Mr. Nelson and dear users of this forum,
There are a lot of Cad Board Design Program on the fly.
On one of your post, Mr. Pass, i have seen that you use PCAD 2006.
I've been making research over this sw just for curiosity.
I personally use Allegro Cadence.
What do you think is the most suitable for the audio circuit design?
Cold you explain me why you use the Pcad?
you choose it just 'cause the licence's cost or for other reasons?
i'm not totally satisfied with the cadence interface, but i've been just learning and working on this sw for the last few months.
I would be very interested on knowing your opinion over this subject.
Thanks in advance.
Best,
Stefano.
P.S. the opinion of the users of this forum are, of course, welcome as well!! 🙂
There are a lot of Cad Board Design Program on the fly.
On one of your post, Mr. Pass, i have seen that you use PCAD 2006.
I've been making research over this sw just for curiosity.
I personally use Allegro Cadence.
What do you think is the most suitable for the audio circuit design?
Cold you explain me why you use the Pcad?
you choose it just 'cause the licence's cost or for other reasons?
i'm not totally satisfied with the cadence interface, but i've been just learning and working on this sw for the last few months.
I would be very interested on knowing your opinion over this subject.
Thanks in advance.
Best,
Stefano.
P.S. the opinion of the users of this forum are, of course, welcome as well!! 🙂
It's only audio.
So it's the easiest thing you can think of for a board design program. You will have to route your traces manually anyway, so you don't have to think about an autorouter.
Use the package you are familiar with, you don't need no special features. Curved traces may be nice, but that's it.
So it's the easiest thing you can think of for a board design program. You will have to route your traces manually anyway, so you don't have to think about an autorouter.
Use the package you are familiar with, you don't need no special features. Curved traces may be nice, but that's it.
Yup, layout software is just a tool, like a hammer. Some may prefer different weights, shaft materials and balance, but they all do the same thing, drive nails.
I agree with you about the autorouter.
But a good cad allows you to have an easy access to different layout and allows you to manufacture a good board.
Nice ground mask, that you surely could do by hand, but much easier with a cad program. 😎
But a good cad allows you to have an easy access to different layout and allows you to manufacture a good board.
Nice ground mask, that you surely could do by hand, but much easier with a cad program. 😎
I started out using Tango, and it was bought by PCAD,
and as Wayne needed more sophisticated layout tools for
surface mount and so on, we continued to upgrade it over
the years. I don't use the autoroute functions, nor do I
use the component and netlist functions (although Wayne does).
and as Wayne needed more sophisticated layout tools for
surface mount and so on, we continued to upgrade it over
the years. I don't use the autoroute functions, nor do I
use the component and netlist functions (although Wayne does).
On a more serious note, I am not sure what is gained through upgrading and expensive maintainance contracts. If you can do 8 layers the day before V5 arrived, you can still do 8 layers the day after.
I have no intention of changing - I would still be using Tango
if I didn't have a need to be able to deal with Wayne's work.
😎
if I didn't have a need to be able to deal with Wayne's work.
😎
Tango was a nice, easy to use product that I used for years. Fast forward to today and 10 years in between of no electronics work and now I'm learning Eagle. An adequate package but Tango was far more intuitive....heavy sigh... getting old sucks...
I'm using ultiboard the newest version. It's now in hands of National Instruments. But i want to make the move to Eagle becouse ist more user frendly i think. And also i don't use the auto router, did you ever seen an nice design from a auto router ?? No !!! but I'm using the netlist stuff.
I got started with Orcad, migrated to Protel (for the simulation; I still have a working copy) but do my audio layout in Express PCB software. I do the basic simulations, then layout the boards and get four beautiful boards for less than 200 bucks... One channel of a preamp or amp never goes over the size limitations and the software allows really creative things once you experiment with it.
Only down side is I end up with two sets of boards and my next ideas always demand a new layout, so I'm creating quite a file of backup boards... Highly recommended if you're not pinching pennies or can get your ideas down the first pass.
Layout is like a game of chess, you spend allot of time moving parts around and thinking about the consequences. Then you build it and see if you were right.
Regards, Mike.
Only down side is I end up with two sets of boards and my next ideas always demand a new layout, so I'm creating quite a file of backup boards... Highly recommended if you're not pinching pennies or can get your ideas down the first pass.
Layout is like a game of chess, you spend allot of time moving parts around and thinking about the consequences. Then you build it and see if you were right.
Regards, Mike.
I've used Pcad from the first version. Still have a lisenced full version of 2006. I'll be upgrading to the next version - designer I think it is.
I upgraded each time because there are always bugs with these things. There were alot in PCAD2002. The autorouter was getting better as the product matured, but I dont use it that much.
I use most of the features available with PCAD and have done some pretty complex designs.
Nelson, I'm surprised you dont use the netlist function. It makes double checking your routing so much easier.
I upgraded each time because there are always bugs with these things. There were alot in PCAD2002. The autorouter was getting better as the product matured, but I dont use it that much.
I use most of the features available with PCAD and have done some pretty complex designs.
Nelson, I'm surprised you dont use the netlist function. It makes double checking your routing so much easier.
Now i'm trying to see what Eagle is about.
I have noticed that is much more intuitive than Cadence Allegro, but one thing that i don't see.....but it's possible that it's me ...i've downloaded it yesterday..... i don't see the shape like in cadence.....
I mean...on cadence allegro i can draw a shape and assign it to a specific net and set rules on the copper as it was a net...so the shape can go throught the nets on the circuit.
Is it possible to do he same thing with Eagle?
I have noticed that is much more intuitive than Cadence Allegro, but one thing that i don't see.....but it's possible that it's me ...i've downloaded it yesterday..... i don't see the shape like in cadence.....
I mean...on cadence allegro i can draw a shape and assign it to a specific net and set rules on the copper as it was a net...so the shape can go throught the nets on the circuit.
Is it possible to do he same thing with Eagle?
Stefanoo said:
Hi,
I'm afraid Eagle does not do it like Cadence.You have to ideally complete your routing of pcb and then do the copper pour or whatever that you want to d😵f course you can assign a keepout "shape" if you desire.
Stefanoo,
Unless you like to spend time in this environment, use whatever will do the job.
All packages have pros & cons.
If what you are using works, stay with it.
If your package is causing your problems, identify those area of concerns, and ask the vendor of these packages if their software will do what you want.
I personally use AUTOCAD (2006 release). Over the years, I have built up an extensive library of symbols and pad / track layouts, and written lisp routines that combine several opperations in the sinble function.
Eg lay 6 x 1mm tracks 2 mm apart simultaneously
Its also excellent for curved traces.
But it does not have autorouting etc. Even if it did, I doubt that I would use it.
I find that I have a better understanding and control, if I do it manually.
AUTOCAD is arguably one of the most powerfull design / drafting tools ever conceived. However it was not designed for exclusive electronics work.
You have to massage it to do what you want.
The other advantage of autocad, it its almost universal integration with other software, and its vast array of output formats.
One of the reasons I use autocad for electronics work is the ability to output to a DXF file, and have a CADD / CAMM controlled mill machine automatically do all the drilling.
Yes I am aware that other dedicated packages can do that, but autocad is one system that works for me and I understand it.
At the end, use whatever you are comfortable with, works for you, and most importantly, gets that board designed, printed and built.
Kind Regards,
George.
Unless you like to spend time in this environment, use whatever will do the job.
All packages have pros & cons.
If what you are using works, stay with it.
If your package is causing your problems, identify those area of concerns, and ask the vendor of these packages if their software will do what you want.
I personally use AUTOCAD (2006 release). Over the years, I have built up an extensive library of symbols and pad / track layouts, and written lisp routines that combine several opperations in the sinble function.
Eg lay 6 x 1mm tracks 2 mm apart simultaneously
Its also excellent for curved traces.
But it does not have autorouting etc. Even if it did, I doubt that I would use it.
I find that I have a better understanding and control, if I do it manually.
AUTOCAD is arguably one of the most powerfull design / drafting tools ever conceived. However it was not designed for exclusive electronics work.
You have to massage it to do what you want.
The other advantage of autocad, it its almost universal integration with other software, and its vast array of output formats.
One of the reasons I use autocad for electronics work is the ability to output to a DXF file, and have a CADD / CAMM controlled mill machine automatically do all the drilling.
Yes I am aware that other dedicated packages can do that, but autocad is one system that works for me and I understand it.
At the end, use whatever you are comfortable with, works for you, and most importantly, gets that board designed, printed and built.
Kind Regards,
George.
Hi George,
Is there an electronics package that sits on top of AutoCAD that does the back and forward annotation between the schematic and PCB?
regards from an old
MicroStation user
Is there an electronics package that sits on top of AutoCAD that does the back and forward annotation between the schematic and PCB?
regards from an old
MicroStation user
autocad add on
Gday Greg.
Yes, I believe that there are add on packages that add onto autocad to streamline the PCB design process.
Whilst I have not tried any of them, or have specific knowledge of the specific features that you mention, I am happy to make some enquiries for you, as I am in regular contact with others "in the know"
I have been an autocad user for over 16 years and it never ceases to amaze me how may other packages bolt onto autocad.
I have included a sample of a recent project. This is a work in progress, so please ignore the strange / random linework.
This project is being undertaken completely within autocad
Should be finished this weekend.
Greg Erskine said:
Gday Greg.
Yes, I believe that there are add on packages that add onto autocad to streamline the PCB design process.
Whilst I have not tried any of them, or have specific knowledge of the specific features that you mention, I am happy to make some enquiries for you, as I am in regular contact with others "in the know"
I have been an autocad user for over 16 years and it never ceases to amaze me how may other packages bolt onto autocad.
I have included a sample of a recent project. This is a work in progress, so please ignore the strange / random linework.
This project is being undertaken completely within autocad
Should be finished this weekend.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.