Sorry if i didnt write this before. But i will remember some things meanwhile i am working.
The differential pair routing tool, tell the total length of the tracks and their difference. But the recommendation to avoid EMI is match the length on each section where you get a mismatch (After each curve or another instance).
I also see that after routed, i can move one by one of the pair, and cannot drag both at same time.
Also the differential pairs has only one propierties for every pairs on the PCB. But this is not real.
The tracks from ethernet phy to magnetics has a different impedance than USB, and LVDS or MIPI.
Another thing to take care, the same pair has different propierties if is outside/inside or if the gnd plane is at 0.2mm or 1.6mm
What do you mean by this? You can set up differential pair properties on a case-by-case basis by using netclasses and DRC rules.
i didnt find it. How i can do assign one width/spacing for MIPI and another for USB. And how i can assign different width/spacing to the same track depending if is at middle or outer track?
I appreciate learn how do this.
Take a look here for a starter:
Basically, you’ll want to assign different Net Classes to the MIPI and USB diff pairs, and then set rules based on Net Class and layer.
This is controversional I know but I would like to see much fewer options and alternatives. This would simplify the interface and options in the windows. This gives the developers more time to streamline the program.
For example, the global and local symbol/footprint library option could be reduced to just one of them. People will adapt and many options and questions can be removed.
Another example. Perhaps the main PCB editor can be used for footprints as well? Just treat them as a minute PCB. One less chunk of code to maintain. Perhaps the same can be made for symbols using the eeschema editor?
In any case I would like to thank the developers for this fine piece of software.
The main issue for most users is that one has to look up all the key words and remember the rules. This was the issue for me as well with learning the rule system. This is CAD - Computer-aided design, which means computers should help as much as possible. It would be great if the rules system had a UI that helped define them.
I got a simple explanation on how to do the exact same thing here:
Being able to select/delete multiple corner/edges/nodes in a zone.
I use zones quite a bit and manipulating corners one by one is quite time consuming.
Uff, there is not graphical tool to do this assign the propierties?.
One thing I’d really like is for the properties panel to support all properties of symbols and footprints. Some are missing from it. And custom added entries are never shown.
Perhaps a different layout for this assign footprint menu. As you can see the lines are always long. I often have not enough screen room. I always need to drag the right menu to become bigger.
I’d prefer having the middle and right menu underneath eachother. And perhaps a small corner for an integrated previewer. Even with a small previewer in a corner you can quickly see if you have the right thing or not.
EDIT: something like this or something, fixed in paint
Kind regards,
Bas
As a non-pro, but nonetheless rather prolific user, there are two-and-half things in KiCad which kinda annoy me (unless, obviously, I’m doing it wrong) :
-
UI issue : In the PCB editor, clicking on a DRC error (or warning) to pinpoint it, often results in not finding it because the error-crossmarker is either invisible, hidden behind the DRC panel, or disappears between many other fine lines. (Note: on a Mac with a large hires monitor.) Making the marker more visible (thicker line, depending on zoom, contrasting color ?) and screen-centering and zooming-in to the error would solve that.
-
When tracks are already routed in the PCB editor, and I change a footprint (e.g. same footprint but different pinout) in the schematic, then update the PCB layout, the relevant tracks are not really ratsnested. This often results in existing tracks seemingly routed to the wrong pads, etc… Why not automatically ratsnesting those tracks to the nearest breakpoint or corner or something ?
(3) UI Weirdness ~again, on a Mac : when switching from PCB to a schematic with several sheets, the relevant/active sheet is [very] often completely zoomed-out ? (ie. much smaller than the available screen space). I’ve had this since version 7, and this seems like a trivial and obvious thing to solve.
Cheers !
You can change the colour of the DRC markers by creating a new theme for the colours you want in Preferences > PCB Editor > Colors.
Maybe it’s time to revitalize Visual effects for item states (#5240) · Issues · KiCad / KiCad Source Code / kicad · GitLab? You can add your use case there as a comment.
I don’t think this user is complaining about the markers . . . but the way in which a specific marker is “highlighted” when the issue in the DRC list is clicked.
I don’t know if things have changed in recent versions but I now notice that when I click an issue my mouse cursor is positioned on the position on the PCB where the issue is . . . if I keep my mouse still I can then find the mouse cursor on screen and find the issue. I do use full window crosshairs (for my cursor) though . . . this probably makes this easier.
Not implying that it’s the complete solution but putting this titbit out there as people may think themes are only for layers.
Have you searched in the issue database to see if this has been reported, and if it has been, have you voted for it (with thumb up), and if it hasn’t been, have you filed a new issue? It really seems like a trivial and obvious, but sometimes it just happens that something doesn’t bother other users enough or they just haven’t met that situation, and a developer may wake up when it’s reported for the first time.
That’s why I think “visual states”, or even animation effects, would be great. It could be possible to make many things stand out better which now get easily lost in many situations even when they are highlighted.
I wasn’t aware that I could change the colours of DRC errors/warnings too (I do use a custom theme, but probably never scrolled the extensive colour list all the way to the bottom)…
Changing those does help a bit, but IMHO locating an error/warning is still difficult in some circumstances.
To investigate further, I’ve just set up a layout with several deliberate errors & warnings, close to eachother. In doing so, I discovered something I didn’t notice before. When one clicks on an error line in the DRC dialogue, a small and thin crosshair will appear. So far so good… but not really, because:
- The error crosshair disappears when your mouse cursor leaves the dialogue ! (or enters the layout)
- In this particular case, I ratsnested a small section of a track. The [resulting] DRC crosshair then covered that ratsnest, rendering the underlying ratsnest invisible (since both are 1px thick).
Here’s a screenshot of the setup after I clicked on the DRC warning (rightmost arrow, closest to the DRC dialogue). The missing track sits underneath the crosshair, going to that Pad 1 (LINFM).
https://guyd2.com/KC-DRC_error.jpg
And here’s a suggestion to what I think is a better solution for locating those pesky errors/warnings
(note - I dimmed all arrows but the active one) :
https://guyd2.com/KC-DRC_error-sugg.jpg
So, I think the disappearing crosshair is a bug of some sorts, and I suspect that DRC error tracking could be improved without much re-coding (though I ain’t no programmer).
Cheers,
_g
I’m a bit fuzzy on the details, but I recall OrCad Layout had a “High Contrast” mode that toggled everything to grey except the selected object (or toggled everything back to normal). It was useful for finding a selected object on a complex board.
I always zoom right into the board before doing a DRC then when you click on the error/ warning it jumps straight to the middle of the screen and is easy to find.