As example: its my folder structure inside project. In “procuction” folder exists “Gerber”, “PnP” (Peek-and-Place) folders, simple BOM and PCB-Ducumentation for manufactory. In “mechanicals” I have dxf board-outline I get from my M-Cad collegs, 3-D Model export of my PCB when Im done for my M-CAD collegs to check possible collisions etc. In “documents” is extended BOM, schematic as pdf (if someone have no KiCAD installed) etc.
Ok, “datasheets” - its clear…
Sorry Sebastian, I don’t understand what you mean by inside or outside polygon. I guess you mean copper zone, but I’m not sure.
In a D-PACK it is possible to assign different thermal pad connections to different pads. I’m not sure if you are looking for this feature:
Yes, I think we all have some kind of folder structure. In my case I also have a folder for libraries (symbols, footprints and 3D models) with relative paths.
I meant one “over -all” polygon (copper area), and one with different settings and smaller inside
some of nice improvements:
- curve tracks, via fielding, via shielding, solder mask clearance for RF routing
relative topic - via padstack for complex board
relative topic and here - 3D viewer improvement to handle direct on the viewer models visibility and transparency
2 Likes
You said something, that I would like to amplify:
This question is not about if the tool has all the features today. The big company can wait many months. What is needed is assurance that the customers pain is taken care of and there is price offered. Money is secondary issue. Many missing features can be developed as closed modules that are baked with NDA by the servicing body (company). That is not issue neither.
I see that CERN has taken care of few aspects of pushing KiCAD, offering support and tailored development / consultancy service for corporate customers is what I would like to amplify here.
2 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.