kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Russell Oliver <roliver8143@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hi all,

As a crazy thought related to having the board capture orphan pads under an
parent footprint,  conceptually what about a pcb being represented as a
hierarchy of footprints.

>From what I understand most elements of a board can be included in
footprints except for tracks. If tracks could be included as part of a
"footprint" would it not be possible to export a group of footprints and
tracks as a new reusable section of already laid out  components.

Regards
Russell
On 30 Jan 2016 04:29, "jp charras" <jp.charras@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Le 29/01/2016 16:57, Tomasz Wlostowski a écrit :
> > On 29.01.2016 16:49, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> >> Oh, it's definitely a dirty hack - but it's a dirty hack that is
> somewhat
> >> necessary, and used to be possible, and now it's not, so... regression,
> dude!
> >> :)
> >>
> >> Yeah, yeah, I'm a spacebar heater, I know... :D
> >>
> >> https://xkcd.com/1172/
> >>
> > No, you're not :) I perfectly agree with your reasoning and I'll add an
> > option to disable component removal.
> >
> >> I'd argue that while using a footprint as a via is a dirty hack, the
> simple
> >> concept of allowing footprints on the PCB that aren't on the schematic
> is
> >> *not*. Lots of people want to be able to place things like mounting
> holes
> >> without having to put them in the schematic. (Whether or not that's best
> >> practice is beside the point, it's very common.)
> >
> > Most tools I've used require that the components on the schematic fully
> > match the PCB, but they also allow drawing mounting holes as 'free'
> > pads. This is another limitation of pcbnew - in Eagle/Altium you can
> > just draw an arbitrary pad straight on the PCB.
>
>  " In Kicad, it requires a footprint (and so the sch/pcb inconsistency)."
>
> This is not true.
> In Pcbnew, pads can live outside a footprint.
> (They are used in the pad properties editor)
>
> But without a footprint, you cannot manage easily the net of this pad.
> Just because schematic knows only footprints, the net of the orphan pads
> cannot be managed by the schematic.
>
> Therefore users have to manage the net of these orphan pads *by hand*.
> and these pads create sch/pcb inconsistency
> AFAIK, Altium has not solved this issue (sch/pcb inconsistency).
>
> To fix this kind of issue, we need a good idea, not just mimic what is
> made in Eagle/Altium.
> I have already used Altium, and worked with guys who are using Altium,
> but I am not a Altium specialist.
> I have seen some very good and powerful ideas (rooms), and some less
> good ideas (Well, I was not impressed by ERC and net management)
>
> My preferred idea (I am not saying this is a good idea) is to consider
> the board itself as a parent footprint these "orphan" pads.
>
> Power connections could be managed at schematic level by something like
> a few test or connect points ( pins of the board, seen like a footprint)
> connected to the nets (usually GND, VCC ...)  we want to connect to
> these "orphan" pads
> Stitching vias could be some of these "orphan" pads.
> You do not need a footprint by pad: only one footprint is enough.
>
> I am pretty sure this is not a lot of work to code that.
> At least less than trying to manage stitching vias as standard vias.
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Tom
>
>
> --
> Jean-Pierre CHARRAS
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>