a star. These are the prime implicants.

Repeat until no further combinations can be made.

Stage 1: Find all prime implicants

No. 2-77

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Quine-McCluskey Method

Tabular method to systematically find all prime implicants

Implication Table

Column I Column II Column III 0000 √ 0-00 * 01-- * -000 * 0100 √ -1-1 * 1000 √ 010- √ 01-0 √ 0101 √ 100- * 0110 √ 10-0 * 1001 √ 1010 √ 01-1 √ -101 √ 0111 √ 011- √ 1101 √ 1-01 *

1111 √ -111 √ 11-1 √

f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Step 1: Fill Column 1 with ON-set and DC-set minterm indices. Group by number of 1's.

Step 2: Apply Uniting Theorem Compare elements of group w/ N 1's against those with N+1 1's. Differ by one bit implies adjacent. Eliminate variable and place in next column.

E.g., 0000 vs. 0100 yields 0-00 0000 vs. 1000 yields -000

When used in a combination, mark with a check. If cannot be combined, mark with a star. These are the prime implicants.

Repeat until no further combinations can be made.

Stage 1: Find all prime implicants

No. 2-78

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Quine-McCluskey Method Continued

Prime Implicants:

0-00 = A' C' D'

100- = A B' C'

1-01 = A C' D

-1-1 = B D

-000 = B' C' D'

10-0 = A B' D'

01-- = A' B

AB CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

No. 2-79

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Quine-McCluskey Method Continued

Prime Implicants:

0-00 = A' C' D'

100- = A B' C'

1-01 = A C' D

-1-1 = B D

-000 = B' C' D'

10-0 = A B' D'

01-- = A' B

Stage 2: find smallest set of prime implicants that cover the ON-set recall that essential prime implicants must be in all covers

another tabular method- the prime implicant chart

AB CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

X 1 0 1

0 1 1 1

0 X X 0

0 1 0 1

No. 2-80

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification

rows = prime implicants columns = ON-set elements place an "X" if ON-set element is covered by the prime implicant

Prime Implicant Chart

No. 2-81

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification

rows = prime implicants columns = ON-set elements place an "X" if ON-set element is covered by the prime implicant

Prime Implicant Chart

If column has a single X, than the implicant associated with the row is essential. It must appear in minimum cover

No. 2-82

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Prime Implicant Chart (Continued)

Eliminate all columns covered by essential primes

No. 2-83

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Prime Implicant Chart (Continued)

Eliminate all columns covered by essential primes

Find minimum set of rows that cover the remaining columns

f = A B' D' + A C' D + A' Bf = A B' D' + A C' D + A' B

No. 2-84

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification ESPRESSO Method (Berkeley Tool)

Problem with Quine-McCluskey: the number of prime implicants grows rapidly with the number of inputs

upper bound: 3 /n, where n is the number of inputsn

finding a minimum cover is NP-complete, i.e., a computational expensive process not likely to yield to any efficient algorithm

Espresso: trades solution speed for minimality of answer

don't generate all prime implicants (Quine-McCluskey Stage 1)

judiciously select a subset of primes that still covers the ON-set

operates in a fashion not unlike a human finding primes in a K-map

No. 2-85

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Espresso Method: Overview

1. Expands implicants to their maximum size Implicants covered by an expanded implicant are removed from further consideration Quality of result depends on order of implicant expansion Heuristic methods used to determine order Step is called EXPAND

Irredundant cover (i.e., no proper subset is also a cover) is extracted from the expanded primes Just like the Quine-McCluskey Prime Implicant Chart Step is called IRREDUNDANT COVER

Solution usually pretty good, but sometimes can be improved Might exist another cover with fewer terms or fewer literals Shrink prime implicants to smallest size that still covers ON-set Step is called REDUCE

Repeat sequence REDUCE/EXPAND/IRREDUNDANT COVER to find alternative prime implicants Keep doing this as long as new covers improve on last solution

A number of optimizations are tried, e.g., identify and remove essential primes early in the process

2.

3.

4.

5.

No. 2-86

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Espresso Inputs and Outputs

.i 4

.o 1

.ilb a b c d

.ob f

.p 10 0100 1 0101 1 0110 1 1000 1 1001 1 1010 1 1101 1 0000 - 0111 - 1111 - .e

-- # inputs -- # outputs -- input names -- output name -- number of product terms -- A'BC'D' -- A'BC'D -- A'BCD' -- AB'C'D' -- AB'C'D -- AB'CD' -- ABC'D -- A'B'C'D' don't care -- A'BCD don't care -- ABCD don't care -- end of list

f(A,B,C,D) = m(4,5,6,8,9,10,13) + d(0,7,15)

Espresso Input Espresso Output .i 4 .o 1 .ilb a b c d .ob f .p 3 1-01 1 10-0 1 01-- 1 .e

f= A C' D + A B' D' + A' B

No. 2-87

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Espresso: Why Iterate on Reduce, Irredundant Cover, Expand?

Initial Set of Primes found by Steps1 and 2 of the Espresso

Method

4 primes, irredundant cover, but not a minimal cover!

Result of REDUCE: Shrink primes while still

covering the ON-set

Choice of order in which to perform shrink is important

AB

CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

1 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

1 1 1 1

AB

CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

1 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

1 1 1 1

No. 2-88

Gate Logic: CAD Tools for Simplification Espresso Iteration (Continued)

Second EXPAND generates a different set of prime implicants

IRREDUNDANT COVER found by final step of espresso

Only three prime implicants!

AB

CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

1 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

1 1 1 1

AB

CD 00 01 11 10

00

01

11

10

D

B

C

A

1 1 0 0

1 1 1 1

0 0 1 1

1 1 1 1

No. 2-89

Practical Matters: Technology Metrics

Bipolar: TTL (transistor-transistor logic) and ECL (emitter-coupled logic) families

MOS (metal oxide semiconductor): CMOS (complementary MOS)

Metric Bipolar MOS

Gate delay Low Medium

Integration Low High

Power High Low

Noise Good Good

Cost Low Medium

Fan-out Fair Good

Drive Good Low

No. 2-90

Practical Matters: TTL Packaged Logic

TTL (transister-transistor logic) 74-series components A logic family – can be interconnected w/o too much

concern about electrical operation

No. 2-91

Practical Matters: TTL Packaged Logic

Subfamilies 74XX: standard 74HXX: higher speed, more power consumption 74LXX: lower speed 74SXX: Schottky TTL (S TTL) 74LSXX: low-power Schottky (LS TTL) √ 74ASXX: advanced Schottky (AS TTL) 74ALSXX: advanced low-power Schottky (ALS TTL)

Speed-Power product Trade-off between speed and power consumption

Delay (nsec) Power (mW) Speed-Power Product

Standard 9 10 90

LS TTL 9 2 √ 18

ALS TTL 5 1.3 √ 6.5 √

S TTL 3 √ 20 60

AS TTL 1.6 √ 20 32

No. 2-92

Logic Functions: Alternative Gate Realizations

Two-Level Realization (inverters don't count)

Multi-Level Realization Advantage: Reduced Gate

Fan-ins

Complex Gate: XOR Advantage: Fewest Gates

Number of gates: Z1 - 3x inverters, 3x 3-input AND, 1x 3-input OR Z2 - 2x inverters, 3x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input OR Z3 - 1x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input XOR

0 1 0 1 0 1

A B C

0

0

Z 1

Z 2

Z 3

0

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Z 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0

No. 2-93

Logic Functions: Alternative Gate Realizations

Two-Level Realization (inverters don't count)

Multi-Level Realization Advantage: Reduced Gate

Fan-ins

Complex Gate: XOR Advantage: Fewest Gates

TTL Package Counts: Z1 - three packages (1x 6-inverters, 1x 3-input AND, 1x 3-input OR) Z2 - three packages (1x 6-inverters, 1x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input OR) Z3 - two packages (1x 2-input AND, 1x 2-input XOR)

0 1 0 1 0 1

A B C

0

0

Z 1

Z 2

Z 3

0

A 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1

B 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1

C 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1

Z 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0

No. 2-94

Two-Level Logic: Summary

Primitive logic building blocks INVERTER, AND, OR, NAND, NOR, XOR, XNOR

Canonical Forms Sum of Products, Products of Sums

Incompletely specified functions/don't cares

Logic Minimization Goal: two-level logic realizations with fewest gates and fewest number of gate inputs

Obtained via Laws and Theorems of Boolean Algebra

or Boolean Cubes and the Uniting Theorem

or K-map Methods up to 6 variables

or Quine-McCluskey Algorithm

or Espresso CAD Tool

Docsity is not optimized for the browser you're using. In order to have a better experience please switch to Google Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer 9+ or Safari! Download Google Chrome