Re: gEDA-user: naming and creation of 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil) footprint, request for help
Bert Timmerman wrote: Hi Jelle, On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 14:45 +0200, Jelle de Jong wrote: Hello everybody, I am trying to create a footprint with a correct name using the IPC-7351 Naming Convention for Standard SMT Land Patterns. But I am having some issues, i am using the below document to learn about the naming convention: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/working/pcb/documents/footprint-name-spec.pdf The footprint I want to make is a 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil), see: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/doc/SDRAM/MT48LC16M16A2P-7E/256MSDRAM.pdf # page 75, 54-Pin Plastic TSOP I tried to figure it out but I don't know what the lead span 1(L1) is? footprint: TSSOP-65P-640L1-54N 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil) TSSOP pin spacing, lead span 1, pin count P pin spacingdimension L1 lead span 1dimension N pin count count I also learned to create footprints with the following document: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/working/pcb/documents/land_patterns_20070818.pdf I had my ups and downs learning this and had some help trough IRC. However the creation of a 54-pin TSOP II seems to be able to automate using a script. I looked at the following, but it uses a license I disagree with and I can't figure out how it works, I prefer OSI and GPL compatible licenses. http://www.luciani.org/geda/pcb/pcb-perl-library.html Would somebody be able to help me out, what should the name of the footprint become and what scripts can I use to make the footprint and how can I do this? I would go for a name like: TSSOP80P1176X120-54N.fp as in the IPC standard IPC-7351 0.80 mm pitch, 11.76 mm lead span, X 1.20 mm height - 54 leads with Nominal pad conditions (as one of the following: Least, Nominal, Most). Maybe it is a wise thing to avoid - characters in footprint file names or to have a use-files line in your gsch2pcb config file and pass a --skip-m4 flag to disable m4 macro generated footprints to goof up your pcb stuff. Maybe include a vendor and part name too, while footprint artwork recommendations may vary across vendors and specific parts. Thanks Bert for the feedback, I am confused, I calculated the pitch on 0.65 mm how did you came to 0.80mm, and could you explain what exactly the lead span is. If I look at page 75 of the datasheet how can I exactly calculate this lead span? Why did you include the height where did you find this requirement in the IPC-7351 for TSSOP footprints? And why should one avoid the - character in footprint names? I see a lot of footprints with this character, would you be willing to discuss the arguments? I call the gsch2pcb with the following arguments: gsch2pcb --use-files --skip-m4 ~/openarm/working/gschem/openarm-sbc.prj --elements-dir ~/openarm/working/pcb/footprints/ I hope that is ok... Sorry for al the questions, I am kind of confused, and searching for answers and help. Best regards, Jelle de Jong ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 13:19 -0400, al davis wrote: Gnucap has always worked on windows. It works with gEDA, with gnetlist generating a spice file, as well as any simulator does. How about using Gnucap? Well, for this particular course, for these particular students I needed something they could start doing very simple simulations with reasonable graphical output with about a 5 minute intro. Last time I looked at gnucap there was a steeper learning curve, which I just didn't have time for on this course. I'd certainly look at gnucap for anything more advanced - something that's been on my summer list of things to do for the past few years. -- Peter Baxendale University of Durham peter.baxend...@durham.ac.uk School of Engineering tel +44 191 33 42492 South Road fax +44 191 33 42408 Durham DH1 3LE England ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: collapsing or non-collapsing balls, how can i tell?
I am trying to make the correct name for my LFBGA320 footprint I have some questions: What is the differences between: * Ball Grid Array’s * BGA w/Dual Pitch * BGA w/Staggered Pins * Collapsing or Non-collapsing Balls and how can I figure out what type of BGA component I have? The footprint and device info can be found here: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/doc/CPU/LPC3180FEL320/ (use http://www.cacert.org/ for root ca authority) The IPC naming conventions tells me I need to use the following format: Ball Grid Array’s: BGA + Pin Qty + C or N + Pitch P + Ball Columns X Ball Rows _ Body Length X Body Width X Height https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/working/pcb/documents/IPC-7351ANamingConvention.pdf Can somebody help me? I am gambling the following: BGA-320N-50P-4X4_1300x1300x90.fp LFBGA320: plastic low profile fine-pitch ball grid array package; 320 balls; body 13 x 13 x 0.9 mm SOT824-1 If somebody can check the footprint and name on errors I would be very thankful this is the first time I am working with BGA's. Best regards, Jelle de Jong ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: collapsing or non-collapsing balls, how can i tell?
There is a new version of the naming convention, IPC-7351B Naming Convention for Standard SMT Land Patterns, that lists the various BGA types. Dual pitch has Col Pitch x Row Pitch attributes Staggered pins is BGAS A C or N suffix is added for collapsing or non-collapsing balls (* jcl *) -- You can't create open hardware with closed EDA tools. [1]http://www.luciani.org References 1. http://www.luciani.org/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
Peter Baxendale wrote: On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 13:19 -0400, al davis wrote: Gnucap has always worked on windows. It works with gEDA, with gnetlist generating a spice file, as well as any simulator does. How about using Gnucap? Well, for this particular course, for these particular students I needed something they could start doing very simple simulations with reasonable graphical output with about a 5 minute intro. Last time I looked at gnucap there was a steeper learning curve, which I just didn't have time for on this course. I'd certainly look at gnucap for anything more advanced - something that's been on my summer list of things to do for the past few years. AFAIK Gnucap is not quite SPICE-compatible, but that's what your students will be facing when they head out into industry. LTSpice might be an alternative. Very short learning curve, free of cost, nice graphics output and by now very widespread in industry. LTSpice probably runs under wine but try it out first, see if the help files are ok because students will certainly need those a lot. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ gmail domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: mimedel is annoying (was: collapsing or non-collapsing balls, how can i tell?)
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:00:47PM -0400, John Luciani wrote: There is a new version of the naming convention, IPC-7351B Naming ... (* jcl *) -- You can't create open hardware with closed EDA tools. [1]http://www.luciani.org References 1. http://www.luciani.org/ I notice 'X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.9' in the headers... Lately I've been having trouble reading John's mail because of odd formatting. It's especially hard to tell which text is his in replies. It turns out that the list seems to be taking his alternative html + plain email and turning it into plain + plain with one oddly formatted by mimedel. My mailer seems to pick the ugly one, unfortunately. Looking at one random old message from John from January I don't see this problem. Is this a switch we can flip back? Or can we make mimedel at least prefer the plaintext as formatted by the original mailer? -- Ben Jackson AD7GD b...@ben.com http://www.ben.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: collapsing or non-collapsing balls, how can i tell?
John Luciani wrote: There is a new version of the naming convention, IPC-7351B Naming Convention for Standard SMT Land Patterns, that lists the various BGA types. Dual pitch has Col Pitch x Row Pitch attributes Staggered pins is BGAS A C or N suffix is added for collapsing or non-collapsing balls Thanks you for responding, your library looks great, I am still trying to figure out how you created and named the footprints. There may be a B version for the naming convention but I can't find the documents with an popular internet search engine. My question in the original mail where more focused on the how and why. I under stead that C and N stands for collapsing or non-collapsing balls but I am not very experienced in BGA and I have no idea what this exactly is and how I can see what type of BGA I have. The same goes about Dual Pitch BGA what is a dual pitch BGA, how can one tell. Please see my original mail for all questions. Thanks in advance, Cheers, Jelle ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: mimedel is annoying (was: collapsing or non-collapsing balls, how can i tell?)
On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 09:23 -0700, Ben Jackson wrote: Lately I've been having trouble reading John's mail because of odd formatting. It's especially hard to tell which text is his in replies. It turns out that the list seems to be taking his alternative html + plain email and turning it into plain + plain with one oddly formatted by mimedel. My mailer seems to pick the ugly one, unfortunately. Thanks for pointing this out -- I have complained also a few times about the strange format of some mails. Some people seems to send plain text and the same in HTML -- and this list forwards both. So I have the text twice in my email client. Other list seems not to have this problem, or their subscribers know that HTML is for webpages, not for email. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: naming and creation of 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil) footprint, request for help
Hi Jelle, Jelle de Jong wrote: Bert Timmerman wrote: Hi Jelle, On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 14:45 +0200, Jelle de Jong wrote: Hello everybody, I am trying to create a footprint with a correct name using the IPC-7351 Naming Convention for Standard SMT Land Patterns. But I am having some issues, i am using the below document to learn about the naming convention: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/working/pcb/documents/footprint-name-spec.pdf The footprint I want to make is a 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil), see: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/doc/SDRAM/MT48LC16M16A2P-7E/256MSDRAM.pdf # page 75, 54-Pin Plastic TSOP I tried to figure it out but I don't know what the lead span 1(L1) is? footprint: TSSOP-65P-640L1-54N 54-pin TSOP II (400 mil) TSSOP pin spacing, lead span 1, pin count P pin spacingdimension L1 lead span 1dimension N pin count count I also learned to create footprints with the following document: https://secure.powercraft.nl/svn/openarm/trunk/working/pcb/documents/land_patterns_20070818.pdf I had my ups and downs learning this and had some help trough IRC. However the creation of a 54-pin TSOP II seems to be able to automate using a script. I looked at the following, but it uses a license I disagree with and I can't figure out how it works, I prefer OSI and GPL compatible licenses. http://www.luciani.org/geda/pcb/pcb-perl-library.html Would somebody be able to help me out, what should the name of the footprint become and what scripts can I use to make the footprint and how can I do this? If you have access to a windoze box you could install the free demo version of the PCB Matrix Land pattern viewer. Free as in beer :-( This is an easy way to get a rough guestimate for land pattern dimensions. It can be found at: http://www.pcbmatrix.com/downloads/LPSoftware.asp BTW: I'm coding a pcb footprint wizard called fpw (and a GTK version called pcb-gfpw). Best to google for pcb-fpw. This is still alpha so Your Mileage May Vary. I would go for a name like: TSSOP80P1176X120-54N.fp as in the IPC standard IPC-7351 0.80 mm pitch, 11.76 mm lead span, X 1.20 mm height - 54 leads with Nominal pad conditions (as one of the following: Least, Nominal, Most). Maybe it is a wise thing to avoid - characters in footprint file names or to have a use-files line in your gsch2pcb config file and pass a --skip-m4 flag to disable m4 macro generated footprints to goof up your pcb stuff. Maybe include a vendor and part name too, while footprint artwork recommendations may vary across vendors and specific parts. Thanks Bert for the feedback, I am confused, I calculated the pitch on 0.65 mm how did you came to 0.80mm, and could you explain what exactly the lead span is. If I look at page 75 of the datasheet how can I exactly calculate this lead span? On page 75 the lead span dimension of the package is given in mm, it's at the bottom of the top view, it is the maximum width of the package. This is not to be confused with the toe-to-toe distance of the landpattern, which will have to protrude from below the leads at least twice the solder fillet dimension. The package body itself is 400 mil or 10.16 mm. Why did you include the height where did you find this requirement in the IPC-7351 for TSSOP footprints? I found a copy over here: http://www.pcblibraries.com/resources/files/IPC-7351/IPC-7x51%20%20PCBL%20Land%20Pattern%20Naming%20Convention.pdf BTW: your Micron SDRAM is in TSOP package, any confusion my mistake ;-) And why should one avoid the - character in footprint names? I see a lot of footprints with this character, would you be willing to discuss the arguments? M4 macros may treat this as an operator and try to do some math. I call the gsch2pcb with the following arguments: gsch2pcb --use-files --skip-m4 ~/openarm/working/gschem/openarm-sbc.prj --elements-dir ~/openarm/working/pcb/footprints/ Looks good to me, although I recently did my first couple of boards. Hopes this helps a bit. Kind regards, Bert Timmerman. I hope that is ok... Sorry for al the questions, I am kind of confused, and searching for answers and help. Best regards, Jelle de Jong ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
On Thursday 14 May 2009, Joerg wrote: AFAIK Gnucap is not quite SPICE-compatible, but that's what your students will be facing when they head out into industry. LTSpice might be an alternative. Very short learning curve, free of cost, nice graphics output and by now very widespread in industry. It depends which spice. Strictly, SPICE is not SPICE compatible, because if you move to a different one something will be different. I get the impression that what you want is bug-for-bug compatibility. From a beginners perspective, the important differences between Gnucap and any particular Spice are usually that Gnucap has extra capability that the Spice doesn't have, and this extra capability is useful to a beginner. From the viewpoint of undergraduate education, it is as close as any, and provides an experience closer to the high-end simulators than the PC spice's do. It has a shorter learning curve that the real Spice from Berkeley, and a smoother learning curve than the graphic commercial and cover-crop spice's. The popular graphic PC spice's carry you part way in luxury, then dump you when you really need it. The PC graphic spice's only provide a short learning curve if you already are comfortable with the typical project baggage. Then if you want to play, to do more than what you can do with a few kick buttons, you need to start over. Educators typically use simulators very poorly, as if they themselves don't understand. In most cases, the total use is a few specified runs with a couple of graphs, that you do after everything else is done. A more appropriate use of simulators is to explore things that you can't see with real measurements. There is a lot that you can find out about a circuit that you can't measure in a practical way. Students need to learn to be flexible, and they need to learn to use computers effectively, not just by kicking the GUI a few times. EE's, even analog designers, need to learn some serious programming. Too many schools don't do this. In the extreme case, EE could become a dumping ground for students who can't make it in CS. Is that what you want? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
al davis wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009, Joerg wrote: AFAIK Gnucap is not quite SPICE-compatible, but that's what your students will be facing when they head out into industry. LTSpice might be an alternative. Very short learning curve, free of cost, nice graphics output and by now very widespread in industry. It depends which spice. Strictly, SPICE is not SPICE compatible, because if you move to a different one something will be different. I get the impression that what you want is bug-for-bug compatibility. From a beginners perspective, the important differences between Gnucap and any particular Spice are usually that Gnucap has extra capability that the Spice doesn't have, and this extra capability is useful to a beginner. Not bug-for-bug, but as close to the industry standard as practical. If you let them use something that has nice features they get used to those, and then in industry where they don't have those it becomes a problem. You can do just about anything with SPICE, even simulate mechanical devices. But one has to learn who to kludge and cajole SPICE to do that. From the viewpoint of undergraduate education, it is as close as any, and provides an experience closer to the high-end simulators than the PC spice's do. It has a shorter learning curve that the real Spice from Berkeley, and a smoother learning curve than the graphic commercial and cover-crop spice's. The popular graphic PC spice's carry you part way in luxury, then dump you when you really need it. The PC graphic spice's only provide a short learning curve if you already are comfortable with the typical project baggage. Then if you want to play, to do more than what you can do with a few kick buttons, you need to start over. That's where Usenet comes in :-) Even a (very) seasoned engineer had to ask about that three days ago, how to set abstol and stuff and make it travel with the file. Nothing wrong with asking. Educators typically use simulators very poorly, as if they themselves don't understand. In most cases, the total use is a few specified runs with a couple of graphs, that you do after everything else is done. A more appropriate use of simulators is to explore things that you can't see with real measurements. There is a lot that you can find out about a circuit that you can't measure in a practical way. Absolutely. That's how I found what degraded and eventually killed RF switching diodes in a client's board. With PSPICE. Impossible to see even with sampling scopes. Educators should give students stuff to grind their teeth on like Hey, this thing doesn't work right, find out why and how to improve it. Students need to learn to be flexible, and they need to learn to use computers effectively, not just by kicking the GUI a few times. EE's, even analog designers, need to learn some serious programming. They need to and they do, to some extent. They do not have to become programming experts, else I might as well demand that all CS guys fully understand Maxwell's equations because we have to ;-) Too many schools don't do this. In the extreme case, EE could become a dumping ground for students who can't make it in CS. Is that what you want? That has IME never been the case, and won't be. None of the EEs I know started out CS. And don't believe EE is easy, our university had an EE flunk-out rate of around 75% plus. ME and EE were the toughest paths there, some of the grueling 4h written exams could make grown men shake in their boots. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ gmail domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: A not too serious PCB question
On Wed, 2009-05-13 at 16:16 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote: Someone asked how one can build PCB boards like this: http://www.mikrocontroller.net/topic/137821#new (Click on the picture too enlarge) This layout may have advantages if PCB is made mechanical, i.e. by milling machines. So I asked myself is current PCB can do it -- I guess not, but I may be wrong. For the records: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/drl/wiki/index.php/Visolate:_Voronoi_Toolpaths_for_PCB_Mechanical_Etch ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: A not too serious PCB question
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 08:34:17PM +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote: http://groups.csail.mit.edu/drl/wiki/index.php/Visolate:_Voronoi_Toolpaths_for_PCB_Mechanical_Etch Voronoi diagrams are a related problem, but I think the correct way to approach it is: 1. Produce the polygon (with holes) of all of the *non copper* areas of the board. PCB can do this easily with existing polygon primitives. 2. Find the straight skeleton of the resulting polygon. I believe if the orientation of the PCB polygons was cleared up you could do this with the CGAL library. Or it could be reimplemented for our polygon structure. Skeletonization can be done with a raster method, but I think this would produce suboptimal toolpaths if the intent were really to output Gcode. 3. Delete all of the stubs in the resulting skeleton. Holes in the original non-copper polygon (which represent islands of copper) will create loops in the skeleton, which we want to keep. Peninsulas of non copper will produce stubs (which do not serve to actually isolate any region -- imagine a P shape simplified to an O). If you use a library like CGAL these should be removed. -- Ben Jackson AD7GD b...@ben.com http://www.ben.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: Parts!
I'm gearing up to populate a bunch of powermeter boards, plus the sdram board, and got the biggest digikey box I've ever gotten. This time, it was cost effective to by reels of two of the parts, and many parts were ordered at the next price-point up (10 is cheaper than 9 sometimes - I've got a TUBE of ethernet jacks now), so I'll have leftovers. How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
I use boxes of duplicate parts and a faulty memory! On May 14, 2009, at 12:34 PM, DJ Delorie wrote: I'm gearing up to populate a bunch of powermeter boards, plus the sdram board, and got the biggest digikey box I've ever gotten. This time, it was cost effective to by reels of two of the parts, and many parts were ordered at the next price-point up (10 is cheaper than 9 sometimes - I've got a TUBE of ethernet jacks now), so I'll have leftovers. How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
DJ Delorie wrote: I'm gearing up to populate a bunch of powermeter boards, plus the sdram board, and got the biggest digikey box I've ever gotten. This time, it was cost effective to by reels of two of the parts, and many parts were ordered at the next price-point up (10 is cheaper than 9 sometimes - I've got a TUBE of ethernet jacks now), so I'll have leftovers. How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? I use a MS-Works database. It lists the qty, part description and (very important) where is is stashed. For SMT stuff that I may need at client sites I use tiny jewel boxes that have around 50 micro-bins each in a 2*2*1/3 space, stackable. No chance for labels or anything, without this database I would not have a clue what's where. MS-Works comes pre-config'd on most PCs but I don't know if there is a Linux equivalent. The OpenOffice database is not useful IMHO. Look for something much simpler. You probably won't need 3D-graphed statistics about your usage of Ethernet jacks in correlation to sun spot numbers or so :-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Steven Michalske wrote: I use boxes of duplicate parts and a faulty memory! Yea, that one has worked well for me for years too. :) I've been interested to try something I saw a lawyer use once to track an incomprehensibly-large pile of documents: divide them up into small, arbitrary groups, and put them into numbered folders. Then keep a notepad (or in his case, a database) that mapped the document title, author, etc. to the folder number. The lawyer knew that he didn't need to classify his documents, he just needed to be able to find them individually. Applied to our work, sometimes it doesn't make sense to have a drawer for resistors, another for connectors, etc. Just get some of those small-parts boxes from Lowes or whatever, and as new parts come in then you put the little bags into the most-empty bin and then jot down which bin it was. There was a time when I kept all my Mouser orders in their original shipping boxes, along with a hardcopy of the order. Then I could just flip through the order sheets until I found which box the part I wanted was in. It really seemed helpful, although manually searching 10+ page lists was an ideal opportunity for improvement. Just a thought. Not that I have time to do better, of course. :) b.g. -- Bill Gatliff b...@billgatliff.com ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:34:31PM -0400, DJ Delorie wrote: How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? I have some flat text files of interesting stuff (like microcontrollers and voltage regulators) and things I have vast quantities of (reels of 0603 caps) and then I just try to keep kits on hand so that I know I have any value of resistor I want (currently in through-hole and 0805). Connectors I'm really bad about. I tend to go through my collection of connectors every time I need something. -- Ben Jackson AD7GD b...@ben.com http://www.ben.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Bill Gatliff wrote: Joerg wrote: I use a MS-Works database. It lists the qty, part description and (very important) where is is stashed. For SMT stuff that I may need at client sites I use tiny jewel boxes that have around 50 micro-bins each in a 2*2*1/3 space, stackable. No chance for labels or anything, without this database I would not have a clue what's where. Even worse, many of my SMT parts are so small that the labeling on them is pretty meaningless--- if there is any at all. If a box of parts were to drop open, you'd be better off sweeping the whole pile into the trash and starting over! I meant the bins themselves. The individual storage areas as such tiny square holes that even a label on that part of the box would be like micro-fiche. I did find these once: http://t-rexelectronics.com/7.html Seems great for cut tapes, at least. Where did you get your boxes? The usual, at a company that closed the subsidiary. They are actually containers where SMT inductors were shipped in. My wife has suggested mini-scrapbook albums, whose page folders are about the same size as the small static-safe bags that Mouser ships in. Plano makes some small boxes with configurable compartments, but I've found that their dividers don't seat tightly enough to keep small SMT parts from passing underneath them. And I worry about static. John Larkin on s.e.design gave me the hint: Coin envelopes. So I bought two boxes of No.1 coin envelopes at Staples and started filing the various parts inside. It's the brownish post-consumer stuff and I could not detect any static on those. You can write onto them, including comments such as mushy at VCC 4V. Digikey ships with these nice peel and stick labels and I also stick those on there. So when I run out of something I just key in the number on there and, bingo. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
What a headache! I dig through boxes until I find it! As far as computerized inventory tracking, I have almost zilch. I have a few old BOMs lying around. I keep datasheets for parts I own in different directories from other parts. I try to keep the files named so that I can find them when I need them, but often it is just as easy to re-download it, than look through my directories of datasheets. I am terribly disorganized about this. Nobody knows what I have, including me. * I keep unfinished projects in clear plastic shoeboxes that you get for about a buck at discount stores. * Except for projects that are too big, so I have some cardboard boxes too * And large plastic tubs * Sometimes I clean up my bench and used a clear plastic shoebox for that, or a cardboard box, or a large tub. * I have a couple of three ring binders, with clear plastic pocket pages for parts that can be filed in order * I also have tons of those clear plastic do-dads whose base is the next one's lid. * And some tiny little flip-top dingers that I found in China * And many cut-tapes rubber-banded together * A few reels here and there (.01µF anyone?) * And some auto parts store style bolt bins * A bookshelf full of random sample kits * Drawers with IC's stuck in foam * Let's not forget those clear acrylic-drawer organizers * And a bunch of other plastic (abs?) multi drawer organizers * Fishing tackle boxes * I try to keep dev-kits in their original box I sure wish that at some stage in the design workflow (the step between gschem and PCB perhaps), I could somehow cleverly integrate part (footprint) selection (from my inventory). Then maybe I would take an inventory. Sigh. How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
DJ Delorie wrote: I'm gearing up to populate a bunch of powermeter boards, plus the sdram board, and got the biggest digikey box I've ever gotten. This time, it was cost effective to by reels of two of the parts, and many parts were ordered at the next price-point up (10 is cheaper than 9 sometimes - I've got a TUBE of ethernet jacks now), so I'll have leftovers. How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? I've tried several ways, including writing programs and perl scripts but I find a simple spreadsheet works for me. I keep the basic part specs, mfg part number, supplier part numbers (DigiKey, Mouser mostly), last order price, qty on hand and location. Location is just a storage box number. I keep the parts in their original packages. Almost all of my parts, except some connectors, are SMT. I'm a little lazy about keeping qty on hand updated so I usually inventory when I start a new project. I dont really worry about qty for resistors, I just by 500, 1K or 5K qty. I keep the pdf data sheets in a directory with a sub-directory for each manufacturer. -- Joe Chisolm Computer Translations, Inc. Marble Falls, Tx. 830-265-8018 ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Bill Gatliff wrote: Joerg wrote: John Larkin on s.e.design gave me the hint: Coin envelopes. Why not just leave the parts in the little anti-static envelopes they came in? They're already labeled, even. They come in too many different sizes and don't stack nicely. Also, they have no flap and you are always cutting and re-applying Scotch tape. This really slows down prototyping work. With the coin envelopes I don't even tuck the flap, never lost a part. Also, caps, resistors and such come in loose snippets of paper-reel. That's not very handy to store stuff. They need a better home :-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
On Thursday 14 May 2009, Joerg wrote: Not bug-for-bug, but as close to the industry standard as practical. If you let them use something that has nice features they get used to those, and then in industry where they don't have those it becomes a problem. You can do just about anything with SPICE, even simulate mechanical devices. But one has to learn who to kludge and cajole SPICE to do that. It's pretty close. In the development snapshot, and in the next official release due this summer, the whole user interface is done by plugins, which can be made any way you want. Perhaps someday it will be bug-for-bug, with more than one, and still have extensions if you ask. Significant parts of industry are moving to Verilog-A. None of the cheap simulators have it, but Gnucap does. Gnucap also accepts Spectre netlists, a subset. As to those nice features .. all tools have advantages and disadvantages. There are features you will find in one but not another. Students need to learn this. So, having nice features like Gnucap's interactive operation, extended probes, and the ability to easily change circuits interactively or with scripts is good. The ability to directly enter a netlist without file baggage is a big help at the beginning. On the other hand, the tightly integrated graphics of LTspice and other PC simulators is in that category where they don't really add to functionality, but become a crutch. Then they have a problem when the GUI isn't available, or more importantly they have a task that is complicated enough that the GUI gets in the way. Those features are the ones to avoid. So, it's LTspice that has nice features that they would be better off without. I start them with a netlist, then later they learn how to use schematic capture as a way to generate a netlist. Even a (very) seasoned engineer had to ask about that three days ago, how to set abstol and stuff and make it travel with the file. Nothing wrong with asking. Students need to learn that simulators don't always work. In a senior level course on analog design, it is reasonable to expect that they will see a convergence failure, and need to mess with abstol and stuff. It might even be desirable for a simulator to have a hidden mode that makes convergence worse to make sure this happens. Students need to learn to be flexible, and they need to learn to use computers effectively, not just by kicking the GUI a few times. EE's, even analog designers, need to learn some serious programming. They need to and they do, to some extent. They do not have to become programming experts, else I might as well demand that all CS guys fully understand Maxwell's equations because we have to ;-) Even the CS guys are not programming experts. The EE's should be able to work with unix, with the command line. They should be able to write programs to solve engineering problems. They should be able to administrate their own systems and write scripts to solve their own problems. They should be able to install a program from source, and do some simple porting. At both universities where I was on the faculty, we got constant comments from employers that the students need to learn more programming. We got those comments from accreditation reviewers too. We were not worse than average. It's a widespread problem. Too many schools don't do this. In the extreme case, EE could become a dumping ground for students who can't make it in CS. Is that what you want? That has IME never been the case, and won't be. None of the EEs I know started out CS. And don't believe EE is easy, our university had an EE flunk-out rate of around 75% plus. ME and EE were the toughest paths there, some of the grueling 4h written exams could make grown men shake in their boots. Typically, the first year curriculum is pretty much the same for all science and engineering. The students usually have not really have made up their mind yet. They made a guess, but that's all. They move around depending on how the first year goes. It amazes me how many have said I chose EE because I had trouble with the programming course and want something else. Then they learn too late that EE is hard too. At a lot of schools, the EE program (and probably others) keeps getting easier. Many older EE professors are having a hard time dealing with this. Don't sell CS short. It can be pretty grueling too. We really shouldn't be saying that one is harder than the other. To get back on topic . We had cygwin on the lab computers. I encouraged students to install it on their own computers if they were running windows and didn't also have a unix-type OS such as Linux, BSD, or Mac. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
DJ Delorie wrote: Also, caps, resistors and such come in loose snippets of paper-reel. That's not very handy to store stuff. They need a better home :-) Do you put the tape snippets in the coin envelopes, or peel the parts out of the tape first? Depends on the parts. Jelly-bean parts such as caps and resistors I just dump in there as loose parts. As reel snippets they'd occupy too many envelopes because of quantity. Just imagine 500 0.01uF/0603 as reel snippets. With PIN diodes or similar more noble parts I cut the tape into short snippets. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ gmail domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
DJ Delorie wrote: How do people manage their parts inventories, so they know what they've got? An inventory spreadsheet, a file case of 66 2 inch tall drawers intended for music sheets holds bags, reels, boxes, and some file folders with cut tape SMT parts double-stick-taped on letter size paper with edges labeled. Miscellaneous is in clear plastic organizer drawers. John ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
al davis wrote: On Thursday 14 May 2009, Joerg wrote: Not bug-for-bug, but as close to the industry standard as practical. If you let them use something that has nice features they get used to those, and then in industry where they don't have those it becomes a problem. You can do just about anything with SPICE, even simulate mechanical devices. But one has to learn who to kludge and cajole SPICE to do that. It's pretty close. In the development snapshot, and in the next official release due this summer, the whole user interface is done by plugins, which can be made any way you want. Perhaps someday it will be bug-for-bug, with more than one, and still have extensions if you ask. Significant parts of industry are moving to Verilog-A. None of the cheap simulators have it, but Gnucap does. Gnucap also accepts Spectre netlists, a subset. I can only speak for analog. There, I can currently see nobody moving away from SPICE, and except for chip design most are migrating towards LTSpice for obvious reasons ($ versus $0). So when they hire new engineers they prefer them to be familiar with LTSpice. As to those nice features .. all tools have advantages and disadvantages. There are features you will find in one but not another. Students need to learn this. So, having nice features like Gnucap's interactive operation, extended probes, and the ability to easily change circuits interactively or with scripts is good. The ability to directly enter a netlist without file baggage is a big help at the beginning. Ahm, I used to enter everything by netlist and some of the old stuff I have used on LTSpice. It can do that, you'd be free to write a netlist there. On the other hand, the tightly integrated graphics of LTspice and other PC simulators is in that category where they don't really add to functionality, but become a crutch. Then they have a problem when the GUI isn't available, or more importantly they have a task that is complicated enough that the GUI gets in the way. Those features are the ones to avoid. So, it's LTspice that has nice features that they would be better off without. I start them with a netlist, then later they learn how to use schematic capture as a way to generate a netlist. LTSpice can accomodate that. It works off of a plain old ASCII file. Any time I needed it to do something in a more traditional way like in the DOS days, it complied. Even a (very) seasoned engineer had to ask about that three days ago, how to set abstol and stuff and make it travel with the file. Nothing wrong with asking. Students need to learn that simulators don't always work. In a senior level course on analog design, it is reasonable to expect that they will see a convergence failure, and need to mess with abstol and stuff. It might even be desirable for a simulator to have a hidden mode that makes convergence worse to make sure this happens. Yes :-) Just like the flight simulator where suddenly the manifold pressure changes unpredictably right after take-off. Students need to learn to be flexible, and they need to learn to use computers effectively, not just by kicking the GUI a few times. EE's, even analog designers, need to learn some serious programming. They need to and they do, to some extent. They do not have to become programming experts, else I might as well demand that all CS guys fully understand Maxwell's equations because we have to ;-) Even the CS guys are not programming experts. The EE's should be able to work with unix, with the command line. They should be able to write programs to solve engineering problems. They should be able to administrate their own systems and write scripts to solve their own problems. They should be able to install a program from source, and do some simple porting. Ok, here we differ. There comes a point where the amount of learning is plain impossible to cram into any brain in the given number of semesters. While, for example, it would be nice if every person holding a commercial driver license is able to design their own engine control unit this is not going to happen. Did I ever write my own programs? Yes. Would my career have come to a screeching halt if I wouldn't have? No. I would have just paid someone to do it for me. At both universities where I was on the faculty, we got constant comments from employers that the students need to learn more programming. We got those comments from accreditation reviewers too. We were not worse than average. It's a widespread problem. If by accreditation you mean ABET I better not comment, cuz it'll get ugly ;-) Too many schools don't do this. In the extreme case, EE could become a dumping ground for students who can't make it in CS. Is that what you want? That has IME never been the case, and won't be. None of the EEs I know started out CS. And don't
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
DJ Delorie wrote: Also, caps, resistors and such come in loose snippets of paper-reel. That's not very handy to store stuff. They need a better home :-) Do you put the tape snippets in the coin envelopes, or peel the parts out of the tape first? Oh, before it's too late: _Don't_ remove hi-ohms resistor like 10M and such from their tapes because plating can rub off onto their bodies when tossed about. Also, they should not be touched with bare hands. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ gmail domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
On Thu, 14 May 2009 15:02:40 -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote: Seems great for cut tapes, at least. Where did you get your boxes? I got mine from elv: http://www.elv.de/output/controller.aspx?cid=74detail=10detail2=4213 The lid of these boxes is spring loaded. It keeps the parts inside even when the rack hits the floor. The boxes come in different sizes and colors. They can be combined like lego. ---(kaimartin)--- ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Just FYI, I was mostly asking about the database aspect, not the storage aspect. Both aspects are interesting to read about, of course. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Kai-Martin Knaak wrote: On Thu, 14 May 2009 15:02:40 -0500, Bill Gatliff wrote: Seems great for cut tapes, at least. Where did you get your boxes? I got mine from elv: http://www.elv.de/output/controller.aspx?cid=74detail=10detail2=4213 The lid of these boxes is spring loaded. It keeps the parts inside even when the rack hits the floor. The boxes come in different sizes and colors. They can be combined like lego. Neat! 2 Euros for 10 of those is not expensive. But only the last one says ESD-safe and that doesn't mention whether you'll get 10 for that price. Now we have to find out where to get those in America ;-) -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ gmail domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM. ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
To get back on topic . We had cygwin on the lab computers. I encouraged students to install it on their own computers if they were running windows and didn't also have a unix-type OS such as Linux, BSD, or Mac. Have you seen Sun's Virtual Box? It's very cool. Basically, it creates a virtual environment, somewhat isolated from the host OS, in which you can install any OS you like. At work, I've installed Ubuntu on my XP system. I'm finding it a bit of a memory hog, but otherwise it works just fine. I have Cygwin too, but really prefer the Virtual Box. I get full blown Linux without compromises of Cygwin. Then, if it turns out you don't like it, or want it to go away just delete the virtual partition. gene ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: geda cygwin package
gene glick wrote: To get back on topic . We had cygwin on the lab computers. I encouraged students to install it on their own computers if they were running windows and didn't also have a unix-type OS such as Linux, BSD, or Mac. Have you seen Sun's Virtual Box? It's very cool. Basically, it creates a virtual environment, somewhat isolated from the host OS, in which you can install any OS you like. At work, I've installed Ubuntu on my XP system. I'm finding it a bit of a memory hog, but otherwise it works just fine. I have Cygwin too, but really prefer the Virtual Box. I get full blown Linux without compromises of Cygwin. Then, if it turns out you don't like it, or want it to go away just delete the virtual partition. I'll second that, also using VirtualBox here with Ubuntu mounted on it. Installing the guest additions required some wrestling but this now enables me to jump back and forth between Windows programs and, for example, gschem. You can even copy and paste stuff between the two OS'es. The only thing you must remember is the right-ctrl F key combo to get in and out of full screen mode. It's not cool if you are in full screen for hours and then don't remember how to get back to your host OS (this happened to me the first time I tried gEDA). In full screen mode you literally think you are on a Linux box, tux and all. Except that tux looks mal-nourished and jaundiced on Ubuntu. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
On Thu, 14 May 2009 16:02:16 -0700, Joerg wrote: Neat! 2 Euros for 10 of those is not expensive. But only the last one says ESD-safe Only the black are ESD-safe. They sell all sizes in all colors. http://www.elv.de/SchraubenMagazine/x.aspx/cid_74/detail_1/detail2_159 Pricing for smallest size antistatic is 3 EUR/10, VAT included. These look similar, but not quite the same: http://www.transforming-technologies.com/smd-clear.html ---(kaimartin)--- ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
gEDA-user: installing 1.5.2 - progress?
no joy on doing the apt-get build-dep's -- make clean yields make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/libgeda-1.5.2' make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/libgeda-1.5.2' ( cd geda-symbols-1.5.2; make clean ) make[1]: Entering directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/geda-symbols-1.5.2' make[1]: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/geda-symbols-1.5.2 'make open' does fine, but geda-utils unpacks into geda-docs for some reason: 'make reconfig' gives: make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/libgeda-1.5.2' make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/libgeda-1.5.2' ( cd geda-symbols-1.5.2; make clean ) make[1]: Entering directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/geda-symbols-1.5.2' make[1]: *** No rule to make target `clean'. Stop. make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/kurt/Documents/gedacompile/geda-symbols-1.5.2 I'm not mv geda-docs-1.5.2 to geda-utils-1.5.2, untaring the original geda-docs, and seeing if that works. Kind of makes me wonder if I'm the only person that has tried this... literally. Regards, kurt _ From: petersk...@msn.com To: geda-user@moria.seul.org Subject: RE: frtitzing Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 18:43:24 -0600 Wish I had thought of that... or better yet, it was somewhere in the install do cumentation. Kurt KURT PETERS wrote: Criminy... I have to admit, I couldn't even get the (1.5) source to compile in Linux Kubuntu recently... so if people are saying it's easy for those not in the know to work on gEDA source code, they're just delusional. Of course, I am now going to try to use git and compile that way since I was NEVER able to get the source on the release web page to compile -- hoping those instructions are slightly clearer. Kurt Have you tried this command for getting the compile dependencies? sudo apt-get build-dep geda-gschem sudo apt-get build-dep geda sudo apt-get build-dep geda-gnetlist sudo apt-get build-dep geda-gsymcheck sudo apt-get build-dep geda-symbols sudo apt-get build-dep geda-utils Whether you have those geda-* packages installed or not, these commmands might get you all you need to compile from source on kubuntu. John -- Ecosensory Austin TX ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
Re: gEDA-user: Parts!
Cullen Newsom wrote: What a headache! I dig through boxes until I find it! As far as computerized inventory tracking, I have almost zilch. I have a few old BOMs lying around. I keep datasheets for parts I own in different directories from other parts. I try to keep the files named so that I can find them when I need them, but often it is just as easy to re-download it, than look through my directories of datasheets. I am terribly disorganized about this. Nobody knows what I have, including me. * I keep unfinished projects in clear plastic shoeboxes that you get for about a buck at discount stores. * Except for projects that are too big, so I have some cardboard boxes too * And large plastic tubs * Sometimes I clean up my bench and used a clear plastic shoebox for that, or a cardboard box, or a large tub. * I have a couple of three ring binders, with clear plastic pocket pages for parts that can be filed in order * I also have tons of those clear plastic do-dads whose base is the next one's lid. * And some tiny little flip-top dingers that I found in China * And many cut-tapes rubber-banded together * A few reels here and there (.01µF anyone?) * And some auto parts store style bolt bins * A bookshelf full of random sample kits * Drawers with IC's stuck in foam * Let's not forget those clear acrylic-drawer organizers * And a bunch of other plastic (abs?) multi drawer organizers * Fishing tackle boxes Oh man! I assume you are not married. Can't be. Impossible ... * I try to keep dev-kits in their original box I sure wish that at some stage in the design workflow (the step between gschem and PCB perhaps), I could somehow cleverly integrate part (footprint) selection (from my inventory). Then maybe I would take an inventory. Sigh. [...] -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ ___ geda-user mailing list geda-user@moria.seul.org http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
