These slides incorporate figures from Digital Design

Principles and Practices, third edition, by John F.

Wakerly, Copyright 2000, and are used by permission.
NO permission is given to re-use or publish these
figures, in either original or modified form, in printed,
electronic or any other format.
 Slide Set 4
Combinational Logic
Combinational logic
--- outputs logical functions of inputs
--- new outputs appear shortly after changed inputs
(propagation delay)
--- no feedback loops
--- no clock

Sequential logic
--- outputs logical functions of inputs and previous
history of circuit (memory)
--- after changed inputs, new outputs appear in
the next clock cycle
--- frequent feedback loops
For analysis and synthesis...
primary tool is Boolean algebra

• also known as “switching algebra”

– deals with boolean values -- 0, 1
• Positive-logic convention
– analog voltages LOW, HIGH --> 0, 1
– negative logic (reverse assignments) seldom used
• Signal values denoted by variables
(X, Y, FRED, etc.)
 Boolean operators
• Complement: X′ (opposite of X)
• AND: X⋅ Y binary operators, described
functionally by truth table.
• OR: X+Y

• Axiomatic definition: A1-A5, A1′ -A5′

 Axiomatic definition:

X ≠1⇒ X = 0 X ≠ 0 ⇒ X =1
X = 0 ⇒ X '=1 X =1⇒ X '= 0
0•0 = 0 1+1 = 1
1•1 = 1 0+0 = 0
0 •1 = 1• 0 = 0 0 +1 = 1+ 0 = 1
 Axiomatic definition: Dual statements:

X ≠1⇒ X = 0 X ≠ 0 ⇒ X =1
X = 0 ⇒ X '=1 X =1⇒ X '= 0
0•0 = 0 1+1 = 1
1•1 = 1 0+0 = 0
0 •1 = 1• 0 = 0 0 +1 = 1+ 0 = 1
 More definitions
• Literal: a variable or its complement
– X, X′ , FRED′ , CS_L
• Expression: literals combined by
AND, OR, parentheses, complementation
– X+Y
–P ⋅ Q ⋅ R
–A + B ⋅ C
– ((FRED ⋅ Z′ ) + CS_L ⋅ A ⋅ B′ ⋅ C + Q5) ⋅ RESET′
• Equation: Variable = expression
– P = ((FRED ⋅ Z′ ) + CS_L ⋅ A ⋅ B′ ⋅ C + Q5) ⋅
RESET′
 Theorems

Proofs by exhaustion:
Let variables assume all possible values and show
• Proofs by perfect induction
validity of result in all cases
 Example: Show X + 0 = X

(a) Keep axioms handy X ≠1⇒ X = 0 X ≠ 0 ⇒ X =1

X = 0 ⇒ X '=1 X =1⇒ X '= 0
0•0 = 0 1+1 = 1
1•1 = 1 0+0 = 0
0 •1 = 1• 0 = 0 0 +1 = 1+ 0 = 1

(b) Elaborate cases:

if X = 0, have
X+0=0+0=0=X
if X = 1, have
X+0=1+0=1=X
 More Theorems

Can prove by exhaustion....but have more cases

For distributive laws,
T8 looks like ordinary algebra
T8’ also true (swap operators, factor, swap back)
T9, T10 for logic minimization - drop irrelevant terms
 T9, T10, T11 for logic minimization - drop superfluous terms
T9 (Covering): X + X•Y = X and X•(X+Y)=X
Proof: X + X•Y = X•1 + X•Y = X•(1+Y) = X•1 = X
X•(X+Y) = (X+0)•(X+Y) = X+(0•Y) = X+0 = X

T10 (Combining): X•Y + X•Y’ = X and (X + Y) • (X + Y’) = X

Proof: X•Y + X•Y’ = X•(Y + Y’) = X•1 = X
(X + Y)•(X + Y’) = X + (Y•Y’) = X + 0 = X

T11 (Consensus): X•Y+X’•Z+Y•Z = X•Y+X’•Z and (X+Y)•(X’+Z)•(Y+Z)= (X+Y)•(X’+Z)

Proof: If Y•Z = 0
X•Y+X’•Z+Y•Z = X•Y+X’•Z+ 0 = X•Y+X’•Z
else
Y=Z=1
left side: X•Y+X’•Z+YZ = something + YZ = something + 1 =1
right side: X•Y+X’•Z = X + X’ = 1
So, in either case, X•Y+X’•Z+YZ = X•Y+X’•Z

If Y+Z = 1
(X+Y)•(X’+Z)•(Y+Z)= (X+Y)•(X’+Z)•1= (X+Y)•(X’+Z)
else
Y=Z=0
left side: (X+Y)•(X’+Z)•(Y+Z)= something • (Y + Z) = something • 0 = 0
right side: (X+Y)•(X’+Z) = (X+0)•(X’+0) = X•X’ = 0
So, in either case, (X+Y)•(X’+Z)•(Y+Z)= (X+Y)•(X’+Z)
 Duality
• De Morgan’s Theorems:
(X + Y)’ = X’ • Y’
(X • Y)’ = X’ + Y’
• Dual: Swap 0 & 1, AND & OR, but leave variables unchanged
– Result: Theorems still true
• Why?
– f(X, Y) = g(X, Y)
– complement[f(X, Y)] = complement[g(X, Y)]
– dual[f(X’, Y’)] = dual[g(X’, Y’)]
– but X’, Y’ just dummy variables, replace with originals
• Counterexample?
X + X ⋅ Y = X (T9) X + (X ⋅ Y) = X (T9)
X ⋅ X + Y = X (dual) X ⋅ (X + Y) = X (dual)
X + Y = X (T3′ ) (X ⋅ X) + (X ⋅ Y) = X (T8)
!! error ? X + (X ⋅ Y) = X (T3′ )
parentheses,
operator precedence
 N-variable Theorems

• Prove via induction

• Most important: DeMorgan theorems
 DeMorgan Symbol Equivalence

Bubble-pushing...
Likewise for OR
 Alternate Gate Symbols
X + Y = [( X + Y ) ']' = [ X 'gY ']'
Alternate Gate Symbols
Logic representations:

(a) truth table (b) boolean equation

from 1-rows in truth table:

F = X’Y’Z’ + X’YZ + XY’Z’ + XYZ’ + XYZ

F = Y’Z’ + XY + YZ

from 0-rows in truth table:

F = (X + Y + Z’)(X + Y’ + Z)(X’ + Y + Z’)

F = (X + Y’ + Z)(Y + Z’)
Definitions:
Literal --- a variable or complemented variable (e.g., X or X')

product term --- single literal or logical product of literals (e.g., X or X'Y)

sum term --- single literal or logical sum of literals (e.g. X' or (X' + Y))

sum-of-products --- logical sum of product terms (e.g. X'Y + Y'Z)

product-of-sums --- logical product of sum terms (e.g. (X + Y')(Y + Z))

normal term --- sum term or product term

in which no variable appears more than once
(e.g. X'YZ but not X'YZX or X'YZX'
(X + Y + Z') but not (X + Y + Z' + X))

minterm --- normal product term containing all variables (e.g. XYZ')

maxterm --- normal sum term containing all variables (e.g. (X + Y + Z'))

canonical sum --- sum of minterms from truth table rows producing a 1

canonical product --- product of maxterms from truth table rows producing a 0
Truth table vs. minterms & maxterms
 Shortcut notation:

F = X’Y’Z’ + X’YZ + XY’Z’ + XYZ’ + XYZ

= Σ (0, 3, 4, 6, 7)

F = (X + Y + Z’)(X + Y’ + Z)(X’ + Y + Z’)

= Π (1, 2, 5)

Note equivalences:
Σ (0, 3, 4, 6, 7) = Π (1, 2, 5)

[Σ (0, 3, 4, 6, 7)]’ = Σ (1, 2, 5) = Π (0, 3, 4, 6, 7)

[Π (1, 2, 5)]’ = Π (0, 3, 4, 6, 7) = Σ (1, 2, 5)

 Combinational analysis

... derives truth table

 Signal expressions

Multiply out:
F = ((X + Y′ ) ⋅ Z) + (X′ ⋅ Y ⋅ Z′ )
= (X ⋅ Z) + (Y′ ⋅ Z) + (X′ ⋅ Y ⋅ Z′ )
New circuit, same function
Any number of manipulations can yield equivalent circuits
e.g.
F = ((X + Y’)Z) + X’YZ’
Note: [X’YZ’]Z = 0
(X + Y’)X’YZ’ = 0
(X’YZ’)(X’YZ’) = X’YZ’
So, F = [(X + Y’) + X’YZ’][Z + X’YZ’]
=(X + Y’ + X’)(X + Y’ + Y)(X + Y’ + Z’)(Z + X’)(Z + Y)(Z + Z’)
=(1)(1)(X + Y’ + Z’)(X’ + Z)(Y + Z)(1)
= (X + Y’ + Z’)(X’ + Z)(Y + Z)

Circuit:
Push bubbles to obtain cancellations
Push bubbles to obtain cancellations
Conclude:
given circuit ==> many equivalent equations

circuit does not determine equation

 Also, equation does not determine circuit:

Two-level AND-OR Two-level NAND-NAND

Three-level equivalent
Combinational analysis
given circuit, determine function

Combinational synthesis
given function, determine circuit
Prime number detector: F = Σ (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13)

AND-OR design
N 3 N 3 ' N 0 N 0 '
 Alarm:

Derive truth table or expand:

A = P + E • EX’ • (W • D • G)’ = P + E • EX’ • (W’ + D’ + G’)

= P + E • EX’ • W’ + E • EX’ • D’ + E • EX’ • G’
A = P + E • EX’ • W’ + E • EX’ • D’ + E • EX’ • G’
NANDs, NORs have fewer transistors than ANDs, ORs
AND-OR converts readily to NAND-NAND
Complication if some inputs go directly to second stage:
OR-AND to NOR-NOR
Bubble-pushing produces non-standard gate
Solution: inverters
Bubble-pushing produces non-standard gate
Solution: inverters
Bubble-pushing produces non-standard gate
Solution: inverters
Synthesis approaches illustrated to this point:
Truth table derivation of minterms

Ad hoc construction of logic equation

Need systematic approach

that minimizes hardware

Karnaugh maps

Quine-McCluskey algorithm
Prime number detector: F = Σ (1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13)

N3 N2
00 01 11 10 0001
00 00-1
0011
0--1
01 x x x
N1 N0 0101
01-1
11 x x x 0111

10 x
Karnaugh maps: 2, 3, and 4 variable
Example:

F = X’YZ’ + XZ + Y’Z
 Prime implicants
Another example: (maximal clusters)
Prime number detector
Prime number detector
Another example:
distinguished cell: covered by only one prime implicant
essential prime implicant: contains distinguished cell
Another example:
primes, distinguished cells, essentials
Selecting essentials leaves an uncovered cell
cover with simpler implicant: W’Z
Eclipsing (in reduced map)
P eclipses Q if P covers all of Q’s ones
if P is no more expensive (same or fewer literals),
then choose P over Q
Alas, no essential prime implicants
branching: choose a cell and examine all implicants
that cover that cell
Don’t cares....
Multiple functions
can use separate Karnaugh maps
...or can manage to find common terms...
For more than 6 input variables,
Karnaugh maps are difficult to manipulate

Need computer program....

Quine-McCluskey algorithm
typedef unsigned short WORD; /* assume 16-bit registers */
struct cube {
WORD t; /* marks uncomplemented variables */
WORD f; /* marks complemented variables */
}
typedef struct cube CUBE;

CUBE P1, x, y, z;

X 15 X 12 X 10 X 9 X 4 X 1 X 0
 Example in four variables
Equation:

w x’ y z’ + w’ x’ y z’ = x’ y z’

Karnaugh map:

wx
00 01 11 10
yz 00
01
11
10 1 1

Cubes (last four bits):

1010 ⊕ 0010 = 1000 ==> single one in common position ==> combinable
0101 ⊕ 1101 = 1000

1010 & 0010 = 0010 ==> w now missing, new cube corresponds to z’ y z’
0101 & 1101 = 0101
Start with minterms (0-cubes)
Combine when possible to form (1-cubes)....
Example: w’xy’z + wxy’z + w’xyz + wxyz = xz

wx
00 01 11 10
yz 00
01 1 1
0101 ⊕ 1101 = 1000
11 1 1
1010 ⊕ 0010 = 1000
10
0101 & 1101 = 0101
Cubes: 0101 1101 0111 1111
1010 & 0010 = 0010
1010 0010 1000 0000

0101
1010

1101
0010

0111
1000

1111
0000
Start with minterms (0-cubes)
Combine when possible to form (1-cubes)....
Example: w’xy’z + wxy’z + w’xyz + wxyz = xz

wx
00 01 11 10
yz 00
01 1 1
0101 ⊕ 1101 = 1000
11 1 1
1010 ⊕ 0010 = 1000
10
√
0101 & 1101 = 0101
Cubes: 0101 1101 0111 1111
1010 & 0010 = 0010
1010 0010 1000 0000

0101
1010 wx
00 01 11 10
√ 1101 0101 yz 00
0010 0010 01 1 1
11 1 1
0111 10
1000

1111
0000
Start with minterms (0-cubes)
Combine when possible to form (1-cubes)....
Example: w’xy’z + wxy’z + w’xyz + wxyz = xz

wx
00 01 11 10
yz 00
01 1 1
11 1 1
10
√ √ √
Cubes: 0101 1101 0111 1111
1010 0010 1000 0000

0101
1010 wx
00 01 11 10
√ 1101 0101 yz 00
0010 0010 01 1 1
11 1 1
√ 0111 0101 10
1000 1000

√ 1111 1101 0111

0000 0000 0000
Continue to form 2-cubes

Example: w’xy’z + wxy’z + w’xyz + wxyz = xz

wx
00 01 11 10
yz 00
01 1 1
11 1 1
10
√ √
Cubes: 0101 0101 1101 0111
0010 1000 0000 0000

0101
0010

0101
1000

√ 1101 0101
0000 0000

√ 0111 0101
0000 0000
Quine-McCluskey Algorithm:
Read in all minterms (0-cubes);
mark all 0-cubes “uncovered”;
for (m = 0; m < Nvar; m++)
for (j = 0; j < Ncubes[m]; j++)
for (k = j + 1; k < Ncubes[m]; k++)
if (combinable(cube[m][j], cube[m][k])) {
mark cube[m][j] and cube[m][k] “covered”
temp = combined cube;
if (temp not already at level m + 1) {
add temp to level m + 1;
mark temp “uncovered”
}
}
Manual algorithm: F = Σ (2, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15) (variables WXYZ)

uncovered terms
0010

0101 01-1 -1-1

1001 -101
1-01
0111 -111
1101 11-1

1111
Manual algorithm: F = Σ (2, 5, 7, 9, 13, 15) (variables WXYZ)
WY’Z
0010

0101 x 01-1 x -1-1

1001 x -101 x
1-01 XZ
0111 x -111 x
1101 x 11-1 x
WX
1111 x 00 01 11 10
00

YZ 01 1 1 1

W’X’YZ’ 11 1 1

10 1
 Minterms
Prime 2 5 7 9 13 15
Implicants

0010 x
1-01 x x
-1-1 x x x x

distinguished minterms (cells): 2, 5, 7, 9, 15

essential prime implicants: 0010, 1-01, -1-1 (all)

F = 0010 + 1-01 + -1-1 = W’X’YZ’ + WY’Z + XZ

Not all prime implicants are necessarily essential

distinguished cells
essential implicants

remainder C eclipses B and D

Minimal form: A + E + C
Not all prime implicants are necessarily essential

distinguished cells
essential implicants

remainder C eclipses B and D

Minimal form: A + E + C
Not all prime implicants are necessarily essential

distinguished cells
essential implicants

remainder C eclipses B and D

Minimal form: A + E + C
 Static hazard: X = Y = 1, Z falls from 1 to 0

XZ’ Z’
Z’

XZ’

Reconstruct Karnaugh map:

F = XZ’ + YZ = XYZ’ + XY’Z’ + XYZ + X’YZ

Consensus term
Solution: add consensus term

XZ’ Z’
Z’

XZ’

XZ’

Z’

Consensus term