How do you people make such good layouts?

[gaussmarkov]

gaussmarkov: I see what you mean. I think I will try ExpressPCB for my next perfboard layout; that makes a lot of sense. Have you figured out a measurement for how much space you need under the board to clear the hookups? I ask b/c in the stuff I've built so far, I mount the board over the pots in tall standoffs, and there isn't a whole lot of room.

i have been thinking about space.    maybe we should start a new thread about this?    when i get another moment, i'll put my thoughts together and post them in a new topic.  or maybe just pm them to you.

[Dave_B]

Eagle is availible to me in from the Unix port but I still don't use it. Some reasons are reasons. Mostly that the interface is pretty stinky even for techincal software which has always been traditonaly difficult for the average user.

You know I should point out that I've not used anything other than Eagle.  Before that it was all 1984 vintage graph paper.    

Maybe this topic would benefit from a poll? 

[gaussmarkov]

i am an eagle user, just because that's where i started.  i did try expresspcb sometime later and found no compelling reason to switch--both were mysterious to me as a beginner.     i just installed expresspcb again and tried it out and it now seems like a reasonable alternative to eagle.  i do not think that it is easier to use in every respect and, of course, some aspects actually seemed awkward.  i believe those who have said that expresspcb is easier to get started on.  it appears to be simpler and, as a natural consequence, may be less flexible or powerful in some ways.  i do not think the simplicity is a drawback for the circuits that i have been drawing.  expresspcb would be fine.  if i were starting out again, knowing what i know now, i would probably start with expresspcb and consider switching to eagle later.

but i probably won't switch from eagle to expresspcb.  there is at least one feature in eagle that i like very much which i would lose in expresspcb ... and probably more if i kept experimenting.    as i understand it (and i may be mistaken here) one must populate the pcb and manually name each component to a corresponding component in a prepared schematic before the network information can be imported from the schematic to the pcb.  that is, one enters and names the components twice in expressPCB/expressSCH, once in the schematic and once in the pcb.  in eagle, you prepare the schematic first and simply open a pcb window that automatically contains all the components and nets from that schematic.  there is no need to enter the component information a second time.

i hope this is helpful information for those considering the options. 

[bwanasonic]

there is at least one feature in eagle that i like very much which i would lose in expresspcb ... and probably more if i kept experimenting.  ;)  as i understand it (and i may be mistaken here) one must populate the pcb and manually name each component to a corresponding component in a prepared schematic before the network information can be imported from the schematic to the pcb.  that is, one enters and names the components twice in expressPCB/expressSCH, once in the schematic and once in the pcb.  in eagle, you prepare the schematic first and simply open a pcb window that automatically contains all the components and nets from that schematic.  there is no need to enter the component information a second time.

This is one of the strongest features of Eagle for *real world* purposes, and is what makes it annoying for me. That is it's selection of *real world* specific *packages* . Finding *packages* that suit my needs takes longer than doing a layout in ExpressPCB for me. I prefer the more generalized *abstract* method. Obviously Eagle is a much *deeper* program, and if my needs were more complex, I would take the time to get over my annoyance with it's clunky and very unsexy interface. My needs are very much at the *hobbyist* end of things, and I come from a graphics background. ExpressPCB functions much more like a drawing program with limited *error / connectivity* checking.

Kerry M

[Basile]

Hi everyone,

I'm also an EAGLE user and even if you need some experiences with EAGLE,  I really like it. Specially  when I use the script called Eagle3D. This creates a POVRay file with can render in 3 dimension the board that you've created (POVRay is an open source software). The link : http://www.matwei.de/

Well another industrial product is PROTEL DXP but when I say it is complicated that's because my english vocabulary is not enough important to qualify this software.

Well, I haven't seen the name of Kicad software. I never used but I named it in case of someone you will find it interesting. http://www.lis.inpg.fr/realise_au_lis/kicad/

Regards..

Basile

[gaussmarkov]

there is at least one feature in eagle that i like very much which i would lose in expresspcb ... and probably more if i kept experimenting.    as i understand it (and i may be mistaken here) one must populate the pcb and manually name each component to a corresponding component in a prepared schematic before the network information can be imported from the schematic to the pcb.  that is, one enters and names the components twice in expressPCB/expressSCH, once in the schematic and once in the pcb.  in eagle, you prepare the schematic first and simply open a pcb window that automatically contains all the components and nets from that schematic.  there is no need to enter the component information a second time.

This is one of the strongest features of Eagle for *real world* purposes, and is what makes it annoying for me. That is it's selection of *real world* specific *packages* . Finding *packages* that suit my needs takes longer than doing a layout in ExpressPCB for me. I prefer the more generalized *abstract* method. Obviously Eagle is a much *deeper* program, and if my needs were more complex, I would take the time to get over my annoyance with it's clunky and very unsexy interface. My needs are very much at the *hobbyist* end of things, and I come from a graphics background. ExpressPCB functions much more like a drawing program with limited *error / connectivity* checking.

Kerry M

i hope it is helpful to distinguish between two different things here:  the "real world" packages that Kerry refers to and the single pass entry that i refer to.  the "real world" packages part of eagle is very annoying, at least initially.  it's my impression that many eagle users end up assembling their own package libraries, making eagle similar to the expresspcb approach.  one of these days i am going to get mine in shape for general distribution as a single library.    maybe another forumite who is more capable will offer theirs.

the single-pass entry that i was talking about would be a great feature to have in expresspcb.  so would the rubberbanding mentioned earlier in this thread.  it isn't necessary to enjoy using expresspcb.  our circuits generally have low package counts.  these features are just very convenient.

[gtrmac]

I use Protel 99SE. I only use it because they have it here at the shop where I work, it's too expensive for me to buy myself. My job is actually repair and maintenance but the engineer was kind enough to give me a few lessons to get started. I've been using it for about a year now and I have made my own Schematic and PCB footprint libraries. The original libraries were really setup for automated soldering and the pads and trace widths were tiny. The first few boards I had made were hard to solder so I started making new libraries eventually.

I do all the part placement and routing manually. Autorouting is probably necessary if you have a big board with 4 layers but for a little stompbox it's fun to just DIY. Even if you use Autorouting, as the engineer does you have to do a lot of editing to clean it up. I tried to have it Autoroute a board a couple of times but it seemed to take forever on my little computer here at the office and the board ended up looking stupid anyway. I probably could make it work, the key is in locking the location of certain components I think.

Any program that synchronizes the schematic and the PCB is helpful because it tells you which pins are to be connected. Even so, a decent layout takes quite a bit of time, usually the best part of a day.

[The Tone God]

I don't want to sound like I am dis-missing Eagle for being too complex but for basic audio analog layout work it is too much program as is Protel, which I won't use for reasons I have posted about before so I will not repeat them here. If I am doing a multi-laid digital board then they are the right tool and I will use them.

I like the software I use now for analog boards. It has a straight ahead keyboard/mouse interface that I learned through "training exercises" like Doom, Quake, Hitman, and so forth.

Some understanding about software development has to be explained here to the people who complain of the complexity of technical software like PCB layout software. When the software is being design the audience of the software is taken into account. In the case of PCB layout software it can be assumed that the user has technical knowledge the requires a certain amount of intelligence. To put it simple the user is not an idiot so don't design a patronizing UI for an idiot. In that case the focus is not on making the software user friendly but to enable features user will find useful and shorten development time like better auto-routers and more comprehensive part libraries.

There is no idiot friendly PCB layout program. No iTunes for PCBs. There is no market for them and why ? The market for a friendly easy PCB software package would be hobbyists and despite what we may think hobbyists are a very tiny minority in the market place. The market for PCB software are companies. The current crop of more "easy" PCB programs lack a great deal of the advanced and even basic features that all serious PCB programs have. No company will want software that lacks basic functions that even cheapest software contains.

What about ExpressPCB and it's ilk ? Notice they don't sell the software but give it away ? They know there is no market for that software. Instead they wrote the software to encourage people who have little technical knowledge to use their service. Make it easier for the people to layout boards for your service, the more likely they will use your service. That is where they make their money. If they charged for the software no one would use their service. It also provides a level of over site and initial quality assurance that they don't have to do. The software does it or more specifically prevents you from doing something beyond their manufacturing scope.

Sorry but that print screen crap is not used by any serious board designer. That is a hack. Its fine for people doing their own boards at home. No board shop / company would accept that silliness. They want gerbers and drill files.

Just a few thoughts.

Andrew

[Paul Perry (Frostwave)]

Something to think about when choosing a program: if there is any chance that you are going to want to have boards prepared by PCB companies, you had better have a program that wil put out the files they require.
Incidentally, the 'complexity' of the Protel isn't due to the English languge! It *IS* complex!
Admittedly, it isn't helped by the fact that different PCB programs use the same words to describe different things..

[formerMember1]

i don't know if i am posting in the right thread,..I hope i am,...But, i have been trying to grasp the basics of designing a circuit board. Is there any books out there, anyone could recommend to me?  R.G. I will buy a book off you if you have some left.... I will only be doing simple stuff like a fuzzface pcb, actually all i really want to do at the moment, is modify a layout that is online.(is that legal?)

I want to "modify" the fuzzcentral layout for the Axis Face Silicon Rev 3,   I just want to make the 33k resistor on the board, a 3 hole, so that i could mount a trimpot on board, like he has the 8.2k resistor trimpotted.  I find i could get better tones with the fuzz, by adjusting both the 8.2k and 33k resistors, so instead of socketing the 33k everytime i build it, and swapping resistors, i would rather have the option of having it a trimpot.

1. Do i have the right to modify Phillip's layout to add a trimpot, instead of fixed resistor, or do i have to make my own layout from scratch? (i was worried about the copyright, or i am just dumb thinking this?)

2. Which program Eagle, ExpressPCB, etc... is the easiest to just do the above?  (without getting into the headaches,...I have no training in graphic arts, circuit layouts, etc....)

3. I was hoping by starting off this way, i could also learn from it also.


I also later on in the future would like to modify the wah board at fuzzcentral, for having a power supply filter cap, and polarity protection on board.  Is this possible for me? Or do i need to be Expierenced?

thanks,... And i apologize if i shouldn't have posted here, or whatever,... I read the thread numerous times and can't make much sense of it.     But, i will continue to search the forum for past threads, to aid me. 

[gaussmarkov]

hey formerMember1,

phillip is providing his pcb layout on line so that you can use it, which means you can modify it.  but you can't post your mod of his layout image without his permission.  if you do a fresh version of phillip's layout with a program like expressPCB, then i would still ask permission though technically you don't have to.  one can only copyright the layout image itself (as i recall).

i think the consensus is that expressPCB is the easiest.  and its free. 

and you will definitely learn from the experience.  go for it!!

[formerMember1]

thanks gaussmarkov, i will give it a try.

thanks for clearing that up becuase i don't like to steal from others, who work hard to do what they do,...

[The Tone God]

Get it from Phillip himself. Email him.

Andrew

[bwanasonic]

Some understanding about software development has to be explained here to the people who complain of the complexity of technical software like PCB layout software. When the software is being design the audience of the software is taken into account. In the case of PCB layout software it can be assumed that the user has technical knowledge the requires a certain amount of intelligence. To put it simple the user is not an idiot so don't design a patronizing UI for an idiot. In that case the focus is not on making the software user friendly but to enable features user will find useful and shorten development time like better auto-routers and more comprehensive part libraries.

I am fully aware of this, and have been since shortly after the punch card era. I have learned many a proprietary interface for *technical* software, some using massive custom keyboards with multi-function keys using three letter abbreviations for german words. Arcane and obsolete programs on Sparcstations, SGI worksations, etc. I also have it on the authority of a professor of neuropsychiatry ( at a *well known university*) who designs intelligence tests, that I possess a "certain amount of intelligence". It's just that I can't be bothered, and I doubt most DIY pedal hobbyists will ever have need for most of the features of "serious board designer" software. Because someone is not a "serious board designer" does not mean they are an idiot, and I often find a lot more *genius* in software that is *idiot friendly*. I think it's understood, the difference between a free program and a "professional" product, but in the context of DIY pedal building (NOT large scale manufacturing or commercial board design) Eagle remains a PITA, and the time spent learning it would be better spent in other ways, for people who are primarily musicians, parents and other non-idiots. 

Kerry M

[Paul Perry (Frostwave)]

I'm certainly with Bwanasonic on this. Software is no more than a tool; but like any tool, it can be well designed & a pleasure to use, or a piece of cr*p.
I find that software is too often kludged together & then polished up until it 'just' satisfies the users. Since the users of pcb layout are usually above average intellegence (at least at computer type tasks) there is often not enough effort made to produce software that is logical, intuitive, and robust. (eg. poor or absent error checking is a real curse in some pcb software. Entering illegal codes should trigger a warning, not just crash everything).

[birt]

i use the pencil and paper approach. but i haven't done any big circuits yet