On 15/10/09 05:25, Peter Clifton wrote:
> I think it takes a good board to show off the potential benefits of the
> 3D view, so I've made another screen-shot.
>
> The board is by John Bass (jb...@dmsd.com), Copyright 2007 DMS Design.
>
> http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/pcb+gl_3d/pcb+gl_3d-6.p
> I don't have any >2 layer designs myself.
Here you go...
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/alarmclock/board.pcb
(esp the ground plane clearances under the crystals and switcher)
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/usb-gpio/usb-gpio-pp.pcb
(has lots of curvy bits)
http://www.delorie.com
On Oct 14, 2009, at 11:25 PM, Peter Clifton wrote:
> I think it takes a good board to show off the potential benefits of
> the
> 3D view, so I've made another screen-shot.
>
> The board is by John Bass (jb...@dmsd.com), Copyright 2007 DMS Design.
>
> http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/pcb+gl_3
I think it takes a good board to show off the potential benefits of the
3D view, so I've made another screen-shot.
The board is by John Bass (jb...@dmsd.com), Copyright 2007 DMS Design.
http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/pcb+gl_3d/pcb+gl_3d-6.png
I don't have any >2 layer designs myself.
B
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 09:36 -0700, Mike Bushroe wrote:
> WOW, that looks nice! And having that might help me to remember that
>PCB keeps defaulting to putting the rat lines on the component side
>for a single sided board, so when I finally produce the board, I have
>to turn it over and
Stephen Williams wrote:
> I'm planing a circuit where some chips have a wide variety of
> different power supply requirements.
Assuming the nice star pattern of power distribution from the source and back
will assemble itself is a lost cause, so there's no need to pre label every
part with a t
On Wed, 14 Oct 2009 15:58:14 -0700, Stephen Williams wrote:
> I'm planing a circuit where some chips have a wide variety of different
> power supply requirements. I'm debating with myself whether I should
> create symbols that have net= attributes for all the various power
> types, or if I should
I'm planing a circuit where some chips have a wide variety of
different power supply requirements. I'm debating with myself
whether I should create symbols that have net= attributes for
all the various power types, or if I should attach attributes
from outside the symbol, or create pins for all th
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 14:34 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
>
> But is it not a typical work flow to first move and rotate the parts, do
> the layout and after that move the labels around? If I first move the
> labels, they may appear near another element. This makes things a bit
> difficult to han
That would be a burn UP spec, not a burn IN spec ;-)
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.org
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user
I don't know about burn-in specs, but one usually specifies a glass
temperature (Tg) and a destruction temperature (Td) for the PCB
material you want to use (typically FR-4). I don't recall the nominal
Td and Tg we used to use, but I do know they is now higher due to the
RoHS directives.
A quick
Can somebody recommends burn in spec. for PCB such as time vs.
temperature? Is there a mil spec for that? I could only find mil-spec
for burning in individual IC, not PCB (mil-std-883 for example).
Thanks,
Chris.
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@
WOW, that looks nice! And having that might help me to remember that
PCB keeps defaulting to putting the rat lines on the component side
for a single sided board, so when I finally produce the board, I have
to turn it over and flip all the components.
Mike
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 07:54 -0400, Ethan Swint wrote:
> > Just proof of concept stuff...
> >
> > http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/pcb+gl_3d/
> >
> > There isn't anything clever here.. just the same PCB+GL translucent
> > rendering I had before, but with a 3D virtual trackball to rotate the
> >
> and I think, to flip the parts around a middle line or the center of the
> board is not really what a user want.
If you've selected many elements, this is the best we can do, and it
keeps the group of elements in the same position relative to each
other once they're moved.
__
> If I set "settings->lock names" I could rotate the element if the name
> is visible.
"Lock names" locks the element names relative to the element, so you
don't keep accidentally moving the name when you intend to move the
whole element. I do most of my PCB editing with names locked.
> If sil
On 10/14/09, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
> I think the "no rotation of elements if silk layer is off" is a bit
> mysterious.
>
> The lock names setting is my work around for the problem, so I can do my
> work. But I think this is not the behavior which is expected.
Who don't expect unexpected, shall not
Thanks guys.
On Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 5:09 PM, Gareth Edwards
wrote:
> 2009/9/30 Peter TB Brett :
>> Try adding the following to your gafrc:
>>
>> (load (build-path geda-rc-path "print-colormap-lightbg"))
>>
>
> Thanks, Peter, that works for me and I've update the wiki to reflect this.
>
> Gareth
Stefan Salewski schrieb:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 08:51 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
>> Ineiev schrieb:
>>> On 10/13/09, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
I try to rotate some smd parts (0603) on the layout,m but only the silk
layer rotates. If I switch of the silk layer, I could not rotate
anythi
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 08:51 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
> Ineiev schrieb:
> > On 10/13/09, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
> >> I try to rotate some smd parts (0603) on the layout,m but only the silk
> >> layer rotates. If I switch of the silk layer, I could not rotate
> >> anything. Rotating SO14 is working
> Just proof of concept stuff...
>
> http://www2.eng.cam.ac.uk/~pcjc2/geda/pcb+gl_3d/
>
> There isn't anything clever here.. just the same PCB+GL translucent
> rendering I had before, but with a 3D virtual trackball to rotate the
> viewport.
>
>
Very cool! How do you set the origin for the vi
Stefan Salewski schrieb:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 13:19 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
>> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:07 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> if I move a component to the other side of the board, the part is moved
>>> to a total different position!
>>>
>>> I expected that the
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 13:19 +0200, Stefan Salewski wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:07 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > if I move a component to the other side of the board, the part is moved
> > to a total different position!
> >
> > I expected that the part is on the same place
On Wed, 2009-10-14 at 10:07 +0200, Klaus Rudolph wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> if I move a component to the other side of the board, the part is moved
> to a total different position!
>
> I expected that the part is on the same place but on the other side.
>
> What I did wrong?
>
>
How do you move th
Hi all,
if I move a component to the other side of the board, the part is moved
to a total different position!
I expected that the part is on the same place but on the other side.
What I did wrong?
___
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@moria.seul.o
25 matches
Mail list logo
