0
\$\begingroup\$

I have the expression: x'y+xy'+y'z . I want to express this with only OR, NOT gates, but the issue is I have no idea how to remove the AND functions. I was thinking of using demorgans law, but I am unsure how and if it can be used on only part of the expression. Is there a way to simplify it and remove the ANDS?

\$\endgroup\$
4
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Hint: Can you make an AND gate out of an OR gate and three NOT gates? \$\endgroup\$ Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 0:31
  • \$\begingroup\$ x'y+xy'+y'z === (x'y)+(xy')+(y'z). Now you can use De Morgan's laws inside each parathesis until all the ANDs are gone. \$\endgroup\$
    – Dampmaskin
    Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 0:47
  • \$\begingroup\$ Oh I see. So (x'y) would be (x+y') correct? @Dampmaskin \$\endgroup\$
    – Kytex
    Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 0:50
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The whole paranthesis also gets inverted. If De Morgan's laws are not clear to you, you should study them more closely. \$\endgroup\$
    – Dampmaskin
    Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 0:55

1 Answer 1

2
\$\begingroup\$

Q: \$\overline{x}y+x\overline{y}+\overline{y}z\$, Turn this into NOT and OR gates only.


Just apply De Morgan's law on each of them individually.

Here's a refreshener:

\$\overline{AB}=\overline{A}+\overline{B}\$

\$\overline{A+B}=\bar{A}\bar{B}\$

\$\overline{\overline{A}}=A\$


First add some not gates.

\$\overline{\overline{\overline{x}y}}+\overline{\overline{x\overline{y}}}+\overline{\overline{\overline{y}z}}\$

Then De Morgan them to the maximum.

Here's the continuation in hidden format, I do encourage you to apply De Morgan's law on your own.

\$\overline{\overline{\overline{x}}+\overline{y}}+\overline{\overline{x}+\overline{\overline{y}}}+\overline{\overline{\overline{y}}+\overline{z}}\$

And after you've applied De Morgan's Law, then you might want to remove unnecessary gates. Use these two yellow boxes as a way to control that you've calculated correctly.

\$\overline{x+\overline{y}}+\overline{\overline{x}+y}+\overline{y+\overline{z}}\$


This is how it looks like in a schematic.

schematic

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thank you, that makes much more sense. Now since the parenthesis have a complement, how would I go about making an AND gate? Wouldn't I need to have the complement somehow removed? \$\endgroup\$
    – Kytex
    Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 2:30
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ "how would I go about making an AND gate?", from what? And wasn't the OR + NOT gates the goal? - I am not following you. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 2:32
  • \$\begingroup\$ sorry, misworded. I meant the or gate. How would I deal with the complement on the parenthesis since I need just the or gate \$\endgroup\$
    – Kytex
    Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 2:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ Are you talking about inverting the OR gate? \$\overline{x+y}=\$ NOT(OR(x,y)). - Just add a NOT gate at the output of the OR gate. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 2:42
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Kytex Added schematic for clarity. \$\endgroup\$ Commented Feb 15, 2018 at 2:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.