I work at a startup of 5 people and we used to fly by the seat of our pants
for everything but that gets really messy very quickly.

I saw a nice system that one of our contractors uses and I am trying to use
it myself.  We use Protell 99SE in conjunction with a program called
Parts&Vendors.  All parts receive their own part number (CPM, Company Part
Number) assigned by Parts&Vendors.  I don't group part numbers with similar
parts; it gets too difficult to do so down the road.  I make a part in the
schematic library for all parts and store the CPM in the description field
along with information like voltage, power etc... I don't make a separate
part for small items like resistors even though they do receive a CPM.
When I place a part I copy the CPM from the description field into a user
defined "Part Field" and show "Hidden Fields".  I have to delete all of the
silly * symbols that Protell 99SE automatically puts everywhere but then
voila, a part with a company part number, a matching footprint and I can
make a BOM from the schematic which ties into my Parts&Vendors relational
database for purchasing.  Parts are even organized in boxes according to the
CPM so it is really nice.  This isn't fully implemented yet but I'll get
there.

I haven't figured out if it is best to have a separate "resistor" or
"capacitor" library, which is your question.  I am trying that though to see
if it speeds everything up.  There is value in being able to scroll through
a resistor library and select 1K_0805 or 1K_1206 and have the CPM already
there.  For small parts with so many options it is necessary to have a
separate library though.  Each separate resistor value with a certain
footprint with a certain wattage receives a new CPM and a new part symbol.
You can have the same part from different vendors but if you can't swap out
the part on the PCB with another part then the two parts require different
CPM's.

To tell you the truth I am really a programmer and I love this system
because it reminds me of object oriented programming where I can reuse code
but in this case I reuse parts.  When used to fly by the seat of my pants I
felt like I was reinventing the wheel every time I started a new design.
Now I can draw from past efforts and past projects very easily.

If anyone has a better system I would love to hear about it.

By the way, does anyone know where to buy good part boxes.  I go to
http://www.uline.com/Browse_Listing_302.asp but I hate having a minimum
order of 100 boxes when I want to get several sizes of boxes.

Trent


-----Original Message-----
From: John A. Ross [Design] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 7:26 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] company schematic libraries

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Wilson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 2:41 AM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] company schematic libraries
>
> Snip <
> I call this the "one-part, one-symbol system".
>
> It sounds like work but it is not hard to manage - unless you
> have overblown restrictive part number management systems
> that means it takes 2 week to get a new part number issued.

Ian

Sometimes when the responsibilities of spec, draft, design, purchasing &
availability and worse customer approval/sign off, manufacturing et all,
are handled by different people at split sites, a common part number
system is the only way to do it for the required paper trail.

If managed properly, it actually works better for multi user
environments or split sites and helps reduce error (auto generate
barcode checks for pick lists & reels, purchase ....).

Of course the whole system is a lot easier when managed by one person,
one part, one symbol i.e. overall responsibility at one desk.

I guess this might be straying a bit as it is more a procedures issue
than library management, but is worth considering when planning a
library structure.

I wish I still had the luxury of being able to do everything myself, I
really do, but over-complex systems are just things some of us
'unfortunates' have to live with :-(

John





* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
*
* Contact the list manager:
* mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
*
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
*
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to