Yes, all those things are supported by KiCad, and they have been for a long time. So apparently there is some sort of disconnect.
1 Like
Color matching to PCB is mentioned in comments on this wishlist issue:
Consider giving it a thumbs up on Gitlab to show support.
EDIT: Noticed this post was put at the end as well as below the original: reply to bask185 of Jan 14 and iabarry’s reply.
Yes, I can see that variants supporting SMD/TH are of benefit for hobbyists, but a bigger one for persons developing commercially is different SMD packages: it is pretty common to have BGA and QFP variants of the same chip.
Often footprints are different enough that two board designs are required, but commonly the only difference might be ONE chip - in my circumstance I wanted to design for a microcontroller that came in two sizes of QFP with different lead pitches. Identical functionality. Identical pinout. It would have been nice to design “variant 1” and “variant 2” and flip seamlessly between the designs, but I ended up having to exit KiCAD, manually edit filenames, and restart KiCAD. The opportunity for error is uncomfortably large.
Why? COVID and the worldwide chip shortage. I was redesigning boards solely because I could get, for example, a BGA version of a micro, but not a QFP. Now I like to put a little extra effort up-front to cater for both.
Reply to ‘fjullien’ of Jan 14: Flat / hierachical design.
Solely personal preference, but I prefer flat designs, but I can see a use for hierarchical designs too. I have a couple of large projects that are “flat”… I do so by using global labels on nets. It looks good and is easy to follow.
Yes, that’s how I’m doing it too. I place sheets on the root page, and they act as a table of content:
2 Likes
Dear,
I get your point. but is a presumption false. Please don’t be in a hurry to say hobbyist.
In argentine you have not a stable supply chain. Today you got a RTC on DIP8, the next month on SO8, and in 90 days on SO8W.
The microprocessor, the same. You want purchase 1000, but the distributor has 600, and 400 of similar model. And not known the reposition time due a govern regulation.
The import is closed (except to certain company) so we cannot purchase outside.
At this moment, in 2 paraph we have 6 differents PCB. If i use more components this number will grow up.
I used many times this, and many times thanks to this i can continue the production.
Now i am on spain, and yes, is easy see like you said. I can purchase that i want, choose footprint and another advantages. But i know my root and understand the another point.
2 Likes
It has kinda become my religion to use hierarchial sheets. Only for the most smallest of designs, I may use a flat schematic in the root sheet. This is my very latest schematic. I try to let them look like the eventual board.
For repetitive things which I clearly have, they are also mandatory due to the repetetive layout plugin.
Bas
4 Likes
In 2017 with KiCad V4 I organised my BOM generation that way that from KiCad schematic I get its BOM listing references for elements and value and footprint. The rest I’m getting (based on value+footprint) from my database I have in spreadsheet. Later (V7 or V8) KiCad got elements database integration. Don’t know more about it as didn’t tried it.
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.
1 Like
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:
2 Likes
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.
1 Like
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.
2 Likes
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
3 Likes
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 !
1 Like
You can change the colour of the DRC markers by creating a new theme for the colours you want in Preferences > PCB Editor > Colors.