Other thing I like to check are:
SCH:
the pins are correctly oriented (ie the hot spot is where you expect).
the pin hotspots are on 10 unit grid points to ease connections.
Be careful adding text - it doesn't rotate well.
PCB:
the holes sizes are correct.
the pad numbers match the SCH symbol pin numbers.
The length of the pin number should be 4 characters or less for P98 (not sure if this is
still a problem in P99SE or DXP).
Always run the error checker in the library editor to validate new symbols/parts.
Cheers,
Glen Campbell wrote:
Hello all,
I have several questions about the library part (both schematic symbol and
pcb footprint) approval process.
To review a new (or an existing) schematic symbol, things to check include:-
all pins
are included;
have the correct pin number and/or name;
have the correct electrical type;
the symbol makes sense, ie pins are grouped logically, and placed so that a
schematic will be as clear as possible;
library fields are filled in where applicable;
part fields have a distinct name (this helps when hiding/unhiding various
fields in a schematic. Can the hidden status be set individually in a
library part?);
description, default designator, footprint alternatives are filled in.
To review a new or existing footprint, things to check include:-
all pads are
present;
dimensionally correct (right size and position);
numbered/named correctly (in the correct order);
overlay is
placed correctly, not over pads;
practical line width, consistent with other footprint overlays;
Any corrections to this, or any to add?
When it comes to an actual review process, I would like to print (perhaps to
pdf) each separate library part with all attributes listed above. It seems
to me that printing in this way makes the review process open and accessible
at any time.
For schematic parts, I can print everything except the electrical properties
of the pins. How can I do that as well?
For footprints, I was hoping to be able to print a footprint with pad
number/name and dimensions, scaled to a reasonable size. I could make such a
document using Autocad or something, but I would like such a drawing to be
the symbol itself, or directly derived from it, preferably without manual
intervention.
Is there a better way to approach this? What do others do?
Glen
______________________________________________________
Thorlock International Ltd. http://www.thorlock.com
+61 8 9351 1200 (tel) +61 8 9351 9522 (fax)
-- Don Mayfield Anglo-Australian Observatory 167 Vimiera Rd Eastwood NSW 2122 Australia Ph. 61-2-9372-4836 Fax. 61-2-9372-4880
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:proteledaforum@;techservinc.com * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:ForumAdministrator@;TechServInc.com * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@;techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
