The last link i posted above should be about exactly what you show here
ver 4.05, should I upgrade it, seems to work very well… till now.
thanks, I will check it out
Yes, at the end, make it with pads 
works for me, thanks.
In the upcoming v5 it can be made with graphic lines which are turned into pads, no need to use bitmaps or external vector graphic programs. Ask if you’re interested.
1 Like
Even better. You can use kicad stepup and design such complicated footpirnts completely in a powerful parametric CAD tool. More details about that: Kicad StepUp: The Sketcher for Footprint generation
General warnings for using development versions apply: Is it a good idea to use a nightly build version?
2 Likes
Do you think it is safe to upgrade to 5 ?
Will that over write the 4.0.5 version I have ?
Great work, so much faster when you get advice.
I downloaded the slider.mod, no good to me…
I reviewed all posts and links above,
caught a snippet, a Trapezoid pad, it works very well…
Thanks to all.
Its a bit of a mess now, I cant seem to run a track to every pad, to satisfy the DRC
the auto snap wont let me get close to some pads.
Slider2.kicad_mod (4.4 KB)
Yes, How can IO use 5 ?
I have a lot of kicad files running on 4.05, will most of it come across ok ?
otherwise, I have the draft copy .mod file below
please guide me.
Migrating the projects from 4 to 5 may be problematic. I just wrote an article which tries to give some options. The safest way is to install 5 alongside 4 so that they can be used in parallel and continue with v4 for old projects.
Two recent threads discussed the possible problems in the upgrade process.
https://forum.kicad.info/t/thoughts-about-advice-for-upgrade-from-v4-to-v5/10895/9
Somehow part of my previous post was erased. I meant to add that “unfortunately not everyone can read that post” because at the moment it’s meant for peer review and comments before releasing to wider public. I don’t want to spread false info… You can read the other topics and then ask your questions in your own topic. Version 5 can be installed alongside 4, but the procedure depends on the system, so you have to give more information about that (mostly the operating system and flavor). And read Is it a good idea to use a nightly build version?, although at the moment the nightly builds are (almost) as stable and good as the final will be.
The docu is the main problem. It is still lacking and will continue to be lacking until way after v5 is released. (I would guess it will take a few months till everything is ironed out.)
My suggestion is to go the easy way and run either v4 or v5 in a virtual machine (yes i know you can run them now on the same system but that might be too much for a beginner)
Use v5 for new projects and continue using v4 for old ones.
Make sure v5 is cleanly installed. Meaning you either cleaned out the old official lib entries from version 4 and replaced them with the ones from version 5 or you have installed the 3d model and symbol lib of version 4 to fit with the footprint libs.
1 Like
I installed the nightly build, in a separate folder, now I have both instances (k4 and k5) running at the same time. on Win10 x64
I am trying to make a footprint with tracks, I made a new footprint, saved it to a new library.
How do I make tracks on the footprint ?
I have drawn a square in F.silk, right click on a line, Create Pad from Selected Shape:
“Cannot Convert items to a custom shaped Pad. Consider adding a small anchor pad.”
How do I set an Anchor ?
OK, placed a pad next to it, and BAM, I have a Graphic line converted to a trackPad but includes the pad…
All good, thanks for the great work guys.
Excellent work really…
I haven’t used this feature yet, but I would imagine that KiCad needs the “anchor” pad to know where to snap traces to. If you make the anchor pad either physically abutted to the graphic lines to be converted, or coincident with the graphic lines then you won’t have a footprint that is your custom shape plus a random, floating pad.
Yes, I cut down the pad to a slither and slipped it into my custom shape.
I am no expert in capacitive sensors, but I think I read somewhere you should use a wider gap between the traces. This lowers the direct capacitance between the traces and the relative capacitance change of the object in proximity will be bigger.