No disagreement! A good EDA suite should support exactly what you describe. Some suites will be more opinionated about the workflow, in which case it may not be a good fit with your organization. But if you are an independent DIYer, you have a lot of flexibility in choosing your workflow.
My comment was directed mainly at the newish user who just wants to drop a few footprints down and connect them with traces. Then maybe go back and add a couple new parts and add traces, etc. Don't do that. Follow the flow. 🙂
P.S. I've got a bunch of poorly recorded videos from a presentation I made a few years ago about the subject at https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL4E9E905D6FDF5F1C .
I went through this whole "what software to use" mallarky when starting my PCB designs.
Issues I cam across (being a total newbie on the subject) was that "good" software was free, flexible, easy-to-use, "open" output format (GERBER), and I could only pick two of those four! 😀
After some playing around with designspark, finding it somewhat heavy for relatively simply designs (yes, parts library the integration with RS is very handy), I opted for Zenitpcb. Made by an Italian white goods engineer!
Went with his as it was:
- light on the install
- free (limited to 800 pins IIRC)
- supports dual layer (top and bottom)
- supports features such as copper pours, full silkscreening, etc.
- comes with decent parts library AND with an editor to add your own symbols and decals
- complete design stage from electronic circuit design to PCB routing to files output
- output in standardised GERBER format with drill files as well.
The chap who wrote it has even responded to a couple of my question emails, and has been very helpful. I need to send him a coffee as a thank you 🙂
Issues I cam across (being a total newbie on the subject) was that "good" software was free, flexible, easy-to-use, "open" output format (GERBER), and I could only pick two of those four! 😀
After some playing around with designspark, finding it somewhat heavy for relatively simply designs (yes, parts library the integration with RS is very handy), I opted for Zenitpcb. Made by an Italian white goods engineer!
Went with his as it was:
- light on the install
- free (limited to 800 pins IIRC)
- supports dual layer (top and bottom)
- supports features such as copper pours, full silkscreening, etc.
- comes with decent parts library AND with an editor to add your own symbols and decals
- complete design stage from electronic circuit design to PCB routing to files output
- output in standardised GERBER format with drill files as well.
The chap who wrote it has even responded to a couple of my question emails, and has been very helpful. I need to send him a coffee as a thank you 🙂
Regarding PCB standards the IPC is your place...
IPC-2221 to IPC-2226 are the basic specs for PCB design, there is also a course for PCB designers...
Designers Council Participation | IPC Designers Council
Trouble is it costs about £2000 to do the course, but getting familiar with the aforementioned guides will give you the basics...
IPC-2221 to IPC-2226 are the basic specs for PCB design, there is also a course for PCB designers...
Designers Council Participation | IPC Designers Council
Trouble is it costs about £2000 to do the course, but getting familiar with the aforementioned guides will give you the basics...
A question for the many proponents of KiCAD . . . .
I may be forced to acquire, install, learn, and use KiCAD for a commercial project in the near future. While doing a little background work I learned (from, e.g., the official "Installing KiCad" page at http://www.kicad-pcb.org/display/KICAD/Installing+KiCad ) that the last official release is about 3 years old and lacks some significant corrections and improvements resulting from development activity since 2012. Even that "Installing KiCad" page says the "official" version is out of date and shouldn't be used for new projects.
There are several places (such as http://www2.futureware.at/~nickoe/ ) where you can get packages which seem to be a by-product of development work-in-progress. And there are some pages giving instructions for compiling, linking and assembling the program from the most recent development source code. Over the last 45 years I have been paid to write code in at least half a dozen different languages but I don't call myself either a programmer, or an application developer. The thought of "building" a major application is more than a little frightening to me.
So for those of you who recommend KiCad . . . What version are you running? Where can I get a copy? Does it behave in a manner that is acceptable in a commercial business?
Dale
On what OS are you planning to install KiCad? Based on your description, I'm guessing it's Windows. If that's the case, then I'm probably not the best person to ask. I use aptosid Linux--a Debian sid derivative. Installing KiCad 0.20141025+bzr4029-2 was as easy as issuing apt-get install kicad in a root terminal. For answering your questions about a Windows install, I think your best resource may be the KiCad mailing list.
As for its performance, I am able to do professional work with it, but the experience isn't what I would call refined. It's about on a par with Eagle--though the awkwardness is different. Having had my commercial tool of choice (on Windows) disappear without a trace several years ago, I decided to move all future development to an open source solution--and KiCad seemed to be, and continues to be, the best alternative for me.
Its weakest spot (and possible deal breaker depending on workflow) is the lack of proper back annotating. What it calls back annotation doesn't do what you think. Its second weakest spot is the cumbersome way it manages schematic parts and footprints. It's third weakest spot is the way it uses different conventions for identical or nearly identical operations in the different apps (schematic capture, symbol design, pcb layout, etc.) Its fourth weakest spot is the unconventional and sometimes inconsistent nomenclature it uses: schematic parts/symbols are "components" and footprints are "modules".
The routing support is quite good, and if you want an autorouter, the now open-source Freerouting does a decent job. DRC support is good in both schematic capture and layout. To make the schematic capture DRC happy, you need to be up to speed on KiCad's concept of the "power flag."
I also use KiCad as my schematic capture tool for SPICE simulation. Feel free to browse the KiCad notes on my personal wiki at KiCad notes [Mithat Konar (the wiki)] for how to do this and other tidbits and tips.
If there's anything else you think I can help you with, PM me or reply here. Or ask the KiCad mailing list. I'm almost never there, but the people who are there tend to be pretty friendly.
I don't see these two mentioned.
AutoTRAX PCB Design Software
EasyEDA - Web-Based EDA, schematic capture, spice circuit simulation and PCB layout Online
I actually like the concept of the latter as it can be used on different OS. However, it's not as advanced as the first.
Mogens
AutoTRAX PCB Design Software
EasyEDA - Web-Based EDA, schematic capture, spice circuit simulation and PCB layout Online
I actually like the concept of the latter as it can be used on different OS. However, it's not as advanced as the first.
Mogens
@dchisholm:
Now first - I realize that there are many different ways of working with software and what is intuitive for one person isn't necessarily so for somebody else. However, in a process of evaluating PCB softwares a couple of years ago I tried out KiCad, Eagle, Diptrace & one more (name forgotten) and I let go of KiCad because the integration between component making & pcb layout was less than intuitive to the way my mind works. I ended up choosing diptrace because the workflow here is quite straightforward to me. They have a free version (non-commercial) as well as commercial versions which are priced depending on the No. of pins & layers needed.
Would like to add though that I have not used the Gerber making feature as I do my own PCBs and haven't yet needed it.
Cheers,
Jesper
Now first - I realize that there are many different ways of working with software and what is intuitive for one person isn't necessarily so for somebody else. However, in a process of evaluating PCB softwares a couple of years ago I tried out KiCad, Eagle, Diptrace & one more (name forgotten) and I let go of KiCad because the integration between component making & pcb layout was less than intuitive to the way my mind works. I ended up choosing diptrace because the workflow here is quite straightforward to me. They have a free version (non-commercial) as well as commercial versions which are priced depending on the No. of pins & layers needed.
Would like to add though that I have not used the Gerber making feature as I do my own PCBs and haven't yet needed it.
Cheers,
Jesper
- Status
- Not open for further replies.