Program for PCB/Circuit Design
BoysBoysBoys
printing?
linnix
BoysBoysBoys wrote:
> What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
> printing?
Probably none. Just feed them to laser photoplotters.
JeffM
>What program do PCB makers use
Tim Wescott
> What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
> printing?
>
PCB makers don't usually lay out the circuits -- their customers usually do.
There are a variety of PCB layout packages out there, if you look.
--
Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Posting from Google? See http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" came out in April.
See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Coos Haak
> What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
> printing?
Have you /never/ heard of searching the web?
"pcb layout development" gave me 1.850.000 hits in google.
Altavista a /least/ 50 pages.
--
Coos
CHForth, 16 bit DOS applications
http://home.hccnet.nl/j.j.haak/forth.html
sdey...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
>printing?
Pulsonix.
sdey...@hotmail.com
wrote:
>What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
>printing?
CircuitCam.
Neil
> What program do PCB makers use to layout all of the circuits before
> printing?
>
BoysBoysBoys
karel
"BoysBoysBoys" <ntr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161623183.9...@m7g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> What is the most widely used, or the standard?
round pads
BoysBoysBoys
rickman
He is joking. But PADS is a very popular layout package. Why do you
care which one is most popular? What are you looking for?
JeffM
>What is the most widely used, or the standard?
No such animal.
You may be able to generalize based on your locale, but even then...
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/browse_frm/thread/92c5b75a1af2ce5e/0bbf23b1a9d72985?q=Eagle+OrCad+Protel+Tango+EMA-EDA+p-cad+Protel+Cadence+PADS+AutoEngineer+gEDA+hierarchical+Sure-they-are+not-particularly-realistic+license-costs
BoysBoysBoys
sure that I start learning schematics and PCB layout with the right
program.
Rene Tschaggelar
company and the product. The company got renamed to
Altium, the product got renamed to Altium Designer
and P-CAD is a products that was purchased by them
and lives further under the same name.
Rene
Jim Stewart
> No, they are one. Protel used to be the name of the
> company and the product. The company got renamed to
> Altium, the product got renamed to Altium Designer
> and P-CAD is a products that was purchased by them
> and lives further under the same name.
P-CAD was EOL'ed a couple of months ago.
http://www.altium.com/pcad/announcement/
JeffM
This is NOT **Google Groups** (it is **USENET**)
and MOST FOLKS DON'T SEE WHAT YOU SEE ON GOOGLE.
It is NOT necessary to re-post everything that was in the post
to which you are responding.
It *IS* a good idea to include SOME of that as **context**
--especially the name of the previous poster.
The general rule is TRIM and BOTTOM-POST.
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:SXIajvWUVHAJ:groups.google.com/support/bin/answer.py=answer=12348+Tempting-though-it-is-*-*-*-*-*-*+remove-*-*-*-irrelevant+STOP+zz-zz+Summarize.what.you're.following.up+BOTTOM+qq+Usenet
(Scroll down to the good stuff before reading ALL of the page.)
Note how others post on Usenet and EMULATE.
Note also that Rene and Jim are iconclasts.
.
.
JeffM wrote:
>>http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.design/browse_frm/thread/92c5b75a1af2ce5e/0bbf23b1a9d72985?q=Eagle+OrCad+Protel+Tango+EMA-EDA+p-cad+Protel+Cadence+PADS+AutoEngineer+gEDA+hierarchical+Sure-they-are+not-particularly-realistic+license-costs
BoysBoysBoys wrote:
>I just want to make sure that I start learning schematics
>and PCB layout with the right program.
>
I thought that's where you were going.
That's a fool's errand. There are no guarantees
that the one you learn will be used at any given company.[1]
Learn CONCEPTS instead; they translate between apps.
When you see the prices for some of these packages,
you may just wander over to KiCAD's site
and get their open source offering (gratis and libre).
.
.
[1] This reminds me of schools that, instead of using free software,
piss away kilobucks on M$ software because
"it's what they will encounter in industry".
Hogwash. LEARN CONCEPTS--especially with pliant young minds.
Neil
Pads-PCB is a professional package, And expensive.
Schematic is is another tool. Or-cad is popular.
Learn the concepts. they translate across packages.
Max
Before I bought I downloaded and tried everything I could get my hands on
and at that time (8 years ago) some of the cheaper packages wouldn't run and
some of the expensive packages were, well, expensive. I found Eagle to be
the best price/performance tradeoff in my catagory (sub $1000)
"BoysBoysBoys" <ntr...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1161633781.5...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Grant Edwards
> I have used Cadsoft Eagle for many years and have been very happy with it
> Before I bought I downloaded and tried everything I could get my hands on
> and at that time (8 years ago) some of the cheaper packages wouldn't run and
> some of the expensive packages were, well, expensive. I found Eagle to be
> the best price/performance tradeoff in my catagory (sub $1000)
Eagle is also one of the few choices for somebody running Linux
or OS-X. Even the free version is darned useful, and the free
support on the newsgroups is first-class.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Should I get
at locked in the PRINCICAL'S
visi.com OFFICE today -- or have
a VASECTOMY??
JeffM
>>I found Eagle to be the best price/performance tradeoff
>>in my catagory (sub $1000)
The pricing structure of Cadsoft's EAGLE
(Easily Applicable Graphical Layout Editor)
is very good--as is the buy-only-what-you-need modularity.
(I have never seen an autorouter for which I would pay the asking
price.)
Grant Edwards wrote:
>Eagle is also one of the few choices
>for somebody running Linux or OS-X.
>
The cross-platform thing is a nice selling point.
As far as I know, the open source packages
are the only others that do this (well, in varying degrees).
>Even the free version is darned useful,
>
Yup. No FEATURES are crippled.
Limits of the demo:
100mm x 80mm boards
2 copper layers
Single-sheet schematics.
If you want to sell what you produce with the demo,
you can licence this version for $50.
>and the free support on the newsgroups is first-class.
>
Amen.
Grant Edwards
>>Eagle is also one of the few choices for somebody running Linux
>>or OS-X.
>
> The cross-platform thing is a nice selling point. As far as I
> know, the open source packages are the only others that do
> this (well, in varying degrees).
>
>>Even the free version is darned useful,
>>
> Yup. No FEATURES are crippled.
> Limits of the demo:
> 100mm x 80mm boards
> 2 copper layers
> Single-sheet schematics.
>
> If you want to sell what you produce with the demo,
> you can licence this version for $50.
I'll probably never sell anything, but I gave CADSoft the $50
just to reward them for supporting Linux.
>>and the free support on the newsgroups is first-class.
>
> Amen.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! Why am I in this ROOM
at in DOWNTOWN PHILADELPHIA?
visi.com
Markus Zingg
>I have used Cadsoft Eagle for many years and have been very happy with it
>Before I bought I downloaded and tried everything I could get my hands on
>and at that time (8 years ago) some of the cheaper packages wouldn't run and
>some of the expensive packages were, well, expensive. I found Eagle to be
>the best price/performance tradeoff in my catagory (sub $1000)
I'm useing an Eagle professional version too, but I will switch by the
next ocasion.
The reason is their habitus towards their paying customers. About 3.5
years ago, I downloaded a little Eagle project somewhere from a
website I can't even remember. It happened that back then, I reused a
very small part of this schema (with copy and paste) in one of my
projects and continued to copy and paste the same part from my project
into a couple of other projects of mine later on. I forgot the schema
I downloaded from said website back then and it disapeard from my PC
about two years ago when I switched to a new one. No problem cause I
did not further needed this third party schema and therefore did not
care for it. So far so good right?
Well, not so with Eagle! For about 3 years I did not experienced any
problems whatsoever. But this changed after they released version 4.1
to which I upgraded my former fully payed full 4.0 version by buying
the upgrade. Thereafter it turned out that some of my projects could
no longer be opened. Baffeled about this I opened a support case with
Eagles and their final/official reply after quite a long ping pong
game was that "my" designs were produced with a cracked version of
Eagle alas they would not help me. For those interested, I do have the
complete e-mail conversation. Needless to say that I never used a
cracked Eagle myself which is obvious since I do have the full
version.
Even though they know the complete story and even though this
behaviour can easily be reproduced and even knowing my license
information and also knowing that I'm a full paying customer for
several years, they still (and still do) refused to unlock my designs
(which I sent them for analysis) just because I once copied a voltage
regulator (I think it was) out of a design which aparently was made by
some third party with a cracked version.
The "funny" part is that I would not have had the slightest chance to
avoid this, cause this fact (their attitude against such cases as well
as the technical circumstances) is to my knownleadge not documented
and the 4.0 version does NOT recognize this "foreign" schema as being
made with a cracked version. Would it have done so, I obviousely would
not have been able to reuse parts of that design. That's actually
clear cause a cracker obviousely will have to crack a version after
it's release which at the same time means this can happen to any Eagle
user any time again!
I do fully understand a companies right to take measures against
piracy etc. I do however not understand if they void my own work. That
said if say only the very first design would no longer work so be it,
or even if they would have asked for money to unlock my projects so be
it, but no, no chance - eventhough they confirmed that they
technically could unlock my designs therby giving my work back to me.
This evil schema part creaped into quite some of my designs with which
the only option I have now is to recapture their schemas from scratch!
Lucky me the affected projects are not the biggest/most important
ones, but still.
I just wanted to share this little nice experience with Eagle support
and CadSoft as a company to give a little counterweight here. So,
before you consider buying Eagle, make yourself aware of the fact that
you never ever can exchange a design with a third party cause you
never know if projects or parts of projects coming from a third party
somewhere later in the future all of a sudden will render your own
work useless if you happen to reuse only a single bit made by someone
else. This is especially true cause the party which sends you a
project may is a fully paying customer too but is having something in
his designs which originates from some other source which in turn
oringnates from somewhere else - you get the idea.
Markus
Spehro Pefhany
<m.z...@nct.ch> wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:13:59 GMT, "Max" <nos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
<snip story>
Did you save the previous program version, which could open your
files?
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Max
> price.)
I bought the autorouter with the original Eagle program but the only
thing I found it useful for was to give me an approximate idea of
whether a layout was going to give me trouble in certain areas. I
would run the router and if it could get to 70% or better than I knew
I could route the whole thing without trouble. I didn't bother with
the auto router on the last version and haven't missed it.
JeffM
>I downloaded a little Eagle project somewhere from a website[...]
>I reused a very small part of this schema
>(with copy and paste) in one of my projects
>after they released version 4.1
>
>[Cadsoft said] that "my" designs were produced
>with a cracked version of Eagle
>knowing that I'm a full paying customer for several years,
>they still (and still do) refused to unlock my designs
>
>they technically could unlock my designs
That is inexcusable.
If the app can determine that a component is from a cracked version,
there is no reason that the same mechanism could not be used
to flag a bogus component at the time it is being added.
This ex post facto bullshit is way over the line.
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:nfU8yxSZ788J:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party+reform+patent+right-to-privacy+zzz+design+copyright
Frank Bemelman
news:1jisj25b43ucaddcu...@4ax.com...
>
> I just wanted to share this little nice experience with Eagle support
> and CadSoft as a company to give a little counterweight here. So,
> before you consider buying Eagle, make yourself aware of the fact that
> you never ever can exchange a design with a third party cause you
> never know if projects or parts of projects coming from a third party
> somewhere later in the future all of a sudden will render your own
> work useless if you happen to reuse only a single bit made by someone
> else. This is especially true cause the party which sends you a
> project may is a fully paying customer too but is having something in
> his designs which originates from some other source which in turn
> oringnates from somewhere else - you get the idea.
Unbelievable! These guys ought to be locked up. For life.
--
Thanks, Frank.
(remove 'q' and '.invalid' when replying by email)
rickman
http://www.freepcb.com/ and has a Yahoo group for support.
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/FreePCB/
I believe freepcb.com also has a forum.
kevin...@comcast.net
On Oct 24, 11:00 am, Markus Zingg <m.zi...@nct.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Oct 2006 13:13:59 GMT, "Max" <nos...@hotmail.com> wrote:
...
> I just wanted to share this little nice experience with Eagle support
> and CadSoft as a company to give a little counterweight here. So,
> before you consider buying Eagle, make yourself aware of the fact that
> you never ever can exchange a design with a third party cause you
> never know if projects or parts of projects coming from a third party
> somewhere later in the future all of a sudden will render your own
> work useless if you happen to reuse only a single bit made by someone
> else. This is especially true cause the party which sends you a
> project may is a fully paying customer too but is having something in
> his designs which originates from some other source which in turn
> oringnates from somewhere else - you get the idea.
>
> Markus
You can export schematics and components from Eagle as text files using
scripts provided by Cadsoft. You can then import them into the new
version to remove the problems if the files become damaged.
kevin
Markus Zingg
>files?
Yes, I do have 4.0 still here and can open the files there, but not
being able to port those designs into newer versions is very anoying
and actually renders them useless in the long term.
Markus
Markus Zingg
[snip]
>That is inexcusable.
>If the app can determine that a component is from a cracked version,
>there is no reason that the same mechanism could not be used
>to flag a bogus component at the time it is being added.
Not exactly, cause only the NEXT version will know. That's obivious.
Say if they release 4.0 and someone cracks it, there is no way that
4.0 could know about a cracked version. They therefore include the
cracked serial number (from what I heard from their support that's how
it works) into the next version which then flags those components. But
between 4.0 and 4.1 one (like me) could be trapped by this many times.
>This ex post facto bullshit is way over the line.
Oh yes, I obviousely fully agree.
Markus
Markus Zingg
>You can export schematics and components from Eagle as text files using
>scripts provided by Cadsoft. You can then import them into the new
>version to remove the problems if the files become damaged.
>
>kevin
Do you have pointers to such scripts? CadSoft did not mentioned them.
Markus
kevin...@comcast.net
There are ULPs such as "export-board.ulp" and 'export-schematic.ulp" on
Cadsoft's web site in the download section.
They create a text file that can then be used as a script to regenerate
the project. They are useful if you want to do mass changes to the
libraries or cleaning up boards.
kevin
David Kelly
>
> He is joking. But PADS is a very popular layout package. Why do you
> care which one is most popular? What are you looking for?
A lot of people are afraid to stand out from the crowd by doing anything
different.
If he knew what he wanted then he could web search for products, read
the material found, and make a selection. But apparently what he wants
is to do what "everyone else" is doing.
To a couple replies above I would not have said "pads" but "Gerber
photoplot and Excellon drill." What ever one uses to lay out a PCB,
generate those two sets of files and the fabricator will be able to
build your board.
Antoon
"JeffM" <jef...@email.com> schreef in bericht > I thought that's where you
were going.
> That's a fool's errand. There are no guarantees
> that the one you learn will be used at any given company.[1]
> Learn CONCEPTS instead; they translate between apps.
>
> When you see the prices for some of these packages,
> you may just wander over to KiCAD's site
> and get their open source offering (gratis and libre).
> .
> .
> [1] This reminds me of schools that, instead of using free software,
> piss away kilobucks on M$ software because
> "it's what they will encounter in industry".
> Hogwash. LEARN CONCEPTS--especially with pliant young minds.
>
Hear, hear!
And FreePCB is free too (duh!)
Antoon
Antoon
"rickman" <gnu...@gmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1161742633.0...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Has anyone here tried FreePCB? It is available at
> http://www.freepcb.com/ and has a Yahoo group for support.
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/FreePCB/
>
> I believe freepcb.com also has a forum.
>
I started using it a few weeks ago since it is the right price for a
hobbyist like me.
It comes with a number of footprint libraries but you will still have to
invest some
time to add your own parts. The footprint editor that comes with the package
is
not the most user-friendly (it can't move lines you've already drawn for
example:
if it's in the wrong place you need to remove it and try again). It does
however
interface very well with TinyCAD (also free).
The program itself is a tad quirky but is very stable. Unlike one of the
demo
version I tried of a commercial program (written in Delphi!) which would
crash randomly. No autorouting though.
Antoon
Markus Zingg
>Cadsoft's web site in the download section.
>
>http://www.cadsoft.de/cgi-bin/download.pl?page=/home/cadsoft/html_public/download.htm.en&dir=eagle/userfiles/ulp
>
>They create a text file that can then be used as a script to regenerate
>the project. They are useful if you want to do mass changes to the
>libraries or cleaning up boards.
>
>kevin
Nice idea, alas thanks for the pointer, but the scrips error out with
a parse error in line 57. The ulp code looks fine to me so I have no
idea why it does not work.
Markus
James T. White
news:qsr3k2dc2phj5qm01...@4ax.com
I assume you got this error when you tried to run the ULPs you
downloaded on your 4.0 version that will read the "cracked" files. This
is probably caused by a difference betwen 4.0 and 4.1 in the ULP
language. Go check the release notes and you should see something in
there about the changes to the ULP language. Also pay attention to any
changes between 4.0 and 4.1 for the scripting so you can modify the ULP
so it will produce a script that can be processed by 4.1.
The net effect is that you may have to modify the ULPs so they work with
4.0 but to me that would be worth the effort since it would allow you to
avoid starting from scratch if you have a lot invested in your existing
designs.
--
James T. White
rickman
I am an engineer and everywhere I have worked, they create tons of
footprints regardless of whether footprints are available or not. It
seems that in the PCB and fabrication world, there is very little
standardization. Every company tailors their process and tailors the
footprints to match the process. So having a footprint library is
nice, but the pros don't use them much.
About the limitations of editing parts, have you checked the user group
at Yahoo? I have used the program a bit, but not extensively. I just
know that when I have asked about a "missing" feature I typically find
that it can be done, I am just not getting it. There is also a forum
at the freepcb.com web site that will likely get a quicker answer from
the author.
Markus Zingg
>downloaded on your 4.0 version that will read the "cracked" files. This
>is probably caused by a difference betwen 4.0 and 4.1 in the ULP
>language. Go check the release notes and you should see something in
>there about the changes to the ULP language. Also pay attention to any
>changes between 4.0 and 4.1 for the scripting so you can modify the ULP
>so it will produce a script that can be processed by 4.1.
>
>The net effect is that you may have to modify the ULPs so they work with
>4.0 but to me that would be worth the effort since it would allow you to
>avoid starting from scratch if you have a lot invested in your existing
>designs.
Thats true, and thank you for the pointer. I will ocasionally dig into
this. But then, since I already decided to dropp Eagle I have to
redraw those projects I intend to keep longer anyways. Again, it's not
only necesairly the technical aspect of this that tells me that
CadSoft is no professional partner. It's the attitude they have shown
in this case. I mean I even CC'ed their CEO and they did not change
their point of view, so I have no other choice than asuming that it's
really their coporate phylosophy to deal this way with their paying
customers. Sad for the lost investment but there are other CAD
companies out there which are happy to have me as their customer as
unimportant I may seem to be with a single user license.
Markus