Would there be any interest in a PCB footprint lib. with all the parts you
would ever need for free. I ask this because I am working on trying to get a
large lib. in Protel. It would have the silk screen, a fence that would be
on the last electrical layer to avoid component placement conflictions,
Original Message-
> From: Ted Tontis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 24 July 2001 4:50 AM
> To: Protel Forum (E-mail)
> Subject: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
> Would there be any interest in a PCB footprint lib. with all
> the parts you
> would ever nee
At 01:50 PM 7/23/01 -0500, Ted Tontis wrote:
>Would there be any interest in a PCB footprint lib. with all the parts you
>would ever need for free. I ask this because I am working on trying to get a
>large lib. in Protel. It would have the silk screen, a fence that would be
>on the last electrical
models for
the parts they want to use)
TC
> Original Message-
> From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 7:03 AM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
> At 01:50
On 09:52 AM 7/24/2001 +1000, Thomas wrote:
>It cannot be done.
While I understand the sentiment, boy do I just hate when people say such things...
After all, there are not all THAT many footprints. Components, yes, footprints...I
don't think so...
aj
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Ted Tontis wrote:
> Would there be any interest in a PCB footprint lib. with all
> the parts you would ever need for free. I ask this because I am
> working on trying to get a large lib. in Protel. It would have the
> silk screen, a fence that would be on the last electrical layer to
> avoid comp
The standards are all ready set. I do not have control of them, this task
was put into motion sometime ago. If you want to look at the standards you
can at www.pcbstandards.com . again I have no control over the set
standards.
anyone who thinks this can not be done is sorry to say wrong. We as
de
-Original Message-
From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 1:03 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
Mr. Lomax
>What I forsee is a system whereby a user wishes to use a part which is not
>in the library w
t.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Andrew J Jenkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2001 9:48 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
> On 09:52 AM 7/24/2001 +1000, Thomas wrote:
>
> >It cannot be done.
>
&
wow, what ambition!
can you pls explain:
> 2 There is a conductive fence on the lowest layer as to avoid part placement
> conflicts
a little more?
lowest layer = bottom layer?
and how does conductive help?
Dennis Saputelli
Ted Tontis wrote:
>
> The standards are all ready set. I do not have co
-
From: Dennis Saputelli [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 12:01 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
wow, what ambition!
can you pls explain:
> 2 There is a conductive fence on the lowest layer as to avoid part
placement
> conflicts
a littl
On 08:54 AM 7/24/2001 -0700, Brad Velander wrote:
>Andrew et al,
> I get the feeling that many people think that there would not be too
>many footprints.
IMO, "too many" is a relative term. 2500 is nothing compared to the discrete number of
components available, footprint(s) aside.
> H
w J Jenkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 12:10 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
> On 08:54 AM 7/24/2001 -0700, Brad Velander wrote:
> >Andrew et al,
> > I get the feeling that many people thi
We are moving from California to Massachusetts and things are a bit hectic
right now, but I have started a mailing list for the purpose of developing
-- or choosing -- standards for library creation. We might decide to adopt
en masse the IPC standards, or we might pick and choose.
Some good id
-
> From: Andrew J Jenkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 July 2001 5:10 AM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
-snip-
> However, my main reply point was to the comment "It can't be
> done". It's an irritating s
AIL PROTECTED]>
cc:(bcc: Clive Broome/sdc)
Subject: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
Would there be any interest in a PCB footprint lib. with all the parts you
would ever need for free. I ask this because I am working on trying to get a
large lib. in Protel. It would have the silk screen, a
email glitch...
For validation, on the PCB side, I used to place a 'scanned version' in
a translucent state, of the part over the footprint. I've been able to find
and correct many footprint problems in advance using this technique. If
such an ability was built into Protel & a copy of the s
At 12:03 PM 7/25/01 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Taking just the
>semiconductor footprints, thats
>1067 footprints that will be bundled into the super library that someone
>will be
>remaking. Or will these footprints
> just be copied from the existing Protel libraries? If these seperate
> l
02
John Haddy
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, 25 July 2001 12:03 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
>
>
> Im assuming that the existing PCB footprint libraries on
At 02:04 PM 7/25/01 +1000, John Haddy wrote:
>Under no circumstances should the Protel libraries be copied! They
>are riddled with errors (I'd list them all as "unverified"). For
>instance, any metric pitch component that's been created with the
>footprint wizard is likely to be wrong.
First of a
Clive
"John Haddy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/25/2001 02:04:02 PM
Please respond to "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: (bcc: Clive Broome/sdc)
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
On 08:55 PM 24/07/2001 -0700, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said:
>As I stated, I do prefer that we move this discussion to the new list,
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You may prefer but the vast majority if people responding do not want
another mail list it seems...
Ian Wilson
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I started the thread on this subject. I knew the size of this
project was going to be large, that is why I posted the thread in the first
place. I wanted to see if anyone else would like to help or even if anyone
wanted to have a large library system that was free. My idea was to get
every
t.com
> -Original Message-
> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 9:56 PM
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
>
> I'd assume that the libraries would not normally contain paste
Original Message-
From: Ted Tontis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 7:30 AM
To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
I started the thread on this subject. I knew the size of this
project was going to be large, that is why I
At 07:10 PM 7/25/01 +1000, Ian Wilson wrote:
>On 08:55 PM 24/07/2001 -0700, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax said:
>
>>As I stated, I do prefer that we move this discussion to the new list,
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>You may prefer but the vast majority if people responding do not want
>another mail list it seem
At 09:29 AM 7/25/01 -0500, Ted Tontis wrote:
> As designers we sometimes have to make the impossible happen, and we
>do make it happen. So why then all the negative remarks?
All I know is that if you want to accomplish something valuable, get used
to it. It is *much* easier to sit back
ou pay for it. Check the
footprint yourself before you use it. I do.
Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website: www.bagotronix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent:
ROTECTED]
Web: www.lavenir.com
-Original Message-
From: Bagotronix Tech Support [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 10:11 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
> >You may prefer but the vast majority if people responding do
On 10:23 PM 7/24/2001 -0400, Brian Guralnick wrote:
>email glitch...
>
> For validation, on the PCB side, I used to place a 'scanned version' in
>a translucent state, of the part over the footprint. I've been able to find
>and correct many footprint problems in advance using this technique.
For me at least, the issue of a separate list is moot. I'm interested, and
I will (did) subscribe. Then it just comes as more email, mixed in with
mail from all the other lists that I have joined. If a separate list makes
it easier to administer, then I don't mind.
A separate list does have
development
time down considerably.
Ted
-Original Message-
From: Andrew J Jenkins [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 12:35 PM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
On 10:03 AM 7/25/2001 -0700, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>At 09:29 AM 7/25/01 -0500,
On 01:10 PM 7/24/2001 -0700, Brad Velander wrote:
>Andrew,
> please don't throw me into the simple nay-sayers
Nope. I didn't. Just "doubting" Thomas, to whom I originally replied.
> I have my doubts
>about whether it could be accomplished amongst a group as diverse as ours,
>but it can
At 01:11 PM 7/25/01 -0400, Bagotronix Tech Support wrote:
>As far as "verification" of parts goes, I oppose any bureaucratization that
>would hinder or slow down the footprint distribution process. This sounds
>like more "total quality management" business school bullsh*t. The buyer
>beware - fr
hursday, 26 July 2001 05:56
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
> On 01:10 PM 7/24/2001 -0700, Brad Velander wrote:
> >Andrew,
> > please don't throw me into the simple nay-sayers
>
>
> Nope. I didn't. Just &qu
At 02:07 PM 7/25/01 -0400, Andrew J Jenkins wrote:
>The problem, as I see it, with traffic in multiple locations is that it's
>end result is fragmentation of the group and
Meeting in committee is hardly "fragmentation." The records of the
committee are open to the public and will remain so, and
.
You get the idea.
Regards
Ian Middleton
> -Original Message-
> From: Abd ul-Rahman Lomax [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: 26 July 2001 01:06
> To: Protel EDA Forum
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
>
>
> At 02:07 PM 7/25/01 -0400, Andrew J Jenkins
For validation, on the PCB side, I used to place a 'scanned version' in
a translucent state, of the part over the footprint. I've been able to find
and correct many footprint problems in advance using this technique. If
such an ability was built into Protel & a copy of the scan was kept with
is thingy.
Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website: www.bagotronix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Brian Guralnick" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 11:29 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. fo
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Ian Middleton wrote:
> It could also ask about paste, solder, plating and tenting overrides as
> well. It could also allow mixing on units when entering (mills and mm).
you can type xxxmm and yyymil - works nicely. The rest of the wishlist I
also wish for...
(The library
i would agree with steve's comments here
sometime i have spent longer looking for a footprint than it would take
to make one (simple ones only that is)
also it is true that they can and sometimes should be slanted to the
project at hand
sch parts, however, don't strike me as being hard at all
Den
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, Dennis Saputelli wrote:
> sch parts, however, don't strike me as being hard at all
My current design, with 3 devices over 250 pins, has reminded me how dull
generating sch parts can be. It's just galling that the information _must_
be available within the IC manufacturers,
6, 2001 11:04 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
On 11:10 AM 7/26/2001 -0400, Bagotronix Tech Support wrote:
>Does anyone know if the wildcard character '?'
>is acceptable in footprint names?
Good question. According to a Windriver document (Ge
> Oh for a pdf -> library converter that'd get the pin types, names
> and numbers right!
One solution may be to look at ClientBasic as Sch:PlacePin has some
parameters that govern Name,Number,X,Y, etc. etc. but ClientBasic (VB for
all intents and purposes) is a super major pain in the ass to do
At 12:28 PM 7/26/01 -0500, Ted Tontis wrote:
> I would like to try and stay with Wind Rivers standards. They have
>already done most of the leg work on this subject.
An obvious step to take would be for a user to move that the Wind Rivers
standards be adopted, and then we could go over t
At 03:06 PM 7/26/01 -0400, chris mackensen wrote:
>because
>cadence's files are all OPEN and TEXT based and NOT ENCAPSULATED in a
>DATABASE (and NOT BINARY), it was a matter of my perl script just parsing
>Excel sheets of pin data (automatically saved as text files over the web)
>and generating th
f paper office records from that time
that are still quite readable!
Best regards,
Ivan Baggett
Bagotronix Inc.
website: www.bagotronix.com
- Original Message -
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent
rotel.
"Steve Wiseman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/27/2001 03:19:34 AM
Please respond to "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc: (bcc: Clive Broome/sdc)
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for ever
On Fri, 27 Jul 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The pin data probably does exist somewhere as a text file or bonding details of
> die pad location ( in x,y ) to pin number on the package. But for manufacturers
> to put these into Protel specific format, its not going to happen soon.
I don't need
On Thu, 26 Jul 2001, chris mackensen wrote:
> for example, to get an Excel spreadsheet of pin data, one only has to copy
> and paste from PDF to Excel (usually through MS-Word, to get the tables
> correct)
Hmm, the massaging this needs normally makes it very painful. I've not
tried going t
OTECTED]>
To: Protel EDA Forum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2001 7:14 AM
Subject: Re: [PEDA] a lib. for everyone
> > It should be noted that the Protel ASCII format is not only text based,
> but
> > it is self-documenting. All the records and fields are nam
56 matches
Mail list logo
