New to KiCad.
I created a symbol which has some inverted output signals:
But when I insert this symbol into my schematic, the circles get resized. Why is this/what am I doing wrong?
The general schematic-setup parameter âPin symbol sizeâ affects this presentation. It allows to globally change the appearance of a schematic according to the users viewing-liking.
Fileâ>Schematic Setupâ>Generalâ>Formattingâ>Symbolsâ>pin symbol size. Change to a smaller value. I think the picture from your symbol-editor equals around 10âŚ12mil.
1 Like
More like 50 mil.
The default is 25 mil.
Ah. I see. The mils confuse the hell out of me. Iâm trying to convert to mm and make everything follow ISO standards but I am beginning to see this will probably not work out as I want.
Thanks for the help.
The problem is the whole schematic system revolves around arbitrary increments someone decided to call mils. They could just as easily be called âpeanutsâ. They are not measurements as such, more like ratios.
Measurements in Schematic are pretty much meaningless as the file is printed to fit the sheet of paper.
Schematics are just an abstract, hopefully easy to follow, view of the PC assembly.
1 Like
I get that now. Which is a shame really. It means having to make and maintain 2 circuit diagrams. I understand KiCad isnât made for professional use but even as a hobbyist I like to document my projects properly. Its part of the fun. So be it. There are worse things in life.
Is the 7406 for practice or are you really going to use one? There is already a 7406 symbol in the library, but with 7 units (6 inverters, usual triangle with inverting output + 1 power unit) which may make your schematic easier to read as you do not have to route the wires to a single rectangle thatâs your symbol above.
It was both for practice and use. Like I said: I wanted an IEC/ISO compliant circuit diagram. Using parts isnât 
What ISO standard tells that symbols must be defined in millimeters? Why do you have to make 2 circuit diagrams? What does this have to do with documenting projects properly?
BTW, KiCad is made for professionals â itâs the vision of the project, even though it canât still fully compete with some of the more expensive commercial software. If you can tell whatâs the actual problem here which should be fixed for KiCad to be suitable for professionals, please tell.
2 Likes
The standards that deal with technical drawings. They define line thickness, text height and symbol-sizes etc. E.g. iec60617 but there are others.
Iâm sorry to say this but, Youâre Wrong. Milâshave been a standard used in engineering and drafting for over 100 yrs⌠One âMilâ - 1/1000 inch. I grew up using Milâs and confusion is not too different from listening to smart people on the Newâs shows use the word âPreliminaryâ but, pronounce it, âPuliminaryâ. Thatâs not a real word, is it
This, The introduction of the thousandth of an inch as a base unit in engineering and machining is generally attributed to Joseph Whitworth[12] who wrote in 1857
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thousandth_of_an_inch
ADDED: Take a look a the Gerber Specification, youâll see (example)
2 Likes
I think jmk does know what mil (also called thou) means.
In the schematic the units are not important, the size of the lines does not mandatorily need to be mils, mm or peanuts. Just some length unit.
I grew up using mm. When I first time used PCB design software (about 1989) I first time heard about mils.
This is true only if you regard the schematic as just an intermediate to make a pcb. But if you want the schematic itself to conform to industry standards then it does matter. And yes, I understand that KiCad is not e.g AutoCad and not intended for that use. I am not criticizing or complaining. I was just confused and baffled by the choice to not follow international standards.
I have been a technical draftsman for 10 years in the past (30+) years ago for an engineering firm. Drawings need to adhere to both international, national and company standards. The way you use symbols, which symbols, text placement, line thickness, etc. Obviously KiCad is not intended for making such drawings but for making pcbâs. But this means you now have 2 circuit diagrams: one official one and one used to create a pcb and they use different drawing styles and symbols. This is a maintainers nightmare and adds to costs, not to mention the potential for mistakes and confusion.
I have no idea how to solve that but at the very least there should be some type of import/export to dxf where measurements do not get messed up.
The mils is pretty much legacy and the library of parts has developed with them. That is the main issue. One world, one measurement system? That would be nice but it isnât reality. A schematic is not to scale so I really donât see how measurements are âstandardâ except in how the symbols relate to one another.
Still. Itâs a matter of, if Kicad doesnât currently meet you needs, check back later but most just work with it. Personally though, Iâve never dragged out a ruler and started measuring things on a schematic, but, thatâs me.
Lol. Drawing standards are for consistency, maintainability and readability. And sofar I very much like KiCad for its intended use. I just struggle with how to integrate it into my workflow as it is pretty much isolated from other software. It was not my intent to criticize or complain or start a discussion.
As far as i have read 60617, it allows to resize and/or scale but it states that the line width should stay the same (I donât know what that width would beâŚ). I think the document about those things was 11714 that now changed to 81714.
On the KiCadâs side, grid points can be changed, and symbols can be designed as required. This is not a limitation, this is just the lack of those kind of symbols in the official libraries.
1 Like
Yeah it does. But it also relates to (if Iâm not mistaken) ISO 128. The symbol sizes relate to the text size of their labels. So the resizing is limited to e.g. 2.5 or 3.5 mm text variations. And it needs to be consistent across the sheet. All symbols also relate to each other as 60617 defines them to a common grid.
Consider:
Drawings have revision control, are signed by Drafter, Engr and Mgmât
The companies and govât Iâve worked for had a Documentation Dept, wherein engineers/drafter turned in the working drawing/schematic and someone-else made them into official docâs for signature and release and control.
For small companies with a more âinformalâ system, well⌠depends on what you want, where you work and the âClientâsâ requirements.
There are Resources for gaining an understanding of thisâŚ
There are âStandardsâ (those we often see, such as ANSIâŚetc) and many resource-aids that filter the standards into a more specific, useful pamphletâŚ
Example screenshot (I canât locate my Electronics guide)
