Best practice to identify filtered power inputs for ERC?

[mdsaund]

I have a schematic built around a microcontroller and some of the pins have specific power filter requirements (see image).

However, because there are passives between the pin and the power net, ERC thinks the pin is not driven.

I can eliminate the warning with a PWR_FLAG but that uglies up my schematic. I can also eliminate the warning by changing this pin type to a regular input or passive, but that obscures the underlying functionality.

What’s the best practice to inform ERC that power does flow through a passive component?

[straubm]

Frankly: none. You already listed the alternatives available.

[straubm]

You could group all the PWR_FLAGs needed in a bottom corner of your schematic, together with the respective wires and labels for each.

[paulvdh]

I am also not a ware of any proper method to:

@mdsaund

inform ERC that power does flow through a passive component?

and this is one of the nuisances in KiCad.
As long as this is not fixed, you have two options to disable these warnings. You can first run ERC, then right click on the warning and click on “Exclude this Violation”.

Another option is to disable this option directly in Schematic Editor / File / Schematic Setup / Electrical Rules / Violation Severity

[antto]

no elegant way right now
the Signals idea would be one possible way, since that’s exactly one of the use-cases
if you like it you could press the Like button

[636Steve]

I put the power flag connected to the relevant net off to the side of the sheet outline. When the schematic is printed these are not included and so give a clean schematic.

[Jonathan_Haas]

@mdsaund

I can eliminate the warning with a PWR_FLAG but that uglies up my schematic.

Another thing you could do is modify the PWR_FLAG symbol to make it less ugly. For example set the pin length to 0 so you can place it directly on a wire or junction. (And then probably reduce the size of the diamond shape)