Missing ${KISYS3DMOD}/Package_CSP.3dshapes?

I added an included library part, which had both a symbol and footprint built in.

The footprint links to 3d model: ${KISYS3DMOD}/Package_CSP.3dshapes/LFCSP-72-1EP_10x10mm_P0.5mm_EP5.3x5.3mm.wrl

However, I don’t have the directory “Package_CSP.3dshapes”, anywhere, and can’t see where I might download this. Searching for the 3d model directly was fruitless as well. Any ideas?

A simple search shows me:

paul@medion:~$ locate EP_10x10mm_P0.5mm_EP

For a longer part of the string it just finds 2 “.kicad_mod” files, nothin in the packages3d directories:

paul@medion:~$ locate 72-1EP_10x10mm_P0.5mm_EP5.3

Not all KiCad footrpints have 3D models. There are many without. I’m guessing here, but the Footrprint may have been prepared for the 3D model, while none has been made yet.

I do not even have the *packages3d/Package_CSP directory:

paul@medion:/usr/share/kicad/modules/packages3d$ ls -hld Package_*
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 20K Sep 5 14:01 Package_BGA.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 36K Sep 5 14:01 Package_DFN_QFN.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 36K Sep 5 14:01 Package_DIP.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4,0K Sep 5 14:01 Package_DirectFET.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4,0K Sep 5 14:01 Package_LGA.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12K Sep 5 14:01 Package_QFP.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4,0K Sep 5 14:01 Package_SIP.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 36K Sep 5 14:01 Package_SO.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4,0K Sep 5 14:01 Package_SON.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 12K Sep 5 14:01 Package_TO_SOT_SMD.3dshapes
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 16K Sep 5 14:01 Package_TO_SOT_THT.3dshapes

1 Like

OK. I have the footprints of course, I assumed since the footprint referred to a specific, apparently built-in directory for the 3D model that it would exist; maybe mine didn’t install for some reason. But seems that it’s expected to be missing.

I don’t mind hunting down my own 3d model, I just wanted to be sure I wasn’t missing something that was supposed to be there.

See https://gitlab.com/kicad/code/kicad/-/issues/3815.

All the stock KiCad footprints have a pre-defined placeholder filename for a 3d model, however the model may not actually exist (yet). There were good reasons for doing this but it does seem to cause a lot of confusion.You can see the latest version of the library at https://github.com/KiCad/kicad-packages3D

It’s good to not have to edit the Footrpint library just to add a link to a 3D model. However:
If the the path to the Footprint is valid, then it shows a preview:

When the preview is not possible, there is plenty of room to show some error message with an explanation, and why the links are already added for 3D models that do not exist yet.

Yes, and I hope people give a thumb up for that issue. There are probably dozens of examples in this forum where people have been misguided by the file path which points to non-existing file. Some examples are gathered in the issue.

Thanks. That the symbol and footprint existed in the default installation, with a reference to a specific 3d library, implied to me that the 3d library is supposed to exist. Very confusing for sure.

If it doesn’t, then it’s fine, but I don’t understand why there’s a link to a nonexistent library. But I’m new to Kicad so there’s undoubtedly reasons.

(I was hoping for a manual install from https://github.com/KiCad/kicad-packages3D but it’s not there either).

I would definitely support some kind of indication/explanation of why the 3d model doesn’t exist yet. I’d personally prefer not linking to a 3d model at all until it actually is expected to exist.

1 Like

That one is quite easy to add using https://github.com/easyw/kicad-3d-models-in-freecad/tree/master/cadquery/FCAD_script_generator/QFN_packages.

1 Like

I added a short FAQ article Why a footprint points to a 3D model but the model file doesn't exist?. Is that explanation clear and exhaustive enough, does it help to understand “why there’s a link to a nonexistent library”?

1 Like

I saw your FAQ post, but making a FAQ entry for this seems a bit overdone to me.

I don’t think so, considering how many times it has come up in the forum. There would be no need for it, though, if the issue linked to above would be solved within KiCad UI.

1 Like

Of course. You would not have written the FAQ article if you did not think there was a need for it.
What we both agree on is that some kind of message in KiCad itself would be better.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.