Ok. I suppose that using small circuit blocks is fine to built boards without having an electrical schematic, because I do not see how you may use board blocks with a net list?
I suppose to that this way do not allow pads to be very close together. Thank you, Jean-Paul **************** Jean-Paul Gendner 03.88.27.03.44 _____ De : kicad-users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:kicad-us...@yahoogroups.com] De la part de Andy Eskelson Envoyé : mardi 26 janvier 2010 14:41 À : kicad-users@yahoogroups.com Objet : Re: [kicad-users] Problem description Yes I mentioned the same thing a few messages up the thread. Either that or a system that allowed circuit blocks to be created. Currently I have a couple of small circuit blocks that I keep on a separate board layout, and when I want to use them I import that board into the board I am working on, and then block copy the part of the circuit I want. This works but can get a bit messy. Andy On Tue, 26 Jan 2010 12:14:00 +0100 "Jean-Paul Gendner" <jean-paul.gendner@ <mailto:jean-paul.gendner%40orange.fr> orange.fr> wrote: > What would be easier would be the ability to draw custom pad shapes with > multiple drill points. That way there would only be one pad number to > worry about. > > > > The dream for me is to have the possibility with the module > editor to add tracks (as in the board editor) AND dummy pads. I mean pads > which are treated as tracks not as numbered pads. > > > Regards, > > Jean-Paul > > > > **************** > > Jean-Paul Gendner > > 03.88.27.03.44 > > _____ > > De : kicad-users@ <mailto:kicad-users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com [mailto:kicad-users@ <mailto:kicad-users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] De la > part de Andy Eskelson > Envoyé : lundi 25 janvier 2010 16:37 > À : kicad-users@ <mailto:kicad-users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com > Objet : Re: [kicad-users] Problem description > > > > > > > > People working with components from the scrap are fairly used to mount the > components they have, and not they want. :-) > > To hell what shape a Capacitor has. He has to match capacitance, voltage, > ESR......so its nice to have layouts which would accept more > than one > shape of component. > > I agree, my junk box is the same as everyone elses :-) However Kicad was > not designed as that sort of program. So we have to workaround things as > best we can. There is a lot of development going on with Kicad, so lots > of improvements are being worked on. The next beta release looks like it > will be fairly soon, but if not you can play wit the nightly builds if you > want to. As kicad develops I would expect that there will be some easier > methods to add multiple pads developed. > > There was some discussion several months ago regarding some components > that have more than one power pin, This was a solution to some noise > issues I think by the component manaf. however two power pins caused > quite a but of confusion. So at least that sort of problem has been > flagged up. I don't know if there is any solution to this so far as I've > not been taking the nightly builds. If anything has been done then that > might help. > > > Of course. This would eliminate some other similar Problems ocouring with > components which have more than one pad per connection. Worst i actual have > is a screw terminal with ten pads in two rows, all the same > connection.......:-) > > That should not be an issue really, give each terminal pad it's own number > and also create a connector part with a matching number system, then > connections you make on the circuit diagram will be reflected onto the > module, including any multiple connections. > > I have some terminal blocks that already have one side parallel > connected, with the other side for wires. i.e. it forms a bus-bar type > connection. Each pad is numbered differently and on the circuit I just > make sure I parallel connect all the pins, that keeps everything happy. > > > An other point would be a TO-92 footprint wich allows stright and molded > Types. I saw it so often, but seldom you get a layout program, which allows > this...... > > That's more difficult - you can end up with clearance issues and it can > make track routing a bit awkward. > > I tried that some time ago and in the end I decided it was easier to > simply have two footprints. :-) > > > > I am thinking, more than one pad per connection would create an logical > problem for DRC. Perhaps there would be a way to let the DRC recognizing a > (well declarated) group of pads as one pad? > > What would be easier would be the ability to draw custom pad shapes with > multiple drill points. That way there would only be one pad number to > worry about. > > Andy > > >
