Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering
ElectronicsKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Electronics Forum / CAD / April 2008



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Free schematic and pcb design programs

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Rene - 29 Apr 2008 14:49 GMT
Hello to all of You!

I am planning to sink my teeth into a "electronics CAD suite" in a not so
far away future. I have used ulticap and ultiboard back in the days they
still were DOS appz, I even bought a 80387 copro for them ;-). Not necessary
to say that the version I still own is a bit dated now.

What is important, as it is only a hobby (and I am Dutch ;-), is that it is
free. Open source is preferred by me but not a demand. It is highly
preferable that the suite can be used both in windows and Linux, though not
a demand either. If not cross-platform, I prefer a windows program but it is
fairly important that it will run in 98SE as the computer I have in my hobby
room is very old, 98SE runs great on it (much faster that Xubuntu) but I
expect it to be too old for XP or 2000. This does not mean that Linux-only
is out of the question.

I have already done a lot of reading on the web and KiCad, which I have been
looking at a couple of years ago (it contained too many bugs back then to be
of interest to me) and the gEDA tools are of particular interest to me.
Free, open source and KiCad is cross platform. gEDA is officially Linux only
and I don't judge myself to have enough knowledge to make it run under
windows (at several places I have read that theoretically can be build for
windows, perhaps with Cygwin, anyway, I do not feel like doing that). Linux
only would do as well though it is not preferable.

Furthermore I have found out that gEDAis much more flexible/powerfull but
also more difficult to get into than KiCad. I do not mind having a steep
learning curve as long as it is possible with some engagement by me. I will
probably be using it for a long time so it is an investment.

I am not going to do very sophisticated things. What is of utmost important
to me, and that is my main question, is that the suite is _reliable_. Every
program contains bugs but how often do You stumble upon them when using
these programs?
Very important as well is that there are libraries with many, many parts in
them and an easy way to add new components.

I bought the program "Frontdesigner" program from
http://www.abacom-online.de/html/produkte.html, it was not expensive and is
a great tool. This company sells a schematic capture program and a pcb
editor as well but they do not cooperate, for me, that is a reason not to
buy them (judging from the quality of the Front plate design program, I
think they might have suited my demands, this is however too big a
short-coming). So that is something else that is important to me: I have to
be able to enter the schematic and then use that to design the pcb (check
connections a.s.f.). But I also want to able to draw a pcb without being
obliged to use a schematic. It does not have to be KiCad or gEDA.

I would be very pleased if You would express Your thoughts/experience
concerning the things I have been writing. I am especially curious when it
comes to stability/reliability of the different programs, the level of
sophistication is less important.

Thank You very much in advance!
Yours sincerely,
Rene
DJ Delorie - 29 Apr 2008 16:24 GMT
> gEDA is officially Linux only

This is totally wrong and I wish people would stop spreading this lie.

gEDA is fully supported on ALL unix platforms (not just Linux -
includes BSDs, Solaris, etc) AND on MacOS/X (via fink).  It is
partially supported on Windows (it works, there are some glitches
we're working on).

> Furthermore I have found out that gEDA is much more
> flexible/powerfull but also more difficult to get into than KiCad.

I think that's true of any EDA program - more features means more
learning.  I have recently written some tutorials for PCB at least.
http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/gs/

> What is of utmost important to me, and that is my main question, is
> that the suite is _reliable_. Every program contains bugs but how
> often do You stumble upon them when using these programs?

We try to fix bugs as they're encountered.  We have a very active set
of mailing lists.  Plus, the tools have been used for many boards,
including some very complex ones.  I don't usually encounter any bugs
doing my boards, and the ones that others encounter are rare and
usually obscure (today's bug was about duplicate traces causing
polygon clearance issues - but pcb normally doesn't let you create
duplicate traces).

> Very important as well is that there are libraries with many, many
> parts in them and an easy way to add new components.

Get used to the idea that you'll need to create your own symbols and
footprints.  Even on the best EDA tools, you can't guarantee that the
library is complete or accurate.  My tutorials cover footprint
creation (footprint creation is done in the board editor), and symbol
creation uses the schematic editor.  The user community has also
supplied a wide range of tools to automate these.

PCB's library does have most of the standard footprints, though.

> So that is something else that is important to me: I have to be able
> to enter the schematic and then use that to design the pcb (check
> connections a.s.f.). But I also want to able to draw a pcb without
> being obliged to use a schematic.

gEDA/pcb works both these ways.
Rene - 29 Apr 2008 19:14 GMT
>> gEDA is officially Linux only
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> partially supported on Windows (it works, there are some glitches
> we're working on).

Hello DJ Delorie,

First of all, thank You for replying. Apologies for spreading a lie, that
was not my intention.

>> Furthermore I have found out that gEDA is much more
>> flexible/powerfull but also more difficult to get into than KiCad.
>
> I think that's true of any EDA program - more features means more
> learning.

I think You might even leave out the word "EDA" ;-).

> I have recently written some tutorials for PCB at least.
> http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/gs/

I am going to have a thorough look at them later.

>> What is of utmost important to me, and that is my main question, is
>> that the suite is _reliable_. Every program contains bugs but how
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> polygon clearance issues - but pcb normally doesn't let you create
> duplicate traces).

That means that practically speaking, it can be considered stable (in my
opinion) and that is what is very important to me.

>> Very important as well is that there are libraries with many, many
>> parts in them and an easy way to add new components.
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> PCB's library does have most of the standard footprints, though.

Now that is what is important. If I choose some very modern or some obscure
component, You won't hear me complaining that I have to make the footprint
myself. But in a review of the program "Sprint editor", by the company I
pasted the url of, I read that there were not many footprints in there, even
many very common components.

>> So that is something else that is important to me: I have to be able
>> to enter the schematic and then use that to design the pcb (check
>> connections a.s.f.). But I also want to able to draw a pcb without
>> being obliged to use a schematic.
>
> gEDA/pcb works both these ways.

That is good as well. I must admit that the gEDA tools look very attractive.
I am curious what others have to say but it does sound like it will be worth
the effort to dig deeper into it.

Thanks again!
Yours sincerely,
Rene
Joel Koltner - 29 Apr 2008 19:35 GMT
> (today's bug was about duplicate traces causing
> polygon clearance issues - but pcb normally doesn't let you create
> duplicate traces).

I might not be understanding what you mean here, but certainly most programs
like you "route over the top of/slightly to the side of/way off of" existing
trace and then have the option of removing the original trace when you finish?
DJ Delorie - 29 Apr 2008 20:16 GMT
> I might not be understanding what you mean here, but certainly most
> programs like you "route over the top of/slightly to the side of/way
> off of" existing trace and then have the option of removing the
> original trace when you finish?

The problem only occurs when one line is EXACTLY on top of the other,
though.  PCB doesn't allow those by default; you have to do it on
purpose, by creating a new line elsewhere and moving it on top of the
old one, lining up the end points.  At that point, you have two traces
that are identical in every way, so why would you do it anyway?

That's why I consider it a rare bug.  In normal usage, you won't see
it.
Hal Murray - 29 Apr 2008 20:28 GMT
>We try to fix bugs as they're encountered.  We have a very active set
>of mailing lists.  Plus, the tools have been used for many boards,
>including some very complex ones. ...

What's the status of a (semi-)auto router for the gEDA package??

I'm mostly interested in medium complexity boards.  They are big
enough that hand routing would be a pain but not so big or complicated
that the super fancy/expensive routers would have any troubles.

I'm happy to do a lot of hand holding, but I'm not very good
at full on manual routing.  It seems as though I fall off
some cliff when the board gets too complicated.  Maybe I'm
just not patient enough.

Signature

These are my opinions, not necessarily my employer's.  I hate spam.

DJ Delorie - 29 Apr 2008 21:01 GMT
> What's the status of a (semi-)auto router for the gEDA package??

It mostly works (meaning, it works, but doesn't always route to
completion).  We've got a student working on upgrading it this summer.
Baron - 30 Apr 2008 10:52 GMT
DJ Delorie inscribed thus:

> I think that's true of any EDA program - more features means more
> learning.  I have recently written some tutorials for PCB at least.
> http://www.delorie.com/pcb/docs/gs/

I think that there may be a small problem with your tutorials !

I tried to follow "Building from Source"  and seemed to keep coming back
to the same point without finding out how !

Thanks.

Best Regards:
               Baron.
DJ Delorie - 30 Apr 2008 15:42 GMT
> I tried to follow "Building from Source" and seemed to keep coming
> back to the same point without finding out how !

Obviously, I haven't finished that part yet ;-)
Baron - 30 Apr 2008 16:32 GMT
DJ Delorie inscribed thus:

>> I tried to follow "Building from Source" and seemed to keep coming
>> back to the same point without finding out how !
>
> Obviously, I haven't finished that part yet ;-)

Oops !  Sorry if I am a bit premature !
I'll keep checking.

Thanks.
       Baron.
JeffM - 29 Apr 2008 20:48 GMT
>[...]I prefer a windows program
>but it is fairly important that it will run in 98SE

FreePCB can use LTspice netlists.
The former is Free Software and the latter is freeware.
Both can be used cross-platform (VM / WINE).

BTW, this group is archived and searchable:
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=cross-platform+ingroup:sci.electronics.
cad+-jeffm
_
http://groups.google.com/groups/search?q=cross-platform+FreePCB+ingroup:sci.elec
tronics.cad+-jeffm
_

>[...]98SE runs great on it (much faster that Xubuntu)[...]
>This does not mean that Linux-only is out of the question.

Damn Small Linux?  aLinux (nee Peanut Linux)?  Feather Linux?

>[...]the gEDA tools are of particular interest to me.
>[...]gEDA is officially Linux only

As DJ said, the key word is "supported".

**There is no supported Windows version of gEDA
(BUT it can be built from source)** by Ales Hvezda
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:WTdypZlJUk4J:www.geda.seul.org/download.htm
l+There.is.no.supported+Stuart.Brorson+depending.upon.your+Windows+only.works+La
st.update+gEDA-is-free-*-*-*-*-*+your.*.*.expertise+theoretically.possible+*.*.y
ourself+version+ahvezda+distribution.and+2007+missing.dependencies+*-*-*-despair
+Linux

(at the bottom).

>(at several places I have read
>that theoretically can be build for windows)

That's been true for quite some time
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:VBsSPv1ihqYJ:archives.seul.org/geda/user/Fe
b-2005/msg00252.html+on.*.*.Window.*+started.Cygwin+I.managed.to.install.PCB+es+
es+installed.Cygwin+successfully.and.simply+and.did+startx+Feb.2005+experience.w
ith.PCB.on.Windows+typed.pcb


There have been times when Windoze binary installers were available,
but those weren't maintained.
**Why there is no Windows installer for gEDA** by Ales Hvezda
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:Se7Yo6rriSUJ:archives.seul.org/geda/user/De
c-2006/msg00113.html+are.NOT.Windows.programs+Dan.McMahill+From.Ales.Hvezda.ahve
zda+Windows+2006+*-*-*-*-objection-to-*+*-don't-want-negative-perceptions-*-*-*-
*-*-*-*+point-and-click-*-installer

.
.
There is also a bootable CD that contains gEDA:
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.electronics.cad/browse_frm/thread/3b6f24029a8
b34cf/5ef0c2c6f82294d6?q=*-Knoppix-like-CD-with-gEDA-*-*+Quantian+Cygwin+Win-200
0-or-XP+Gtk.libraries+MinGW+qq+*-distro-*-*-providing-open-source-scientific-and
-engineering-apps+recent.improvements

(It is somewhat dated).
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.