2
\$\begingroup\$

My professor briefly mentioned that there are ways of "taking 0's" and "taking 1's" from a K-map that allow you to form the logical expressions differently (e.g. NAND-NAND, AND-OR, NOR-NOR, etc.). Can anyone explain this, or direct me towards a discussion on this topic? The only method I can seem to find is minterm vs maxterm solutions.

Here is my current understanding:

For minterm solutions, we make groups of 1's in powers of 2. For each grouping, invert if the unchanged variable is a 0, and do nothing if it's 1. Each variable in the group is ANDed together, and this forms a product of sum of products with the other groupings (if any)- the result is AND-OR logic.

For maxterm solutions, we make groups of 0's in powers of 2. For each grouping, invert if the unchanged variable is a 1, and do nothing if it's 0. Each variable in the group is ORed together, and this forms a product of sums with the other groupings (if any)- the result is also AND-OR logic.

I'm not sure what I'm missing.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ NAND-NAND and AND-OR are the same. You can directly implement a SOP using this. Similarly NOR-NOR can be used to implement a POS easily. \$\endgroup\$ – nidhin Feb 12 '15 at 14:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ Can this be done using DeMorgan's theorem? \$\endgroup\$ – Lefty Feb 12 '15 at 14:08
  • \$\begingroup\$ Using DeMorgan's theorem, it can be proved that NANAD-NAND is equivalent to AND-OR (SOP) and NOR-NOR is equivalent to OR-AND (POS). \$\endgroup\$ – nidhin Feb 12 '15 at 14:10
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm not sure what textbooks you're using but this is fairly standard material, e.g. books.google.com/books?id=xqLl9_YwYn4C&pg=SA2-PA27 \$\endgroup\$ – Fizz Feb 12 '15 at 20:36
4
\$\begingroup\$

What you understood is correct. Grouping mintems results in sum of product (SOP) form or the AND-OR form as shown in (1) $$Y = a_1a_2a_3 + b_1b_2b_3 + \cdots + \omega_1\omega_2\omega_3\tag1$$ Calculating \$\overline{Y}\$ using De-Morgan's theorem, $$\overline{Y} = (\overline{a_1a_2a_3} )\ (\overline{b_1b_2b_3}) \cdots (\overline{\omega_1\omega_2\omega_3})$$ From this Y can be written as $$Y = \overline{(\overline{a_1a_2a_3} )\ (\overline{b_1b_2b_3}) \cdots (\overline{\omega_1\omega_2\omega_3})}\tag2$$

Which is the NAND-NAND form since variables in a group are NANDed together and NANDed again to obtain Y. So the AND-OR form and NAND-NAND form are equivalent.

Point to be noted (from(1) and (2) )is that a AND-OR circuit can be converted to NAND-NAND circuit just by replacing the AND and OR gates with NAND gates without changing any interconnections.

So grouping "1"s from K-map allow us to form AND-OR and NAND-NAND easily.

Similarly, grouping maxterms produces POS or OR-AND form: $${Y} = ({a_1+a_2+a_3} )\ ({b_1+b_2+b_3}) \cdots ({\omega_1+\omega_2+\omega_3})\tag3$$

Using De-Morgan's theorem it can be proved that OR-AND is equivalent to NOR-NOR form.

So grouping "0"s from K-map allow us to form OR-AND and NOR-NOR easily.

UPDATE:

From K-map you have to find SOP or POS then you can directly implement using NAND-NAND or NOR-NOR circuit.

For example, assume that from K-map you obtained the following SOP from K-Map $$Y = abc + ab\overline{c} + \overline{a}bc$$

You can implement this using AND-OR logic as:

schematic

Same way it can be implemented using NAND-NAND as,

schematic

So If you can directly draw AND-OR circuit from K-map (SOP) then you can draw NAND-NAND just by replacing the gates with NAND. Similarly, given POS, NOR-NOR circuit can be drawn directly.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ I appreciate the in-depth response. Thanks! This really clears things up. I think what my professor was doing was using NAND-NAND and NOR-NOR logic directly from the K-map, which might be why it was a bit confusing. \$\endgroup\$ – Lefty Feb 12 '15 at 19:39
  • \$\begingroup\$ How do you get the NAND-NAND and NOR-NOR directly from the K-map without grouping "1"s and applying DeMorgan's theorem? \$\endgroup\$ – Lefty Feb 12 '15 at 19:46
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Lefty I have edited the answer. I think the update can explain it for you. \$\endgroup\$ – nidhin Feb 12 '15 at 20:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ Thanks a ton! I don't know why my professor is over-complicating things. The update helps a lot. \$\endgroup\$ – Lefty Feb 12 '15 at 20:14

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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