Re: Comments About Eeschema
circle on transistor symbol is used to indicate that this is discrete component (individually packaged transistor - has nothing to do with form or shape of package). transistors without circle therefore indicate that they are part of IC circuit (look at schematics of opamp or gates for example).
From: Bernd Wiebus
To: kicad-users@...
Sent:
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 5:51:45 AM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
?
Hello Robert.
> I will shrink
> some components, so perhaps I should postfix the components with _SMALL
> to eliminate clashes. Mainly I'll be shortening pin lengths.
Yes, i used this postfix method in my first attemp to create a library
when i noticed that my symbols were much too big......
>
> Is it OK in IEC60617 to have circles around transistors? I notice that
> a circle is included when one of the electrodes is connected to the
> envelope (and then you're supposed to show the connection with a dot),
> but what about where there is no connection?
Of course, EN60617-5 contains as No. 05-05-02 only one example of a
transistor encapsulated with a circle for a housing and a dot for the
connection.
Furthermore EN60617-5 is modular, so it contains a lot of symbols of
typs of electric channels, intrinsic zones, multilpe gates and so on.
So you can create your fitting symbol for your transistor or diode.
But EN60617-5 contains no example of a single transistor housing as a
symbol....this circle just exist in this exampleNo. 05-05-02.
So No. 05-05-02 should not exist, or it implicides, that a circle is a
symbol for a (conductice) housing.
No. 05-07-01 and No. 05-07-02 do not fit in this system, too, because
they are symbols for a tube envelope, which can be steel, but used to be
glass or ceramic.
Now i am thinking about canceling the circles in the library. I used
them only for classic pipolar transistors. Theoretikal there should be
three alternative symbols for every transistor type: one without
housing, one with housing, but not connected, and one with a housing
connected to the collector (but what is with emitter connected
housings?) So it would be a bulky library with many seldom used symbols.
And i think, exactly this is the reason why the EN60617-5 is
modular.....
Today transistors with shielded housings are very uncommon. So it is
better to cancel the housings, and the few cases, where a housing is
importand, have to draw an extra circle around their transistors and tie
it where it fits.
> I like having the circle because it shows at a glance that the part
> has its own package, and by making part of the circle dashed one can
> show at a glance that the tcomponent shares its package with other
> devices (and therefore there will be fewer packages on the board).
> By
> way of example I've attached an image showing my own symbol for a
> BC817DS, for which Yahoo Groups should provide a link.
Nice. About this way i didnt think yet.
Here the circle is mostly used by old people from the times when
transistors in round thin cans were common. Is also a taste of
nostalgie.
By the way: My EN60617-5 here, which is from 1996 and active, contains
44 pages. 3 pages pr?ambel, 15 pages about semiconductors and 26(!)
pages about tubes(!). ;O)
With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
|
Thanks to both of you.
It's saves ma a lot of struggling with footprint design.
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Hello Robert. Does the "envelope" (to use the IEC term) have to be conducting to
appear on the schematic? Historically I think most transistors and
valves had non-conducting envelopes (eg OC45, ECC83) but they all had a
ring around them on the schematic. No, i think envelope just means envelope. But if the envelope is conductive, it can be used as a shielding, and thats important. Some early transistors are in glasshousings with black paint, and if the paint gets away, they will act as phototransistors..... It would seem that valves still do
so in the standard (and they would look messy without a ring), but not
all transistors. And Of course, the envelopes of tubes have not only round structures. There are also rectangles with rounded corners and the odd shaped envelopes of CRT-Tubes. However, a search on the official term "envelope"
reveals S00061 and the seemingly identical S00062, suggesting (since the
document shows primitives, not just complete symbols) it *is* allowed to
place a ring around anything. S00064 suggests it's also allowed to use
a dashed outline as in my BS817DS symbol. Yes, and that is similar how i remember i have learned it with tubes. EN60617-5 is a modular system. And so you can combine primitives as it fit the need and is understandable. Furthermore, some primitives are not defined, but only shown in examples. So the are indirectly defined.... Being an old fogey I'm
minded to stick with the ring in symbols I create as it keeps the
symbols consistent. If some young whipper-snapper wants to remove them
they would be free to do so (though I reserve the right to suck air
through my three remaining teeth). The realy young youngsters are drawing rectangles, adding the pins to it, and then write numbers, and, when in good mood, make a note about the funktion with a three letter abbrevitation like "CLK". ;O)
The copy of the standard I found using Baidu is 2001, BTW, so later than
yours.
I bought mine 2010 from "Beuth Verlag", who is the official EN-standart source in germany, an they told me, that the 1996 version is the active..... Many people in germany are unhappy about them.... With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Nice. About this way i didnt think yet.
Here the circle is mostly used by old people from the times when
transistors in round thin cans were common. Is also a taste of
nostalgie. Guilty as charged :). Actually I was taught that a transistor with a ring was a discrete component, whereas without the ring it was part of an integrated circuit. In practice since everything at that time was hand drawn I think most engineers left off the ring (certainly I did). Does the "envelope" (to use the IEC term) have to be conducting to appear on the schematic? Historically I think most transistors and valves had non-conducting envelopes (eg OC45, ECC83) but they all had a ring around them on the schematic. It would seem that valves still do so in the standard (and they would look messy without a ring), but not all transistors. However, a search on the official term "envelope" reveals S00061 and the seemingly identical S00062, suggesting (since the document shows primitives, not just complete symbols) it *is* allowed to place a ring around anything. S00064 suggests it's also allowed to use a dashed outline as in my BS817DS symbol. Being an old fogey I'm minded to stick with the ring in symbols I create as it keeps the symbols consistent. If some young whipper-snapper wants to remove them they would be free to do so (though I reserve the right to suck air through my three remaining teeth). The copy of the standard I found using Baidu is 2001, BTW, so later than yours. Regards, Robert. -- () Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive. /\
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema [1 Attachment]
Hello Robert. I will shrink
some components, so perhaps I should postfix the components with _SMALL
to eliminate clashes. Mainly I'll be shortening pin lengths. Yes, i used this postfix method in my first attemp to create a library when i noticed that my symbols were much too big......
Is it OK in IEC60617 to have circles around transistors? I notice that
a circle is included when one of the electrodes is connected to the
envelope (and then you're supposed to show the connection with a dot),
but what about where there is no connection?
Of course, EN60617-5 contains as No. 05-05-02 only one example of a transistor encapsulated with a circle for a housing and a dot for the connection. Furthermore EN60617-5 is modular, so it contains a lot of symbols of typs of electric channels, intrinsic zones, multilpe gates and so on. So you can create your fitting symbol for your transistor or diode. But EN60617-5 contains no example of a single transistor housing as a symbol....this circle just exist in this exampleNo. 05-05-02. So No. 05-05-02 should not exist, or it implicides, that a circle is a symbol for a (conductice) housing. No. 05-07-01 and No. 05-07-02 do not fit in this system, too, because they are symbols for a tube envelope, which can be steel, but used to be glass or ceramic. Now i am thinking about canceling the circles in the library. I used them only for classic pipolar transistors. Theoretikal there should be three alternative symbols for every transistor type: one without housing, one with housing, but not connected, and one with a housing connected to the collector (but what is with emitter connected housings?) So it would be a bulky library with many seldom used symbols. And i think, exactly this is the reason why the EN60617-5 is modular..... Today transistors with shielded housings are very uncommon. So it is better to cancel the housings, and the few cases, where a housing is importand, have to draw an extra circle around their transistors and tie it where it fits. I like having the circle because it shows at a glance that the part
has its own package, and by making part of the circle dashed one can
show at a glance that the tcomponent shares its package with other
devices (and therefore there will be fewer packages on the board).
By
way of example I've attached an image showing my own symbol for a
BC817DS, for which Yahoo Groups should provide a link. Nice. About this way i didnt think yet. Here the circle is mostly used by old people from the times when transistors in round thin cans were common. Is also a taste of nostalgie. By the way: My EN60617-5 here, which is from 1996 and active, contains 44 pages. 3 pages pr?ambel, 15 pages about semiconductors and 26(!) pages about tubes(!). ;O) With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
In that case I'll go ahead with a basic set of symbols. I'll leave Bernd's library alone, copying symbols as necessary. I will shrink some components, so perhaps I should postfix the components with _SMALL to eliminate clashes. Mainly I'll be shortening pin lengths.
Is it OK in IEC60617 to have circles around transistors? I notice that a circle is included when one of the electrodes is connected to the envelope (and then you're supposed to show the connection with a dot), but what about where there is no connection? My PDF shows no circle. I like having the circle because it shows at a glance that the part has its own package, and by making part of the circle dashed one can show at a glance that the component shares its package with other devices (and therefore there will be fewer packages on the board). By way of example I've attached an image showing my own symbol for a BC817DS, for which Yahoo Groups should provide a link.
Regards,
Robert.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 12/06/2012 00:15, Cirilo Bernardo wrote: Hi Bernd,
Thanks for your responses. I went through the KiCAD posts looking
for discussions on grid sizes; it looks like EESchema will retain the
mil grid (in all the posts I can find regarding grids, the devs say
they have no plans to change the schematic grid since there is no
great advantage to this). So I was mistaken; symbol standardization
can go on with the mil grid. This does result in larger symbols
though since nodes are at 2.54mm rather than 2.0mm.
________________________________ From: Bernd
Wiebus<bernd.wiebus@...> To: kicad-users@... Sent:
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 4:08 AM Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re:
Comments About Eeschema
Hello Cirilo.
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad
library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have
nothing to check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites
are worth exploring) I guess it would be a good place to start,
though personally I find Bernd's symbols too big. Is it the
latest standard?
Some of those symbols do comply with the IEC standard and many
that don't do comply with older standards.
If this is, it is marked by the symbols name. Thomething with
"old". In this cases, there are existing two symbols, one for the
old standard, ans one for the new. This is because here most people
like the old timed full black inductance boxes.....
But there are some "needfull things" among those EN60617 symbols,
wich are not EN60617, but this are normally not electronic devices,
with the exeption of "wire bridges". If desired, i could split this
library in two and purify the EN60617 part.
I suspected some people wanted older symbols; personally I think some
of the older symbols are prettier and for me they're easier to
understand. It would be good to keep the EN60617 compliant symbols in
their own directory+library since that will help a lot with the
standardization process and in the future if people have requirements
to use a specific symbol set it makes it easier for them to comply.
Anyway, as I said, what's important is that people can read the
schematics. I think Bernd's symbols can't really be shrunk much more; EN60617 makes no statements about the aspect ratio of symbols
(means wether a resistor "box" is lean or fat and something like
this). And for kicad i should not go away from the 50-50 raster for
easily drawing circuits without jumping into the engin room and
changing the raster.
That's one of the situations common with standards (lack of
implementation details). In this case it just means choosing your
own settings based on what looks good and is easy to read; the grids
used might impose some restrictions on what you can draw and that may
be one reason the aspect ratio is not specified.
I'd say his symbols are OK, certainly usable, but most can be
improved (for example, the purists will howl about the line
connecting the vertices of the inductor symbols - and rightly
so). The problem as usual is time; building a good symbol set
takes an awful lot, Yes. This is a time problem. But there are some other points
counted against creating a "new" library. And this is to be
compatible with older versions of this library. If i change them to
much, people will see gaps if the new symbols do not fit to the
same connections as the old do. This may not be an issue for an
experinenced kicad user, but for an necomer.
I agree 100%. I was thinking there would be a metric and a mil set
of symbols, but for now it looks like EESchema will retain the mil
grid.
and at this point in time I'd recommend waiting for KiCAD to go
metric (internal units = nanometers) before spending time
building up standard symbols. However, if you look at the symbols
which come with KiCAD, very many (I can't say 'most' because I
haven't looked through the set and counted the bad ones) are not
only non-compliant with the latest IEC specifications, but I
don't recognize the symbols as IEC, IEEE, or ASME - some of the
symbols are such poor caricatures of standard symbols that they
will actually make a schematic difficult to read. This is because there is not only a mixing between IEC, IEEE, ASME
ec. but with different ages of this librarys, too.
What I would like to see in the future is a standards-compliant
symbol set for KiCAD. This can start with an IEC60617 directory
with libraries classified according to form or function - that
alone will give us many of the symbols we typically use - and
then people can contribute other symbols but those symbols will
need to be vetted before they're put into the library tree; once
you head down the path of standardization you really can't afford
any compromise - any symbols which have not been vetted will have
to go into a 'non-standard' directory branch. Ok.
This is all somewhat academic at the moment. KiCAD is certainly
usable as it is and although it would be great to start
implementing improvements, KiCAD also happens to be in a state of
development where it's probably best to hold back on making those
improvements. The actual version of my EN60617 Library is RefE4. So send me your
suggestions for improvement.
With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
Thanks Bernd, for now I can't really comment since I don't have a
copy of the specifications or a current subscription to the database;
my previous comments such as the one about the wire crossing the
vertices of the inductor symbol was based on what I remember of
specifications ca. 1998. I think for now, just keeping the standards
compliant symbols separate from the others and with perhaps a note in
the directory to give the name of the reference document is a good
step. Hopefully in about a year I can put some effort into building
and checking symbols.
- Cirilo
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting
your question. Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked
up by the creator of Kicad. Please visit for
details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad
library. For building Kicad from source and other development
questions visit the kicad-devel group at
! Groups Links
--- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS):
120611-0, 11/06/2012 Tested on: 12/06/2012 08:26:12 avast! -
copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
By accident I came across one solution to creating a searchable PDF, this is not a solution for everyone because it uses Adobe Acrobat X.?
I sent a PDF schematic to an assembly house, the person who opened it had Adobe Acrobat X installed. When they opened the schematic the following happened:
Acrobat told him that the PDF was not searchable because it is a flat copy with no text layer. He selected the note and it went through all the pages and then the PDF was searchable. He sent me the PDF back and sure enough it's searchable.?
Adobe has a video on how to do this here:
Hope this is a solution for somebody. Now I just need to find a friend with Acrobat X. :)
- Eric
On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 2:29 AM, Robert <birmingham_spider@...> wrote:
?
I too have appreciated PDF files created in other CAD packages that are
text searchable. I guess it would help to raise the profile of kicad
amongst other engineers (those who see a useful feature and poke around
to see what created it), but I can understand why the developers might
not want to write the code.
Regards,
Robert.
On 04/12/2011 19:37, Berwyn Hoyt wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> As you know, it is easy to create PDFs from Circad using a program lie
> PdfCreator. But PDFs created this way are not text-searchable.
>
> I have appreciated searchable schematic PDFs produced by other CAD packages
> because a third party can decipher a pdf, compare it with the BOM, search for
> net names, component identifiers, etc., all without having to install the CAD
> package.
>
> I do not know how or why a PDF becomes text-searchable, but I do know that the
> other cad packages I've used have done it automatically even when creating the
> PDF using PdfCreator.
>
> I'm interested to know:
>
> 1. whether others would find this a useful feature
> 2. whether any of the programmers know how hard/easy this is to add.
>
> Many thanks,
> Berwyn
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> avast! Antivirus<>: Inbound message clean.
>
> Virus Database (VPS): 111202-0, 02/12/2011
> Tested on: 05/12/2011 08:54:23
> avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2011 AVAST Software.
>
>
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Hi Bernd, ? Thanks for your responses.? I went through the KiCAD posts looking for discussions on grid sizes; it looks like EESchema will retain the mil grid (in all the posts I can find regarding grids, the devs say they have no plans to change the schematic grid since there is no great advantage to this). So I was mistaken; symbol standardization can go on with the mil grid.? This does result in larger symbols though since nodes are at 2.54mm rather than 2.0mm. ________________________________
From: Bernd Wiebus <bernd.wiebus@...>
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Tuesday, June 12, 2012 4:08 AM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
?
Hello Cirilo.
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have nothing to
check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites are worth exploring)
I guess it would be a good place to start, though personally I find
Bernd's symbols too big.?? Is it the latest standard?
??Some of those symbols do comply with the IEC standard and many that don't do comply with older standards.
If this is, it is marked by the symbols name. Thomething with "old". In
this cases, there are existing two symbols, one for the old standard,
ans one for the new. This is because here most people like the old timed
full black inductance boxes.....
But there are some "needfull things" among those EN60617 symbols, wich
are not EN60617, but this are normally not electronic devices, with the
exeption of "wire bridges".
If desired, i could split this library in two and purify the EN60617
part.
I suspected some people wanted older symbols; personally I think some of the older symbols are prettier and for me they're easier to understand. It would be good to keep the EN60617 compliant symbols in their own directory+library since that will help a lot with the standardization process and in the future if people have requirements to use a specific symbol set it makes it easier for them to comply. Anyway, as I said, what's important is that people can read the schematics. I think Bernd's symbols can't really be shrunk much more; EN60617 makes no statements about the aspect ratio of symbols (means
wether a resistor "box" is lean or fat and something like this). And for
kicad i should not go away from the 50-50 raster for easily drawing
circuits without jumping into the engin room and changing the raster.
That's one of the situations common with standards (lack of implementation details).? In this case it just means choosing your own settings based on what looks good and is easy to read; the grids used might impose some restrictions on what you can draw and that may be one reason the aspect ratio is not specified. I'd say his symbols are OK, certainly usable,
but most can be improved (for example, the purists will howl about the line connecting the vertices of
the inductor symbols - and rightly so). The problem as usual is time; building a good symbol set takes
an awful lot, Yes. This is a time problem. But there are some other points counted
against creating a "new" library. And this is to be compatible with
older versions of this library. If i change them to much, people will
see gaps if the new symbols do not fit to the same connections as the
old do.
This may not be an issue for an experinenced kicad user, but for an
necomer.
I agree 100%.? I was thinking there would be a metric and a mil set of symbols, but for now it looks like EESchema will retain the mil grid. ??and at this point in time I'd recommend waiting for KiCAD to go metric (internal units = nanometers)
before spending time building up standard symbols. However, if you look at the symbols which come with KiCAD,
very many (I can't say 'most' because I haven't looked through the set and counted the bad ones) are not only
non-compliant with the latest IEC specifications, but I don't recognize the symbols as IEC, IEEE, or ASME - some of the symbols are such
poor caricatures of standard symbols that they will actually make a schematic difficult to read. This is because there is not only a mixing between IEC, IEEE, ASME ec.
but with different ages of this librarys, too.
??What I would like to see in the future is a standards-compliant symbol set for KiCAD.??This can start with an IEC60617 directory
with libraries classified according to form or function - that alone will give us many of the symbols we typically use - and then
people can contribute other symbols but those symbols will need to be vetted before they're put into the library tree; once you head
down the path of standardization you really can't afford any compromise - any symbols which have not been vetted will have to go into
a 'non-standard' directory branch. Ok.
??This is all somewhat academic at the moment.??KiCAD is certainly usable as it is and although it would be great to start
implementing improvements, KiCAD also happens to be in a state of development where it's probably best to hold back on making those improvements. The actual version of my EN60617 Library is RefE4. So send me your
suggestions for improvement.
With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
Thanks Bernd,? for now I can't really comment since I don't have a copy of the specifications or a current subscription to the database; my previous comments such as the one about the wire crossing the vertices of the inductor symbol was based on what I remember of specifications ca. 1998.? I think for now, just keeping the standards compliant symbols separate from the others and with perhaps a note in the directory to give the name of the reference document is a good step.? Hopefully in about a year I can put some effort into building and checking symbols. - Cirilo
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema /Error
Sorry, an error: The actual version of my EN60617 Library is RefE4. No, its actual E5. So send me your suggestions for improvement. With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Hello Cirilo.
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have nothing to
check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites are worth exploring)
I guess it would be a good place to start, though personally I find
Bernd's symbols too big. Is it the latest standard?
Some of those symbols do comply with the IEC standard and many that don't do comply with older standards.
If this is, it is marked by the symbols name. Thomething with "old". In this cases, there are existing two symbols, one for the old standard, ans one for the new. This is because here most people like the old timed full black inductance boxes..... But there are some "needfull things" among those EN60617 symbols, wich are not EN60617, but this are normally not electronic devices, with the exeption of "wire bridges". If desired, i could split this library in two and purify the EN60617 part. Anyway, as I said, what's important is that people can read the schematics. I think Bernd's symbols can't really be shrunk much more; EN60617 makes no statements about the aspect ratio of symbols (means wether a resistor "box" is lean or fat and something like this). And for kicad i should not go away from the 50-50 raster for easily drawing circuits without jumping into the engin room and changing the raster. I'd say his symbols are OK, certainly usable,
but most can be improved (for example, the purists will howl about the line connecting the vertices of
the inductor symbols - and rightly so). The problem as usual is time; building a good symbol set takes
an awful lot, Yes. This is a time problem. But there are some other points counted against creating a "new" library. And this is to be compatible with older versions of this library. If i change them to much, people will see gaps if the new symbols do not fit to the same connections as the old do. This may not be an issue for an experinenced kicad user, but for an necomer. and at this point in time I'd recommend waiting for KiCAD to go metric (internal units = nanometers)
before spending time building up standard symbols. However, if you look at the symbols which come with KiCAD,
very many (I can't say 'most' because I haven't looked through the set and counted the bad ones) are not only
non-compliant with the latest IEC specifications, but I don't recognize the symbols as IEC, IEEE, or ASME - some of the symbols are such
poor caricatures of standard symbols that they will actually make a schematic difficult to read. This is because there is not only a mixing between IEC, IEEE, ASME ec. but with different ages of this librarys, too. What I would like to see in the future is a standards-compliant symbol set for KiCAD. This can start with an IEC60617 directory
with libraries classified according to form or function - that alone will give us many of the symbols we typically use - and then
people can contribute other symbols but those symbols will need to be vetted before they're put into the library tree; once you head
down the path of standardization you really can't afford any compromise - any symbols which have not been vetted will have to go into
a 'non-standard' directory branch. Ok. This is all somewhat academic at the moment. KiCAD is certainly usable as it is and although it would be great to start
implementing improvements, KiCAD also happens to be in a state of development where it's probably best to hold back on making those improvements. The actual version of my EN60617 Library is RefE4. So send me your suggestions for improvement. With best regards: Bernd Wiebus alias dl1eic
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Hmmm. I have a PDF of the "IEC 60617 database snapshot created on
2001-12-12" (via Baidu) and I would be prepared to make a start creating
kicad symbols from it if that's the latest we can get hold of.
However, I don't like the sound of all the libraries being rendered
useless by the switch to nanometres (much as I otherwise look forward to
being able to work in metric without having weird decimals creeping in).
Regards,
Robert.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/06/2012 23:50, Cirilo Bernardo wrote: ________________________________ From:
Robert<birmingham_spider@...> To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 8:00 PM Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re:
Comments About Eeschema
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have nothing
to check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites are worth
exploring) I guess it would be a good place to start, though
personally I find Bernd's symbols too big. Is it the latest
standard?
Regards,
Robert.
Hi Robert,
Some of those symbols do comply with the IEC standard and many that
don't do comply with older standards. Anyway, as I said, what's
important is that people can read the schematics. I think Bernd's
symbols can't really be shrunk much more; I'd say his symbols are OK,
certainly usable, but most can be improved (for example, the purists
will howl about the line connecting the vertices of the inductor
symbols - and rightly so). The problem as usual is time; building a
good symbol set takes an awful lot, and at this point in time I'd
recommend waiting for KiCAD to go metric (internal units =
nanometers) before spending time building up standard symbols.
However, if you look at the symbols which come with KiCAD, very many
(I can't say 'most' because I haven't looked through the set and
counted the bad ones) are not only non-compliant with the latest IEC
specifications, but I don't recognize the symbols as IEC, IEEE, or
ASME - some of the symbols are such poor caricatures of standard
symbols that they will actually make a schematic difficult to read.
What I would like to see in the future is a standards-compliant
symbol set for KiCAD. This can start with an IEC60617 directory with
libraries classified according to form or function - that alone will
give us many of the symbols we typically use - and then people can
contribute other symbols but those symbols will need to be vetted
before they're put into the library tree; once you head down the path
of standardization you really can't afford any compromise - any
symbols which have not been vetted will have to go into a
'non-standard' directory branch.
This is all somewhat academic at the moment. KiCAD is certainly
usable as it is and although it would be great to start implementing
improvements, KiCAD also happens to be in a state of development
where it's probably best to hold back on making those improvements.
- Cirilo
On 10/06/2012 00:04, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
________________________________ From:
Robert<birmingham_spider@...> To:
kicad-users@... Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2012 7:15
PM Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
I'm not sure what is the intention of this thread but please
remember that kicad is international and these are all US
standards. Component annotations are almost certainly
governed by an ISO standard.
Regards,
Robert.
Sure, but many of the ASME standards were transferred to IEC and
some later became an ISO standard - but having said that, many of
the symbols people created for EESCHEMA do not comply with
standards. For example, the MOSFET with a symmetric gate -
standards documents dating over 35 years ago were recommending
the asymmetric gate symbol and personally when I see a symmetric
gate symbol I want to hit someone with a large book. This is not
really a problem because people can still understand the
drawings. However, it's a good idea to move towards standards
compliance. On the down side, I think the best way to proceed is
to have a working group who spends time making up a new set of
compliant symbols, including existing symbols after confirming
that they comply with standards, and checking symbols other
people submit. This is not a small job; it's something I
wouldn't mind doing, but at the moment all my free time is going
into the 3D solid
model
issues which I believe is of far more value to users at the
moment than standards-compliant symbols. However, regarding the
comments on standard reference designators - that's something
which should be brought into conformance as part of the process
of making KiCAD a top quality tool.
- Cirilo
On 09/06/2012 07:14, Lawrence wrote:
John, I have been able to find the IEEE and ASME standards
online on the Internet. They are usually in PDF and some may
be freely downloaded for non commercial usage because they
are copywrited material. --For IEEE 315-1975 (R1993) "Graphic
Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams (Including
Reference Designation Letters)" see message number 11068 to
see where to go to get a PDF copy that can be downloaded.
This standard was withdrawn by ANSI as an American National
Standard (ANS) as of June 2004. The IEEE has this as an
active standard but there has been no activity on it since
being reaffirmed in 1993. --For ASME Y14.44-2008 "Reference
Designations for Electrical and Electronics Parts and
Equipment" I went to a Chinese Website<www.> and
ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-6030462696.html>. This is
viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not
straight forward. --For ASME Y14.34-2008 "Associated Lists" I
also went to the Chinese Website<www.> and ended
up at<www.doc88.com/p-5990462641.html>. Again, this is
viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not
straight forward.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
--- In kicad-users@..., John Hudak<jjhudak@...>
wrote:
LOL, well said! (I am not a developer in this effort, but
have been on others). I've often wondered this myself.
Having seen this lack of attention to standards in other
open src tools, I can guess at many reasons, ranging from
ignorance to arrogance to cost (acquiring some of those
standards requires real money). In many cases, there is
quite a lot of overlap between IEEE/ANSI/IEC/CENELEC etc.
OTOH, I am thankful for the tool.... I am very interested
in the response..... -John
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Lawrence<lawrence_joy@...>
wrote:
**
To developers of Kicad and others. Comments about
Eeschema.
--Why are the X,Y coordinates upside down in the Y axis?
When I learned Cartesian coordinates the abscissa (X
axis) has positive values going to the right and negative
values going to the left with the ordinate (Y axis) with
positive values going up and negative values going down.
Quadrant I would have the 0,0 point in the lower left
corner. Do they teach this differently in Europe? It is
very confusing to me.
--Terminology for reference designators: A basic
reference designator has a class designation letter(s)
and a number. Class designation letters are 1, 2, or 3
letters, but if 3 letters are used the 1st letter will be
X as in XDS or XAR. For the complete reference designator
A1R7, the A1 is called the reference designator prefix
and for the complete reference designator A1PS1C3, the
A1PS1 are called reference designator prefixes. The Unit
Numbering Method of assigning reference designators is
covered by ANSI/ASME Y14.44-2008 (used to be ANSI/IEEE
200-1975).
--I have seen in many messages the term "multi-part
component" used. The terminology I know is
"mulple-element part" and is covered in ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008, Clause 2.1.4 Suffix Letter.
--The terminology I know calls a listing of parts a
"parts list (PL)" and is covered by ANSI/ASME
Y14.34M-2008 Associated Lists. In this standard it is
stated that "bill of material" is an obsolete term.
Just some ramblings.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before
posting your question. Please post your bug reports here.
They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad. Please visit
for details of how to contribute your
symbols/modules to the kicad library. For building Kicad from
source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel
group at !
Groups Links
--- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database
(VPS): 120608-0, 08/06/2012 Tested on: 09/06/2012 09:52:38
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
-- () Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive. /\
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before
posting your question. Please post your bug reports here. They
will be picked up by the creator of Kicad. Please visit
for details of how to contribute your
symbols/modules to the kicad library. For building Kicad from
source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel
group at ! Groups
Links
--- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database
(VPS): 120610-0, 10/06/2012 Tested on: 10/06/2012 09:40:01 avast!
- copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
-- () Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive. /\
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting
your question. Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked
up by the creator of Kicad. Please visit for
details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad
library. For building Kicad from source and other development
questions visit the kicad-devel group at
! Groups Links
--- avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS):
120611-0, 11/06/2012 Tested on: 11/06/2012 15:25:29 avast! -
copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
See if this works for you....
From: f6eeq
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 7:39:47 AM
Subject: [kicad-users] Si570 library
?
Hi there,
does anyone have a library (schematic and foot print) for the Si570 oscillator?
Thanks in advance.
73 from Gerard, F6EEQ
|
Hello Gerard. does anyone have a library (schematic and foot print) for the Si570 oscillator?
Look at the attachment for "SI570_SI571_11Jun2012.zip" But be careful, fresh backen and burning hot, but jet untested. There are three different footprints. One SMD-Satandart like suggested from Sillicon labs, one with long extendet pads for handsoldering and one for "Dead bug style". Please tell me what you think about and wether it worked for you. 73 from Bernd, dl1eic
|
Hi there,
does anyone have a library (schematic and foot print) for the Si570 oscillator?
Thanks in advance.
73 from Gerard, F6EEQ
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
________________________________
From: Robert <birmingham_spider@...>
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Sunday, June 10, 2012 8:00 PM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
?
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have nothing to
check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites are worth exploring)
I guess it would be a good place to start, though personally I find
Bernd's symbols too big.?? Is it the latest standard?
Regards,
Robert.
Hi Robert, ?Some of those symbols do comply with the IEC standard and many that don't do comply with older standards. Anyway, as I said, what's important is that people can read the schematics. I think Bernd's symbols can't really be shrunk much more; I'd say his symbols are OK, certainly usable, but most can be improved (for example, the purists will howl about the line connecting the vertices of the inductor symbols - and rightly so). The problem as usual is time; building a good symbol set takes an awful lot, and at this point in time I'd recommend waiting for KiCAD to go metric (internal units = nanometers) before spending time building up standard symbols. However, if you look at the symbols which come with KiCAD, very many (I can't say 'most' because I haven't looked through the set and counted the bad ones) are not only non-compliant with the latest IEC specifications, but I don't recognize the symbols as IEC, IEEE, or ASME - some of the symbols are such poor caricatures of standard symbols that they will actually make a schematic difficult to read. ?What I would like to see in the future is a standards-compliant symbol set for KiCAD.? This can start with an IEC60617 directory with libraries classified according to form or function - that alone will give us many of the symbols we typically use - and then people can contribute other symbols but those symbols will need to be vetted before they're put into the library tree; once you head down the path of standardization you really can't afford any compromise - any symbols which have not been vetted will have to go into a 'non-standard' directory branch. ?This is all somewhat academic at the moment.? KiCAD is certainly usable as it is and although it would be great to start implementing improvements, KiCAD also happens to be in a state of development where it's probably best to hold back on making those improvements. - Cirilo On 10/06/2012 00:04, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
________________________________
From: Robert<birmingham_spider@...>
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
I'm not sure what is the intention of this thread but please remember
that kicad is international and these are all US standards.?? Component
annotations are almost certainly governed by an ISO standard.
Regards,
Robert.
Sure, but many of the ASME standards were transferred to IEC and some later became an ISO standard - but having said that, many of the symbols people created for EESCHEMA do not comply with standards.??For example, the MOSFET with a symmetric gate - standards documents dating over 35 years ago were recommending the asymmetric gate symbol and personally when I see a symmetric gate symbol I want to hit someone with a large book.??This is not really a problem because people can still understand the drawings. However, it's a good idea to move towards standards compliance.??On the down side, I think the best way to proceed is to have a working group who spends time making up a new set of compliant symbols, including existing symbols after confirming that they comply with standards, and checking symbols other people submit.??This is not a small job; it's something I wouldn't mind doing, but at the moment all my free time is going into the 3D solid
model ?? issues which I believe is of far more value to users at the moment than standards-compliant symbols. However, regarding the comments on standard reference designators - that's something which should be brought into conformance as part of the process of making KiCAD a top quality tool.
- Cirilo
On 09/06/2012 07:14, Lawrence wrote:
John,
I have been able to find the IEEE and ASME standards online on the Internet. They are usually in PDF and some may be freely downloaded for non commercial usage because they are copywrited material.
--For IEEE 315-1975 (R1993) "Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams (Including Reference Designation Letters)" see message number 11068 to see where to go to get a PDF copy that can be downloaded. This standard was withdrawn by ANSI as an American National Standard (ANS) as of June 2004. The IEEE has this as an active standard but there has been no activity on it since being reaffirmed in 1993.
--For ASME Y14.44-2008 "Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronics Parts and Equipment" I went to a Chinese Website<www.>?? and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-6030462696.html>. This is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
--For ASME Y14.34-2008 "Associated Lists" I also went to the Chinese Website<www.>?? and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-5990462641.html>. Again, this is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
--- In kicad-users@..., John Hudak<jjhudak@...>?? wrote:
LOL, well said!
(I am not a developer in this effort, but have been on others).??I've often
wondered this myself.??Having seen this lack of attention to standards in
other open src tools, I can guess at many reasons, ranging from ignorance
to arrogance to cost (acquiring some of those standards requires real
money).
In many cases, there is quite a lot of overlap between
IEEE/ANSI/IEC/CENELEC??etc.
OTOH, I am thankful for the tool....
I am very interested in the response.....
-John
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Lawrence<lawrence_joy@...>?? wrote:
**
To developers of Kicad and others.
Comments about Eeschema.
--Why are the X,Y coordinates upside down in the Y axis? When I learned
Cartesian coordinates the abscissa (X axis) has positive values going to
the right and negative values going to the left with the ordinate (Y axis)
with positive values going up and negative values going down. Quadrant I
would have the 0,0 point in the lower left corner. Do they teach this
differently in Europe? It is very confusing to me.
--Terminology for reference designators: A basic reference designator has
a class designation letter(s) and a number. Class designation letters are
1, 2, or 3 letters, but if 3 letters are used the 1st letter will be X as
in XDS or XAR. For the complete reference designator A1R7, the A1 is called
the reference designator prefix and for the complete reference designator
A1PS1C3, the A1PS1 are called reference designator prefixes. The Unit
Numbering Method of assigning reference designators is covered by ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008 (used to be ANSI/IEEE 200-1975).
--I have seen in many messages the term "multi-part component" used. The
terminology I know is "mulple-element part" and is covered in ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008, Clause 2.1.4 Suffix Letter.
--The terminology I know calls a listing of parts a "parts list (PL)" and
is covered by ANSI/ASME Y14.34M-2008 Associated Lists. In this standard it
is stated that "bill of material" is an obsolete term.
Just some ramblings.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120608-0, 08/06/2012
Tested on: 09/06/2012 09:52:38
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120610-0, 10/06/2012
Tested on: 10/06/2012 09:40:01
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
Have you seen Bernd Wiebus's EN60617 (aka IEC60617) kicad library?
If it's correct (I have no reason to doubt that but I have nothing to check it against, though maybe those Chinese sites are worth exploring) I guess it would be a good place to start, though personally I find Bernd's symbols too big. Is it the latest standard?
Regards,
Robert.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 10/06/2012 00:04, Cirilo Bernardo wrote: ________________________________
From: Robert<birmingham_spider@...>
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
I'm not sure what is the intention of this thread but please remember
that kicad is international and these are all US standards. Component
annotations are almost certainly governed by an ISO standard.
Regards,
Robert.
Sure, but many of the ASME standards were transferred to IEC and some later became an ISO standard - but having said that, many of the symbols people created for EESCHEMA do not comply with standards. For example, the MOSFET with a symmetric gate - standards documents dating over 35 years ago were recommending the asymmetric gate symbol and personally when I see a symmetric gate symbol I want to hit someone with a large book. This is not really a problem because people can still understand the drawings. However, it's a good idea to move towards standards compliance. On the down side, I think the best way to proceed is to have a working group who spends time making up a new set of compliant symbols, including existing symbols after confirming that they comply with standards, and checking symbols other people submit. This is not a small job; it's something I wouldn't mind doing, but at the moment all my free time is going into the 3D solid model
issues which I believe is of far more value to users at the moment than standards-compliant symbols. However, regarding the comments on standard reference designators - that's something which should be brought into conformance as part of the process of making KiCAD a top quality tool.
- Cirilo
On 09/06/2012 07:14, Lawrence wrote:
John,
I have been able to find the IEEE and ASME standards online on the Internet. They are usually in PDF and some may be freely downloaded for non commercial usage because they are copywrited material.
--For IEEE 315-1975 (R1993) "Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams (Including Reference Designation Letters)" see message number 11068 to see where to go to get a PDF copy that can be downloaded. This standard was withdrawn by ANSI as an American National Standard (ANS) as of June 2004. The IEEE has this as an active standard but there has been no activity on it since being reaffirmed in 1993.
--For ASME Y14.44-2008 "Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronics Parts and Equipment" I went to a Chinese Website<www.> and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-6030462696.html>. This is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
--For ASME Y14.34-2008 "Associated Lists" I also went to the Chinese Website<www.> and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-5990462641.html>. Again, this is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
--- In kicad-users@..., John Hudak<jjhudak@...> wrote:
LOL, well said!
(I am not a developer in this effort, but have been on others). I've often
wondered this myself. Having seen this lack of attention to standards in
other open src tools, I can guess at many reasons, ranging from ignorance
to arrogance to cost (acquiring some of those standards requires real
money).
In many cases, there is quite a lot of overlap between
IEEE/ANSI/IEC/CENELEC etc.
OTOH, I am thankful for the tool....
I am very interested in the response.....
-John
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Lawrence<lawrence_joy@...> wrote:
**
To developers of Kicad and others.
Comments about Eeschema.
--Why are the X,Y coordinates upside down in the Y axis? When I learned
Cartesian coordinates the abscissa (X axis) has positive values going to
the right and negative values going to the left with the ordinate (Y axis)
with positive values going up and negative values going down. Quadrant I
would have the 0,0 point in the lower left corner. Do they teach this
differently in Europe? It is very confusing to me.
--Terminology for reference designators: A basic reference designator has
a class designation letter(s) and a number. Class designation letters are
1, 2, or 3 letters, but if 3 letters are used the 1st letter will be X as
in XDS or XAR. For the complete reference designator A1R7, the A1 is called
the reference designator prefix and for the complete reference designator
A1PS1C3, the A1PS1 are called reference designator prefixes. The Unit
Numbering Method of assigning reference designators is covered by ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008 (used to be ANSI/IEEE 200-1975).
--I have seen in many messages the term "multi-part component" used. The
terminology I know is "mulple-element part" and is covered in ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008, Clause 2.1.4 Suffix Letter.
--The terminology I know calls a listing of parts a "parts list (PL)" and
is covered by ANSI/ASME Y14.34M-2008 Associated Lists. In this standard it
is stated that "bill of material" is an obsolete term.
Just some ramblings.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120608-0, 08/06/2012
Tested on: 09/06/2012 09:52:38
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120610-0, 10/06/2012
Tested on: 10/06/2012 09:40:01
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
________________________________
From: Robert <birmingham_spider@...>
To: kicad-users@...
Sent: Saturday, June 9, 2012 7:15 PM
Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Re: Comments About Eeschema
?
I'm not sure what is the intention of this thread but please remember
that kicad is international and these are all US standards.?? Component
annotations are almost certainly governed by an ISO standard.
Regards,
Robert.
Sure, but many of the ASME standards were transferred to IEC and some later became an ISO standard - but having said that, many of the symbols people created for EESCHEMA do not comply with standards.? For example, the MOSFET with a symmetric gate - standards documents dating over 35 years ago were recommending the asymmetric gate symbol and personally when I see a symmetric gate symbol I want to hit someone with a large book.? This is not really a problem because people can still understand the drawings. However, it's a good idea to move towards standards compliance.? On the down side, I think the best way to proceed is to have a working group who spends time making up a new set of compliant symbols, including existing symbols after confirming that they comply with standards, and checking symbols other people submit.? This is not a small job; it's something I wouldn't mind doing, but at the moment all my free time is going into the 3D solid model issues which I believe is of far more value to users at the moment than standards-compliant symbols. However, regarding the comments on standard reference designators - that's something which should be brought into conformance as part of the process of making KiCAD a top quality tool. - Cirilo On 09/06/2012 07:14, Lawrence wrote:
John,
I have been able to find the IEEE and ASME standards online on the Internet. They are usually in PDF and some may be freely downloaded for non commercial usage because they are copywrited material.
--For IEEE 315-1975 (R1993) "Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams (Including Reference Designation Letters)" see message number 11068 to see where to go to get a PDF copy that can be downloaded. This standard was withdrawn by ANSI as an American National Standard (ANS) as of June 2004. The IEEE has this as an active standard but there has been no activity on it since being reaffirmed in 1993.
--For ASME Y14.44-2008 "Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronics Parts and Equipment" I went to a Chinese Website<www.>??and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-6030462696.html>. This is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
--For ASME Y14.34-2008 "Associated Lists" I also went to the Chinese Website<www.>??and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-5990462641.html>. Again, this is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
--- In kicad-users@..., John Hudak<jjhudak@...>??wrote:
LOL, well said!
(I am not a developer in this effort, but have been on others).??I've often
wondered this myself.??Having seen this lack of attention to standards in
other open src tools, I can guess at many reasons, ranging from ignorance
to arrogance to cost (acquiring some of those standards requires real
money).
In many cases, there is quite a lot of overlap between
IEEE/ANSI/IEC/CENELEC??etc.
OTOH, I am thankful for the tool....
I am very interested in the response.....
-John
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Lawrence<lawrence_joy@...>??wrote:
**
To developers of Kicad and others.
Comments about Eeschema.
--Why are the X,Y coordinates upside down in the Y axis? When I learned
Cartesian coordinates the abscissa (X axis) has positive values going to
the right and negative values going to the left with the ordinate (Y axis)
with positive values going up and negative values going down. Quadrant I
would have the 0,0 point in the lower left corner. Do they teach this
differently in Europe? It is very confusing to me.
--Terminology for reference designators: A basic reference designator has
a class designation letter(s) and a number. Class designation letters are
1, 2, or 3 letters, but if 3 letters are used the 1st letter will be X as
in XDS or XAR. For the complete reference designator A1R7, the A1 is called
the reference designator prefix and for the complete reference designator
A1PS1C3, the A1PS1 are called reference designator prefixes. The Unit
Numbering Method of assigning reference designators is covered by ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008 (used to be ANSI/IEEE 200-1975).
--I have seen in many messages the term "multi-part component" used. The
terminology I know is "mulple-element part" and is covered in ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008, Clause 2.1.4 Suffix Letter.
--The terminology I know calls a listing of parts a "parts list (PL)" and
is covered by ANSI/ASME Y14.34M-2008 Associated Lists. In this standard it
is stated that "bill of material" is an obsolete term.
Just some ramblings.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120608-0, 08/06/2012
Tested on: 09/06/2012 09:52:38
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
Miguel,
I agree with you about funding. I would even be willing to donate money myself for desirable features. I'm particularly enthusiastic about the scripting work your are doing and I hope I can try it out soon (hopefully for amending and panellising boards in PCBnew).
Thanks for the new website as well.
David.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
--- In kicad-users@..., Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo <miguelangel@...> wrote:
Hi Dick,
2012/6/7 dickelbeck <dick@...>
**
I am finished with the EAGLE_PLUGIN, and I am suspending my involvement
with KiCad until my time can be funded.
This probably means goodbye, after 5 years and $310,000 donated by my
employer, SoftPLC Corporation, to the project.
Thanks a lot for the hard work and leadership you've been giving to
KiCad, and the funding SoftPLC has been giving, at the end paying your time
means funding.
It's a hard for any company, open source software development comes with a
very blurry and long term ROI, when it does even exist.
My suggestions to users of the project, is that you find a way to fund the
work. And until that happens, be sure and give credit and thanks where it
is due, not to some nebuluous "software dispenser in the sky" called "the
developers". Name names, and understand that software is not free.
A strategy for funding won't be bad at all for the project, may be
willing and proven developers could offer a list of features they'd find
interesting to
develop, including a price tag. Later we get the features voted, and then
we put them on (or any equivalent
platform) to get
them funded.
Each of you are the recipient of a portion of SoftPLC's donation. There
are only about 3 or 4 major financial backers of this project, and I dare
say that SoftPLC corporation was number 2.
Probably we should be maintaining a list of donors in the new KiCad website, it's a way to pay something back to SoftPLC
[... snip ...]
Additionally, I am starting a new company now:
which is going to sell quad-copters and drone technology. Naturally we
will be all over the flight control software. Please please please watch
the website over the next few weeks. And if you feel compelled to give back
a little, buy something for yourself there, or your kid or grand-kids.
Woow!, nice!, I've built a quad copter once, they're spectacular, I wish
you very good luck. Please tell us when the products are ready to take a
look.
I wish I could say that I enjoyed contributing, but to be candid, I was
always a fish out of water. I am a capitalist, not a communist doner, so
the fit was never right. And I am hell to work and with, because of very
high expectations relative to software designs, so maybe this is a good
thing for the other developers and maybe the project as a whole.
As you told me once, donating your time to an opensource project is like
donating blood, if you do it too much, then you're dead.
We live on a capitalist world, and food won't come to our houses if we
"code" for free. Even if we lived in a communist world, then we must be
doing our assigned duties... and not coding what we wanted to. So money is
necessary, and finding a strategy to fund this project would be of a big
benefit to all the users. KiCad has a lot to offer to everyone.
Dick
Good luck :) --
Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo
+34 636 52 25 69
skype: ajoajoajo
|
--- In kicad-users@..., Alain Mouette <alainm@...> wrote:
Hi Dick,
thank you very much for all that you have contributed. Specialy that you
did not only big contributions but also important ones.
Surely Kicad is a better software thanks to you!!!
Only a few weeks ago I was very glad to see you around proposing new
functionalities...
I hope you all the best for you new company :)
Alain
Em 06-06-2012 23:22, dickelbeck escreveu:
I am finished with the EAGLE_PLUGIN, and I am suspending my involvement with KiCad until my time can be funded.
This probably means goodbye, after 5 years and $310,000 donated by my employer, SoftPLC Corporation, to the project.
My suggestions to users of the project, is that you find a way to fund the work. And until that happens, be sure and give credit and thanks where it is due, not to some nebuluous "software dispenser in the sky" called "the developers". Name names, and understand that software is not free.
Each of you are the recipient of a portion of SoftPLC's donation. There are only about 3 or 4 major financial backers of this project, and I dare say that SoftPLC corporation was number 2.
In case you are curious about what I do in my day job, I write factory automation software, and do it very well. My company has about 5% of the U.S. electric power grid power production under control of our flagship product named SoftPLC Corporation. This is all hydroelectric power generation, and we recently were again selected to be the controller for a retrofit application for the largest power plant in the United States, also hydro. This is a complete replacement of all controllers and installation of SoftPLC controllers to run the entire Grand Coulee dam. It is now operational fully on SoftPLCs.
Additionally, I am starting a new company now:
which is going to sell quad-copters and drone technology. Naturally we will be all over the flight control software. Please please please watch the website over the next few weeks. And if you feel compelled to give back a little, buy something for yourself there, or your kid or grand-kids.
I wish I could say that I enjoyed contributing, but to be candid, I was always a fish out of water. I am a capitalist, not a communist doner, so the fit was never right. And I am hell to work and with, because of very high expectations relative to software designs, so maybe this is a good thing for the other developers and maybe the project as a whole.
Dick
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
Dick, Thank you for all the time,money and inspiration you have given to this project. I'm hoping you are still going to be using Kicad so can pop in for a chat on the forum now and then. I'm hoping that we can keep up the momentum and interest here. David.
|
Re: Comments About Eeschema
I'm not sure what is the intention of this thread but please remember that kicad is international and these are all US standards. Component annotations are almost certainly governed by an ISO standard.
Regards,
Robert.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 09/06/2012 07:14, Lawrence wrote: John,
I have been able to find the IEEE and ASME standards online on the Internet. They are usually in PDF and some may be freely downloaded for non commercial usage because they are copywrited material.
--For IEEE 315-1975 (R1993) "Graphic Symbols for Electrical and Electronics Diagrams (Including Reference Designation Letters)" see message number 11068 to see where to go to get a PDF copy that can be downloaded. This standard was withdrawn by ANSI as an American National Standard (ANS) as of June 2004. The IEEE has this as an active standard but there has been no activity on it since being reaffirmed in 1993.
--For ASME Y14.44-2008 "Reference Designations for Electrical and Electronics Parts and Equipment" I went to a Chinese Website<www.> and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-6030462696.html>. This is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
--For ASME Y14.34-2008 "Associated Lists" I also went to the Chinese Website<www.> and ended up at<www.doc88.com/p-5990462641.html>. Again, this is viewable and maybe can be downloaded but the process is not straight forward.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
--- In kicad-users@..., John Hudak<jjhudak@...> wrote:
LOL, well said!
(I am not a developer in this effort, but have been on others). I've often
wondered this myself. Having seen this lack of attention to standards in
other open src tools, I can guess at many reasons, ranging from ignorance
to arrogance to cost (acquiring some of those standards requires real
money).
In many cases, there is quite a lot of overlap between
IEEE/ANSI/IEC/CENELEC etc.
OTOH, I am thankful for the tool....
I am very interested in the response.....
-John
On Wed, Jun 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Lawrence<lawrence_joy@...> wrote:
**
To developers of Kicad and others.
Comments about Eeschema.
--Why are the X,Y coordinates upside down in the Y axis? When I learned
Cartesian coordinates the abscissa (X axis) has positive values going to
the right and negative values going to the left with the ordinate (Y axis)
with positive values going up and negative values going down. Quadrant I
would have the 0,0 point in the lower left corner. Do they teach this
differently in Europe? It is very confusing to me.
--Terminology for reference designators: A basic reference designator has
a class designation letter(s) and a number. Class designation letters are
1, 2, or 3 letters, but if 3 letters are used the 1st letter will be X as
in XDS or XAR. For the complete reference designator A1R7, the A1 is called
the reference designator prefix and for the complete reference designator
A1PS1C3, the A1PS1 are called reference designator prefixes. The Unit
Numbering Method of assigning reference designators is covered by ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008 (used to be ANSI/IEEE 200-1975).
--I have seen in many messages the term "multi-part component" used. The
terminology I know is "mulple-element part" and is covered in ANSI/ASME
Y14.44-2008, Clause 2.1.4 Suffix Letter.
--The terminology I know calls a listing of parts a "parts list (PL)" and
is covered by ANSI/ASME Y14.34M-2008 Associated Lists. In this standard it
is stated that "bill of material" is an obsolete term.
Just some ramblings.
Regards, Larry 9V1/WN8P
------------------------------------
Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your question.
Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of Kicad.
Please visit for details of how to contribute your symbols/modules to the kicad library.
For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the kicad-devel group at ! Groups Links
---
avast! Antivirus: Inbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 120608-0, 08/06/2012
Tested on: 09/06/2012 09:52:38
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2012 AVAST Software.
--
() Plain text email - safe, readable, inclusive.
/\
|
