0
$\begingroup$

I hope the title wasn't butchered but I'll do my best to explain here. I am trying to find the simplified function of $F$ using a K-map and after going through everything I arrived at the simplified function of $F=1$ which doesn't seem right so I wanted to run my work through here and see if there is something I'm missing. below is all my steps

$$F=\overline{ABC}+\overline{A}B+AB\overline{C}+AC$$

which results in the K-map:

Kmap

I hope the K-Map is clear, the three groups below are: $$$$ $$=AB\overline{C}+A\overline{B}C$$ $$=A$$

above is the first one, below is the second,

$$\overline{ABC}+\overline{A}BC$$ $$=\overline{A}$$

and below is the third group,

$$=ABC+AB\overline{C}+\overline{A}BC+\overline{A}B\overline{C}$$ $$=AB+\overline{A}B$$ $$=B$$

After all of these I am left with a simplified function of

$$F=A+\overline{A}+B$$ $$F=1+B$$ since $$A+\overline{A}=1$$ $$F=1$$ since$$ 1+X=1$$

I don't know if this is alright, I hope I was able to get my steps across properly, is it possible to have a simplified function of 1? I know that the original F does not always result in 1, there are cases where F=0, because of that I don't really know what I did wrong.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It is not true that $\overline{ABC} + \bar ABC = \bar A$. Rather, we have $$ \overline{ABC} + \bar ABC = \bar A(\overline{BC} + BC) $$ which amounts to $A$ and $NXOR(B,C)$ $\endgroup$ – Omnomnomnom Oct 12 '18 at 2:57
  • $\begingroup$ That is, assuming you've gone with the usual convention and used $\overline{BC}$ to denote (not B) and (not C) rather than not (B and C) $\endgroup$ – Omnomnomnom Oct 12 '18 at 3:01
  • $\begingroup$ @Omnomnomnom I must admit I've never seen the convention you refer to as the usual convention. In my experience, the usual convention is this one. $\endgroup$ – Jens Oct 12 '18 at 17:23
  • $\begingroup$ @Omnomnomnom well I know that $wy+w\overline{y}=w$ so in this case $w=\overline{A}$ and $y=\overline{BC}$ and $\overline{y}=BC$ making what I did true unless I misunderstood the rule $\endgroup$ – AFC Oct 12 '18 at 17:27
0
$\begingroup$

Could you give an example where $F=0$? As I see it, the function $F$ does reduce to $F=1$ as shown below:

\begin{align} F & =\overline{ABC}+\overline{A}B+AB\overline{C}+AC \\ & = \overline{A}+ \overline{B}+ \overline{C}+\overline{A}B+AB\overline{C}+AC \\ & = (\overline{A}+\overline{A}B)+ \overline{B}+ (\overline{C}+AB\overline{C})+AC \\ & = \overline{A}+ \overline{B}+ \overline{C}+AC \\ &=(\overline{A}+ \overline{C})+\overline{(\overline{A}+ \overline{C})}+ \overline{B} \\ &=1+ \overline{B} \\ &=1 \end{align} The rules used are De Morgan, commutative, absorption, commutative and De Morgan, complementation and finally annihilator.

EDIT

If $\overline{ABC}$ means "Not(A) and Not(B) and Not(C)" (usually written as $\overline{A}\cdot \overline{B}\cdot \overline{C}$) the expression reduces to $$F=B + A\odot C$$ where $\odot$ is the Exclusive NOR.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Well I drew out the truth table for this question and in the case where $A=0$, $B=0$, and $C=1$ then we have $\overline{ABC}$ evaluate to 0, $\overline{A}B$ is also 0, $AB\overline{C}$ is also 0, and finally, $AC$ is also 0 making F zero, I'm not a hundred percent sure but this means that the simplified F can't be 1 since F can evaluate to 0 $\endgroup$ – AFC Oct 12 '18 at 17:31
  • $\begingroup$ When $A=0$, $B=0$ and $C=1$ then $\overline{ABC}=1$. $\endgroup$ – Jens Oct 12 '18 at 17:38
  • $\begingroup$ Are you sure about that? $\overline{ABC}$ is supposed to be Not(A) and Not(B) and Not(C), it is not NOT(ABC). When I punch in Not(A) and Not(B) and Not(C) into Wolfram alpha it tells me that the case of A=F, B=F, C=T results in F=F. $\endgroup$ – AFC Oct 12 '18 at 17:42
  • $\begingroup$ Where did you see that notation? How would you then show Not(A and B and C)? $\endgroup$ – Jens Oct 12 '18 at 17:45
  • $\begingroup$ I just messed up, I realized after that I was confusing everyone with my notation, sorry about that. Given that I have clarified my notation, does it make more sense now why I was asking if the simplified F was correct when I got 1 for it. $\endgroup$ – AFC Oct 12 '18 at 18:01

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.