Absolute newbie forum? <=== "not connected"

Many thanks for you patience and excellent responses.
Screenshots, show the result.
I gave the steps I used so you might see what was missing.
I described the error that someone might remember what it was they learned that fixed it.
I described the steps I took after the error that did not work for me.
I attempted to give all so nothing was missing.
I pointed out that I expected the answer to be something REALLY BASIC.
I also mentioned that the tuts are great, but missing this basic thing. Difficult to describe the missing thing, as I don’t know what it is.
Images below, showing as described above.
Clearly I can place components, as mentioned above.

So, justification raving done.

And placed the same way, but no error.
Again, many thanks for the helpful responses. Hoping someone can tell me the obvious.
On a separate attempt, I set the values of everything, well, I think, everything; everything I could find. Similar error, so this time through, I have not set the values.
This time, from memory, so haven’t checked the values are sensible.

Errors, seemingly unchanged.
Something truely basic?

Again, many thanks to those who responded. Shows a great support group.

Ok, the new users can only post one image, after entering multiple to illustrate is a tad of a surrpise.
Then deleting the image post lines, does not remove them? Eek!

Replying too quickly. :frowning:



Consider repying to several posts at once. :slight_smile:Smart system.
Wish I could.

with values.
Not that.

One GND, no error.
Clue there.
The example (Sparkfun?) I followed used 0V instead. I tried that the first time.
Something truely basic and unsaid?

The errors in ERC are there because global labels are not normally meant to simply label a net. They are meant to create cross connections. In this regard if a specific label exist only once this most likely means that your label has a misspelling in it or you forgot to add the second one.

And the one about power input not driven: Tutorial: How to check footprint correctness?

1 Like

You may want to pick some new tutorial videos to watch. One of the biggest ‘gotchas’ with KiCad is what @Rene was alluding to; when in doubt, add Power Flags to tell KiCad where power is coming from/going to.

I recreated it (with flags) and ran ERC without errors…

The power flags for in and out are the wrong solution here. While they hide the original error they are not what does it! The reason the error disapears is because now you have a second out label and a second in label.

If you use local labels then you should not get an error in the first place.


Many thanks to all who responded.
You have it.
Search “PWR_FLAG”.
Thanking you. Something SO OBVIOUS to frequent users that no one mentions it.
Also many thanks for thr pointer that “global labels” are not a mechanism to label signals/points but an interconnection mechanism.
A wonderfully responsive and helpful forum.

So this was just a troll thread?

I would say it looks more like a language barrier (so much knowledge missing about how ecad works in general that it was hard for the user to communicate their problem.)

1 Like

As I said, a picture is worth a thousand words. It took nearly a day to get a screenshot of what the actual problem was. Perhaps we should make a screenshot of the actual error mandatory rather than struggle with “communication difficulties”, and playing “guess what the poster can see on their screen but can’t tell us”.


Which part was missing from the description?
At no point did anyone previously mention nor ask about “PWR_FLAG”.
I was actually looking for an answer.
The image showed only what I described. “Not connected”.
Many thanks to those who provided positive guesses.


LOL, the trolling continues. I’m not going to waste any more time on this one :wink:

We can only ask such a specific question once we understand the problem. Part of that was getting the full error message in your screenshot which you honestly could have included in the first post you made.

So in future if you get any error message please inlcude it in full in your first post.

1 Like

I have no idea why you think that but you are entitled to your opinion. I see nothing that indicates this poster is doing anything other than trying to get help here.

1 Like

Well, to be fair, Nanren88’s next post after your and my posts had a screenshot. I wouldn’t require a first time poster to understand everything about asking a question here.

I continually wonder why internet forums don’t have a quiz test before accepting a new user. We could give the basic information and questions like:

“Which of these isn’t necessary for a good question? (select more than one)”

  1. KiCad version information
  2. A screenshot of your problematic situation or zipped project files
  3. What you actually want to achieve
  4. Exact steps, using the English UI texts, to reproduce your problem
  5. Your name
  6. Thanking beforehand

“How should you give the version information of KiCad in your question?”

  1. The installation package file name
  2. The first two numbers of the version
  3. Copy the version information using Help->About->Copy Version Info button and paste it

“Which is not a good reason to give a screenshot or zipped project in a question?”

  1. It gives information which may be difficult to describe otherwise
  2. It gives information which the poster doesn’t necessarily think about at all
  3. It prevents posting back and forth for a day without anyone knowing what it is about
  4. People are interested in seeing other people’s errors


1 Like

We really do not want to put any hurdles in between the user and the forum. The few times it goes wrong really is not a problem. Also the fact that the forum does not really allow new users to post more than one image might send the wrong message to be honest.

The thing about the version info is that it really is only required for things that smell like a bug. Every other instance it just makes the question much less readable (as it takes up so much space. If the version info would be shorter then i would be ok with requiring it.)


Very sorry. Had no intention to cause offence.
I had and have looked at many of your fine tutorial images and not a single one I found had anything looking like "PWR_FLAG:.
I copied an example, fromn the image, not unlike the many fine ones in those tutorials and got a message that was given the info unfathomable.
I described it fully. I presumed it was a step I had missed. And asked which step I missed.
The fine list of info above for inclusion might add little to that.
Apologies again for causing turmoil.
Once pointed out, knowing to look for it, I find it is step 43 in getting started.
My reason for following rather than abandoning was that I suspect others might find the same problem. Reproduce the image from the tutorial, yet get an error “not connected”. Perhaps a mention of the likely cause for the beginners?
I suspected what I was missing was trivial, obvious to users, hence not dependent on any of those list of things often demanded with posts.
Really sorry I even started. Sorry for any discord caused.I just wanted to work out what the problem was to get my easy simulation and after the problem to make it easier for anyone following the same path.
I now regret the whole episode.
Looks like a great product and some really helpfuil responses. Many thanks.


Very few threads are truly a problem. (Or, perhaps the moderators spend every waking hour watching this forum like a hawk, and “problem” posts go to the bit-bucket within seconds.)

Forum members are direct yet respectful when it comes to instructing new (or experienced) users about protocols and procedures. And new users nearly always comply as instructed. “Initiative” seems to be a highly respected trait: A user who shows that he has put some effort into trying to find an answer to his question receives relevant help, regardless of how confused, fundamental, or mundane the question may be. (I’m sure other Forum members have sometimes suppressed an urge to poke fun at a post, such as the thread asking “Help me understand Block Dragging” . . . which has the obvious answer, "Well, first you attach your Blockchain . . . . " :grin: )

I agree with @Rene_Poschl - I don’t see a need for additional administrivial processes nor obstacles to participation.


1 Like