RE: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
Thanks for your reply on this. I think I'll give them a ping. Jim From: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of apluscw Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 7:08 AM To: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com Subject: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field I'm really trying to hunt up someone interested, qualified, willing and local to support our engineers in ORCAD and PADS. Seems to be a scarcity for some reason, at least a short distance from Portland, Oregon. Jim I can't tell you of anyone local, but I have worked with a good company in Appleton, WI that in all other respects fits your description. The work they did for us was in Orcad and the board layout was in PADS. They are SMT Engineering - www.teamsmt.com Note that I have not contacted them recently, so if you do contact them it is a cold call. Regards, apluscw
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
apluscw wrote: Regarding KiCad, on more than one occasion I have questioned whether we made the right decision going with KiCad. We were burdened by the fact that we needed 3 seats and none of the professional packages were economically viable at that time. While I still have reservations, now that I am making a point to create every component in my own library before using things are flowing much, much better. There are still some bugs/features/strange behaviors that bother us, but it looks like it will be OK for schematic capture. Board layout, however, is a different matter. While we did an initial evaluation, it is still unproven in our eyes. If we outsourced the layout to someone who could do it in KiCad, then we would forever be able to tweak it if need be. I second what has been said above, by your description it looks like a long shot for KiCAD, people who specilise in that kind of work use EDA packages that can calculate noise/emissions etc. Price is not what you should be looking at when choosing EDA tools for work. That might sound odd coming from someone like me who looked at KiCAD when faced with a $1500 dollar bill for upgrading my commercial package to go over 700 pins. But my boards are much simpler, they are 2 layer and just have lots of interface stuff (connecters, fuseholders, relays etc that are modified to customer requirements. I miffed a bit at paying for a package that included spice emulation and upto 6 layers or whatever that I just did not need. In my line of work a more complicated package could slow me down rather than speed me up! I did however look at other low cost simple packages, to see if they better suited my needs, and KiCAD does compare favourably. The fact that it is OSS is a great bonus. I understand your analysis and do not necessarily disagree. Penny wise, dollar foolish. I do not like making the following statement in a public arena, but the only way to put things in the proper perspective is to know we were not making payroll. [#-o] Not unheard of for a small high tech company, but none the less very painful. Thankfully, things have improved. [:)] Schematic capture is OK as long as you maintain your own parts library in a manner that suits you. Since we are building up our library, work is starting to progress much more quickly. My biggest complaint in terms of functionality at the moment is that it can be very difficult sometimes to select a component. It keeps popping up the menu you get when you click on a blank space. Sometimes it is almost impossible to select a component or text. Maybe that has been addressed in RC2? We have a meeting today and I plan on discussing our board layout plans. I suspect we will outsource our main board and do the daughterboard ourselves with KiCad. My biggest reservation with outsourcing is the inevitable need to tweak the board later and being forced to rely on an outside party. If someone would do the board layout in a KiCad, FreePCB or another package that we might purchase at a reasonable price, then that would be ideal. We are not done with the design, but just checked and we are currently at about 300 components. Perhaps there are some pro packages that fall below that 700 part count one might recommend? We do have some experience with the freeware version of Eagle. Our tech worked with it some and really liked it. Regarding being OSS, it is a mixed blessing. In an active community you can get great support. On the other hand, developers work on a volunteer basis and may or may not be responsive to feedback. I have not been on the forum long enough to know who the main players are. Have people had good luck making suggestions and getting good responses? Thanks all for the feedback. apluscw
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
HI ALL well KiCad will do the capture and the layout even ;) i am trying ot implement in on my work and sofar no major problems or bugs it is very very friendly and has all the basic and some advansed options that would a CAD package need i am not a Pro yet(still not an experienced) but think that Kicad is much better than some comersial CAD systems please correct me if wrong i work in Bulgaria and here the electronics is a few years in the past but i think that if u dont make anything very very spesial Kicad will do ;) what is the board complexity u work on (number of pins ,layers ,clockspeed )? send the netlist and .mod files thow i am not experienced enought yet i am a wolf in sheepskin ;) question is it more complex than the videoboard example in Kicad? will be glad to help u ;) Ironically, I have been in contact with Olimex in Bulgaria. I have a friend that works at another company and he had good experience with them. apluscw
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
HI ALL well KiCad will do the capture and the layout even ;) i am trying ot implement in on my work and sofar no major problems or bugs it is very very friendly and has all the basic and some advansed options that would a CAD package need i am not a Pro yet(still not an experienced) but think that Kicad is much better than some comersial CAD systems please correct me if wrong i work in Bulgaria and here the electronics is a few years in the past but i think that if u dont make anything very very spesial Kicad will do ;) what is the board complexity u work on (number of pins ,layers ,clockspeed )? send the netlist and .mod files thow i am not experienced enought yet i am a wolf in sheepskin ;) question is it more complex than the videoboard example in Kicad? will be glad to help u ;) I finally took a look at the video card. We will have far more components and the board will be much larger, but our components will not be so fine pitched.
RE: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
Hi Gents, The circuitry is rather simple. It's a low density board but has some pretty specific requirements regarding the magnetic output. Talk about a neophyte? If it's listed in the dictionary, it's my picture beside the word. So I don't know too much more than what I've already said. I'm really trying to hunt up someone interested, qualified, willing and local to support our engineers in ORCAD and PADS. Seems to be a scarcity for some reason, at least a short distance from Portland, Oregon. Still, hope springs eternal. If anyone is interested or knows someone who is, check out www.insitu.com. The web site shows what we do, where we are, etc. If anyone likes to ski, snowboard, windsurf, etc., this is the place to be. Jim From: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hristo Antonov Sent: Tuesday, January 16, 2007 2:59 AM To: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field what is the board complexity u work on (number of pins ,layers ,clockspeed )? send the netlist and .mod files thow i am not experienced enought yet i am a wolf in sheepskin ;) question is it more complex than the videoboard example in Kicad? will be glad to help u ;)
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
apluscw wrote: Regarding KiCad, on more than one occasion I have questioned whether we made the right decision going with KiCad. We were burdened by the fact that we needed 3 seats and none of the professional packages were economically viable at that time. While I still have reservations, now that I am making a point to create every component in my own library before using things are flowing much, much better. There are still some bugs/features/strange behaviors that bother us, but it looks like it will be OK for schematic capture. Board layout, however, is a different matter. While we did an initial evaluation, it is still unproven in our eyes. If we outsourced the layout to someone who could do it in KiCad, then we would forever be able to tweak it if need be. I second what has been said above, by your description it looks like a long shot for KiCAD, people who specilise in that kind of work use EDA packages that can calculate noise/emissions etc. Price is not what you should be looking at when chossing EDA tools for work. That might sound odd coming from someone like me who looked at KiCAD when faced with a $1500 dollar bill for upgrading my commercial package to go over 700 pins. But my boards are much simpler, they are 2 layer and just have lots of interface stuff (connecters, fuseholders, relays etc that are modified to customer requirements. I miffed a bit at paying for a package that included spice emulation and upto 6 layers or whatever that I just did not need. In my line of work a more complicated package could slow me down rather than speed me up! I did however look at other low cost simple packages, to see if they better suited my needs, and KiCAD does compare favourably. The fact that it is OSS is a great bonus.
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
--- In kicad-users@yahoogroups.com, Andy Ehlers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have been involved in a many contracts from long distance and except for 1 or 2 they have been a nightmare for both parties. (time deference's, design changes, communication snafu's etc) Although I understand outsourcing is a good thing from a budgetary standpoint from a functional standpoint they can be difficult at best and when the final tally is done sometimes are actually more expensive. Since Kicad is not a widely used commercial product yet. Your requirement of having the layout in Kicad may not be possible while requiring a professional and experienced layout person. This is not to say that my fellow Kicad users are not professionals and good at what they do. Just that they probably don't use Kicad professionally. I have been designing boards out here in San Jose for about 20 years both as a contractor and employee and although I would love to do a board for you I would not be doing it as a priority. This is because I use the Mentor Graphics Expedition tool set professionally and Kicad at home for smaller quick turn circuitry (hobby, test fixturing for work, and smaller interface circuitry that does not require full blown documentation and DRC/EMI analysis). Therefore I would doing it while watching the Sharks on TV at night or on weekends between the kids soccer games. Which obviously is not what you want or need. I am probably not the only one thinking this, which may be why you have received no response. If this is for a commercial product, I hate to write this, but, Kicad may not be ready for you. This is not to say that Kicad can't do it, just your variables and Kicad may not be a good match at this time. Just an opinion. AndyE San Jose,Ca Thanks for the feedback and your honesty. I agree that it is a long shot. Regarding KiCad, on more than one occasion I have questioned whether we made the right decision going with KiCad. We were burdened by the fact that we needed 3 seats and none of the professional packages were economically viable at that time. While I still have reservations, now that I am making a point to create every component in my own library before using things are flowing much, much better. There are still some bugs/features/strange behaviors that bother us, but it looks like it will be OK for schematic capture. Board layout, however, is a different matter. While we did an initial evaluation, it is still unproven in our eyes. If we outsourced the layout to someone who could do it in KiCad, then we would forever be able to tweak it if need be. Regards, apluscw
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
apluscw wrote: A) Relatively large. B) Mostly SMT with some throughhole. I would guess 6 layer board, at least a 4 layer. Analog and digital. Several voltage supplies. Several connectors. C) Ohio Valley region of US Good Luck! It will be interesting to see if you find an experienced layouter prepared to undertake the task with KiCAD.
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
--- In kicad-users@yahoogroups.com, Roger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: apluscw wrote: 3. We are debating using KiCAD for board layout vs. outsourcing. What about open source outsourcing, that is, getting somebody to do your layout in pcbnew so you can later mod the board yourself , i.e. you do not lose control. It is a big part of what OSS is all about ;-) Agreed. Do you have anyone you would recommend? I have been in a situation before where someone else made board changes and I later wanted to make changes and was literally forced to edit the gerber files as raw artwork and hand edit drill files to makes changes. It was quite ugly. There was not way to take their project files in their board layout package and import them into our tools. As a rule, exchanging schematic capture is much easier to do than board layout files.
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
apluscw wrote: --- In kicad-users@yahoogroups.com, Roger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: apluscw wrote: 3. We are debating using KiCAD for board layout vs. outsourcing. What about open source outsourcing, that is, getting somebody to do your layout in pcbnew so you can later mod the board yourself , i.e. you do not lose control. It is a big part of what OSS is all about ;-) Agreed. Do you have anyone you would recommend? Me:- Of course much depends on: A) Size of project B) Board Technology C) Your location.
Re: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
apluscw wrote: 3. We are debating using KiCAD for board layout vs. outsourcing. What about open source outsourcing, that is, getting somebody to do your layout in pcbnew so you can later mod the board yourself , i.e. you do not lose control. It is a big part of what OSS is all about ;-)
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
--- In kicad-users@yahoogroups.com, roger_irwin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The problem is a) in the guidelines and b) in the use. There are 2 ways at looking at how libraries should be: *** Mode A) Libraries should be standard and centralized such that we can link designs to components in libraries and accept the component form as it is. Mode B) Libraries should be bazzar where you fish around for components to place into the private library which holds all the components of your design. * I agree with Roger regarding mode A and mode B use of libraries. I'm not an electronics engineer myself, but I have come to understand that building and maintaining a library, for personal use or in an organization is a big issue. My impression though is that the size of the issue is strongly dependent on the ease of use of the library management tools. I guess part of this reasoning is consistent with the fact that so many users on this group request library conversion tools from other EDA suites. Could it also be so that providing a good component library with an EDA tool is an important sales proposition for the commercial tools? Am I a genius? I think so, but I bet the next post is going to point out a wapping big hole in my reasoning :-))) No, I see no holes in your reasoning! I just want to stress that ease of use is going to be the most important success factor for being able to provide a competitive library with Kicad. I think most of us envision the Kicad component library as a collaborative library which is ever growing, and evolving, and which facilitates several schematic symbol styles, pad layout guidelines, etc. I agree that Kicad needs an Internet enabled library editor/browser/manager, were users can browse trusted (or experimental) component library feeds, easily copy components to their own private libraries if they are mode B users, and publish their own work. One problem (which may have a solution already) is coping with the fact that once libraries are distributed across the Internet and start evolving, components will be added, removed and modified inside existing libraries at an increased rate. With revision control (subversion, CVS, etc) this can be dealt with by locking a project to a specific revision of each library used, but that could also make a cumbersome situation if a new component which is useful in that project shows up in a newer version of a library. Mode B users will not suffer from this since they hold private copies from any version of any library. In fact I cannot come up with a single solution for mode A users that does not happen to be the equivalent of becoming a mode B user. My imagination sets the limit here. Perhaps someone else on the group is more imaginative than I? :-) Additional requirements for a library editor/browser/manager for Kicad: * Internet enabled (e.g. enter library pathnames as URL:s) - Libraries imported from the Internet read-only * Support for publishing libraries on the Internet - Must have: Single user publishing on a single URL - Nice to have: Multiple users publishing on a single URL * Built in revision control - Revision optionally included in library URL:s for browsable libraries - Revision control for published libraries - Nice to have: merge revisions (when more than one user publishing on an URL) * Copy components (symbols, footprints and 3D) between libraries - Nice to have: Keep track of copy source * Nice to have: Announcements of new versions of used libraries * Nice to have: Links! Option to link to a component in another library rather than copying it. - Optional link de-referencing for published libraries I think that just about captures what is needed from a user's point of view. The back-end implementation could be e.g. a Subversion repository (one or several), but that is secondary to defining a good set of functionality. Comment about links: I think links could be a powerful feature, but one should beware! Powerful features share a common property that they are easily used inappropriately. What I had in mind was to be able to maintain a published library which contains links to current versions of private libraries. A user may then maintain a set of private libraries and automatically publish current versions of selected parts from several private libraries with a single click. Nice to have, but we might well do without! Regards, Erik Sundkvist
Re: [kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
In some respect the use of the libraries reflect the type of work the user does. Hobbyists, hams, reaserchers and experimenters need to get boards up quickly and they will probably make a few examples and move on. They tend to be mode A users. People who design boards in industry tend to be working with a much more restricted range of boards and list of components. Few companies develop microwave repeaters one day and industrial ovens the next, you just keep producing variations on a theme or new enhanced versions of the old stuff. Mode B makes sense because your designs, while restricted in scope, will be highly optimised. That is way I feel strongle that a solution should support both modes. Libraries which are carefully and strictly maintained, and where components do not change except to correct errors or add detail (even the latter could be risky if components are not cached) suit Mode A users. But the technique should also support individual users just posting thier components into personal libraies which can captured as a one-off and reused. As for commercial companies, more than making it a selling issue thay seem to make it a licensing issue. By making component libraries on-line than users are continually linking to it. It is easy to get your hands on a cracked copy of Orcad or whatever, but as soon as you link to the online libraries they know about it. They do a similar technique with the backend programs they supply free to PCB houses. I feel that libraries are very important, but the most important thing is that you can find a component drawn the way you like it rather than rigidly standardised designs, but then I am strictly a Mode B user! Many potential users of KiCAD fall into the Mode A category. Both needs must be met. I am doing my first design with KiCAD and I have spent far more time building up my personal library than I will spend laying out the board, but as my designs use mostly the same components, this is a one off issue for me. But like I said, a multi project CVS server like sourceforge could cope with such requirements. A project for each library and each library could have it's own style. Any user could open thier personal library project for just sharing thier components in an ad hoc fashion, or users could make joint efforts on standard libraries. As for the stuff about actually using source forge, linked browsers, etc etc, perhaps I was exagerating! At the end of the day compnents are small by modern bandwith standards, I don't suppose it would be difficult for KiCAD to have it's own server.
[kicad-users] Re: Default field allocations in component properties - let's define those field
--- In kicad-users@yahoogroups.com, Magnus Beischer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Roger wrote: What we do need is the internet enabled library editor and the unlimited field list with a grid list on the component properties page. Thoughts anybody? Why not set up a subversion repository (or cvs) for shared libraries so we all can easily contribute to the libraries. It would need som basic guidlines for naming components etc. but it could be done... // Magnus The problem is a) in the guidelines and b) in the use. There are 2 ways at looking at how libraries should be: *** Mode A) Libraries should be standard and centralized such that we can link designs to components in libraries and accept the component form as it is. Mode B) Libraries should be bazzar where you fish around for components to place into the private library which holds all the components of your design. * Personally I favour Mode B, but I so no reason why people should not choose Mode A) if they wish. In this respect CVS is inflexible, it is only really appropriate for Mode A), it requires carefull administration and access rights. On the one hand you do not want to risk having the libraries mixed up by an enthusiastic but inexpert newbie, on the other hand you do not want to exclude the valid contributions from users who do not post regularly bu happen to have a perfectly valid 500 pin BGA component or a some brilliant 3D modules of LCD displays. But what I proposed addresses both modes. It is only necessary to standardise a way of presenting components on web pages and allowing the library editor to browse and fish these components using a list of sites given by the user. Casual Mode B users such as myself can fish around for components and publish parts we have designed on our own free hompages. No access problems as each only updates his own website and the library editor only needs ftp info and component root directory for our own server in order to allow us to publish our components directly. On the other hand, if a group of Mode A) users decide they want to maintain a common standard library for a family of parts then they set up thier CVS server which they use for updating, and put some PHP or Perl script of something to present the component data in the standard way. Plan B** Writing this, I have also thought of a third way. Just suppose that the CVS server was a multi-project server, kind of like source forge. Individual users could have thier own sites, like a project with a home page where they also describe thier libraries and thier key/value pairs, whilst other 'projects' could host Mode A) users, where registered users collaborate on maintaining a controlled standard library which can be relied upon. One mechanism fit's all! That would make things easier for the library editor, it need only worry about linking to CVS, which is well documented and libraries allready exist for pulling and poking data. The problem would be setting up and maintaining the server. Hosting should not be much of a problem as the quantity of data involved is peanuts by modern standards. Perhaps it could be hosted on sourceforge? If they had a category for EDA files the rest of the mechanism could be used as-is. Source forge rely on targetted advertising, no shortage of that for electronics designers. If people used thier sourceforge project homepage for describing the library then the library editor could have a built in browser (and page editor) that automatically brings up the homepage for a selected component if desired (browser et al allready exist as wxWidgets). That way sourceforge get thier targetted advertising straight onto designers workspaces and we get a library server for free! Am I a genius? I think so, but I bet the next post is going to point out a wapping big hole in my reasoning :-))) Saluti, Roger.
