VituixCAD

^VituixCAD version 1.1 has predefined blocks. You were talking about this version.
VituixCAD version 2 has free form network supporting unconventional topologies, unlimited amount of components and drivers.

Yes, I figured, topic is getting pretty long
Since the start post is not being updated, I just sometimes miss a thing or two apparently, lol forgive my ignorance. :ashamed:

Well, I do have a question.
I was using the brand new schematic editor.
Two things,

1 - is it possible to use the wire automatically as soon as the user clicks on the nodes/wire in the schematic? (like most SPICE editors do)
2 - For some reason I don't seem to get my components numbered. Which makes it difficult to see which component is which in the power dissipation graph.

Oh and one last thing, the total system impedance doesn't work with active filters.
Sometimes I would like to combine active and passive filters in one design.
 
1 - is it possible to use the wire automatically as soon as the user clicks on the nodes/wire in the schematic? (like most SPICE editors do)

Maybe, but component selection canvas should be smaller in order to separate terminal clicking and body clicking. Wire selection would be much bigger problem.
Pressing of W key starts wiring. Should be quite easy for right-handed users.

2 - For some reason I don't seem to get my components numbered. Which makes it difficult to see which component is which in the power dissipation graph.

Version 2 does not have part numbering at all (Parts list has generated numbers). Power dissipation curves are identified with resistance value which could be difficult if you have multiple resistors with the same resistance.

Oh and one last thing, the total system impedance doesn't work with active filters.
Sometimes I would like to combine active and passive filters in one design.

Yes. This is fundamental problem with free form networks with one generator which plays also power amplifier. Workaround would be forcing users to add active buffer as output stage of each active "way" and associate buffer as power amp. Just like in LspCAD 6. This is not yet done because I'm not sure it is the best decision.
 
Maybe, but component selection canvas should be smaller in order to separate terminal clicking and body clicking. Wire selection would be much bigger problem.
Pressing of W key starts wiring. Should be quite easy for right-handed users.



Version 2 does not have part numbering at all (Parts list has generated numbers). Power dissipation curves are identified with resistance value which could be difficult if you have multiple resistors with the same resistance.



Yes. This is fundamental problem with free form networks with one generator which plays also power amplifier. Workaround would be forcing users to add active buffer as output stage of each active "way" and associate buffer as power amp. Just like in LspCAD 6. This is not yet done because I'm not sure it is the best decision.
Part numbering is a must have in a schematic anyway.
Otherwise it's going to be difficult to "talk about" a schematic with some text referring to the schematic.
If you work with nodes you need to have "part numbers" anyway, so I don't see the issue of plotting them next to the component?

About the impedance; (just thinking out loud)
- Why don't you build in a buffer in each active filter section?
- You know the filter response of each active section. So basically it's just a matter of subtracting that from the source.
- There is a lot to say for the fact that users need to actually add a power amplifier.

It makes the schematic a lot cleaner and easier to understand. Also it give the possibility to add the gain of an power amplifier.
Which can become handy in multi-way systems with different amplifiers.
Also adding the output resistance of the amplifier (think tube amps etc) is sometimes something to take into consideration.

You need to use the impedance anyway to plot a proper power dissipation graph for the amplifier.
It's no uncommon to use a some active highpass filter around 80-100Hz for a 2-way bookshelf system.
 
Part numbering is a must have in a schematic anyway.
Otherwise it's going to be difficult to "talk about" a schematic with some text referring to the schematic.
If you work with nodes you need to have "part numbers" anyway, so I don't see the issue of plotting them next to the component?

I don't like or need traditional part numbers though they help referring to schematic in some cases. They waste space in schematic without valuable information. Of course program has index number for each component, wire and ground symbol because parts are saved as a List (array) in the memory. That number is possible to show (and is shown in parameters table while creating library block).

- Why don't you build in a buffer in each active filter section?...

Buffer block as a power amplifier is good solution with clear connection to reality. Another option is probes/meters measuring load impedance and power. Both need some controlled manual action from user to give correct result. Forcing to individual active ways such as in version 1.1 is not an option with free form schematic.
 
I don't like or need traditional part numbers though they help referring to schematic in some cases. They waste space in schematic without valuable information. Of course program has index number for each component, wire and ground symbol because parts are saved as a List (array) in the memory. That number is possible to show (and is shown in parameters table while creating library block).
You're the first person I know with that opinion.
In my eyes these numbers are essential as they are a must have to refer in any schematic.
Also sharing a schematic with other people (community) and asking for advice or help is practically impossible.
"Yes, you need to change that resistor there above the third inductor from the right with the value 12 ohm"?
How is that gonna work.

As mentioned before, for the power dissipation it's also pretty undoable with more complex multi-way filter systems.

Well, let's make a compromise and make it as an option for the user to decide to switch on or off these numbers?
Everyone happy.
 
Version 1 has the option to display either part numbers or component values when printing the schematic - I used both options.

When reviewing a printed copy of a circuit I like to look at the component values, but when it came time to order the components I used a schematic printout with part numbers along with the parts list.

Hopefully this functionality can be restored in version 2 at some point.
 
Hopefully this functionality can be restored in version 2 at some point.

Part # without value is just pain... though it could be useful with commercial kits when designer doesn't want to reveal component values. Purchasing works with component type, value, unit and pcs. Seller does not need private part ID or #.

As mentioned earlier, value is essential information for purchasing, evaluation and discussion, and part # is not. Users should study other methods for indicating than classical part number. Not so difficult in 2018, imho.
 
Part # without value is just pain... though it could be useful with commercial kits when designer doesn't want to reveal component values. Purchasing works with component type, value, unit and pcs. Seller does not need private part ID or #.

As mentioned earlier, value is essential information for purchasing, evaluation and discussion, and part # is not. Users should study other methods for indicating than classical part number. Not so difficult in 2018, imho.
Sorry but your line of reasoning for not including part numbers on the schematic as an option really doesn't make any sense.

To be clear, when we are talking about "part numbers" we are not referring to manufacturers part numbers, (ordering codes) but internally generated part numbers, eg L1, L2, L3, eg unique identifiers within the schematic.

As b_force has already said, if you are publishing a circuit for discussion how else are you going to refer to components unambiguously if it is not possible to display part numbers on a schematic ?

As another example of why part numbers are useful is I used the internally generated part numbers (from V1) to reference parts so that I could create a spreadsheet of the precise parts I was going to order, including additional information like manufacturer name and part number, resistor wattage, series resistance of coils, physical dimensions of coils, weight of coils/capacitors, cost etc. See screenshot for a small snippet of that spreadsheet.

The part numbers give me an unambiguous reference between the schematic and my spreadsheet entries. Without part numbers on the schematic I would have just printed it out and written them on by hand anyway.

It seems silly to still have a parts list function that lists part number against component value, but not also be able to print or display a schematic with part numbers to go along with the list, especially when V1 could do it.

You seem to be thinking very narrowly about the usefulness of part numbers. They might not seem useful to you but they are to others.
 

Attachments

  • parts-list.png
    parts-list.png
    51.7 KB · Views: 226
...for discussion how else are you going to refer to components unambiguously if it is not possible to display part numbers on a schematic ?

For example with snapshot if you have multiple components with equal value. This is probably one of the easiest challenges in discussion at international forum.
One perception in practice: it is quite rare that VituixCAD user asks comments about component values. He has - or at least should have comprehensive measurement data, Optimizer and all views to graphs available. Whole project data (vxp + measurements) is usually needed for constructive proposals.

You seem to be thinking very narrowly about the usefulness of part numbers.

Thanks! Have you checked Parts list view of version 2. Few columns more and you have complete shopping list with part numbers ;)

P.S. I'm working on part numbers. Meanwhile do not exaggerate problems, please.
 
Last edited:
Rev 2.0.3.12 (2018-07-21)

* Automatic part numbering added for passive (LCR) and active (U) components. Part number is shown in crossover schematic by checking View->Part #.
* Part # added to curve tooltips of resistors and inductors in Power dissipation window.
* Pmax added to curve tooltip of resistors in Power dissipation window.
* Part # of passive and active components saved to project file (.vxp) and library blocks (.vxl).
* Type and Nbr columns replaced with Part # column in Library block parameter window. Part # created if not found in existing/old library block file. Part # forced to show in schematic while creating new library block.
* OP amps. added to Parts list.

Active buffers will be associated with power amps later to restore impedance and output power responses for each "way" as they are in version 1.1.
 
For example with snapshot if you have multiple components with equal value. This is probably one of the easiest challenges in discussion at international forum.
One perception in practice: it is quite rare that VituixCAD user asks comments about component values. He has - or at least should have comprehensive measurement data, Optimizer and all views to graphs available. Whole project data (vxp + measurements) is usually needed for constructive proposals.



Thanks! Have you checked Parts list view of version 2. Few columns more and you have complete shopping list with part numbers ;)

P.S. I'm working on part numbers. Meanwhile do not exaggerate problems, please.
Well, it's just part of any standard schematic.
It's just a little odd to leave an essential default part out of it.
So I don't think it is strange that people get a little emotional about something that is so trivial to have.
Absolutely no disrespect btw,

I personally also don't really understand the whole issue here, it's not much of an hassle to add it.
I am also missing some additional parameter text fields, like power.
In some 3-way design I sometimes have 3 different types of resistors so it is also very nice to see that in the schematic right away.

Best compromise there is just make one or two extra textfields available.

Btw, would it also be possible to add the excursion graph to the main window?
At this moment I can't add any additional (active) filters to the box calculator.
While this is actually a very important part of finding the right enclosure, parameters and optimizing the design for a certain power/excursion limit and what not.
 
Last edited:
I personally also don't really understand the whole issue here, it's not much of an hassle to add it.

Main reason why I finally added part numbers is need for better reference while creating new library blocks. As you can see, I've managed to create all library blocks without part numbers. Secondary reason was power dissipation graph which is faster to link with part numbers if equal values exist. Not impossible or very slow in practice. No other reasons (sorry about repeat): never needed part numbers for designing or purchasing. But I really understand why this kind of traditions could be quite difficult to forget.

...like power.

Power would be easy to show because it is existing parameter with relative location. Just activation of Visible-bit.

Btw, would it also be possible to add the excursion graph to the main window?
At this moment I can't add any additional (active) filters to the box calculator.

You can link filter transfer function of currently selected driver to Enclosure tool by checking "Crossover of current driver" (in Align tab @ Enclosure tool). This works but it's not convenient in version 2 because you have to re-select the driver after crossover changes. Version 1.1 is better in this because driver selection is stable/maintained. Enclosure tool of version 2 would need list box for drivers (see Optimizer window).

Main program wont be able to show X because it is using far field measurement data which does not always/usually correlate with X. Sd parameter of driver would not help much because all systems are not closed 4pi
 
[….]But I really understand why this kind of traditions could be quite difficult to forget.[…]

Hmmm, I'm always open to new procedures and tools, also dismissing traditions, but I too have a hard time to understand you.

How do you create say a schematic or a drawing with 1000 parts without the use of an unambiguous part number system, creating a 1:1 relation between bill of material and drawing / schematic? Any producing company somehow needs a numbering system for different parts.

Or am I somehow misunderstanding this discussion?
 
Hmmm, I'm always open to new procedures and tools, also dismissing traditions, but I too have a hard time to understand you.

How do you create say a schematic or a drawing with 1000 parts without the use of an unambiguous part number system, creating a 1:1 relation between bill of material and drawing / schematic? Any producing company somehow needs a numbering system for different parts.

Or am I somehow misunderstanding this discussion?
My guess is that he mainly talks about loudspeaker filter schematics, which only have an handful of components.
Still, it wouldn't work for more complex multi-way filter schematics, with similar parts, different power-ratings etc etc or when people would like to share their schematic with the community (for whatever reason) or in a tutorial/circuit desciption or something.

I personally don't understand the whole issue about something so small that apparently is important for a lot of people.
Even if it wasn't needed at all, I also fail to see how a small bit of extra text is screwing your schematic so significantly?
It's to small to be bothered about, yet it gives advances in many other situations.
It even makes the programming a lot easier.

So in the end that doesn't have anything to do with "a tradition".
It's just very handy to have.

@ kimmosto
My main question was that I don't see a reason why the user can't add or remove any kind of graph in the main window?
Not only can you keep an eye on several essential parts in designing your loudspeaker (power and excursion for example), but also gives you a very good overview of everything, instead of going into different menu's/sections back and forth all the time (which really works counter intuitive)
For some graphs you can even decide to maybe add multiple things (although more than three can be a little busy)
 
Last edited:
Just another Moderator
Joined 2003
Paid Member
I also don't worry so much about part numbers when I'm designing a crossover. I often forget to put them in if I am using speaker workshop...

The one time I do make sure I put them in though is when I am sharing a schematic for a crossover, for the reason mentioned by someone else earlier. It makes discussion of the crossover easier for anyone who wants to question or make suggestions. For example someone might ask what does C1, R1, L1 do (where that may have been a parallel notch).

Tony.
 
How do you create say a schematic or a drawing with 1000 parts without the use of an unambiguous part number system...

As b_force wrote, (passive) project has usually only handful of components. Values are typically different, but in uncertain cases identifying of individuals with equal value can be done by modifying value temporarily. For example resistor with some power issue can be found in seconds.
My latest 4-way design has 21 passive components. Values of all resistors and coils are different -> no problem to identify in Power window.

Of course you could have hundreds of components in active filter with operational amplifiers. Those projects can be simulated with VituixCAD without part numbers - no problem, but it is not recommended tool to design whole schematic and import to PCB layout tool for manufacturing files because simulation would not include power supplies, connectors, supply voltage caps and probably also RF filtering caps in OP feedback. You better select some other software such as DipTrace or Eagle. Those tools create complete lists with part numbers, and labels can be printed on PCB if you like to work with parts list and numbers or totally hide components values from PCB silk layers.

Anyway, I suggest we move forward because part numbers are there for everyone who needs them.
 
Last edited:
Hi Kimmo, Is there a chance to add an Emulator option like in LspCAD?

I guess that performance of integrated convolver (with .NET engine) would not be adequate. Emulator might be possible with some external library or dll, but I've not investigated that possibility. VituixCAD has been able to export IR for each way to convolver software and plugin since ver 1.1.0.1 (2017-01-23), but working is quite far from real-time. See Impulse response window.

Personally I don't need or haven't use emulator though I have also LspCAD 6 Pro. Need for listening and tuning is minimal or not needed at all with comprehensive measurements (0-180 deg) and "quasi 3D" simulation in two planes, producing off-axis responses, power response and DI response. Different topology scenarios etc. cannot be compared, but overall balance is typically final or very close requiring tuning of single component.
 
Last edited: