I also got the same idea, but…
How to make that symbols not looking for footprint but for sub-circuit.
May be you can use some from hierarchy schematic to reach the same. I never used so not sure.
1 Like
Not necessary. For an IC, you also don’t look for a sub-circuit with all the transistors. An extra little schematic with the switch circuit would be enough. It can even be placed in a corner of the main schematic if you like. The simulator might not like it, though.
For IC you want to place at PCB that IC (footprint) and not the individual transistors from it. But here you want to place those capacitors and switches. It will be not easy to tell KiCad that this symbol means 3 capacitor footprints + one switch footprint when PCB will be updated from schematic.
@pigeon
Personally, I’d leave the nine switch circuits on the page, however, I would spread them out to leave “white space” as @paulvdh suggests.
Decrease the width of TONESTACK then spread out INPUT, INPUT & TONESTACK across the page.
I’d also increase the width of the boxes a little so the labels (left) and caps. (right) are not so close to the dotted box . Likewise, the top… remove the small “input” from above the sw. and lower the SW1 & INPUT to move them from the dotted outline.
Do similar to OUTPUT & CLIPPING boxes.
Main circuit below is nice
1 Like
Another thought?
Maybe don’t turn the graphic line into a complete box… IMHO this also helps reduce the noise and clutter.
1 Like
As the subcircuits are all identical, this would be a good case for a hierarchical design. You can design your switch interface on one sheet and instantiate multiple copies of it in your master sheet. It will make this easier to maintain.
2 Likes
If you create a new symbol for your switch with two parts (like the individual gates in a 74 series logic part), you can create a clearer schematic with no crossings. This also shows the center off position of the switches that gives the 5n capacitance.
7 Likes
Because I can only do one like. 
@ Dennisch
That’s very ambiguous to say the least.
Drawing a switch like that is open to misunderstanding, Indeed, it’s misleading.
Having the capacitor wires crossing and keeping the switch action coherent is much better.
2 Likes
Yes, I thought about that option as well. But hierachical sheets do not lend themselves well to this application. You’ll need to create each sheet individually (copying/duplicating isn’t possible).
On maintenance: You’ll need to maintain every sub-sheet individually. Not nice.
Scrap my comment above!! I just tested it. Creating multiple sub-sheets that link to the same sub-sheet file is possible. Probably the best idea after all. 
1 Like
Guess I need to start reading up on hierarchical sheets! 
It’s good design practice to split up a complicated design. That’s not the case here.
But in this special situation it makes a lot of sense.
I’ve made an example design for you.
Open Scratchpad.sch first, that will enable the second file.
Scratchpad.sch (372 Bytes)
SW.sch (2.5 KB)
The best approach would be to create a new DPTT switch in your custom library and use that for the design (in the sub-sheet).
1 Like
You are lucky to have Kicad. In the pencil-and-paper days you had to buy the big erasers and use them a lot to make a schematic look pretty.
If the schematic in Kicad is a little messy you can use a feature I just discovered (as a super-newbie). If you hold the control button down when you click on a trace that whole net gets highlighted.
I was drawing a simple adapter between two headers. No matter how neat it’s difficult to eyeball trace one wire out of a couple dozen. If I light up the net I know immediately whether or not it’s going to the right place and if there are any accidental cross connections.
I first started using Kicad for its schematic drawing capability. Then I got a quote for duplicating an old PCB whose Gerbers were not welcome anywhere anymore. I just heard that v6.0 was out. So I down loaded it and entered my schematic.
One advantage I had was that I had a wired version of the old board and the old schematic. That helped me straighten out the rat nest and place the parts because I made the layout look like the original.
So insted of paying $$$$ for new gerbers to make maybe 3 copies of the old board I paid $ plus 30 hours of my time, which was less than the professionals estimated, plus it was a learning experience. That’s definitely win-win for me.
The trick is to find the right symbol for your part and mate it to the right footprint. So far I have found lots of free symbols for odd parts that are not in the library. They didn’t always have the same name as my part, but if the had the right pin out I could use it. Also, I realized that a lot of footprints are generic so all you need to know is the basic description.
I’m not ready to conquer the world, but I am happy to have a new arrow in my quiver.
2 Likes
My guess is that it is a 2-pole switch because the caps can directly be soldered onto it. If there is a PCB for the caps then it would possibly be single pole (or both poles in parallel to last longer). Duplicate symbol SW_DPDT_x2 and modify unit A (and B):
I don’t understand your post at all. The OP’s post was completely clear on this, it’s a DPDT with middle position (aka DPTT, aka On-Off-On).
Why are you throwing confusion into this?
Yes, its a DPDT On-Off-On
You could connect pin 4 with 5 and 6, and it would still work the same…
Unless you are making a well…?
1 Like
That would short-circuit one side of the switch. I’m convinced that that’s not the asker wants
Friendly advice: “When you’re in a hole, stop digging…”
Unfortunately not, I’m using the DPDT On-Off-On to toggle between 3 capacitance values in parallel.
On position is 5nF shorted across pins 2 & 5 + 5nF from pins 1 & 4 giving a value of 10nF
Off position is 5nF shorted across pins 2 & 5 giving a value of 5nF
On position is 5nF shorted across pins 2 & 5 + 10nF from pins 3 & 6 giving a value of 15nF