Firstly, I want to express my appreciation for KiCad and its incredible community. I’ve used it extensively to design numerous PCBs, and I deeply respect the effort and passion that has gone into making KiCad such a fantastic tool. This post isn’t meant as a critique but rather as an exploration of how KiCad’s workflow might be made even more intuitive and efficient.
Recently, I transitioned to a new job where I now use Altium Designer. While Altium is a powerful tool, I’ve been struck by how much less intuitive its workflows feel compared to KiCad. Simple tasks like creating a library component often require consulting external resources, such as outdated tutorial videos, rather than being self-explanatory as they were for me in KiCad.
This experience got me reflecting on KiCad’s workflow and how it achieves its ease of use. However, I also began thinking about areas where the workflow could be further refined. Specifically, I believe KiCad’s tools could benefit from a more structured categorization of workflows, which could make the software even more accessible to new users while enhancing productivity for experienced ones.
Here’s a proposal for categorizing KiCad’s workflows into three main areas:
General Tools
Gerber Viewer
Calculator Tools
Plugin and Content Manager
Project Management
Schematic Editor
PCB Editor
Library Management
Symbol Editor
Footprint Editor
Template Editor
And some wish list sub-workflow modules for library management:
Parts Editor (for linking symbols and footprints, which might include functionality such as defining modules such as headers for a Pi Pico [still appearing as two separate headers in the BOM, but acting as one part in the schematic and layout])
Sub-circuits Editor (For defining reusable/repeatable schematic sheets and linked PCB layouts across multiple projects such as a DC-DC converter)
In my mind I feel this categorization could make KiCad’s interface and workflow even more intuitive!
Questions for the community:
Do you agree that a structured categorization like this could help improve KiCad’s workflow?
Are there other tools or workflows that you think should be included or prioritized in this kind of structure?
Do you see any potential downsides to implementing such a change, or are there reasons the current structure is better?
I’d love to hear your thoughts and feedback. If I’m missing something or there’s a reason things are the way they are, I’m always open to learning. Thanks for taking the time to read this!
Draw a workflow diagram containing those tools and contribute it to the Getting Started document. That’ll save you 1000 words and not require a lot of text translation.
Also put in the possible links to external DBs enabled by the database connection feature.
Existing tools only. Wishlist should be discussed a separate post in the subcategory Feature Request Chat.
Yes. Awareness of the Kicad workflow will alleviate considerable frustrations for new users, whether they be old time professionals or shiny brand newbees.
My only concern is how far to go with a diagram or list.
Below are a couple of examples that could really bog down the reader. These are too far, but where do you stop to improve the workflow philosophy?
eg. For Library Management, there are Kicad libraries, Personal libraries, 3rd party libraries that need to be imported to personal libraries (eg. digikey), and 3rd party libraries that can be used directly (eg. Altium). Should all this be included? If not, how do we make it easy to find this information.
Another example: Eagle, Cadstar and Altium library files can be used directly. To find that information if you have not originally noticed the “Documents” link beside the “Download” link, you need to go to: Help > About Kicad > www.Kicad.org > Documentation > Schematic Editor > Symbols and Symbol Libraries > Managing Symbols.
Whatever you decide, just make sure there is a prominent link (in bright flashing lights? ) to https://docs.kicad.org
No need to make the workflow diagram all-encompassing. Details can be elaborated in other diagrams, maybe even in the FAQs. Hyperlinks are your friends.
With the workflow diagram we can point newbies to the section with the diagram instead of asking have you read through the Getting Started document.
Thanks @retiredfeline for your comment. You alerted me to a vital comment I had been thinking about when placing the above examples, but had failed to write.
Please re-read my above post. It should make a bit more sense.
The answer is that you have to envisage your audience (or should that be vidience?). Say you decide to target a newbie who has just installed KiCad. This means you need process and document icons in the diagram, plus arrows to indicate the flow. Personal libraries are quickly encountered so you would need to distinguish the types of libraries (and the KiCad library icon would somehow be marked read-only). But you wouldn’t show import of projects from other software, that comes later. (I for one have never done that.) If they have already used other software, the flow diagram will be familiar, unless they have adopted an idiosyncratic workflow.
It’s not wrong to omit details in the simple diagram. More complex elements and operations can be intrroduced in more advanced diagrams. So you wouldn’t include the arrow indicating the import of gerbers into the PCB editor in this simple explanation.
My comments were really aimed at the OP. Maybe as some sort of polite prompt.
I’d be useless at organizing a workflow chart. My methodology doesn’t even come close to, say, the “Beginners Guide”.
I remember when I first encountered Kicad; I went straight to the footprint and symbol editors to find out how hard it was to make items. The documentation was pretty sparse then. Somewhere to store the made up stuff was next. This documentation was only in the FAQs and was written by a member who assumed the reader had some knowledge of Kicad. This took a bit of head scratching, but I finally saw the light.
It wasn’t 'till after that that I started experimenting with the Schematic and PCB editors.
Anyhow, I agree with the OP. There is plenty of room for a decent, not overly involved, flow chart. I hope he does it. I hope it is written in a manner that the experienced as well as the uninformed can understand. I hope it is adopted and placed in a prominent, easily found, position.
) to