In gschem I have my default text size set as 8. If I add attributes
via gattrib then the text is added as size 10. Obviously these are two
separate programmes and gattrib is not dependant on the settings in my
gschemrc, so this behaviour is kind of expected. Is there any way to
set the default
In gschem I have my default text size set as 8. If I add attributes
via gattrib then the text is added as size 10. Obviously these are two
separate programmes and gattrib is not dependant on the settings in my
gschemrc, so this behaviour is kind of expected. Is there any way to
set the
-- Free Dog Gathering Announcement
The Free EDA Users Group will meet Thursday, November 6th.
It's been many months since we last gathered. Let's get back
into the swing of things with a fall gathering at the
Bear Rock Cafe in Reading, MA!
The meeting will be an
I forget the exact behavior of gattrib, but I can say that gattrib
*does* read the gafrc file. Therefore, try putting a text-size
declaration in your gafrc file.
I tried putting (text-size 8) into the gafrc file and removed it from
the gschemrc file. Text added in gschem is then back to the
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 07:35 -0400, Stuart Brorson wrote:
I forget the exact behavior of gattrib, but I can say that gattrib
*does* read the gafrc file. Therefore, try putting a text-size
declaration in your gafrc file.
I tried putting (text-size 8) into the gafrc file and removed it
Sometimes it is necessary/recommended to partition (separate) power or
ground planes, i.e. for ADC or DC/DC-Converters, see page 16 and 17 in
http://focus.ti.com/lit/ug/slwu028c/slwu028c.pdf
We can do this in pcb program with (adjoining) polygons.
Disadvantage is, that if we change the size of
I do not fully understand what is going on when a polygon is divided by
a trace (with clearance).
Is there somewhere an explanation how it (should) work?
Is there a way to deactivate the removal of copper?
It is my impression that always the smaller part of a rectangle/polygon
is removed, even
I typically deal with this by separating the planes at the schematic
level using a bead-core inductor. The two planes are then on different
nets at the PCB level. This not only makes it easier to do the routing
but they also serve an electrical purpose of isolating the two planes
from a high
Am Montag, den 27.10.2008, 11:59 -0400 schrieb Neil Webster:
I typically deal with this by separating the planes at the schematic
level using a bead-core inductor. The two planes are then on different
nets at the PCB level. This not only makes it easier to do the routing
but they also serve an
I do not want to start a flame war, since I am relatively new here but I
have to comment ...
On Sun, 2008-10-26 at 20:47 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
Am Sonntag, den 26.10.2008, 14:25 -0500 schrieb Kipton Moravec:
There are huge differences in the size of these footprints!
Please note,
Why in gods name would some one call a footprint 0603 when it is
really an 0201. Nobody uses a metric name for resistors or
capacitors. You folks are asking for trouble.
It's not us, it's the international standards. We're microscopic fish
in a galaxy-sized pond.
Ahh, haha.
In the USA, electronic design engineers have been using inches (with
0603 meaning 0.06 by 0.03 inches) to describe surface mount resistors
and capacitors.
Folks in other countries have probably always been using metric.
But I've noticed that recently digikey.com (a
On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 11:21:50AM -0600, John Doty wrote:
Nobody uses a metric name for resistors or capacitors.
I see it all the time. For example, here's a blurb that gives both
with priority to metric:
http://www.rohm.com/ad/mcr004/index.html
Another example is Altium, which comes
I typically deal with this by separating the planes at the schematic
level using a bead-core inductor.
Yes, I also have GND and AGND in my schematics.
Don't put inductors between ground planes, connect them at a star
point. If you are going to use inductors then have them on the power
side,
Am Montag, den 27.10.2008, 19:47 +0200 schrieb Duncan Drennan:
Yes, I also have GND and AGND in my schematics.
Don't put inductors between ground planes, connect them at a star
point. If you are going to use inductors then have them on the power
side, not between grounds.
I think so
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:47:32 +0200, Duncan Drennan wrote:
How do I best divide a copper area (physically) into subsections with
complicated shape/outline.
Is there a good way to do this with PCB?
If you want to partially divide a polygon:
* Draw lines on copper with zero thickness but
Am Montag, den 27.10.2008, 18:17 + schrieb Kai-Martin Knaak:
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:47:32 +0200, Duncan Drennan wrote:
How do I best divide a copper area (physically) into subsections with
complicated shape/outline.
Is there a good way to do this with PCB?
If you want to
On Mon, 2008-10-27 at 16:47 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
I do not fully understand what is going on when a polygon is divided by
a trace (with clearance).
Is there somewhere an explanation how it (should) work?
Is there a way to deactivate the removal of copper?
It is my impression that
Kipton Moravec wrote:
I do not want to start a flame war,
.
.
.
Everyone
should design for the machine.
You might get one. But probably not... gEDA users are about as individual as
they come,
and often do things their way, so you won't be able to convince them to all
design any one way.
I agree with Niel, I separate my ground planes with a symbol for a power
inductor. I do this at the schematic level and then I read the layout
suggestions typically provided by the A/D data sheet on where to connect
the planes. For the fab I put in the power inductor foot print. You can
then use
On the issue of powering boards I have been playing with some really
neat programmable power supply controllers (surface mount chip) that
support power supply modules. Prices of the modules seem to be
comparable to the prices of the individual components one would need to
build various forms of
On Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:47:52 +0100, Stefan Salewski wrote:
* Draw lines on copper with zero thickness but finite clearance.
Does this really result in legal Gerber files -- would be not so nice if
a few manufacturers can not handle it.
I didn't check the Gerber specs. My favorite fab
22 matches
Mail list logo
