Hi Bob:

I'll second the usefulness of checking the layout against the schematic.  The early versions of ExpressPCB did not have
schematic capture and even on very simple boards I ended up making patches.  http://www.expresspcb.com/
Now when you're doing the layout you can turn on checking and all the pads for the currently active note light up in a
different color.  By stepping through all the nodes you can confirm that they are all connected to each other.

I've been using ExpressPCB for a long time and for what I'm doing it's the most effective in terms of my time.  The down
side is that their free software is proprietary to their process.  You don't get to shop vendors.  In exchange you get a
very simple and easy to learn interface and an extensive library of standard parts.  It's also easy to add a custom
part.  For me the learning curve for working with something like Eagle and the different file types and conventions is
not worth the time.

I use the schematic capture to draw schematics for things where I'm not going to make a board.

Have Fun,

Brooke Clarke
http://www.PRC68.com
http://www.end2partygovernment.com/Brooke4Congress.html

Bob Camp wrote:

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 9:52 AM, Brooke Clarke brooke@pacific.net wrote:

A good feature to look for is autorouting.  and design rule checking.
Of course every engineer thinks he is smarter than this kind of
software.  Mostly he is but it is good to use software that simply
will not allow some kinds of errors.  Design rules generally are
things like following the schematic and the geometry of traces and
limits of the PCB fab like line widths.

I've used "rat's nest" routing too.  This allows you to place the
parts on the PCB and then does the interconnects with "as the crow
flies"  traces that cross and can't possibly work but they are drawn
in red.  you click them one at a time and  rout them.  As you place
components you can see the rats net and you move them around to
minimize the crossings.

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California

I suggested expresspcb earlier and all thats been said is on target.
General ease of use.
What is however tricky is if you need to create a symbol. Lets say a
particular PIC micro.
It is cumbersome to adapt one that exists and I am unsure as to why.
But that said its is pretty easy to use overall.
I do plan to try a few others suggested here. Like most of us I am a small
board/project kind O time-nut and since most of my stuff is really one off
do point to point and really just want to document what on earth I actually
did.
I do think this thread has been pretty good as a overall state of the
industry today. I want to go hunting for libraries since that does seem to
be pretty key.
Regards
Paul.
WB8TSL

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Brooke Clarke brooke@pacific.net wrote:

Rick,

Thanks for the comments on Eagle.

I have been frustrated trying to learn Eagle for a small urgent project recently. I ended up using ExpressPCB and the attendant schematic capture.
While it uses proprietary file format and is therefore locked to one vendor, it was surprisingly easy to use.
I created a schematic and a double sided RF PWB in a couple of weeks with minimum reference to the documentation. That was my first PWB design.

I intend to learn Eagle for future projects though, as I need the capability to generate Gerbers at least.

I tried KiCAD but I found it unfriendly and I do not like the way the schematic symbols look (I like my resistors wiggly, not rectangular, call me old fashioned...)

If someone only needs a simple schematic capture tool, ExpressSCH from ExpressPCB is hard to beat. You can easily edit or create new symbols and the printouts look good and professional.

Didier KO4BB

Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless thingy while I do other things...

-----Original Message-----
From: "Rick Karlquist" richard@karlquist.com
Sender: time-nuts-bounces@febo.com
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 17:21:39
To: Discussion of precise time and frequency measurementtime-nuts@febo.com
Reply-To: richard@karlquist.com,
Discussion of precise time and frequency measurement
time-nuts@febo.com
Subject: Re: [time-nuts] Schematic capture, anyone?

Jim Hickstein wrote:

I'll add another vote for Eagle.  It is a German program written in
Unix, and ported to Windows.  Therefore, you select the action
first then click on the object of the action.  It takes some getting
used to.  There has been a pattern of PC layout companies getting
cobbled up leaving you with an orphan program, or an upgrade
to some very expensive program.  Orcad and Protel go gobbled up.
Eagle did too, but by a distributor, Newark.  They just came out
with a new improved version.  You can finally draw arbitrary SMT
footprints.  I think that was the major limitation of the old
version.  You can of course draw your own symbols any way you like.
I have been using Eagle for 5 years now and never looked back.
One other drawback of Eagle is that it is difficult to move a design
between computers, and there are issues with the way preferences
are stored.  If you use a part from a library in a design, you are
forever locked into that library.  Many other CAD systems have these
issues.  Mentor used to be terrible about having absolute path names, etc.

Rick N6RK

time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com
To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts
and follow the instructions there.

First off if you prefer the American style zig-zag resistors or maybe
circles around your transistors,  all of them allow you to edit
symbols and most have alternate symbol libraries.

I think xciruit wil make the best looking schematics and it can be
used along side other software
http://opencircuitdesign.com/xcircuit/index.html

One feature to look for is BOM management.  You should be able to not
only label a cap as "C24" but say it's value, who makes it,
manufacture part number the maybe even the distributer's part number

The other thing is backwards references.  So you can change a part int
e PCB layout and have the schematic change

On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:56 PM,  shalimr9@gmail.com wrote:

--

Chris Albertson
Redondo Beach, California

Hi

You will indeed spend a lot of time learning any of the more powerful packages. The same is true about re-learning them if you don't work with them for a while. Unless you are going to do this at least once a month, there is such a thing as "to powerful".

Bob

On Feb 24, 2012, at 8:56 PM, shalimr9@gmail.com wrote:

On Fri, 24 Feb 2012 10:41:37 -0800
Chris Albertson albertson.chris@gmail.com wrote:

I advice against the use of autorouting. It's not that the engineer
is so much smarter than the router, but it's that the engineer has
much more knowledge than the router to know what those wires carry
and which ones should be short, which wide, which do not really matter
if they have a small trip around the PCB...

Of course, you can annotate the schematics with all that info in order
to get the autorouter to the point it can beat you. But it'll take much
longer than doing it yourself.

The usual way i do routing, is to use rats nest place the parts and see
whether i can route the important signals nicely. Then route those first.

If the PCB is complex (either too many highly interconnected componets,
or not enough space) i often do a first run to asses how the connections
will look like when routed and after that a second run with adjusted placement.

		Attila inali

--
Why does it take years to find the answers to
the questions one should have asked long ago?