Am I allowed to group column 010 with 110
And colum 001 with 101

Yes. You can group boxes when only one variable changes. In the first proposed grouping, only C changes. The second case is the same, only C changes.

If you're uncertain, you should leave them separate. The logic won't be minimized, but it will still work.

 

So close now. Almost had it
Got 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,11,12

What count does it go to after 12? Pause the counter at 12 to debug logic.

When I wire counter circuits, I label each implicant for ease in debugging. I usually make several errors (transcribing or wiring) in a counter of this complexity.

This is from the up/down version of your counter:

 

And at last I finally have it working
Thank you so much for your help

Glad it's working.

If you don't normally use the style of Kmap I use, you should use what you're being taught. That will make it easier for your instructors and classmates to help you.

Apparently the format I use is now considered "old" and the overlay format is being taught. I use what I was taught, 4 decades ago; it still works and I'd probably use it for more than 6 variables because it's more natural for me.

 

Glad it's working.

If you don't normally use the style of Kmap I use, you should use what you're being taught. That will make it easier for your instructors and classmates to help you.

Apparently the format I use is now considered "old" and the overlay format is being taught. I use what I was taught, 4 decades ago; it still works and I'd probably use it for more than 6 variables because it's more natural for me.

I was never taught that style of karnaugh map before. Always used a 4 variables kmap
But I think I prefer your way just need to get the hang of the mirroring thing
Gunna attempt the same circuit with JK flip flop in the next few days. Wish me all the best

 

But I think I prefer your way just need to get the hang of the mirroring thing

Just remember to look for mirroring. Your DE expression could be simplified by making the grouping of 8 in green:

 

Just remember to look for mirroring. Your DE expression could be simplified by making the grouping of 8 in green:
View attachment 120687

Hi there, sorry to bother you again. But I have a question regarding my design
Say I got a count on my waveform that isn't in the sequence. I would want to reset the count so it can count the Correct sequence
Would it possible to automatically set reset to high instead of doing it manually and then count the real sequence that I need

Thank you
Saidur

 

Say I got a count on my waveform that isn't in the sequence. I would want to reset the count so it can count the Correct sequence
Would it possible to automatically set reset to high instead of doing it manually and then count the real sequence that I need

When I simulated that counter, I never had a case where it counted to an invalid number.

Can you post your truth table, your schematic, and the invalid count causing a problem?

You can force the counter to count out of invalid states by changing to don't care rows to force a valid count on the next clock; but that makes the logic more complex.