← Back to team overview

kicad-developers team mailing list archive

Re: Library Repository [1 Attachment]


--- In kicad-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Vesa Solonen <vsolonen@...> wrote:
> Mateusz Komorkiewicz kirjoitti:
> > Vesa!
> > 
> > I started working with transformers (old and new one example attached),
> > please give me your feedback about it, as I don't want to rework more
> > symbols without knowing I am doing it right. Line widths are: Bold line
> > for coil, Thick line for core, 2*DU for pin length.
> This is going to be tricky as I don't have a clue what is exactly right
> :) The more I study what other CADs do and what the standard says, the
> more it seems the best way is just to bend the standard a bit and cherry
> pick what to follow. For pin lengths I'd like to suggest a rule that
> uses one DU per digit of pin number. One may extend the pin with
> standard 0.06 DU line as layout needs, but pin length is reserved for
> smart pin number placement (and rotation when it gets implemented). Is
> this reasonable enough?
> Attached is a png rendered from KiCad PS output by Inkscape, showing a
> piece of a "dream circuit". So don't say you haven't been warned when it
> blows up ;). Diode symbols are old library stuff. New inductors are
> drawn with 60 mil arcs to keep size conveniently interchangeable with
> resistors. BJT symbol is a bit too small to my taste, but standard
> defines about twice of the size, which seems a bit too much. Unfilled
> (semiconductor) diodes seem somewhat strange too and I'd like to see
> reasoning why filled ones were dropped from the standard.
> > I have another bunch of questions:
> > 
> > 1. According to SG:
> > "
> > -"Reference" on top left corner, outside the body, left justified
> > -"Value" on bottom right corner, outside the body, right justified
> > "
> > what about reference and value for transformers, they seems OK for me as
> > they are placed now.
> Yes, they are fine IMO. This needs some case by case judgment. If layout
> needs centered text, then use it with center justification. Top
> reference and bottom value should be adhered to, or what do you others
> think?
> > 2. Is using filled rectangle rather than line for transformer core allowed?
> > 
> > Thanks
> > Mateusz
> That's my compromise as uncapped lines (non round ends) aren't
> available. The standard allow only one "core line" and I'm inclined to
> finally agree on that. Transformers with static shield between windings
> would need the core (thick) and dotted shield line (with line or thin),
> but these aren't standard...
> All in all, I'm going to ask some well reasoned opinions to steer the
> library direction from you all. I somewhat underestimated the work and
> thought this would need.
> -Vesa


After drawing some components, I agree with you that the standard need to be a little bit bended. But it has to be well defined too. Below are my observation:
1. Drawing with your guideline yields good results (see examples).
2. I added arrow head style (taken from your drawing).
3. I also draw sample transistor compare to your drawing.
4. There is no pin name/number defined yet.

what's your opinion?



Follow ups